[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide
July 24 CHINA: China's top court vows death penalty to child sex offenders of serious cases China's Supreme People's Court (SPC) announced Wednesday that criminals committing sexual assault against children that are "extremely vile in nature" and cause "extremely severe consequences" will be sentenced to death with no leniency. The SPC published 4 typical cases concerning sex offenses against children, including the case of Wei Minghui who was recently executed for raping and killing a young girl. The 3 criminals involved in the other 3 cases have been given heavy punishments. The crimes of sexual assault against children gravely damage the physical and mental health of children and seriously violate social ethics and morals, to which the SPC has always maintained a hard-line stance of zero tolerance, the SPC said. Child sex offenders will be sentenced to heavier punishments within the limits of the prescribed punishments, according to the SPC. Courts across the country concluded 8,332 cases of sex offenses against children from 2017 to June 2019, according to the SPC, adding that recent years have seen an increasing number of such cases due to the public's strengthened awareness of child protection and reporting cases immediately. The Intermediate People's Court of Linyi in Shandong Province on Wednesday morning executed He Long, a criminal who raped young girls under the age of 14 and forced them into prostitution, upon verification and approval of the SPC. (source: xinhuanet.com) SRI LANKA: IBAHRI voices concern over potential reinstatement of the death penalty in Sri Lanka The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) has sent an open letter to the President of the Democratic Republic of Sri Lanka, Maithripala Sirisena, to express serious distress over the intention to reinstate the death penalty and seek the execution of four individuals currently on death row for drug-related offences. Any execution would contravene a moratorium on the death penalty in Sri Lanka that has been maintained since 1976. IBAHRI Co-Chair, the Hon Michael Kirby AC CMG, commented, ‘I am deeply saddened by President Sirisena’s decision to reverse on the 43-year long moratorium on the death penalty upheld by previous office-holders despite ample empirical evidence that the imposition of capital punishment has no deterrent effect on drug offenders. To proceed with the execution of those four individuals would stand in direct contravention with Sri Lanka’s international commitments under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The imposition of the death penalty in cases other than those arising from the most serious of crimes is a violation of Article 6 (2) of the ICCPR, and as the United Nations Human Rights Committee has made clear, drug offences do not meet this threshold.’ Anne Ramberg Dr jur hc, IBAHRI Co-Chair, stated, ‘The death penalty constitutes a cruel, inhumane and degrading form of punishment, and it is regrettable that the Sri Lankan President has chosen to undermine the country’s long-standing commitment towards an abolitionist stance. I am also deeply troubled by the apparent arbitrariness in choosing the 4 individuals concerned, as reviving the death penalty would deprive them of their right to life and to equality before the law as guaranteed by the Constitution and in international law. The respect for both rights is a vital prerequisite for the maintenance of the rule of law in Sri Lanka – a value that should be specially protected by politicians in a country that has only recently emerged from internal conflict.’ The IBAHRI urges the President of Sri Lanka to refrain from reinstating the death penalty and, instead, to continue the long-standing moratorium and commute the penalties to a life sentence, thereby strengthening Sri Lanka’s commitment to the protection and fulfilment of all human rights, including the right to life and equality before the law. (source: colombogazette.com) INDIA: Death Penalty for Rape of Kids is No Solution Introducing the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences ,POCSO (Amendment) Bill, 2019 in Rajya Sabha yesterday Smriti Irani the Minister for Women and Child Development initiated a process that had been left unfinished in the last Parliament. This Bill had been introduced in the 16th Lok Sabha but lapsed when its term got over.With an increasing number of cases being reported recently the Union Cabinet has now approved amendments to POCSO allowing death penalty for all cases of 'aggravated penetrative sexual assault' against children. But high-lighting this aspect in every press release shows that the government is only pandering to the populist mood to satisfy public anger on a very sensitive issue. But when this was introduced initially as well child rights activists had called it counter productive. They arg
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, FLA., OHIO, ILL., KY., MO., WYO., ORE., USA
July 24 TEXASdeath row inmate, foreign national, dies Mexican national on Texas death row dies of cardiac arrest After more than 2 decades on Texas death row, a Mexican national convicted of killing 3 teens in El Paso died in bed early Sunday of cardiac arrest, a prison spokesman confirmed. Officials found 49-year-old Ignacio “Nacho” Gomez in his cell on the Polunsky Unit around 5:37 a.m. and took him to a Livingston hospital, where he was pronounced dead just over an hour later. The 49-year-old had long suffered from mental illness, and spent much of his time behind bars in the prison psychiatric ward. According to his lawyer, he wasn’t competent to be executed. (source: Houston Chronicle) Exonerated death row inmate fulfills mission 14 years ago, I reviewed the innocence claim of Texas death row inmate Anthony Graves for the Judicial Process Commission in Rochester. I concluded that Graves’ claim was meritorious. I wrote about his case in “Justicia,” JPC’s newsletter. Graves also asked me to help get his case more national attention. “I want this case of injustice exposed on a national stage to bring attention to the serious flaws with the death penalty,” he said. “I feel very strongly that this is why I’ve been chosen to experience such injustice.” On March 8, 2006, Graves wrote to me again: “I don’t know if you’ve heard, but the courts have overturned my conviction, and ordered the state to retry me or turn me loose. I’m totally speechless for the past several days. I’ve never prepared myself for a favorable ruling because I’ve been so used to receiving negative news. But they have finally gotten it right. And the opinion they’ve written speaks volumes about the prosecution’s conduct. I can’t believe it. My attorney said that the opinion is pretty much air tight and there’s no way the courts would ever accept an appeal from the state to review it. This is so mind boggling! It’s like a dream that I’m afraid to wake up to.” On an August night in 1992, in Somerville, Texas, six people including 5 children were beaten, stabbed, shot and left to die in a burning house. One of the children was the son of Robert Earl Carter. Four days earlier, Carter learned the child’s mother had filed a patrimony suit against him. The police investigation focused on Carter after he attended the victims’ funerals with bandages on his ears, face and hand, all concealing burns. After failing a polygraph test, Carter admitted guilt. Not wanting to implicate his wife — who had a burn on her neck immediately after the fire — and pressed by police who doubted Carter committed the crime alone, Carter said Anthony Graves, his wife’s cousin, had helped him. Carter, his wife and Graves all were indicted. Shortly before Graves’ trial, police had Carter undergo another polygraph test. Afterward, Carter told the district attorney that his wife was his accomplice and Graves was not involved. Nevertheless, Carter was warned that if he refused to testify against Graves, Carter’s wife would be tried for murder. The withholding of this information by prosecutors prompted the 5th U.S. Court of Appeals to overturn Graves’ conviction and to conclude that Graves would likely have been acquitted had the jury been given this information. Although at trial Carter testified that Graves was his accomplice, Carter told many people before and after Graves’ trial that Graves was innocent. He said he testified against Graves to protect his wife. In his final statement before he was executed, Carter said, “Anthony Graves had nothing to do with it. I lied on him in court.” Carter’s wife was not put on trial. Graves was convicted and given a death penalty. It was later shown that wounds prosecutors claimed were inflicted by a knife like one owned by Graves could have come from any single-edged knife. Also, investigation by Graves’ appellate lawyers cast doubt on the credibility of jailhouse informants and guards who testified they overheard Graves make inculpatory statements to Carter. Charles Sebesta, the Burleson County district attorney who prosecuted Graves, offered no plausible motive for Graves’ participation in the murders. An alibi witness for Graves didn’t testify because she received a threat she would be prosecuted as an accomplice if she testified on Graves’ behalf. My own review of his case also revealed that Graves consented to a polygraph test. Sebesta claimed Graves failed it. But authorities refused to give the polygraph charts of Graves or Carter to Graves’ attorneys. Warren Holmes, a highly respected criminologist and polygraph expert, offered to evaluate these charts after I appraised Holmes of Graves’ case. I concluded that the most plausible explanation for the unwillingness of Texas officials to relinquish the polygraph charts was their concern the charts would support Graves’ claim of actual innocence. In his
