[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS

[Rick Halperin]

June 6


TEXAS----foreign national loses dp appeal

Argentine on death row loses appeal


An Argentine whose 1st death sentence was overturned because of improper
racial testimony, lost another appeal to get off Texas death row
Wednesday.

Victor Saldano's case gained international attention when former state
Attorney General John Cornyn said Saldano should either be sentenced to
life in prison or given a new punishment hearing because a psychologist's
testimony during his 1996 trial said Saldano's Hispanic background made
him likely to be a future danger to society.

Cornyn, now a U.S. Sen., went before the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000,
arguing that county prosecutors made a mistake by allowing the testimony.

A federal judge threw out Saldano's original death sentence, but he landed
back on death row in 2004 after a new punishment hearing.

In another appeal to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Saldano raised
multiple issues, including that he should have been allowed to present
expert testimony that conditions on death row caused him to suffer
psychological deterioration and misbehave, issues that again could be used
to judge his future dangerousness.

That testimony was not allowed because Saldano would not agree to also be
interviewed by a state psychiatric expert.

Saldano wanted to argue that his bad behavior on death row  threatening
guards, throwing urine and feces and setting fires  was the result of his
wrongly being sent to death row in the 1st place.

The court, which had upheld Saldano's 1st death sentence, ruled against
him again.

Saldano was convicted in 1996 of abducting Paul King, 46, from a Dallas
grocery store, then robbing and fatally shooting him. His case was widely
publicized in Argentina, which does not allow capital punishment.

(source: Associated Press)

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

Court overturns conviction in yogurt shop murders


A 2nd conviction stemming from Austin's "Yogurt Shop Murders" was
overturned on appeal Wednesday, leaving prosecutors with no convictions
from one of the city's most notorious crimes in which four teenage girls
were killed.

A divided Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday ruled that Michael
Scott got an unfair capital murder trial because he was not allowed to
cross-examine co-defendant Robert Springsteen IV, who had given a
statement to police incriminating him.

A lower appeals court ruled against Scott, but the Court of Criminal
Appeals ruled 5-4 to order a new trial. The court had the same margin when
it overturned Springsteen's capital murder conviction last year.

Springsteen, who was 17 in 1991 when the crime was committed, was sent to
death row 2001, but his sentence was commuted to life in prison after the
U.S. Supreme Court ruled executing juvenile killers is unconstitutional.
Scott was convicted in a separate trial and sentenced to life in prison.

Both raised appeals that they were convicted based on statements they gave
to police and their constitutional right to confront their accuser was
violated.

Killed during the robbery of the I Can't Believe It's Yogurt store were
Eliza Hope Thomas, 17; Amy Ayers, 13; and sisters Jennifer and Sarah
Harbison, ages 17 and 15. The store was then set on fire.

It was one of the city's most notorious crimes, sending detectives chasing
thousands of leads, some as far as Mexico.

The case went cold until 1999, when police following old leads returned to
question Scott and Springsteen, who had moved to Charleston, W. Va.

Police arrested both men and two other defendants, but prosecutors have
struggled to make their case ever since. Charges against the other 2 men
were dismissed.

Because the fire at the shop destroyed most of the physical evidence, the
confessions from Springsteen and Scott that implicated each other were
vital to the case.

Springsteen's confession was secretly recorded during a pre-arrest
interview with police. Scott talked with investigators for nearly 20
hours. His statements were recorded, and he signed a written version of
his comments.

They were tried separately for Ayers' murder, and their lawyers fought
unsuccessfully to keep the statements out of court.

Both men accused police of coercing the confessions and exercised their
Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination to avoid testifying at
trial.

Prosecutors said the statements merely corroborated details in the
confessions and did not harm the defendants' constitutional rights.

(source: Associated Press)

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

New Date Set for Renteria Retrial


A new date has been set for the sentencing retrial of a man convicted of
kidnapping and murdering a 5 year-old girl.

The retrial for David Renteria's sentencing will be on October 5th.

Renteria is on death row in Huntsville for the 2003 killing of 5 year-old
Alejandra Flores.

In 2006, an appeals court decided to reverse Renteria's death sentence,
but El Paso District Attorney- Jaime Esparza- says he will seek the death
penalty again in the retrial.

(source: KTSM News)

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

Cruel reality: The innocent are sometimes convicted


We have recently learned about the apparent tragedy of Timothy Cole, a
possibly innocent man, who died in prison and may have been wrongly
convicted of rape. Regardless of the particulars of this case, it is not
an uncommon occurrence for an innocent person to be convicted. Why does
this happen?

The most common cause is misidentification. A victim is absolutely sure of
her identification (e.g. "I'll never forget those eyes.") The jury quite
naturally believes the witness who is being fully truthful but
unfortunately wrong. That may have been the problem in the Cole case.

Additionally, innocent people are sometimes convicted because of false
confessions. Most people believe that an innocent person would never
confess, but it sometimes happens.

Still others have been wrongly convicted on the basis of bad forensics,
that is cases in which an "expert" inadvertently (or in rare cases,
intentionally) misreads blood or fingerprint tests.

So-called jailhouse confessions also have led to conviction of the
innocent. Here, the prosecutor sometimes offers leniency to a jailhouse
inmate in exchange for testifying to the defendant's confession. This has
been known to cause inmates to falsely report a confession so that the
inmate can receive his own benefit of leniency.

There is yet another reason for convicting the innocent. The standard of
proof is supposed to be beyond a reasonable doubt. But frankly it is
sometimes hard for a jury that has a probably guilty murderer, rapist, or
child molester before it to just turn him loose. So, if a jury sees a man
who probably molested his daughter, it can either find him not guilty and
return him to his daughter, or find him guilty and protect his family.
Frequently, juries choose the latter alternative.

Unfortunately, the sad fact is that no matter what we do, we are still
going to have to face the cruel reality that we sometimes will convict the
innocent.

What does or should this say about capital punishment? In Texas, as we
know, we are seeking to add certain child molestation crimes to list of
death eligible. This is likely to increase our lead as the state most
likely to impose capital punishment. Regrettably, the state that leads the
nation in death sentences is very likely to be at or near the lead in
death sentences for innocent people (unless we are statistically very
lucky.)

Of course there are powerful reasons for retaining the death penalty. Some
think that it serves as a deterrent to crime. Others believe that the
public needs to be protected lest a vicious killer escape from prison and
attack other innocent people. Finally, there are some people that are just
so rotten, it feels wrong to some to let them live.

These arguments, though surely debatable in the context of even a guilty
person, take on an ominous gloss when we realize that some of the people
that we sentence to death are actually innocent. I have listened to some
of these people speak, and frankly it is chilling to hear about their time
on death row for a crime they did not commit.

But they are the lucky ones. My heart goes out to those who were factually
innocent and actually executed. Unfortunately, nobody knows how many were
in that category. But given the number of our known near misses, it is
hard to believe that the number is insignificant.

I believe that this cold hard fact should tell us that we need to be
rethinking the cost/benefit value of retaining capital punishment. At the
very least, we should be wary about expanding it. Recently, upon learning
that more than half of its death row inmates had not been properly proven
guilty, and that many were factually innocent, Illinois imposed a
moratorium on its death penalty.

I would support a similar a similar approach for Texas before we execute
another innocent person, perhaps somebody that you or I really care about.

(source: Lubbock Avalanche-Journal -- ARNOLD H. LOEWY is the George Killam
Professor of Criminal Law at Texas Tech Law School)

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

Ex-deputy gone bad to be executed tonight


Alone in her family's Houston flower shop, Deborah McCormick saw repeat
customer and former Harris County sheriff's deputy Michael Griffith at the
door and figured it was OK to let him in to buy some roses.

The decision almost 13 years ago cost McCormick her life when she was
robbed, raped and fatally stabbed.

Griffith is set to pay with his life Wednesday evening when state
corrections officials execute him.

"My mother was always welcoming and very friendly," said McCormicks
daughter, Dawn Kirkland, who planned to watch Griffith's execution. "If
anything, he hasnt spoken out at all. I would like to know why, why her of
all people. Then again, I might not like the answer."

Griffith, 56, would be the 15th condemned inmate executed this year in
Texas, the nation's busiest capital punishment state. He's also the 1st of
5 convicted killers scheduled for lethal injection this month in Texas.

The U.S. Supreme Court in January refused to review his case and Griffiths
lawyer planned no additional appeals to try to block the execution.

"I have consulted my client on this  about filing anything on his behalf,"
James Rytting said. "Theres nothing left."

Griffith, one of the few former lawmen ever on death row in Texas, rose to
the rank of sergeant over his 10-year Harris County career, then was fired
for violating the sheriffs department policy on domestic abuse.

He declined to speak with reporters in the weeks preceding his scheduled
punishment.

Griffith also was convicted of committing two violent robberies in October
1994, the same month the 44-year-old McCormick was killed. In one,
evidence showed he shot a woman in the head during the robbery of a
savings and loan office. In the other, he robbed and sexually assaulted a
woman at a bridal salon. Both women survived and testified against him.

Former wives and girlfriends also testified how he abused them, including
one who said he became violent with her on their wedding day.

"It's amazing to see a policeman go bad like that," said Ira Jones, a
former Harris County assistant district attorney who prosecuted Griffith.
"Policemen make mistakes. They are human beings. But to go that bad,
there's something seriously wrong."

Griffith was arrested after the robbery and attack at the bridal shop.
Police found him with credit cards belonging to McCormick's mother that
were taken in the flower shop robbery. They also found a knife and a
receipt for roses he'd purchased that day from the store.

McCormick's mother, who ran the store with her daughter, said Griffith had
been a frequent customer. Mary Ringer left briefly that morning and the
women had a policy to not allow people into their place unless they knew
them. When Ringer returned, she found her daughters body.

A medical examiner testified the knife found on Griffith was used to
repeatedly stab McCormick. DNA tests tied it to the victim and to
Griffith.

"The evidence against him was overwhelming," said David Cunningham, his
trial lawyer. "We didn't contest the issue of guilt-innocence. It was a
punishment case from the start."

A defense psychologist said Griffith had a borderline personality disorder
that showed up against wives and girlfriends whose actions reminded him of
growing up in Los Angeles where his neglectful mother was described as
often angry and violent when drunk.

"The way our mental health experts described it, the glue that held him
together was the fact he had his environment provided by law enforcement,"
Cunningham said. "When he got out of law enforcement, he went overboard. I
thought it was a compelling case to show why he should live."

A Harris County jury disagreed, deliberating about three-and-a-half hours
before returning with the death penalty.

After Griffith, scheduled to die next is Cathy Henderson, facing lethal
injection June 13 for the 1994 slaying of Brandon Baugh, a 3-month-old
Austin-area child she was baby-sitting. Henderson has insisted the child's
skull was fractured accidentally when she dropped him. His body was found
18 days after she and the child disappeared and about 60 miles to the
north, buried in a field in a wine cooler box. She said she panicked and
fled to her native Missouri.

Henderson would be the 4th woman executed in Texas since the state resumed
carrying out capital punishment in 1982 and the 12th nationally since the
U.S. Supreme Court in 1976 allowed the death penalty to resume.

(source: Associated Press)