April 17


TEXAS:

Livingston residents undaunted by prison----Death row unit hasn't hurt
growth at this lakefront area


When Rick O'Connor and his wife, Janet, bought a new house on Lake
Livingston, they gave little thought to their new neighbors: inmates on
death row.

Like hundreds of other water-lovers who have flocked to this East Texas
town, 75 miles north of Houston, the recently retired couple says the
proximity of the prison, which is within sight of their neighborhood,
doesn't bother them.

"If they escape, they're gonna want to get the hell out of here," Rick
O'Connor said recently as he cleaned his boat.

Like most of the towns in Polk County, Livingston has been growing in
population over the last several years. The 8-square-mile city had a
population of nearly 6,400 in 2004, according to the latest estimate from
the U.S. Census Bureau, compared with 5,400 in 2000 and 5,000 in 1990.

Much of that growth can be attributed to a scramble for remaining
lakefront property, which despite the neighboring prison is expensive and
in high demand. A typical waterfront home there costs more than $300,000
said Realtor Patty Laviolette.

But some growth likely was related to the arrival in 1993 of the Texas
Department of Criminal Justice's Polunsky Unit. The sprawling, fenced
facility employs nearly 800 people, some of whom moved to town for the
job.

The O'Connors' lakeside neighborhood, located behind the prison, is a
dramatic contrast to the drab stretch of FM 350 in front of the facility.
That area is dotted with trailer-home communities.

Lakeside or not, the prison-area residents say they're not afraid.

"All the bad guys are locked up here," said Peggy Smith, a convenience
store employee. "In the city they're all out running loose."

Although men on death row are held at the Polunsky Unit, executions take
place 40 miles away in Huntsville, as required by state law.

Livingston Mayor Ben Ogletree Jr. said the prison has had little effect on
the community other than bringing jobs.

"It's just out there," Ogletree said. "You just see a building, and you
don't see any people. And whatever goes on there is within those walls."

The community solicited the prison in the early 1990s, he said, because of
the potential for economic development. Death row, which accounts for 400
of the prison's 2,900 inmates, arrived in 2000.

"It has done exactly what we thought it was going to," he said. That is -
aside from providing jobs and water and sewer contracts for the city - not
much.

There was little movement on prison property on a recent weekday, other
than the occasional car driving in or out of the parking lot.

The town, too, was serene. Some residents say that's what drew them to
Livingston.

"It's real peaceful," said Cindy Hill, 27, who moved into the neighborhood
a month ago to live with her mother-in-law. "My little girl loves it."

More businesses have popped up in the city since the inmates moved in,
said Florida Harris, who owns a restaurant a mile from the prison.

She remembers FM 350 as a country road, unlike the highway it has become.
Extra traffic means more hungry customers. Much of her clientele is from
out of town, passing through on the way to the lake or the prison, Harris
said.

"I don't really think anything bad is going to happen," Harris said.

Indeed, no inmate has ever escaped from the prison, said Michelle Lyons,
spokeswoman for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.

"Housing the death row population is different than housing any of the
other prison populations," Lyons said. "We are conscious that we are
dealing with a population that really doesn't have anything to lose, so
our security measures are pretty stringent."

Death row inmates are held separately from other prisoners and face more
restrictions, particularly in terms of mobility. The building is set back
from the road and surrounded by fields and nonlethal electronic fencing.

If there were an escape, prison officials would notify people living in
the surrounding area by phone or by walking door-to-door, Lyons said.

On some days, prisoners - not death row inmates but convicts who will be
eligible for parole within the next 2 years - work outside in front of the
prison doing yard work, maintenance or tending horses.

Across the street, Sandra Gates feeds dogs at a makeshift animal shelter.

"They don't even look in this direction," Gates said. "It's like we don't
exist to them. We don't think of it really."

Despite its growth, Harris said, Livingston still has a small-town feel.
"Everybody looks out for one another," she said.

She and her husband, after living in the town for 25 years, are building a
new house - just down the street from the prison.

(source: Houston Chronicle)

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

Forced into sanity before death


With his wild-haired Charles Manson look and a long history of delusional
thinking, self-inflicted injuries and gibberish speech, Steven Kenneth
Staley, when off his anti-psychotic medication, is the picture of madness.

Found guilty in 1991 of murdering a Fort Worth restaurant manager during a
botched holdup, Staley, 43, has spent much of the past 15 years on death
row, in and out of a schizophrenic haze.

Claiming doctors are trying to poison him, he regularly refuses to take
his medicine, leaving him with a shaky grasp of his legal circumstances.

"I had a truck-horse thief, catterwalky judge, I had 12 crooked jurors,
one cry baby water juror baby," Staley said this spring to court-appointed
psychologists trying to determine his competence.

"(They) are trying to steal my '58 Pontiac red pickup truck, which is
about a million and a half dollars on the street, it's a one-of-a-kind
classic," he said of the trial judge and prosecutor.

He also accused talk show host Oprah Winfrey of paying off the jury.

Both state and federal law prohibit the execution of an insane or
incompetent person; Staley already has dodged execution 3 times.

But despite recent findings that Staley does not understand why he is to
be executed and thus is incompetent, he again may face lethal injection.

Last week, a state district judge in Tarrant County ordered that Staley be
forcibly medicated to render him temporarily competent enough to die.

"This Court finds that the State has an essential interest in ensuring
that the sentence of this Court is carried out," District Judge Wayne
Salvant wrote. "Medication is not only the least intrusive method, but
apparently the only method, that will further State's interest."

While the ruling was denounced as Orwellian by Staley's court-appointed
lawyer, Jack Strickland, it was hailed by Tarrant County prosecutors who
emphasize the cold-blooded nature of Staley's offense.

He was convicted of the 1989 shooting of Steak & Ale restaurant manager
Robert Read, who had offered himself as a hostage to spare his employees
and customers.

Staley had threatened to kill Read if anything went wrong, and the manager
was shot in the head at close range during a failed getaway. The killing
came during a 4-state crime spree involving Staley and 2 others.

"Simply put, you should not be able to circumvent the judgment of a jury
by not taking your medication, and thus escape the consequences of your
action," Assistant Tarrant County District Attorney Charles Mallin said.

He said the medication should be administered, forcibly if necessary, and
he questioned Staley's motives for avoiding it.

"One of the flashpoints in this case is that he was competent when he
stopped taking his medication. He made an intentional choice. Why else
would he do it but to save his life?" Mallin asked.

Strickland, who has represented Staley since 1999, was given 3 weeks to
file an appeal to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

"They are trying to cloak this as being in the best medical interests of
Mr. Staley," Strickland said. "I don't care what kind of lipstick they
want to put on the pig. The real purpose is to render him competent so he
can be executed."

In his court pleadings, Strickland rejects the state's claim that Staley
is refusing to take his mediations to avoid being executed.

"There is absolutely no evidence, either direct or implied, that Prisoner
is engaged in a deliberate attempt to avoid medications and thereby avoid
the imposition of the death penalty," he wrote recently.

Both Strickland and Mallin acknowledge state and federal case law on the
issue is thin to nonexistent.

"There is no Texas law, and the Supreme Court of the United States has
never decided this issue. We're out on the cutting edge here. We have
nothing to lose," Mallin said of pressing the issue.

Because the anti-psychotic medication usually helps Staley, Mallin said it
is justifiable to force him to take it, even if it results in him being
executed.

"You can't just order someone to be medicated because we want to execute
them. Not withstanding that we want to execute him, the treatment has to
be medically necessary and appropriate," Mallin said.

While the Supreme Court has ruled a mentally ill inmate can be forced to
take medication to alleviate behavior that makes him a hazard to himself
and others, it has never dealt with a case in which the inmate then could
be executed.

"We have over 3,900 people on death row in the United States. Some studies
would indicate that 70 percent suffer from schizophrenia. So I think it's
a case that will have repercussions not only in Texas, but in the federal
system," Strickland said.

"I think everyone has the expectation that this case might wind up in the
Supreme Court."

The unusual aspects of the case have drawn the attention of various death
penalty interest groups, including the Death Penalty Information Center in
Washington.

Richard Dieter, director of the watchdog organization, which does not take
a position on the death penalty, said several similar cases have arisen
over the past several decades.

In one case, involving Louisiana inmate Michael Owen Perry, who suffered
from incurable schizophrenia, the state Supreme Court ultimately blocked a
forcible medication order that would have allowed his execution.

In an earlier case involving convicted murderer Fred Singleton in South
Carolina, the courts also had ruled that he could not be forced to take
medication that would lead to his execution.

But in an Arkansas case involving an inmate named Charles Singleton, the
courts allowed his execution to go ahead after he voluntarily resumed
taking medication that rendered him competent.

Dieter said executing the mentally ill is fraught with ethical
complications.

"I think even among those who support the death penalty, it is supposed to
be for the worst of the worst, and not just for the crime, but for the
criminal's understanding of the crime and their responsibility for it," he
said.

"Someone who is so mentally ill that they have to be forcibly medicated in
order to tip them close enough to sanity to kill them, whatever their
crime, they are not the worst offenders," Dieter added.

The issue also raises immediate problems for whatever doctor would be
expected to assist in forcing Staley to take his anti-psychotic
medication.

Both the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric
Association have rules against their members participating in such
treatment.

"We cannot treat a person like that for the purpose of restoring
competence so they can be executed," said Dr. Priscilla Ray, chairman of
the AMA's council on ethical and judicial affairs.

Strickland, who is not a death penalty opponent, said evolving standards
of public thinking about who could be executed suggest profoundly mentally
ill people deserve special protection.

"We've gotten to the point where we realize it's not a good idea to
execute mentally retarded people or 17-year-olds," he said.

During his 17 years in state custody, Staley has shown he has a chronic,
untreatable mental illness requiring repeated hospitalizations, Strickland
said. Justice would be served by making certain Staley is never free
again, he said.

"I see little purpose in executing Mr. Staley. It would seem to me that
hospitalization or imprisonment for life, where they would be free to
medicate him without the threat of him being killed, would be
appropriate," he said.

(source: San Antonio Express-News)






ILLINOIS:

Pardon Randy Steidl


8 months ago, Gordon "Randy" Steidl got laid off for 2 weeks from his
factory job. He applied for nearly a dozen other jobs, carefully
explaining to each employer that he had been wrongfully convicted of a
double murder in Illinois. Try putting that on your work application.

Steidl spent 17 years behind bars before the courts ordered a new trial,
and prosecutors declined to pursue one. They did so with good reason:
There had no valid evidence against Steidl, and mounting evidence that he
had been framed.

Again, that's hard to explain on a job app.

"I never got a call back from anybody," Steidl said of his hunt. He is
employed in Missouri as a die-cut operator.

Steidl, 54, seeks an official pardon from the governor. It may be his best
hope for creating some semblance of a normal life. It is certainly his
best chance of finding better-paying employment.

Steidl appeared Wednesday before the Illinois Prisoner Review Board to ask
for a pardon based on his innocence. The board makes private
recommendations to the governor about clemency petitions.

During the proceeding, board members seemed to agree that he deserved a
pardon, but questioned why it should be based on a finding of innocence.
The best a criminal defendant can get in court is a finding of "not
guilty."

Everything in this case does, indeed, point to Steidl's innocence--and to
more sinister things.

Two witnesses that once linked Steidl to the crime have been utterly
discredited. The forensic evidence in the case doesn't connect Steidl.
Witnesses in the case have said that police encouraged them to lie. A
veteran state investigator who looked into the case became convinced that
Steidl and another defendant were innocent. But supervisors allegedly
thwarted him when he sought to investigate a suspect who had political
connections. A federal jury found last year that the supervisors had
retaliated and it awarded damages to the investigator.

Meanwhile, witnesses who confirmed Steidl's alibi have been consistent and
have passed polygraph tests.

A special prosecutor who called a grand jury to re-investigate the murders
told the prison review board that he has found no evidence that Steidl was
connected. "I am almost totally convinced that we have no case," said the
special prosecutor, Ed Parkinson.

Yet Steidl remains in legal limbo: Not guilty, but not declared innocent
either.

Steidl spent years behind bars as a convicted double-murderer before he
was allowed to go home. 12 of those years were on death row.

A pardon based on innocence from the governor would allow Steidl to get
about $160,000 from the Illinois Court of Claims--compensation for the
years the state took from him. It would expunge his record. It would allow
Steidl to explain the 17-year gap in his resume to potential employers.

The grand jury probe set to conclude at the end of May.

So let's get on with it. The prison review board should recommend a pardon
based on innocence. And the governor, as soon as the grand jury concludes
its work, should accept that recommendation.

And when that's done, it will be time to focus attention on Herb Whitlock.
He is the former drinking buddy of Steidl's who was convicted in the same
crime on almost the same discredited evidence. He remains behind bars,
serving a life sentence.

(source: Editorial, Chicago Tribune)






NORTH CAROLINA:

Decision could end N.C. death penalty----Judge to determine if techniques
used meet his standards


Death-penalty opponents are hopeful and supporters are fearful that a
federal judge's decision about whether a convicted murderer should be
executed next week could end the death penalty in North Carolina.

U.S. District Judge Malcolm J. Howard will decide whether prison officials
have resolved his concerns that the state's lethal-injection method puts
Willie Brown Jr. at risk for a painful execution.

Earlier this month, Howard asked state prison officials to have a
medically trained professional on hand to ensure that Brown is sedated
enough before the paralytic and heart-stopping drugs are injected. The
state has suggested that a doctor and nurse monitor a machine to determine
Brown's level of consciousness. But Brown's attorneys said Friday that
only an anesthesiologist will do.

The problem is that anesthesiologists may not be willing to participate -
their professional ethics say that doctors are healers, not executioners.
If Howard decides that the state has to employ an anesthesiologist and
none are willing, the death penalty may be in jeopardy in North Carolina.

"This might be the breakthrough that really ends executions," said state
Sen. Ellie Kinnaird, a Democrat from Carr-boro who first introduced a bill
for a death-penalty moratorium 10 years ago.

But the demise of the death penalty is not something that state Rep. Rick
Eddins, a Republican from Raleigh, would like to see happen.

"I'm very concerned about his decision," said Eddins, a death-penalty
supporter. "I think the current system is fine. It sure is a painless way
to die in comparison to what they put the victims through."

Dick Adams, a victims' advocate and death-penalty supporter, said he hopes
that Howard's intent is to get the U.S. Supreme Court involved. "There
might be a method to his madness," Adams said.

It is unknown when Howard, who was recommended for the bench by former
U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms, a Republican, will make a ruling. It will have to
be before 2 a.m. Friday when Brown is scheduled to be executed.

Howard has found himself in a situation similar to what a California judge
experienced two months ago. That judge's ruling has stalled the death
penalty in California because the state could not find doctors willing to
be involved. It also revitalized similar legal challenges across the
country. Howard was the first judge to follow suit in asking the state to
further involve medical professionals.

Brown, 61, was sentenced to death for the 1983 murder of Vallerie Roberson
Dixon, a convenience-store clerk in Williamston.

Brown is not the first death-row inmate to challenge North Carolina's
method of lethal injection: a series of 3 drugs that first puts an inmate
to sleep, then paralyzes him and finally stops his heart. A similar drug
cocktail is used by most of the 36 other states that offer lethal
injection as a method of execution.

Since 2004, 6 other death-row inmates in North Carolina have filed similar
lawsuits but haven't been as successful. 4 of those inmates have been
executed. Jerry Conner, who is scheduled to be executed May 12, has filed
a federal lawsuit raising the same claims.

The inmates say that if they are not fully sedated before the next 2 drugs
are injected, then they are awake to experience an agonizing death.

Their attorneys say that violates the constitutional ban on cruel and
unusual punishment. James E. Coleman Jr., a law professor at Duke
University, says he thinks that these claims were initially discounted
because they were raised by death-penalty opponents and on behalf of
death-row inmates.

But with reports of innocent people on death row, Coleman said, "I think
judges, especially, and the public now realize these really are important
issues."

The California judge was swayed in part by the prison system's execution
logs that seemed to indicate that inmates' breathing wasn't stopped as
quickly as expected and before the other drugs were injected.

In North Carolina, Howard considered postmortem levels of the sedative in
the four most recently executed inmates. The levels appeared to contradict
the state expert's predictions for what would be there if an inmate
received adequate anesthesia. The state says that the blood samples may
have been incorrectly collected or stored.

Under the state's proposal, a doctor and nurse would monitor the inmate's
level of consciousness on a BIS, or bispectral index monitor, in an
observation room next to the execution chamber. The machine operates on a
scale of zero to 100 - the lower number indicates brain death, and the
higher number indicates that the patient is awake.

The target value for an unconscious patient is below 60, according to the
state's expert, Dr. Mark Dershwitz, an anesthesiologist at the University
of Massachusetts. Once the inmate's level falls below 60, the next two
drugs are injected, Dershwitz said.

In court records, Dershwitz said that the BIS monitor within the context
of the state's protocol "will prevent the possibility of the inmate being
awake."

(source: Winston-Salem Journal)






OKLAHOMA:

Bill seeks death option for sex offenders

A bill working its way through the Legislature would make repeat sex
offenders eligible for the death penalty in Oklahoma. South Carolina
already has the option.

There are more than 5,000 sex offenders registered in Oklahoma, 121 of
whom are habitual offenders, Corrections Department officials said. Though
it is unclear how many of those offenses were against children, many with
more than 1 molestation conviction would have been eligible for the death
penalty had the bill been law when they were convicted.

Supporters of the legislation say child molestation is one of the most
serious crimes and should carry the maximum penaltu. But opponents
question whether killing an offender for a crime other than murder is
constitutional.

Decades ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the death penalty for
rape, kidnapping and robbery.

Sen. Jay Paul Gumm, D-Durant, who introduced legislation this session
calling for the death penalty or live without parole for child molesters,
said the instances of rape struck down by the Supreme Court involved adult
victims, not children. Children are irreparably damaged after being
sexually assaulted, Gumm said. For ruining a child's life, the perpetrator
deserves to die, he said.

"The victims suffer lifelong effects," he said. "I think any crime that
resonates through a victim's life like this is stealing innocence in an
unspeakable way, and we should use the strongest weapon in ourarsenal to
proctec them."

Not many lawmakers are likely to disagree, even if they think the law goes
too far or may be unconstitutional. In an election year, legislators are
leery of voting against any legislation making them look weak on crime or
sympathetic to child molesters, according to lawmakers who did not want to
be named in this report.

Also included in Senate Bill 1708 are penalties for watching pornography
on in-car television screens; a mimimum 25-year sentence for those
convicted of molesting a child 12 or younger, even on the 1st offense; and
longterm institutionalization for those deemed sexually violent predators
after they have completed their sentences.

Rep. Fred Morgan, House sponsor of the bill, said the legislation gives
judges and juries more options, including the death penalty in certain
cases, for sex offenders who are likely to reoffend upon release. He said
treason also carries the possibility of death upon conviction.

"People are sick of sex offenders, and it is time to do something about
it," said Morgan."

Unconstitutional?

Gumm and Morgan contend the bill would withstand a constitutional
challenge because a crime against a child would qualify as "heinous." The
same term is used whether a m;urder conviction qualifies for the death
penalty.

The legislation also is meant to be a strong statement of policy, Gumm
said, showing child molesters their behavior is unacceptable and
punishable by the full extent of the law.

"The life of a perpetrator should not be held in higher regard than the
damage that is done to a child," Gumm said. "We need to send a message to
offenders before they prey on these innocent children."

Randy Coyne, a death penalty and constitutional expert and law professor
at the University of Oklahoma, said deterrence is not much of a factor for
sex offenders.

"I have never seen a threat of death turn a monster into an angel," he
said.

Though he understands the seriousness of sexual child abuse, Coyne said
putting someone to death for it is going too far.

"It is easy to say you want to kill someone for a hideous offense without
regard to the constitution in an election year," he said. "A child can
receive treatment, life does go on, and they can overcome (the abuse) with
help. To add to the harm done to them, the death of another human being
adds next to nothing to their recovery."

Rep. Odilia Dank is the author of legislation calling for a 25-year
minimum sentence for child molesters.

"If a person is so perverted to prey on the young and helpless, they do
not deserve a 2nd chance," said Dank, R-Oklahoms City. "People have a
choice to victimize a child or not, and we need to make the consequences
clear."

The bill was amended in the House Corrections Committee last week and will
next be considered by the full House.

**

Death penalty

Of the 162 people put to death in Oklahoma since 1915, only 8 were for
offenses other than murder.

Since 1960, the Oklahoma death penalty only has been used for those
convicted of murder. About 90 criminals are on Oklahoma's death row,
according to the state Corrections Department.

Senate Bill 1708

Senate Bill 1708 proposes the following:

Allow life imprisonment, life without parole or the death penalty for sex
offenders convicted of raping a child after a prior conviction.

Require child molesters be given a minimum sentence of 25 years, even on a
first offense, if crime involves victims 12 or younger.

Expand state law that prohibits sex offenders from living within 2,000
feet of a school to also include a licensed child-care business.

Allows rapists and pedophiles to be committed to long-term
institutionalization in state prisons after completing their sentence if
they are declared by a jury to be a "sexually violent predator."

Make it illegal to play pornographic movies on any screen in an
automobile.

Forbid a sex offender from living in the same house with his/her child
victim until the victim is at least 18.

Restrict bail for people charged with a crime that would require registry
with the state's sex offender list upon conviction.

Increase penalties for prison escapees, making it a felony punishable by
at least 2 and not more than 7 years in prison.

Allow an arresting officer to test to determine the presence or
concentration of any intoxicating substance, including but not limited to
alcohol.

(source: Oklahoman)






VIRGINIA:

Justices to consider whether killer is mentally retarded


A 28-year-old Virginia man whose case led to a landmark U-S Supreme Court
ruling on the death penalty goes before the state's highest court this
week. A York County jury ruled last August that Daryl Renard Atkins failed
to prove he was mentally retarded, which would spare him execution in
Virginia.

In briefs filed with the state's highest court, lawyers for the state and
for Atkins offer starkly different versions of his childhood and
adolescence, his intelligence and ability to cope with daily life.

Atkins' case led to the U-S Supreme Court ruling that executing the
mentally retarded violates the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual
punishment.

In Virginia, mental retardation is defined as an I-Q of 70 or lower by the
age of 18 and an inability to function well in society.

Atkins scored between 59 and 76 on 4 I-Q tests administered after he was
charged with the 1996 slaying of Eric Nesbitt, an Air Force enlisted man.

(source: Associated Press)

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

Moussaoui Jury Faces a Complex Defendant----The admitted terrorist could
escape execution if found mentally ill. But behind the courtroom tirades
is an educated and observant person.


When the 9 men and 3 women gather for the last time in the 7th-floor jury
room later this week, their verdict on whether Zacarias Moussaoui lives or
dies may well hinge on how they size up the bearded figure in the green
prison jumpsuit they have watched intently for the last 6 weeks.

Is he crazy?

To look at him, he would seem mad - the bruised forehead from so much
praying on his jail cell floor, his inaudible mumbles, the cold-hearted
stare he flashes across the courtroom.

At times, he appears to have lost his senses - his determination to kill
all Americans, the shouted tirades at each trial recess, the riddles in
which he sometimes speaks.

The Supreme Court has decreed that the mentally ill cannot be executed,
and that could ultimately spare the life of the confessed Sept. 11
conspirator.

His defense lawyers, citing family history, believe he is mentally ill,
even schizophrenic. He pleaded guilty to capital murder against their
advice. He will not cooperate with them; he chooses instead to curse them
out loud. Even his Al Qaeda handlers dismissed him as "cuckoo."

Yet he lucidly told prosecutors on the stand last week that he was neither
crazy nor delusional. Moussaoui, 37, earned a master's degree in business
in Britain, speaks 3 languages and seems remarkably familiar with American
history and culture.

Judge Leonie M. Brinkema believes he is not at all touched in the head. In
pretrial hearings, she found no proof he was "insane from a psychological
standpoint."

His erratic behavior in court could, of course, be calculated to convince
jurors he is deranged. Or by preaching hate from the witness stand, he
could be inviting jurors to execute him and make him a martyr. Or he could
just be more evil than mad, someone who Dr. Michael Welner, a forensic
psychiatrist at New York University Medical Center, said takes a perverse
delight in the pain of others.

Last week several dozen relatives of the Sept. 11 dead told the jury of
their suffering. As many of them broke down, Moussaoui sat impassively
nearby. Sometimes he yawned; sometimes he glanced nonchalantly at his
fingernails. Sometimes he smiled.

"Moussaoui's lack of remorse and contempt for victims are among the
characteristics exhibited by perpetrators of the most depraved crimes,"
Welner said.

Moussaoui clearly understands his surroundings.

He had been in this country only eight months when he was arrested 3 weeks
before Sept. 11, 2001, after his flight training in Minnesota attracted
suspicion. Since then he has been isolated in a cell.

Yet he has immersed himself in American culture. His tirades during court
breaks often are full of Americanisms.

"Burn in the U.S.A.!" he taunted after videos were shown of the World
Trade Center afire. After tapes were played of victims crying for help
before they were burned alive, he shouted: "No pain, no gain!"

He has also versed himself on American law and performed credibly when
acting occasionally as his own lawyer. He even questioned witnesses at
pretrial hearings. Occasionally the judge would have to correct him on the
rules of jurisprudence, but he pretty much got it.

In a 2002 hearing on his competency, Brinkema said she believed him of
sound mind.

"It's very, very, very significant that the day-to-day observations of the
people in the Alexandria jail consistently negate any question about there
being any serious mental illness or disease in Mr. Moussaoui," she said.

"Mr. Moussaoui's cell was neat, he was appropriately dressed, his hygiene
was appropriate. And we all know, because we have been in this business a
long time, people with serious mental illness, that's one of the first
things you look for. They are often disheveled. They sometimes smell bad.
They are unkempt. That's not Mr. Moussaoui."

His jail record has been fairly spotless. He was caught hiding milk
cartons, plastic spoons and a sock, items that could be fashioned into
weapons. But rarely has he been difficult with the guards. Only once has
he been written up.

It is in his court case that Moussaoui has appeared demented. For a year
he sent hand-scrawled "legal briefs" to the court, calling Brinkema the
"death judge" and the "little bitch." She warned him he must settle down.

Federal marshals, according to courthouse sources, strapped an electronic
device onto his midsection and hid it under his prison suit. They could
zap him should he become unruly or violent during the trial.

Moussaoui confirmed the presence of the device during his testimony last
week. Asked why he was well-mannered when the trial was in session, he
said he would prefer to act up, but "I have a box on my back."

Nevertheless, court documents and his testimony show he has seldom behaved
in his best interests - if his interests are conventional at all.

He agreed to be examined by mental health experts working for the
government.

But he refused even to talk to psychiatric experts hired for his defense.

When one approached him for a jail visit, he drank water and then spit it
out at the doctor. When another defense psychiatric team asked to chat, he
loudly accused them of trying to use his name to gain fame.

"You lie to me and now you think I'm a fool," he screamed at them.
"Bye-bye. God curse you!"

In their last effort to save his life, his defense lawyers plan to present
mental health testimony.

Jan Vogelsang, a clinical social worker from the University of South
Carolina, has studied Moussaoui's upbringing in France. His mother was
undernourished and physically and emotionally sick when she was pregnant
with him. His father was a violent alcoholic who abused the family and
finally abandoned them.

Moussaoui spent much of his first 5 years in and out of orphanages. A
Muslim, he faced bigotry in Western Europe. In England, he separated from
family and friends and turned to radical mosques in the London area that
were preaching anti-American hate.

Nancy C. Andreasen, a psychiatrist from the University of Iowa, believes
Moussaoui "suffers from a major thought disorder, most likely
schizophrenia."

His family is "loaded" with the disease, his defense lawyers said,
explaining that his father and 2 sisters suffer from it and that one
sister tried to kill herself.

"Mr. Moussaoui has delusions that cannot be rationalized," said defense
lawyer Gerald Zerkin.

He said his client believed President Bush would release him, but only
after another cataclysmic attack like Sept. 11. Given the chance, he
thinks he can clear up mysteries about the Sept. 11 plot that would win
him his freedom. And Moussaoui is convinced his lawyers are conspiring to
have him killed.

Whatever the state of his mind, Moussaoui has outwitted authorities
before.

When he was subject to military service as a young man in France, he
testified last week, he could have faked insanity and beaten the draft.
Instead, he boasted, he pricked his finger with a needle and dripped the
blood into his urine sample. They excused him because they thought he had
kidney failure.

That time, Moussaoui smiled, "I didn't have to act crazy."

(source: Los Angeles Times)

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

Testimony Resumes Mon. in Moussaoui Trial


Defense lawyers for Sept. 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui will have to
persuade a jury to spare their client's life without the help of his
al-Qaida comrade, would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid.

Testimony resumes Monday in Moussaoui's death-penalty trial with the
defense in flux. Moussaoui took the witness stand in his own defense
Thursday for a second time, and again did more harm than good as he
reveled in the death and destruction of 9/11 and mocked the testimony of
the terror attack victims and their families.

One day after Moussaoui's testimony, the judge vacated an earlier order
compelling Reid to testify in his defense. The jury may instead hear a
written statement summarizing some of what he would have said on the
witness stand.

Reid is serving a life sentence in the federal government's
maximum-security prison in Florence, Colo., after a failed try to blow up
an American Airlines flight in 2001.

Moussaoui, who calls Reid his "buddy" from their days together in al-Qaida
training camps in Afghanistan, testified last month at his death-penalty
trial that he and Reid were going to hijack a 5th plane on Sept. 11, 2001,
and fly it into the White House.

That testimony came after Moussaoui had for years denied any specific role
in 9/11.

Moussaoui's lawyers have suggested he fabricated his story about Reid and
their role in the 9/11 plot in an effort to sabotage his own defense and
achieve martyrdom through execution. They also say he is trying to inflate
his role in history.

Defense lawyers had hoped Reid would disavow any knowledge of Moussaoui's
claim and bolster their argument that Moussaoui is now lying.

The defense may also be revising other parts of its defense. It initially
planned to call witnesses who would recount Moussaoui's difficult
childhood in France, his family's history of mental illness and even some
family members of 9/11 victims in an effort to counter the emotional
victim-impact testimony put on by prosecutors.

But on Thursday, after Moussaoui's testimony, the lawyers and U.S.
District Judge Leonie Brinkema held a lengthy bench conference. Brinkema
sent jurors home for the weekend and advised them that their deliberations
could begin early this week, sooner than had been anticipated.

It is likely that the defense would have to cut back some of its planned
testimony to conclude its case by then.

Moussaoui is the only person charged in this country in connection with
the Sept. 11 attacks. The jury deciding his fate has already declared him
eligible for the death penalty by determining that his actions caused at
least one death on 9/11.

Even though Moussaoui was in jail in Minnesota at the time of the attacks,
the jury ruled that lies he told federal agents a month before the attacks
kept authorities from identifying and stopping some of the hijackers.

Now, jurors must decide whether Moussaoui deserves execution or life in
prison.

(source: Associated Press)




Reply via email to