[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----FLORIDA
Dec. 1 FLORIDA: Cities for Life event gives voice to those opposed to the death penalty More than 60 people shrugged off the threat of rain showers Wednesday night when they gathered outside at the Shrine at the Mission Nombre de Dios to say they wanted to see an end to the death penalty. Those who came heard from a number of speakers, including Deacon Jason Roy who ministers daily to some of the 386 men and women currently sitting on Florida's death row. Others included Darlene Farah, who has been fighting with the 4th Judicial Circuit State Attorney's Office, urging prosecutors there not to seek the death penalty in the case against the man accused of her daughter's 2013 murder. Herman Lindsey, who was sentenced to death in 2006 and exonerated in 2009, told his story, as did Deborah Jackson, whose husband, Kim Jackson, is currently sitting on death row. Through the differing perspectives offered, a number of messages emerged including the assertion that the death penalty hurts far more people than it helps. "The death penalty creates more victims," Farah told those gathered in front of the podium. She told a tale of the hurt and pain that her family has gone through after her daughter's death and the realization that, if the death penalty is secured in the case against the man accused of her murder, they will be forced to relive it for decades to come as the case goes through the appeals process. It was that appeals process that saved Lindsey, who called himself the Florida's "23rd death row survivor." His case, he said, was the 1st in the state's history to be thrown out with a unanimous decision from the Florida Supreme Court, who ruled that the evidence presented at his trial did not support a conviction. After his conviction, Lindsey told those gathered that he "lost all faith," but eventually came to the conclusion that, after his exoneration, he had to fight to end the death penalty. "God takes us through things so he can use us in a certain way," he said. The 1-hour event, co-hosted by the the Catholic Diocese of St. Augustine and Equal Justice USA, was called Cities for Life. It also featured music from the St. Augustine Chamber Singers, who sang during a candle lighting ceremony where those in attendance lit 386 candles representing each death row inmate. Cities for Life is an effort that was started 15 years ago by the Rome-based Sant'Egidio Community as a movement to end the death penalty. Since it began, more than 2,000 cities throughout the world have declared themselves against executions, according to diocese spokeswoman Kathleen Bagg. While local cities haven't signed on, Bagg said parishioners started organizing the event locally last year. That 1st event was smaller than Wednesday evening's, but, Bagg said, the anti-death penalty cause has grown in significance here since the Rev. Rene Robert, a local priest known for his opposition to the death penalty, was found shot to death in Georgia earlier this year. Robert's body was found in April in a remote area of Burke County, Georgia, days after he was reported missing by friends and family. Authorities say he was killed there by 28-year-old Steven James Murray, a man with an extensive criminal record, who, it is believed, met Robert through the priest's active ministry devoted to serving the less fortunate, including those who had spent time in prison and jail. Shortly after Murray was arrested and charged, Georgia district attorney Ashley Wright filed her intent to seek the death penalty in the case against him. That troubled some who knew of Robert's beliefs. The issue was further compounded, at least for some, when a signed and notarized document was found in Robert's file at the diocese that left virtually no doubt as to his wishes should he be killed. The Declaration of Life, as it is titled, said that if he were ever to fall victim to a violent crime, he would not want the death penalty sought against the person convicted of the crime. That discovery prompted letters from the Most Rev. Felipe J. Estevez, bishop of St. Augustine, to the editor of The Record and to Wright herself, calling for an end to the "cycle of violence" perpetuated by the use of the death penalty. Wright told The Record in a subsequent interview that such letters or even the decalration itself held no sway over her. "My oath actually prohibits me from making decisions based on what the community demands or rejects," she said. The Rev. John Gillespie, pastor at San Sebastian Church, read a portion of his friend's declaration Wednesday night. As the ceremony drew to a close and the wind began extinguishing the candles behind him, Gillespie asked those who came to consider adding their signature to a petition asking Wright to revisit her decision to seek the death penalty in the case against Murray. "I don't think he wants it," Gillespie said of Robert. "I do
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide
Dec. 1 SAUDI ARABIA: Take Action! - Man Faces Execution After Grossly Unfair Trial (Saudi Arabia: UA 270/16) A Shi'a man is at risk of execution in Saudi Arabia after he exhausted all his appeals. He was sentenced to death after a grossly unfair trial. He claims he was tortured into "confessing", but his allegation has not been properly investigated. Yussuf Ali al-Mushaikass, 42, was sentenced to death on 6 January by the Specialized Criminal Court (SCC) in Riyadh, the capital, for offences that included "armed rebellion against the ruler", "destabilizing security and stirring sedition by joining a terrorist group" and "participating in riots". Following his appeal on 1 February his legal representative learned that the sentence had been upheld by both the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. The case was later sent to the Ministry of Interior on 20 April raising fears that the sentence will be ratified by the King and Yussuf al-Mushaikhass might be executed at any time. According to the verdict the SCC seems to have based its decision on signed "confessions" which Yussuf al-Mushaikhass claims were extracted under torture and other ill-treatment. However, the court did not fully investigate such claims. During the first three months of his incommunicado detention he was held in solitary confinement and interrogated repeatedly. He told the court that he was: subjected to sleep deprivation; hung from the ceiling and beaten with a bamboo cane and electrical cable on different parts of his body; and, handcuffed and forced to lay on the ground while he was severely beaten by 4 officers from the General Directorate of Investigation (GDI). Under international law, statements elicited as a result of torture, ill-treatment or other forms of coercion must be excluded from evidence in trial proceedings. Yussuf al-Mushaikhass was arrested on 26 February 2014 in Ras Tanura City and taken to the GDI prison in Dammam, both in the Eastern Province. He was placed in solitary confinement and denied access to his legal representation throughout his interrogations. He is still detained in the same prison. TAKE ACTION Write a letter, send an email, call, fax or tweet: -- Urging the Saudi Arabian authorities to quash the conviction and death sentence against Yussuf Ali al-Mushaikass, given grave concerns about the fairness of the trial, and, if there is sufficient admissible evidence against him, to retry him in line with international fair trial standards without recourse to the death penalty; -- Calling on them to order a prompt, impartial, independent and effective investigation into his allegation of torture and other ill-treatment; -- Urging them to immediately establish an official moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty in Saudi Arabia. Contact these 2 officials by 11 January, 2017: King and Prime Minister His Majesty Salman bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud The Custodian of the two Holy Mosques Office of His Majesty the King Royal Court, Riyadh Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Fax: (via Ministry of the Interior) +966 11 403 3125 (please keep trying) Twitter: @KingSalman Salutation: Your Majesty Ambassador Abdullah bin Fisal Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia 601 New Hampshire Ave. NW Washington DC 20037 Fax: 1 202 944 5983 -- Phone: 1 202 342 3800 Email: i...@saudiembassy.net Salutation: Dear Ambassador (source: Amnesty International USA) INDIA: World is moving towards abolition of death penalty: Gopalkrishna Gandhi 140 of 195 countries have abolished the death penalty but it still looms large over the world as the nations that have retained it -- including India -- account for the bulk of the global population, former diplomat and Governor Gopalkrishna Gandhi says, urging that the punishment be removed from the statute. "The world is moving towards the abolition of death penalty... but the countries that have retained this penalty are those which have the largest populations. So, the majority of the world is still under the death penalty," Mahatma Gandhi's grandson, a former Bengal Governor, told IANS in an interview ahead of the formal release of his book, "Abolishing the Death Penalty: Why India Should Say No to Capital Punishment" (Aleph). "It is curious that the countries that have retained death penalty are those which have a certain punishment mentality like USA, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea and Pakistan. So we are in the company of China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea and Pakistan. What are our compulsions? Why are we retaining it?" "Some argue that terrorism is the reason. Death penalty does not deter murder. Does death penalty deter terror? We cannot say. But terror has continued. The bizarre thing about terrorism is that the terrorists are prepared to die in the act of terror itself. They are in a fitoor (craze), in which maut (death) is regarded as a shahadat (martyrdom). So
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide
Dec. 1 INDIA: A manifesto for life: Abolish the death penalty What makes Indians bloodthirsty in this 21st century? While most of Latin America and Europe have abolished the death penalty, India, along with the United States, Pakistan and China, find it necessary to eliminate undesirable elements in society by the death penalty and feel reassured. Gopalkrishna Gandhi, former diplomat and governor of West Bengal, makes a convincing case for life in Abolishing The Death Penalty (Published by Aleph, Pages 124, Price Rs 399). Abolishing The Death Penalty is a must-read for all those who value life as well as for every incensed Indian who wants retributive justice for terror attacks and for crimes such as murder and rape. A few weeks ago, when the Supreme Court scrapped the Kerala high court's decision awarding the death penalty for the convict in Soumya murder case, there was bedlam in Kerala. The 'civil society' was shocked at the 'apparent' miscarriage of justice. The Supreme Court's decision even provoked a former SC judge, that gadfly Markandeya Katju, to castigate the judgment in a Facebook post, and resulted in the Supreme Court, uncharacteristically, hauling him over the coals of contempt of court proceedings. The public sentiment, in this case, was for hanging the convict. Gandhi, however, points out the need for administrators and the ruling class to rise above public sentiment and adhere to certain values. He urges politicians to learn from the example of Nelson Mandela, the South African legend, and Francois Mitterrand, the former French president, who led rather than allowed themselves to be led by an inconstant public opinion in abolishing the death penalty in their own countries. Gandhi raises the question that: Would our progressive enactments on untouchability, dowry and domestic violence have stood a chance against the orchestrations of opinion by khap panchayats and their kind. He concedes that a democracy is about what people want, no doubt, but reminds us that a state that believes in a moral code is also about what its enlightened New Agers from Asoka to Ambedkar have wanted it to be. Gandhi writes that the death penalty is a symbol of a state's political strength, even as a nuclear weapon is a sign of its military strength. "We need the death penalty to strike the fear of a secular God in those who want to challenge the writ of the Indian state, and want to undermine its sovereignty, its essential being," writes Gandhi. The greatest dilemma faced by abolitionists is when they come face-to-face with those bereaved or affected by murders. Gandhi says that to try to explain the reason for abolishing the death penalty to the bereaved would not just be futile, it would be callous. What, however, makes Gandhi's argument special is the realization that the answer to revenge cannot be ecumenical or evangelical but has to be emotional. The central argument in Gandhi's passionate plea is that victims' anguish and the penalty's cruelty are independent truths - one is not less than the other. And he lists three reasons. First, murder cuts short the victim's span of life - an inherently audacious act. Second, committed by a fellow human who is part of the same chain of life, it is aberrant. And the third, it is irreversible. Gandhi is a realist and rues the fact that the death penalty (which he describes as a conglomeration of multiple murders - judicial, administrative, political and social) is not likely to be abolished in India in the foreseeable future despite it being a global trend. He, however, reminds us that the ending of the death penalty has to be accompanied by the ending of a great many ills in our criminal justice system, of which the use of the '3rd degree', the use of torture to extort what passes for confessions, prolonged imprisonment of undertrials, and a coarsening investigation system, are part. There need to be greater and vigorous efforts by the ruling class and human rights activists to bring about changes, at least, in those aspects. (source: John Cheernan, The Times of India) PAKISTAN: For killing family: Court awards death penalty to man A court in Gilgit on Wednesday handed down the death penalty to a man who had killed his wife and 2 kids by pushing them into the river. The sentence was pronounced by Justice Haq Nawaz and Justice Wazir Shakil of Gilgit-Baltistan's Chief Court where the killer, Ibrahim, had appealed against the decision of a lower court. "When the act of murder is established, its penalty is death," observed the judges. On July 29, 2010, Ibrahim pushed his 30-year-old wife Parveen, his 6-year-old son and 8-month old daughter into the river. He then lodged an FIR with the Gilgit police, claiming that his family had gone missing. Police discovered that it was Ibrahim who had pushed them into the river, something which he confessed to later. Subsequently, a
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLA., NEB., CALIF., WASH.
Dec. 1 OKLAHOMA: Oklahoma inmate exhausts appeals; executions still on hold 13 Oklahoma inmates are now eligible for execution dates after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of a man convicted in 1999 double slaying. But executions remain on hold in the state as officials rework Oklahoma's death penalty protocol, and there's no indication on when they may resume. According to The Oklahoman, inmate James Chandler Ryder became the 13th inmate eligible for execution after the nation's highest court declined Monday to review his appeal. Ryder was sentenced to death for the killings of Daisy Hallum and her adult son, Sam Hallum, in Pittsburg County. Oklahoma last executed an inmate in January 2015, and an autopsy showed that officials used a drug in that lethal injection that wasn't part of the state's execution protocol. (source: Associated Press) NEBRASKA: Nebraska Finds New Route to Death Drugs State voters having approved a ballot measure restoring capital punishment, Nebraska on Monday announced the process it will use to change its policies and procure the drugs it will use to execute its 10 inmates on death row. "Nebraskans were decisive in their choice to maintain the death penalty and it is now our duty as elected officials to carry it out," Gov. Pete Ricketts said in a statement. "These proposed changes in protocol balance appropriate inmate notification with the flexibility to utilize various constitutionally approved drugs, so political maneuvers at the federal level can???t circumvent the will of the people," said Ricketts, a 1st-term Republican. Previous procedures required 3 drugs - sodium thiopental, pancuronium bromide and potassium chloride - to be administered in precise order and dosage. The new protocol will remove any restrictions on what drugs can be used for lethal injection, provided that "the substance or substances can be intravenously injected in a quantity sufficient to cause death without the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain," Department of Correctional Services Director Scott Frakes said in a statement. Prison officials must notify the condemned inmate of the drugs to be used at least 60 days before an execution warrant is issued by the Nebraska Supreme Court. Officials will not be required to publicize who manufactured the lethal drugs, an important factor, domestic pharmaceutical firms have refused to produce some lethal injection drugs, and the Food and Drug Administration has banned the importation of some lethal drugs. Under the revised protocol, "substances may be directly purchased or obtained through the department pharmacy or obtained through any other appropriate source." The director of Correctional Services will have the discretion to keep records confidential if they identify the source of lethal injection drugs. This lack of transparency promises to be a sticking point for opponents of the death penalty, and the subject of future litigation. "The ACLU of Nebraska stands ready to fight against any effort to cloak Nebraska's broken death penalty in secrecy," ACLU of Nebraska executive director Danielle Conrad said in a statement. "Regardless of how people feel about the death penalty we should all agree that Nebraskans value government transparency and accountability in all matters. In fact, inscribed right on our state Capitol is 'the salvation of the state is the watchfulness of the citizens.' As citizens, we can't complete that duty if the government only offers us selective information, editing out all the ugly parts." The state has had a tumultuous recent history with the death penalty. Nebraska last executed a man in 1997, when Robert Williams went to the electric chair. That method of execution was declared unconstitutional by the Nebraska Supreme Court in 2008. The state changed to lethal injection by legislative action a year later, only to see 2 of the 3 necessary drugs expire before they could be used. In 2015, the issue was a persistent thorn in the side of Gov. Ricketts, who watched as the Legislature voted to abolish capital punishment, then overrode his veto a week later. Ricketts has repeatedly sought to obtain the 3-drug cocktail, but one of the drugs is no longer produced in the United States. Ricketts and corrections officials contracted with a small pharmaceutical broker in India to import the drug, despite objections from the ACLU and warnings from the FDA that it is illegal to import sodium thiopental. The FDA subsequently blocked shipment of the $54,400 order from India, as it said it would. Undeterred, Ricketts was the main financier of the pro death penalty group Nebraskans for the Death Penalty, donating more than $300,000 of his own money, to put an initiative on the Nov. 8 ballot that restored capital punishment in the state. Referendum 426 was approved with 60 % of the votes, setting the stage for the latest
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, DEL., GA., FLA.
Dec. 1
TEXAS:
Will the Supreme Court Stop Texas from Executing the Intellectually Disabled?
Since the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in the United States, in
1976, Texas has been responsible for more than 1/3 of the country's executions
- 538 out of 1440. The most egregious reason is the state's unique and grudging
approach in cases where the defendant claims intellectual disability.
In 2002, in Atkins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court reached the decision that, no
matter how heinous the crime, an intellectually disabled person cannot be
sentenced to death. Disabilities of reasoning, judgment, and control of
impulses, the Court said, do not allow a person to "act with the level of moral
culpability that characterizes the most serious adult criminal conduct."
Because offenders with intellectual disabilities are less blameworthy, the
Court said, imposing the death penalty contributes neither to deterrence of
capital crimes nor to retribution for them, and so it causes "purposeless and
needless" pain and is cruel and unusual punishment.
The Court recognized that there was "serious disagreement" about which
offenders were intellectually disabled. "Not all people who claim to be
mentally retarded will be so impaired as to fall within the range of mentally
retarded offenders about whom there is a national consensus," the majority
opinion said. ("Intellectual disability" has replaced "mental retardation" as
the favored term.) The Court anticipated a variety of approaches to enforcing
its prohibition, and left to the states "the task of developing appropriate
ways to enforce the constitutional restriction upon its execution of
sentences."
Most states with the death penalty rely on a combination of intelligence
testing and clinical assessment to confirm that a defendant has severe
intellectual disabilities. In 2004, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the
state's highest criminal court, created its own definition of intellectual
disability, in a case called Ex Parte Jose Garcia Briseno. In the Briseno
opinion, the C.C.A. said that reliance on clinical testing is "exceedingly
subjective." The court's responsibility, it said, was "to define that level and
degree of mental retardation at which a consensus of Texas citizens would agree
that a person should be exempted from the death penalty." The court decided it
was possible to be intellectually disabled according to medical and scientific
standards, which apply to no more than three per cent of Americans, yet not
disabled enough to be exempt from execution in Texas.
The Texas approach to intellectual disability is so different from national
standards that, according to the American Bar Association, the state has
regularly sentenced to death "defendants with intellectual disabilities whom
other jurisdictions almost certainly would have recognized as exempt." Jordan
Steiker, a professor at the University of Texas Law School, and Richard Burr,
the lawyer who represented Jose Briseno before the C.C.A., estimate that Texas
has executed 30 to 40 people with strong claims of intellectual disability, and
that between 30 and 40 of the 242 people on the state's death row have
similarly strong claims to exemption. This week in the Washington Post, Steiker
and his sister, Carol Steiker, a professor at Harvard Law School, wrote that
Texas "focuses on questions that no medical professional would deem appropriate
in diagnosing intellectual disability, such as whether an offender's family and
friends thought he had intellectual disability." They continued, "Instead of
relying on the same approach to intellectual disability that Texas uses in
every other context (such as placement in special education or eligibility for
disability benefits), the court sought to redefine the condition in the capital
context so that only offenders who meet crude stereotypes about intellectual
disability are shielded from execution."
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Moore v. Texas, about
whether the state is violating the Constitution by prohibiting judges from
using current medical standards in deciding whether a defendant, Bobby James
Moore, is exempt from capital punishment. Moore, now 57, has been on death row
for 37 years for his part in a failed supermarket robbery in Houston, in which
he shot and killed a sales associate. (Moore has said the shooting was
accidental.)
In 1995, a federal district court granted Moore a new sentencing hearing after
the court found that his lawyers had "grossly mishandled the representation of
Moore and violated their oath as members of the bar with astonishing frequency"
by, among other ways, failing to present any mitigating evidence, including of
the defendant's impaired mental development and functioning. In 2001, he was
sentenced to death again, after a jury determined that there was not sufficient
mitigating evidence to warrant a sentence of life
