May 11
COLORADO:
Judge will allow James Holmes' attorneys to argue for 'heightened standards of
fairness'
The judge overseeing the movie theater shooting case has granted a defense
motion to add a hearing about fairness to next week's court schedule.
Accused shooter James Holmes and his defense were already expected to argue
that they be allowed to change the current not guilty plea to not guilty by
reason of insanity. That hearing is scheduled to begin at 9 a.m. Monday.
Judge Carlos Samour wrote Friday that he would add to the scheduled appearance
the defense's requested hearing about "heightened standards of fairness and
reliability to all aspects of this capital case."
Samour noted that the prosecution had objected to the defense's motion, but had
not filed a written response. The response, however, is posted on the site
hosting the case's public documents.
Samour had offered to delay the hearing if the prosecution wanted to file a
response, but that doesn't appear to be necessary.
Holmes, a 25-year-old former University of Colorado graduate student, is
charged with 166 counts in the July 20 massacre. The shooting, which occurred
during a showing of the "The Dark Knight Rises," left 12 moviegoers dead and
injured 70 people.
Prosecutors declared on April 1 they would seek the death penalty.
**********************
Letters urge governor to deny clemency for Nathan Dunlap, sentenced to death
for 4 murders
Gov. John Hickenlooper is being asked to "show courage" by denying clemency for
Nathan Dunlap, sentenced to death for killing four employees of an Aurora Chuck
E. Cheese during a robbery in 1993.
Letters to the governor from the Arapahoe County District Attorney and his
deputy district attorney, the jury foreman on the last Colorado death penalty
case from State Representative Rhonda Fields and from a former co-worker were
made public Friday. All of them argued that Nathan Dunlap deserves the death
penalty for his crime because he admitted killing all four employees to
eliminate witnesses in the case.
The only other inmates on Colorado's death row were also convicted of killing a
witness in a criminal case, the son of Rep. Fields, who was scheduled to
testify against them.
The jury foreman on the Robert Ray case, who did not want his name released,
wrote Hickenlooper, telling him "Mr. Dunlap, as he stated himself, killed
people because they would be witnesses. Freedom, peace and justice are all
values worth more than any one of our individual lives."
The foreman called the Chuck E. Cheese murders as "Aurora's original mass
shooting." He also addressed augments that racism played a part in placing
Dunlap on death row.
"You must trust that your citizens are not racists or ignorant fools," the jury
foreman wrote. "Show the nation that Colorado does not tolerate cowardly acts
of mass murder."
Rep. Rhonda Fields wrote the governor about her personal experience in the
death penalty trials of Robert Ray and Sir Mario Owens -- the two men convicted
of killing her son and his fiancee
Fields also argued that racism did not play a part in any of the 3 death
penalty verdicts -- all rendered in Arapahoe County.
"It was not the fault of the DA back in 1993 or the DA in 2005 that Dunlap, Ray
and Owens all chose to commit their murders in Arapahoe County. It was the
nature of the murders, not their locations, that cause the death penalty
decisions."
She called it "offensive" to suggest that race played a part in any of the
cases.
Regarding the Ray and Owens death penalty verdicts, Fields wrote, "...the
jurors believed that the killing of witnesses was the main factor that required
the death penalty." She added, "I know that Dunlap, when asked why he killed
his victims, answered that it was because they were witnesses to his crime."
She concluded her letter to the governor by saying, "I think that granting
clemency would send the wrong message to criminals and to witnesses."
District Attorney George Brauchler and Chief Deputy District Attorney Matt
Maillaro wrote a joint letter to to Hickenlooper, stating, "He (Dunlap) took
the lives of four Colorado citizens and justice requires he now pays with his
own."
"We ask you to take the courageous stop of not granting his request for
executive clemency," the 2 also wrote.
A former Chuck E. Cheese co-worker and high school acquaintance of Nathan
Dunlap also wrote Gov. Hickenlooper, urging him to not grant clemency for the
condemned murderer.
The woman, who did not want to publicly identified, told Hickenlooper,
"(Dunlap) was always a vindictive, evil and mean dark person."
She said Dunlap is a "bad person, he always has been and I believe he always
will be...His actions did not just happen to occur on this one horrible night,
it was from the monster that he always was."
The woman relates personal interactions with Dunlap at school and at work where
she said he used "intimidation and fear."
The woman said she was scheduled to work the night of the murders but had
changed her schedule in order to babysit. She said that decision saved her
life. She is now a nurse.
-- DA's response: http://ch7ne.ws/11Z9LxB
-- Ray jury foreman and Rep. Fields responses: http://ch7ne.ws/16niHmb
-- Letter from co-worker who was supposed to work the night of the shooting:
http://ch7ne.ws/10odAtF
Dunlap has been sentenced to die by lethal injection during the week of Aug.
18. The last person executed in Colorado was Gary Lee Davis in 1997.
Before that, the last person executed in Colorado was Luis Monge in 1967. Monge
was executed in the gas chamber for murdering his wife and 3 children. Prior to
his death, Colorado averaged 1 execution per year for the years the gas chamber
replaced hanging in the state, which was 1934.
(source for both: thedenverchannel.com)
************************
DA seeks no clemency for death row inmate Dunlap
The district attorney of the office that prosecuted a death-row inmate who
killed 4 employees at a Chuck E. Cheese restaurant a 1993 is among those asking
Gov. John Hickenlooper to take the "courageous step" of rejecting his clemency
petition.
Nathan Dunlap's lawyers are seeking clemency while also fighting in court to
try to spare him from execution for the Aurora slayings, which happened during
a robbery. They say their client had undiagnosed bipolar disorder at the time.
Several letters to Hickenlooper that were released Friday say Dunlap's death
sentence should be carried out. They were from Arapahoe County District
Attorney George Brauchler and Senior Chief Deputy District Attorney Matt
Maillaro; the jury foreman in a separate Colorado death penalty case; and state
Rep. Rhonda Fields.
A judge has scheduled Dunlap's execution for the week of Aug. 18. Dunlap would
be the 1st person Colorado has executed since 1997.
He is among 3 men on Colorado's death row. The other 2 were convicted in the
death of Fields' son, who was to testify against them in another case. The jury
foreman who wrote to Hickenlooper had served at the trial of one of the men,
Robert Ray. The foreman's name was redacted from the letter.
Brauchler and Maillaro wrote that the Colorado Legislature, the courts and the
jury in Dunlap's case already have resolved moral and legal questions
surrounding his death sentence.
"In short, to commute Nathan Dunlap's death sentence after almost 20 years
would be a cruel and unjust slap in the face to those family members who have
been waiting so long for justice, and it would disregard the facts of the case
and the law of the land," they wrote.
In a letter more than 30 pages long, the prosecutors outline why Hickenlooper
should allow the jury's decision to sentence Dunlap to death to be carried out.
"We ask you to take the courageous step of not granting his petition for
executive clemency, as Mr. Dunlap and his lawyers have presented you with
nothing that should cause you to believe his punishment is not just when
balanced against the gravity of his crimes," they wrote.
Dunlap's lawyers have said he is remorseful. They also argue that Colorado's
death penalty law, which mandates execution by lethal injection, could cause
excruciating pain in violation of the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual
punishment, partly because it doesn't list required qualifications for
executioners and doesn't include medical safeguards.
They also plan to argue that Dunlap cannot be executed until after he finishes
a 75-year prison term for robbery and that making him wait on death row for a
decade and a half is cruel and unusual punishment.
(source: Associated Press)
ARIZONA:
Arias murder trial: Death penalty for women is rare; Last female execution in
Arizona: Gruesome 1930 hanging
If a jury finds Jodi Arias eligible for the death penalty, she would join only
a handful of women on Arizona's death row.
Only 3 of the 125 inmates on death row in Arizona are women, and one of them,
Debra Milke, recently had her conviction overturned. A woman hasn't been
executed in Arizona since 1930. And that execution didn't go very well. Eva
Dugan, convicted of killing a Tucson chicken farmer, was hanged and
accidentally decapitated.
Arias was convicted Wednesday of the premeditated murder of her former
boyfriend, Travis Alexander. Next week jurors will start deliberating whether
the 32-year-old should get the death penalty or life in prison.
Killing unlikely
"Statistically ... it's very unlikely that she will be sentenced to death,"
said Victor Streib, a retired law professor at Ohio Northern University who has
researched the death penalty since the 1970s. "If she's sentenced to death,
it's extremely unlikely she'll be put to death. But predicting what a jury will
do is difficult."
Streib and other experts point to 2 factors leading to the low number of women
on death row:
-- Women commit far fewer 1st-degree murders than men.
-- Jurors may have a gender bias, viewing women as mothers and caregivers,
traits that make it harder to impose the death penalty, they say.
Still not treated equally
"Even though we've come a long way in trying to treat women and men equally, as
we know, we aren't there," said Andy Silverman, an attorney who has worked on
capital cases and a professor at the University of Arizona's James E. Rogers
College of Law.
Nationally, women commit about 10 % of murders but account for only about 2 %
of death sentences. In a given year, 3 to 5 women receive the death penalty, a
number that has stayed about the same over the past 40 years, Streib said.
It's even more rare for a state to execute a woman. Since 1973, women have
accounted for only 12 executions, less than 1 %.
Women are also more likely to kill someone close to them - a husband, lover or
a child - than strangers, the experts say. Crimes of passion are many times not
premeditated, so they don't end up being capital cases.
Killing those they know well
In Arias' case, she knew her victim well. Travis Alexander was her former
boyfriend, and they had an on-again, off-again relationship. They would split
up, but then he would invite her over for sex.
Arias admitted killing Alexander on June 4, 2008. 5 days later, friends found
Alexander in the shower of his Mesa home. He had 27 stab wounds, a slashed
throat and a bullet in his head.
The jury will look at what are called "aggravating factors" in determining
whether she deserves the death penalty.
The prosecution has alleged cruelty as an aggravating factor in Arias' case.
For a finding of cruelty, the jury must agree that the victim, while conscious,
experienced mental and physical pain and that the defendant knew or should have
known that the victim would suffer.
The jury has to find an aggravating factor - or the death penalty is off the
table. Arias would instead then get 25 years to life in prison or life without
the possibility of parole.
In the Arias case, the experts say that even though the jury found her guilty
of 1st-degree murder, sentencing her to death is another matter.
"Even somebody who voted for (1st-degree murder) may not feel comfortable with
the death penalty," Silverman said.
(source: Courier Post Online)
******************************
Jodi Arias trial: Jurors to reconvene next week over sentencing
On May 9 NY Times reports that the jury for the Jodi Arias trial will reconvene
on May 15 to decide whether Jodi will be given the death penalty for the first
degree murder of Travis Alexander. It seems that as a whole the group can't
make the life altering decision as to whether allow her to sit in prison for
the rest of her life, with the possibility of parole, no matter how improbable,
or give her the death sentence.
This trial has been full of twists and turns and while Jodi was very ruthless
in the way that she murdered Travis Alexander, she was obviously a victim of
some degree, as it was very obvious to most that she was being played and
wasn't as meaningful to him as she was to him. The life altering decision of
handing someone the death sentence takes a toll on everyone. The jury will
individually have to live with the fact. for the rest of their lives, that they
played a part in killing someone. Jodi Arias wants the death penalty as she
feels that it would be the ultimate freedom and she wants it as quickly as
possible. However, if Jodi were given the death sentence, she would be only one
of four women to ever be on death row in the state of Arizona.
The jury will reconvene on May 15 and hopefully they will have had a chance to
come to an agreement that suits everyone.
***********************
Jodi Arias is afraid to face victim's family
On May 10, 2013 ABC News 15 out of Ariz. reported the latest in the Jodi Arias
drama extravaganza. It's now being reported that the woman doesn't want to face
the loved ones of Travis Alexander when they make their post-trial statements.
Her attorneys have formally requested that Travis's loved ones make their
statements on video for the jury to view, and not do so in the presence of
Arias during the sentencing phase of the trial, post-conviction. This appears
to be a final attempt at having the upper hand after being convicted of
1st-degree murder. Arias believed she wouldn't be convicted, and was quoted as
saying that no jury would ever convict her. Now it seems that she is tucking
her tail, so-to-speak, and is too cowardly to face those who were impacted most
by the horrific murder she committed.
The motion that was filed by her attorneys said the following:
"Ms. Arias requests that any and all victim impact evidence be presented via
videotape so as to prevent an unpredictable outburst."
What is meant by the above statement? Are Arias's attorneys insinuating that
Jodi may have an outburst of anger, despair or guilt? If justice were to truly
be served -- and it looks like it may -- then the victim impact statements will
be made in person, just feet from Jodi Arias. It seems as though the just
decision would be for all parties to be present throughout the entirety of the
trial.
The Phoenix based Herald and News reports that the sentencing portion of the
trial has been postponed until next week. That means Jodi has time to mull over
her actions and the events that have transpired over the past several days. She
is undoubtedly playing over the jurors announcing their agreement to the
conviction, 1-by-1, while she thinks about whether or not it's even worth it to
appeal the conviction. She claims that she wants the death penalty, that it's
better to her than a life sentence. She'll find out just what's in store in a
few days.
(source for both: The Examiner)
*************************
Who was last person executed in Arizona?
--60-year-old Richard Dale Stokley was put to death Dec. 5, 2012
--He was convicted for the 1991 rape and murder of 2 girls
--125 inmates are currently on Arizona death row; 3 are women
If newly convicted killer Jodi Arias gets the death penalty, it could be
decades before the sentence is ever carried out.
Arizona's most recent execution was that of 60-year-old Richard Dale Stokley on
Dec. 5, 2012, by lethal injection. He was convicted in 1992 for the 1991 rape
and murder of 2 teenage girls who were abducted from a July 4 fair.
Stokley and another man, Randy Brazeal, took the girls out into the desert
where they were raped, strangled, stomped and stabbed to death. The men took
the bodies and threw them into an abandoned mine shaft. The next day, Stokley
turned himself in to police.
Despite that confession and conviction, Stokley spent the next 20 years on
death row appealing his sentence. In return for a lesser sentence, Brazeal
entered a plea agreement saying Stokley was the one who did the actual murders.
Arizona's state website lists 125 inmates currently on death row. Several of
them have been there since the 1980s. Edward Schad, for example, was sentenced
to death row on Jan. 2, 1980. His case is still being appealed to various
courts this year.
There are 3 women on Arizona's death row. Wendi Andriano was put there by Arias
prosecutor Juan Martinez. She too claimed self-defense in the 2008 killing of
her husband. It came out in court that he had been poisoned and was undergoing
debilitating chemotherapy for advanced stage cancer. The prosecution said
Andriano killed him for a malpractice settlement.
According to AZCentral.com, Debra Milke was sentenced to death for having her
4-year-old son killed in 1989. Just this month, an appeals court tossed out her
1991 conviction. They said she deserved a new trial because the detective in
the case had a history of misconduct issues. He testified she had confessed to
him, but she denies it, and no record of the confession exists.
The 3rd woman, Shawna Forde, was sentenced to death for the 2009 killings of a
man and his daughter in their home. Prosecutors said she was the ringleader of
a robbery operation that targeted the man because they believed he was a drug
dealer. Her defense was based around the idea that she was never in the home.
Forde had previously made her name as a member of Arizona's controversial
Minutemen movement.
The botched Arizona execution of the notorious Eva Dugan led the state to
change from hanging to the gas chamber. In 1992, voters decided to switch yet
again to lethal injection.
(source: HLN TV News)
CALIFORNIA:
Fugitive Ukiah murder suspect brought back to U.S.
After 12 years and 8 months on the run in Mexico, a man suspected in the brutal
slaying of a 1-time Ukiah neighbor could find himself facing the death penalty
now that he's in the hands of Mendocino County authorities.
Charges lodged Friday against Jerred Raymond Hernandez, 32, include 1st-degree
murder with special circumstances that could mean a death sentence or life
imprisonment without possibility of parole if he's convicted.
Hernandez's arrest and pending prosecution bring to a close one of the
lengthiest and most complex manhunts for Ukiah police, Chief Chris Dewey said.
The arrest also brings some closure to the family of Michael Williamson, who
was killed in his parents' home, said father Norman Williamson, 89.
"We're a close, happy family and you can imagine what this does for us to have
this resolved," the elder Williamson said.
Just this week, the family gathered at their Carolyn Drive house to celebrate
the joint birthdays of Michael, who would have turned 57, and his younger
brother Dan, as they do most years, Norman Williamson said.
But this year, with Hernandez in custody, the family celebrated with a new
sense of relief they have not felt since Michael Williamson was killed Aug. 2,
2000.
"We learned to live with our lives. Our faith supported us through it, but it
is nice to have it resolved," Williamson said.
Firefighters found Williamson bludgeoned to death in the home, which had also
been burglarized, police said. The suspect apparently set a small fire, which
mainly caused smoke damage.
Hernandez, who was 19 at the time and living around the corner, was quickly
identified as a suspect through physical evidence and several statements from
family members and acquaintances, Detective Rick Pintane said.
Police said Hernandez was among several addicts whom Williamson, a recovering
drug user, had been mentoring.
But Hernandez was gone, and his father later told police he visited an uncle in
Ensenada, Mexico, according to a federal warrant for his arrest filed in
September 2000.
That is where Mexican police found him Sunday, after an adulthood spent on the
run.
But in the early days of the investigation, police were following tips that
Hernandez could also be in Humboldt County, Trinity County or Southern
California.
The investigation eventually led police to the East Coast as well as Mexico and
Canada, said Pintane, who was part of the original investigation team and took
over the case in 2010.
"You have to keep opening doors to get the right door," Pintane said.
A television show, "America's Most Wanted," featured the search for Hernandez
in February 2012. Several tips prompted by the show went nowhere, Pintane said.
Then, about a month ago, Ukiah police received their first solid sign of
Hernandez's whereabouts: photographs as well as "communications," which Pintane
wouldn't describe further but said involved technology and resources not
available a decade ago.
They alerted the FBI, and federal agents coordinated with Mexican police on his
apprehension Sunday.
Hernandez was charged Friday in Mendocino County Court with 1st-degree murder
with special circumstances for commission of the crime in the course or a
robbery, murder in the course of a burglary, murder while engaged in an arson,
as well as independent charges of 1st-degree robbery, 1st-degree burglary and
arson, with a special allegation for use of an accelerant.
He is to return to court May 21 to enter a plea.
Hernandez is being held without bail.
Norman Williamson, a retired English teacher who taught at Ukiah High School
and Mendocino College, said he and his wife Maggie stayed in their home even
after the devastating events that took place there.
They raised 4 children in the home and have hosted 8 grandchildren and 10
great-grandchildren. Their daughter is moving next door.
"Mike was a good kid," Williamson said.
And although Hernandez's arrest also brings up the grief, Williamson said his
family has experienced more good than bad, "way way way more," he added.
"That was a big bad one, but this is our life. It's been right here, and this
is where it's going to end too," Williamson said.
(source: The Press Democrat)
WASHINGTON:
Justices weigh death penalty in Carnation killings.
The state Supreme Court is considering whether prosecutors should be allowed to
seek the death penalty against 2 people accused of killing a family of 6 in
Carnation on Christmas Eve 2007.
In arguments before the justices Thursday, the King County Prosecutor???s
Office argued that Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Ramsdell overstepped his
authority by taking capital punishment off the table, The Seattle Times
reported.
Ramsdell ruled in January that in making their decision to seek execution,
prosecutors should only have considered whether mitigating evidence warranted
leniency for the defendants, Michele Anderson and her former boyfriend, Joseph
McEnroe. Instead, they also considered the strength of their case, the judge
said.
Senior deputy prosecutor James Whisman argued that Ramsdell didn???t have
access to all of the mitigation evidence his office considered, and he said
decisions to seek the death penalty are not reviewable by the judiciary because
they are charging decisions, which rest with the elected prosecutor.
Anderson and McEnroe are charged with aggravated 1st-degree murder in the
slaughter of Anderson's family - her parents, brother, sister-in-law, and her
young niece and nephew. The only possible penalties for aggravated 1st-degree
murder are life without release and the death penalty.
Under state law, mitigating factors in potential death-penalty cases can
include evidence of an extreme mental disturbance or impairment. Leniency also
can be merited if a suspect acted under duress or domination of another person.
Attorney Kathryn Ross, who represented the defendants before the Supreme Court,
argued that the state's death penalty statute is unique in that prosecutors are
directed to impose it only if there isn't sufficient evidence of mitigating
factors to merit leniency.
"I guess that's why we're here - to decide how to read that statute. Is
mitigation the only thing they consider" in deciding to seek the death penalty,
said Chief Justice Barbara Madsen.
Outside the courtroom, Pam Mantle - whose daughter Erica Anderson and
grandchildren Nathan and Olivia were among those killed - said the constant
delays in the case have taken a toll.
"Everything has been put on hold. You just wait and wait and nothing happens,"
she said.
3 weeks after Ramsdell issued his ruling, King County Superior Court Judge
Ronald Kessler tossed the death penalty in another high-profile case: the 2009
killing of Seattle police officer Timothy Brenton. Kessler ruled that
prosecutor Dan Satterberg abused his discretion by relying on a flawed
investigation into mitigating factors that could have merited leniency for the
defendant, Christopher Monfort.
The Supreme Court is to hear oral arguments in Monfort's case June 27.
(source: Associated Press)
USA:
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg shows different side to DePaul audience
It was a different side of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg that
a DePaul University audience of some 500 were treated to at a centennial
celebration for its law, business and music schools Friday night at the Chicago
History Museum.
They got a witty, laid-back, opera aficionado who humorously linked those
divergent fields together in deft commentary.
But they also heard poignant remarks at night's end about Ginsberg's lifelong
championing of equality for all and the most difficult cases to come before her
- those involving the death penalty.
DePaul, said the 80-year-old justice and staunch women's rights advocate,
"holds a special place in my remembrance of good things past," as it conferred
on her an honorary degree in 1985, "8 years before I was appointed to this
invitation-attracting job I now hold."
The event featured Ginsburg - on the court 20 years, appointed by President
Bill Clinton in 1993 - sitting on stage engaging in a 1-on-1 repartee with
William Mason, the Lyric Opera of Chicago's general director emeritus.
The 2 bantered between various opera performances by DePaul music faculty -
with Ginsberg's daughter-in-law, soprano Patrice Michaels, a voice teacher at
University of Chicago who is married to her son, James, and sings with the
Lyric Opera, a special guest.
Michaels performed an original piece dedicated to the justice.
Ginsburg, considered part of the court's moderate-liberal bloc, kicked off the
evening with a short lecture about law and opera, displaying her keen knowledge
of that medium as the names and plots of myriad operatic pieces rolled off her
tongue.
"Lawyers and judges as a rule fare rather badly in operatic works," she said to
laughter.
"My expertise to address this topic may not be clear. For truth be told, I am
ill-equipped to break out in song. My grade school music teacher labeled me a
sparrow, not a robin, and instructed me to just mouth the words. Still, in my
dreams I can be a great diva."
It was after the program - accepting a handful of questions from the audience -
that Ginsburg talked of her court career.
Born Mar. 15, 1933, in a low-income, working class neighborhood in Brooklyn,
she graduated 1st in her class at Cornell University in 1954. She spoke of the
male-dominated, hostile environment she encountered at Harvard Law School.
"In the law, women were simply not there in the ancient days when I went to law
school, maybe 3 % of women were of the legal profession. My entry class at
Harvard had over 500 people - 9 women," the justice said.
But Ginsburg excelled at Harvard, becoming the first female member of its
prestigious Law Review before transferring to Columbia Law School, where she
again graduated 1st in her class in 1959. It was the gender discrimination she
encountered when seeking employment that shaped her early feminist views, she
said.
"People always ask me, 'Did you always want to be a judge?' What I wanted to do
was get a job," she said. "It's absolutely wonderful to see the changes and
where we are now."
She taught at Rutgers University Law School from 1963-1972; and Columbia from
1972-1980, becoming Columbia's 1st female, tenured professor. She entered the
national spotlight in the '70s, as director of the Women's Rights Project of
the American Civil Liberties Union, a time during which she argued 6 landmark
gender equality cases before the Supreme Court.
Asked her heroes, she drew laughter with: "I suppose mine was Nancy Drew,
because she was a girl who was out there doing her work, and dominating her
boyfriend." Turning serious, she named the late 1800s suffragist Belva Ann
Lockwood, one of the nation's 1st female lawyers and the 1st woman allowed to
practice before the Supreme Court - in 1879, after having successfully
petitioned Congress to change that law.
"And Bella wasn't satisfied," said Ginsburg. "She ran for president twice, in
1884 and 1888. She said I know we don't have the vote yet, but there is nothing
in the constitution that says we can't run for president."
Ginsberg was appointed in 1980 by President Jimmy Carter to the U.S. Court of
Appeals, then selected by Clinton to fill the seat then vacated by Supreme
Court Justice Byron White.
She wrote the court's 1996 landmark decision in U.S. vs. Virginia, which said
the state-supported Virginia Military Institute could not refuse women. She
also wrote a dissenting opinion in Bush v. Gore, in which the majority Court
decided Bush won the 2000 presidential election.
"What I've tried to do is show the world is a better place for all of us - men,
women and children - if we aren't pigeonholed or put in a box," she said.
And her most challenging case?
"From my very 1st year on the court up till my 20th year, death penalty cases
are for me the most difficult," Ginsberg said. "To be part of a system that has
the last word on whether somebody lives or dies is very, very difficult."
(source: Chicago Sun-Times)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/deathpenalty@lists.washlaw.edu/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
