Feb. 26



GEORGIA:

Jones and Baldwin counties have more inmates on death row than other
midstate counties combined


A statistical snapshot of Georgia's death row reveals something
surprising: Ranked among the metropolitan centers with the highest number
of convicted killers awaiting execution are two relatively rural midstate
counties. Combined, 9 men who committed murder in Jones and Baldwin
counties are waiting to die for their crimes. 5 of those inmates killed in
Baldwin County, 4 in Jones.

Those 2 counties, state statistics show, account for more current
death-row inmates than all other midstate counties combined.

The numbers from Jones and Baldwin are on par with more populated counties
such as Fulton (Atlanta), Chatham (Savannah) and Muscogee (Columbus), each
with 5 death-row inmates, according to the state Department of
Corrections. 7 inmates from Cobb County (Marietta) sit on death row, the
state said.

Chris Adams, director of the Georgia Capital Defender, the state public
defender's office that deals with capital cases, said the number of
death-row inmates from Jones and Baldwin counties is striking.

"It seems to be that there is something about (that) place that makes it
different from the places all around it," he said. "If I got a new case
from there, that would be a red flag that I need to do some digging and
find out why that is."

While the number of death-penalty cases is high for Baldwin and Jones
counties, there are not a disproportionate number of killings there.

For example, in 2004, Fulton County, with a population of more than
800,000, had 76 murder cases. Jones and Baldwin counties, with populations
of 26,000 and 45,000, respectively, have had an estimated 70 murder cases
combined during the past 25 years, officials said.

There are no definitive answers for the apparent disparity.

Some officials say Baldwin's and Jones' death-row numbers are high because
of a few particularly horrible crimes, while others say prosecutors have
wide-ranging discretion on whether to pursue capital cases.

Some point to Fred Bright, prosecutor for Jones, Baldwin and 6 other
counties in the Ocmulgee Judicial Circuit, as a prosecutor who
aggressively pursues the death penalty.

Bright says he follows the legal guidelines when deciding whether to seek
death for a particular crime.

"It's not whether I want the death penalty or not. We're guided by the
law," he said. "The final decision as to who is on death row falls on the
jury, and the jury is the conscience of the community."

Stephen Bright, who is not related to the prosecutor, is the president of
the Southern Center for Human Rights and an opponent of the death penalty.
"Everybody thinks that death-penalty cases are decided by juries; however,
they're decided by DAs and plea agreements," he said.

The Telegraph examined public records related to the state's
capital-punishment law, its death-row inmate population and interviewed
prosecutors, sheriffs, the state's leading capital-crime public defender
and legal experts.

The documents and experts provide no universal explanation of how capital
cases are prosecuted and decided in Georgia. But they do provide insight
into the administration of the death penalty.

A recent report from the American Bar Association questions the fairness
of death-penalty prosecutions.

"Our system cannot claim to provide due process ... unless it provides a
fair and accurate system for every person who faces the death penalty,"
the report said.

'WE'VE HAD SOME REALLY HEINOUS MURDERS'

Fred Bright, who has been the district attorney of the Ocmulgee Judicial
Circuit since 1994, has tried 12 death penalty cases.

All of those defendants were convicted, although only 7 received the death
penalty. The other 5 were given life sentences, he said.

"Unfortunately, we've had some really heinous murders here, and we don't
take the killing of another human being very lightly," he said. He
estimates about one in 10 cases in his district is a death penalty case.

But Bright said he doesn't always seek the death penalty in cases where he
could, and he sometimes allows plea agreements that spare someone's life.
Of the current death-row tally, Bright said his circuit prosecuted 10 of
those inmates - more than any other circuit in the state.

Recently, Bright filed to seek the death penalty against Brian Brookins, a
Baldwin County man charged with shooting to death his estranged wife and
her daughter. If Brookins is found guilty and sentenced to die, he would
be the sixth man who has committed a crime in Baldwin County to be on
death row. If that happens, Baldwin's number of death-row inmates would
surpass some urban counties, including Fulton.

Putnam County Sheriff Howard Sills, considered by some prosecutors to be a
death-penalty expert, has assisted several prosecutors in Georgia capital
cases, and he has investigated several cases that ended with inmates going
to death row.

Sills said the higher-than-average number of inmates from Bright's
district is partly because of Bright's aggressiveness in seeking death for
heinous crimes.

Sills said he thinks some DAs avoid seeking capital punishment because
they are concerned about the expense and time spent on numerous legal
motions. He thinks that idea is wrong-headed.

Prosecutors, he said, should always seek the death penalty whenever
possible.

"If it meets the criteria, guess what? It's taken out of the district
attorney's hands," Sills said. "If the death penalty is not warranted,
then the jury will not give the death penalty."

But a recent American Bar Association study suggests that the discretion
prosecutors use for capital cases isn't always cut-and-dried. The study
found that some prosecutors take into account a number of factors,
including evidence, magnitude of the crime, a defendant's mental
disabilities, criminal record and background, a defendant's family history
and background, and even public sentiment.

Joe Briley, Fred Bright's predecessor in the Ocmulgee circuit, said he
dealt with criticism while in office because of the frequency with which
he sought the death penalty.

"I've been accused of aggressively seeking the death penalty," Briley
said. "I can't see why other DAs didn't seek the death penalty."

Briley advocates always seeking the death penalty no matter what the
defendant's history.

"I never saw a defendant who didn't have a bad childhood," he said, "I
cannot judge. That's for a jury to decide."

Stephen Bright, the Southern Center for Human Rights president, said the
fact remains that some DAs are more apt to seek the death penalty than
others, and it's that latitude that disturbs him and others who oppose
capital punishment.

"The prosecutor has the discretion whether or not to seek the death
penalty," he said. "The death penalty is never required. Some very seldom
seek it, some seek it at every opportunity."

IS THE SYSTEM FLAWED?

There is no detailed study that compares how cases that fit death-penalty
criteria are adjudicated in various judicial circuits, said Anne Emanuel,
a member of a team of legal experts for the American Bar Association.
Emanuel said the death penalty appears to be applied unequally in Georgia
and that the state needs to study whether that's true.

"We're concerned there are inappropriate disparities," she said. "Whether
or not you get the death penalty shouldn't depend on what part of the
state you live in."

The recent ABA study, which doesn't address whether the death penalty is
right or wrong, recommends that a state commission review death-penalty
filings and ensure that the death penalty is being pursued in a similar
way. That is something Fred Bright predicts would lead to more appeals and
probably wouldn't work in the long run. "I question not only its
practicality, but I even question the legality of it," he said.

Stephen Bright compared differences in how district attorneys across
Georgia seek the death penalty to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to
overturn the death penalty in 1972.

That decision determined that the death penalty was meted out in an
arbitrary way, he said. Some defendants, he argued, were being sent to
death row, while others who committed similar crimes were not.

At the time, three Supreme Court justices said race was a factor in
determining who would die for their crimes.

In 1976, the death penalty was reinstated in Georgia after the Legislature
approved a list of circumstances that limited the number of possible
capital crimes. But Stephen Bright said there are still discrepancies in
seeking capital punishment, only with a smaller range of crimes.

Studies show that people who kill whites are more likely to receive the
death penalty than people who kill blacks, he said. For example, blacks
make up 65 % of all Georgia murder victims, but 80 % of the state's
death-row inmates were convicted of killing whites, he said.

Fred Bright said race was not a factor in any of the death-penalty cases
he prosecuted. Of the nine death-row inmates from Jones and Baldwin
counties, 4 of them murdered blacks, he said.

He also said he has never had an all-white jury in a death penalty case,
and in one case, a majority-black jury sentenced a black man to death in
1997 for shooting a white Baldwin County sheriff's deputy.

Stephen Bright said race played a role in why so few death-row inmates
came from Fulton County.

In general, blacks tend to oppose the death penalty, he said, and because
Fulton is a majority-black county, it hasn't been pursued there as often,
he said.

Through a spokesman, Fulton County District Attorney Paul Howard declined
to comment.

NO DEATH ROW INMATES FROM BIBB COUNTY

Bibb County, which has a population of about 155,000, has no inmates
currently on death row.

It is among several midstate counties without a single capital sentence
waiting to be carried out, including Twiggs, Peach, Crawford, Wilkinson
and Dooly counties. Houston County has 2, while Monroe, Laurens and Macon
counties have 1 each.

Howard Simms, district attorney for Bibb, Crawford and Peach counties,
said one of his predecessors, Willis Sparks, rarely sought the death
penalty because he was concerned that those cases would be overturned on
appeal. With the exception of a case against Keith Patillo, for which he
did seek capital punishment, Sparks ended up reaching plea agreements.

Patillo was sentenced to die for the 1987 rape and beating death of
Stephanie McLamb. His sentence was later commuted to life because he was
considered mentally retarded.The last person to be executed for a Bibb
County crime was Terry Mincey, who was on death row for nearly 20 years
before he was put to death in 2001.

Simms said that in 1997, Charles Weston, another of his predecessors,
sought the death penalty against Reginald Acres, who killed his estranged
wife, his 8-month-old daughter and his wife's pregnant cousin. Eventually,
Weston made a plea deal after prospective juror questionnaires showed that
jury pools were biased against the death penalty, Simms said.

Simms said his philosophy about the death penalty is that he should seek
it whenever appropriate.

Since the beginning of 2005, Simms has filed intent to seek the death
penalty against 4 people, 2 of whom are accused of chopping a man into 10
pieces and burning his body.

Crystal May Carver and Shay Allen Morey were charged with murder in
February 2005, accused of killing Carver's husband, Bobby Gene Wagner. He
was hacked to pieces in a Bibb County motel and dumped in Twiggs County.

In another case, Jomekia Dechelle Pope is accused of burning his
girlfriend to death last summer. And earlier this month, Simms announced
that he will seek the death penalty against 19-year-old Brandon Parker on
charges that he stabbed a 72-year-old Macon grandmother to death in
December.

Since he took office in January 2001, Simms has pursued the death penalty
against two people in trials, though juries decided against capital
punishment. Still, Simms said that doesn't mean Bibb County juries are
anti-death penalty.

"I don't think it's fair to say Bibb County juries won't give the death
penalty," he said. "They haven't had a whole lot of opportunities."

***

ON DEATH ROW

BALDWIN COUNTY

John W. Hightower--Age: 61

On July 12, 1987, apparently after a domestic squabble, 44-year-old John
W. Hightower of Baldwin County shot and killed his wife, Dorothy, and her
two daughters, Sandra Reaves, 22, and Evelyn Reaves, 19. John Hightower
told detectives he had planned to kill himself, but he was arrested in
nearby Putnam County before he could. John Hightower was sentenced to die
for the 3 murders.

Joshua Bishop--Age: 31

Joshua Bishop was tried in early 1996 for malice murder and armed robbery
in the death of Leverette Morrison, a Milledgeville native who had been
visiting from Savannah. Morrison was visiting his children in
Milledgeville at the time of his death in June 1994.

An autopsy showed that Morrison was beaten on the head and face with a
blunt object. However, a murder weapon was never found.

Authorities have said Bishop and Mark Braxley wrapped his body in a sheet,
placed it near a trash bin, and burned Morrison's 1984 Jeep Wagoneer near
a pond. Braxley pleaded guilty and is serving a life sentence for murder.
Braxley, Morrison and Bishop had all been drinking together before the
killing.

Robert Wayne Holsey--Age: 40

Robert Wayne Holsey was sentenced to die for the murder of Baldwin County
sheriff's deputy Will Robinson. Early in the morning of Dec. 17, 1995,
Robinson responded to an armed robbery at a convenience store in which the
suspect was seen driving away in a red Ford Probe. Four minutes after the
robbery, Robinson stopped a car fitting that description in a motel
parking lot not far from the scene. A gun battle ensued, and Robinson died
of a wound to the head. Within 4 hours, Holsey was in custody.

Robert Earl Butts--Age: 28

Marion Wilson--Age: 29

Robert Earl Butts and Marion Wilson were each convicted separately for the
March 28, 1996, shotgun slaying of Donovan Corey Parks. Wilson was
sentenced to death in 1997, while Butts was sentenced to death the
following year. District Attorney Fred Bright built his case around
evidence that Parks gave Butts and Wilson a ride from the Wal-Mart on
North Columbia Street but was later forced to drive to Felton Street, off
Ga. 49. The 24-year-old victim was found face down on a rural street with
a fatal gunshot wound to the back of the head. His wallet and car were
missing. His blue Acura Vigor was found burning in Macon the next day.

JONES COUNTY

Eddie W. Finney Jr.--Age: 49 Eddie Finney was sent to death row for
killing 2 Macon women. Finney, along with Johnny Mack Westbrook,
kidnapped, robbed, bound and then beat to death the women, Thelma Kalish,
67, and Ann Kaplan, 65, in September 1977. Westbrook was sentenced to
death but that sentence was later overturned.

Keith Tharpe--Age: 47

Keith Tharpe was convicted in 1991 for kidnapping and murder. Tharpe
kidnapped his sister-in-law, Jacquelyn Freeman, and then killed her in
September 1990. Tharpe kidnapped his wife in the same incident, though she
was able to escape.

Daniel Lucas--Age: 27

Brandon Rhode:--Age: 26

Daniel Lucas and Brandon Rhode are on death row for killing a father and
his 2 children. On April 23, 1998, Kristin and Bryan Moss stepped off
their school buses and into their home, followed minutes by their father,
Steven Moss. They interrupted a burglary inside their Griswoldville Road
home and were shot a total of 13 times.

[SOURCE: Telegraph archives]

***

DEATH PENALTY FACTS

Since 1973, more than 120 people have been released from death row with
evidence of their innocence. 5 inmates in Georgia have been exonerated
during this period.

Georgia ranks 9th in the United States in the number of death row inmates
with 107.

According to the FBI Uniform Crime Report, the South has the highest
murder rate, and accounts for more than 80 percent of all executions.
[SOURCE: www.deathpenalty.org]

***

GEORGIA CASES CHANGE U.S. LAW

In Furman v. Georgia in 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated all death
penalty laws in the country based on the inherent arbitrariness of their
application. Capital punishment was suspended between 1973 and 1976.

In 1976, in Gregg v. Georgia, the court upheld Georgia's new
capital-sentencing procedures, concluding that they had sufficiently
reduced the problem of arbitrary and capricious imposition of death
associated with earlier statutes.

[SOURCE: www.law.umkc.edu]

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

GEORGIA'S DEATH PENALTY LAW 17-10-30.


(a) The death penalty may be imposed for the offenses of aircraft
hijacking or treason in any case.

(b) In all cases of other offenses for which the death penalty may be
authorized, the judge shall consider, or he shall include in his
instructions to the jury for it to consider, any mitigating circumstances
or aggravating circumstances otherwise authorized by law and any of the
following statutory aggravating circumstances which may be supported by
the evidence:

(1) The offense of murder, rape, armed robbery, or kidnapping was
committed by a person with a prior record of conviction for a capital
felony;

(2) The offense of murder, rape, armed robbery, or kidnapping was
committed while the offender was engaged in the commission of another
capital felony or aggravated battery, or the offense of murder was
committed while the offender was engaged in the commission of burglary or
arson in the 1st degree;

(3) The offender, by his act of murder, armed robbery, or kidnapping,
knowingly created a great risk of death to more than one person in a
public place by means of a weapon or device which would normally be
hazardous to the lives of more than one person;

(4) The offender committed the offense of murder for himself or another,
for the purpose of receiving money or any other thing of monetary value;

(5) The murder of a judicial officer, former judicial officer, district
attorney or solicitor-general, or former district attorney, solicitor, or
solicitor-general was committed during or because of the exercise of his
or her official duties;

(6) The offender caused or directed another to commit murder or committed
murder as an agent or employee of another person;

(7) The offense of murder, rape, armed robbery, or kidnapping was
outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible, or inhuman in that it involved
torture, depravity of mind, or an aggravated battery to the victim;

(8) The offense of murder was committed against any peace officer,
corrections employee, or firefighter while engaged in the performance of
his official duties;

(9) The offense of murder was committed by a person in, or who has escaped
from, the lawful custody of a peace officer or place of lawful
confinement; or

(10) The murder was committed for the purpose of avoiding, interfering
with, or preventing a lawful arrest or custody in a place of lawful
confinement, of himself or another.

(c) The statutory instructions as determined by the trial judge to be
warranted by the evidence shall be given in charge and in writing to the
jury for its deliberation. The jury, if its verdict is a recommendation of
death, shall designate in writing, signed by the foreman of the jury, the
aggravating circumstance or circumstances which it found beyond a
reasonable doubt. In nonjury cases the judge shall make such designation.
Except in cases of treason or aircraft hijacking, unless at least one of
the statutory aggravating circumstances enumerated in subsection (b) of
this Code section is so found, the death penalty shall not be imposed.

(source for both: The Macon Telegraph)






CALIFORNIA:

Lethal injection facing scrutiny


The 1st time prison officials considered using lethal injection as a
supposedly humane method of execution, the medical profession balked.
Injections were the province of doctors, and they objected to helping
cause someone's death.

That was in 1888. The governor of New York was looking for a modern
alternative to hanging, according to death penalty researcher Deborah
Denno. But after a year of deliberations, New York settled on the electric
chair.

More than a century later, experts are still debating lethal injection --
the method of execution in all but one of the 38 states with the death
penalty. And last week's last-minute cancellation of an execution at San
Quentin has again raised the question of whether there is a more humane
way to put someone to death.

A federal judge in San Jose has effectively halted the practice in
California, after state officials said they could not satisfy his orders
to have medical personnel take part in executing rapist-killer Michael
Morales last week. Despite a widespread assumption that it is painless,
courts around the country are weighing similar challenges from prisoners
who contend the most common method of lethal injection can still lead to
physical suffering.

While the issue has provoked impassioned debate, it has sometimes turned
on subtle points.

Last December, for example, hundreds of protesters were demonstrating at
San Quentin against the execution of former gang leader Stanley Tookie
Williams. Inside, a prison official quietly noted that Williams' chest was
still moving, several minutes after he received an initial barbiturate
that in theory should have stopped his breathing.

The official's log did not prove Williams felt any pain, U.S. District
Judge Jeremy Fogel concluded earlier this month. But the judge cited the
entry as one of several from recent California executions that raised
questions about whether the procedure was working as intended. The 1st of
3 injections, while considered a fatal dose, is primarily meant to be an
anesthetic.

Experts say the 3rd shot, which stops the heart so death comes more
quickly, can bring excruciating pain.

With challenges to lethal injection pending around the country, several
experts said the scrutiny will most likely result in the further
refinement -- not elimination -- of capital punishment.

"The American public still supports the death penalty. The courts are not
going to stand in the way of that,'' said Richard Dieter, a law professor
and executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center in
Washington, D.C. ``They'll find a way to allow the death penalty until the
public says they're not sure they want it anymore."

National polls show support for the death penalty has declined in recent
years, but is still above 60 %.

But after Morales' attorneys challenged the way lethal injection is
carried out in California, Fogel gave state officials a choice: They could
have medical workers participate, in a role they have never played before,
or face a hearing to examine the state's procedures later this spring.
When the state said it could not find medical workers who were willing to
participate, the execution was called off and the hearing was on. Now,
Morales' attorneys are predicting some of the most intense scrutiny that
lethal injection has ever received.

"We have only seen the tip of the iceberg," said Morales attorney John
Grele, adding that the unusual hearing will give Morales' lawyers an
opportunity to subpoena more evidence than other inmates have been able to
muster -- including prison medical records, execution logs and testimony
from a variety of witnesses to other recent executions.

Yet Grele said he believes the state probably can develop a procedure that
satisfies constitutional standards and doesn't require doctors to
participate. He agreed with several legal experts who said death penalty
opponents should not pin their hopes on Fogel's order requiring the state
to have medical personnel participating in Morales' execution.

Doctors' groups have said their ethical codes prohibit them from
participating in state killings. But Fogel's order applied only in the
Morales case, and experts said the judge could easily drop that
requirement if he is convinced the state's procedures are sufficient.

"This is not a challenge to his underlying conviction and sentence," Grele
said of Morales. ``The judge has said that whatever method they come up
with, he's still going to be executed."

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation spokeswoman Elaine Jennings
reiterated last week that state officials believe their current procedures
"are humane and do not constitute cruel and unusual punishment." And some
say it's a mistake to assume the Constitution requires more than that.

"We're not going to torture people, but I don't believe there is a right
to a painless execution, and certainly there is no guarantee," said Kent
Scheidegger of the Sacramento-based Criminal Justice Legal Foundation,
which supports capital punishment. "In the real world, nothing is 100 %."
But in California, where many people are ambivalent about the death
penalty, some have taken comfort in the notion that lethal injection is
painless, said Franklin Zimring, a University of California-Berkeley law
professor who has written extensively on capital punishment. Now, he said,
the Morales case is bringing new attention to questions about how the
death penalty is administered.

Most states that use lethal injection follow the same three-drug protocol
used in California. And with several challenges pending around the
country, Dieter, at the Death Penalty Information Center, said that sooner
or later one will probably come before the Supreme Court. But he said the
high court is unlikely to require an absolute guarantee of painless
executions.

"The Constitution doesn't demand perfection," Dieter said. "I think the
court's going to accept something less than 100 % perfection because
they're not going to be willing to say we can't have a death penalty."

Denno, a Fordham University law professor who has studied the use of
lethal injection, made a similar prediction. "I think they're going to try
to come up with an alternative method," she said, "maybe fiddle around
with these chemicals or some kind of process that doesn't require doctors
to be involved."

In the history of execution in this country, Denno said, authorities have
gotten around humanitarian or constitutional challenges by adopting new
technologies -- from the electric chair to gas chambers and finally to
lethal injection. "There's always been a new method around that seems to
be better than the one that exists."

But at the moment, she conceded, there's no obvious alternative model. "It
seems hard to think of what they're going to come up with."

(source: Mercury News)

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

Death penalty returns to spotlight


California is living up to its reputation for initiating legal, social and
political trends - or, in this case, prompting reconsideration of an
existing one.

Last week's suspended state execution of convicted murderer Michael
Morales, 46, raised questions about the future of the death penalty,
lethal injections and the role doctors and should play in such cases. Some
of the issues may not stop ascending the judicial ladder until they reach
the U.S. Supreme Court. (Morales was convicted in 1983 of the brutal rape,
torture and murder of Lodi teenager Terri Winchell.)

Our nation's highest tribunal has never ruled on the constitutionality of
lethal injections. Perhaps getting it to do so is what U.S. District Judge
Jeremy Fogel had in mind when he ordered that a person with medical
training be present at Morales' execution to determine if the three-step
injection process violates the U.S. Constitution's Eighth Amendment ban on
"cruel and unusual punishment."

That doctors refused to participate shouldn't have been surprising. Dr.
Michael Sexton, president of the California Medical Association, said,
"Legal execution is not a medical procedure, it's not a medical task."

The fact that no medical personnel would be part of the execution
effectively suspended such events in our state until at least after a May
hearing in Fogel's San Jose court - and probably longer.

It also casts a cloud of doubt over the future of lethal injections - the
preferred method of execution in 37 of 38 states with capital punishment.
CMA-proposed legislation would bar physicians from participating in or
attending executions.

As a result, the future of executions in California is in limbo and the
use of lethal injections in as many as 37 states may be in doubt.

The unusual sequence also raised questions about whether a convicted
murderer has the right to a painless execution under the Eighth Amendment.
Is it possible? Perhaps the goal should be to alleviate unnecessary pain
and suffering.

Under that standard, lethal injections might be salvageable. They've been
used in California since 1996, after a federal judge and appeals court
found that the gas chamber at San Quentin posed an undue risk of a painful
death.

Last week's events set the stage for showdowns on such issues. But
reversing or suspending California's stand on capital punishment, as some
suggest, should not be done unilaterally by lawmakers. The public must
participate in the process, and the matter should probably be put to a
public vote.

If Californians prefer to keep capital punishment, it's probably best not
to put doctors in the untenable position of participating in executions
that conflict with their ethical and professional training to preserve
life. Technicians should be able to fill the void that creates.

By February, lethal injections had been used in 841 executions nationally.
Another 650 condemned California inmates await resolution of the issues
raised by Morales' attorneys, Judge Fogel and the medical profession. Odds
are that their ultimate fates won't be determined soon.

(source: San Mateo County Times)

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

Execution story earns Times reporter national honorBy Andrew McGall


A Times reporter's account of Stanley "Tookie" Williams' execution has won
a $10,000 prize from the American Society of Newspaper Editors.

Staff writer John Simerman witnessed the execution by lethal injection
early Dec. 13 and returned to the Times to write an early morning account
of it for the www.contracostatimes.com. That story also appeared Dec. 14
on the paper's front page.

The Jesse Laventhol award honors deadline writing, but the editors' group
emphasizes that the writing is the most important element. It is named for
a former Philadelphia journalist.

Simerman will receive the award April 27 at the society's convention in
Seattle.

Other winners in the annual contest were the New York Times for commentary
writing; Rocky Mountain News for photojournalism; Washington Post for
outstanding writing on diversity; Denton, Texas Chronicle for editorial
writing; Los Angeles Times for news reporting by a team; Cleveland Plain
Dealer for watchdog reporting; and Rocky Mountain News for nondeadline
writing.

Simerman's terse story put readers among the witnesses standing in risers
around San Quentin's green execution chamber.

He wrote: "Stanley 'Tookie' Williams walked in chains and cuffs through
the oval door of the execution chamber. 4 uniformed men entered with him.
Midnight remained a minute away."

Simerman described the condemned man's reactions as he awaited death in
the soundproof chamber:

"They strapped him down at the shins, knees, waist, chest and wrists. His
stomach rapidly rose and fell. Williams lifted his head and peered to his
left. Barbara Becnel, his longtime advocate and the editor of his books,
stood atop a riser with the four others chosen by Williams to witness his
death."

Later: "As the drugs began to course through his veins, Williams lifted
his head. He held it there, tilted slightly left. It fell back and he
raised it again, refusing to lay still. His breathing hitched. His stomach
convulsed, lurching upward. Light shone across his damp temples."

And then death came: "A hundred eyes stared at the still body of the man
convicted of murdering four people in 1979, the man whose claims of
redemption and innocence failed to sway the governor and the courts, the
man who refused a last meal and declined to offer the warden any last
words. ... "Williams was dead at age 51, having spent nearly half his life
on death row.

"A guard pulled the curtain across the chamber windows."

(source: Contra Costa Times)

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

Cooper likely unaffected by decision


San Bernardino County's most notorious death-row inmate probably won't be
affected by a judge's ruling last week that called into question the
methods California uses to put condemned inmates to death.

State prosecutors expect the debate over whether the state's
lethal-injection procedures amount to cruel and unusual punishment to be
resolved long before Kevin Cooper again becomes eligible for the execution
chamber.

"We're very confident in our (death penalty) protocol," Deputy Attorney
General Holly Wilkens said. "We're very confident this is not cruel and
unusual punishment and we're looking forward to having this issue
resolved."

Cooper is on death row for the 1983 hatchet murders of four people in
Chino Hills. He was nearly executed 2 years ago, but a federal appeals
court spared him in the final hours and ordered hearings on his claims
that police framed him for the killings.

His appeals continue.

A federal judge last week told the state's prison system that it couldn't
execute another condemned killer, Michael Morales, unless licensed medical
personnel were present to ensure Morales did not feel pain.

Authorities could not find medical personnel willing to participate, and
the execution was postponed.

U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel ordered further hearings on the matter
for May.

Until that time, neither Morales nor any other California death-row inmate
is likely to be executed.

Wilkens said last week that she expected the lethal-injection flap to be
resolved soon after the hearings begin and that prosecutors don't expect
the issue to hamper any future executions.

She said no other death-row inmates, including Cooper, are on track to
have an execution date set prior to May.

And Cooper, 48, is no higher than 3rd in line, even if his remaining
appeals are all summarily denied by the courts, the prosecutor said.

A federal judge in San Diego upheld

Cooper's conviction in April, and his attorneys appealed that ruling to
the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Attorneys for both sides have submitted hundreds of pages of briefings to
a three-judge panel of the appeals court and are now waiting for the
court's response.

The court could do anything from immediately halting Cooper's efforts to
ordering a whole new round of evidentiary hearings.

Wilkens said the court could issue a decision any day.

Cooper's attorney, David Alexander, also said last week that he didn't
expect the lethal-injection issue to affect Cooper's case.

In the days before his scheduled execution in 2004, Cooper also challenged
the state's lethal injection procedure based on arguments nearly identical
to those Morales used last week.

Both inmates claim the process is excruciatingly painful.

Ironically, the same judge who granted the motion for Morales denied it
for Cooper.

Wilkens and Alexander said it was because Morales' attorneys used failed
prior attempts by other inmates, such as Cooper, to refine their
arguments.

Cooper is on death row for the killings of Douglas and Peggy Ryen; their
10-year-old daughter, Jessica; and 11-year-old houseguest, Christopher
Hughes.

All 4 were stabbed and hacked to death inside the Ryen family home 2 days
after Cooper escaped from the nearby prison in Chino.

Cooper admits to hiding in a house next to the Ryen home but denies the
killings.

(source: San Bernardino County Sun)

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

It's a cruel and unusual battle on death penalty


Is it just us, or is there something more than a little surreal in the
legal battle over how convicted murderer Michael Morales will be executed
by the state of California?

There are compelling arguments for and against the death penalty, and we
don't propose to resolve them here. If a state has decided to exact that
punishment, however - to deliberately and purposely end the life of a
human being - doesn't it seem a little strange to worry about whether the
procedure might involve some discomfort to the person being executed?

Professor John Eastman of Chapman University's law school sees the
arguments raised about whether certain methods of execution constitute
"cruel and unusual punishment," which the Eighth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution prohibits, as "a long-term effort by certain lawyers and
judges to end the death penalty indirectly through technicalities rather
than directly through the political process." It certainly looks that way.

The problem is that once a polity has decided that execution is part of
what states may do justifiably, it is difficult to describe any method as
"humane" beyond any argument. Some methods seem obviously "cruel and
unusual": The Romans used crucifixion to be purposely cruel and unusual
and thus to send a message to rebels; some electric chairs that didn't
work properly imposed great suffering. Beyond a certain point, however, it
is difficult to make intelligent distinctions, especially given that
different individuals will interpret experiences subjectively and
differently.

Is it crueler to be killed by a firing squad than by hanging? Is a gas
chamber crueler than a lethal injection? It is doubtful there can ever be
complete agreement on such questions.

If execution per se, then, does not constitute cruel and unusual
punishment (a position the U.S. Supreme Court entertained for a while and
then rejected), put the question of suffering in context. When a person's
life is ended, some suffering - if only while awaiting a fate one fully
expects - is virtually inevitable. It is sensible to try to perform
executions with as little unnecessary suffering as possible. But reducing
suffering to zero while killing somebody does not seem possible. Courts
and judges, hardly known for infallibility, would do well not to attempt
it.

A straightforward effort to end the death penalty might reopen a healthy
debate on a seemingly intractable issue. That would be preferable to what
looks like a stealth campaign to make legal executions practically
impossible.

(source: Appeal-Democrat)

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

The death of the death penalty?


The death penalty is fighting for its life. Not only in California, where
the state has "indefinitely" suspended its plans to execute condemned
murderer-rapist Michael Morales, but around the world.

The incident this week at San Quentin State Prison, and separate matters
here in Napa County, offer fascinating illustrations of what's going on.

Morales was condemned to die in 1983 for the brutal 1981 rape and murder
of 17-year-old Terri Winchell of Lodi.

A co-defendant in the case was sentenced to life in prison without the
possibility of parole.

As Morales' execution date neared, U.S. District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel
granted a request by Morales' defense attorneys -- who include former
Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr -- that, in essence, required the
presence of a physician or nurse. But physicians have taken the
Hippocratic Oath to "do no harm," and those asked to ensure the proper
injection of lethal drugs and related anesthetics refused to cooperate.

These medics faced competing mandates -- one to make sure the
state-induced death of a convicted killer goes smoothly, and another to
protect human life at all costs -- and sided with the latter.

Organizations such as the American Medical Association have long sought an
end to the death penalty.

Meanwhile, international pressure is mounting for the United States to
abolish the death penalty. Many countries refuse to extradite suspected
murderers to the United States because those countries do not support
capital punishment; they are not willing to place the fate of one of their
citizens in the hands of the United States' criminal justice system.

Last week, the Register published a story about changes in the law
regarding Mexico. While Napa County District Attorney Gary Lieberstein
said that country is more willing than in the past to extradite suspects
who may face life sentences -- and there are three people believed to be
in Mexico who are suspects in Napa County murder cases -- Mexican
authorities still require assurance that no Mexican nationals will face
the death penalty here.

Last year, Canadian authorities returned to Napa a man accused -- and
ultimately convicted -- of sex crimes involving juveniles. Had that man
been at risk of facing the death penalty, the cooperation between nations
might have evaporated.

Our own courts have struggled with the issue, as well. In 1972, the United
States Supreme Court essentially abolished the death penalty in the United
States in a case called Furman v. Georgia, saying the law was imposed in
such a way as to be considered cruel and unusual punishment in violation
of the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

In the following years, states crafted new death penalty laws that met the
Supreme Court's concerns regarding uniformity and standards for judges and
juries in capital cases.

But as we can see in the international tensions, the Morales case and even
in Napa -- where prosecutors have yet to decide whether to seek the death
penalty against suspected double-murderer Eric Copple -- the debate is far
from over.

(source: Opinion, Napa Valley Register)






OHIO:

2 Plain Dealer series win national awards


The Plain Dealer has won 2 national journalism contests whose results
became public today.

"Cold-Blooded Liar," a 3-part series and follow-up stories that questioned
a murder conviction and death sentence, won the American Society of
Newspaper Editors award for best local watchdog reporting of 2005.

"Liar" was a yearlong project begun by Bob Paynter, then investigative
editor, and joined by Sandra Livingston, investigative reporter. It cast
doubt on John Spirko's conviction for the 1982 murder of Betty Jane
Mottinger, a postmaster in rural western Ohio. For instance, a star
witness later reversed key aspects of his testimony, and the strongest
physical evidence in the case pointed to other men, who were never tried.

The stories highlighted numerous problems with the evidence, which helped
persuade 3 members of the Ohio Parole Board to recommend that Spirko's
life be spared. Gov. Bob Taft has delayed Spirko's execution 3 times since
September.

The award comes with a $2,500 prize. The series will be reprinted in the
book "Best Newspaper Writing 2006."

(source: Plain Dealer)






IOWA:

Death penalty debate could be over as lawmaker support fades


A day after a survey of Iowa Senate members revealed there is not enough
support to reinstate the death penalty, the chambers top Democrat said it
is time to move on to other issues.

"Media reports today confirm what we've known for some time: There is not
enough support in the Iowa Senate to reinstate the death penalty in Iowa,"
Senate Democratic Leader Mike Gronstal of Council Bluffs said last week.
The survey, conducted by the Quad-City Times Des Moines Bureau and Radio
Iowa, showed that 29 out of 50 senators would vote against the current
death penalty proposal.

All 25 Democrats and four Republicans oppose the measure, with most of
them citing their religious beliefs as the reason. Only 18 senators
support the bill, with 2 undecided and one unavailable for comment.

Gronstal has refused to debate the death penalty the past 2 years because
he personally is opposed to it and does not think it has enough support to
warrant attention. "Now more than ever, I join my Republican and
Democratic colleagues in hoping that the Senate will focus its time and
energy on issues that unite us and provide real protections to our
communities and neighborhoods," he said.

A death-penalty bill passed the House Judiciary Committee this week, but
House leaders have not said whether they think it will pass or even be
debated on the House floor.

The current proposal in the House and Senate would allow the death
sentence to be used for offenders who kidnap, rape and murder a child.

Senate Co-president Jeff Lamberti, R-Ankeny, said earlier in the session
that he thought there was majority support for the death penalty in the
Senate. When he was told this week that 29 senators oppose the plan, he
replied that the results might change during a debate, if debate is
allowed.

"Maybe thats where they all are, but it sometimes changes when it comes to
a vote," he said.

(source: Quad Cities Times)

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

Theater project focuses on death penalty issue


University of Northern Iowa students, faculty and staff will ask the
community to think critically about incarceration and the death penalty
during the Dead Man Walking School of Theatre Project week of events.

Jennifer Freitag, the UNI Interpreters Theatre graduate production
assistant, said the events are particularly timely since the Legislature
has been asked to rethink the death penalty in Iowa.

"This is an issue that really does affect everyone in some way, a distant
way," Freitag said. "A lot of students or people don't realize the opinion
they hold about the issue. A big part of this week's events is raising
awareness about the issue and helping people to make an informed opinion
on the issue."

The Dead Man Walking School of Theatre Project aims to widen the circle of
public discourse on the death penalty and capital punishment. It is a
project supported by the Death Penalty Discourse Center. To learn more
about the project go to www.dmwplay.org.

Events include:

--- "Ethnic Minorities in the Criminal Justice System: Serving Justice &
Equity while Preserving Safe Communities," 7 p.m. Monday in the Commons
Slife Ballroom, free to the public. This will be a panel discussion on
disproportionate minority incarceration in Iowa. Panel members include R.
Allen Hays, UNI professor of political science; Christopher W. Mullins,
UNI assistant professor of criminology; Robert Smith, Black Hawk County
Board of Supervisors; and the Rev. Belinda Creighton-Smith, pastor at
Faith Temple Baptist Church in Waterloo.

--- Theatre UNI will present a reading of the play "The Exonerated,"
directed by Jay Edelnant, UNI professor of theater, at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday
in room 108 in the Communications Arts Center, free to the public. The
play is about the true stories of 6 people and their experience with the
American justice system. This production does contain material that may
not be suitable for all audiences.

--- New York artist and activist Michael Keck will speak with students and
faculty members about his work with the incarcerated and their families at
3:30 p.m. Wednesday in Sabin 102, free to the public. Keck's theater
workshops are built around themes of social change, community, identity,
understanding between cultures, creativity and expression.

--- "Dead Man Walking," directed by Karen Mitchell, UNI professor of
communication, explores the relationship that develops when a Catholic nun
receives a letter from a death row inmate trying to find help to avoid
execution. The play is based on the experiences of Sister Helen Prejean.
The show starts at 7:30 p.m. each night Wednesday through Satruday in the
Interpreters Theatre in Lang Hall 40. Admission is $3 for UNI students and
$6 for the general public. Tickets are available at www.theatreuni.com or
273-6391. Keck will be available for discussion following the Friday
performance. This production may contain material not suitable for all
audiences.

(source: Waterloo Cedar Falls Courier)






MISSISSIPPI:

Man found guilty in Hinds County death penalty case


A jury found Eric Moffett guilty today of capital murder in Hinds Countys
1st death penalty case in 6 years.

After a little more than 4 hours of deliberation, the jury convicted
Moffett of killing his then-girlfriends 5-year-old daughter, Felicia
Griffin, in 1994.

Shortly after 8 p.m., the jury began hearing evidence in the penalty phase
to decide whether he receives the death penalty or life in prison without
parole.

If the jury cant decide, Circuit Judge Swan Yerger would be required by
law to sentence Moffett to life in prison without parole.

(source: Clarion-Ledger)



Reply via email to