[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, PENN., GA., FLA.
March 3 TEXAS: Justice for Louis Castro Perez! The 5th Circuit Court has released an opinion denying relief to innocent Texas death row prisoner Louis Castro Perez. Many folks will be familiar with the case through Louis' sister, Delia Perez Meyer, who sits on the board of the Campaign to End the Death Penalty. Delia has been a tireless advocate for her brother and all death row prisoners. She has travelled the world in the fight to win death penalty abolition. For some time, Louis has been fighting to win DNA testing of several items found at the crime scene that contain the DNA of an unknown person, including on a bloody towel wrapped around a knife found at the crime scene! For more facts about the physical evidence and issue in this case please check out: http://nodeathpenalty.org/get-the-facts/justice-louis-castro-perez-test-all-dna The latest appeal for Louis was based on an issue of ineffective assistance of counsel. The 5th Circuit had previously rendered a judgement denying Louis relief. His lawyer then had 30 days to respond, however, she failed to respond to a 30 day deadline for filing a new motion with the district court. In fact this attorney received notification of the deadline and without alerting Louis or the other consulting attorney on the case, she decided on her own not to respond to the motion, effectively abandoning her client. In March of 2012, after being made aware of the error, the court granted a motion to allow Louis to reenter the appeal that his lawyer should have made. However, late last week the 5th Circuit vacated that order, and has decided to let the original judgement of denial of relief stand. We will continue to fight for justice for Louis Castro Perez and against any execution date! The full judgement from the 5th Circuit can be read here: http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions%5Cpub%5C13/13-70002-CV0.pdf (source: CEDP) *** Prosecutors: Man Expresses No Remorse For Killing Austin Cop Prosecutors who secured a death penalty conviction of a 26-year-old man in the slaying of an Austin police office told jurors time and again that the killer expressed no remorse for the shooting. Travis County jurors were reminded during the capital murder trial and the penalty phase that Brandon Daniel was not sorry for the death of officer Jaime Padron. Jurors were told he remained a danger to others. Witnesses to the shooting at an Austin Wal-Mart testified that Daniel at one point said, I killed a cop, and laughed. The jury after 8 hours of deliberation condemned Daniel to death Friday for the April 2012 killing of Padron. The jury had the option of sentencing Daniel to life imprisonment without parole. Austin police Chief Art Acevedo was in court Friday along with a large contingent of law enforcement officers. The Austin American-Statesman reports the prosecution's portrayal of Daniel as a calculating, remorseless killer was answered by the defense's claim that he's a brilliant computer scientist with a history of depression and suicidal tendencies. Defense attorney Russell Hunt Jr. told jurors that Daniel was under the influence of the anti-anxiety drug Xanax when Padron was shot, and said his mental state had been deteriorating. Hunt argued that with proper medication and a structured environment Daniel could contribute to society. We tried to bring you the answer as to why such a young person with a bright future fell so quickly, Hunt said. Contrary to the prosecution's argument, Daniel had told a former girlfriend in a letter that he was unbelievably remorseful for what he did to Padron and his family, the defense team said. Employees of the Wal-Mart store called police after seeing Daniel stumble through the aisles. Daniel ran when Padron approached him. Padron tackled him and the 2 struggled before Daniel pulled a handgun and shot Padron at close range. Jurors took only an hour Feb. 21 to convict Daniel of the killing. (source: Associated Press) PENNSYLVANIA: Death takes a holiday 2 Philadelphia Common Pleas Court juries last week passed on imposing the death penalty in 2 homicide trials. On Friday, a jury sentenced Fernando Real, 31, to life in prison without chance of parole after finding him guilty of 2 counts of 1st-degree murder for a double slaying in 2002 in Frankford. Real was convicted of the Sept. 9 shootings of Byron Story and Marcus Herbert, both 18, in what police called a drug-related robbery-murder. Both teens were shot about 4:30 a.m. outside Herbert's home in the 5200 block of Hawthorne Street. Story was shot in the head and died on the sidewalk; Herbert was shot twice in the back and died 13 months later. Judge Glenn B. Bronson ordered mental health and presentence reports and set Real's formal sentencing for April 25. Assistant District Attorney Gail Fairman prosecuted the case; defense attorney Gerald A. Stein handled the trial
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLA., ARIZ., USA
March 3 OKLAHOMA: U.S. Supreme Court upholds new trial ruling for Oklahoma death row inmate The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday upheld a federal appeals court ruling granting a new trial to a man who was sentenced to death for killing a Tulsa woman in 1997. Without comment, the high court rejected an appeal from Oklahoma, which wanted the justices to review the decision by the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That court ruled last year that jurors in the murder trial of Sterling B. Williams should have been allowed to consider a 2nd-degree murder verdict. Williams was convicted of 1st-degree murder for the stabbing death of LeAnna Hand at her Tulsa home. The appeals court said the Tulsa County judge should have considered evidence that Williams didn't go to Hand's home intending to kill her. The death penalty can not be imposed for 2nd-degree murder convictions. (source: The Oklahoman) ARIZONAfemale may face death sentence Mother who 'suffocated daughter, 13, and attempted to poison 3 other children by force-feeding them narcotic drugs' on Christmas Day may face death penalty An Arizona mother accused of killing her daughter and of trying to poison her 2 other children on Christmas Day could face the death penalty. A Pinal County Superior Court judge has approved postponing the deadline for the Pinal County Attorney's Office to file a seeking a death sentence against Connie Villa, The Casa Grande Dispatch reports. According to court documents, the deadline was changed earlier this month from March 10 to May 9. Deputy Pinal County Attorney Patrick Gard filed motions Feb. 5 seeking interviews with Connie Villa's mother and brother as material witnesses. Prosecutors say 34-year-old Villa is charged with 1 count of 1st-degree murder in the death of her 13-year-old daughter and 4 counts of attempted murder of her 3 younger children and of her ex-husband. Police say Villa tried to force her kids aged 13, 8, 5 and 3 to swallow prescription narcotics. Adam Villa first called police to report that his crazed ex-wife Connie had attacked and stabbed him repeatedly in the torso after he went to pick up his children from her Casa Grande home. Mr. Villa arrived after he was lured there by his ex-wife, AZcentral.com reports. He called authorities as he drove himself to the hospital. Police forced themselves into the home and found teenaged Ania Rael in the bathroom, suffocated to death. Left behind were his 3 children, the younger surviving children, who were at their mother's side as she held a knife to her chest and bled from what looked to be self-inflicted stab wounds to her upper torso. The children appeared unharmed. Tests later discovered traces of opiates in each of their systems. 2 of Villa's children told cops their mother gave them doses of her prescription medicine, the Dispatch reports, but that Ania Rael refused to take the medicine. Police say they found a suicide note from Villa, addressed to her mother Anita Salazar. Documents say the note 'stated words to the effect that Villa wanted to die and take her children with her.' Police also reportedly found prescription drug bottles and an open wine bottle. Connie Villa was admitted to a Pheonix-area hospital, where she was treated for the stab wounds. The Dispatch reports that she is in the Pinal County Jail and is not allowed to post bond for release. Meanwhile, Ania Rael's shocked family are left to wonder how and if a mother could commit such an atrocity and released this statement: 'On behalf of Michael Macias, Ania's father, Vera Macias, Ania's grandmother and extended family, we request that the focus of this tragedy be a celebration of our precious Ania's life. 'She was a gentle, kind and beautiful spirit who was taken from us much too soon. Michael and his family are heartbroken. Ania was always smiling. She loved her brothers and sisters. She enjoyed spending time with her father and sister Gaby. 'We are writing this statement in hopes that the media and other outlets will allow Michael and our family to grieve peacefully. We thank everyone for the outpouring of support for our family. We appreciate your prayers and positive thoughts. We pray that justice will be served.' (source: Daily Mail) USA: Use of the death penalty being reviewed by Supreme Court The divide between people who are in favor of the death penalty and those who want it declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court may have taken a turn, in favor of those who want it abolished. The Supreme Court of the United States is reviewing a case as to whether a criminal on death row is too intellectually challenged to be executed, in other words, those who have a lower IQ, could not be punished by the Eighth Amendment under its cruel and unusual punishment clause. In recent years this argument has gained traction in the courts and in our society. And that's a
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide
March 3 THE MALDIVES: Comment: The politics of the death penalty in the Maldives In a presidential campaign rally in 2008, former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom dismissed the issue of death penalty: Maldivians won't accept it. The international community no longer accepts it...this can't be done in the Maldives. 5 years on, and such a statement from a major politician seems unthinkable. In fact, in 2012, in the aftermath of the murder of Afrasheem Ali, Gayoom stated: Death penalty is an option. Not mainly a religious or human rights issue Coming from a secular liberal background, a person may conveniently blame the changing nature of this issue to a rise in 'fundamentalist Islam', Islamism, or Salafi puritanism. Without denying the reality of re-Islamisation, this explanation comes partly from a fundamental fear of Islamism by secular liberals. The death penalty goes deeper than religion or liberal human rights. While none in this debate claim that criminals should be set free, in 2008 Gayoom eloquently argued that forgiveness is more preferred in Islam. The Islamist side has been largely silent on the emphasis of mercy in Islam, thus making it difficult to limit the Islamist calls for death penalty to religion. Even during President Amin's time, the execution of the death penalty was not particularly meant to fulfill a religious obligation by a religious state. Amin's constitution - based on Ceylon's constitution granting dominion status - was one of the most secular and authoritarian of all Maldivian constitutions. Back then, Ibrahim Shihab claimed: I could not find in the Republican Constitution any concern for Islamic principles and Divehi conventions'. Amin himself was accused of being ladini (irreligious). Now take human rights. The right to life is the main basis for rejecting capital punishment under mainstream liberal conception of human rights. Yet, the death penalty has no equal juridical, advocacy, or enforcement status to other basic rights like freedom of religion, which has been completely denied in the Maldives. In reality, for both sides, death penalty is about the very identity, the very nature of the state. It is indeed one test case for the 'Islamist state' - or the 'secular state', depending on which side one stands in the debate. The death penalty is about this mutual fear of the perceived influence and control by one side over the other with regards to the nature of the Maldivian state. A matter of secular yet illiberal politics While the death penalty may be a life-and-death issue about the nature of the state for liberals and the Islamists, the real actors and the real issues in this debate are neither religious nor liberal - though Islamism and human rights now feed into the background context of this issue. The real actors who will determine the issue one way or the other are the secular (yet illiberal) politicians. The real issue is instrumentalisation of religion and Islamo-nationalist sentiments of the people for political gain by ordinary politicians. This has created a vicious cycle in which every politician/party has a high premium to show their religious or Islamo-nationalist credentials, and discount the opponents' credentials. The result is what I call the 'instrumentalist dilemma' - the situation where a person (or a group) individually or privately holds a position/belief that they collectively or publically can't hold. The instrumentalist dilemma is at play not only in the death penalty, but also in religion-based discrimination such as citizenship restriction. Gayoom's apparent turnaround or Foreign Minister Dunya Gayoom's position seems to be none other than this dilemma. More clearly, the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) chairperson's recent support for it, or the MDP's retraction of a statement rebuking the death penalty in 2012 - is this dilemma in action. Stop the instrumentalist madness The upshot of these instrumentalist dialectics is the irrational, out-of-hand outcome that the collective don't necessarily want as individuals. If anything will see the death penalty implemented, it's such secular, illiberal instrumentalist madness - not Islamism, Salafi puritanism, or religious fundamentalism. But an outcome of madness neither serves religion nor human rights. And, much less does it address the issue of murder. As for religion, irrespective of the question whether or not capital punishment is a religious obligation, without personal pious intention (niyah) the act doesn't become a religious act. As for human rights, saying no to capital punishment is saying yes to the right to life. As for murder reduction, a 2009 survey of criminologists - people who know the stuff about crimes and crime reduction - revealed that an overwhelming 88% believed death penalty was not a deterrent to murder. Similarly, murder rates have remained consistently lower in non-death
