[Deathpenalty] death penalty news-----TEXAS

[Rick Halperin]

Oct. 12



TEXAS:

Panel will review 180 HPD crime lab cases----Judges want an outside look
into dubious evidence

Days after the release of a man wrongfully convicted on faulty forensics,
Harris County criminal district judges are poised to appoint a panel to
review 180 cases with problematic Houston crime lab evidence, ending a
dispute about how to scrutinize those cases.

Local officials have argued about how best to address those cases since
June, when an independent investigator recommended appointing a "special
master" to review cases with questionable body fluid testing known as
serology from the scandal-plagued Houston Police Department crime lab.

Mayor Bill White, Police Chief Harold Hurtt and top prosecutor Chuck
Rosenthal dismissed the need for an outsider for the serology review,
saying the cases could be handled within the existing system.

But others, including state legislators and criminal defense attorneys,
pressed the need for a consolidated, independent review. Just this week, a
man freed after serving 14 years for a rape he did not commit urged the
City Council to take action saying, "something must be done."

At a routine administrative meeting Wednesday, Harris County's criminal
district judges prepared to take action.

They plan to assign 3 defense attorneys to determine the importance of
crime lab evidence to the 180 convictions and act accordingly. Those three
likely will report to retired Judge Mary Bacon. Bacon will conduct
teleconferences beginning Oct. 22 with 160 of the defendants in those
cases, inform them of the issues with their cases and determine whether
the defendants want their cases reviewed.

State District Judge Olen Underwood, the presiding judge over the judicial
region that includes Harris County, must approve the project. It will be
paid for with county funds.

'The right thing to do'

State District Judge Mike Anderson said the judges felt the responsibility
had fallen to them to develop a plan for reviewing the cases.

"Everyone is in agreement that we need to get the right thing done, do it
as quickly as possible, and have competent people do it," Anderson said.

Bacon was a state district judge in the county for 15 years. Since
retiring in 1998, she has served on the state Board of Criminal Justice
and presides over Harris County cases occasionally as a visiting judge.

"It is the right thing to do for all of us to have this inquiry," Bacon
said. "I feel deeply honored to have a role in it."

Bob Wicoff is one of the attorneys who will work with defendants wanting
representation, he confirmed. Wicoff is known for representing Josiah
Sutton, the first man exonerated in the crime lab scandal.

The 2 other attorneys have not been named. The details of their
assignments have not been worked out.

"Do we get our own experts on-call to discuss these (cases) with?" Wicoff
wondered. "I would assume so. Do we get our own office space for the
hundreds of boxes of files as we are reading these records? Do we get to
go visit these inmates if we need to? I would think (the judges) can't say
no to any of that."

Wicoff said that he has also been asked to recommend two more defense
attorneys to join him. As of Thursday afternoon, Wicoff said, no one he
had approached had agreed to sign on.

Most, he said, are too busy to take on the project.

The attorneys, Wicoff added, will each be paid $100 an hour  well below
the going rate.

Wicoff said the City Hall appearance of recently exonerated Ronald Gene
Taylor may have spurred the judges to act.

"I guess they're feeling some heat, and they want it to look like they are
doing everything they can to address it," Wicoff said. "I don't know if
I'm the answer, but I guess it's a start."

Mayor, DA supportive

The judges' action comes after months of debate over how best to review
the serology cases identified as part of a 26-month crime lab probe.
Investigators found the serology division was among the most troubled in
the lab, turning out unreliable evidence at an alarming rate.

The chief investigator, former U.S. Justice Department official Michael
Bromwich, called for a "special master" to review 180 of the most
problematic cases from the serology division. Bromwich Thursday said he
was pleased with the judges' progress.

"We have always thought it crucial that the cases be reviewed through a
process that combines expertise with independence," Bromwich said.

Opponents of the "special master" Thursday said they had no problem with
the plan.

"I don't think I ought to have any hand in picking my opponent or in
picking my forum," Rosenthal said. "Whatever they want to do is fine by
me."

White echoed those sentiments: "I am glad to see the judges taking the
leadership on this. That is what should occur in the criminal justice
system."

Accountability an issue

The plan to appoint a review panel stands in contrast to the method used
to scrutinize more than 400 cases with potentially problematic DNA
evidence. For those cases, local judges appointed various attorneys and
those attorneys reported to the judge in whichever court heard each case.

That decentralized plan led to little action on many cases, the Houston
Chronicle reported in September. In fact, nearly two-thirds of defendants
convicted with faulty DNA evidence received little legal help, according
to a review of those cases.

Patrick McCann, president of the Harris County Criminal Lawyers
Association, said he hopes this will work better.

"This would provide a single point of accountability," he said, "which is
essential to making sure that people in need get representation."

(source: Houston Chronicle)

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

Judges to appoint panel to review crime lab cases


Harris County criminal district judges plan to appoint a 3-attorney panel
to review 180 cases that may have been mishandled by the Houston Police
Department's troubled crime lab.

The agreement would end a monthslong dispute over how to scrutinize those
cases, which were identified in June by a former U.S. Justice Department
inspector hired by the city.

It comes just days after the release of a man who was wrongfully convicted
of rape in the mid-1990s after the lab failed to identify semen on the
victim's bedsheet. Testing by an outside lab this summer found DNA
evidence from another man.

Ronald Taylor was the 3rd Texas prison inmate to be released because of
problems with the crime lab.

The review plan calls for three defense attorneys to determine the
importance of crime lab evidence to the 180 convictions and act
accordingly. They probably will report to retired Judge Mary Bacon, who
will confer with most of the defendants to determine whether they want
their convictions reviewed.

The arrangement must be approved by state District Judge Olen Underwood,
the presiding judge over the judicial region that includes Harris County.
It will be paid for with county funds.

The investigator recommended appointing a "special master" to review the
cases, and state lawmakers and criminal defense attorneys pressed for an
independent examination. But the mayor, police chief and district attorney
said the issue could be handled internally.

Michael Bromwich, the former justice department official, said he was
pleased with the judges' recommendation, and opponents of the "special
master" proposal said they had no problem with the new approach.

(source: Associated Press)

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

Family asks jury to spare murderer's life


Family members of a man that went on a murderous crime spree asked a
Travis County jury Thursday to spare his life.

Selwyn Davis was found guilty of capital murder Friday of stabbing to
death Regina Lara, his ex-girlfriend's mother, in East Austin in 2006.
Prosecutors said he broke into her apartment and waited for her to come
home.

Before killing her, prosecutors say he raped a teenager, nearly ran over a
police officer with Lara's stolen car, sliced his uncle with a knife and
badly beat his ex-girlfriend, Lara's daughter.

The jury heard from the final witnesses in the case Thursday.

The victim's family is hoping for the death penalty.

"For us, mainly we just want justice - whatever it is they decide is fine
with us," Teresa Aguirre, victim's niece.

Davis' family is hoping for life. Davis' aunts and grandmother took the
stand in his defense Thursday.

"He came up in an atmosphere of abusiveness, and this has taken its toll
on his life," said Jean Jones, grandmother.

They say Davis was high on drugs at the time of the crime and do not
believe he is a continued threat.

A psychologist also testified for the state Thursday that Davis is a
psychopath and is at a high risk to commit more violence -- even in
prison.

Both the defense and prosecution finished calling witnesses Thursday. The
trial was scheduled to continue Monday with closing arguments, and the
jury was expected to begin deliberations.

For Davis to receive the death penalty, all 12 jurors must believe he is a
continued threat, and 10 out of 12 must believe there are no mitigating
factors that warrant sparing his life.

"I wouldn't want to be in their shoes - I really wouldn't," said Aguirre,
speaking about the difficult decision before the jury.

The jury could also sentence Davis to life in prison.

(source: KVUE News)

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

DAs put political careers first


Regarding Lisa Falkenberg's Oct. 11 column, "Finally free, no grudges":
Just like Falkenberg, I have wondered how Ronald Gene Taylor could have
such grace despite the grave injustice done to him.

Falkenberg tried to give credit to God, speculating that Taylor's grace is
temporary due to his impending freedom, and that it will give way to
outrage.

I would like to first credit Taylor himself for steeling his mind to hold
no grudges against the legal system, the judge or the district attorney. I
would also give credit to his parents and the upbringing they provided to
him. I believe that his family system and its values are the real causes
for the grace displayed by Taylor.

I feel that such cases prove that district attorneys care primarily for
their own political careers and very little about justice. Would it be too
much to ask the district attorney who got Taylor incorrectly convicted to
publicly apologize to him? The victim rights groups who put so much
pressure on the district attorneys to convict someone should also bear
some of the burden.

KETAN MEHTA----Sugar Land

(source: Letter to the Editor, Houston Chronicle)

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

Convicted killer's family cite abuse, lack of care as child----Selwyn
Davis at high risk to commit more violence, mental health experts tells
jury.


Their testimony was vague, with few specific dates or stories, just rough
recollections that Selwyn P. Davis appeared to have been troubled from a
young age.

The 25-year-old's two aunts and grandmother were among the 5 witnesses
called by Davis' defense lawyers, who rested their case Thursday as they
try to save him from the death penalty.

They told of a tough childhood, in which Davis' mother was beaten by his
father before they divorced when Davis was 4 or 5. They also said that
Davis, the middle of three boys separated by about a year in age, and his
brothers were left alone in the family's North Austin apartment for days
at a time while their mother worked.

"A child needs love and structure," said Jean Jones of Martindale, Davis'
grandmother. "This young man, my grandson, he came up in an atmosphere of
abusiveness, and this had taken its toll on his life."

After the defense rested, state District Judge Julie Kocurek sent the
Travis County jury home until Monday, when they will listen to closing
arguments and then begin deliberating whether Davis will get the death
penalty or life in prison for killing his ex-girlfriend's mother, Regina
Lara, on Aug. 22, 2006.

The jury found Davis guilty of capital murder last week and spent most of
this week hearing about Davis' criminal past.

They heard testimony that he attacked a student and, later, a teacher at
Lanier High School. They heard a woman say that when Davis was 16 and she
was 13, he raped her. She said when she told Davis that she was pregnant
with his child, he attacked her, kicking her repeatedly in the stomach.
They heard statements that Davis attacked police officers and a man he
once sold drugs to, as well as former girlfriends, a fellow jail inmate
and immigrant workers he encountered near East Riverside Drive.

Witnesses accused him of stabbing Lara four times in the chest the day he
broke into her 38 Street apartment, sexually assaulting a teenage girl
there and killing Lara's white cat.

Texas law requires prosecutors to prove that Davis would be a continuing
threat before a jury may impose the death penalty. A jury also may
consider whether there are mitigating circumstances that warrant a life
sentence.

Two state witnesses  a psychologist and a psychiatrist  testified Thursday
that Davis poses a high risk of committing future violence. One called him
a psychopath.

A psychiatrist who testified for the defense said Davis has bipolar
disorder that, combined with drug use, caused him to have hallucinations
and delusions the day he killed Lara.

Jones and Davis' aunts, Cerissa Bates of Bastrop and Latreese Cooke of Del
Valle, said that Davis' mother, Stacie Davis, rejected efforts by her
family to step in and help care for Davis and his brothers.

Bates said she noticed signs of emotional problems in Davis when he was
young, such as when he would seem to go into his own world while watching
videos. He also would anger easily, she said.

Bates said she had proposed that Davis see a counselor but his mother
rejected the idea. "I said ... he doesn't seem to be the kid he was, and
she didn't want to hear that."

Cooke said she spanked Davis once to correct his behavior.

"I was just trying to wake him, and he didn't want to be woke," she said.
"He didn't seem to be able to brush off things as easy as my kids."

(source : Austin American-Statesman)

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

Sister Helen Prejean To Speak at St. Thomas School of Law


Death penalty opponent Sister Helen Prejean will speak at the University
of St. Thomas School of Law on Monday, Oct. 22, in the Schulze Grand
Atrium in the School of Law building.

Her talk, "Dead Man Walking  The Journey Continues," will begin at 12:30
p.m. and will conclude by 1:30 p.m.

Prejean is an outspoken death penalty opponent who has written extensively
about the subject. Her books include The Death of Innocents and Dead Man
Walking, the book on which the film was based. Over the years she has been
honored by many groups for her prison ministry.

(source: CrimProf Blog)

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

Vigil held to remember domestic violence victims


Every 12 seconds, a woman is beaten in the United States.

To bring awareness to the issue of domestic violence, the Crisis Center of
Comal County held a memorial Thursday in New Braunfels to remember women
in Texas who have died as a result of domestic violence.

Last year, 120 women died in Texas at the hands of their abuser. At the
memorial, every last one of their names was read. The hope is that those
names will be the last.

A woman who wished to be identified only as Mari married an abuser when
she was just 17 years old. She stayed with him for 33 years.

"He would pull my hair. I would have bumps in my head," she said. "My
body's so hurt already that I couldn't take it anymore."

A month ago, with no friends and no family, she left. Support and services
were waiting for Mari at the Crisis Center of Comal County.

"All educational levels, all income levels, all ethnicities. They come to
us because they have decided to make a change," said Daniel Perez, with
the crisis center.

However, not every woman makes the transition in time. On Thursday, their
names were read.

A week ago, a woman who wished to be identified only as Cindy, made a
break from her husband of 7 years.

"Nobody has to live like this," Cindy said.

He kicked her with steel-toed boots and then laughed.

"I was pregnant at the time. (He) kicked me in the stomach until I
couldn't breathe anymore," Cindy said.

The crisis center reports that a woman is 70 % more likely to be killed
when trying to leave an abusive relationship.

"We have law enforcement, the criminal justice system, the medical
community ... a lot of nonprofits in Comal County assist us in what we
do," Perez said.

Mari is thankful she's alive to start over again.

"I said, 'I'm 48 years old. I have to do the other half of what God has
for me,' " she said.

Last year, local law enforcement agencies responded to 1,100 calls
involving victims of domestic violence.

(source: KENS 5 Eyewitness News)

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

National interests call for a new trial


The death penalty exists for the types of heinous crimes Ernesto Medellin
has committed. In 1993, according to his written confession, he
participated in the brutal gang rape and murder of two teenage girls in
Houston. The facts of the case are not in dispute. A Texas jury found him
guilty of murder in the course of a sexual assault and sentenced him to
death in 1994. And there's every reason to believe that if the case were
retried, the same verdict and punishment would be the result.

A retrial is a discouraging possibility that might arise from the U.S.
Supreme Court's consideration of Medellin's conviction. But it's also what
should happen.

Justices heard oral arguments this week in a volatile case that mixes
states rights, executive authority, immigration, the death penalty and
U.S. sovereignty.

The key issue is that Medellin is a Mexican national. Under U.S. treaty
obligations, he was entitled to contact the Mexican Consulate to obtain
legal assistance but wasn't informed of the right.

Medellin did not raise the issue during his trial, which is one reason the
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has refused to reconsider the case. But
while Texas courts are concerned with Texas laws, the Supreme Court is
concerned with the Constitution.

The U.S. Senate ratified the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations in
1969. It requires nations to notify consular officials if a foreign
national "is arrested or committed to prison or to custody pending trial
or is detained in any other manner."

That provision may seem perverse in the case of Medellin. But it makes
eminent sense when considering how many Americans travel, conduct business
and live abroad. U.S. respect for the treaty helps ensure that Americans
don't disappear into foreign gulags. Reciprocity is an enduring principle
of international law.

That's why President Bush, who presided over 152 executions as Texas
governor, has sided with Medellin's lawyers. Not because he's gone soft on
the death penalty. Not because he's seeking a new way to expand
presidential powers. Not because he's surrendering U.S. sovereignty to the
World Court.

Rather, it's because observing the provisions of a constitutionally
ratified treaty serves a compelling national interest.

Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Pena, the 2 girls Medellin raped and
murdered, deserve justice. There's a way, however, for justice to be
served under Texas law that is consonant with the supreme law of the land
- the Constitution - and U.S. treaty obligations.

(source: Editorial, San Antonio Express-News)

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

Made in Mexico: A New Death Penalty Debate


You can argue that Medellin v. Texas, argued over for nearly 90 minutes
this week at the Supreme Court, is an extraordinarily complex capital case
loaded with tense interactions between state, federal, and international
authorities. You could say it's a case about the eternal struggle between
the various branches of government about which gets the final call about
the timing of an execution. You could say it's a contest between 2
nations, Mexico and America, struggling to abide by long-held rules and
principles of fairness.

Or, if you want to get positively baseline about it, you could say that
Medellin v. Texas is an ironic case which has seen George W. Bush go out
of his way to provide due process protections to a Mexican national - a
convicted killer, no less - after failing or refusing for years to show
any concern at all for the rights of homegrown prisoners. There are no
doubt hundreds of men on death row in America right now who are saying to
themselves: Why Medellin and not me? Why can't I get the president to
intercede on my behalf?

Why, indeed. The justices Wednesday went way beyond their self-imposed
1-hour time limit for oral argument trying to figure out whether the
president has the authority to order the state courts of Texas to provide
a new round of appellate review to a man named Jose E. Medellin, a Mexican
national who was charged with murder in 1993 and then convicted and
sentenced to death a year later. For nearly 90 minutes, the curious
justices peppered lawyers for both sides with questions in what Supreme
Court diva Linda Greenhouse called "an intense and lively seminar."

The White House says that the state courts must respect a ruling by the
International Court of Justice that declared in 2004 that Medellin upon
his arrest was deprived of his right to confer with consular officials.
Texas says that both the president and the international court ought to
butt out of what has traditionally been the province of the states -
capital cases, remember, almost always are brought by state prosecutors
before state juries and judges.

The World Court did not seek to have Medellin retried; it was satisfied
with requesting a new hearing for Medellin which it said was required by
the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. The White House agreed,
perhaps for political purposes more so than for legal ones, but now has
its collective back up because Texas is refusing to enforce a presidential
order. But the president doesn't get to boss around the states, Texas'
solicitor general told the justices on Wednesday. It's not hard to see how
and why the battle lines have hardened the way that they have. It's a
combustible mix.

No matter what happens to Medellin, however, it's clear that he is getting
more attention and help from the White House than Michael Richard did.
Richard was executed by lethal injection in Texas last month on the very
day that the Supreme Court declared it would accept two Kentucky cases
that had raised the issue of poor injection procedures. The Justices
turned down Richard's request for a stay of execution and the state
appellate court offices closed at 5 p.m. that day despite knowing that
Richard's attorneys would be seeking emergency relief that night.
President Bush did not give any orders to stay an execution in Texas on
that occasion. He did not issue an Executive Order requiring a hearing or
have his lawyers file a brief.

In fact, the Justice Department was supporting lethal injection procedures
around the country - and asking the Supreme Court not to get involved in a
review of those procedures - long after Florida Gov. Jeb Bush declared a
moratorium on lethal injections. Gov. Bush acted after a horribly botched
execution in the Sunshine State in December 2006. Meanwhile, the
president's attorney general was defending injection protocols long after
one federal judge after another began to question them. Believe me, state
officials in Texas aren't complaining about President Bush's power grab on
states' rights when it comes to this area of capital punishment law.

Nor for that matter does Texas have cause to complain about the
president's role in the case of a capital convict named Calvin Burdine.
The White House did not rush in 2001 to give direction to the Texas courts
to intercede on behalf of Burdine even though the fellow's lawyer slept
through significant portions of his murder trial. It took years and years
and intervention by the federal courts to ensure that this travesty upon
justice - the Constitution is deemed to require the "effective assistance
of counsel" - to be corrected. There were no presidential directives then.

Indeed, before President Bush came to the White House his main legacy in
the area of capital punishment was an astonishingly glib and shoddy piece
of governance now known to the world as the Texas Clemency memos. In his
famous expose, Atlantic Monthly reporter Alan Berlow revealed in 2003 the
callous, reckless way in which then-Gov. Bush and his then-counsel,
Alberto Gonzales, reviewed clemency memos from capital prisoners of their
state. One by one the men's clemency requests were denied, often when the
facts and analyses in the memos were faulty or downright lies.

Unwilling as governor to muster up concern for the legal claims of the
death row inmates of his own state, the president since coming to
Washington has done little to change anyone's mind about how he truly
feels about capital punishment protocol. He was still insisting Texas'
procedures were fair during the Burdine case. Yet this is the same man who
this week sent the nation's Solicitor General up to the Supreme Court to
argue that a foreign-born killer deserved one more hearing. Go figure.

I know. The principles at stake here - state sovereignty, federal
authority, international law - go beyond the death penalty debate and the
president's role in it. There is a good chance that the president would
have intervened on behalf of his close allies in Mexico even if Medellin
were accused and convicted of a less heinous crime. And there is no
comparison, really, between the legal doctrines involved in this case as
opposed to the ones which emerged in the Burdine or Richard cases.

That's what all the president's men and women will say when they are asked
why they are taking Mexico's side against Texas in a tiny recreation of
the War of Independence fought along the Rio Grande in 1836. What these
tribunes will mean is that their intercession on behalf of Medellin is
strictly business, and nothing personal, and that no Americans who happen
to be on death row today ought to get excited about the prospect of it
getting help from the feds any time soon - whether they deserve it or not.

(source: CBS News (Attorney Andrew Cohen analyzes legal issues for CBS
News)

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

HE NEW WORLD DISORDER----Bush U.N. ambassador says he's 'caving' on world
court; Bolton sees blocking of death sentence for Mexican rapist-murderer
'ridiculous'


Former U.N. ambassador John Bolton says the Bush administration is caving
in to global opinion by siding with Mexico and the International Court of
Justice in their attempt to overturn the death penalty of an illegal alien
convicted of raping and murdering 2 teenage girls.

It's "a bad mistake, but one of many mistakes, I'm sad to say, the
administration has made recently," Bolton said in an interview with
nationally syndicated radio host Laura Ingraham.

The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday in the case of Jose
Medellin, who confessed in 1993 to participating in the rape and murder of
Houston teenagers Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Pena. The girls were
sodomized and strangled with their shoe laces. Medellin bragged about
keeping one girl's Mickey Mouse watch as a souvenir of the crime.

Medellin and four others were convicted of capital murder and sent to
Texas' death row. The intervention in the case by the Bush administration
comes after the International Court of Justice in the Hague found Medellin
was not informed of his right to contact the Mexican Consulate for legal
assistance. The cases of some 50 other Mexicans on death row could also be
affected.

Bolton insisted the U.S. has no obligation to the world court in this
case.

"It is ridiculous," he said. "The Vienna Convention on consular relations
does not create rights personal to the individual. It's a state-to-state
agreement."

U.S. lawmakers who signed the treaty did not believe they were creating a
way for criminals on death row to "get around our judicial system," Bolton
explained to Ingraham.

"It you had said that to the Senate at the time this convention came up,
they'd have laughed at you," he said.

The criminals' argument, Bolton said, boils down to insisting they have
not had sufficient due process.

"They haven't had enough due process? They've had the full panoply of
constitutional protection, and now they're trying to create something
else," Bolton asserted.

"They've used every single possibility within our criminal justice system
to get themselves out of jail, and every one has failed," he continued.
"Now they're pulling this rabbit out of a hat, and it would just be
outrageous if it were allowed to succeed."

Supporters of the administration on this issue contend the U.S. must back
the world court in order to protect Americans abroad.

Bolton says that's comparing apples and oranges. A situation in which an
American might need help, he said, would be "somebody being thrown in jail
in some Banana republic somewhere where we need to get access."

"It's is just a completely separate situation," he said.

Jose Medellin

The Bush administration became involved in the Medellin case in 2003 when
Mexico sued the U.S. over the consular issue in the world court, the
U.N.'s top court for resolving international disputes.

The court ruled in Mexico's favor in late 2004 and ordered the U.S. to
reconsider the Mexican inmates' murder convictions and death sentences. In
February 2005, Bush announced that while he disagreed with the decision,
the U.S. would comply. He ordered courts in Texas and elsewhere to review
the cases.

A few days later, however, the president withdrew the U.S. from the part
of the Vienna Convention that gives the world court final say in
international disputes.

The U.S. Supreme Court, which had agreed to hear Medellin's case,
dismissed it later in 2005 to allow the case to play out in Texas. Last
November, the all-Republican Texas Court of Criminal Appeals balked at the
president's order, saying Bush had overstepped his authority.

The Texas court said the judicial branch, not the White House, should
decide how to resolve the Mexican cases. It also said Medellin wasn't
entitled to a new hearing because he failed to complain at his original
trial about any violation of his consular rights and had therefore waived
them.

Then Medellin appealed again to the U.S. Supreme Court, which announced
last May it would hear his case. His lawyer, Donald Donovan of New York,
argued Wednesday that Bush was correct when he took action to comply with
the world court's decision.

(source: WorldNetDaily)