[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----CONN., USA, CALIF., COLO.
July 30 CONNECTICUT: New death penalty claims in Connecticut must wait A Superior Court judge has denied a motion by defense attorneys for 7 death row inmates to inject in their upcoming habeas corpus trial the issue of whether the state’s new death penalty ban unfairly excludes them. The law, enacted April 25, specified the death penalty prohibition does not apply to the 11 inmates on death row. Some defense attorneys have called this provision arbitrary. The 7 inmates have filed a lawsuit charging there is racial, ethnic and geographic disparity in the way the death penalty is administered in Connecticut. Superior Court Judge Samuel Sferrazza in Rockville ruled Thursday the defense attorneys can pursue the death penalty law issue in separate appeals later. If he were to grant their motion, Sferrazza said, “One can easily envision that the respondent would seek additional time to prepare for the new claim ... The court sees no advantage to try to cram a new claim into the case when that claim can be effectively raised and decided expeditiously through other procedures.” The habeas corpus trial is scheduled to begin Sept. 5 and is expected to last until about Sept. 28. The 7 inmates are Sedrick Cobb, Daniel Webb, Todd Rizzo, Richard Reynolds, Lazale Ashby, Robert Breton and Jessie Campbell III. Sferrazza Friday ruled another inmate, Eduardo Santiago, is ineligible to join the lawsuit because his death penalty sentence recently was vacated. The 2 inmates sentenced to death for the Cheshire triple homicide, Joshua Komisarjevsky and Steven Hayes, also are ineligible to be part of the lawsuit because their appeals are not yet finished. Another death row inmate, Russell Peeler Jr., has withdrawn from the suit. Following legal arguments, Sferrazza also ruled that the trial will be held at Northern Correctional Institution in Somers, site of death row. The inmates will be in a room there during the proceedings, as will Sferrazza, the attorneys and other court staff. The proceedings will be carried on a live video feed to Superior Court in Rockville, where the public and reporters can watch. Steven Strom, an assistant attorney general who represents the state Department of Correction, said he and his associates were involved in setting up the complicated logistics of the trial. He noted the original plan called for the judge and lawyers to be in the courthouse while inmates watched from prison. The inmates’ attorneys objected because the inmates wanted to be present at the legal proceedings. Not all of the 7 inmates are minorities. Strom said the legal issue is not necessarily just the race of the inmate, but also the race of the victim or victims. (source: New Haven Register) USA (LOUISIANA): Escapees learn whether they will face death penalty Federal prosecutors must decide Monday whether 2 escapees from Louisiana State Police will face the death penalty. The 2 sparked a multi-state manhunt after their escape. Darian Drake Pierce and Ricky Wedgeworth are suspected of kidnapping and killing Ohio businessman David Cupps after they escaped the LSP compound in Baton Rouge in March of last year. Investigators said Cupps was attacked in Vicksburg, MS. His body was found in Bessemer, AL. Both men were later arrested in Memphis, TN. They could face the death penalty on 2 counts, kidnapping resulting in death and carjacking resulting in death. Both men pleaded not guilty. A preliminary trial date has been set for Aug. 6, 2012. (source: WAFB News) *** see: MUSIC VIDEOhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3WHBB9-bG4 This is a link to UK singer Steve Balsamo's new music video (source: JRJ) CALIFORNIA: As California dawdles, district attorneys revolt California’s death penalty has been in limbo since 2006, when a federal judge stayed the execution of Michael Morales, who was sentenced to death for the brutal 1981 murder and rape of 17-year-old Terri Winchell. The judge was fearful lest the state’s 3-drug lethal injection protocol would cause Morales undue pain. Since then, a number of states have switched to a one-drug protocol. Why hasn’t California? The answer could be that Gov. Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamala Harris don’t want the death penalty to work. Brown and Harris are personally opposed to the death penalty, but when they campaigned for office in 2010, both pledged to carry out the law. They’re not exactly knocking themselves out to do so. In 2009, Ohio adopted a 1-drug protocol for executions. By administering a lethal dose of barbiturates, Ohio made it harder for frivolous appeals to keep the state from enforcing its laws. Several states followed suit, including Washington. Washington is important because the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit refused to stay a single-drug execution there in 2010. California officials still are sticking with a 3-drug
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----CONN., USA, CALIF.
April 11 CONNECTICUT: Death penalty repeal to hit House floor State Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney joined Mayor John DeStefano Jr. Tuesday in urging state representatives to approve a bill repealing the death penalty, which is now going to the House for a vote. Photo by Christopher Peak. After more than 10 hours of debate, the state Senate last Thursday approved a measure replacing the death penalty with life in prison without parole by a vote of 20 to 16. In hopes of pressuring state representatives in Hartford to approve the measure, city officials, including Mayor John DeStefano Jr. and New Haven Police Department Chief Dean Esserman, held a press conference at City Hall Tuesday calling for repeal. Esserman said the repeal of capital punishment is “long overdue” in the state. “Discipline [that works] is swift and certain,” he said. “The death penalty is neither.” At the press conference, state Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney, a Democrat from New Haven who helped shepherd the repeal bill through the Senate, and Jerry Streets, the pastor at Dixwell Congregational Church and former Yale chaplain, emphasized the importance of Connecticut’s repeal as a message to the rest of the nation. If the bill passes, they said, New Hampshire will be the only state in New England that allows the death penalty. Looney said the death penalty is inappropriate because the criminal justice system is imperfect. He cited several cases of improper convictions in Connecticut, including James Tillman, who served a prison sentence for 16 years before being proven innocent, and Kenneth Ireland, who was exonerated after serving 19 years in prison. In 2009, a similar bill repealing the death penalty passed both chambers of the state’s General Assembly, but was vetoed by Republican then-Governor Jodi Rell. “The death penalty sends a clear message to those who may contemplate such cold, calculated crimes. We will not tolerate those who have murdered in the most vile, dehumanizing fashion,” she wrote in her June 2009 veto message. Should the House approve the current bill, however, Gov. Dannel Malloy, a Democrat, has promised he will sign it into law. A major point of contention in last Thursday’s Senate debate involved the fate of the 11 inmates currently on the state’s death row. Despite assurances by Democrats that the bill is “prospective,” applying only to future cases, Republican senators worried that repeal would give current death row inmates grounds to appeal their sentences. But Democrats cited the case of New Mexico, where the death penalty was prospectively repealed in 2009 and the state’s Supreme Court subsequently ruled that a prisoner sentenced to death before the repeal could not have his sentence lowered on appeal. Democrats also amended the bill to create a special felony charge, “felony murder with special circumstances,” which they said they designed specifically for the purpose of replacing the capital sentence. Prisoners convicted of the charge will be placed in isolation in a maximum security prison and will be subject to increased searches. In the past 50 years, Connecticut has put only one person to death. In May 2005, the state executed serial killer Michael Ross, who requested the death penalty when faced with the alternative of life in prison without parole. (source: Yale Daily News) ** Conn. House to vote on death penalty repeal bill A bill that would abolish Connecticut's death penalty for all future cases is facing its second vote in the General Assembly. Members of the state's House of Representatives are scheduled to take up the legislation in the Wednesday afternoon session. The proposed bill would abolish the death penalty for all future cases, but would not directly affect the sentences of the 11 inmates currently on Connecticut's death row. Individuals convicted under the proposed legislation would receive sentences of life imprisonment without the possibility of release in lieu of the death penalty. The state Senate approved a repeal bill after nearly 11 hours of debate last week. If passed in the House, the bill would go to Democratic Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, who has said he would sign it into law. (source: Associated Press) USA: Guantánamo judge to rule on allowing al-Qaeda suspect to testify about CIA torture The US war crimes tribunal in Guantánamo Bay is to due to make a landmark ruling on Wednesday over whether to allow an alleged al-Qaeda mastermind to testify in public about his torture in secret CIA prisons set up after the September 11 attacks. Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, who is accused of orchestrating the bombing of the USS Cole off the coast of Yemen in 2000 that killed 17 US sailors, is hoping to speak publicly about his experiences of maltreatment, including simulated drowning and mock executions. The tribunal’s decision, which comes during 2 days
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----CONN., USA, CALIF.
Dec. 5 CONNECTICUT: Jury set to decide life-or-death fate of Connecticut murderer A jury will deliberate Monday whether to sentence a man convicted of murdering a Connecticut mother and two daughters to death or to life in prison. Joshua Komisarjevsky was convicted in October of 17 charges, including 3 counts of murder, for the deaths of Jennifer Hawke-Petit and her daughters, 17-year-old Hayley Petit and 11-year-old Michaela Petit. Komisarjevsky was also convicted on 4 counts of kidnapping and charges of burglary, arson and assault in connection with the deadly home invasion. On Friday, a lawyer for Komisarjevsky described his client as damaged and suffering from a mood disorder during a last-ditch attempt to spare his client's life. Steven Hayes, the 1st defendant to stand trial in the case, was sentenced to death in December 2010 after a jury convicted him of 16 of 17 charges. Prosecutors had argued that Hayes and Komisarjevsky went into the Petit home, beat and tied up Dr. William Petit, raped and strangled his wife, molested one of their daughters and set the house on fire before attempting to flee. The two daughters, who were both tied to their beds, died of smoke inhalation, though William Petit managed to escape. Prosecutor Michael Dearington described the ordeal as a night of terror that no person should endure. He also contrasted the defense's discussion of Komisarjevsky's family history with the status of William Petit's family. When I looked at the Komisarjevsky family photos, I realized that Dr. Petit doesn't have any family photos anymore, because they were burned, Dearington said. He described what he called the heinous nature of the crime, insisting that a troubled past couldn't justify Komisarjevsky's actions. How many people do you have to kill before the death penalty is appropriate? he asked. Throughout the trial, defense lawyer Walter Bansley insisted that Komisarjevsky wasn't involved in the killings to the extent that Mr. Hayes was. He then recapped what he described as Komisarjevsky's sordid family history and ongoing battle with his personal demons. His client, Bansley said, was a dark kid who later got caught up in a life of crime, especially burglaries. Joshua was a damaged young man ... and he remains that way, to this day, the attorney said. Komisarjevsky was then quoted in a letter to his mother, saying he was sorry for not being the boy you wanted me to be and a loser. Bansley then insisted that his client posed no danger as long as he is in prison, where he creates art and studies Latin. Josh is not a future danger to anyone, and you really shouldn't consider killing him, Bansley said. There is no reason to kill him. (source: CNN) USA: “Into the Abyss” finds humanity in death row inmates In his new documentary “Into the Abyss,” now playing at the Pleasant St. Theater in Northampton, Werner Herzog asks polite, honest, and sometimes inappropriately phrased questions. But the citizens of Conroe, Texas don’t seem to mind. In fact, at no point does any interviewee seem off-put or offended by Herzog’s frank and heavily accented language. For a film about triple homicide and the death penalty, there were a remarkable number of moments where, due to awkward phrasing on Herzog’s part, the audience in the theater giggled. “Into the Abyss” tells the story of Jason Burkett and Michael Perry, who, as teenagers, killed Sandra Stoler, her son Adam and his friend Jeremy Richardson, all because they wanted to steal a car. The film features interviews with family members of both the victims and the killers, police officers, citizens of the town, friends of those involved and the killers themselves. Burkett is interviewed from inside the jail where he serves a life sentence, and Perry is interviewed days before his execution. Supplementing the talking heads is raw police crime scene footage, which is revealing enough to make the weak of stomach squirm, but tastefully cut before anything truly gory is shown. Incidentally, there is little difference between the amateur cinematography of the crime scene films and the cinematography of “Abyss” itself. Outside of interviews, the camera is always handheld, zooming in on things it wants us to be sure not to miss and lingering on what it finds most important. The haphazard and heavy-handed technique takes away from the power of the images themselves, and it is the only part of the film that feels like it’s trying to beat you over the head with something. “Into the Abyss” is a timely film, following Rick Perry’s brag about executing 234 people in his time as governor of Texas and the controversy surrounding the execution of Troy Davis. But “Abyss” focuses on this one case and the story of the people involved. If there is a moral here, it is not explicit, despite Herzog stating at several points that he is against capital punishment. Watching
[Deathpenalty]death penalty news----CONN., USA, CALIF.
Feb. 4 CONNECTICUT: Ross' Attorney Given A Week To Ponder Role One thing became abundantly clear Thursday: Serial killer Michael Ross did nothing to halt his own execution. I wanted to go forward, Ross told Superior Court Judge Patrick Clifford, referring to the execution scheduled for 2 a.m. last Saturday. I didn't tell them to stop. His lawyer, T.R. Paulding, did - hours after a federal judge directed him to reconsider his advocacy of Ross' desire to die and threatened to go after his law license if Ross was executed and evidence later cast doubt on whether Ross was truly stable enough to opt for execution. I did not consent to the execution being put off that night, Ross said, his voice shrill with emotion. Attorney Paulding, because of his state of mind, felt he needed 48 hours. ... He did that on his own. I don't fault him for it. This was Ross' 1st court appearance since 5 execution dates came and went in the past 10 days. He was clearly exasperated at times and emotional at others. Absent the admonition by Chief U.S. District Court Judge Robert N. Chatigny and Paulding's visceral reaction to it, Ross would have been put to death. The U.S. Supreme Court had vacated the last legal obstacle to the execution just four hours before it was to have taken place. Clifford did not set a new execution date for Ross Thursday. Instead he gave Paulding a week to investigate and soul-search about whether it is a conflict of interest for him to continue to represent Ross and also fulfill his obligation to the court to present any evidence of incompetence. Last Friday's turn of events and the situation it has led to are bizarre even for a capital case on the eve of an execution, when lawyers typically engage in 11th-hour legal maneuvers akin to a game of high-speed chess. At some point during the night of the scheduled execution, Ross the client became counselor to his lawyer. Their respective roles still appeared blurry Thursday. I'm willing to participate in any competency hearing to protect his [law] license, Ross said. That's why I'm doing it. I'm competent. He has been intimidated by this judge and feels obligated to me to explore things that I think are meaningless. Ross told Clifford that if he had been as shaken as Paulding was after the conversation with Chatigny, Paulding would have told him to take his Vistaril - a powerful sedative Ross has used on perhaps a half-dozen occasions when, he said, he feels like his head is going to explode. It was clear to me he was very shaken, Ross said. He was white and shaking. Attorney Paulding told me he was in no position to make a decision and went to the commissioner and asked for a 48-hour stay. Clifford pronounced Ross competent Dec. 28, after hearing from a psychiatrist who had previously examined Ross and who interviewed him for more than three hours Dec. 15 - Dr. Michael Norko. Clifford on Dec. 15 refused to let Ross' former public defenders participate in the competency hearing. They wanted the opportunity to present evidence that Ross is mentally incompetent, due in part to years of restrictive confinement or death row syndrome. Norko, after reviewing some of the information delivered to him Friday by public defender Karen Goodrow, signed an affidavit Saturday saying several letters from Ross highlighting his desire to die to escape death row conditions might have altered his conclusions. The state Supreme Court last month upheld Clifford's finding and said 150 pages of letters and affidavits presented to the court by the public defenders lacked meaningful evidence. But when Chief Public Defender Gerard Smyth appealed to Chatigny, he found a receptive ear. Chatigny had researched death row conditions during a case in the mid-1990s, and said he was deeply disturbed by what he saw. In order to gain standing to intervene on Ross' behalf to halt any execution, the public defenders have to convince a judge that he is incompetent. Now that Clifford has reconvened hearings on the Ross case, Chatigny Thursday dismissed the public defenders' appeal, but left open the option that they could return to his court with another appeal. Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said he is convinced Chatigny should no longer preside over any aspect of the case because his actions, at a minimum, appeared to undermine his role as an impartial, objective arbiter. Blumenthal said he was prepared to ask Chatigny to remove himself from the case, had it continued. But we are gratified the judge has acted on his own. Chatigny's actions were generally seen as logical, and predictable, in light of the willingness of the state courts to revisit the issue of Ross' competence. Ross was dismissive of the death row syndrome evidence. All this information is bogus, he said. I know I'm competent. New London State's Attorney Kevin Kane was highly critical of the public defenders, as was Clifford. I'm just verbalizing my frustration that some of this information -
[Deathpenalty]death penalty news----CONN., USA, CALIF.
I gave an interview saying it was unethical for this lawyer to agree to represent Ross in order to expedite the execution. fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) fbo...@law.uiuc.edu (personal comments only) -Original Message- From: deathpenalty-boun...@lists.washlaw.edu [mailto:deathpenalty-boun...@lists.washlaw.edu] On Behalf Of Rick Halperin Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 9:15 AM To: Death Penalty Subject: [Deathpenalty]death penalty newsCONN., USA, CALIF. Feb. 4 CONNECTICUT: Ross' Attorney Given A Week To Ponder Role One thing became abundantly clear Thursday: Serial killer Michael Ross did nothing to halt his own execution. I wanted to go forward, Ross told Superior Court Judge Patrick Clifford, referring to the execution scheduled for 2 a.m. last Saturday. I didn't tell them to stop. His lawyer, T.R. Paulding, did - hours after a federal judge directed him to reconsider his advocacy of Ross' desire to die and threatened to go after his law license if Ross was executed and evidence later cast doubt on whether Ross was truly stable enough to opt for execution. I did not consent to the execution being put off that night, Ross said, his voice shrill with emotion. Attorney Paulding, because of his state of mind, felt he needed 48 hours. ... He did that on his own. I don't fault him for it. This was Ross' 1st court appearance since 5 execution dates came and went in the past 10 days. He was clearly exasperated at times and emotional at others. Absent the admonition by Chief U.S. District Court Judge Robert N. Chatigny and Paulding's visceral reaction to it, Ross would have been put to death. The U.S. Supreme Court had vacated the last legal obstacle to the execution just four hours before it was to have taken place. Clifford did not set a new execution date for Ross Thursday. Instead he gave Paulding a week to investigate and soul-search about whether it is a conflict of interest for him to continue to represent Ross and also fulfill his obligation to the court to present any evidence of incompetence. Last Friday's turn of events and the situation it has led to are bizarre even for a capital case on the eve of an execution, when lawyers typically engage in 11th-hour legal maneuvers akin to a game of high-speed chess. At some point during the night of the scheduled execution, Ross the client became counselor to his lawyer. Their respective roles still appeared blurry Thursday. I'm willing to participate in any competency hearing to protect his [law] license, Ross said. That's why I'm doing it. I'm competent. He has been intimidated by this judge and feels obligated to me to explore things that I think are meaningless. Ross told Clifford that if he had been as shaken as Paulding was after the conversation with Chatigny, Paulding would have told him to take his Vistaril - a powerful sedative Ross has used on perhaps a half-dozen occasions when, he said, he feels like his head is going to explode. It was clear to me he was very shaken, Ross said. He was white and shaking. Attorney Paulding told me he was in no position to make a decision and went to the commissioner and asked for a 48-hour stay. Clifford pronounced Ross competent Dec. 28, after hearing from a psychiatrist who had previously examined Ross and who interviewed him for more than three hours Dec. 15 - Dr. Michael Norko. Clifford on Dec. 15 refused to let Ross' former public defenders participate in the competency hearing. They wanted the opportunity to present evidence that Ross is mentally incompetent, due in part to years of restrictive confinement or death row syndrome. Norko, after reviewing some of the information delivered to him Friday by public defender Karen Goodrow, signed an affidavit Saturday saying several letters from Ross highlighting his desire to die to escape death row conditions might have altered his conclusions. The state Supreme Court last month upheld Clifford's finding and said 150 pages of letters and affidavits presented to the court by the public defenders lacked meaningful evidence. But when Chief Public Defender Gerard Smyth appealed to Chatigny, he found a receptive ear. Chatigny had researched death row conditions during a case in the mid-1990s, and said he was deeply disturbed by what he saw. In order to gain standing to intervene on Ross' behalf to halt any execution, the public defenders have to convince a judge that he is incompetent. Now that Clifford has reconvened hearings on the Ross case, Chatigny Thursday dismissed the public defenders' appeal, but left open the option that they could return to his court with another appeal. Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said he is convinced Chatigny should no longer preside over any aspect of the case because his actions, at a minimum, appeared to undermine his role as an impartial, objective arbiter. Blumenthal said he was prepared
