June 11 NEW HAMPSHIRE: Brooks is a pawn in Ayotte's game New Hampshire Attorney General Kelly Ayotte wants to kill somebody. She wants to kill Michael "Stix" Addison - provided of course, Addison gets convicted of the capital murder of Manchester police officer Michael Briggs. But New Hampshire isn't the Wild West. You can't just hold court and string 'em up from the nearest tree. These things must be done strategically, like a well-played game of chess. There are many obstacles that stand between Addison and a New Hampshire State Prison body bag. The state hasn't executed anyone since 1939. There are no policies to govern the process of deliberately killing a human being. Few New Hampshire lawyers have any experience in prosecuting or defending a capital case. Removing these obstacles will take time and money. The biggest obstacle to Mr. Addison's execution can't be removed by money alone. You see, Addison is black. There is no criticism of the death penalty more compelling than its discriminatory application against minorities. With a black population of less than 1 %, New Hampshire simply can't break a 70-year moratorium on executions by killing a black man. This is especially true since the last cop-killer convicted in New Hampshire was white. He got a sentence of life without the possibility of parole. What Kelly Ayotte needs is a white man to execute first. Enter Jay Brooks. Brooks is accused of murder for hire. Never mind that no one has ever been executed in this state under that statute. Never mind that there are several convicted killers already incarcerated in New Hampshire who conspired with others to commit murder. Pamela Smart comes to mind. Never mind that the expense of an execution would exceed the total costs of lifetime incarceration for Brooks. The state has indicted Brooks on capital murder charges. Brooks is a pawn in the attorney general's game - a white pawn. If the state can convict Jay Brooks of capital murder charges, it will help diffuse criticism that New Hampshire's application of the death penalty is racially biased. If the state can convict Brooks of capital murder, it's one step closer to checkmate for Stix Addison. PHILIP S. HORNER -- Concord (source: Letter to the Editor, Concord Monitor) INDIANA: Debating the death penalty----Some local clergy are opposed to ultimate punishment, but police say it is necessary for cop killers. Charles Mason, a retired priest from Grace Episcopal Church, emphasized twice during a 15-minute interview that capital punishment is more expensive than life in prison without parole. Make sure to include that it cost more, he said. The bottom-line argument is perhaps the most tangible and easily understood when making a public case against the death penalty. A study conducted by the Indiana Legislative Services Agency compared the cost in Indiana of a death penalty case and life without parole and concluded that the death penalty was 30 to 37.5 percent more expensive. But Mason's true opposition, along with that of many other clergymen, is based on morality. "To take somebody's life is the ultimate in playing God," the self-described social activist said. "We do not have the right to do that." "We must rise above the violence of other people." More than 1/2 of the world's nations have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice, including more than 30 in the past decade. In 1999, the U.S. executed more people than any nation but China and the Congo. Minister Thomas Perchlik of Muncie's Unitarian Universalist Church has written letters and preached sermons against the death penalty. One of his biggest problems with capital punishment, he said, is that it potentially sends convicted killers to their graves before they can make reconciliation with God and those they hurt. 15 years on death row might not be enough time to do so, he said. Perchlik also acknowledged that some might never find reconciliation in their natural lives. "It is for us to keep that door open," Perchlik said. Capital punishment also amplifies social injustice because death rows across America house disproportionate numbers of minorities and indigents, Perchlik said. Muncie deputy police chief Terry Winters, slain officer Gregg Winters' brother, questioned if death penalty opponents would feel the same way if they were in his shoes. He supports capital punishment, especially for cop killers, as a deterrent against murder. "A police officer that is out there protecting society needs protection also," he said. Delaware County Sheriff George Sheridan shared Winters' support. "I think that the death penalty is one thing that keeps tyrant criminals from killing police officers in droves," he said. (source: The Star Press) *************************** TURNING A BLIND EYE: Death penalty not warranted in murder trial In a move that could have long-lasting ramifications for Indiana's criminal justice system, a Lawrenceburg judge denied Tommy Pruitt's request for a new trial Friday. This clears the way for Pruitt to face the death penalty for the murder of a Morgan County sheriff's deputy in 2001. Pruitt has an IQ which has been tested at between 52 and 81. His attorneys have asserted since his original trial that he is mentally retarded and thus should not face execution for his crime. Pruitt has been here before. In 2005 the Indiana Supreme Court issued a 4-1 decision denying him a new trial, arguing that despite his IQ he hadn't proven he was mentally impaired enough to be spared. Justice Robert D. Rucker argued in a dissenting opinion that "it is clear ... that Pruitt is mentally retarded even under a standard requiring proof by clear and convincing evidence." Since the Court overturned Indiana's "clear and convincing evidence" statute as part of the ruling in Pruitt's case, Rucker argued, the case should have been remanded to the trial court with instructions to sentence Pruitt to a term of years. That never happened. Two years later, justice again was not served in Pruitt's case. Pruitt committed a terrible crime. I'm not going to deny that. Pruitt was found guilty of shooting Morgan County Deputy Daniel Stairnes on June 14, 2001. Prosecutors argued he ambushed Stairnes, laying in wait with a police scanner and a cache of guns before shooting Stairnes and his son, who was an intern with the sheriff's department at the time. If Pruitt is, however, mentally retarded, by law the state should not be able to execute him for a crime he committed but did not understand. Atkins v. Virginia stands as precedent that execution of the mentally retarded is cruel and unusual punishment under the 8th Amendment. Stairnes' own son noted in a wishtv.com article after the trial that "[Pruitt] looked like he was kind of bobbing his head up and down. He was ready for the courtroom to be over. He was watching the clock." A week later, WTHR-13 would report that, during the death penalty phase of his trial, Pruitt sat motionless, failed to react to the verdict and said absolutely nothing, just as he had during the trial. "Tommy being Tommy, I am not sure he understands it," said Pruitt's attorney Bill Van Der Pol. Execution of the mentally retarded is nothing new. Before the precedent of Atkins, Mario Marquez was executed in Texas when his lawyer wasn't able to raise evidence of his 65 IQ at trial. And in 1999, Earl Washington, who had a 69 IQ, was pardoned in Virginia when DNA evidence proved his innocence. He'd spent 16 years in prison because he confessed to a crime he never committed. In what sense are any of these cases "justice being done?" We should focus now on Pruitt's case and wonder what good could possibly be served by executing a man who can't even understand he committed a crime. At the very least he deserves to have his death sentence commuted to a term of years in prison. (ource: Ball State Daily News -- Jonathan Sanders is a senior journalism major and writes 'Turning a Blind Eye' for the Daily News) DELAWARE: Suit on executions in Delaware delayed until October A new trial date has been set in the federal civil case that has held up all executions in Delaware since May 2004. Chief District Judge Sue L. Robinson will now hear the class-action lawsuit against Delaware by the Federal Community Defender Service, on behalf of all Delaware's death row inmates, on Oct. 9. Attorneys for Delaware had opposed the delay but Robinson ruled that the plaintiffs should have more time to complete pre-trial discovery. The case had originally been set to go to trial in September. The lawsuit charges that the way Delaware carries out lethal injections amounts to unconstitutionally cruel and unusual punishment. The Delaware lawsuit is similar to suits filed in other parts of the country that also raise questions about the constitutionality of lethal injection as a method of execution. (source: The News Journal) CALIFORNIA----new death sentence Ramirez gets death penalty for cop killing For the first time since the death penalty was reinstated in California 31 years ago, an Alameda County jury issued a death sentence Monday for a cop killer. Irving Alexander Ramirez, 26, should be killed for shooting San Leandro Police Officer Nels ``Dan'' Niemi seven times, instantly killing him in July 2005, the jury said. The jury returned their verdict after 3 1/2 days of deliberations in an Oakland courtroom. Family members and friends of the slain officer cheered quietly in the courtroom of Judge Jon Rolefson as the verdict was read. Uniformed police officers pumped their fists in the air and relatives of Neimi began to cry. "While we are happy with the outcome, there are no winners,'' said San Leandro Police Chief Dale S. Attarian. The chief said that "if ever there was a case that deserved the ultimately penalty, this was it. The jury saw that somebody needs to protect the people that protect them.'' Meanwhile, on the other side of the room, about a dozen relatives of Ramirez sat in shock upon hearing their loved one would be killed by the State of California. The family later issued a statement. "The pain that we are experiencing in these moments is indescribable. Our hearts are with Irving,'' the statement said. "We also do feel the pain of the officer's family and we extend our care to his family and those affected.'' On July 25, 2005, Ramirez unloaded a clip from his .10 mm handgun into Niemi in hopes of escaping jail time for a probation violation, police said. Neimi was responding to a disturbing the peace call at Doolittle Drive and Belvedere Avenue in San Leandro when he encountered Ramirez, who had drugs and guns in his possession and feared returning to jail. The first shot hit Niemi in the chin after the officer turned his back on the then 23-year-old. After Niemi fell to the ground, Ramirez stood over him and shot his gun 6 more times, ensuring the death of the officer. He was the 1st San Leandro police office killed in the line of duty in 4 decades. The jury's decision to put Ramiriz to death comes after he was convicted of 1st-degree murder with special circumstances. Niemi had been on the force for three years when he died. He left behind a wife and 2 children. "Oh God,'' said Dionne Niemi, the wife of the slain officer, reacting to the verdict Monday. Ramirez's defense team, Deborah Levy and Michael Berger, never disputed the fact that their client killed the officer and admitted the crime was a "horrendous act'' that hurt not only Niemi's family but the entire San Leandro Police Department. However, they argued, the crime did not amount to a death penalty. Ramirez was young and troubled and too drunk to realize what he was doing, they argued. He did not plan to kill Niemi and he did not have a history of violent acts towards others. Instead of death, Levy argued, Ramirez should have received life behind bars without the possibility of parole. ``Irving Alexander Ramirez is not the worst of the worst amongst us,'' Levy said during closing arguments. "He is not an individual that deserves the death penalty.'' But District Attorney Tom Orloff, trying his 1st case in 12 years, said Ramirez deserved the death sentence because of the way the crime was committed and the impact it continues to have on the community. Ramirez didn't just shoot Niemi once to escape a possible jail sentence, he executed the officer at point-blank range with 7 separate bullets, Orloff argued. What's more, Ramirez tried to cover up his crime by taking identification cards from the scene and later throwing his clothes and gun into a muddy marsh in Fremont. "He realized he was going to go to jail, he chose to kill Dan Niemi for his own selfish reasons,'' Orloff said during closing arguments. "It was more important for him to shoot Dan Niemi.'' (source: Oakland Tribune) ************************** possible federal death penalty trial Arellano could face execution for drugs ---- Smuggling law is cited in indictment Kidnapping and torture. Drug smuggling and murder. Federal prosecutors say that for 15 years Francisco Javier Arellano Flix helped direct a ruthless drug-smuggling empire that terrorized both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border, leaving scores dead in its wake. But in a new indictment quietly unsealed May 25, the violence that was the hallmark of the Tijuana-based cartel is not the reason why Arellano could face the death penalty. Instead, the indictment says he is eligible for execution because of his drug smuggling not for any one of the killings outlined in numbing litany in the 29-page indictment. It has not yet been decided whether Arellano will face the death penalty, but it is widely expected that prosecutors will opt for that course before his trial gets under way in January. If that occurs, he could be the 1st person to face execution under the federal death penalty in this district. If he is sentenced to death as a drug kingpin, he would occupy a unique place on the federal death row. All 53 inmates there now are facing execution for committing at least one murder, according to information compiled by the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, D.C. The indictment says Arellano can be executed under the drug kingpin section of the federal death penalty law, enacted in 1994. It says people can be executed if they are part of a continuing criminal enterprise that imports a certain amount of drugs and collects a certain amount of profits. Arellano's indictment says he is responsible for smuggling more than 300 kilograms of cocaine and receiving more than $20 million in profits in a year. Also facing the same allegations is Manuel Arturo Villareal Heredia, a top lieutenant. Why the government elected to lay the groundwork for seeking the death penalty under this part of the law is not spelled out, and federal prosecutors did not respond to requests for comment on the new indictment. Defense lawyers were intrigued. Saying in the indictment that Arellano could face the death penalty as a drug kingpin "is certainly unusual," said Knut Johnson, a San Diego defense lawyer. Certainly the new indictment does not mean prosecutors will have to limit their case to drug-dealing activities, said Charles LaBella, a former federal prosecutor. "They can introduce evidence of other aspects of it that there were murders and he is responsible for them," LaBella said. David Bartick, Arellano's attorney, declined to comment on the new indictment. Prosecutors still could issue another indictment calling for his execution under one of the numerous murder sections in the federal death penalty law, legal experts said. Still, the move to seek Arellano's death as a drug smuggler would be extraordinary. One defense lawyer who did not want to be named said there is only one other case, in North Dakota, where the government has said someone is eligible for the death penalty under the drug-kingpin law. Seeking execution for something other than murder in the Arellano case could present legal problems, said Shaun Martin, a law professor at the University of San Diego School of Law. "The constitutionality of putting someone to death for importing drugs alone is very unclear," Martin said. "If someone was ever sentenced to death purely for importing drugs as opposed to killing someone in the process of doing that, then that would be subject to a constitutional challenge." In a landmark decision in 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a Georgia man could not be executed by that state after being convicted of rape. The impact of the decision largely has been to limit death sentences in the 39 states that allow capital punishment to those who commit or participate in a murder. In recent years some states have begun to test that. 6 states now have laws calling for the death penalty for certain sex crimes against children. A Louisiana man who is on that state's death row for raping a child is believed to be the only nonmurder death row prisoner in the country. California law allows the death penalty only for 1st-degree murders with 1 or more special circumstances, such as lying in wait or multiple murders. The decision on whether to seek the death penalty is still some time away. A committee in the Department of Justice will review a recommendation by local prosecutors on whether to pursue execution, and the final decision will be made by the attorney general. Arellano and his lieutenant, Villareal, pleaded not guilty May 29 to the charges in the new indictment, which include drug, racketeering, conspiracy and money-laundering counts. (source: San Diego Union-Tribune) ******************** Trial Set for California Man Charged With Murdering His Missing Wife As a murder trial gets under way Monday in the disappearance of Nina Reiser, a 31-year-old mother of 2 missing since September, defense lawyers are trying to sow doubt about whether she is dead at all. Reiser's body has never been found a fact that lawyers for her estranged husband, Hans Reiser, 43, are trying to highlight. The defense attorneys have suggested that Nina Reiser may be alive in her native Russia, where she lived until 1999, and that purported family ties to a Russian spy agency and organized crime may be connected to her disappearance. Click here to visit NinaReiser.com, which includes photos of her. The absence of a victim places an added burden on prosecutors, who must rely on circumstantial evidence to persuade jurors not just that her husband committed a homicide, but that a murder was even committed, defense experts say. "Whenever there isn't a body, there's just lots of arguments that are wide open," said Robert Talbot, a criminal law professor at the University of San Francisco. Prosecutors did not charge Scott Peterson, now on California's death row for the murder of his wife, Laci Peterson, Talbot noted, until her remains were found on a beach along San Francisco Bay and identified. The Reisers were embroiled in a nasty custody dispute over their 2 children, a 7-year-old son and 5-year-old daughter, when Nina Reiser disappeared. Her minivan was found abandoned on Sept. 3 after she dropped the children off at her husband's house in a posh section of the Oakland hills, groceries and purse still inside. The son, Rory Reiser, told police that he never saw his mother leave the house after dropping him off, which fits the prosecution's theory that Nina Reiser was killed there. But during a pretrial hearing, the boy testified that he saw his mother drive away. Neither side may get the chance to question the boy about his apparently conflicting statements after he failed to return from a holiday trip to Russia, where his maternal grandmother has begun custody proceedings. Prosecutors have argued that, even without a body, the physical evidence they have uncovered clearly implicates Hans Reiser, a prominent software engineer, in his wife's death. Bloodstains in Hans Reiser's house and car matched Nina Reiser's DNA, police said. Investigators searching Hans Reiser's Honda CRX after his wife's disappearance found trash bags, masking tape, absorbent towels and a floorboard soaked with water, and the car was missing its passenger seat. They also found two books: "Homicide: A Year on the Killing Streets," by David Simon, about the Baltimore police homicide squad, and "Masterpieces of Murder," by Jonathan Goodman, about notorious murder cases. But whatever suspicion their findings manage to cast on Reiser, prosecutors must still contend with California's tough rules on circumstantial evidence. Judges in the state are required to instruct jurors that if the evidence suggests "2 reasonable interpretations," one pointing to guilt and the other innocence, they must reject the guilty interpretation. The decision of Reiser's lawyers not to use legal tactics delay the beginning of his trial as long as possible suggests the defense feels confident it can create uncertainty among jurors, Talbot said. (source: Fox News) WEST VIRGINIA: Death penalty----Is it time for West Virginia to revive capital punishment? Delegate John Overington has been in the West Virginia Legislature for more than 20 years, and it has become a nearly annual effort on his part to try to revive capital punishment in the Mountain State. Overington has been unsuccessful, so far. But after a federal jury, made up of West Virginians, recently handed down death sentences to two individuals from Mingo County who were found guilty of planning to kill and subsequently killing a drug informant, the Berkeley County lawmaker thinks chances are improving for the reinstitution of the death penalty in our state. Gov. Joe Manchin has been on record for more than a decade in support of capital punishment. The governors spokeswoman, Lara Ramsburg, told The Register-Herald earlier this week that his position hasnt changed because when a heinous crime is committed, and where forensic evidence makes it clear beyond a doubt, Manchin would not serve as an obstacle. "There has to be no question of guilt," Ramsburg stated. We're on board with that same train of thought. Far too often in today's society are people guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, of the commission of heinous and senseless acts. Make the death penalty an option for punishment again in West Virginia and maybe some of these vicious felons might think a little longer before acting out. Now we know that for some, no deterrent, even death, would stop them from doing their nasty deeds. Those are clearly your prime candidates for capital punishment. We believe a majority of West Virginians would support such legislation. The problem is that our elected lawmakers on the judiciary panels have squelched even the slightest hint of addressing the issue because it is another one of those hot buttons the politicos never seem to want to touch. It would be nice to see some legislators who are of like thinking with Overington on this subject step up and get this bill into the spotlight for serious consideration. (source: Editorial, The Register-Herald)
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news-----N.H., IND., DEL., CALIF., W. VA.
Rick Halperin Mon, 11 Jun 2007 17:17:19 -0500 (Central Daylight Time)
