April 6
TEXAS----impending execution
U.S. Supreme Court denies petition to halt Texas execution
The U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition to halt the execution planned for
Wednesday of a south Texas man who bludgeoned and slashed to death a
12-year-old boy, mutilated the corpse and said he drank the blood of his
victim.
The move came about 4 hours before Pablo Vasquez, 38, was scheduled to be put
to death by lethal injection at 6 p.m at the state's death chamber in
Huntsville.
If the execution goes ahead, it would be the 6th in Texas this year and the
537th since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976, the
most of any state.
Lawyers for Vasquez launched the last-minute appeal, saying in a petition filed
with U.S. Supreme Court their client was denied a fair punishment because
prospective, qualified jurors in his trial were dismissed if they had
sympathies against the death penalty.
The lawyers have previously said Vasquez had mental health problems and
suffered from learning disabilities.
The 2-sentence statement from the court did not give a reason for why the
petition was denied.
The victim, David Cardenas, was found under metal sheets in the Texas border
town of Donna in 1998. The arms were missing from the corpse, which had no skin
on the back and a hole in the back of the head, court papers filed by Texas
said.
The incident raised worries at the time about occult rituals, which were stoked
when prosecutors produced a taped confession in which Vasquez, then 21,
admitted to the killing and said he drank his victim's blood after saying
voices from the devil told him to do so.
Cardenas, trying to fit in with a group of teenagers and Vasquez, was hanging
out with the group near a mobile home, when he was attacked.
Police later received tips of a murder and found the decaying and mutilated
body of the 12-year-old, the court papers showed.
Prosecutors said Vasquez hit the victim in the head with a pipe and cut his
throat. They also said he stole some jewelry from the victim.
"The body was also mutilated after death by some means that caused bones to
shatter," the court papers said.
It took the jury about an hour to find Vasquez guilty.
A co-defendant, then 15, was sentenced to 35 years in prison on a murder
conviction.
(source: Reuters)
***************
Inmate spared execution: Lawyers agree on Druery's mental incompetence
Lawyers agreed Monday that Brazos County death row inmate Marcus Druery is
unfit to be executed for the 2002 slaying of a 20-year-old man in rural Brazos
County.
Druery's attorneys filed more than 150 pages of reports from 2 mental health
professionals saying Druery suffered from a major mental illness that renders
him unable to understand why he was being punished.
One expert said Druery's illness is "characterized by paranoid and grandiose
delusions" that "deprive him of a rational understanding of the connection
between his crime and punishment." Another said Druery wrote letters from
prison accusing Magic Johnson of impersonating him and claiming that he found
the cure to HIV.
Prosecutors didn't contest the incompetency claims, but the court left the
option open for Druery to be re-examined in the future if prosecutors feel
there has been a change in his mental capacities.
Druery's attorneys, Kate Black and Cathryn Crawford, hailed the judge's order
and the state's decision not to contest the claims, according to a prepared
statement.
"We are grateful to the [DA's] office for their decision not to contest Mr.
Druery's claim that he is incompetent to be executed," Black said. "The state
has the duty to make certain it does not violate the Constitution by executing
an individual, like Mr. Druery, who suffers from a psychotic disorder that
renders him incompetent for execution. We are pleased that they have taken that
duty seriously."
Black, who was appointed to represent Druery after he was given an execution
date in 2012, said Druery has been "seriously mentally ill" since 2009, and she
doesn't expect that to change.
The Supreme Court has ruled that the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the
Eighth Amendment forbids the execution of an inmate who is declared incompetent
at the time of the pending execution, regardless of whether that inmate was
sane at the time of the offense and competent to stand trial at the time of
trial.
Druery was sentenced to death in 2003 for robbing and killing 20-year-old
Skyyler Browne on Halloween 2002. Druery, who was a classmate of Browne's at
Texas State Technical College in Waco, shot the man in the head, took his cell
phone, money and a bag of marijuana, and set the body on fire. Druery then went
to his family's Brazos County ranch, where he dumped Browne's body into a stock
pond.
Druery was set to be executed in August 2012, but was granted a stay by the
state's highest criminal appeals court after his attorneys filed an appeal. The
court ruled in 2013 that Druery's attorneys had presented enough evidence to
warrant a competency hearing, which was conducted Monday after examinations and
reports by mental health professionals.
(source: The Eagle)
FLORIDA:
Judge denies death penalty motion in James Colley case
Lawyers for the man accused of shooting and killing his estranged wife and her
friend tried to get the death penalty off the table.
James Colley was an allegedly abusive husband to his estranged wife Amanda
Colley. She and her friend, Lindy Dobbins, were found dead in the Colleys' St.
Johns County home back in August 2015.
James Colley's lawyer asked Tuesday to have the death penalty taken off the
table, but that motion was denied by a judge. If Colley is convicted, he could
be sentenced to death.
James Colley has a scheduled pretrial hearing for June 16.
James Colley pleaded not guilty to charges of 1st-degree murder, 2 counts of
attempted 1st-degree murder with a firearm and aggravated stalking.
(source: actionnewsjax.com)
******************
18 Years Out: Death row exoneree Seth Penalver speaks at Florida
Atlantic----Death row exoneree Seth Penalver came to campus last Tuesday to
speak about his experiences on death row.
Former death row inmate Seth Penalver, who spent 18 years in prison before his
exoneration, spoke to students and staff on the Boca campus Tuesday night.
"He actually changed my mind on the view of death penalty," said Marissa
Buchanan, a junior majoring in criminal justice. "I wasn't pro death, but I
wasn't against it; my views were mixed."
Close to 450 seats in the Grand Palm Room were entirely filled by students and
staff, with a dozen others standing up in the back of the room.
Professor Cassandra Atkin-Plunk, who specializes in studying corrections and
helped organize the event, opened the floor to Penalver's public speech.
Penalver was accused of committing a 1994 triple murder in Broward County. He
missed a meeting with detectives due to a personal emergency. From there
forward, they were no longer interested in talking to him.
On Aug. 3, 1994, Penalver felt his options were drained. "I turned myself in,
and that's where my nightmare began," he told the audience.
According to NBC Miami, Penalver was tried twice alongside his co-defendant,
Pablo Ibar. The 1st ended with a gridlocked jury and a mistrial, and the 2nd
trial sentenced him to the death penalty in 1999.
While in prison, Penalver turned to faith - he became a life coach and a
minister. "I found God in there," he said.
He also turned to the legal system when he realized that people could receive
new trials when police officers and prosecutors withhold evidence. "While
people were buying candy, I was buying law books, because this can't be the
end," the exoneree told the audience.
Penalver eventually discovered that the prosecutor and police held back
information that may have proved his innocence.
"When I saw some of the stuff they withheld, I broke down," he said. "Like,
why? Why would you do this?"
In 2012 - after spending almost half of his life in prison - Penalver's charge
was overthrown by the Florida Supreme Court due to improper evidence at his
trial.
According to the death row exoneree, one of the witnesses was bribed into
giving a false testimony.
"They were paid - they were paid to say something and we didn't know that until
17 1/2 years later," he told the silent audience.
His co-defendant, Ibar, still remains on death row.
Penalver is the 142th person to be exonerated from death row, and the 24th
person in Florida alone. "Imagine the ones we don't know about that were
killed," he added.
On whether the death penalty should be permissible, Penalver said: "It's either
you have it or you don't, and even 1 person is too many if you got it wrong."
In addition to public speaking and ministering, Penalver reaches out to
juveniles at Miami's Turner Guilford Knight Correctional Center - an adult jail
that houses minors based on their crimes.
Penalver gave advice to students interested in the criminal justice field:
"Don't manufacture what you don't have," he said. "That's what happened to me."
Penalver was invited to campus by the Beta Phi chapter of the American Criminal
Justice Association at FAU. The ACJA Beta Phi chapter and Atkin-Plunk chose
Penalver to shed light onto a different side of the criminal justice system.
"I believe this is important because many of our students aspire to be law
enforcement officers or prosecutors, and as such they should realize the
gravity of these positions and how they could potentially affect people's
lives," President of ACJA Brandon Karns told the UP.
After his speech, Penalver took a Q&A session with the audience. Once that
concluded, about 30 students and staff lined up to speak with him personally.
"It was a different perspective - I've always been neutral on the death row
because I've had corrections and ethics [classes] so my perspective can be very
different," said Amanda Carrasquillo, a senior criminal justice major who is a
part of ACJA. "Whether death row is still enrolled, whether it???s harsher,
whether it's not there anymore, I feel that as our generation we can all grow
and develop from this speaker."
(source: Brittany Ferrendi is the features editor of the University
Press----upressonline.com)
ALABAMA----new execution date
Vernon Madison has been given an execution date for May 12; it should be
considered serious
(sources: MC/RH)
ARIZONA:
Arizona Death Penalty Lawsuit Hearing Scheduled For Thursday
Arizona began executing death-row inmates by lethal injection in 1993.
The Arizona Department of Corrections wants to throw out a federal lawsuit
challenging the constitutionality of its revised execution protocol before a
supply of lethal injection drugs expires next month.
A judge will hear arguments from both sides on Thursday.
Representing 7 inmates facing execution, as well as a coalition of news media,
lawyers for the plaintiffs argue in court documents that the state's proposed
execution method violates the Constitution's 1st, 8th and 18th amendments.
Their case focuses on the cocktail of drugs the state wants to use for lethal
injections. Also used in the so-called "botched' 2014 execution of Joseph Wood,
midazolam is supposed keep an inmate from feeling pain while they die. But the
plaintiffs argue there's no way to be sure midazolam will work because a
paralyzing drug masks whether it's effective in preventing pain caused by a 3rd
drug, potassium chloride.
The state argues that the U.S. Supreme court has upheld using the paralytic
drug, which is not given to inmates until after midazolam makes them
unconscious and therefore unable to feel pain.
It also argues the plaintiffs have failed to provide an alternative for
execution that is feasible, can be implemented quickly and reduces risks the
inmates will feel pain during their execution.
State officials previously said Arizona's supply of midazolam will expire in
May.
(source: KJZZ news; Editor's note: KJZZ is a member of the First Amendment
Coalition of Arizona which is a plaintiff in the lawsuit)
CALIFORNIA:
Death Penalty Hungry DA Suspiciously Loses Appetite In One Perplexing Case
If he weren't wearing an orange jump suit and sitting inside a fortified
visitors' booth under heavy guard at Orange County's Theo Lacy Jail, you would
never guess Kenneth Clair has resided on San Quentin State Prison's death row
for more than 10,000 days. Clair describes the place as "hell," "torture" and
"like living in hell" where "there are fights every day." Yet, remarkably, the
traumatic setting, his home since Ronald Reagan's presidency, has not broken
this 56-year-old Louisiana native's spirit.
On a recent Saturday in his first face-to-face interview with a journalist,
Clair showed no hint of being a monster worthy of state execution. He didn't
threaten, babble or rant. There were no demonic curses, as I'd previously
experienced with another death-row occupant.
A composed Clair is proud he has never committed violence against a prison
guard or a fellow inmate during 30 years of incarceration. He smiled easily,
spoke politely and was thoughtful - even funny. Having undergone 11 surgeries
while living as a condemned man, Clair told the Weekly, "[State officials have]
paid a lot of money to keep me together so they can kill me."
There is, of course, no joking about the crime that caused Clair's
imprisonment. In November 1984, an intruder with sexual assault, burglary and
murder on his mind brutally killed Linda Faye Rodgers. The 25-year-old had been
a live-in babysitter at a Santa Ana residence tied to narcotics trafficking and
owned by a man with ties to a white-supremacist gang, according to court
records. Police quickly settled on Clair, a transient who'd lived in an
abandoned property next door, as the lone suspect. 4 days before the killing,
he'd been arrested for trespassing at the residence and detectives speculated
he might have returned for revenge after his release from custody.
Law enforcement officers faced huge problems, however. No forensic evidence
tied Clair to the crime scene. Cops concluded the murderer must have been
drenched in blood, but a woman who spotted the defendant shortly after the
crime saw nothing out of the ordinary. More powerfully, 2 eyewitnesses - ages 5
and 6, both Caucasian kids Rodgers supervised - told arriving first responders
that the perpetrator had been a white man. Detectives tried to rattle the
description without success, according to an internal Santa Ana Police
Department report. A 3rd kid, the victim's daughter, separately concurred. She
stated, "[They] have the wrong man. That black man didn't do it."
Nonetheless, on Dec. 4, 1987, an Orange County judge handed the ultimate
punishment to the defendant, who could never be mistaken for a white man; he's
a dark-skinned African-American. 5 days later, Clair arrived at San Quentin,
where he says prison officials asked him a disturbing question: Do you want to
pick the method of your execution or allow us to decide?
Relaying the memory drove Clair's chin to his chest. He shut his eyes and
remained silent for about 20 seconds. "I am an innocent man," he finally said
softly.
It's impossible to judge the sincerity of a person you've known for a couple of
hours, but any theatrics wouldn't change the fact the government's case has
suffered multiple devastating blows in recent years. Prosecution witnesses have
recanted statements. Unearthed records show police rushed to pursue Clair
despite clues pointing elsewhere. We've learned the prosecutor, Mike Jacobs,
had a penchant for hiding exculpatory evidence and harboring a relentless,
win-at-all-costs mentality. Proof of a surreptitious Orange County district
attorney's office (OCDA) deal to sway testimony emerged. Several jurors feel
hoodwinked. The trial work of Julian Bailey, Clair's defense lawyer who is now
a superior court judge, was so shockingly incompetent the United States Court
of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit last year ruled the death penalty couldn't be
fairly imposed. If he'd had even a semi-decent legal representation, there's "a
reasonable probability" the case would have ended more favorably for the
defense, the judges noted.
"Bailey served me up on a platter for Jacobs," said Clair. "And Jacobs got his
conviction by using any means necessary."
The case is now in Superior Court Judge Thomas M. Goethals' Santa Ana
courtroom, where the next step will be decided: Should Clair be re-sentenced to
a punishment of life without the possibility of parole? Or can Goethals remove
the special circumstances finding and give him an opportunity to someday regain
his freedom? Those questions are pending because the judge has jurisdictional
concerns. In February, the parties asked a federal appellate panel to provide
guidance before a May hearing.
As a backdrop, there's a lingering forensics battle. In 2008, 21 years after
the defendant landed on death row, scientific testing unavailable during the
trial made a startling discovery. DNA found on Rodgers' vaginal area matched
another individual tied to a Fresno case. District Attorney Tony Rackauckas has
refused to share the identity of the person, claiming he was too young at the
time of the murder to be guilty. Clair defense lawyer John Grele argued the DNA
match extends to the man's male relatives whose identities should be turned
over for investigation into whether 1 of them could be the killer. But,
insisting he is positive Clair is guilty, Rackauckas refuses to cooperate,
declaring the mystery person's "privacy rights" supersede the defendants' due
process rights. Grele countered that he'd agree to a protective order about the
identity, but the DA rejected that proposal, too.
"It's a tough situation," said Clair, who believes the DNA secrecy hides an
inconvenient truth for prosecutors. "The race factor is self-explanatory. I'd
bet $1 million, it's a white person's, like what the kids told the first
responders . . . [The DA's office] knew the biological evidence didn't match me
in 1985. They didn't want to test me [before my trial]. I was the one who
demanded I be tested for 2 years. Finally, I got a court order."
Here's where the DA's sinister side re-emerges. With the defense signaling it
has not given up on the DNA issue, Scott Simmons, one of Rackauckas' ranking
deputy DAs, declared the office, usually adamant about keeping inmates on death
row, will not pursue renewal of the death penalty in this case. Intrigue is
heightened by the fact that OCDA continues to contrarily maintain Clair is
worthy of execution.
Did Rackauckas alter his habit to slyly serve a double whammy on Clair? Defense
lawyers certainly think so. If OCDA tried to re-impose capital punishment, the
agency would have to surrender the buried DNA evidence, and the indigent
defendant would likely keep publicly financed legal counsel to battle
prosecutors.
"I look at that [OCDA decision] as their way of hoping I'd just go away and
attention to my case would go away," he said. "They're not showing me any
compassion."
Clair is also not happy with his own counsel. He claims Grele, his attorney for
a decade, has kept him in the dark about strategy, repeatedly generated
mistrust, failed to energetically demand the DNA evidence and has been unjustly
dismissive of C.J. Ford, the private investigator who discovered most of the
holes in the government's case. On April 2, he fired the San Francisco-area
lawyer.
"I no longer want him to represent me," said Clair. "I'm always learning stuff
after paper have been filed [in court] without him telling me what he's doing.
My life is the one on the line here."
Grele refused to comment.
Near the end of the interview, the inmate summarized his goal.
"I was wrongly accused, convicted and sentenced," he said. "31 1/2 years later,
I am still pleading for a fair trial."
(source: Orange County Weekly)
_______________________________________________
A service courtesy of Washburn University School of Law www.washburnlaw.edu
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Unsubscribe: http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/options/deathpenalty
