May 18
IDAHO:
A change of heart regarding death penalty
Recently your paper ran an article regarding David Card and his ability to
avoid execution of the death sentence imposed because of his involvement in the
deliberate and premeditated murder of Mr. and Mrs. Morey.
The murder was perhaps as heinous a crime as occurred during my tenure as
Canyon County prosecuting attorney. During that period, 11 death sentences were
handed down. None of the 11 sentences have been carried out.
I do not expect any death sentence to be carried out in Idaho, even though we
have a death statute on the books.
As long as the Idaho Supreme Court and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals remain
as is, no sentence of death in Idaho will be permitted to be carried out.
Because of that reality, my position on the death penalty has changed and I no
longer support imposition of a death sentence in Idaho.
A life sentence without parole is the most we can hope for. You see a number of
those who were sentenced to death during my tenure as prosecutor are no longer
even in the penitentiary.
Judge Lodge with regard to Card, because of allegations that Card was mentally
disturbed, imposed a hold on his execution, but the hold was to be reviewed
every 6 months to determine if there was any change in his mental condition
which would warrant imposition of the sentence.
Card has been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia. That condition is
treatable with medication, but the policy of IDOC is not to involuntarily
administer medication unless the inmate is gravely disabled, unable to care for
his personal needs.
Card is not gravely disabled. So Card does not have to take the medication,
thereby maintaining the status quo of his mental disability and consequentially
avoiding imposition of the death sentence. Something about that makes no sense
at all, and Terry Morey's quest for justice goes begging.
Judge Lodge used to say to every defendant he placed on probation that he (the
defendant) carried the "keys to the jail in his pocket." If he violated
probation, he would go to jail. Here, Card carries the keys to his execution in
his pocket by not taking the medication that would treat his mental problem and
hence his execution.
(source: Guest Commentary, Richard Harris; Idaho Press-Tribune)
ARIZONA:
Rector trial likely to be moved to 2017
The murder trial for a Bullhead City man facing the death penalty for allegedly
murdering a young girl will likely be postponed until next spring.
Justin James Rector, 27, is charged with 1st-degree murder, kidnapping, child
abuse and abandonment of a dead body for kidnapping and murdering of Isabella
Grogan.
Cannella on Sept. 2, 2014 and leaving her body in a shallow grave near her
Bullhead City home.
Documents filed Tuesday show that Superior Court Judge Lee Jantzen has received
the prosecutor's response to a motion from Gerald Gavin, Rector's attorney, to
disclose 2 state witnesses. The judge previously granted Gavin's motion and
redacted and sealed the motions not to reveal the identity of the witnesses for
their protection.
Deputy Mohave County Attorney Greg McPhillips also filed a motion Tuesday not
opposing Gavin's request to postpone the Oct. 17 trial. The murder trial is
expected to take 10 weeks. A pre-trial hearing currently set for Aug. 23 is
also expected to be delayed. Rector's next hearing is set for July 15.
The reason for the delay is that Rector's case requires 2 death
penalty-qualified attorneys. A co-counsel has been appointed but will not be
available until June 25 after he or she completes the necessary training
required to handle a death penalty case. It will take at least 6 months after a
co-counsel makes his or her 1st appearance for Rector's trial to take place,
Gavin argued.
A Chronis hearing is also expected at the July 15 hearing. A Chronis hearing is
when the prosecutor argues aggravating factors to seek the death penalty
against Rector. Only 1 of 14 aggravated factors needs to be proven to seek the
death penalty. 1 aggravating factor is if the victim is under the age of 15.
Bella was only 8 years old at the time of her murder.
(source: Mohave Valley Daily News)
*****************
Gov. Doug Ducey signs legislation to expand Arizona Supreme Court
Gov. Doug Ducey signed legislation Wednesday to expand the state Supreme Court
to 7 justices from 5, saying the additional judges will allow the court to take
on more cases and ensure "swift justice."
Ducey's approval of House Bill 2537 will cost the state an additional $1
million and came despite objections from Chief Justice Scott Bales, who earlier
this month asked the Republican governor to veto the legislation. In that
letter, Bales wrote additional judges are not needed and expansion "is not
warranted when other court-related needs are underfunded."
Ducey will have the final say on the 2 new justices; in January, he appointed
Clint Bolick, a registered independent and Goldwater Institute litigator, to
the bench.
Such appointments are among a governor's most important decisions, given
jurists??? long tenures and impact on issues ranging from the death penalty to
constitutional questions.
In a letter explaining his signing Wednesday morning, Ducey said the additional
justices will put Arizona on par with states that have similar or smaller
populations yet more Supreme Court justices. He cited Nevada, Colorado,
Washington, Wisconsin and Massachusetts.
"Arizonans deserve swift justice from the judicial branch," Ducey's letter
said. "Adding more voices will ensure that the court can increase efficiency,
hear more cases and issue more opinions."
To those who argue the bill is unnecessary and the justices' caseloads are not
burdensome, he wrote, "...I believe you'll hear a different story from the
businesses and individuals facing litigation, who are in need of certainty."
The governor said the legislation, introduced by Rep. J.D. Mesnard, R-Chandler,
does not contradict his goal to streamline government, because it would make
the court more efficient and accessible to the public.
Mesnard said the expansion will result in a "greater opportunity for diversity
on the court, there will be more legal minds looking at critical issues and
hopefully the opportunity to take on more cases and a diversity of opinion."
Democrats called the bill a move by Ducey and Republicans to stack the Supreme
Court. Democratic Sen. Katie Hobbs, of Phoenix, said court caseloads were not a
problem, and "the only reason to do it is so the governor can stack the Supreme
Court with his picks."
Ducey addressed the notion in his letter, writing, "Some, particularly national
activists and media who aren't familiar with our system here, have inaccurately
described this as 'court packing.' That's just wrong."
He pointed out the justices are selected through a merit-based process.
Ultimately, however, it's Ducey who selects from the names that are forwarded
to him.
Bales had supported court expansion, but only if the Legislature and governor
ensured other court priorities were met. He and other court officials argued
the $1 million that would be spent to grow the court could instead be used for
other priorities.
(source: The Arizona Republic)
CALIFORNIA:
Grim Sleeper's Killing Spree Worse than Thought, Prosecutors Claim----In
arguing for the death penalty, prosecutors allege the Grim Sleeper's kill count
is higher than the 9 murders he was convicted of.
A fingerprint comparison expert testified today that a fingerprint from the
magazine of a gun linked to a woman's December 2000 killing matched the
fingerprint of the man convicted of the "Grim Sleeper" killings of 9 other
women and a 15-year-old girl.
Jeff Deacon, who works for the Los Angeles Police Department's latent print
unit, told the Los Angeles Superior Court jury that he compared fingerprints of
Lonnie David Franklin Jr. from a fingerprint database and concluded that a
print found on the magazine of a Titan .25-caliber pistol discovered in July
2010 behind a false wall during a search of Franklin's garage "originated" from
his left thumb.
In her opening statement last week in the penalty phase of Franklin's trial,
Deputy District Attorney Beth Silverman told jurors that the gun was used to
kill 43-year-old Georgia Mae Thomas, who was found dead Dec. 18, 2000, in South
Los Angeles.
Franklin, 63, was convicted May 5 of the 10 "Grim Sleeper" killings, along with
the attempted murder of Enietra Washington, who survived being shot in the
chest and pushed out of a moving vehicle in November 1988. In testimony Feb.
25, she identified the former Los Angeles city garage attendant and sanitation
worker as her assailant.
The 7-woman, 5-man jury is being asked in the latest phase of the trial to
recommend whether Franklin should be sentenced to death or life in prison
without the possibility of parole.
The prosecutor told jurors that they would hear during the penalty phase about
a series of other killings, including Thomas' shooting death, that she said are
linked to the defendant.
Silverman told the panel that a separate gun used to kill Janecia Peters --
the final victim in the charged "Grim Sleeper" killings -- was also used in the
January 1984 shooting death of 21-year-old Sharon Dismuke, a crime for which
Franklin was not charged. The weapon was found in a bedroom during the July
2010 search of Franklin's property, the prosecutor said.
Deacon told jurors that he took a sample of Franklin's fingerprints in court
Monday to compare to the set from the database and found that both matched.
He testified that he did not compare the fingerprints he had collected from
Franklin to the latent print found on the magazine of the gun. He noted that he
could compare the prints he had taken from Franklin with the latent print from
the magazine of the gun, but that it would take time for others within his unit
to verify his findings.
Franklin could not be excluded as the source of a fingerprint found in the area
of the gun's serial number, but the print was "very low quality" and a
conclusive determination could not be made, the fingerprint comparison expert
testified.
"I knew from the very beginning that this print has limited potential," he said
of that print.
Under cross-examination by defense attorney Seymour Amster, Deacon acknowledged
that he could not determine the amount of time that a latent print has been on
a surface.
When asked if he was aware of any incorrect identifications through fingerprint
analysis, Deacon said the best known incident involved an investigation into a
Madrid train station bombing in which the FBI eventually acknowledged that it
had made an error in misidentifying a suspect after Spanish national police
advised the agency that the fingerprint had been identified as belonging to
someone else.
Along with the killings of Thomas and Dismuke, Franklin is suspected of killing
28-year-old Inez Warren, who was found Aug. 15, 1988, with a gunshot wound to
the left side of her chest and blunt-force trauma to her head, Silverman said
last week.
A kit used to collect potential DNA evidence from the woman was inadvertently
destroyed in 2000 -- years before Franklin's arrest -- but the killing bore the
"same pattern or signature" as the other slayings, the deputy district attorney
said.
The prosecutor also told jurors that a high school ID card which belonged to
18-year-old Hawthorne High School senior Ayellah Marshall, who vanished in
January 2006 -- and a Nevada ID card belonging to 29-year-old Rolenia Morris,
who disappeared in September 2005 -- were found by police in Franklin's garage
during a July 2010 search. Authorities have not been able to locate either of
the women, Silverman said.
Franklin, while serving in the U.S. Army in Germany in 1974, joined with 2
other men to grab a 17-year-old girl off a street, gang-rape her and take
photos of her, the prosecutor told jurors.
Franklin's attorney declined to present an opening statement at the start of
the penalty phase, in which jurors are hearing emotional testimony from the
murder victims' families, along with evidence about the uncharged killings in
which Franklin is suspected.
In his closing argument in the trial's guilt phase, Amster contended that an
unknown assailant may have been responsible for the 10 killings for which
Franklin was prosecuted.
Silverman countered that there was no evidence to support the defendant's
theory and told jurors that "the only DNA profile that repeats itself again and
again is the defendant's."
Jurors deliberated about 1 1/2 days before finding Franklin guilty of the
killings, which occurred between 1985 and 1988 and 2002 and 2007, with the
assailant dubbed the "Grim Sleeper" because of what was believed to be a 13-
year break in the killings.
Franklin, who has remained jailed without bail since his July 2010 arrest, was
convicted of killing:
-- Debra Jackson, 29, found dead from 3 gunshot wounds to the chest in an
alley on Aug. 10, 1985;
-- Henrietta Wright, a 34-year-old mother of 5 who was shot twice in the chest
and found in an alley with a cloth gag stuffed in her mouth on Aug. 12, 1986;
-- Barbara Ware, 23, shot once in the chest and found under a pile of debris
and garbage in an alley on Jan. 10, 1987;
-- Bernita Sparks, 26, shot once in the chest and found in a trash bin with
her shirt and pants unbuttoned on April 16, 1987;
-- Mary Lowe, 26, shot in the chest and found in an alley with her pants
unzipped behind a large shrub on Nov. 1, 1987;
-- Lachrica Jefferson, 22, found dead from 2 gunshot wounds to the chest --
with a napkin over her face with the handwritten word "AIDS" on it -- in an
alley on Jan. 30, 1988;
-- Alicia Alexander, 18, killed by a gunshot wound to the chest and found
naked under a blue foam mattress in an alley on Sept. 11, 1988;
-- Princess Berthomieux, 15, strangled and discovered naked and hidden in
shrubbery in an alley in Inglewood on March 9, 2002;
-- Valerie McCorvey, 35, strangled and found dead with her clothes pulled down
at the entrance to a locked alley on July 11, 2003; and
-- Janecia Peters, 25, shot in the back and found naked inside a sealed
plastic trash bag in a trash bin in an alley on Jan. 1, 2007.
(source: patch.com)
****************
Oakland 8-year-old's shooting death could yield 1st county death penalty in
years
As a jury this week decides the fate of an Oakland man convicted of killing an
8-year-old girl and a man with whom he argued over a dice game, the case marks
a turning point for Alameda County and its district attorney, Nancy O'Malley.
It's the 1st death penalty trial in the county since O'Malley took office 7
years ago.
She's had 103 other cases where she could have sought the death penalty. And
except for 1 other case, where she initially sought death but reversed the
decision before trial, this is the only one she's pursued.
Because of a gag order, O'Malley, defense attorneys and prosecutors wouldn't
talk about the case against Darnell Williams, 25, of Oakland, who was convicted
last week of killing Alaysha Carradine, 8, as she was spending the night with a
friend in Oakland, and Anthony Medearis, 22, after the two fought over a dice
game in Berkeley.
But Steven Clark, a former Santa Clara County prosecutor and now a criminal
defense attorney who has no connection to the Williams case, said seeking the
death penalty in 2016 is almost a symbolic gesture, given that the courts have
placed executions on hold in the state.
Still, the murder of a young girl who was indiscriminately targeted in the
crossfire of a crime, and the fact that the defendant later committed another
murder, can contribute to reasons to make a death recommendation, Clark said.
"It's someone that clearly isn't following society's rules," he said. "That's
the kind of defendant you look for."
The outcome of this kind of case, he said, could also set the tone for future
death penalty recommendations in Alameda County.
If the jury doesn't sentence Williams to death, "then you re-evaluate if it's a
community that wants the death penalty. It's a feeling out process," Clark
said.
"If it's not this case, then what is it?" he said.
Before O'Malley took office in 2009, the last time the district attorney
prosecuted a death penalty case was for David Mills -- sentenced to death in
2012 for killing 3 people in Oakland in 2005. O'Malley's predecessor, Tom
Orloff, pursued 47 death penalty cases during his 15-year stint as district
attorney, four of which were in his last 4 years in office.
O'Malley 1st recommended the death penalty in the case of a Castro Valley man
who used a screwdriver that he shaved into a shank to fatally stab his longtime
companion in front of a Hayward medical office where she worked in 2009. But
O'Malley reversed that decision, she said later, because the victim's family
wanted a speedy trial resolution.
By comparison, San Mateo County District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe's office has
reviewed 26 death penalty-eligible cases since taking office in 2011 but has
never recommended death. Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen, who
also took office in 2011, has reviewed 8 such cases and recommended prosecution
for 2 current death penalty cases -- Antolin Garcia-Torres for the alleged
kidnapping and killing of Sierra LaMar and Alejandro Benitez for the alleged
brutal rape and death of a 16-month-old boy. San Francisco hasn't seen a
district attorney -- including Attorney General Kamala Harris, who is now
running for a senate seat -- seek the death penalty since the 1990s.
Clark said that prosecutors may go for death because of a societal demand for
justice.
"The symbolism of a young child caught in a murder like this, if society is
going to return a death verdict, this is it," Clark said.
Family members of Williams' victims agreed with the decision. "I want justice
for my baby," said Medearis' aunt, Jackie Winters, who was in court every day
during the monthlong trial.
The sentiment is echoed by the family of Alaysha, whom the slain girl's cousin,
Shaquilla Jackson, said they called "Ladybug."
During Williams' trial, prosecutor John Brouhard called his crimes a "rampage
of violence." Alaysha died on July 17, 2013, after Williams went to the
apartment where she was sleeping over to get revenge for the death of his
friend who was gunned down earlier that day. Williams went to the apartment,
prosecutors said, intent on hurting loved ones of the man he believed killed
his friend. When the kids opened the door, Williams fired a barrage of bullets
through the screen door, apparently aiming at a woman on the couch behind them.
Medearis died Sept. 8, 2013, after he and Williams argued over a dice game.
Williams shot Medearis in the back as he ran away.
Frank Zimring, a UC Berkeley law professor and death penalty expert, said
Alaysha's slaying was a case of "extreme victimization" of an innocent girl
caught in an enormous violence. There wasn't a fight between equals; the
gunfire blasted through the door, he said.
Even an office that wouldn't touch the death penalty with a 10-foot pole would
feel an obligation to do so "in an extraordinary case of unprovoked and
meaningless violence," he said.
Still, an actual execution could be 20 years out or more. Most death row
inmates die waiting for execution rather than actually being executed by the
state, a result of a yearslong appeals process and the fact the executions in
the state are on hold because of an ongoing legal battle over the lethal
injection protocol.
1 federal judge once called death penalty sentences in the state "life in
prison with a remote possibility of death." Since California reinstated the
death penalty in 1978, the state has executed 13 inmates, the last of which was
January 2006. There are 743 death row inmates as of Jan. 1, awaiting execution
in California, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.
There are 42 inmates from Alameda County alone on death row, at least nine of
whom have had their appeals exhausted.
Though the gag order prevented her from talking about the Williams case,
O'Malley talked in general about how she views such cases in a 2012 interview
with this newspaper.
"It's not a lightweight decision to make. We should be pondering this decision
and looking at it from all angles," O'Malley said then. "My own personal
feeling is that if we make that recommendation, it would be rarely done because
we want it to be reserved for the most heinous cases."
(source: eastbaytimes.com)
******************
Prosecutor Seeks Death Penalty For Man Convicted Of 2 2013 Murders
Darnell Williams Jr., who was recently convicted of 2 counts of murder with
special circumstances for killings in 2013, should get the death penalty
because he has a history of committing violent attacks, a prosecutor told
jurors this week.
In his opening statement in the penalty phase of the trial for Williams, a
25-year-old Oakland man, prosecutor John Brouhard said that at the end of
Williams's trial he will ask jurors "to return a verdict of the death penalty
against the defendant."
Williams was convicted on May 6 of 2 counts of 1st-degree murder for the
shooting death of 8-year-old Alaysha Carradine at an apartment in the 3400
block of Wilson Avenue in Oakland at about 11:15 p.m. on July 17, 2013, and the
unrelated fatal shooting of 22-year-old Anthony Medearis in Berkeley about 7
weeks later.
He also was convicted of three counts of premeditated attempted murder and the
special circumstance of lying in wait for the Oakland shooting, the special
circumstance of murdering Medearis during the course of an attempted robbery
and the special circumstance of committing multiple murders.
In the penalty phase of his trial, which is expected to conclude next week, the
same jury will choose between recommending the death penalty or life in prison
without the possibility of parole.
In making their decision, jurors can take into account the facts of the crimes,
the suffering of the victims and the impacts of the murders on survivors.
Williams' trial marks the 1st time in 4 years that the Alameda County District
Attorney's Office is seeking the death penalty against a defendant.
Brouhard said in the guilt phase of Williams' trial that Williams fired at
least 13 shots into the apartment on Wilson Avenue in retaliation for the fatal
shooting of his close friend, 26-year-old reputed gang member Jermaine Davis,
in Berkeley about 5 hours earlier.
Brouhard said Williams wanted to harm anyone who was close to Antiown York, the
man he thought had murdered Davis, and went to the apartment because York's
ex-girlfriend, who was the mother of York's 7-year-old girl and 4-year-old boy,
lived there.
The mother wasn't home when Williams arrived at the apartment but the 2
children were there along with their 63-year-old grandmother and Alaysha, who
was a close friend of the 7-year-old girl and was spending the night there.
The 7-year-old girl, the 4-year-old boy and their grandmother were also struck
by gunfire but survived their injuries.
Brouhard said Williams shot Medearis because he thought he was a snitch and
also because he wanted to rob him because he had run out of money to buy guns,
drugs and jewelry.
In his penalty phase opening statement on Monday, Brouhard said Williams was
convicted of assault with a semi-automatic firearm for shooting a childhood
friend on Oregon Street in Berkeley on Oct. 9, 2009, after his father ordered
him to do so.
The friend, who is now in state prison for a crime he committed years later,
testified Tuesday that he's reluctant to testify about the Berkeley shooting
for fear of being labeled a snitch and getting harmed.
Brouhard said that while Williams was at the Folsom State Prison to serve time
for his assault conviction, he and another inmate attacked a 3rd inmate in a
prison yard in 1 incident and he attacked another inmate in the dining area in
a 2nd incident.
Brouhard also said that after Williams was arrested in 2013 for the deaths of
Alaysha and Medearis, he and his cellmate attacked and robbed another inmate of
his commissary snacks and other items. In addition, Brouhard said jail deputies
who conducted a surprise cell search about a week later found an 11-inch-long
metal shank in Williams' cell that could be used to stab a fellow inmate or a
guard.
He described the shank as "something terrifying" and "very concerning."
Brouhard is expected to finish presenting witnesses on Wednesday.
Williams' lawyers, who won't give their opening statements until they begin
presenting their case, have said that their major witness in the penalty phase
will be Gretchen White, an Oakland psychologist who specializes in death
penalty and murder cases.
The penalty phase will be in recess on Thursday and Friday and White is
expected to testify on Monday.
(source: CBS news)
OREGON:
Victim's family members testify in hearing to determine whether murderer A.J.
Nelson deserves death penalty
Helpful and generous.
That's how Tino Gutierrez's family members described him in testimony given
Tuesday during the sentencing phase of a trial in Lane County Circuit Court for
1 of 3 people convicted of murdering the 22-year-old Eugene man in 2012.
Gutierrez's closest relatives said they're still grieving, and still unable to
come to terms with the fact that the kindness he regularly showed others during
his relatively brief life ultimately put him in a position to be killed.
"It's that trait that took him to his death, and that's a really hard pill to
swallow," his brother, Matt Gutierrez, told jurors during A.J. Scott Nelson's
murder trial.
Gutierrez's other brother, Jeff, also testified, as did his parents, Rose and
Celestino Gutierrez.
Through her tears, Rose Gutierrez said from the witness stand that the death of
her youngest son - whom she referred to as "little Tino" - leaves "a hole that
is never going to be filled."
The 6-woman, 6-man jury in Nelson's case last week found the Army veteran
guilty of 18 felony charges, including 2 counts of aggravated murder. The
verdict triggered a 2nd trial phase, in which jurors are presented evidence
that should help them decide if Nelson should be sentenced to death for his
role in Gutierrez's slaying.
If the jury does not unanimously agree to recommend the death penalty, Nelson
will be sentenced to life in prison without parole, or life with a chance to
apply for parole after 30 years.
"This is as serious as it gets in the courtroom," Assistant Lane County
District Attorney David Schwartz told jurors on Tuesday while giving a brief
opening statement.
Schwartz said in court that he expects the jury will conclude that the crimes
committed by Nelson "are so horrible, so cold, so calculated and so
unnecessary" that a death penalty is the proper sentence.
Members of the Gutierrez family did not indicate Tuesday what penalty they
believe is most appropriate for Nelson.
According to trial evidence, Nelson and 2 other people previously convicted in
the case schemed to kidnap and kill a stranger in order to use the victim's car
in a bank robbery in Mapleton.
The plot worked, starting when Gutierrez agreed to give Mercedes Crabtree a
ride in his car after she appeared to have been stranded in the parking lot of
the Brew and Cue tavern on Highway 99 in Eugene. Nelson and Crabtree had staged
an argument outside the bar moments before Crabtree met Gutierrez there.
Crabtree had Gutierrez drive her to the nearby home of David Taylor. There,
Nelson and Taylor inflicted a series of injuries upon Gutierrez before killing
him. The 2 men then dismembered Gutierrez's body in a bathtub.
Hours later, Taylor, Nelson and Crabtree used Gutierrez's car as the getaway
vehicle in an armed, takeover-style robbery of a Siuslaw Bank branch in
Mapleton.
Taylor, 60, was convicted of murder and sentenced to death in 2014. Crabtree,
22, is serving a life sentence with the possibility of parole after 30 years.
Laurie Bender, an attorney representing Nelson, said Tuesday in her opening
statement to the jury that her client endured a troubled upbringing and that
his longtime psychological problems worsened after he joined the Army and
served a combat tour in Afghanistan.
Bender said the sentencing-phase evidence will show that Nelson does not
deserve a death sentence.
"We are confident you will spare Mr. Nelson his life," Bender told jurors.
(source: Register-Guard)
USA:
Lethal injections in jeopardy after Pfizer bans execution drugs
In May of 2015, Nebraska's Unicameral repealed the death penalty. A referendum
campaign gathered enough signatures so the issue will be decided once and for
all by state residents this November when they head to the polls. There is
another twist to the story that may impact lethal injection executions across
the country.
The pharmaceutical giant Pfizer announced last week they will no longer allow
their drugs to be used for lethal injection. Pfizer was the last remaining
company that supplied these drugs on an open market. Death penalty expert Rick
Halperin says Pfizer is the world's leading producer of drugs used in
executions so this is a major event in the ongoing effort in this country to
end the death penalty.
Halperin says, "It is going to force states that do execute with some degree of
regularity to either use compound pharmacies to get drugs or consider changing
the method of lethal injection to another method."
Halperin says several states have turned to compound pharmacies to get their
supply of execution drugs but the results have not been good. He says, "I don't
think the cost would be prohibitive. Some states have done this with disastrous
results - Ohio and Oklahoma to name just 2. On a cost issue I don't think it is
going to be a prohibitive factor."
(source: nebraskaradionetwork.com)
***************
Private Groups, Not Government, Lead the Charge on Prison Issues
The ethics panel of the American Institute of Architects (AIA) is considering
prohibiting members from designing "execution chambers and spaces intended for
torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment."
Although no final decision has been announced, the proposal has been lauded by
Architects/Designers/Planners for Social Responsibility (ADPSR), an
architectural ethics and human rights group, as a huge leap forward on human
rights,
A ban would reverse the AIA's position from 2014, when it rejected a similar
proposal, and put it in line with other professional groups' decisions related
to human rights.
The American Pharmacists Association and the International Academy of
Compounding Pharmacists, for instance, voted last year to prohibit members from
"providing medical drugs to be used for executions."
More dramatically, pharmaceutical giant Pfizer announced Friday that it would
ban the sale of drugs that could be used in executions, and the American
Psychological Association (APA) recently voted to prohibit member psychologists
from participating in national security interrogations. The United Nations has
declared the practice of solitary confinement in the United States a form of
torture.
If the AIA imposes a formal ban on designing new execution chambers and "spaces
intended for torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment," this will, by
extension, lead to a cessation of new prison construction, including solitary
confinement units. Indeed, the ADPSR is circulating a petition whereby signers
agree to "not contribute my design to the perpetuation of wrongful institutions
that abuse others," and "pledge not to do any work that furthers the
construction of prisons and jails."
Instead, the AIA and ADPSR are encouraging architects and designers to use
their "professional skills to design positive social institutions, such as
universities or playgrounds, but these institutions lack funding because of
spending on prisons."
They're right. Fully 1/4 of the Justice Department budget goes to the Bureau of
Prisons, which rehabilitates nobody, which trains nobody and which prepares
nobody for life on the outside. Instead, its $7 billion budget is spent on
personnel, prison construction and maintenance.
This begs the question: Where is governmental leadership on this issue? Where
is Congress? Where are the judiciary committees? The deplorable state of prison
conditions in this country is nothing new. Neither are the overuse and misuse
of solitary confinement, the depravity of state executions and prison
overcrowding.
The problem spans political parties. Certainly the Republican Congress hasn't -
and won't - do anything to make the situation better. But neither did the
Democrats when they controlled the process. Furthermore, there has been no
change or reform throughout the Clinton and Obama administrations. And George
W. Bush's position on prison reform is not even worth discussing.
These recent moves by the AIA, ADPSR, APA, Pfizer and others are examples of
leadership on the issues of mass incarceration and the death penalty that are
largely unseen in today's America. Congress is missing in action. The White
House's incremental steps on mass incarceration have been inconsequential.
Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder's Justice Department did nothing to
rein in overzealous prosecutors. And judges either can't or won't consider
alternatives to draconian sentences, especially in drug cases.
If there is going to be positive change, it will come from private
organizations like the AIA and ADPSR. That's leadership. Congress and the White
House should take heed.
(source: John Kiriakou is a former CIA counterterrorism operations officer and
former senior investigator for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee----
truthdig.com)
*************************
Foster v. Chatman
The case: The Supreme Court is reviewing a death penalty case from Georgia that
could change existing rules for how race influences which jurors lawyers can
have removed from a trial. Under existing law, lawyers on both sides can get a
certain number of jurors kicked off the case for essentially no reason.
But in Batson v. Kentucky in 1986, the Supreme Court looked at how race
affected these "peremptory challenges," which prosecutors often used to remove
black jurors from a case when a defendant was black. The Court ended up
establishing a test to make sure the reasons for kicking out a juror were
race-neutral, but prosecutors have largely found ways to get around the test
and have black jurors removed anyway.
The defense in Foster v. Chatman claims that's exactly what happened in their
case, in which an 18-year-old black man, Timothy Tyrone Foster, who was accused
of killing a 79-year-old white woman was sentenced to death by an all-white
jury. Underlying the case is a major racial disparity in the criminal justice
system: Black defendants are more likely to be executed than their white
counterparts, especially by an all-white jury.
Appellate court ruling: The Georgia Supreme Court denied Foster's writ of
habeas corpus, effectively rejecting his challenge.
What's at stake: Depending on how the Supreme Court rules (the trial court and
Georgia Supreme Court rejected the defense's claims), the case could
potentially make it a lot harder for prosecutors to get an all-white jury in
the first place.
(source: Washington Post)
********************
Should Veterans With PTSD Be Exempt From The Death Penalty?
Capital punishment represents the most power in our criminal justice system.
How should vets with PTSD fit in?
In 2009, Marine veteran John Thuesen broke into his ex-girlfriend's home, then
shot and killed her and her brother. Texas convicted him and sentenced him to
death. Thuesen was undeniably involved in combat operations in Iraq. It's
reasonably possible that his post-traumatic stress disorder was not adequately
diagnosed by the Veterans Health Administration.
Should that keep him off death row? Some say it should.
Movies and television sometimes portray insanity or mental illness as a
guaranteed get-out-of-jail-free card, but it's actually rarely employed and
even more rarely successful. In order to get off by reason of insanity, the
defense typically has to prove that the defendant was incapable of knowing
right from wrong. That requires a degree of mental defect that is severe, rare,
and hard to prove. Even if someone does "get off" by pleading insanity, it
often means spending more time in a mental institution than one would have
spent in prison.
But that's not what we're talking about here. Advocates for Thuesen aren't
claiming he wasn't responsible for his actions, just that his PTSD lessened his
culpability to a degree that makes him undeserving of the death penalty. They
argue that combat-related PTSD should play a key role in the sentencing phase.
The result of this argument could affect the fates of an estimated 300 veterans
on death row in the United States, according to the Death Penalty Information
Center.
The question of whether the death penalty itself is a just punishment is a much
broader question. Nevertheless, it represents the most severe sentence a court
can give in those states that allow it. The severity and irrevocable nature of
the death penalty means that it needs to be given with utmost care and
deliberation. In those cases where special circumstances exist due to the
nature of the perpetrator, the justice system needs to take notice. But is
military service such a circumstance?
In particular, some PTSD advocates claim that such a punishment is not
warranted for veterans due to the effects of military service in combat. For
example, Anthony Giardino, in the Fordham Law Review, argues that
combat-related PTSD is separate and distinct from any other type of PTSD
because "combat veterans would not have service-related PTSD or TBI but for
government action in the form of training them to kill and sending them to
war." Giardino, among others, calls for a categorical exclusion from the death
penalty for those suffering from combat-related PTSD and TBI, much like those
given to juveniles and people with an intellectual disability.
While PTSD and TBI are likely more common among veterans than the general
population, they are by no means unique to veterans. The fact that a veteran's
PTSD was likely incurred during combat service makes it tragic, but not
necessarily more deserving of accommodation than someone else's. A
psychological trauma or brain injury is what it is, regardless of cause. Is
PTSD resulting from a rape, for example, less relevant than that from a
firefight? Is TBI from a car accident medically different from that due to an
IED? Those sound like decisions that need to be made on a case-by-case basis
with specific medical evidence. That's why there is already a mechanism during
the penalty phase for a defendant to present evidence of such mitigation.
Making a special categorical exclusion for combat PTSD infantilizes veterans. A
special category, be it by judicial precedent or legislation, for combat PTSD
or TBI might benefit a few convicted murderers, but it would further stigmatize
millions of law-abiding veterans. These stereotypes are exactly why veterans
are often discriminated against. The idea that somehow veterans are on a hair
trigger, ready to lash out against anyone who causes them emotional distress is
the foundation of so many of the misconceptions about vets.
Some veterans suffered mental wounds from their military experience. Some of
those wounds may indeed warrant consideration by courts. The extent to which
that affects the degree of culpability varies from case to case. Veterans are
generally some of the most outstanding members of society, but just like any
other large group of people, some commit major crimes, such as murder.
In certain cases, mental health issues should be a mitigating factor when
determining sentencing for a crime, whether it's a capital case or not. In
others, it shouldn't. It's up to the defense to establish that through
testimony and medical evidence.
Military service merits respect, but not a pass for brutal crimes.
(source: Carl Forsling is a senior columnist for Task & Purpose. He is a Marine
MV-22B pilot and former CH-46E pilot who is retired from the military after 20
years of service----Task & Purpose)
*****************
Federal court hearing for Dylann Roof set for next month
The man accused of shooting 9 people at Emanuel AME Church in Downtown
Charleston last June will have a federal court hearing next month.
According to federal court records, there is a hearing scheduled June 8.
Dylann Roof is facing both federal and state charges.
His federal trial date has not been set.
The feds have also not decided whether he will face the death penalty.
Roof is facing death in his state trial set to begin in January.
(source: WCSC news)
**************
Death penalty support is no longer a given in red states
Almost exactly a year ago, we watched Nebraska become the 1st
Republican-controlled state in more than 40 years to abolish the death penalty.
At the time, we wondered this: Are conservatives starting to eschew the death
penalty?
A year later, we have more of an answer: maybe. At least, there's increasing
evidence to suggest Nebraska's move to drop the death penalty was not an
anomaly in conservative circles but rather the start of a trend.
So far this legislative session, GOP state lawmakers in 10 states -- an
unprecedented number -- sponsored or co-sponsored legislation to repeal the
death penalty, including in perhaps the reddest state in the nation, Utah. None
of them passed, but some got further than even their supporters expected. In
Utah, a repeal bill passed the state Senate and a House committee. For the 1st
time in decades, Missouri's full state Senate debated the issue. A Kentucky
legislative committee held a hearing on repealing the death penalty for the 1st
time since the state reinstated capital punishment in 1976 (even though it
failed 9 to 8).
There's more evidence outside legislative circles. This fall, the National
Association of Evangelicals changed its 40-year position of exclusive support
for the death penalty to make room for evangelical Christians to take an
alternative position on the death penalty. And in Georgia, anti-death-penalty
advocates point out that last year no jury there handed out a death sentence
for crimes that were eligible for it.
Kansas Republicans are the latest group of conservatives to question the death
penalty. 2 years ago, the state GOP party switched its platform from supportive
to neutral on the issue to make room for the growing number of Republicans who
didn't back it. Then, at their state convention over the weekend, they batted
down an attempt to put the death penalty back on their platform. The debate got
so contentious that they cast secret ballots and eventually voted 90 to 75 to
keep their position on the death penalty neutral.
There are just too many Republicans in the state who oppose the death penalty
to have it on their platform, explained Ed O'Brien, a vice chairman of the
Kansas Republican Party -- plus, Republican politicians and voters just aren't
as focused on the death penalty as they used to be.
"If I was advising a candidate running for office, I'd say: If you want to make
that an issue, go ahead. But there's other things that need to be addressed,"
he said.
It's possible that silence is giving conservatives who oppose the death penalty
the opportunity to be heard. And from Kansas to Utah, conservatives are
presenting their colleagues some pretty compelling -- and conservative --
reasons to abolish the death penalty.
Their reasoning generally falls under 1 of 3 arguments: 1) It's not moral and
not consistent with conservatives' antiabortion (that is "pro-life") beliefs.
2) It's not fiscally sound and not consistent with conservatives'
small-government policies. 3) Life in prison without parole is bad enough.
"I'm thinking that it's wrong for government to be in business in killing its
own citizens," Utah state Sen. Steve Urquhart (R), who sponsored the repeal
bill there, told me in February. "That cheapens life."
Former Kansas College Republicans president Dalton Glasscock said it's a
generational issue, too. This summer, the group voted to oppose the death
penalty on its official platform.
"My generation is looking for consistency on issues," he said. "I believe if we
say we're pro-life, we need to be truly pro-life, from conception to death."
Of course, this is far from a settled issue on the right, and the opposition is
still far outnumbered and still fighting to get a foothold. Nebraska's death
penalty repeal is on hold and will be put to voters this November in a ballot
measure that was funded in part by Gov. Pete Ricketts (R), who vetoed the
original repeal last year. (The legislature then overrode it.)
Similarly, in Oklahoma, voters will decide this November whether to enshrine
the death penalty in the state's constitution.
And when pharmaceutical giant Pfizer announced Friday it would keep its drugs
from being used in lethal injections, some conservative groups criticized the
decision. David Muhlhausen, a criminal justice expert with the Heritage
Foundation, told the New York Times that Pfizer's move to get out of the death
penalty market is not "in the public interest" because he believes research
shows the death penalty can deter crimes.
More broadly speaking, there's evidence to suggest that elected Republicans are
increasingly amenable to having a larger conversation on criminal justice
reform, an issue traditionally owned by Democrats. As I wrote last year:
Alabama's Republican governor is calling for a $541 million tax package in part
to offset overstuffed prisons, for instance. States like South Carolina and
Georgia have also passed their own justice reform packages changing who gets
sent to prison and for how long.
"When states in the Deep South, which have long had some of the country's
harshest penal systems, make significant sentencing and prison reforms, you
know something has changed," the New York Times's editorial board wrote in
2015.
As for why this is happening in isolated instances now, it's unclear. Turning
to public opinion polling doesn't give us much clarity.
The Pew Research Center has found support for the death penalty is on a
downward trend, but it credits that drop to Democrats backing away from it, not
Republicans.
And Gallup has pegged support for the death penalty at a stable 60 %.
The bottom line: It's not like anyone can claim a groundswell of support on the
right for dropping the death penalty. But it's notable that a year after we
wondered whether Nebraska was an anomaly or the start of a trend, there's
plenty of evidence to suggest that conservative opposition to the death penalty
may indeed be a trend -- a small but growing one.
(source: Amber Phillips, Washington Post)
US MILITARY:
Navy officer pleads not guilty to espionage
A Navy officer who spent time at the Pentagon and served in a secretive
squadron pleaded not guilty to espionage charges Tuesday during a hearing at
Norfolk Naval Station.
Lt. Cmdr. Edward C. Lin faces 2 counts of espionage, 3 counts of attempted
espionage and 5 counts of communicating defense information, The
Virginian-Pilot reported. If convicted by a panel of officers of the espionage
charge, Lin could face the death penalty. No trial date has been set.
Lin is accused of spying for a foreign power from 2012 to 2014, during which
time he was primarily a staff aide to Vice Adm. Joseph Mulloy. It is not
publicly known what classified information Lin is alleged to have passed on,
but his attorneys have said he's accused of spying for Taiwan, where he was
born. Lin moved to the U.S. when he was 14 and became a citizen in 1998, a year
before joining the Navy, The Virginian-Pilot reported.
While in the Navy, Lin worked at the Pentagon and also was part of a squadron
in Hawaii, where the military believes some of the information handoffs may
have occurred.
The Navy has designated Lin's prosecution as a "national security case." He was
arrested at the Honolulu airport in September.
Lin's attorney contended during a preliminary hearing that some of the charges
against his client stem from entrapment.
(source: Fox News)
_______________________________________________
A service courtesy of Washburn University School of Law www.washburnlaw.edu
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Unsubscribe: http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/options/deathpenalty
