May 13
NEBRASKA:
Man on death row in 'Boys Don't Cry' case is engaged to be married
A Nebraska death row inmate whose killings were depicted in the movie "Boys
Don't Cry" is engaged to be married.
John Lotter and a woman from Washington state recently applied for a marriage
license at the courthouse in Tecumseh, Neb., the community closest to the state
prison where death row inmates are housed.
Lotter, 41, said in an interview last week that he has not yet gotten married.
But he otherwise declined to discuss his plans or his relationship with Jeanne
Bissonnette, 50, of Lakewood, Wash.
"I'd really like to keep this part of me as private as I can," he said.
Phone messages left with Bissonnette were not returned.
State prison officials do not keep records of inmate weddings, but they were
unaware of any previous marriage involving a death row inmate.
The marriage license is valid for 1 year.
Lotter was convicted by a jury of 1st-degree murder in the 1993 killings of 3
people at a rented farmhouse near Humboldt, Neb.
Lotter and Marvin Thomas Nissen targeted Brandon Teena, 21, of Lincoln, who was
born female but lived as a man and dated women. They sought to silence Teena
because he reported to authorities that he was raped by the men after they
learned his biological gender. They also killed 2 others staying in the house:
Lisa Lambert, 24, and Phillip DeVine, 22.
The case inspired a 1999 film that won actress Hilary Swank an Academy Award
for her portrayal of Brandon Teena.
Lotter has always maintained his innocence, but he has failed in several
appeals to persuade a court to overturn his convictions.
At trial in 1995, Nissen testified that Lotter fired the gun that killed all 3
victims. Nissen downplayed his involvement, saying he only stabbed Teena.
Nissen's cooperation with authorities earned him a life sentence, which would
have to be commuted by the Nebraska Board of Pardons for him to be released.
In 2007, Nissen recanted and said that he both fired the gun and wielded the
knife. But he maintained that Lotter was present during the killings. Under
Nebraska's felony murder law, Lotter's presence in the farmhouse at the time of
the killings was enough to result in 1st-degree murder convictions.
In 2006, Nissen became engaged to a Chicago woman who started writing letters
to him in prison. They did not follow through with the marriage.
The Nebraska Department of Correctional Services does not track the number of
weddings that take place in state institutions each year, said Dawn Renee
Smith, the department's spokeswoman. But there have been weddings of inmates
serving life terms.
Prison weddings follow a strict policy that allows only 2 witnesses and someone
to perform the ceremony. The inmate is allowed to receive a ring and photos of
the ceremony, but there can be no refreshments or decorations.
Nebraska does not allow the couple to consummate the union, nor does the state
permit conjugal visits for married inmates.
During last week's interview, Lotter was more willing to talk about a bill to
repeal the death penalty in Nebraska. The Legislature is scheduled to begin
debating the measure this week.
Lotter said he does not think most people behind bars are deterred by the death
penalty, or even think about it before they act.
While he hopes lawmakers will repeal the death penalty, he said he will
continue his fight to prove his innocence.
He and others will watch the debate on public television.
"I'm not going to get my hopes up," he said. "I'm just not going to put myself
through that roller coaster."
(source: Omaha World-Herald)
*******************************************
Report: Nebraska death penalty is costly, inefficient
As Nebraska lawmakers prepare to debate whether to abolish the death penalty, a
new report says the state has spent an exorbitant amount of time and money on
capital punishment -- with few results.
"The average delay for appeals more than doubles for death sentences: 13.3
years versus 5.8 years for life sentences," attorney and long-time
death-penalty opponent Alan Peterson said in a report given to lawmakers. "The
number of appeals for death cases averages 7.76, and the number of appeals for
life sentences averages only 1.64 filings."
The report quotes Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty
Information Center, who told the Legislature's Judiciary Committee earlier this
year that studies have shown the average death penalty case costs $3 million to
prosecute, compared to $1.1 million for life without parole cases.
Since 1976, when the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of
capital punishment, Dieter said, Nebraska has spent an estimated $100 million
on death-penalty cases.
"It has resulted in 3 executions," he said.
According to the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services, it costs an
average of about $36,000 a year to keep a person in a maximum-security prison.
That means that over 25 years, the state would spend $900,000 to house an
inmate.
Lawmakers will begin debate Monday on a bill by Sen. Ernie Chambers, of Omaha,
to change the death penalty to life in prison without the possibility of
parole.
Chambers, the most ardent death penalty opponent in the Legislature, was
re-elected to his North Omaha seat in November after sitting out four years
because of term limits. Each year from 1973 to 2008, he introduced a bill to
abolish the death penalty. In 1979, his bill passed but was vetoed by then-Gov.
Charles Thone.
Last week, Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley, of Maryland, signed a law making
that state the 6th in as many years to abolish the death penalty and the 18th
overall to abandon capital punishment.
And some observers sense this could be the year Nebraska lawmakers follow suit.
Peterson's report also quotes Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty,
a project of Equal Justice USA, a national organization working to end the
death penalty in the United States.
"Capital punishment is a bloated government program that has clogged our
courts, delayed justice for victims' families and devoured millions of
crime-fighting dollars," the group says on its website.
"For fiscal conservatives, the cost of the death penalty is indefensible."
Before a death sentence may be imposed in Nebraska, a capital case essentially
goes through three trials: the guilt/innocence phase; a hearing to prove
aggravating circumstances -- such as whether the killing was particularly
heinous; and a sentencing hearing.
"Without the death penalty, the costs involved in these two additional trials
are eliminated" Peterson said. "Subsequent appellate litigation to correct
serious error and constitutional defect that occurred in phases two and three
are also eliminated."
Among those supporting Chambers' bill is the Nebraska Innocence Project, which
is part of a national network that gives free legal representation to people
wrongly convicted of crimes. It was founded in 1992 to help prisoners who could
be proved innocent through DNA testing.
To date, 306 people in the United States have been exonerated by DNA testing,
including 18 who served time on death row. They spent an average of 13 years in
prison before exoneration and release.
According to the Death Penalty Information Center, its use is in sharp decline.
9 states executed people in 2012, compared with 13 the year before. The 43
executions in 2012 were 56 % fewer than at the peak in 1999. The 78 people
sentenced to death in 2012 represented a 75 % decline since 1996, when 315
death sentences were handed down.
A comprehensive study of the death penalty in Nebraska done by the Nebraska
Commission on Public Advocacy found these details from the 1,450 murder cases
in Nebraska from 1973 to 2013.
-- 235 1st-degree murder convictions, or 16 % of all murder cases
-- Death penalty sought in 103 cases, or 7 % of all murder cases
-- 31 death sentences given, 2 % of all murder cases
-- 3 executions, less than 1 % of all murder cases
Nebraska has 11 men on death row. The last execution in Nebraska was in 1997,
when Robert E. Williams was electrocuted. He confessed to killing 3 women and
trying to kill a 4th during a 3-day rampage in 1977 that crossed into 3 states.
(source: Sioux City Journal)
*********************
Local View: Why I support repeal of death penalty
My stance on the use of the death penalty has gone through changes. I found it
easy to have a pro-death penalty stance until faced with the option of having a
voice in the policy.
Before my policymaking role, I had never given much consideration to the
matter. It seemed reasonable. It felt right to be on the side of justice for
the victim. An "eye for an eye" had a nice ring to it. The phrase appealed to
my sense of justice.
That sense of justice, however, changed when I began to meet the relatives of
actual victims.
More than my experiences as a senator, however, one event changed my heart,
mind and my outlook on capital punishment. On Sept. 3, 1994, as a college
freshman, I took a short trip to the Nebraska Penitentiary to bear witness in
the parking lot of the execution of Willie Otey.
I can only describe what I saw there as ugly. If you didn't know where you
were, you might have thought you were at a New Year's Eve party. There was a
band playing music, a barbecue, coolers of beer and an official countdown to
midnight when he would be executed. There was a genuine celebratory nature of
the event. There were people banging pots and pans and chanting "fry him, fry
him."
A snow fence was erected to separate this group from another consisting of
quiet, praying observers.
That night, I partied, I chanted, chugged beer and at midnight I celebrated
someone's death. Along with hundreds of others, I toasted a midnight clock
stroke of justice.
That was the event that changed my view. I attempt no persuasion of others on
this issue. My position is the result of my experience. I made a decision
during my shame that I would no longer be a part of someone's death.
Thankfully, I don't think anyone else will have the opportunity to play a role
in a similar way.
My changed sense of justice has been further reinforced by my frequent
conversations with Merriam Thimm-Kelle. Her brother's killer sits on death row.
Every time an execution date is set, she feels she will have justice. When that
date comes and goes her family is again forced to relive her brother's murder
with attention going to the condemned.
As she stated in our hearing: "Our sentence has been going on for over 25 years
and there's been no execution. ... Every appeal and on and on, everything about
the horrible death again, year in, year out. If execution ever comes, it will
be another day about Michael Ryan and nothing about (my brother) Jim. ... Death
penalty supporters say that carrying out the death penalty is family closure.
Closure is a myth. The death penalty does absolutely nothing for families
except more pain."
I ask, "Where is the justice?" I didn't find it as a young college student, and
find no justice as a senator.
(source: Opinion; Sen. Colby Coash of Lincoln is serving his 2nd term
representing legislative District 27--Lincoln Journal Star)
**********************
New faces in Nebraska's Legislature may turn tide on capital punishment
The most ardent supporter of capital punishment has left the Nebraska
Legislature.
The harshest critic is back.
And some newly elected state senators oppose the death penalty, unlike the
folks they replaced.
As lawmakers gird for an emotional debate Monday on a death penalty bill,
supporters voice hopes that a repeal could happen this year. They say some
unlikely conservatives may join their cause because of the higher legal and
emotional costs of prosecuting such cases.
"This may be the 1st time in a long time that we have enough senators to repeal
it," said State Sen. Sara Howard of Omaha, who was elected in November.
"I'm optimistic, in a freshman way," she said.
That might be overly optimistic.
Gov. Dave Heineman still supports the death penalty and would likely veto any
move to repeal it.
And a leading proponent of capital punishment, Sen. Scott Lautenbaugh of Omaha,
indicated Friday he would likely mount a filibuster to thwart any repeal
attempt.
Halting a filibuster requires a supermajority of senators, 33 of the 49
lawmakers, a high bar even for less emotional issues.
"I'll do whatever it takes to stop it," Lautenbaugh said.
That death penalty opponents envision a majority of senators, 25, will support
an end to capital punishment represents a dramatic shift at the State Capitol.
The last time capital punishment came to a formal vote, in 2009, only 13
senators voted in support of repeal.
But things have changed since then.
Sen. Mike Flood of Norfolk, a leading proponent of the death penalty and former
speaker of the Legislature, has departed because of term limits.
Meanwhile, Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha, who has mounted annual assaults on
capital punishment during his 39 years in office, is back. He is promising
another all-out effort to repeal it. His proposal, Legislative Bill 543, would
replace the death penalty with a sentence of life in prison without the
possibility of parole.
There's some momentum nationally. 3 states - Maryland, Connecticut and Illinois
- have repealed the death penalty since 2009.
Nebraska is now 1 of 32 states that retain capital punishment. Neighboring Iowa
dropped the death penalty in 1965.
If Nebraska repealed the death penalty, it would be an exception. The other
states are much less conservative, and had governors who supported an end to
capital punishment.
But death penalty foes think that the exoneration of several convicted
murderers because of DNA tests is helping change some opinions. Also, they say,
the added expense and additional years of litigation is leading even past
supporters of the death penalty to question if it's worth it when so many cases
get reduced to life sentences anyway.
"The policy just doesn't work," said Stacey Anderson, executive director of
Nebraskans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. "We've tinkered with it for
30 years, to make it better, more efficient. But it's produced 3 executions (in
Nebraska) and a whole lot of frustration, and wasted a whole lot of taxpayer
money."
How much has been spent is the subject of fierce disagreement.
Richard Dieter of the Washington, D.C.-based Death Penalty Information Center
told Nebraska lawmakers earlier this year that all studies agree that
prosecuting death penalty cases was "far more expensive," though the costs vary
by state.
A Maryland study, Dieter said, estimated the costs of a death sentence at about
$3 million, 3 times the cost of sending an inmate to life in prison. A Kansas
study indicated that a death penalty trial costs 16 times more than a murder
trial carrying only the possibility of a life sentence.
Death penalty foes say the high cost needs to be weighed against the results.
In Nebraska, there have been 33 men sent to death row since capital punishment
was reinstated in 1973. But 14 had their sentences reduced, and 5 either died
of natural causes or suicide.
The state has seen only three executions in 40 years. The last was in 1997. 11
men now sit on death row. One, Michael Ryan, convicted of 2 murders related to
a Rulo, Neb., cult, has been there for 34 years.
"Is this really the best use of our resources?" said Sen. Steve Lathrop of
Omaha, a leading death penalty opponent.
A report released Friday by the American Civil Liberties Union concluded that
death penalty cases require nearly 5 times as many appeals as life sentence
cases and take an average of 13 years to resolve.
Lathrop said Nebraska has another problem. The state's supplies of sodium
thiopental, 1 of 3 drugs required to carry out a lethal injection, will expire
in December.
Because pharmaceutical companies have stopped selling that drug for use in
executions, that would force Nebraska to change its execution protocol to
utilize another drug, an administrative process that could take a year. Lathrop
said that also would open up a whole new round of legal challenges, further
delaying any executions.
Anderson, head of the Nebraska death penalty opposition group, is the first
Republican to head that organization. She said conservatives are realizing the
death penalty doesn't reduce violent crime but is instead another "wasteful and
inefficient" government program that needs to end.
But the Nebraska Attorney General's Office has long contended that the costs of
handling death penalty cases are overstated and are part of normal office
operations. Death cases involve 1 % or less of the office's total prosecution
costs, said spokeswoman Shannon Kingery.
And plenty of death penalty proponents say any extra cost is worth it, because
certain especially heinous crimes warrant the ultimate penalty.
"Our whole corrections system is very expensive," said Sen. John Nelson of
Omaha. "But if a person chooses to murder someone, with premeditation ... then
the state has the right and authority to carry out (an execution)."
Sen. Jim Scheer of Norfolk, elected in November to replace Flood, said the cost
of the death penalty "is not important. It's the justice."
His district experienced 1 of the most shocking murder cases in state history.
Three gunmen walked into a Norfolk bank in 2002. In about 60 seconds, they shot
and killed 3 bank employees and 2 customers. They fled without taking a dime.
"I believe that in some instances, that being one of them, there should be the
ultimate penalty," Scheer said.
He noted that in the Norfolk bank case, a videotape taken by surveillance
cameras left no doubt about the identity of the killers, who are all now on
death row.
But other newly elected lawmakers have brought new views on the issue.
Howard replaced a senator whose last vote on the death penalty was in support -
her mother, former Sen. Gwen Howard.
Sara Howard said her mother had a personal reason for voting against repealing
the death penalty in 2009: a murder in their central Omaha district occurred at
a convenience store that she had allowed Sara and her sister to walk to alone
as young children to buy slushies.
The new Sen. Howard said she believes the death penalty costs too much to
prosecute and defend and that the justice system is flawed to the point that an
innocent person could be executed.
"In my mind, I don't think a civil society encourages the death penalty,"
Howard said. "I think Nebraska can do better."
Another shift has come from Nebraska's Sandhills, a bastion of conservatism.
Freshman Sen. Al Davis, a Hyannis rancher, is an opponent of the death penalty,
unlike the former representative of District 49, Deb Fischer, now a U.S.
senator.
Davis, a Catholic, said he adheres to his church's belief that the death
penalty is wrong in a civilized society.
He said he's also concerned that an innocent person could be executed, citing
the recent exoneration via new DNA tests of evidence of several people
convicted of murder.
Davis said he was compelled by testimony earlier this year by the sister of
murder victim James Thimm. Miriam Thimm Kelle told the Legislature's Judiciary
Committee that the 34-year effort to execute her brother's killer, cult leader
Ryan, had only prolonged her family's suffering.
Said Davis, "I think it's time we looked at something else."
(source: The Star Herald)
************************
Lawmakers prepare to debate LB 543
Nebraska is 1 of 32 states that have the death penalty.
Omaha Sen. Ernie Chambers has fought this for years.
Chambers introduced LB 543 back in March. The bill would eliminate the death
penalty in the state, life in prison would be the alternate charge.
Lawmakers are set to debate the bill Monday.
Some say the touchy subject will likely bring a somber and thoughtful debate.
"I realize my strongly held religious beliefs," said Dist. 34 Sen. Annette
Dubas. "I consider myself pro-life and I take that all the way from conception
to natural death and for me I just couldn't go against that personally held
conviction that I have."
Senator Chambers has introduced a bill to abolish the death penalty every year
from 1973 to 2008.
He was successful in getting the bill passed in 1979; but was vetoed by then
Governor Charles Thone.
(source: KHAS TV News)
COLORADO:
Holmes asking judge to change plea to insanity
The long journey toward a verdict in the deadly Colorado theater shootings
enters a new and critical phase Monday when suspect James Holmes asks a judge
to change his plea to not guilty by reason of insanity.
The plea is widely seen as Holmes' best hope, and perhaps his only hope, of
avoiding the death penalty. But his lawyers have held off until now, fearing a
wrinkle in the law could cripple their ability to raise his mental health as a
mitigating factor during the sentencing phase.
2 judges have refused to rule on the constitutionality of the law, saying the
attorneys' objections were hypothetical because Holmes had not pleaded
insanity. The defense had little choice but to have Holmes enter the plea and
then challenge the law.
Holmes' lawyers announced last week that Holmes would ask to change his plea at
Monday's hearing.
Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty. They say Holmes, a former
neuroscience graduate student, spent months acquiring weapons and ammunition,
scouting a theater in the Denver suburb of Aurora and booby-trapping his
apartment.
Then on July 20, dressed in a police-style helmet and body armor, he opened
fire during a packed midnight showing of "The Dark Knight Rises," prosecutors
say. 12 people died and 70 were injured.
No motive has emerged in nearly 10 months of hearings, but Holmes' attorneys
have repeatedly said their client is mentally ill. He was being treated by a
psychiatrist before the attack.
The insanity plea carries risks for both sides. Holmes will have to submit to a
mental evaluation by state-employed doctors, and prosecutors could use the
findings against him.
"It's literally a life-and-death situation with the government seeking to
execute him and the government, the same government, evaluating him with regard
to whether he was sane or insane at the time he was in that movie theater,"
said attorney Dan Recht, a past president of the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar.
Among the risks for prosecutors: They must convince jurors beyond a reasonable
doubt that Holmes was sane. If they don't, state law requires the jury to find
him not guilty by reason of insanity.
"That's a significant burden on the prosecution," Recht said.
If acquitted, Holmes would be committed to the state mental hospital
indefinitely.
A judge entered a standard not guilty plea on Holmes' behalf in March, and he
needs court permission to change it. Recht said it's a foregone conclusion the
judge will accept the new plea to preclude appeals later.
The mental evaluation could take weeks or months. Evaluators will interview
Holmes, his friends and family, and if Holmes permits it, they'll also speak
with mental health professionals who treated him in the past, said Dr. Howard
Zonana, a professor of psychiatry and adjunct professor of law at Yale
University.
Evaluators may give Holmes standardized personality tests and compare his
results to those of people with documented mental illness. They will also look
for any physical brain problems.
Zonana estimates he has conducted around 200 mental evaluations of criminal
defendants, including some death penalty cases.
"All cases are tough," he said.
Meticulous planning, as in the scenario prosecutors laid out against Holmes,
doesn't necessarily mean a defendant is sane, Zonana said.
Zonana said he helped evaluate Stephen Morgan, who was found not guilty by
reason of insanity in the 2009 shooting death of Johanna Justin-Jinich in
Middletown, Conn., where she was attending college.
Evidence showed Morgan planned the shooting, "but he was delusional as hell,"
Zonana said.
(source" Associated Press)
WASHINGTON:
Scherf jury begins considering death or life in prison; The jury in confessed
killer Byron Scherf's trial now decides if he is to be executed or remain in
prison for the rest of his life.
Last week jurors needed less than an hour to convict confessed killer Byron
Scherf, but starting today the jury will be asked a more complicated question:
Should Byron Scherf live or die for murdering a Monroe corrections officer?
Prosecutors are expected to begin today trying to convince jurors the inmate
doesn't deserve leniency.
An aggravated murder conviction carries only 2 possible punishments in
Washington -- life in prison without the chance of release, or execution.
Scherf, 54, already was serving a life sentence when he strangled Jayme Biendl
on Jan. 29, 2011 at her post in the chapel at the Washington State Reformatory.
In this next phase of the trial jurors are required by law to answer this
question: "Having in mind the crime of which the defendant has been found
guilty, are you convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that there are not
sufficient mitigating circumstances to merit leniency?"
It will be up to the prosecutors to prove that there aren't reasons Scherf
deserves mercy.
The law spells out some of the relevant factors that the jury may consider,
including Scherf's past criminal history. However, jurors likely won't be
allowed to hear the details of his prior crimes. The state Supreme Court has
overturned death sentences because jurors were given too much information about
a person's past crimes.
Before Scherf's trial began, lawyers argued over whether jurors should know
that he was serving a life sentence when he killed Biendl. Prosecutors said
they should be allowed to prove Scherf's prior convictions by giving the jurors
a certified copy of the judgment and sentence for each of his offenses.
Scherf's defense team argued that their client would be unfairly prejudiced if
jurors know he was already serving a life sentence.
Telling jurors about Scherf's prior life sentence "allows the jury to wrongly
weigh whether the sentence of life without possibility of parole in this case
would be punishment at all because he was already serving a life sentence,"
they wrote.
Snohomish County Superior Court Judge George Appel ruled against the defense,
saying case law clearly allows prosecutors to provide juries with certified
copies of the judgment and sentence of the defendant's past convictions.
Jurors heard testimony during the week-long trial that Scherf was serving life.
Prosecutors also were allowed to enter into evidence a message Scherf wrote to
prosecutors not long after the murder.
He noted that he was already serving a life sentence. He urged prosecutors to
charge him with aggravated murder and to seek the death penalty.
"I WILL plead guilty!" Scherf wrote at the time. "I have a moral obligation to
do so. The Biendl family deserves no less. I will not put them through any more
suffering than they are already enduring. They deserve swift justice and
closure."
Byron Scherf's criminal history:
1978 -- 2nd-degree assault: Scherf, then 19, and two friends picked up a
16-year-old hitchhiker. Scherf threw the girl to the ground, cut off her shirt
with a large knife and threatened to kill her. One of his friends intervened,
stopping the attack. Scherf later admitted to prison officials that he intended
to rape the girl.
1981 -- First-degree assault and rape: Scherf, then 22, stalked and kidnapped a
waitress in Pierce County. He drove her to an abandoned house, bound her, raped
her and lit her on fire. The woman, who jumped out a 2nd-story window, survived
the attack. At the time Scherf was on parole for his 1978 conviction. He said
he planned the attack while in prison. Scherf was sentenced to life without the
possibility of parole. Under the laws at the time, he was paroled after 12
years.
1997 -- 1st-degree rape, kidnapping and illegal firearm possession: In 1995,
Scherf arranged to meet a Spokane real estate agent at a home for sale. Scherf,
then 37, choked the woman and forced her into the trunk of his car. He drove
her to a wooded area, where he raped her. He was armed with a butcher knife and
rifle. Scherf was sentenced to life without the chance of release under the
state's persistent offender law.
2013 -- Aggravated 1st-degree murder: Scherf ambushed a Monroe corrections
officer in 2011 at the Washington State Reformatory. He strangled Jayme Biendl
with an amplifier cord inside the prison chapel. There was no evidence that
Scherf sexually assaulted Biendl.
(source: Everett Herald)
US MILITARY:
Defense next up in Calif Marine slaying trial
The scene inside the French Valley home was horrific.
Marine Sgt. Jan Pietrzak and his wife were found gagged, tied and shot in the
head. She was naked and sexually assaulted, he had been beaten. Racial slurs
were spray-painted in the house and fires had been set in an apparent attempt
to destroy evidence.
Prosecutors have spent the last several weeks presenting their case against 3
of the 4 Marines charged in the double murder who face the death penalty if
convicted. A 4th suspect, also an ex-Marine, had his case severed and is
awaiting trial.
On Monday, defense attorneys will get to present their side of the story to
jurors.
Emrys John, 23 and Tyrone Miller and Kevin Cox, both 25, have pleaded not
guilty to murder and allegations of burglary, robbery and sexual assault. All
three men worked with Pietrzak at one time while stationed at Camp Pendleton.
The Pietrzaks were newlyweds and had been living in the home for only a few
months when the incident occurred in October 2008. Prosecutors said robbery was
the motive for the crime.
Pietrzak's wife, Quiana, had her wrists bound with red duct tape and laying
against a living room couch. Pietrzak was bloodied and found in his underwear.
During opening statements, prosecutor Daniel DeLimon said the ordeal may have
lasted more than an hour.
"It wasn't pretty and it wasn't fast," he said.
Prosecutors said John shot the couple through couch cushions to muffle the
noise. The racial slurs were used to throw investigators off, according to
court records.
Authorities were led to the 4 men after receiving tips from fellow Marines.
DeLimon said Miller told another Marine after the shooting that he handed the
gun to John the night of the murders and said, "Do them."
Marine Justin Weissinger testified at a preliminary hearing that Miller and
John had boasted about the killings
Jewelry, including the couple's wedding rings, and Pietrzak's dress uniform was
found at the suspects' homes, authorities said.
Pietrzak, 24, who was born in Poland and raised in Brooklyn, N.Y., joined the
Marines in 2003 and served in Iraq from July 2005 to February 2006.
(source: Associated Press)
USA:
Lawyers worry new measure of mental retardation could prompt more executions
A new standard from the country's leading psychiatric association to diagnose
mental retardation could allow courts to execute convicted criminals with IQ
scores below 70 more easily, say death penalty lawyers.
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, published by the
American Psychiatric Association (APA), is the standard guidebook of
psychiatric disorders and is used by clinicians to identify and diagnose
psychiatric illnesses.
Each new edition is scrutinized by mental healthcare providers and the
pharmaceutical industry for changes in definitions as well as new categories of
illnesses. Such shifts can have enormous economic, social and legal
implications and often are the subject of controversy.
The 5th edition of the book since it was first published in 1952, or DSM-V, is
due to be released May 22. Already it has prompted concern from death penalty
lawyers because of the change in the way the manual defines mental illness, or
intellectual disability, the new name given in DSM-V.
Earlier editions of the DSM defined mental retardation as an IQ score below 70
accompanied by an inability to meet certain developmental norms, such as
bathing regularly or maintaining work. Based on that IQ benchmark, the U.S.
Supreme Court ruled in Atkins v. Virginia in 2002 that it is illegal to execute
a mentally handicapped person.
But the editors of DSM-V have dropped the 70 IQ score as an indicator of mental
retardation and instead recommend that clinicians consider IQ scores while
analyzing an individual's behavior to determine if he or she meets the
developmental standards.
VARYING STATE LAWS
Making the definition of mental retardation more subjective could prompt more
courts to subvert Atkins, said David Dow, a death penalty lawyer in Houston
whose client Marvin Wilson was executed in Texas last summer despite his IQ
score of 61.
"There are a lot of courts that are hostile to the basic legal doctrine the
Atkins case established," Dow said. "When you replace a test that is one part
objective, one part subjective with a solely subjective test, it becomes easier
for courts that are hostile to the constitutional principle of Atkins to evade
that criterion."
While it is illegal under Atkins to execute someone who was diagnosed mentally
handicapped, states have the leeway to determine what criteria are used and who
makes the diagnosis, said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death
Penalty Information Center. Consequently, states like Texas, Georgia and others
have their own statutes outlining criteria to diagnose a convicted criminal as
mentally retarded.
From 2002 to 2012, only a quarter of the death row inmates who claimed to have
mental retardation were granted stays of execution, according to research by
John Blume, director of Cornell University Law School's Death Penalty Project.
This included cases that had exhausted all appeals from the time of the Atkins
decision to the end of 2012.
"Judges and jurors have stereotypes of what it means to be mentally retarded,"
Blume said. "There is a problem with people who have lower than 70 IQ scores
getting executed in spite of the Atkins ruling, and under the new DSM guidance,
that problem is only going to get worse."
IGNORING DSM-V
According to Darrel Regier, vice chairman of the task force that produced the
DSM-V revisions, the DSM is developed to provide guidelines for diagnosing
mental illnesses for clinicians, not to provide treatment or judicial
guidelines, and the test scores are only useful when interpreted by a clinical
expert.
The DSM-IV's reliance on an IQ score led, in some cases, to jurors sentencing
people with IQ scores of 71 or 72 to death, in spite of the test's 5-point
margin of error, Regier said.
"A single IQ point on a test can have profound implications for life and death
without (clinical) interpretation," he said.
James Harris, the founding director of the Developmental Neuropsychiatry
Program at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and a member of the
DSM-V work group, said the criteria focus on 3 areas of adaptive functioning:
academic, social and practical.
Looking at a death row inmate's social adaptive area, an expert can examine how
gullibility may have led the inmate into a crime, which could support a claim
of mental retardation, Harris said in an email.
"We believe that we are providing the courts with a more fine-grained means to
consider adaptive functioning more comprehensively and more meaningfully,"
Harris said.
Lawyer Susan Orlansky of Feldman Orlansky & Sanders said Texas's individualized
statutes are the reason her client, Elroy Chester, will be executed even though
he meets the lower-then-70-IQ standard. Chester was convicted in 1998 of
fatally shooting a firefighter and confessed to killing 4 other people in the
south Texas town of Port Arthur. He is scheduled to be executed June 12.
Orlansky does not think changes in the reliance on IQ scores would impact the
decision in Elroy's case.
"Personally, I think if the Texas court system is willing to ignore the DSM-IV,
I don't know why they wouldn't be just as willing to ignore the DSM-V," she
said.
(source: Reuters)
_______________________________________________
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
