May 23 TEXAS: Quintero juror 'outraged' over killer's life sentence A juror who advocated executing Juan Leonardo Quintero for murdering a Houston policeman blasted her fellow jurors who sentenced the Mexican national to life without parole. In an emotional telephone interview today, Cypress secretary Cindy Bradford, 44, called for a change in state law that requires only 10 jurors to agree to a life-without-parole sentence. "If it takes a unanimous 12-juror vote for the death sentence," she said, "it should be unanimous for life without parole." Jurors deliberated about 10 hours this week before sentencing Quintero to prison for the 2006 murder of Houston police officer Rodney Johnson. Johnson was shot 7 times as he filled out paperwork after stopping Quintero for a traffic violation. Bradford said she and 1 other juror supported a death sentence. She did not name that juror. "I'm as outraged as anyone else about this," Bradford said. ". . .We're telling everyone that you can enter this country illegally, plead guilty to indecency with a child, get deported, come back anyway, execute a police officer and that's OK. Now we get to take care of him for the rest of his natural life, and I personally have a problem with that." Bradford took exception to the argument of fellow jurors, who, she said, suggested police officers are aware of the risks of their profession. "It's like Johnson somehow deserved to get what he got. . . .I beg to differ," Bradford said. "They don't sign up to be assassinated." After the jury's decision to spare Quintero's life was announced, juror Letty Burkholder of Houston said she felt the killer's life had "potential." "He's loved by many of his family and friends," she told the media, "and that was number one." Quintero, in an interview with the Houston Chronicle, this week said that he was surprised that his life was spared. Earlier he predicted that he would be sentenced to die. "(The life sentence) is not anything to be happy about," he said. Bradford said she favored executing Quintero because he "shot the officer in cold blood in the back." "There's a flaw in the system," she said. "If it took 12 votes to get life without parole, we'd still be sitting there. I'd be sitting there until the judge declared a hung jury." Other jurors who initially favored the death sentence changed their votes as the deliberations dragged on, Bradford said. "I got the impression that they were just tired of deliberating and wanted to get it over with and go home," she said. Bradford said neither she nor her family has been touched by violent crime. "In my opinion, the death penalty exists for a reason," she said. "I don't necessarily feel it should be handed out like aspirin, but I believe there are cases in which it is warranted. This case absolutely was one of them." Bradford expressed sympathy for the Johnson family. "I can't even imagine how they must feel at this point after everything they've been through," she said. "I wish it had turned out differently. I hope that, despite everything, they can move on. We did everything that a couple of us could do, but when you're out-voted, you're out-voted." (source: Houston Chronicle) OHIO: Sidney Woman Could Face Death Penalty In Recent Murder Meeting in a special session, the Shelby County Grand jury returned an aggravated murder indictment with a death penalty specification Thursday afternoon agaisnt Gloria Ann Jelks, 36, of Sidney. She is accused of beating to death Paul Wilt, 80 of Sidney. According to Sidney police, a caregiver found the body of Wilt in his Independence Court home in Sidney the morning of May 13. Wilt died from "blunt force trauma to the head," according to Sidney police spokesperson Capt. Rod Austin. Jelks was also indicted on a charge of aggravated robbery. Police say they found Wilt's home ransacked and an undetermined amount of cash missing. Jelks is held in the Shelby County jail without bond. "What was done to Wilt was heinous and should never happen to anyone," said Shelby County prosecuotor Ralp Bauers. (source: WHIO TV News) CALIFORNIA: California Supreme Court denies death row inmate's request for DNA testing----The justices in a 5-2 decision say there is overwhelming evidence that Charles Keith Richardson took part in the slaying of an 11-year-old Tulare girl. A death row inmate will not be allowed a DNA test to determine whether he left biological evidence at a murder scene because the results would have made no difference to the jury that condemned him, the California Supreme Court ruled 5 to 2 Thursday. In a decision written by Justice Carlos R. Moreno, the state high court said that Charles Keith Richardson had failed to show that a DNA test, even one eliminating him as the source of hairs found where an 11-year-old Tulare County girl was murdered, "could raise a reasonable probability" of overturning his conviction and death sentence. In a companion case, the court also unanimously upheld Richardson's penalty. The court's decision, which interpreted a state law granting DNA requests in defense innocence claims, is likely to deny inmates genetic testing when a trial judge determines there is other, strong evidence of guilt. In the case before the court, the hairs Richardson wanted tested were the only physical evidence against him. Prosecutors said he admitted guilt to police, although he quickly retracted his statement. His lawyer said Richardson is mentally retarded. In 1988, April Holley was raped and sodomized, then drowned in a bathtub in the trailer she shared with her mother and sister. A jury in 1992 found Richardson and another man guilty of the murder. DNA tests on semen recovered from the child excluded Richardson but not his accomplice, who also is on death row. Prosecution experts testified that microscopic analysis showed that some pubic hairs in the tub were consistent with Richardson, but defense experts disagreed. Since 2004, Richardson has sought to have the hairs tested for DNA with a technology not available at the time of the trial. But the court majority upheld a trial judge's decision to deny him the test. "The hair evidence was, at most, simply one piece of evidence tending to show guilt and it was fiercely disputed by the defense to the point that it may well have had little significance in the jury's determination of guilt or sentence," Moreno wrote. "By contrast, the evidence that the petitioner was the perpetrator was strong." That evidence included statements Richardson made to a witness that he knew the victim was alone on the night of the murder. After the murder, Richardson revealed to police details of the crime not known to the public, the court said. The court ruled that inmates must show that "in light of all the evidence, there is a reasonable probability -- that is, a reasonable chance and not merely an abstract possibility -- that the defendant would have obtained a more favorable result" if DNA tests had been available. Richard Jay Moller, Richardson's lawyer, said he was "mystified" by the court's decision. He said the prosecution had told the jury that there was a 99.8% chance the hairs belonged to Richardson. Moller said Richardson has an IQ of about 70 and passed a polygraph in which he admitted witnessing the drowning but denied participating in the crime. The admissions to police were sarcastic, Moller said, and came during a 2-hour interrogation. "All this so-called overwhelming evidence against Richardson is nonsense," Moller said. "It boggles my mind how they ignored the facts in the case." Justice Ming W. Chin, joined by Chief Justice Ronald M. George, dissented from the decision. Chin is considered the scientific expert on the court, and he and George tend to side with prosecutors. Chin said he agreed that the requested testing, "viewed in isolation," was unlikely to have changed the outcome of the trial, even if Richardson had been excluded as the source of the hairs. But Chin noted that Richardson also might have be able to present other evidence to bolster his claims. "This 4-year effort [to obtain a DNA test] has undoubtedly been far more expensive -- in terms of monetary costs, passage of time, and expenditure of judicial resources -- than if the hairs simply had been tested 4 years ago," Chin wrote. The hair evidence "played a prominent role at trial," and that prominence "should have been enough" to warrant a DNA test, Chin said. Deputy Atty. Gen. Kathleen A. McKenna said "the correct procedure was followed" in the case. But Moller said he would ask the court to reconsider Richardson's appeal, and pledged to include evidence of Richardson's retardation in a separate constitutional challenge. Moller said Richardson, who is in his 40s, is severely ill and not likely to live long enough to be executed. (source: Los Angeles Times) ********************************* Jury rules in favor of death penalty for Cook A Riverside County Superior Court jury recommended Thursday that Michael Cook of Cathedral City should get the death penalty for 2 murders he committed 10 years ago. A sentencing date for the 36-year-old Cathedral City man was set for July 25 at the Larson Justice Center, 46-200 Oasis St. in Indio, according to Riverside District Attorney's Office spokesman Michael Jeandron. Meanwhile, a motion date for Cook's attorneys was set for June 20 at the courthouse to give them an opportunity to modify the verdict, said Riverside County prosecutor Tricia Fransdal. "The death penalty is reserved for the worst of the worst in our society," Jeandron said. "What the defendant (Cook) did is the worst of the worst." Cook was convicted April 22 of 3 counts of arson, seven counts of burglary, two counts of murder and one count each of attempted burglary and auto theft in a string of crimes that took place a decade ago in Cathedral City, Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage. Fransdal argued Cook should die, while his defense attorneys John Hemmer and David Wiesen said he deserves life in prison without the possibility of parole. Authorities testified in April that from Jan. 17, 1998 to April 22, 1998, Cook had a pattern of going into mobile home parks, setting fire to trailers and burglarizing neighboring homes. On two occasions in 1998, Florence Mash, 84, and Lucille Quigley, 86, were burned alive in their Cathedral City mobile homes, Cathedral City police Sgt. Paul Herrera has said. "These women were completely innocent," Fransdal told the jury Thursday in front of two large photos of Mash and Quigley during her closing argument. "They should've met death on death's terms, but they met it on his (Cook's) terms. "The only thing that justice demands is a sentence of death," Fransdal said. In Hemmer's argument, he acknowledged that Cook was going to die in prison, but charged the jury to really think about its decision. "The only question is: Is he (Cook) going to die of old age, or die because you said he should?" Hemmer asked. "The easy way out is death. I'm begging you; let him die of natural causes." Cook sought to avert the death penalty - which is meant for people who commit murders with special circumstance - by contending he was mentally retarded, a condition that would have made him ineligible for the death penalty under California law. On May 8, the same jury found that Cook is not mentally retarded. Cook's adoptive mother, Georgia Cook of Macomb, Miss., and biological sister, Tina Franklin of Baton Rouge, La., testified on his behalf Wednesday, mentioning that Cook had an abusive childhood. But, according to Fransdal, abuse had nothing to do with his criminal acts. "A lot of people are abused," Fransdal said. "And a lot of people make choices that they're not going to let that affect their lives." (source: The Desert Sun) OKLAHOMA: Judge says Tulsan's killer due new trial He was found guilty of killing a woman in Tulsa in 1991. A convicted Tulsa County murderer who has spent more than 14 years on death row could get a new trial, based on a Tulsa federal judge's finding that his 1993 trial was "tainted by constitutional error." In a 92-page ruling filed Thursday, U.S. District Judge Terence Kern found that Lonnie Wright Richie is entitled to relief in the form of a new trial on two grounds that a Tulsa County judge did not instruct jurors properly and that defense counsel failed to present mental-health evidence on Richie's behalf. Assistant State Attorney General Jennifer Miller said she is "pretty sure that we will appeal" Kern's ruling to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver. Kern's order directed prosecutors to start proceedings to retry Richie, 41, within 180 days. But Miller said an appeal by the Attorney General's Office would include a request to delay that 180-day requirement until the 10th Circuit can review Kern's decision. In another issue raised previously on appeal, Kern also ruled in 2004 that Richie was entitled to a new trial. The 10th Circuit in 2005 reversed that finding and sent the case back to federal court for consideration of other issues. In September 1993, a jury imposed a death sentence upon convicting Richie of the 1st-degree murder of Laura Elaine Launhardt, 34. She disappeared Aug. 28, 1991, after shopping at a Kmart store in Tulsa. <>P Launhardt's body was found in a walk-in closet in an abandoned, storm-damaged house near Lake Keystone. Her hands were tied behind her, and her ankles were bound. She was lying face-down, with her head suspended slightly above the floor by a strap that was tied on one end to a clothes rod and to her neck on the other. At the trial, the prosecution argued that Richie deliberately killed Launhardt by lifting her by her feet, causing her strangulation death from the strap around her neck. The defense theory "was that Mrs. Launhardt was left in the house restrained, but alive," Kern's order said. The state Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Richie's death sentence and a 1st-degree murder conviction tied to an allegation that he had a deliberate intent to kill. At the trial, then-Associate District Judge Bill Beasley denied defense requests for jurors to have the option of returning a verdict on the lesser offense of 2nd-degree murder, which carries a maximum sentence of life in prison. In this week's order, Kern found merit in Richie's claim that his jury should have been instructed about second-degree murder, which applies to a death caused by "imminently dangerous" conduct that indicates "a depraved mind" in extreme disregard of human life but without a premeditated design to cause death. In Richie's case, the prosecution's direct evidence in support of the "malice aforethought" element of first-degree murder "was glaringly sparse," Kern wrote. Kern also found that the performance of Richie's trial counsel was deficient in failing to investigate and present mitigation evidence in the form of expert testimony regarding Richie's mental state. Four years ago, Kern adopted a magistrate's report and concluded that Richie was entitled to a new trial because of ineffective legal assistance, linked to trial defense attorney Melody Brannon's cross-examination of a medical examiner. The Attorney General's Office successfully challenged that decision by appealing to the 10th Circuit. In the Launhardt case, Richie also was sentenced to consecutive prison terms totaling 209 years for kidnapping, robbery, auto larceny and unauthorized use of debit cards. Co-defendant Daniel P. Waller Jr., now 34, is in prison serving sentences of life with parole possible plus 15 years, imposed in 1993 after he pleaded guilty to 1st-degree murder, kidnapping and robbery. (source: Tulsa World)
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, OHIO, CALIF., OKLA.
Rick Halperin Fri, 23 May 2008 11:32:05 -0500 (Central Daylight Time)
