Oct. 11





NORTH CAROLINA:

Former Death Row Inmate Out Of Jail


A one-time death row inmate is out of jail and is speaking out about the
murder he said he didn't commit.

Use the comments field below to share your thoughts on this story. We may
read your comments on air.

Rex Dean Penland, 47, spent almost 15 years in jail after a Stokes County
jury convicted him in the 1992 rape and slaying of Vernice Alford of
Winston-Salem.

Penland's sentence was overturned 2 years ago, and a judge ordered a new
trial. Penland's attorneys argued that his DNA wasn't a match.

Last week, a deal was struck that essentially sentenced Penland to time
already served.

Penland told WXII 12's Margaret Johnson he had "no part" in Alford's
slaying. He said he is deeply sorry for the family's loss.

"I did not kill her. I swear, I did not," he said.

Authorities who investigated the incident are upset about Penland's
release.

"To me, he didn't use the system to prove his innocence," said Stokes
County Sheriff Mike Joyce. "He used the system to strike a better deal.
Vernice Alford doesn't get a better deal. Her family can't get a better
deal."

(source: WXII12.com)






NEW JERSEY:

Death row inmate's case is heard by state Supreme Court


DEATH ROW: New Jersey first executed a prisoner using an electric chair in
1907. The last electrocution took place in 1963. New Jersey outlawed the
death penalty in 1972, then reinstated it a decade later, opting for
lethal injection. It hasn't been used. 8 inmates are currently on death
row.

ABOLISHMENT? Proposals to eliminate the death penalty are pending in the
Legislature, and one may be adopted by January. The Senate Judiciary
Committee in May advanced a bill ending capital punishment, but it needs
at least 5 more approvals.

A death row inmate's claims of innocence were on the line Wednesday, as
the state Supreme Court heard arguments about whether new or ignored
evidence warrant overturning his conviction in the 1985 murder of a
Plainsboro woman.

Nathaniel Harvey, 57, was sentenced to death in 1986 for the murder of
37-year-old Irene Schnaps a year earlier. Harvey later was granted a new
trial by the state Supreme Court in 1990, then was again found guilty by a
new jury in 1994.

Harvey's lawyers argue shoe-print evidence from New Jersey State Police
reports and a search warrant affidavit were never disclosed to prior
juries because of negligent and ineffective defense attorneys.

"It's very doubtful that counsel did a thorough review of the 1986 trial
transcripts," said Michele Adubato, one of Harvey's attorneys.

Associate Justice Barry T. Albin said Adubato's arguments were "pretty
damning," since it was a capital punishment case and the state Office of
the Public Defender assigned the attorneys.

Eric Kleiner, another of Harvey's attorneys, also said new DNA evidence
should be taken from stained bedding found in the laundry room of the
apartment building - possibly linking the murder to one of Schnaps'
neighbors who was originally questioned in her death.

Although Harvey's 1985 confession was ruled inadmissible because he was
not read his rights, Middlesex County Assistant Prosecutor Nancy Hulett
argued the court "cannot ignore the fact he confessed to the murder."
Hulett added the defense was trying to deflect this fact by pinning the
murder on another suspect.

Hulett said the new evidence "would not have raised reasonable doubt."

Some of the justices did not agree the evidence would not be relevant,
especially if Schnaps' blood turned up on the bedding.

The case comes at an interesting time for capital punishment in New
Jersey. The state Legislature in the coming months could vote on a measure
abolishing the death penalty and replacing capital sentences with life in
prison.

The Legislature's actions will not affect Harvey's case because his
lawyers are still arguing to overturn his conviction, not just his death
sentence, Adubato said.

(source: Asbury Park Press)




OKLAHOMA:

Cruel and unusual?


Purcell, OK -- Those waiting on death row whose execution date is within
the next year may have a reprieve.

Yes, a reprieve. Our state Attorney General asked the state Court of
Criminal Appeals last week to postpone scheduling executions in Oklahoma.
The postponement would be until the U.S. Supreme Court settles the issue
of what is cruel and unusual punishment.

There are 80 individuals on death row in our state.

Cruel and unusual punishment? Please.

I'm not opposed to the death penalty, but I do think in most cases it
doesn't fit the crime, if that makes sense.

You take an individual who has brutally tortured and killed a human being.
That human being didn't have 10 years to appeal their death, nor did they
have 10 more years of life.

This cruel and unusual punishment thing surfaced when two Kentucky death
row inmates filed a lawsuit claiming that lethal injection was cruel and
unusual.

The Supreme Court is set to hear the case sometime next year and until
then the 80 facing the needle in Oklahoma may be in the clear, for the
time being that is.

In our state constitution, the Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and
unusual punishment. The Attorney General said the issue in front of the
Supreme Court is what standard defines "cruel and unusual."

The Supreme Court's decision in this particular Kentucky lawsuit is
expected to set the U.S. standard.

Oklahoma enacted the law on executions by lethal injection in 1977. The
state's 1st execution by lethal injection was in 1990. Since then, 86
executions have been carried out.

Before 1977, the electric chair was the end result, while hanging was the
thing back in the day.

If lethal injection is deemed unconstitutional by the high court, the
state will fall back on the old way, death by electrocution.

Then, if electrocution was deemed cruel and unusual, the next step would
be a firing squad or maybe just an old fashioned hanging.

Who do these murderers think they are? They have supposedly been the
reason lethal injections have stopped in many states until the high court
makes its decision.

What about the families of the many, many victims? Don't they have a say?
Next thing on the agenda will probably be an ordinary criminal claiming
its cruel and unusual to go to jail or prison.

(source: Purcell Register)






FLORIDA:

Justices to hear lethal-injection challenges today


Convicted murderer and child rapist Mark Dean Schwab will fight for his
life once more today, challenging the state's lethal injection methods
before the Florida Supreme Court.

Schwab, 38, is scheduled for execution Nov. 15. His is the 1st death
warrant signed by Gov. Charlie Crist and the 1st in the state since a
moratorium on executions was lifted following an inquiry into the December
2006 lethal injection of Angel Diaz.

Schwab kidnapped, raped, tortured and murdered 11-year-old Junny
Rios-Martinez of Cocoa on April 18, 1991. Just a month earlier, Schwab was
released from prison after serving less than 1/2 of an 8-year sentence for
raping a 13-year-old boy in Cocoa Beach.

Junny's mother said Wednesday she has waited a long time for justice to be
carried out and is not going to stress about whether the execution gets
delayed.

"There's nothing I can do about it, so it doesn't do any good to think
about it because it stirs up memories about it," Vicki Rios-Martinez said.
"I'm not going to stop living. I'm not going to let this rob me of my joy.
When it happens it'll happen and we'll just have to be ready."

The Florida Supreme Court today will hear challenges to the state's lethal
injection methods in cases brought by Schwab and fellow death-row inmate
Ian Deco Lightbourne, a convicted murderer.

Both defendants say the state's 3-drug mixture used to carry out
executions is unconstitutional and they question the state's procedures
and methods as revealed by December's botched execution.

It took 34 minutes for Diaz to die, more than twice the normal amount.
Witnesses described Diaz gasping for breath, grimacing and his body
jolting more than 25 minutes into the execution. An autopsy revealed that
the needles used to deliver the deadly drugs missed his veins and instead
went into tissue.

In an interview Wednesday, Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum said
lower court rulings in the Lightbourne case included "extensive and
exhaustive findings" that the state's lethal injection procedures are
acceptable.

"We feel comfortable and confident the Florida Supreme Court will find"
the state's protocols constitutional, McCollum said.

In his arguments, Schwab's attorney, Mark Gruber, says lethal injection is
not inherently unconstitutional, but that the way Florida goes about it is
a problem.

"Lethal injection is a method of committing an inherently violent and
deadly act - execution of a condemned prisoner - masquerading as a
peaceful and painless medical procedure," Gruber argued in Schwab's
appeal.

A further factor in Schwab's appeal is a U.S. Supreme Court stay of
execution in a Kentucky death-penalty case. The federal court review will
set standards for what constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in lethal
injection cases.

The Florida Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to delay today's proceedings
because of the federal case, but it did say it would consider holding off
on ruling after oral arguments are made.

McCollum said the Kentucky case is separate, and pointed to lethal
injections that have gone forward in Texas after the U.S. Supreme Court
stayed the Kentucky execution. He said Florida wants to proceed lawfully,
but to carry out the sentences of its courts.

"No one wants to delay due process, but the public has a due process,
too," McCollum said.

The Rios-Martinez family has long been critical of a system that has made
them wait more than 16 years to see the sentence carried out against their
son's killer.

"It's the best criminal justice system in the world," Vicki Rios-Martinez
said, "as long as you're a criminal.

(source: Tallahassee Democrat)





Reply via email to