Jan. 31 NORTH CAROLINA: Governor holds clemency hearing Those who want to see James Adolph Campbell executed and those who want to see his life spared made their cases Tuesday to Gov. Mike Easley. The clemency hearing took place even though a Wake County judge last week delayed Campbell's Feb. 9 execution, as he did for two other inmates, because of questions about whether top state leaders had approved a doctor's limited role in executions. Prison officials have not said whether they will appeal the ruling or take other action to get the executions back on schedule. Also Tuesday, another death row inmate, Archie Lee Billings, filed a lawsuit in Wake Superior Court to stop prison officials from setting his execution date. The lawsuit raises the same issues that led to the judge's ruling last week. Billings was convicted of the 1995 rape and murder of an 11-year-old Yanceyville girl and the stabbing her 13-year-old brother. Campbell, 45, was sentenced to death for the 1st-degree murder of Katherine Price, a 20-year-old Kannapolis woman. On Sept. 9, 1992, Campbell raped Price, twice attempted to strangle her and stabbed her 22 times in the face and neck. At the time, prosecutors say, Campbell had recently been released from a South Carolina prison after kidnapping and rape convictions. Rowan District Attorney Bill Kenerly described Campbell as a serial rapist, saying Campbell had raped four women before Price. "He is the most dangerous person I've ever prosecuted. And I've prosecuted people for their second murder," Kenerly said in an interview last week. On Tuesday, Kenerly and lawyers with the state Attorney General's Office said they told Easley why Campbell should be executed. For Kenerly, there is no question that Campbell is guilty. Kenerly said that in a 27-page confession, Campbell offered a specific time of Price's death, telling investigators this detail: He looked at his watch when he saw the lights go out of her eyes. "His past crimes in addition to this crime justify the ultimate punishment," Kenerly said. Campbell's appellate attorneys, William Livesay and Gordon Widenhouse, urged Easley to spare Campbell's life, saying his trial attorneys and the judge failed him. Livesay said that Campbell's trial attorneys didn't tell the jury details of Campbell's horrific childhood and mental illness that might have explained how and why the crime occurred. They said Campbell "snapped" when he killed Price, and therefore committed at most 2nd-degree murder. The lawyers also said the jury asked during its deliberations how long Campbell might spend in prison and whether he could get out for good behavior. The judge refused to answer the question, they said. "He would have been 92 before he could be considered for parole," Widenhouse said. The lawyers said that if the jurors had known, they might have sentenced Campbell to life in prison. (source: The News & Observer) **************** Death Penalty Needs Review North Carolina's use of the death penalty increasingly is raising concerns about its fairness, its cost and its irrevocable nature at a time when a number of condemned inmates here and elsewhere have been exonerated. Now another major issue has surfaced, involving the role of doctors in executions. A ruling by Judge Donald W. Stephens of Wake County Superior Court gives state officials a solid reason to put the capital punishment machine on hold. Stephens' ruling requires the Council of State to approve a change in the procedure by which executions are conducted. What's involved is the role of a doctor. State law specifies that a doctor must be present when inmates are put to death. However, the N.C. Medical Board, which licenses and sets ethics standards for doctors, declared earlier this month that while physicians may serve as observers at executions, they will be acting unethically if they do anything more. The reason this is problematic has to do with a controversy over lethal injection. Lawyers for death row defendants have argued that the drugs used in executions could leave an inmate in agonizing pain, although unable to signal it. Thus, they contend that the process could amount to cruel and unusual punishment, which is unconstitutional. N.C. officials responded to that concern by installing monitors intended to ensure that an inmate has been rendered unconscious before paralyzing and heart-stopping drugs are injected. Officials with the prison system say that in light of the medical board's ruling, technicians will observe the monitors, not the doctor on duty. But whether that change will pass legal muster is uncertain. Further, the arrangement could put a doctor in a difficult position. What happens, for instance, if the death drugs fail to kill the person in the expected time frame? Does the doctor, following a health care provider's instincts and training, spring into action to revive the inmate - and violate the policy? Or should he instruct the executioner on how to finish the job, and still break the new ethics rule? The case landed in Stephens' court because of a lawsuit, filed on behalf of inmates scheduled to be executed on Jan. 26 and Feb. 2, questioning the constitutionality of lethal injections. Those executions were halted as a result of the ruling. Another set for Feb. 9 also has been put off. Stephens' ruling, based on an obscure 1909 law, brings the death penalty issue before a group that hardly expected to have to deal with it. But the Council of State, 10 officials elected statewide and headed by the governor, would have the credibility to decide that it's time to take a long look at the state's death penalty procedures. State Auditor Les Merritt, for example, pointed out that the costs involved deserve to be examined. The state Senate in a previous session agreed to a moratorium on the death penalty, although that move stalled in the House. Both chambers have ample reason to reconsider a moratorium this year. But in the meantime, better for the Council of State to go along with a temporary halt - giving the legislature, with help from the medical and legal communities, time to decide the best way to punish those who commit the state's most diabolical crimes. (source: The Sun News) NEBRASKA: Death penalty debate coming up in Legislature The 1st Legislature affected by term limits could be headed toward the first full-fledged debate on abolishing Nebraska's death penalty in many years. Judiciary Committee Chairman Brad Ashford of Omaha said he wants to send a proposal to repeal the death penalty to the full Legislature. While he supports the death penalty, Ashford said repeal should be discussed by all lawmakers, not bottled up in committee. "It is a seminal issue in how we approach crime and punishment. I'll listen to arguments both in committee and on the floor, but it does need to get on the floor," Ashford said in an interview. The Judiciary Committee has scheduled a public hearing today on Legislative Bill 476, introduced by State Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha to repeal the death penalty and replace it with a sentence of life without possibility of parole. 5 votes are needed to advance a bill from committee. Ashford would join 3 death penalty opponents - Chambers, DiAnna Schimek of Lincoln and Dwite Pedersen of Elkhorn. The 4 remaining committee members - Sens. Steve Lathrop of Omaha, Amanda McGill of Lincoln, Vickie McDonald of St. Paul and Pete Pirsch of Omaha - all said they are keeping an open mind and may join the others in sending the bill to floor debate. Attorney General Jon Bruning said that while he does not begrudge the Legislature's debate, Nebraska should retain the death penalty and eventually adopt lethal injection as its mode of execution. "I believe in the efficacy of the death penalty, and I believe Nebraska should continue to have the death penalty for those rare cases that are beyond the pale," he said. No bill to change to lethal injection was introduced this year. No one has been executed in Nebraska since Robert Williams went to the electric chair on Dec. 2, 1997, for the murders of two Lincoln women. Carey Dean Moore, the death row inmate considered closest to execution, was sentenced in 1979. If repeal is debated, it would be the first time since 1979 that the full Legislature has considered the question, said Eric Aspengren of Nebraskans Against the Death Penalty. That year, lawmakers approved a repeal law. It was vetoed by then-Gov. Charles Thone. In 1988, the Legislature debated replacing the death penalty with a flat 30-year minimum prison sentence. In 1992, a repeal proposal came out of the Judiciary Committee, but support fell away and the measure never was brought up for debate. In 1999, the Legislature voted for a 2-year moratorium on executions while the death penalty's fairness was studied. The moratorium was vetoed by then-Gov. Mike Johanns. Chambers, who has introduced a repeal proposal every legislative term since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976, said he expects the committee to advance LB 476. He offers no predictions on its ultimate fate. "The issues, other than the emotionalism, will be heard by (most senators) for the first time," he said. Chambers has less than two years remaining under term limits to accomplish his long-time goal of repealing the death penalty. Getting rid of the death penalty is as important to him today as it was in the very beginning, he said. "I look at this effort like a marathon. It's necessary to pace yourself so you have the same amount of strength as you started," he said. In an Associated Press survey before the session began, 29 legislators, including Pirsch and McDonald, said they opposed repealing the death penalty. McDonald said Tuesday that she has not decided how she will vote in the Judiciary Committee. "The jury's still out. It's been a long time since there's been an execution in Nebraska," she said. "Maybe we need to address this issue again." Pirsch supports the death penalty in the most heinous circumstances. He said he may consider voting the bill out for debate. "It's a healthy debate," he said. "It's a very somber, serious act that the state takes; it deserves that level of review." McGill and Lathrop said they have concerns about the death penalty. Although he neither supports nor opposes the death penalty, Lathrop said he may vote to advance the bill just so it can be debated by the full Legislature. (source: Omaha World-Herald) INDIANA: Death penalty change debated----Senate measure would exempt the mentally ill Indiana could be the 1st state to prohibit the execution of mentally ill people under a bill debated by a key Senate corrections committee Tuesday. No vote was taken on Senate Bill 24, which would allow a judge to find in the beginning of a case that a defendant has a severe mental disability or disorder that significantly impairs the ability to appreciate the wrongfulness of his or her conduct. Currently, jurors can use mental illness as mitigating evidence when considering the death penalty, but it is still legal for a mentally ill person to receive the death penalty so long as he is not mentally retarded. Several members of the Senate Corrections, Criminal and Civil Matters Committee focused their questions on the level of mental illness that would be required to meet this new definition and those people who purposely stop taking their medication. But Kathy Bayes, executive director of National Alliance for the Mentally Ill Fort Wayne, testified that mental illness is about brain dysfunction, not choices made. She told the members about her highly educated husband slipping into psychosis. He believed his family would be attacked by the Antichrist and was stockpiling guns and knives to defend them. At one point, her daughter became so afraid that she installed a lock on the inside of her door. "It isn't anything he did," Bayes said. "It isn't his fault. His brain is broken." Eventually, with proper medication, her husband returned to relative normalcy. He leads a support group and no longer is obsessed with anger or violence. But if he had committed a crime, Bayes said, "these are not the people we should be giving the death penalty to. These people are very sick." Steve Johnson, executive director of the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council, testified against the bill, saying it means legislators don't trust Indiana citizens on juries to make the right call when presented with all the evidence during the sentencing phase of a trial. He believes the state should wait for a U.S. Supreme Court opinion on a similar case that is currently pending before it moves forward. Sen. Brent Steele, R-Bedford, held the bill so that legislators could consider the significant policy change before possibly taking a vote next week. (source: the Journal Gazette) IDAHO: No death penalty for smuggling-case driver Prosecutors said they will not seek the death penalty against a driver arrested for investigation of human smuggling after his crowded van crashed near Idaho Springs, killing 4 people. Jose Franco-Rodriguez, 23, of Mexico, who has been deported from the United States twice for being here illegally, appeared Tuesday in federal court in Denver. Franco-Rodriguez is charged with transporting unlawful aliens in the United States resulting in death and unlawful re-entry of a previously deported alien. In November, Franco-Rodri guez was driving eastbound on Interstate 70 in a Dodge van filled with 14 passengers from Mexico when he lost control on a snow-packed curve, hit a tree and rolled the van, authorities said. Franco-Rodriguez, who is in federal custody, faces a possible life sentence because of the deaths. But prosecutors said Tuesday they will not pursue a death sentence against him. His next court appearance is scheduled for Friday. (source: Denver Post) FLORIDA: Daytona killer wins chance to get off death row in '89 plot----A judge agreed with 'Kosta' Fotopoulos' claims that his death sentence was unfair. The man behind one of Central Florida's most bizarre and sensational murder plots has won a victory in his attempt to get off death row. An Orlando federal judge has ruled in favor of resentencing Konstantinos "Kosta" Fotopoulos, who was condemned to die for masterminding the 1989 scheme to kill his wife with the help of his lover, a plot that left 2 teenagers dead. U.S. District Judge Gregory A. Presnell ruled Monday that Fotopoulos deserves a new sentencing hearing, which could lead to a new penalty trial for Fotopoulos. Carolyn Snurkowski, who heads the criminal appellate division for the state Attorney General's Office, said Tuesday that her office will appeal the ruling, so a new penalty trial will have to wait for a final federal decision. The case is expected to go to a federal appeals court in Atlanta. Still, State Attorney John Tanner, who prosecuted the original trial in 1990, said his office is prepared to go through the sentencing phase again if necessary. "We're gearing up to begin the resentencing process and, if need be, we'll retry the penalty phase and seek the death sentence," Tanner said. Fotopoulos' attorney, James L. Driscoll Jr., said Tuesday that he was pleased with the federal ruling. "For Mr. Fotopoulos, this is an extremely significant ruling, but it still has to go through the appellate process in federal court," said Driscoll of Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, which represents death-row inmates. Fotopoulos, 47, once ran a pool hall on the Daytona Beach Boardwalk and has spent the past 16 years on death row for the notorious plot to kill his then-wife, Lisa, for $700,000 in life insurance. The plot began, according to court records, when Fotopoulos videotaped his former lover, cocktail waitress Deidre Hunt, tying 19-year-old Kevin Ramsey to a tree and shooting him to death. He then used the tape to gain leverage over Hunt, persuading her to hire 18-year-old Bryan Chase to stage a burglary at the Fotopoulos home. During the burglary, Chase shot Lisa in the head as she lay beside her husband in bed. Kosta Fotopoulos then shot and killed Chase. Lisa survived but still has a bullet in her head. Hunt originally pleaded guilty to the killings and was sentenced to death. She was allowed to withdraw her guilty plea in 1995 when the Florida Supreme Court decided her former attorney improperly sold her story to the tabloid TV show A Current Affair. During her 1998 trial, Hunt was convicted of her role in the killings but was sentenced to life in prison. Fotopoulos' former wife remarried and is now Lisa Psaros, who, along with her brother Dino Paspalakis, runs a gift shop and an arcade on the Daytona Beach Boardwalk, carrying on the tradition of Greek-American families who have run many Boardwalk businesses. Neither could be reached for comment Tuesday. In the new federal ruling, Presnell agreed with two of Fotopoulos' claims that his death sentence was unfair. The judge pointed out that prosecutors had set up two starkly different pictures of Hunt's role in the murder scheme. During Hunt's original sentencing hearing, she had been portrayed by prosecutors as a coldblooded murderer who wasn't coerced by anyone. During Fotopoulos' trial, prosecutors portrayed her as a battered woman controlled by her lover. The jury in his trial had been profoundly affected by the battered-woman portrayal, the judge wrote, as well as the knowledge that Hunt was already sentenced to die. The federal judge wrote that Fotopoulos' original defense attorney failed by not taking advantage of the markedly different portrayals of Hunt. "Had defense counsel done so, it would not only have impeached Ms. Hunt's testimony, it would have brought into question the integrity and credibility of the prosecution itself," Presnell wrote. "There can be no more powerful defensive tactic than the impeachment of one's opponent." (source: Orlando Sentinel)
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----N.C., NEB., IND., IDAHO, FLA.
Rick Halperin Wed, 31 Jan 2007 10:55:24 -0600 (Central Standard Time)