[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----VT., DEL., GA., FLA., ALA.
Dec. 10 VERMONT: Juror whose conduct upset death penalty case loses state job The Vermont Supreme Court has upheld the firing of a state Transportation Agency official whom the state Supreme Court accused of "serious misconduct" as a juror in a death-penalty trial. The high court on Friday ruled John Lepore's dismissal as an environmental biologist with the state agency was proper. Court documents say Lepore, of Northfield, secretly traveled to a crime scene in Rutland during the 2005 federal death penalty trial of Donald Fell in the abduction and killing of Terri King, 53, of North Clarendon, in November of 2000. The documents say he later lied under oath about his actions and was dishonest with officials at the Transportation Agency. The Burlington Free Press reports (http://bfpne.ws/2gm2euv ) the court said his actions brought discredit to the state. Lepore could not be reached (source: Associated Press) DELAWARE: Delaware quietly disbands death row As Delaware's Supreme Court weighs whether 12 men sentenced to death should be spared from execution, prison officials have quietly disbanded the state's death row and moved its former occupants to other housing. Prison officials say the move, which occurred in August, resulted in former death row inmates having 5 times more recreational time than they had before, and in some cases, sharing cells with other inmates who are not facing the death penalty. "It's gone well," Department of Corrections Commissioner Robert Coupe told The Associated Press this week. "Some of the inmates initially preferred not to interact ... but we continued to work with them through our behavioral health folks and eventually all of them were moved out of what was formerly known as death row." The former death row space is now being used as general maximum security housing. Officials said the move comes amid evolving standards for treatment of inmates in restrictive housing settings and will help the DOC keep its American Correctional Association accreditation. In an August revision of its standards, the ACA said inmates in extended restrictive housing should have access to educational services, commissary services, library services, social services, behavioral health and treatment services, religious guidance and recreational programs. "Although services and programs cannot be identical to those provided to the general population, there should be no major differences for reasons other than danger to life, health, or safety," the ACA said. Delaware officials said they were already working on a revision to restrictive housing standards when the ACA issued its guidance. "It was already in the works," said DOC spokeswoman Jayme Gravell. But Coupe said the change was not related to a recent settlement in a federal lawsuit by the Community Legal Aid Society alleging that mentally ill inmates in Delaware have been subjected to solitary confinement without proper evaluation, monitoring and treatment. Under the settlement, the Department of Correction agreed to limit the length of time inmates spend in disciplinary housing and increase the amount of unstructured recreation time available to inmates in certain maximum security settings. Inmates in restrictive housing, formerly known as solitary confinement, traditionally have been kept in their cells for up to 72 hours at a time, with only three hours outside their cells each week for exercise and showers. Officials said inmates sentenced to death will now be offered 17.5 hours of unstructured recreational time per week. "They definitely have more freedom than they would in the SHU," Coupe said, referring to the secure housing unit at the maximum security prison in Smyrna. Coupe said DOC officials believe the change is "humane" and beneficial to both the inmates and the institution. Officials said 12 of the former death row inmates are now in "medium housing," where nine of them are sharing cells with other inmates who have not been sentenced to death. One former death row inmate, whom prison officials would not identify, remains in a single cell in the secure housing unit. Among the former death row inmates sharing a cell is Otis Phillips, a gang member who was sentenced to death after a 2012 soccer tournament shooting that left three people dead, including the tournament organizer and a 16-year-old player. The state Supreme Court heard arguments earlier this week in an appeal by Phillips challenging his conviction. In response to Phillips' appeal, prosecutors acknowledged that because his conviction is on direct appeal and not considered final, he is covered under a Delaware Supreme Court ruling declaring Delaware's death penalty unconstitutional. In August, a majority of Delaware justices concluded that Delaware's law was unconstitutional because it allowed a judge to sentence a person to death independently of a jury's recom
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----ARK., NEV., ID., USA
Dec. 10 ARKANSAS: Torres files appeal of death sentence A notice of appeal has been filed on behalf of the Bella Vista father who was sentenced to death for killing his 6-year-old son. Mauricio Alejandro Torres, 45, was found guilty of capital murder and 1st-degree battery. A jury recommended last month that Torres die by lethal injection, and Benton County Circuit Judge Brad Karren sentenced Torres to death. Torres is being held on death row at Varner Supermax in Gould. Maurice Isaiah Torres, 6, died March 30, 2015, at a Bella Vista hospital. A medical examiner said the boy's death was caused by a bacterial infection as a result of being sodomized with a stick. The medical examiner also said chronic child abuse contributed to the child's death. Mauricio Torres' wife, Cathy, also is charged with capital murder and 1st-degree battery. Prosecutors have said they plan to seek the death penalty against her as well. Her trial is set for May. She has pleaded innocent to the charges and is being held without bail. (source: NWA Demcrat-Gazette) NEVADA: Prosecutors plan to seek death penalty against suspect in 3 homicides Clark County prosecutors intend to seek the death penalty against a suspect in three homicides who escaped from North Las Vegas police custody for several days in September. A notice of intent to seek the death penalty against Alonso Perez was filed Friday. Perez, 25, is scheduled to be arraigned Wednesday on charges related to grand larceny of an automobile, robbery with a deadly weapon, grand larceny, possession of a stolen credit card, conspiracy to committ robbery. But that's not the only case he's facing. He is also scheduled to appear in court on multiple dates in January for separate cases, including 2 charges of murder with a deadly weapon and 2 charges of attempted murder. Perez was first arrested in September in connection with the fatal shooting of Mohammed Robinson, 31, just before midnight Aug. 27. While waiting to be interviewed at the North Las Vegas police detective bureau Sept. 2, Perez managed to escape, snapping his handcuffs in half, standing on a chair, shifting a ceiling tile and hoisting himself up. Once in the ceiling, he dropped to the floor in a police hallway, which happened to be empty, then bolted for the door. Outside, about 100 yards away, he happened upon an empty work truck, which was running with the keys in the ignition and the air conditioning blasting to cool the truck down. Perez drove away but was recaptured Sept. 6. Police have said they also believe that about three hours after Robinson was killed late Aug. 27, Perez was involved in the Aug. 28 fatal shooting of Jeffrey Johnson, 50, according to an arrest report. That shooting occurred on the corner of Imperial Avenue and Lamont Street, near Charleston and Nellis boulevards. At least 1 of the casings collected at the scene of Johnson's shooting matched casings found in Robinson's shooting, a police report said. The casings also were linked to the fatal shooting of Candelario Duran, 37, near Covey Lane and Irwin Avenue on Aug. 20 and a separate battery with a deadly weapon case on Aug. 15 (source: Las Vegas Review-Journal) IDAHO: Judge: Death penalty decision premature A judge ruled Friday that challenging the use of the death penalty in the case of the man accused of murdering Coeur d'Alene Police Sgt. Greg Moore is more appropriately done after a successful conviction. Jonathan Renfro, the 26-year-old Rathdrum resident accused of killing Moore in a Coeur d'Alene neighborhood on May 5, 2015, faces the death penalty if found guilty. Renfro's attorneys filed a motion asking Kootenai County District Court Judge Lansing Haynes to reconsider a previous decision denying the preclusion of the death penalty because of ineffective legal representation. "It's an evolving area of law but one most appropriately dealt with in a post-conviction setting," Haynes said of the use of the death penalty. The motion up for reconsideration was the 7th attempt by public defenders to take the death penalty off the table. Kootenai County Public Defender Linda Paine asked Haynes to consider there are 3 other active death penalty cases in Idaho now. There is also, Paine added, the potential for 2 more death penalty cases in Kootenai County since charges of 1st degree murder have been filed. The Kootenai County Prosecutor's Office has not announced if it intends to seek the death penalty in either case. Paine said the motion was filed to argue that there is a presumption of ineffective representation because of the case load and inadequate funding for both the Kootenai County Public Defenders Office and public defense offices throughout the state. In a brief reply to Paine's argument, Kootenai County Deputy Prosecutor David Robbins told Haynes that, although there are other death penalty cases in Idaho and up to 2 mor
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide
Dec. 10 SINGAPORE: Something's not right when courts call defending poor, weak and marginalised an abuse of process in capital case In referring to The Straits Times article 'Stopping abuse of court process', which explained how Singapore's top court is trying to deal with last-minute applications from death-row convicts who try to escape the gallows, lawyer Eugene Thuraisingam said "something's not right when our courts call defending the poor, weak and marginalised, an abuse of process in a capital case merely because a serious point of law, involving a new piece of legislation, could (in their view) have been argued earlier." Last week, the Court of Appeal comprising Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon and Judges of Appeal Chao Hick Tin and Andrew Phang pointed out that the recent applications before it involving capital drug offenders failed to satisfy the necessary requirements under Section 33B of the Misuse of Drugs Act. The court now requires lawyers who file such last-minute applications to explain why they could not raise the arguments during earlier appeals. Writing in his Facebook about the notice from the Court, Mr Thuraisingam said: "this provision flies in the face of established common law that the executive cannot decide the punishment in each individual offenders' case. It is for the judiciary to do so. This is called separation of powers, which is trite in any democracy. This section violates that rule." Just in case you are not able to read the post, this is what Mr Thuraisingam said. -- Section 33B of the Misuse of drugs Act is a new section which came into force in 2013. It allows for the Public Prosecutor (the executive) to decide in an individual's case, whether the individual lives or dies. This provision flies in the face of established common law that the executive cannot decide the punishment in each individual offenders' case. It is for the judiciary to do so. This is called separation of powers, which is trite in any democracy. This section violates that rule. Being a new section, it takes time for lawyers to come to terms with the section and formulate serious arguments. Unfortunately, our Courts have held that notwithstanding the fact that four men faced the ultimate penalty for being innocent couriers, it is an abuse of process and a waste of judicial time to bring what is at the very least a controversial law for clarification before them, simply because it had already been in existence for 2 years, and could have been argued earlier. Something is not right when our courts call defending the poor, weak and marginalised, an abuse of process in a capital case merely because a serious point of law, involving a new piece of legislation, could (in their view) have been argued earlier. (source: The Independent) PHILIPPINES: UN warns: PH will violate pact if it restores death penalty The United Nations (UN) High Commissioner for Human Rights warned the Philippines that it will violate an international agreement if its government allowed the reimposition of death penalty in the country. Early this week, the death penalty bill hurdled the committee level in the House of Representatives. In an open letter addressed to Senate President Aquilino "Koko" Pimentel III and House of Representatives Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, UN Commissioner Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein expressed his concerns over the pending measure to restore capital punishment in the Philippines. "The Philippines would violate its obligations under international human rights law if it reintroduced the death penalty, I appeal to you and all members of Congress to uphold the international human rights obligations of the Philippines and maintain the abolition of the death penalty," Al Hussein said in his letter. Al Hussein also reminded the Philippines that it has signed the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in 2007, which "guarantees that no one can be executed within its jurisdiction." "International law does not permit a State that has ratified or acceded to the Second Optional Protocol to denounce it or withdraw from it," he added. At the same time, Al Hussein noted that the Philippines passed the Republic Act 9346 or "An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines" under the administration of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in 2006. In his letter, Al Hussein also acknowledged the Philippines' intensified campaign against illegal drugs. However, he stressed that ICCPR "considers that the use of the death penalty for drug crimes is incompatible under international law." The death penalty bill, which will be deliberated next at the Senate committee, listed the use and trade of illegal drugs as some of the heinous crimes liable for capital punishment. "The most effective manner of addressing drug-related offences is through strengthening the rule
