Nov. 6 TEXAS: Texas executions reap heavy toll on prison staff >From the chaplain who shares the condemned prisoner's final hours to the guard who attaches the needles and the prison director who orders the fatal injection: the relentless march of Texas executions is taking a heavy toll. In the three years from 1998 to 2001 that Jim Willett ran "The Walls" prison in Huntsville, Texas, he oversaw the executions of 89 people, personally giving the order for the death sentence to proceed once the condemned prisoner had finished their final statement. With the passage of time most of the names and faces have blurred in his memory, but he has been forever changed by "the biggest, the hardest thing to deal with" in his life. "You see that person lie here, perfectly healthy, and you know that within minutes he's gonna be dead, and he's gonna be dead because I'll give the signal to kill him. That just doesn't happen in real life," Willett, 58, told AFP. Presbyterian pastor Carroll Pickett, 74, was a chaplain at the notorious prison which has now executed more than 400 people since the death penalty was reinstated in the United States in 1976. "It takes a toll on you, and you never know what the toll is. I had a triple bypass two years after I retired," he told AFP. He walked the final hours with 95 death row inmates from 1980 to 1995, who would arrive at a special holding block in the prison at dawn from the Texas death row center and die at midnight the same day. Pickett would stay with them, even keeping a calming hand on their leg as the condemned took their last breath strapped to a gurney with a lethal cocktail of drugs pumping through their veins. He remembers every face, every name, every story. One wanted to write a letter, another drank a last soda, another died with a cigar in his pocket. Some wanted to hear their favorite song for the last time, others wanted to sing or play a final game of chess. "I would spend that last day with him, make it as comfortable as possible. A lot of them had a lot of things to confess, especially after 10:00 pm," Pickett said. "I've had people confess to crimes they weren't even convicted for," he said, while others "talked vividly about their crimes. Sometimes so vividly the guards were becoming sick." When he first began his "ministry of presence" at the jail, Pickett was in favor of the death penalty. But over time his views have gradually changed, faced with the never-ending parade of young, poor, often illiterate men condemned to die for crimes, most of which were far from the worst atrocities committed in the country. "Practically everyone I met was not the same person that committed the crime. Some of them I would have brought them back home without any problem. Most of them were not really mean people," he said. And he believes that many of the 95 people whose final hours he sought to alleviate were innocent of the crimes for which they died. "I could feel it. Not that I'm so smart, but they come in with a different attitude. A person who is truly innocent, and I've seen too many of those, is not going to fight," in order not to worsen the ordeal of their families, he said. Even the guards who had to carry out such an onerous duty "were good officers but this experience changed their lives," he said. "Of course, they all quit after a while. Some of them got sick, had a nervous breakdown, a lot of them went on to work in a private prison, where they wouldn't have to take part in executions." Some executions reap a higher toll than others. After the death in February 1998 of Karla Faye Tucker for murder, despite an international outcry, the guards who strapped her down resigned, while the prison director retired, Willett said. Both Willett and Pickett would try to deal with their emotions by recounting the details of each execution just hours after it happened. Willett poured out his feelings onto a computer before his retirement. Today he is the director of a Texas prisons museum which houses "Old Sparky," the electric chair used in 361 executions. Pickett meanwhile used to recount the day's events into a dictaphone, sitting on the floor of his living room. But even then the pastor's job was not necessarily done. In a third of all cases, he was called on to officiate at the condemned man's funeral in the small cemetery next to the prison -- the final resting place of those whose families failed to claim the body. (source: Agence France Presse) IDAHO: 'Bad' Legal Advice and the Death Penalty 18 years have passed since an Idaho murder defendant took his lawyer's advice to reject the states offer of a guilty plea that would have resulted in a life sentence. The defendant, Maxwell Hoffman, went to trial instead, and was sentenced to death for participating in the murder of a government informer. A federal appeals court eventually ruled that the lawyer's advice reflected such bad judgment as to fall below the Sixth Amendments guarantee of the effective assistance of counsel. On Monday, the Supreme Court announced that it would use the case to decide how appellate courts are to evaluate claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in plea negotiations. To that question, posed by Idaho's attorney general in the state's appeal, the justices added a question of their own: What should the remedy be for bad legal advice during plea negotiations if the defendant is later convicted and sentenced after a fair trial? In its opinion, issued in July 2006, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted Mr. Hoffman's petition for a writ of habeas corpus and gave Idaho the choice of offering him the same plea agreement that he turned down in 1989 or releasing him from confinement. The Idaho attorney general, Lawrence G. Wasden, is arguing in that state's appeal that the Ninth Circuit incorrectly concluded that Mr. Hoffmans legal representation was unconstitutionally deficient. A defendant should have to show not just bad judgment but "gross error" by the defense lawyer, the state's brief maintains, explaining that such a high standard is needed to keep appellate courts from 2nd-guessing a defense strategy with the benefit of hindsight. Although a 1970 Supreme Court decision, McMann v. Richardson, referred to a "gross error" standard, the court has not elaborated on that requirement in the intervening decades. Mr. Hoffman's current lawyers are arguing that the court effectively rejected that standard in 1984, when it decided the case that has provided the modern framework for evaluating claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The 1984 case, Strickland v. Washington, requires defendants to prove both "cause" a quality of legal representation that is objectively deficient and "prejudice," proof of harm from the lawyer's behavior. In 2003, the court applied the Strickland case to overturn the sentence of a man on Maryland's death row on the ground that the defense lawyer had failed to investigate and present to the jury facts of his client's personal history that could have led jurors to spare his life. In the new case, Arave v. Hoffman, No. 07-110, the Ninth Circuit concluded that Mr. Hoffman had met both prongs of the Strickland test. The court found that Mr. Hoffman's court-appointed lawyer, William Wellman, who had never before handled a murder case, failed to conduct "reasonable research into the legal landscape" before advising his client to reject the guilty plea. The appeals court also found a "reasonable probability that the outcome of the proceedings would have been different had counsel acted competently." It was the defense lawyer's misfortune to receive the assignment in Mr. Hoffmans case at a moment when death-penalty law was in a particularly high state of flux. Just 6 weeks before Idaho offered the plea bargain to Mr. Hoffman, the Ninth Circuit had invalidated Arizona's death penalty law on the ground that it gave too much fact-finding power to the judge. Since Idaho's death penalty law was indistinguishable, and Idaho is also in the Ninth Circuit, Mr. Wellman reasoned that even if his client received a death sentence, it would be overturned on appeal. However, Mr. Wellman was unaware that four days before the plea bargain was offered, the Arizona Supreme Court, in a separate case, had rejected the Ninth Circuit's reasoning and had upheld the Arizona death penalty statute. This decision injected a good deal of ambiguity and made it likely that the United States Supreme Court would resolve the conflict. In fact, the next year, the justices upheld the Arizona law. "We do not fault Wellman for failing to predict the outcome of these divergent opinions," Judge Harry Pregerson said in the Ninth Circuits opinion in Mr. Hoffmans case. "We do not expect counsel to be prescient about the direction the law will take," he added. Nonetheless, the appeals court concluded, the lawyer "vastly underestimated" the chance that his client would be sentenced to death if he rejected the plea bargain. Idaho is arguing in its appeal that the Ninth Circuit relied on "impermissible hindsight" in reaching this conclusion. "Counsel are not required to guess what may happen regarding future court decisions," Mr. Wasden, the state attorney general, told the justices, adding that, given the "unsettled" state of the law, "Wellman's advice was not objectively unreasonable." (source: New York Times) FLORIDA: Rapist-killer is poster boy for death penalty Real doubts gnaw away at our rationale for the death penalty. Irrefutable DNA evidence has undone too many cases based on faulty eyewitness testimony or lying jailhouse snitches or false confessions bullied out of suspects after hours of interrogation. Extrapolate those finding against the majority of cases without DNA evidence and it's hard not to conclude that innocents reside among the 375 men on Florida's death row. Mark Dean Schwab is not among them. Death-penalty opponents have suffered a heinous draw. The next killer up for lethal injection, 16 years after his crime shocked Florida, remains among the state's most despised, least sympathetic criminals. No doubts ever clouded this conviction. Six weeks after the convicted child-rapist was released from prison, Schwab kidnapped, raped and strangled an 11-year-old boy. The public outrage spawned state laws that lengthened prison terms for child-predators, tightened early-release programs and invoke ever more severe residential limitations for sex criminals. Sex offenders forced to live in their cars or under the Julia Tuttle Causeway can thank Mark Dean Schwab, in part, for their predicament. SLOPPY EXECUTIONS His death-penalty challenge has nothing to do with questions of guilt or innocence. Last week, the Florida Supreme Court rejected Schwab's argument that lethal injections violate constitutional prohibitions against cruel or usual punishment. But the U.S. Supreme Court has taken on a similar case out of Kentucky and other states that employ lethal injection (even Texas) have suspended executions until that's decided. Not Florida, which could have avoided unnecessary dramatics next week, but went ahead and set an unlikely Nov. 15 execution date for Schwab. The Florida Department of Correction has been notoriously sloppy with its execution protocols, setting a couple of convicts' heads on fire back in the days of the electric chair. Then, last December, botching the lethal injection of Miami's own Angel Diaz, and prolonging his death into a 34-minute fiasco. But, eventually, even a state like Florida will figure out a way to humanely dispatch condemned prisoners. Schwab's challenge amounts to no more than a temporary diversion from the real issues. BEYOND HORRENDOUS Meanwhile, any argument against the death penalty that invokes Mark Dean Schwab will only rile Floridians, particularly around Cocoa Beach, into a lynch-mob mentality. In 1991, Schwab befriended the family of 11-year-old Junny Rios-Martinez in Cocoa, pretending he was a newspaper reporter interested in Junny's surfing exploits. He kidnapped, raped and strangled the child. Schwab later led police to the boy's body, stuffed in a locker, dumped in the woods and concocted a story of a mysterious stranger, the real killer, who forced him at gunpoint to abduct and rape the child. He estimated Junny's pain, on a 10-point scale, at 5. Later, awaiting trial, he enhanced his notoriety with a letter sent to Junny's parents threatening their surviving child. The evidence was so overwhelming, so horrifying, his lawyer waived a jury trial. ''Any jury anywhere in Florida, in our estimation, was going to recommend death,'' his attorney told an appeals court. 16 years later, death-penalty abolitionists can cite intriguing arguments against capital punishment. None of them include Mark Dean Schwab. (source: Miami Herald) USA: Use death penalty Reference "Is execution by injection humane, or horrible?" Oct. 22. Of course, it's horrible to be executed by injection, but more horrible to be raped and stabbed at the age of 79, like Beulah Mae Kaiser. She surely had no choice of how she would die. Our justice system needs to be overhauled. Death row is overcrowded, and the system needs to go ahead and execute every one there proven to be guilty by DNA. These prisoners whine and demand to see lawyers to have their convictions overturned. There is one sitting on death row right now who brutally raped, stabbed and cut the throat of a 47-year-old bank officer here in Hampton. His name is William Morrisett. This destroyed our whole family, but we don't have any rights; neither does Dottie White, who has been dead 27 years. But a different story for Morrisett; he is still paying all of our tax money to lawyers to keep him from execution. The public needs to be riled up about this and demand to take these monsters out of society. Doris E. White ---- Hampton (source: Daily Press) *********************** Death penalty opponents should reconsider A suggestion to the bleeding hearts who oppose execution by lethal injection: Maybe we should return to the firing squad method and see how many oppose that. Then inform them that our boys in Iraq and Afghanistan face bullets every day. If they deem that cruel and unusual punishment, I recommend we bring them home now. Carl Drakeley -- Davie (source: Sun Sentinel) PENNSYLVANIA: DA will seek death penalty Nevin G. Wetzel, charged with killing a Saint Clair woman in her apartment in May, could become the 4th man sitting on Pennsylvania's death row for a Schuylkill County homicide. District Attorney James P. Goodman said Monday he would seek the death penalty against Wetzel, 68, of Minersville, for the May 8 knifing of Gloria M. Pauzer, 57, of 219 S. Second St. "It speaks for itself," Goodman said of his decision. He declined to comment further. Under state law, Goodman's decision means the case against Wetzel, also listed on the state's Megans Law Web site, will proceed along a unique track reserved for death penalty cases. Saint Clair police Chief Michael Carey charged Wetzel with criminal homicide and 2 counts each of aggravated assault and simple assault in connection with the killing of Pauzer around 10 a.m. in her first-floor apartment. Police said Wetzel rode his bicycle to Pauzers apartment that morning to confront her because he was angry she would not sit with him the day before at the Pottsville Senior Citizens Center. According to police, Wetzel said he and Pauzer argued in the hallway of her apartment building, and he pushed her down, grabbed a knife that Pauzer had gotten from her apartment and cut her neck. Police said they found Wetzel that evening hiding in bushes near Ann Street and Route 61. Assistant Public Defender Paul G. Domalakes, Wetzels attorney, could not be reached Monday for comment on Goodmans decision. Because Goodman decided to seek the death penalty, Wetzel will be subjected to a potential bifurcated, or 2-part, trial if he does not decide to plead guilty. In the first phase, the fact-finder will decide whether Wetzel is guilty of 1st-degree murder, the only crime in Pennsylvania that carries a potential death sentence. That fact-finder will be a jury unless Wetzel decides he wants to be tried by a judge alone in a nonjury, or bench, trial. If Wetzel is found not guilty of first-degree murder, the case will proceed as any other, either with his being released if he is found not guilty of all charges or with the presiding judge imposing a sentence after a presentence investigation is prepared by the county adult probation and parole office. The most serious possible charge would be second-degree murder: it carries an automatic life sentence, which in Pennsylvania includes no chance of parole. If he is found guilty of 1st-degree murder, the same jury will decide the sentence, which will be either death or life imprisonment. In order to get the death penalty, prosecutors must prove the existence of at least one aggravating circumstance most commonly, a defendants significant prior criminal record and that it outweighs any mitigating circumstances. Defendants have much wider latitude in presenting mitigating circumstances, which can include a difficult childhood, mental health issues and many other factors. Wetzel's criminal record, which dates back to the 1960s, includes larceny, burglary, rape and corruption of minors. Prosecutors must convince all 12 jurors to impose a death sentence; if jurors cannot reach a unanimous decision, the judge must impose a life sentence. Defendants sentenced to death have an automatic right to appeal their sentence to the state Supreme Court. If sentenced to death, Wetzel would join these three men on death row for county killings: Ronald G. Champney, 56, of Pottsville, convicted in October 1999 of murdering Roy A. Bensinger, 37, around 6:30 p.m. June 4, 1992, at the victim's North Manheim Township home. Daniel M. Saranchak, 39, of Pottsville, convicted in September 1994 of murdering his grandmother, Stella T. Saranchock, 78, and his uncle, Edmund J. Saranchak, 57, between 10 p.m. and 2 a.m. Oct. 15-16, 1993, in their home in Five Points, East Norwegian Township. Mark N. Spotz, 36, of Chestnut Grove, convicted in March 2006 of murdering June Rose Ohlinger, 52, of Wayne Township, on Feb. 1, 1995, and kicking her body off the Church Road bridge into Little Swatara Creek. They are among the state's 228 death row inmates; a 229th has had a jury pronounce a death sentence but the judge has not yet officially imposed it. (source: The REPUBLICAN & Herald) OKLAHOMA: Man charged with 4 murders won't face death penalty Tulsa County prosecutors say a man charged with 4 murders is not eligible for the death penalty if convicted because evidence indicates he is mentally retarded. 20-year-old Joshua Julius Anderson is charged with 4 counts of 1st-degree murder and single counts of 1st-degree arson and assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. Yesterday, District Judge Tom Gillert set a March 17th trial date for Anderson. Assistant District Attorney Bill Musseman says Anderson's mental retardation prevents prosecutors from seeking the death penalty in the case. Chief Public Defender Pete Silva, who is representing Anderson, says the "significant evidence" of Anderson's condition includes previous school and Social Security disability records. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2002 in a Virginia case that it is unconstitutional to execute mentally retarded defendants. Such a defendant can be competent to face prosecution, however. (source: Associated Press)
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, IDAHO, FLA., USA, PENN., OKLA.
Rick Halperin Tue, 6 Nov 2007 11:12:50 -0600 (Central Standard Time)
