Nov. 30 KENTUCKY: Prosecutors to seek death penalty for men on trial for killing mother, severely wounding 2-year-old----Murder suspects learn they're eligible for death There are major developments in a high profile murder case we've been following. 2 Louisville men accused of murdering a woman and shooting her then 2 year old daughter, could be put to death if convicted. WAVE 3 Investigator Scott Harvey has the latest. 22-year-old Kenneth Williams and 26-year-old James Quisenberry were arrested in August, following a 15-month investigation. Prosecutors want the jury to consider the ultimate punishment if the men are convicted. Neither of the suspects had any reaction in court Thursday when they learned the death penalty could be considered in this case. Both men are accused of killing Earon Harper and shooting her daughter Erica Hughes 3 times and leaving her for dead. Police rushed her to the hospital in the back of a cruiser, and she survived, although she lost sight in 1 eye. Prosecutors say they have filed a capital murder charge because Williams and Quisenberry killed Harper during a robbery, and that the murder was for money. "It just allows the jury to consider the possibility of 1 of the capital penalties," said Commonwealth's Attorney John Heck. "Obviously, the death penalty, life without parole, life without parole for 25 years, now become available." Harper's mother, Judith, was in court to face the men accused of killing her daughter. "Erica is going to have to pay for the rest of her whole life and they need to pay for the rest of their lives." Harper also told us Erica continues to ask for her mother, who she calls "Honey" and that at some point she probably will lose her right eye, from the injuries she received during the shooting. But right now she is doing well and going to school. (source: WAVE TV News) ALABAMA: Georgia pastor William Neal Moore to speak at Midfield retreat on redemption William Neal Moore is a preacher with a story to tell -- a story of death, life and hope. Yeah, big deal, you say. What preacher doesn't? But Moore's is different. Moore, see, is a killer -- someone who at a low point in his life set out to rob a 77-year-old man of his money and instead robbed him of his life. He was 22 at the time, an Army soldier in Georgia, hard up for cash. A drinking buddy told him about his uncle, Fred Stapton, who kept lots of cash around his house. In Moore's altered state of mind, Stapton's cash looked like the solution. It didn't go well. Stapton heard Moore in his home and fired at the intruder. Moore shot back in the darkness and heard someone fall to the floor. One light switch later, a horrified Moore saw what he had done. "When I found out that I had actually killed somebody, I couldn't believe it," Moore once told BET.com. "I felt sick ... as if a part of me had died." Moore quickly pleaded guilty, he said, because he was guilty. He was sentenced to death in July 1974, just 3 months after the crime. But a strange thing happened on the way to his execution: Moore found a new life. He learned he wasn't so low as to be out of the reach of God's mercy. Or even the mercy of Stapton's family, which ultimately forgave Moore and advocated that his life be spared. The Georgia parole board, which can commute death sentences, did so for Moore at the urging of Stapton's family and a number of other advocates, including Mother Teresa. In 1991, he was paroled from prison, after more than 17 years behind bars, 16 of them on death row. Some, no doubt, will dismiss Moore's experience as a phony jailhouse conversion. But, if so, he's kept up the act a long, long time. Today, at 57, he is a Pentecostal minister who lives in Rome, Ga., and travels the country, speaking to young people, old people, churches, temples and anyone who will listen to his story about truly amazing grace. He'll tell his story Friday night at the Walnut Grove United Methodist Church conference center in Midfield, as part of a weekend Advent retreat sponsored by Mary's House Catholic Worker. The retreat's fitting theme: "no one beyond redemption." Although many profess this to be true, Moore actually believes it. "Everybody needs to experience forgiveness," Moore said. And by experience, Moore means being on the giving end as well as the receiving end. But even in the Bible Belt, his message is sometimes a hard sell. "Our society doesn't teach forgiveness," he said. "We teach if someone harms you, you harm them back." Some even equate forgiveness with weakness, a notion that suggests they haven't tried lately to actually do it. And, he said, among his fellow believers, forgiveness is not an option, if they expect to be forgiven by God. "For those who profess to be Christians, we're actually commanded by the Bible to forgive one another," Moore said. Besides, forgiveness is freeing; refusing to forgive is a form of prison, he said. Even Moore could be bitter if he chose. While he was guilty, it doesn't take a legal scholar to figure out he didn't have a top-dollar defense. He got the death penalty even though he pleaded guilty, even though he killed in the course of a bungled burglary that most wouldn't include in a lineup of the most heinous of crimes. But Moore's freedom today is a miracle. Often, our nation's judicial machinery seems to resist freeing even those who are exonerated by new evidence or new trials. In Moore's case, there was no new evidence. Just a new person. Moore doesn't suggest forgiveness translates to a get-out-of-jail card for every inmate. But he does believe there must be room for redemption. In Moore's case, there was redemption and forgiveness, and there is hope and new life. What a message for Advent. After all, what are we celebrating this holiday season if not that? Editor's note: Moore speaks Friday at 7 p.m. at Walnut Grove United Methodist Church. The event is free. For information or directions, call 205-780-2020. (source: Robin DeMonia is an editorial writer for The (Birmingham) News) ******************** Alabama asks Supreme Court to deny stay of execution----State to Supreme Court: Deny Thomas Arthur stay of execution The Alabama attorney general's office on Thursday urged the U.S. Supreme Court to deny a stay of execution for convicted murderer Thomas Arthur, who faces lethal injection next week. Arthur has waited too late to challenge Alabama's method of execution and the high court should not block his execution scheduled for next Thursday, Assistant Attorney General Clay Crenshaw said in a court filing. Crenshaw responded to a petition for a stay filed earlier this week by New York attorney Suhana S. Han, who represents Arthur. She asked the high court to block the execution while the court considers constitutional issues in a Kentucky lethal injection case. Those issues include "the proper standard for determining whether a method of execution violates the Eighth Amendment" protection against cruel and unusual punishment. A ruling in the Kentucky case isn't expected until next year. In the meantime, many lethal injection cases, including Arthur's, remain in limbo. Arthur, 65, was sentenced to death for the 1982 killing of Troy Wicker, 35, of Muscle Shoals. Arthur came within hours of execution at Holman prison on Sept. 27, when Gov. Bob Riley granted a 45-day reprieve so the state could make minor changes in its execution procedure. Riley acted after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the Kentucky challenge to lethal injection. In his filing Thursday, Crenshaw said Arthur could have challenged the method of execution when the state of Alabama in 2002 adopted use of lethal injection. He also argued that Arthur hasn't met any of the court's requirements for a stay. Crenshaw said the state filed its motion for Arthur's execution date at the appropriate time. "It was Arthur who failed to bring his civil rights lawsuit at a time that would have allowed full consideration of his claims," Crenshaw wrote in his filing. Citing a ruling in a separate death penalty case, he reminded the high court that federal courts considering a stay request must be "sensitive of the state's strong interest in enforcing its criminal judgments without undue interference from the federal courts." He also said granting a stay of execution is not necessary before the high court decides whether to even hear Arthur's appeal. That decision may not come until next week. Depending on the court's ruling, a stay request apparently could then be considered. Crenshaw said Arthur also hasn't shown the court that he's likely to succeed with his appeal - another requirement for granting a stay. Noting the Kentucky case, Arthur's attorneys allege there is "a grave and substantial risk" that Arthur will be "conscious of suffocation" during the execution and will suffer "excruciating pain." In earlier court filings, Crenshaw said Arthur has not produced evidence of any execution mishap in an Alabama lethal injection execution or any "cruel or unusual pain" suffered by an inmate during a lethal injection. Arthur has been on death row about 16 years after being convicted for capital murder and sentenced to death in 1992 at his 3rd trial. His first 2 convictions and death sentences in the Wicker murder were overturned on appeal. (source: Associated Press) NEW JERSEY: Ending Capital Punishment----Close death row New Jersey leaders are poised to make history by becoming the first state to eliminate the death penalty since the 1970s. They should do it. With staunch support from Gov. Corzine, Democratic legislators are pushing for a vote in the coming weeks on a plan to replace the death penalty with life in prison without parole. The time is right. The cause, unquestionably, is just. Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts Jr. (D., Camden) and Senate President Richard J. Codey (D., Essex) should be celebrated nationally as trailblazers if their reform succeeds. Their unease over capital punishment is widely shared by millions of Americans. There's the real fear that an innocent person might be executed, given dozens of documented cases in which death-row inmates have been exonerated. Before the availability of the DNA evidence crucial to many of these reversals, it's anyone's guess how many death-row inmates failed to prove legitimate pleas of innocence. While government executions court the horror of killing an innocent person, the system otherwise is unjust. Studies show that accused murderers who are poor and black or brown face a far greater risk of being sent to death row due to inadequate legal defenses. The fact that states without capital punishment have fewer homicides also calls into question whether executions have any deterrent effect. Even if you accept a recent, hotly contested study that says capital punishment deters other killers, there should be no dispute that the death penalty wastes vast government resources. Running prison death rows is hugely expensive, as is dealing with the many legitimate death-penalty appeals. That time and public funds could be devoted instead to crime prevention and compensating victims of crime. The U.S. Supreme Court has helped set the stage for states to take the step that New Jersey anticipates. The court's ban on the execution of juveniles and the mentally ill acknowledged the growing global consensus that such executions are wrong. Now the high court effectively has halted all executions while it reviews whether lethal injection represents cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Constitution. New Jersey might be positioned uniquely to scrap its death-penalty law. In all but name, the state years ago abolished capital punishment: The last execution was in 1963 and Jersey's death row population has dwindled to just 8 inmates. It's almost a formality for the state to shutter its death row. Not only that, Trenton policymakers should be emboldened by a New Jersey study commission's forceful call to end all executions. The panel's near-unanimous recommendation in January to switch to life without parole noted that executions go against "evolving standards of decency." Pennsylvania's capital punishment system is fatally flawed as well. Indeed, the American Bar Association recently gave Pennsylvania a dismal rating due to injustices found in death penalty cases. So Harrisburg lawmakers need to follow Trenton's in taking the same hard look at closing down death row. New Jersey lawmakers can strike the first blow for justice by outlawing executions now. (source: Editorial, Philadelphia Inquirer) USA: Axe U.S. death penalty When comparing the American stance on capital punishment to other Westernized nations, a stark contrast is visible. In fact, an entrance requirement to the European Union is that the death penalty be outlawed in the joining country. While nations such as Great Britain, France and Germany all banned capital punishment decades ago, there are nations in the Eastern bloc that are trying to gain admittance to the E.U. and are now revising their penal codes. The European Union and their committees on human rights have become world leaders for global abolition of the death penalty and it is time for the U.S.to heed their advice. A large contingent of Americans not only believes that capital punishment should continue to be implemented but that it is sound policy. This group fails to recognize that capital punishment is an unnecessarily costly policy that is based on flawed reasoning. First, it a commonly held belief that life imprisonment is more expensive because the government body must pay for the lengthy prison term, as opposed to simply paying the killing of the prisoner. This stance, however, fails to consider the entire judicial process involved with the previously mentioned 2 alternatives. It is impossible for a prosecutor to obtain either a life or death sentence without first bringing the accused to court. Thus, it would be completely irresponsible to disregard those judicial expenses when comparing the cost of that prosecutor seeking either sentence when doing a cost analysis. In other words, one cannot simply compare the costs of the last step of 2 alternatives and make a definitive decision on which is more financially beneficial. When taking into account the entire judicial process (from arrest through death by execution or life imprisonment), it is almost always more expensive for a prosecutor to seek the death penalty. Effectively, the second alternative is always a more cost-effective means of seeking punishment for a crime. Thus, our government officials continue to implement a publicly funded, inefficient policy. This type of data is generally irrefutable and readily available, but the American public either is unaware or unwilling to recognize the truth behind the research. Secondly, preventative arguments are equally unsound and often based on similarly fallacious reasoning. The contingency of pro capital punishment thinkers also believes that the fear of death acts as a deterrent for many hardened criminals not to commit heinous crimes such as rape and murder, when in fact this is not the case. The U.S. has for decades been one of the world leaders in the number of murders per year, while law enforcement officers in other Westernized nations don't even have to carry a firearm because there is so little crime. For proponents of capital punishment to think that the fear of death row is so much more substantial than the fear of life imprisonment that it actually prevents numerous murders a year is absurd considering the outrageous number of homicides that happen on American soil each year. Lastly, the death penalty is the only form of punishment that disallows for mistake correction. If an individual is convicted of a crime and given any other sentence in our penal codes he would have the opportunity to be exonerated if new evidence arises. Indeed, people are often found innocent in appeals court and the influx of people being taken off of death row based on DNA or other forms of evidence should remind everyone that mistakes are inevitable in our judicial system. If one assumes that those mistakes are inevitable, how can he also justify sentencing an individual to a place where those mistakes can not be corrected? Proponents would argue that there are certain crimes that necessitate such a punishment based on the historic "eye-for-an-eye" mindset. The U.S. should reconsider the use of capital punishment based on both empirical and value-based evidence. If justice is truly blind, and the legal system we champion as the best in the world in the U.S. is built on the foundation of fairness and equality, it is imperative and necessary to analyze the benefit of our capital punishment system and form a new approach to punishing the most heinous of crimes for the betterment of society as a whole. (source: Dante Marinucci is the president of the Undergraduate Political Science Organization; The Lantern)
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----KY., ALA., N.J., USA
Rick Halperin Fri, 30 Nov 2007 17:07:02 -0600 (Central Standard Time)
