[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide
Oct. 3 IRAN: Death decrees finalized for 2 women in Khoy and Isfahan Death decrees were finalized for 2 women in the cities of Khoy and Isfahan while two women were executed in late September in the cities of Sanandaj and Tehran. The death decree for Zahra Derakhshan was recently upheld and finalized by the Criminal Court of Urmia. Zahra Derakhshan has been detained in Khoy Prison since November 2016. The first time she received the death decree was in November 2018, but she objected to the court ruling. Khoy is the second largest city of West Azerbaijan Province, in northwestern Iran, after the capital city of Urmia. Another woman by the name of Fariba was also sentenced to death for killing a police officer while trying to help a prisoner escape. Mohammad Reza Habibi, general director of Isfahan’s Department of Justice, announced that the death decree had been objected by the lawyer of this case, but the ruling was finally upheld by the supreme court on September 3, 2019. (The state-run ROKNA news agency – September 23, 2019) Leila Zarafshan was hanged in the Central Prison of Sanandaj on September 26, 2019, and another unidentified woman was hanged in Gohardasht Prison in Karaj, on September 25, 2019. Ninety-six (96) women have been executed in Iran under Rouhani. The actual number of execution victims and other victims of the clerical regime’s Judiciary are far above the data and information published in the state-run press. One of the signs of stepped up pressure and crackdown on women in Iran and the accelerating pace of executions is the number of women hanged in recent months. Eight (8) Iranian women have been executed in a period of slightly over 3 months, while in a year-long period from 2016 to 2018, the number of women executed by the Iranian regime in the whole year ranged between 6 and 10. (source: ncr-iran.org) ** 4, including 2 Iranians, told to enter defence for drug chargeJudge Datuk Akhtar Tahir made the decision at the end of the prosecution case against J. Balakrishnan, 61, B. Lacheme Devi, 56, Mohammad Abbasi Younes, 27, and Syedmohsen Namazikivaj Seyedreza, 31. 4 accused, including 2 Iranian men, were told to enter their defence by the High Court here today for drug charges in 2015. Judge Datuk Akhtar Tahir made the decision at the end of the prosecution case against J. Balakrishnan, 61, B. Lacheme Devi, 56, Mohammad Abbasi Younes, 27, and Syedmohsen Namazikivaj Seyedreza, 31. An amended charge was read out to all the accused – in Tamil for Balakrishnan and Lacheme Devi, and in Persian for the Iranians. In the amended charge, all 4 were accused of trafficking by the way of manufacturing methamphetamine at a house at Taman Sri Rambai in Seberang Perai Tengah district on Aug 20, 2015 about 10.10pm. It is an offence under Section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 which is punishable under Section 39B(2) of the same Act read together with Section 34 of the Penal Code which carries the death penalty or lifetime imprisonment. If not sentenced to death then the accused must be whipped not less than 15 times. All 4 pleaded not guilty and claimed trial after the charge was read to them. Balakrishnan was represented by A. Ashok, Lacheme Devi by RSN Rayer and the 2 Iranians were represented by Kitson Foong. Deputy Public Prosecutor Farah Aimy Zainul Anwar prosecuted. "I hereby order the accused to enter defence against the charges," said the judge. He then explained the 3 options that are available to enter defence; to remain silent, give testimony from the dock, or sworn testimony from the witness stand. "They can speak with their counsels, but the decision must be made by them," he added. All 4 then agreed to give sworn testimony and the court fixed Nov 11 to 14 for hearing. (source: indiatimes.com) SRI LANKA: Mother and son sentenced to death over murder A mother and a son of the same family have been sentenced to death by the Colombo High Court over a case of murder. The order was issued by High Court Judge Pradeep Hettiarachchi when the case was taken up today (03). The convicted mother and son had murdered the wife of the son by setting on fire back in 2007. The incident which had taken place in 2007 had, reportedly, been the result of a family issue. Following an extensive hearing, the 75-year-old mother and the 35-year-old son were issued capital punishment today. (source: adaderana.lk) INDIA: Prime Accused In Radha Kumari Murder Case Sentenced To Death The prime accused in the Radha Kumari rape and murder case has been awarded the death penalty by the District and Sessions Judge, Sivasagar, SK Poddar on Thursday, October 3. The court gave the accused, Bikas Das, 30 days to appeal before the High Court. 21-year-old Radha Kumari was raped and strangled to death inside a passenger train travelling from Tinsukia to Rangia on July
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OHIO, NEV., ORE., USA
Oct. 3 OHIO: Ohio Governor Grants Reprieve to Prisoner Who Was Abandoned by Attorneys Ohio Governor Mike DeWine has granted a reprieve to Cleveland Jackson, delaying his execution date from November 13, 2019 to January 13, 2021, because of a misconduct complaint filed against his previous appellate attorneys. The ethics complaint alleges that John Gibbons and James Jenkins, who were appointed in 2007 to represent Jackson during his habeas corpus appeal, missed critical filing deadlines, did not meet with their client for years, and even failed to inform him when an execution date was set. Without consulting with Jackson, they also rejected offers of help from the Capital Habeas Unit for the Northern District of Ohio. The Board of Professional Conduct, the disciplinary branch of the Ohio Supreme Court, filed the complaint on September 27, 2019. Governor DeWine issued the reprieve three days later. The reprieved marked the sixth time Jackson’s execution date has been postponed. A news release issued by the Governor’s office on September 30 suggested that the Jackson’s execution might be postponed beyond the two months authorized by the reprieve order. “While a certified disciplinary complaint is only an allegation, this is a serious allegation raising significant questions that need to be resolved in the disciplinary process,” the statement said. “It is prudent to issue a reprieve in this matter until the disciplinary process is resolved.” The statement also said the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections was experiencing “[o]ngoing issues” relating to its ability “to acquire drugs pursuant to their protocol.” The 25-page ethics complaint sets forth a litany of failures that the Board of Professional Conduct complaint charges Gibbons and Jenkins with failing to provide competent representation, failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing Jackson, failing to reasonably consult with Jackson about the case, keep him informed of developments in the case, and respond to his inquiries, failing following their withdrawal from the case “to take steps, to the extent reasonably practicable, to protect [Jackson’s] interest,” and “engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.” In 2007, Jackson requested that federal defenders be appointed to represent him in his habeas corpus proceedings. The court denied that request and instead appointed Gibbons and Jenkins, who filed a habeas petition that was quickly denied. They appealed that denial, seeking several extensions of time before ultimately submitting a brief that, the complaint says, failed to conform to the court’s rules. After the appeals court upheld the lower court’s ruling, the Ohio federal defender’s office offered to help the 2 lawyers. They refuse the offer without consulting Jackson. They then failed to inform Jackson when Ohio issued a death warrant scheduling his execution for 2013. Even after agreeing to withdraw from the case, counsel remained uncooperative, failing to time provide the defense files to Jackson’s new lawyers. In response to one request for those files, Gibbons emailed to Jackson’s federal defenders: “Thank you for your gratuitous, asinine, threatening letter …. Mr. Jenkins and I are individual practitioners, not supported by the United States taxpayers, such as you and your office.” He insisted on up-front payment for the costs of retrieving the files before providing them to the new lawyers. The ethics complaint says that, when the files were turned over, they contained very little work product. Jackson’s current lawyer, assistant federal defender Dale Baich, called the reprieve issued by Governor DeWine “entirely appropriate due to the failure of Mr. Jackson’s former habeas counsel which resulted in a problematic legal process in his case.” Baich said numerous issues “were not explored due to Mr. Jackson’s poor legal representation, [and] evidence of Mr. Jackson’s intellectual disability was not developed and presented at the appropriate time.” Baich said that prior counsel’s failures have “cost Mr. Jackson his right to raise this constitutional challenge, which would have made him ineligible for a death sentence. Now,” Baich said, “the courts may no longer have the ability to review these and other meritorious claims.” (source: Death Penalty Information Center) * Murderer George Brinkman: No excuses, give me death George Brinkman argued for his own death sentence Wednesday, telling a panel of 3 judges he deserves the harshest of punishments. Stepping to the witness stand, the 47-year-old Stark County man apologized for murdering Roberta (Bobbi) and Rogell (Gene) John in June 2017. Brinkman said he wasn’t making excuses for taking their lives. “They were extremely kind, caring and wonderful and people who did not deserve to be killed by me,” he said. ”... I’m so very
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, N.C., FLA., MISS., LA.
Oct. 3 TEXAS: Death Watch: Judge's "Horrible Bigotry" Not Enough to Force New TrialThe 5CA has denied Randy Halprin's plea as his death date nears The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals doesn't dispute that the judge in Randy Halprin's trial was a racist. But in its Sept. 23 ruling, the 5CA says there's nothing it can do about it now that will help Halprin, a member of the notorious Texas 7, scheduled to be executed Oct. 10. Halprin's attorneys allege that his trial was biased beyond repair and a new one is in order. The 1st sentence of their appeal to the 5CA reads: "The Honorable Vickers Cunningham, the presiding judge at Randy Halprin's capital trial, is a racist and anti-Semitic bigot who described Halprin – a Jewish man – as 'that fuckin' Jew' and a 'goddamn kike.'" Cunningham presided over most of the trials of the Texas 7, a group of inmates who broke out of prison in 2000 and robbed a sporting goods store, then shot down Irving police officer Aubrey Hawkins when he responded to the alarm. They hid out for months before a tip to the television show America's Most Wanted led authorities to Colorado, where they apprehended 6 of the 7 men in 2001 (one killed himself to avoid capture). One after another, the defendants received death sentences from Cunningham; 4 have already been executed. Patrick Murphy, whose execution was stayed in March after he'd asked for a Buddhist priest to attend to him in the death chamber, is now scheduled to die in November. Cunningham's bigotry came to light 15 years after the trials, when he was running in the 2018 Republican primary for a seat on the Dallas County Commissioners Court. Cunningham's brother told The Dallas Morning News about the living trust Cunningham had set up for his children – allowing them to receive shares of their inheritance only upon marrying straight white Christians. In a video interview with the News, Cunningham said, "I'm supporting what my beliefs are." When asked if he had ever used the "N-word," he gazed pensively into the air and waited 9 seconds before answering no. This news broke on the last day of early voting in the run-off, in which Cunningham had been heavily favored; he ended up losing by 25 votes. He and other family members deny he is a racist; he still practices law in Dallas today. McKinney said Cunningham took pride in the death sentences he handed out, and remembers him saying, “from the wetback to the Jew, they knew they were going to die.” Halprin's appeal to 5CA is replete with other examples of Cunningham's bigotry. Tammy McKinney, who grew up with Cunningham and knew him well, is quoted as saying he regularly used language "such as 'nigger,' 'wetback,' 'spic,' 'kike,' 'the fuckin' Jews.'" She said Cunningham took pride in the death sentences he handed out to the Texas 7 and remembers him saying, "From the wetback to the Jew, they knew they were going to die." Amanda Tackett, who worked on Cunningham's earlier failed run for Dallas County district attorney in 2006, also remembers his demeaning language. She says Cunningham often used the N-word and would place it in front of a black person's name, as he did with former Dallas D.A. Craig Watkins, whom he referred to as N-word Watkins. Halprin's request for a new trial attracted widespread support; over 100 Jewish attorneys and community leaders filed a brief in his favor, and The Washington Post backed his appeal. Current Dallas County D.A. John Creuzot did not oppose a retrial. But there were technicalities to consider, rules of procedure. The 5CA said that for the appeal to be considered, it had to have something new in it; while Halprin's defense attorneys argued that they didn't know about Cunningham's racism until the 2018 election – and thus it was new evidence – the judges ruled that since Cunningham had been racist all along, it did not constitute new grounds for appeal, and in any event wouldn't matter. For the 5CA to order a new trial, the evidence of bias would have to be so compelling that it would make a normal jury change its verdict; the judges ruled that Halprin's jury would still have found him guilty even if they'd known of Cunningham's bigoted views. Now, time is growing short. Halprin's lawyers will surely ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review his case and order a new trial, but SCOTUS hasn't replied to questions about their plans. If they don't hear the case, the appeal has nonetheless offered a picture of the judiciary rarely seen, though often suspected. In that regard, the 5CA felt compelled to draw a distinction between Cunningham's views and its own. The statement of principle came in a footnote: "Cunningham's racism and bigotry are horrible and completely inappropriate for a judge." (source: Austin Chronicle) * Man accused of killing trooper appears in court The 24-year-old man accused of killing Texas Department of Public Safety T
