Jan. 27




SOUTH CAROLINA:

If SC botches an execution, state doesn't have to show what went wrong



A little-known S.C. law, on the books for nearly a decade, exempts the state from performing an autopsy on a death-row inmate who has been executed.

That means if a lethal-injection execution doesn't go according to plan, the state is not required to conduct an autopsy, a procedure that could shed light on what went wrong.

However, the state's corrections chief says nothing in state law prevents others from pursuing an autopsy. "The body is immediately turned over to the funeral home," where the family or lawyers of the inmate could decide to have an autopsy done, said Corrections Department director Bryan Stirling.

But the autopsy waiver for executed inmates is troubling to some lawmakers and prisoner advocates as the Legislature debates another controversial proposal aimed at putting parts of the execution process deeper into the shadows.

S.C. lawmakers are debating whether to shield - as a state secret - the identity of companies and pharmacies that sell the state drugs that are used in lethal-injection executions. Without that so-called "shield law," the lethal-injection drugs will be impossible to buy because suppliers fear the backlash of being identified as the source of the drugs, Stirling says.

And that's an issue for the state.

Now, the state is out of stock of the 3 drugs used first to knock unconscious an inmate; then, to cause paralysis and respiratory arrest; and finally, cause cardiac arrest, stopping the heart.

Pressure is mounting for a solution.

Stirling said he has received 3 execution orders in recent months. But, he added, "When we are calling folks to ask for the drugs, and we inform them of who we are, the conversations stop."

Exemption long on the books

The law to waive the state's autopsy requirement for an executed inmate has been on the books since the 2009-2010 fiscal year, when all state agencies were reeling from massive Great Recession-era cuts.

Then-S.C. Corrections Director Jon Ozmint, who oversaw 15 executions, said he asked legislators to adopt the waiver for autopsies, adding they were a waste of money.

"I just remember thinking: 'This is insanity. We had 10 witnesses to the fact that the overwhelming amount of drugs that we pumped into (the inmate's) veins ... killed him instantly.' It just seemed to me like taking money out into the yard and burning it."

Had there been any indication that an execution did not happen as planned - taking too long for the inmate to die, for instance - Ozmint says he would have ordered an autopsy.

Despite the waiver being in place, an autopsy was performed on Jeffrey Motts after his 2011 execution, according to the state Corrections Department. The department could not say Friday why the autopsy was ordered. However, it used a new combination of lethal-injection drugs in Motts' execution, the last one the state has performed.

Questions about transparency

The autopsy waiver raises concerns for some lawmakers and prisoner advocates.

Already hesitant about making secret the source of lethal-injection drugs, state Sen. Marlon Kimpson, D-Charleston, said the autopsy waiver gives him further pause.

"If we did not have transparency, and there was a problem (with the execution) for whatever reason, we don't even know where to start our investigation because the identities of the material parties to the execution aren't traceable," Kimpson said of the proposed "shield law."

"In addition to the shield law, now that we don't have the autopsy, then it makes it more problematic that we would never get to the bottom of what happened during the execution," he said.

"It just shrouds so much of the execution in secrecy," said Lindsey Vann with Justice 360, a group that is fighting the shield law. "We won't know where the drugs are coming from or who's testing them. Won't know if they're being effective. ... If something goes wrong, I don't know how we would be able to figure out what happened to prevent it from happening again in the future."

Stirling said he will conduct autopsies after executions if lawmakers decide to change the law, but he sees no reason to spend the money.

"It doesn't really make much sense to me to have the state pay for an autopsy when you have medical professionals" and other witnesses to the execution, he said.

State House Speaker Pro Tempore Tommy Pope, R-York, said he never would oppose an autopsy being performed if there was some question about whether an execution went according to plan.

However, Pope, a former solicitor who prosecuted Susan Smith in a high-profile death-penalty case, questioned the motivations of critics who call into question the effectiveness of lethal-injection drugs. Their "real push has been to not have the death penalty," he said.

Still, Kimpson said he would prefer the state perform an autopsy after a lethal-injection execution to ensure the drugs were effective.

"That makes good sense, albeit at some expense to the state," he said. "The safeguard is the Constitution which is even applicable to prisoners. No person should be subject to cruel and unusual punishment."

3 S.C. execution orders issued

Pressure is mounting for the state to find a way to obtain lethal-injection drugs - or find another way to carry out executions.

Lacking the needed drugs, the S.C. Department of Corrections could not carry out the court-ordered execution of Bobby Wayne Stone on Dec. 1 of last year. Stone was convicted of killing Sumter County Sheriff???s Sgt. Charlie Kubala in 1997.

Since Stone's execution order was issued, Corrections has received orders for 2 more executions.

Late last year, the state received an order to execute Anthony Woods, sentenced to death in the 2003 death of a Manning school teacher. However, Woods' attorneys have been granted a stay on his execution.

The most recent execution order came Friday for Marion Bowman, sentenced to death in 2001 for the murder of a woman in Dorchester County. Bowman's attorneys have requested a stay of his execution as his case is appealed.

(source: thestate.com)

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

As killer gets reprieve, solicitor suggests another execution option in South Carolina: firing squad



After a former death row inmate from Dorchester County became the latest killer to get a reprieve because South Carolina doesn't have the means to execute him, a prosecutor on Friday suggested an alternative for others who deserve the ultimate punishment: firing squad.

And lawmakers might consider it.

John Edward Weik had been sentenced to death for murdering his girlfriend, Susan Hutto Krasae, at her Knightsville home in 1998. But the S.C. Supreme Court in 2014 found issues with the penalty phase of Weik's trial and ordered a new sentencing.

As the victim's family faced the lengthy proceeding and the fact that South Carolina ran out of the ingredients for lethal injections a year before Weik's successful appeal, 1st Circuit Solicitor David Pascoe decided earlier this month to agree to a lifetime prison term for Weik, now 50.

"He absolutely deserves the death penalty, and I was willing to pursue the death penalty," Pascoe said. "But we live in a state that doesn't have the capability of executing someone, so I think we should bring back the firing squad."

Lawmakers already are considering a bill to make electrocution the primary means of execution if the dearth of the drug cocktail persists, but Pascoe, a Democrat, said a firing squad might be a more effective and humane option.

It isn't a novel concept, Pascoe noted. 2 states already allow it: Oklahoma and Utah, which brought back the method because of the injection shortage. Other prosecutors here have discussed it, Pascoe added.

And South Carolina last considered a legislative proposal on the firing squad alternative in 2015. The measure never gained steam.

Its original sponsor, Rep. Josh Putnam, R-Anderson, said Friday after learning of Pascoe's case that he would likely reintroduce the bill in the coming week.

"People might think it's crazy," Putnam said. "But if I were a death row inmate, I'd much rather be put to death by firing squad."

Family members of Weik's victim also did not want to again endure the lengthy courtroom ordeal of re-sentencing, and they urged Pascoe to accept life, the prosecutor said. Weik was sentenced Jan. 11 by Circuit Judge Diane Goodstein.

Fewer capital cases

Many prosecutors statewide in the past year have agreed to similar guilty pleas in exchange for lifetime terms for killers who might otherwise be eligible for the death penalty. And with various appeals in the works, inmates already on death row are either dying of natural causes or getting their sentences overturned at a much faster clip than South Carolina can carry out the punishments.

In April, 9th Circuit Solicitor Scarlett Wilson said a guilty plea on Emanuel AME Church shooter Dylann Roof's 9 state murder charges was the "surest way" to see that he's executed by federal authorities, who had already won a death verdict.

Wilson also planned to pursue the ultimate punishment against Kenneth Ancrum, who in May 2016 fatally shot three members of his girlfriend's family in Hollywood, including a woman pregnant with twins. But the lack of the injection cocktail weighed heavily in her decision not to.

Admitted Upstate serial killer Todd Kohlhepp got 7 lifetime sentences in May as 7th Circuit Solicitor Barry Barnette noted that the state "doesn't have a functionary death penalty" anyway.

South Carolina ran out of the drugs in 2013 as more pharmaceutical suppliers cited ethical concerns in holding them back. The state's last lethal injection came in 2011.

Only 1 person has been added to death row since 2009: Ricky Lee Blackwell Sr., who was sentenced in 2014 for kidnapping and killing an 8-year-old girl in Spartanburg County.

By Friday, records showed, 34 inmates were housed on death row at Kirkland Correctional Institution in Columbia.

'Some closure'

Weik broke into his girlfriend's home and fired 4 shotgun blasts into Krasae as her 8-year-old daughter watched.

His lawyers during a 1999 trial presented testimony about his paranoid schizophrenia, but they failed to delve into his chaotic childhood and physical abuse by his father. Because that crucial mitigation evidence was never offered, the state's high court said it had no choice but to overturn Weik's sentence.

But a new penalty phase could stretch for weeks, essentially amounting to a 2nd trial nearly 2 decades after Weik's 1st, Pascoe said at the time.

Pascoe said Friday that Weik will now have to spend time in a prison's general population.

"And the (victim's) family won't have to come back to court," he said. "They can finally get some closure.

"I couldn't tell them I would get closure for them if (Weik) got the death penalty again."

Putnam, the Upstate lawmaker, had envisioned the state's current problems with carrying out executions when he made the "forward-thinking" proposal on firing squads 3 years ago, he said. He wanted to start a debate about the alternatives.

From a scientific standpoint, he said, it's a sound means that causes instant
death. But electrocution and lethal injection can go horribly wrong and cause prolonged suffering, he said.

Such squads never have been an official method here. People were hanged before electrocution became the accepted means. Lethal injections started in 1995, though the condemned still can opt for the chair.

"If you just ... take the emotion out of it," Putnam said, "it really is the most humane method of putting someone to rest."

Even U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, thought to be a more liberal-minded jurist, said in a dissent to a 2017 ruling in an Alabama case that a study showed 7 % of 1,054 lethal injections had been "botched" while none of 34 firing squad executions in the U.S. had been.

"Some might find this choice regressive, but the available evidence suggests 'that a competently performed shooting may cause nearly instant death,'" she wrote. "Death by shooting may also be comparatively painless."

(source: Andrew Knapp, Post and Courier)








FLORIDA:

Wife of man in death penalty trial gives emotional testimony



The wife of a Brevard County man on trial and facing the death penalty in a 2012 double murder took the stand Friday in gripping testimony.

Barbara Woodward testified she feared for her life long before the deadly Labor Day encounter between her husband, William Woodward, and 3 men, who of whom died.

"I'm sorry... it's so hard to talk about it," said Barbara Woodward, before crying.

Barbara Woodward struggled on the stand, sometimes breaking down, when describing alleged harassment she and her family endured from neighbors in the months before the shooting.

"We took the threats very seriously. (There's) no doubt that they were capable of doing it," she said.

She broke down several more times, describing how she said Keri Blake - the wife of Bruce Blake, 1 of the men who was shot - told her she would rape her then-12-year-old daughter.

"She would have all the neighbors participate, and then she would burn down my house," Barbara Woodward said.

Woodward said she and her husband asked law enforcement to intervene, but nothing was done, even trying and failing to get a court injunction.

William Woodward is accused killing Gary Hembree and Roger Picior after firing a barrage of bullets. Bruce Blake survived despite being struck 11 times.

A home security camera from Woodward's Smith Drive home recorded the gunshots.

Prosecutors argue that Woodward, a former military member, laid in wait in camouflage under the cover of darkness to gun down the men.

Woodward's defense team argues he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and was acting in self-defense to protect his family after months of harassment, taunting and violent threats to his daughter.

But prosecutors are trying to paint a picture of an ongoing feud fueled by anger on both sides.

Testimony in the death-penalty trial will continue Monday.

(source: mynews13.com)

**********

Another Duval County death row inmate loses appeal----Florida Supreme Court rejects another 10 death row appeals



After issuing another batch of 10 rulings Friday, the Florida Supreme Court this week rejected a total of 40 death-penalty appeals on similar legal grounds.

The 40 appeals all were filed on behalf of death row inmates who received their sentences before June 2002, though the Supreme Court's decision to release 4 large batches of rulings in a week was highly unusual.

The appeals stemmed from a 2016 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in a case known as Hurst v. Florida and a subsequent Florida Supreme Court decision.

The 2016 U.S. Supreme Court ruling found Florida's death-penalty sentencing system was unconstitutional because it gave too much authority to judges, instead of juries.

The subsequent Florida Supreme Court ruling said juries must unanimously agree on critical findings before judges can impose death sentences and must unanimously recommend the death penalty.

But the Florida Supreme Court made the new sentencing requirements apply to cases since June 2002.

That is when the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling known as Ring v. Arizona that was a premise for striking down Florida's death-penalty sentencing system in 2016. In each of the cases this week, the death row inmates had been sentenced to death before the Ring decision and argued that the new unanimity requirements should also apply to their cases.

The inmates who lost their appeals Friday were Richard Harold Anderson in a Hillsborough County case; Charles William Finney in a Hillsborough County case; Kenneth Hartley in a Duval County case; Sonny Ray Jeffries in an Orange County case; William H. Kelley in a Highlands County case; Ian Deco Lightbourne in a Marion County case; Robert D. Morris in a Polk County case; Kenneth Allen Stewart in a Hillsborough County case; George James Trepal in a Polk County case; and Melvin Trotter in a Manatee County case.

(source: Yhe News Service of Florida)

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

Applying the death penalty deftly and fairly



It is possible to question the morality and deterrent value of the death penalty and still appreciate the way Hillsborough State Attorney Andrew Warren has approached the issue of capital punishment during his first 13 months in office. Warren recently announced he would seek the death penalty for Howell Emanuel Donaldson III, who has been accused of killing four people seemingly at random in the Seminole Heights neighborhood in 2017.

Unlike Aramis Ayala, his counterpart in Orange and Osceola counties who has refused to pursue the death penalty under any circumstances, Warren did not hide his beliefs on capital punishment before his election in November 2016. He has readily acknowledged the problems with lengthy delays that contribute to huge financial costs, the racial disparity in death penalty sentences and the rare, but real, possibility of executing someone who was wrongly convicted.

Yet as a candidate, Warren said he believed a state attorney should invoke the death penalty "fairly and consistently and rarely." Thus far, he has upheld that standard. Warren has taken the death penalty off the table in a handful of cases he inherited, and his office has specifically cited mental illness as a mitigating factor that will be considered.

But Warren has also pursued the ultimate punishment in what he determines are the most egregious cases, and the four killings of innocent people walking the streets of their neighborhood qualifies. The worthiness of the death penalty remains open for debate, but Warren has deftly juggled his reservations about its use while still fulfilling the duties of his office.

(source: Editorial, Tampa Bay Times)

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

Palm Beach County jurors hear escort, suspect in death penalty trial



In a grainy interrogation video from 2013, Jefty Joseph almost chuckled as he explained to jurors that before he recognized his old "friend" Gustavo Falsetti Cabral in a casino, he saw Cabral watching him and thought the man wanted to rob him.

Cabral's widow, Christiane, and other relatives seated in a Palm Beach County courtroom Thursday, shook their heads at the sound of those words. They and everyone else in the courtroom, including the jurors who could sentence Joseph to die if they convict him of 1st-degree murder, knew one thing about what Joseph said:

It was all a lie.

Prosecutors told jurors at the start of Joseph's trial last week that Cabral, born and raised in Brazil, had only moved to the U.S. a short time before his body was found in an abandoned house in unincorporated Lake Worth. In the video, Joseph called Cabral "Chico" and claimed Cabral had been a friend of his older brother who'd interacted with him in South Florida ever since Joseph was a child.

Koral Ben Shimon, arrested 2 weeks after authorities apprehended Joseph and best friend Ilmart Christophe almost immediately after the shooting, told jurors earlier Thursday how they all really met. Cabral, she said, was one of several people who responded to an escort ad she'd placed on Backpage.com.

And though Joseph told investigators in his fake story that he initially thought Cabral was contemplating whether to rob him, Ben Shimon told jurors it was Joseph and Christophe, her boyfriend and pimp at the time, who had designs on robbing a john and chose Cabral as their prey.

Both stories aside, the one thing that Joseph was adamant about in the 2-hour interview played for jurors, however, was that he had nothing to do with Cabral's death.

"You have a way you can test? You have that gunshot residue thing? Come through with it, man. I did not shoot that man," Joseph said.

Assistant State Attorney Aleathea McRoberts, who is leading the case against Joseph along with fellow prosecutor Terri Skiles, told jurors that they didn't have to prove whether it was Joseph or Christophe who actually shot Cabral. Both, they say, are guilty under the law of his murder, robbery and kidnapping from the Super 8 Motel in Pompano Beach, where he met Ben Shimon in the early hours of Dec. 1, 2013, just hours before his death.

Ben Shimon, arrested two weeks after Joseph and Christophe, had also faced a murder charge until she accepted a plea deal in exchange for her testimony against Joseph and Christophe, who also faces a potential death sentence but is still awaiting trial. Under the terms of the agreement, prosecutors agreed to drop the murder charge against Ben Shimon and allow her to serve a 10-year prison sentence on the other charges.

Defense attorney Scott Skier, who, along with Robert Gershman and Shaun Rosenberg, is representing Joseph, estimated on Thursday that with the time Ben Shimon has spent behind bars since her 2013 arrest, the deal means she could be out in as few as four additional years.

"That's much better than life in prison, isn't it?" Skier asked Ben Shimon on cross-examination.

Ben Shimon agreed.

"But without you, there is no robbery, and there is no murder, right?" Skier asked, prompting an objection from prosecutors that Circuit Judge John Kastrenakes sustained.

Skier since the start of the trial had said that there is no evidence to support claims that Cabral was robbed or kidnapped. Surely Cabral, who had moved to Florida in hopes of opening a mixed martial arts studio, would have put up a fight if 2 men tried to take him by force from the hotel room, Skier said.

But the hotel room showed no signs of a struggle, Skier said. And the hotel security worker who later saw Cabral leaving the hotel with Ben Shimon and the 2 men thought the group was an odd pairing but said Cabral didn't appear to be in distress or leaving by force.

Ben Shimon said the men robbed Cabral at gunpoint, then forced him into his car, told her to follow them and then went to a bank to try to withdraw some of his money. The caravan wound up back in Palm Beach County in the Indian Pines neighborhood, where Ben Shimon said Christophe told her to go to his mother's house. She said she didn't find out Cabral was dead until Christophe and Joseph were arrested.

In the interrogation video, Joseph said he wasn't in the abandoned house when Cabral was killed and didn't know anything happened to him until police stopped him and Christophe a short time later as they were walking on Eddy Court.

While Joseph sat on the ground immediately, Christophe ran. Joseph pointed that out to investigators in the video as proof he didn't know Cabral had been killed, a sentiment Skier echoed to jurors.

Aside from the video and testimony from Ben Shimon, jurors on Tuesday also heard from Christiane Cabral, who told them she and her husband, who have 2 children, had moved to the United States looking to get away from poverty-motivated violence in their native country.

Christiane Cabral last spoke to her husband less than a day before he was killed. She had been back home in Brazil and expected to return Dec. 4, 2013. After she heard of his murder, she said, she never returned.

Prosecutors are expected to rest their case against Joseph early Friday.

(source: Palm Beach Post)








ALABAMA:

AG: State will continue to pursue death sentence



Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall says the state will continue to pursue a death sentence for an inmate convicted of killing a police officer in 1985.

Marshall said Friday that he was disappointed in the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to stay the execution of Vernon Madison since he had previously been ruled competent to face execution.

The court delayed the Thursday execution that had been scheduled as it decides whether to review claims that strokes have left Madison incompetent and that his sentence was unconstitutional.

Madison was sentenced to death for killing Mobile Police Officer Julius Schulte.

Marshall said Madison committed "a cold blooded crime for which there is no doubt he is guilty."

(source: Associated Press)








INDIANA:

Defense attorney in death penalty case removed, chided as 'unprepared'



The attorney for a man facing the death penalty was removed from the case after a judge said he was unprepared and inexperienced.

Nikos Nakos, the defense attorney in the state of Indiana's murder case against Marcus Dansby, was removed as counsel by Allen Superior Court Judge Fran Gull Friday morning during a hearing.

Dansby faces 4 counts of murder related to the Sept. 11, 2016, deaths of 37-year-old Consuela Arrington; 18-year-old Traeven Harris; 18-year-old Dajahiona Arrington and her full-term baby named A.J., and another for attempted murder related in the shooting and stabbing of 14-year-old Trinity Hairston, all of Fort Wayne.

Since those charges were filed, though, Gull said there have been no depositions taken and no mitigation investigation has taken place, including acquiring a mitigation expert (though Gull signed the appointment for a mitigation investigator in June 2017).

What's more, Gull argued that Nakos did not meet the expectations of a defense attorney in a capital case as laid out by the American Bar Association. Gull said Nakos has 22 open felony cases and lacks special training to represent a client in a death penalty case. The judge also said Nakos has been generally unprepared and has treated the case like any other case.

Prosecutors said they, too, have been concerned with the issues brought up by Gull.

Gull enforced Dansby's 6th amendment right of high quality representation and removed Nakos. The public defenders office will appoint Bob Gevers and Michelle Krause to represent Dansby.

Nakos, who has twice filed motions to have Gull recuse herself from the case for violating the code of judicial conduct, said he plans to appeal the ruling.

Dansby is next scheduled to appear in court Feb. 2. He's not expected to stand trial until 2019.

The charges against Dansby stem from an incident that unfolded around 4 a.m. that Sept. 11 morning inside a home at 3006 Holton Ave. There, police arrive to find the victims bodies stabbed and shot, and Dansby covered in blood, leaning over the couch, crying and asking for help, according to an affidavit. On him, police found a large blood-soaked knife with a broken handle, the affidavit said.

Police said that Dansby and Dajahiona Arrington had been in a relationship, but the pair had separated after the woman became pregnant with another man's child. Nakos had said Allen County Prosecutors will argue that Dansby killed the family because the baby wasn't his but a DNA test confirmed with near-certainty that Dansby was the father of the unborn child. Nakos said previously that it was illogical Dansby would have killed the family armed with the knowledge that he was the father of the child.

The Allen County Prosecutor is seeking the death penalty against Dansby.

(source: WANE news)








ILLINOIS:

In the 1920s, a Makeover Saved This Woman From the Death Penalty----Sabella Nitti was the 1st woman sentenced to death in Cook County, and she was innocent. And then she got a bob.



Sabella Nitti was ugly. At least, that's what the prosecutor said - in fact, he built much of his case around her looks, leaning on sexism, racism, and stereotypes to convince the jury that Nitti was an "ugly animal" capable of killing her husband with their farmhand Peter Crudele, even though the actual evidence was circumstantial and flimsy.

The newspaper stories about her were almost worse. On July 10th, 1923, reporter Genevieve Forbes wrote in the Chicago Daily Tribune that the jury gave the death penalty to "husband killer" Sabella Nitti, a "dumb, crouching, animal-like Italian peasant." Forbes wrote that when the jury read the verdict, "Mrs. Nitti ran stubby fingers, where the dirt was ingrained into broken nails into her matted hair. She shifted her stocky legs and smoothed out the dark blue skirt, made full and short for work in the field. She hadn't understood a word. But she twisted up her face in a grotesque angle of fear, and inferiocity, and cruelty and hope."

Nitti hadn't understood her own verdict and sentencing because she didn't speak English. It took until the next day for someone to translate it for her. Nitti spoke Barese, a dialect of Italian. Her translator spoke a different dialect, and it's likely that Nitti did not understand every word, but she knew the news was bad. When she heard that the state found her guilty and planned to hang her for killing her husband, Francesco Nitti, she fainted.

Sabella Nitti was one of the first women to become part of murderesses row in Chicago in the 1920s, where a spate of women went on trial for murdering their husbands or boyfriends - or murdering for their husbands or boyfriends. The city was captivated by the idea of female killers, who went so against the idealized version of a submissive, nurturing woman. The coverage of their trials turned into a media circus, later inspiring the play Chicago by reporter-turned-playwright Maurine Watkins. The characters Roxie Hart and Velma in the play were based on the very real defendants Beulah Annan and Belva Gaertner. Annan and Gaertner were both likely guilty of murdering their boyfriends - but they were acquitted.

No one treated Annan and Gaertner like they were animals. When they were written about in the newspapers, Annan was called "beautiful" and Gaertner "stylish." Though the evidence in their cases suggested they were guilty of killing their boyfriends, perhaps on purpose, out of anger rather than self-defense, they both were acquitted by the all-male, all-white juries of the time.

"It was kind of understood that Belva would get off because she was this wealthy woman, well dressed, and if you came from high society you were well respected and you couldn't possibly be doing anything like murder," says Douglas Perry, author of The Girls of Murder City, a book about the female killers of 1920s Chicago who inspired the play. "And it was understood that Beulah Annan would be acquitted because she was beautiful and she had this lovely, soft Southern accent."

Nitti had none of these things. She wasn't seen as conventionally beautiful by American standards of the 1920s. She was an immigrant woman who worked on a farm. Her hair was long so she could tie it out of her face while she worked, unlike the trendy bobbed haircut of the '20s, which kept women's hair short around their chin. Spending most of her time on the farm didn't require her to keep up with the latest styles of clothing - not that she could afford them anyway.

The prosecution used her looks to support their case: that Nitti was a killer who deserved to hang. "Can you see that woman? No. She isn't a woman, she is a fiend, she is not a woman," the prosecutor Milton Smith said during the trial, according to Ugly Prey, a book on Nitti's trial written by Emilie Le Beau Lucchesi.

In reality, the evidence was circumstantial. The body that was found was never even proven to be Francesco Nitti, who had disappeared from their farm one night in July of 1922, along with the family???s savings of $300.

But Chicago hadn't been successful at convicting many women murderers. And Cook County had never sentenced a woman to death. The prosecution was hungry for a win, and Nitti became an easy target. "With Sabella Nitti they had someone who not just didn't meet the American standard of beauty for the 1920s, but she was also subject to the stigma that was affixed to women of her socioeconomic status, as well as her immigration status," Lucchesi says. (That Nitti's lawyer, Eugene Moran, was grossly incompetent didn't help. In fact, the judge warned Moran multiple times that his incompetence was harming his client.)

When Nitti's appeal process started (Moran at least got that right), a group of lawyers banded together to help Nitti and take over her and Crudele's defense. One of them was a female lawyer named Helen Cirese.

Cirese and her colleagues helped Nitti navigate appeals, providing much more competent service than Moran, who later underwent long-term care for mental illness. But perhaps just as importantly, Cirese got Nitti new clothes, dyed her hair, and taught her English. Instead of long gray hair piled on top of her head, Nitti sported a dark brown bob. Instead of hands rough from work, Nitti's nails were manicured. After this makeover, instead of calling Nitti an animal in the newspapers, Forbes called her a butterfly.

Nitti's case eventually went to the Illinois Supreme Court, which granted her and Crudele a retrial. When Nitti appeared in court to set a date for her retrial, her transformation was obvious. "It was almost as big of a blow to the state's case as the Illinois Supreme Court's decision the previous week," Lucchesi wrote in Ugly Prey. Nitti was later released on bail. With no new evidence - and with Nitti garnering public support in part based on her new look - her trial date kept being pushed back, until the charges were dropped entirely.

This makeover helped the public, and possibly judges, see her as someone familiar, someone sweet - someone who could be innocent. And other women on murderesses row took note.

Often led by the stylish Gaertner, the women in Cook County jail began talking about what to wear to trial. And the makeup cabinet available to women before they went to court began to see much more use. In her many visits to the jail, Forbes noticed this activity. In a 1927 article with the headline "Jail Can Really Do a Lot for a Woman," Forbes wrote that the women were running a "jail school," and that Nitti had been the star pupil. With a sarcastic tone, Forbes wrote that Nitti???s jail cell became a "'salon de beaute,' and she worked overtime at this business of making herself fair."

But women taking charge of their image at their own trials wasn't foolish at all. There was a perception that a beautiful woman wouldn't get convicted in Chicago, and to ignore that was to go into a trial that your life depended on at a disadvantage.

"You have to know what the rules of the game are. And it's the same thing with dressing," says Eva Hagberg Fisher, who recently wrote about her own experience dressing for legal proceedings in the New York Times article "How I Learned to Look Believable," where she described the outfits she wore after she filed a sexual harassment complaint at UC Berkeley. Hagberg Fisher says she needed to look presentable, attractive enough to be considered "harassable" - but not like she was asking for it - and come across as a "poverty stricken, beleaguered grad student" all at the same time. "The nuance of the presentation that I had to do with my clothing was beyond anything that I'd ever thought about," she says.

Dressing for court isn't just about appearing put together - though that's part of it. It's more about dressing to match the story you're telling and making yourself and your story familiar to the jury. Jury consultant Inese Neiders says that in one case a woman brought a $600 purse to court, which sounds like it would make her look respectable. But she was accused of embezzlement. "It's not as easy as it would appear on the surface to dress somebody appropriately," Neiders says.

Nitti's appearance when she was first arrested matched the prosecution's story. After her makeover, her appearance matched her own defense. It took a female lawyer, which was rare at the time, to recognize and address this issue, leading to female defendants having agency and learning to dress the parts they needed to play in court.

It would, of course, be better to do without these stereotypes and role playing at all, which disproportionately hurt poor women or women who don't fit certain beauty standards, like Nitti. But these women were dealing with the world as it is, rather than as it should be. "Very loving, very supportive friends of mine were like, 'Fuck that, Eva, the patriarchy shouldn't be appearing in your closet,'" Hagberg Fisher says. "But it's already there. It's already there."

(source: racked.com)




SOUTH DAKOTA:

State hopes to move forward with Berget capital sentence



Mental health experts and acquaintances of a man who pleaded guilty to killing a prison guard during an escape attempt will testify next week to the convicted killer's intellectual ability.

The state hopes the court next week will dismiss habeas proceedings to move forward with carrying out a capital sentence for Rodney Berget, 55, who was sentenced to death for the 2011 killing of correctional officer Ronald "R.J." Johnson during a failed prison escape attempt. A habeas appeal is used to determine if a prisoner's imprisonment is lawful. Next week's hearing could take anywhere from two days to the whole week, depending on the length of testimonies.

At a hearing in November 2017, Judge Doug Hoffmann heard attorneys debate over Berget's mental status and determined the court needed more time to decide if he was fit for the death penalty, and scheduled another competency hearing that will start Jan. 29.

Attorney General Marty Jackley talked about Rodney Berget's mental state after the hearing Monday, Nov. 20, at Lincoln County Court in Canton. Berget pleaded guilty to killing guard Ron Johnson in April 2011.

Berget's attorney Eric Schulte at the November 2017 hearing said it was his job to ensure a person with an intellectual disability was not executed, as doing so would be unconstitutional.

"If there was a 12- or 13-year-old who wanted to be executed, the court would bar that," Schulte said in November.

Berget had asked to appeal the death penalty verdict in August 2016 but later withdrew it. Schulte had disagreed with the decision and told a judge in September 2016 he wanted to check Berget's intellectual capability.

Berget last year sent a letter to the court saying he wants his death sentence to be completed because he was worried the death penalty will be repealed in South Dakota and that he didn't want to spend another 30 years behind bars.

Past IQ tests have shown "borderline" results of "average" intelligence levels for Berget. He was given an IQ test in 1971 and received a score of 70, which is considered "borderline" below average.

At the time of the escape attempt, Berget was serving 2 life sentences for attempted murder and for raping a convenience store clerk.

Berget and another prisoner, Eric Robert, killed Johnson during an escape attempt in 2011.

Johnson was working alone in an area where inmates do projects. Robert put on Johnson's uniform and tried to move a large box with Berget inside it toward the prison gate. The 2 were caught before leaving the prison. Robert was executed in 2012 after pleading guilty.

(source: Sioux Falls Argus Leader)








UTAH:

Don't lose the death penalty



I believe the death penalty should not be removed. I know the death penalty is reserved for the most evil of criminals. I choose to live in a society that holds criminals accountable. If someone kills someone, they deserve to die.

I cherish life and I choose to live among people who also cherish the value of life. A person who has chosen to comment a horrible crime, such as murder, has shown that they chose not to cherish the value of life.

Imagine if your best friend or a loved one was killed for no reason. Wouldn't you want justice?

I believe in our current judicial system and I know our current laws show our society's values. If the death penalty is taken away, I am concerned that soon, others will start wanting to take away other punishments. Removing punishments in Utah could possibly increase crime, which would eventually result in Utah being a more dangerous place.

In an earlier letter, Chris Harelson said "this would be real justice for our state." Justice isn't someone killing someone and then their punishment is simply being placed in an air-conditioned room with three hot meals a day. It is them being put to death for an evil crime. I believe removing the death penalty would appear that as a state, we have gone soft on justice.

A society's strength is heavily based on rewarding good and punishing bad. In his letter, Harelson said, "I don't want to see the innocent punished for a crime they did not commit, especially when the punishment cannot be undone."

I trust our judicial system and know they have gotten much better at doing it right the first time. I know it is expensive to put someone to death on death row, but I don't believe the answer is to not have the punishment fit the crime simply to save money. I believe for our society to remain strong criminals need to be held accountable for the crimes they commit. I recommend to never get rid of the death penalty.

Mic Jensen, Salem

(source: Leltter to the Editor, Daily Herald)








USA:

Judge rules statements 'reliable' for death penalty trial



A federal judge in Vermont has ruled that statements made by a man who allegedly participated in the 2000 killing of a Rutland woman alongside another man now facing the death penalty are reliable.

The Rutland Herald reports Judge Geoffrey Crawford ruled last week that some statements Robert Lee made to investigators before he died in prison provided information about motive. Prosecutors had appealed Crawford's original ruling to exclude Lee's testimony.

Prosecutors say Lee and Donald Fell kidnapped 53-year-old Terry King in a carjacking plot and later killed her.

Fell was tried and sentenced to death in 2005 but his conviction was overturned in 2014 for juror misconduct. Fell faces a 2nd death penalty trial.

It's uncertain if Lee's statements will be admissible if the trial reaches a penalty phase.

(source: Associated Press)
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to