Current News and Updates

MAY 21, 2012:

TEXAS----new death sentence

Man gets death penalty in break-in deaths

A jury has decided a man should get the death penalty for capital murder in the fatal shootings of 2 brothers during a March 2009 Dallas home-invasion robbery.

A Dallas County jury reached its decision Monday afternoon on Roderick Harris after deliberating since last week. The same jury on May 10 found Harris guilty of capital murder in the deaths of Alfredo and Carlos Gallardo.

Witnesses said Harris entered the Gallardos' home and confronted 6 family members inside, demanding wallets and valuables. When the robber tried to force the family into a walk-in closet, the brothers tried to defend the family and were shot.

Harris was shot and wounded by police after shooting at officers.

(source: Associated Press)

PENNSYLVANIA:

Another man wrongly executed

With nearly 300 people across the nation exonerated after being sentenced to death, the risk of executing an innocent person is a reality in the 33 states, including Pennsylvania, where capital punishment remains legal.

That risk alone should be enough to persuade responsible elected officials to scrap the death penalty — as Connecticut did in April, following the lead of Illinois, New Mexico, and New Jersey.

There can be no more compelling reason for taking that step than evidence that the wrong person has been executed for a crime.

And that’s exactly what Columbia University law professor James Liebman and 5 of his students provided this week with their book-length exploration of the 1983 murder for which a Texan, Carlos DeLuna, was put to death in 1989.

DeLuna’s conviction in the stabbing death of a female gas-station clerk came despite conflicting and uncertain eyewitness accounts, the fact that DeLuna’s clothing at the time of his arrest bore no blood stains, and the fact that prosecutors soon learned of the likely killer — a man who bragged about DeLuna’s paying for his crime.

Despite the thoroughness of the professor and his students, prosecutors dismissed the academics as “crusaders.” In fact, the lead detective in the Corpus Christi case stands by her investigation.

As it happens, the probable killer died in prison several years after DeLuna. But the lesson in this apparent miscarriage of justice should not be lost on public officials — nor the shrinking majority of Americans who still support capital punishment.

It’s crucial to remember that those backing the death penalty say by wide margins that their continued support rests on the belief that there are legal safeguards to prevent wrongful convictions.

In dozens of cases, fortunately, that safeguard has proven to be the DNA tests that freed many given death-row reprieves.

Yet, it’s clear that there are cases like that of the Texas murder where all safeguards fail. Then, there’s only one assured way to prevent such a horrifying result — which is by outlawing the death penalty.

Connecticut has become the 5th state to take that progressive step in 5 years. Since Pennsylvanians don’t have the option of a referendum, such as the one that will be before California voters in November, they should demand that their state lawmakers act to make the Keystone State next.

Given that the death penalty is no longer viable in the state — with only volunteers having been executed in recent memory — Harrisburg officials can’t say there’s a deterrent effect to a system that also brings exorbitant costs with endless legal appeals.

But more than anything else, it’s the specter of killing an innocent person that should mean the death penalty’s days are numbered.

(source: Editorial, Philadelphia Inquirer)

CALIFORNIA:

Death penalty sought against ex-Marine in several murders in O.C.

The Orange County district attorney’s office announced Monday it will seek the death penalty against a former Marine in the stabbing death of a mother and her son in Yorba Linda and the killings of 4 homeless men.

Itzcoatl Ocampo, 24, of Yorba Linda, is charged with 6 felony counts of murder with special circumstances for multiple murders and lying in wait. He also faces sentencing enhancements connected with personal use of a deadly weapon, a knife, during the commission of a crime.

District Attorney Tony Rackauckas said in a statement that he consulted with a “special circumstances committee” of several prosecutors before reaching his decision in the case against the Iraq War veteran.

Ocampo was arrested Jan. 13 after John Berry, a 64-year-old homeless man, was stabbed to death in an Anaheim parking lot, police said. Witnesses chased Ocampo to a nearby mobile home park, where he was captured, police said.

Police identified Ocampo as the suspect in 3 other slayings that had rattled the homeless community for weeks. James Patrick McGillivray, 53, was killed Dec. 20 near a shopping center; Lloyd Middaugh, 42, was found stabbed to death Dec. 28 in Anaheim; and Paulus Smit, 57, was slain Dec. 30 in Yorba Linda.

DNA evidence linked Ocampo to two additional deaths after his arrest, according to prosecutors. His killing spree began Oct. 25, prosecutors allege, when he stabbed 53-year-old Raquel Estrada and her son, 34-year-old Juan Herrera, in their Yorba Linda home. Estrada, prosecutors said, was stabbed more than 30 times; Herrera more than 60.

Police said Ocampo was friends with Estrada's son in middle and high school.

In February, Anaheim Police Det. Daron Wyatt told grand jurors that Ocampo said he targeted the homeless because "they were available and vulnerable." Ocampo also said he was performing a public service because their presence was a "blight" on the community, Wyatt testified.

In a statement Monday, Rackauckas accused Ocampo of planning the murders and “calculating in carrying out these vicious executions with no plans of stopping.”

Ocampo is being held without bail in the Orange County Jail. His trial is scheduled to begin Sept. 10.

(source: Los Angeles Times)

MONTANA:

Mont. board: No clemency for Canadian on death row ---- The Montana Parole Board on Monday recommended that a Canadian man on death row be denied clemency.

The Montana Parole Board on Monday recommended that a Canadian man on death row be denied clemency.

Ronald A. Smith's case now goes to Gov. Brian Schweitzer, who has the final say on the matter. Smith is seeking life in prison without the possibility of parole - instead of the death sentence he now faces.

Smith is believed to be 1 of only 2 Canadians on death row in the United States.

He argues his original 1983 trial for shooting 2 Blackfeet cousins - in which he asked for and received the death penalty - was botched. His attorneys also have argued it is fundamentally unfair that Smith, of Red Deer, Alberta, be killed while an accomplice was long ago released on parole and returned to Canada.

The Montana Parole Board earlier this month heard testimony for a full day, with Smith's family tearfully pleading for his life. But Blackfeet tribal members and family of the victims argued the execution has been postponed for too long and say it is time for Smith to pay for his crimes.

The Canadian government, after some internal policy changes, is again asking Schweitzer to spare Smith's life.

Smith's lawyers say the governor should look beyond the horrific 1982 killings of Harvey Mad Man, 23, and Thomas Running Rabbit, 20, and consider that Smith is now a different person. They are hoping Schweitzer will take an objective look at the matter since he leaves office at year's end and won't be running again due to term limits.

Schweitzer has not said what action he will take. However, in a past meeting with victims of the family the governor said he will think of them and their desire to see the death penalty carried out in making any decision. But he also has said he does not take lightly any decision to execute a man.

There is no time limit for a final decision from Schweitzer.

At this month's board hearing, prosecutors and victims said the original sentence has stood through several appeals for good reason: Smith committed a premeditated double murder during an international crime spree that stretched to California.

The family of Mad Man and Running Rabbit said Smith's crime and lack of remorse at trial have forever scarred them.

Board Chairman Michael McKee has said the board's decision will hinge on whether its members conclude Smith's rehabilitation and remorse are genuine.

Smith and his supporters told the board he has become a valuable member of the prison community where he has educated himself and helped others. They said Smith has reconnected with his family in important ways, and argued his life has value.

Smith was 24 years old when he marched the 2 young men into the woods just off U.S. 2 near Marias Pass and shot them both in the head with a .22-caliber rifle. He says he was out of his mind on drugs and alcohol.

He told prosecutors at the time that he wanted to know what it was like to kill. But he later said the statements were fabricated to convince the judge to give him the death penalty. Smith even rejected a plea deal at the time that would have spared his life.

At the parole board hearing earlier this month, Smith told the victims' families that he was "horrendously sorry."

"I wish in some way I could take it back. I can't. All I can do is go forward with my life and be a better person," Smith said, adding he understands why they want to see him dead.

Smith was long thought to be the only Canadian facing execution in the U.S., but a link to Canada recently emerged in another case.

Court records show Robert Bolden, on death row for killing a bank security guard in Missouri, has Canadian citizenship, the Canadian Press has reported. Bolden was born to a Canadian woman in Newfoundland and moved to the U.S. when he was young.

The Canadian government, which does not believe in capital punishment, initially refused to support Smith, saying he had been convicted in a democratic country. It now formally supports clemency for him, in accordance with a long-standing policy of seeking clemency for Canadians sentenced to death in foreign lands.

(source: Associated Press)

USA:

States urge feds to help import lethal injection drugs

A nationwide shortage of a commonly used imported drug used in capital punishment has prompted 15 states on Monday to urge the U.S. Justice Department to intervene.

Led by Oklahoma officials, the move comes as the 33 states with the death penalty -- all of whom use lethal injection as the primary execution method -- struggle to preserve existing stock or search for legally acceptable chemical alternatives.

A federal judge in March had blocked the importation of thiopental into states like Arizona, South Carolina, and Georgia saying it was a "misbranded drug and an unapproved drug." Judge Richard Leon in Washington ordered state corrections departments to return suspected foreign-made thiopental to the Food and Drug Administration.

The states called that a "flawed decision" and now want the FDA to appeal that judge's decision, saying upcoming executions are being undermined. Attorneys General Scott Pruitt in Oklahoma and Marty Jackley in South Dakota are leading the legal effort.

"At the very core of the states' police powers are their powers to enact laws to protect their citizens against violent crimes. As state attorneys general, we are tasked with enforcing those laws, including in instances where capital punishment is authorized for the most heinous of crimes," according to attorneys general from the 15 states.

States argued the federal agency had routinely released the imported drug for executions, a practice suspended after the judge's ruling.

"If the (court) decision is not overturned, we as state attorneys general will be forced to take actions to ensure execution by lethal injection remains a viable option."

This comes after Texas officials disclosed Monday they only have enough drugs on hand for 23 more executions. The next scheduled execution in the U.S. is Bobby Hines in Texas on June 6.

Missouri earlier this month announced new protocols, and will use an entirely new drug. Propofol is a surgical anesthetic that in large doses can be administered fatally, but has never been used in the U.S. to put prisoners to death.

Officials in Ohio, Texas and other states last year cited a nationwide shortage of sodium thiopental in their decisions to separately use pentobarbital, a barbiturate that has alternately been used to put animals to sleep.

Some states use a singe execution drug, others rely on a 3-drug mixture or cocktail.

Pentobarbital has become the new legal flashpoint over capital punishment. It was used in a U.S. execution for the first time in December 2010, when it was administered as the first ingredient in a 3-drug cocktail used in a lethal injection given to an Oklahoma inmate. It also has limited Food and Drug Administration approval in smaller doses for humans as a mild anesthetic and to treat some seizures. Many physicians say they no longer administer it to people for medical purposes.

The 2nd drug in the 3-drug coktail -- pancuronium bromide -- paralyzes all muscle movement. The 3rd drug, potassium chloride, induces cardiac arrest and death.

In 2009, Ohio became the first state to perform an execution with a single drug, using a higher concentration of sodium thiopental. There were no reported complications and its use encouraged other states to follow suit.

The nation's only manufacturer of sodium thiopental since announced it was stopping production.

Many capital punishment opponents claim sodium thiopental, which renders the prisoner unconscious, can wear off too quickly, and that some prisoners would actually be awake and able to feel pain as the procedure continued.

The European manufacturers of both pentobarbital and sodium thiopental have opposed using their products for executions in the United States.

Pentobarbital is widely available and has been used for physician-assisted suicide, including in Oregon, where the practice is legal in limited circumstances.

Nationwide, death penalty use continues to decline. Connecticut recently became the latest state to ban capital punishment, although the 11 people on death row will remain there.

Only 43 people were executed in the U.S. in 2011, down 3 from the previous year, and a 56% decline from 13 years ago, when nearly 100 people were put to death.

18 have been executed so far in 2012.

***************

***************

More than 2,000 wrongfully convicted people exonerated in 23 years, researchers say

More than 2,000 people have been exonerated of serious crimes since 1989 in the United States, according to a report by college researchers who have established the first national registry of exonerations.

Researchers say their registry is the largest database of these types of cases and showcases some of the major issues with the criminal justice system, including that the leading causes of wrongful convictions are perjury, faulty witness identification and misconduct by prosecutors.

"No matter how tragic they are, even 2,000 exonerations over 23 years is a tiny number in a country with 2.3 million people in prisons and jails," says a report released by the authors. "If that were the extent of the problem we would be encouraged by these numbers. But it’s not. These cases merely point to a much larger number of tragedies that we do not know about."

The registry itself, which looks deeply into 873 specific cases of wrongful conviction, examined cases based on court documents as well as from groups that have long documented wrongful convictions. That group of wrongfully convicted spent more than 10,000 total years in prison, according to the report, with an average of 11 years each.

Many of the cases of the wrongfully accused were championed by the Innocence Project, a well-known group that works with many inmates to try to clear their names based on DNA evidence. The group has documented 289 post-conviction DNA exonerations. The earliest came in 1989, when DNA testing was being heavily used to re-examine cases for the 1st time.

The database is a fully searchable list of those who were convicted, broken down by their crimes, sentences and reason for exoneration. Some go into extensive detail about the long and treacherous roads to exoneration that prisoners have undergone.

James Bain is the longest-serving prisoner to be exonerated by DNA evidence, spending 35 years behind bars for a crime he didn't commit. He was convicted in 1974, at age 19, of kidnapping and raping a 9-year-old boy in Lake Wales, Florida.

His life was returned to him in December 2009, when a Florida judge freed him after DNA testing proved he did not commit the crime.

"Bain’s photo was included in a lineup of five photographs, and the victim picked Bain as his attacker. Based on the identification and little else, Bain was convicted and sentenced to life in prison," according to the database. "Bain had no criminal record at the time of his arrest, and insisted he was at home watching television with his sister when the crime occurred."

In the backyard of his mother's home in Tampa, Bain stood among grapefruit and orange trees that weren't even planted when he went to prison and said he'd like to tour the country on his motorcycle.

"You spend 35 years in prison, and just the little things, like a grapefruit tree or an orange tree ... Those had vanished for me," he said. "I never thought I'd get a chance to see another one of these."

Bain is only one part of a much larger story. Although the registry report makes clear that most convictions in the U.S. are correct, the database shows a larger need to look closely at how the criminal justice system works, the authors say.

The report also shows which states have exonerated the most people. It notes that Illinois and New York may top the list in part because of the large presence of 2 major wrongful conviction centers in each state. From 1989 to 2011, the following states had tallied the most exonerations:

1. Illinois: 101

2. New York: 88

3. Texas: 84

4. California: 79

(Federal: 39)

5. Michigan: 35

6. Louisiana: 34

7. Florida: 32

8. Ohio: 28

9. Massachusetts: 27

10. Pennsylvania: 27

The report also takes a look at the leading cause of wrongful convictions for specific crimes.

The project's findings alone, the authors say, are reason enough to look closely and continue to monitor convictions across the country. "We cannot prevent all false convictions, but we must not compound these tragedies by stubbornness or arrogance or, worst of all, indifference," the report says. "The more we learn about false convictions the better able we will be to prevent them, or failing that, to identify and correct them after the fact."

(source for both: CNN)

****************

Accused 9/11 planners might get separate Guantánamo trials

The judge in the legal proceeding against 5 men accused of having roles in the 9/11 terror attacks is considering whether to separate the trials.

Scheduling conflicts and legal issues might be reasons to split up the military trial of the 5 Guantánamo men accused of plotting the Sept. 11 attacks, the Army colonel presiding at the case wrote in a court order made public Monday.

Judge James L. Pohl instructed the 9/11 prosecutors to answer him by Thursday on whether separate military juries should hear the death penalty terror trials of alleged mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed and four accused co-conspirators.

Military and Justice Department prosecutors have been preparing a joint prosecution for years. During the Bush administration, the Pentagon built a special courthouse at Guantánamo capable of trying up to six defendants before a single jury.

Now the judge has asked the prosecutors whether they want to stick with that plan. In his order, written last week but held under seal until Monday, the judge wrote that he envisioned potential conflicts at the death penalty phase of the trial, if the men are convicted.

As of Monday afternoon, the prosecutors were preparing their response, said Army Lt. Col. Todd Breasseale, a Pentagon spokesman.

But, “joint trials of alleged co-conspirators are often the best way to ensure a network’s entire conduct is properly and fully considered,” Breasseale said.

The judge’s 2-page order made no mention of the chaotic arraignment of the men May 5, a Saturday hearing that stretched across 13 hours in part because the 5 men staged choreographed protests in the court. Each man refused to answer the judge’s questions and accepted each offer of 3 prayer breaks in the daylong hearing.

Rather, the issue is coming to a head now because the judge had set June 12-15 for the next hearings in the case.

Defense lawyers for some of the men have sought delays, citing conflicts. Notably, Mohammed’s lawyer, David Nevin, has to be in Boise, Idaho, at that time — if not seeking clemency from the governor then attending the execution of another client. He’s Richard A. Leavitt, convicted of the July 1984 murder and sexual mutilation of a Blackfoot, Idaho, woman, and scheduled to die by lethal injection June 12.

Had all 5 of the accused agreed to a delay, the issue might have been averted at this early stage of the case, at least a year before the actual trial.

But Navy Cmdr. Walter Ruiz, defending Saudi Mustafa Hawsawi, said his client wanted the hearing June 12 and did not waive a so-called speedy trial clock requirement in the case.

At the May 5 arraignment, Ruiz had pressed the judge to tackle several fundamental pre-trial motions, notably early challenges to the legitimacy of the case itself as well as a long-festering issue on the prison camp’s reviewing mail between the attorneys and their clients. Pohl said those motions would be taken up June 15.

In his order to the prosecutors, the judge did not instruct them on whether they should consider 5 separate trials for the men or smaller joint prosecutions. He gave the defense lawyers a May 31 deadline to weigh in on whether they want separate trials.

The timeline casts doubt on whether he would still seek to hold a joint hearing the week of June 12.

Defense attorneys for one of the accused, Ammar al Baluchi, had earlier argued unsuccessfully to a Pentagon official to have that case split off on grounds the allegations against Baluchi, Mohammed’s nephew, implicated him largely in money transfers not other aspects of the conspiracy. Baluchi’s lawyer, James Connell III, described the order itself as “unusual because the military commission itself raised the issue of severance.” Under the military commission formula for a death penalty trial, a panel of 12 or more U.S. military officers hears the case, renders a verdict and, in the event of a conviction, then decides punishment. Before they deliberate whether to impose the death penalty, lawyers for the men can bring in evidence on why they shouldn’t order an execution.

The judge wrote in his instruction to the prosecution to consider splitting up the trial that he “is concerned with the capital sentencing phase, if any, in this case. It is conceivable that the mitigation evidence for one accused could possibly be considered aggravation evidence for another.” But Cheryl Bormann, defending an alleged trainer of the 9/11 hijackers, Walid bin Attash, said Monday she had not received sufficient court resources to know whether splitting the trial was in her client’s best interest.

Prosecutors had yet to turn over the evidence against her client, called discovery, she said. Plus, she said, seven months had passed and the Pentagon still had not yet granted a security clearance for her mitigation expert to meet with Bin Attash. He’s Tim Semmerling, who is similarly serving as a mitigation expert in the case of Army Maj. Nidal Hasan, accused of killing 13 people in a Nov. 5, 2009 shooting spree at Fort Hood, Texas.

The judge, said Bormann, is “asking us for input before we have the tools for which we could actually analyze the situation and make a determination.”

(source: Miami Herald)

**********************

How America's death penalty murders innocentsThe evidence is in: the US criminal justice system produces wrongful convictions on an industrial scale – with fatal results

The US criminal justice system is a broken machine that wrongfully convicts innocent people, sentencing thousands of people to prison or to death for the crimes of others, as a new study reveals. The University of Michigan law school and Northwestern University have compiled a new National Registry of Exonerations – a database of over 2,000 prisoners exonerated between 1989 and the present day, when DNA evidence has been widely used to clear the names of innocent people convicted of rape and murder. Of these, 885 have profiles developed for the registry's website, exonerationregistry.org.

The details are shocking. Death row inmates were exonerated nine times more frequently than others convicted of murder. One-fourth of those exonerated of murder had received a death sentence, while half of those who had been wrongfully convicted of rape or murder faced death or a life behind bars. Ten of the inmates went to their grave before their names were cleared.

The leading causes of wrongful convictions include perjury, flawed eyewitness identification and prosecutorial misconduct. For those who have placed unequivocal faith in the US criminal justice system and believe that all condemned prisoners are guilty of the crime of which they were convicted, the data must make for a rude awakening.

"The most important thing we know about false convictions is that they happen and on a regular basis -- Most false convictions never see the light of the day," said University of Michigan law professors Samuel Gross and Michael Shaffer, who wrote the study.

"Nobody had an inkling of the serious problem of false confessions until we had this data," said Rob Warden, executive director of the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University.

The unveiling of the exoneration registry comes days after a groundbreaking study from Columbia law school Professor James Liebman and 12 students. Published in the Columbia Human Rights Law Review, the study describes how Texas executed an innocent man named Carlos DeLuna in 1989. DeLuna was put to death for the 1983 murder of Wanda Lopez, a young woman, at a gas station. Carlos Hernandez, who bragged about committing the murder and bore a striking resemblance to DeLuna, was named at trial by DeLuna's defence team as the actual perpetrator of the crime. But DeLuna's false conviction is merely the tip of the iceberg, as the database suggests.

Recently also, Charlie Baird, a Texas judge, was prepared to issue an order posthumously exonerating Cameron Todd Willingham, who was executed in 2004 for the 1991 arson-related deaths of his three young daughters. Based upon "overwhelming, credible and reliable evidence", Baird concluded Willingham had been wrongfully convicted; this in addition to a jailhouse witness who recanted his testimony, and scientists who challenged the evidence at trial that the fire that destroyed the Willingham home was caused by arson. Baird was blocked by a state appeals court from issuing the order before he left the bench to pursue private practice.

And again in Texas, lawyers for Kerry Max Cook, a former death row prisoner who was wrongfully convicted of a 1977 murder in East Texas, claim that the district attorney in the case withheld in his possession the murder weapon and biological evidence in the case.

In 2012, the American death penalty has reached a crossroads. Public support for executions has decreased over the years, with capital punishment critics citing its high cost, failure to deter crime, and the fact that the practice places the nation out of step with international human rights norms. Last year, the US ranked fifth in the world in executions, a member of a select club of nations that includes China, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran. Further, in the US states that have repealed the death penalty in recent years – including New Mexico, New Jersey, Illinois and, most recently, Connecticut – the killing of the innocent has been cited as a pivotal factor in favor of abolition.

Meanwhile, thanks to an EU embargo on lethal injection drugs to the US, states that practice capital punishment are faced with a shortage of poison to execute prisoners. Some have resorted to purchasing unapproved drug supplies on the black market, or using different chemicals altogether. For example, Ohio has abandoned its three-drug protocol for executions in favor of a single drug called pentobarbital, a barbiturate used to euthanize animals. And Missouri has decided to execute prisoners using propofol, a surgical anesthetic implicated in Michael Jackson's death.

Apparently desperate and lacking in options to kill, these states would be better-served by joining the civilized world and devoting their efforts to end the death penalty, rather than find new methods to satisfy their bloodlust – which, as the new evidence makes abundantly clear, cannot but cause them to execute innocent citizens. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 140 men and women have been released from death row since 1973 due to innocence. That death row inmates are exonerated much more often than other categories of prisoner – even when a person's life is at stake – should shatter anyone's faith in the presumed infallibility of the court system.

It is now transparent to the public that, at best, the application of the death penalty is rife with human error and incompetence. At worst, we know there is prosecutorial misconduct: that the courts shelter and nurture officials who are rewarded for gaming the system by career advancement, rather than determining true guilt or innocence and ensuring that justice is done.

(source: The Guardian)

US MILITARY:

Lawyer says soldier doesn't remember Iraq killings

An Army sergeant charged with killing 4 other soldiers and a Navy officer in May 2009 at a mental health clinic in Iraq should not face a possible death penalty, his lawyer said Monday.

Sgt. John Russell has no memory of being inside the Camp Liberty Combat Stress Center near Baghdad, attorney James Culp said.

"We believe strongly that John went to kill himself in front of the doctor who had mocked him and antagonized him," Culp said. "And the doctors say he was suffering from major depression with psychotic features and chronic post-traumatic stress disorder."

The facts do not warrant a death penalty, he said.

Premeditated murder charges were filed Wednesday against Russell, 47, of Sherman, Texas.

The lawyer from Austin, Texas, said he had tried to avert the possibility of a death sentence.

"The delays were all requested by the defense in the hopes we would end up with a non-capital referral," Culp said.

If convicted, the maximum punishment is death, but the court martial jury will have options short of the death penalty, he said.

"We do not believe now that when a military panel is seated, this is the type of punishment they will seek to impose on John, once the facts are heard," Culp said.

Russell's lack of memory will be a problem for the defense, he said.

No date for the court martial has been set, but Culp said he asked for a date in December and the government wants an earlier date.

The shootings are believed to be the worst case of soldier-on-soldier violence of the Iraq War, said Culp and Lewis-McChord spokesman Lt. Col. Gary Dangerfield.

Russell also has an Army defense attorney, but it is standard procedure for them not to comment to the media, Dangerfield said.

The military trial will focus on the mental stress of combat, Culp said.

"The court martial will tell us a lot about the lack of mental health care in the combat zone," he said.

A hearing on possible charges held in August 2009 at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., established that Russell was nearing the end of his third tour when his behavior changed. Members of his unit testified that he became more distant in the days before the May 11, 2009, attack, and that he seemed paranoid that his unit was trying to end his career.

On May 8, 2009, Russell sought help at a combat stress clinic at Camp Stryker, where his unit was located. On May 10, 2009, Russell was referred to the Camp Liberty clinic, where he received counseling and prescription medication to treat his symptoms.

Witnesses said the following day they saw Russell crying and talking about hurting himself. He went back to the Camp Liberty clinic, where a doctor told him he needed to get help or he would hurt himself. Russell tried to surrender to military police to lock him up so he wouldn't hurt himself or others, witnesses said.

Military prosecutors said Russell left the clinic and later returned with a rifle he took from his unit headquarters and began firing. He was arrested afterward.

Killed in the shooting were Navy Cmdr. Charles Springle, 52, of Wilmington, N.C., and four Army service members: Pfc. Michael Edward Yates Jr., 19, of Federalsburg, Md.; Dr. Matthew Houseal, of Amarillo, Texas; Sgt. Christian E. Bueno-Galdos, 25, of Paterson, N.J.; and Spc. Jacob D. Barton, 20, of Lenox, Mo.

Russell deployed to Iraq with the 370th Engineer Company, 54th Engineer Battalion from Bamberg, Germany. In Iraq the 54th was assigned to the 555th Engineer Brigade, based at Lewis-McChord, which is responsible for the court martial.

(source: Fox News)

TUNISIA:

Libya's ex-Pm starts hunger strike against extradition

Former Libyan prime minister al-Mahmoudi, who is being detained in Tunisia, has started a hunger strike. Baghdad al-Mahmoudi started a hunger strike in protest against his possible extradition to Libya, where he could face the death penalty. Al-Mahmoudi's lawyer Mabrouk Kourchid said the former number 2 of Gaddafi's regime started his protest on Saturday in protest against Tunisian premier Hamadi Jebali's statement that he doesn't want to turn his country into "a shelter for those who may threaten Libya's security". Al-Mahmoudi has been detained in Tunisia since September 2011, when he was arrested there. Tripoli has called for his extradition twice, but Tunisia's former President Fouad Mebazaa never signed an extradition decree. Al-Mahmoudi's successor, Moncef Marzouki, said he would not authorize the extradition, unless the former premier was guaranteed a fair trial in Libya.

(source: AGI News)

TEXAS:

Death-penalty foes rally at courthouse

About a dozen protesters, led by longtime death penalty opponent Rick Halperin, gathered at the Dallas County criminal courthouse Friday afternoon to press District Attorney Craig Watkins to quit seeking the death penalty.

The protest was spurred by the latest report on the possible wrongful execution of Carlos DeLuna 13 years ago for a Corpus Christi slaying.

According to a new report by James Liebman, a Columbia University law professor, another man confessed to the killing repeatedly but was never found by police. DeLuna was convicted primarily on eyewitness identification.

Halperin, a human rights professor at Southern Methodist University, called Watkins a hypocrite for saying he is "on the fence" about capital punishment but continuing to seek death in some cases.

Watkins did not attend the protest. Later, through a spokeswoman, he declined to comment.

(source: Dallas Morning News)

DELAWARE:

Death penalty law needs reviewing

A group of Cornell University law professors believes Delaware’s death penalty laws are wrong, unfair and racially prejudiced.

In an upcoming law review article, the professors take Delaware to task for imposing the death sentence far above the national average.

Delaware officials, many of whom are charged with enforcing the death penalty, vigorously disagree with the Cornell study. They say that the state’s small size distorts the numbers. In a state as small as Delaware, a single instance can change percentages dramatically.

They’re right – death penalty rates are easily skewed when dealing with small numbers.

However, we believe that the Cornell professors are on to something when they lay the blame on a 1991 state law that gave judges the power to impose the death penalty even when the jury vote is not unanimous.

The General Assembly hastily changed the law after the failure of a New Castle County jury to reach a unanimous decision in the cold-blooded murders of security guards.

The jury vote spared the killers from execution and led to life sentences instead. Public outrage led to the change.

The professors behind the study are associated with the Cornell Law School’s Death Penalty Project.

The school’s website describes the project as an even-handed, evidence-based examination of the death penalty in America.

It says, “Because the history of the death penalty in the United States is rife with mistake, arbitrariness, and discrimination, it should be studied for the extent to which arbitrariness, mistake and discrimination persist, and the ways they can be minimized.”

The supposed arbitrariness and discrimination of Delaware’s law is the subject of the study.

The state should take that charge seriously.

Was the 1991 law passed too hastily? Does it give judges too much power?

Other states are now reviewing their statutes and procedures.

Given what is at stake when the state executes someone, Delaware should do likewise.

(source: Opinion, Delawareonline)

USA:

US death row inmates exonerated 9 times more often

US death row inmates are ending up exonerated 9 times more often than any other prisoner convicted of murder, according to a new report made public Monday.

Anti-death penalty campaigners stage a demonstration in Los Angeles in 2010. US death row inmates are ending up exonerated 9 times more often than any other prisoner convicted of murder, according to a new report made public Monday."The most important thing we know about false convictions is that they happen and on a regular basis... Most false convictions never see the light of the day," said the authors of the study, professors of law Samuel Gross and Michael Shaffer of the University of Michigan.

After 3 years of research, the 2 experts, aided by their students, came up with the names of 2,000 inmates exonerated from 1989 to 2012.

They were able to develop profiles of 885 cases in a national registry, which is constantly updated and now includes 891 names listed on their website, exonerationregistry.org.

A quarter of prisoners exonerated of murder -- 101 out of 409 -- had been sentenced to capital punishment, according to the report.

And nearly 1/2 of all rape or murder convicts who had been later found innocent -- 341 out of 721 -- were about to be executed or remain in prison for the rest of their lives, the study said.

10 were found innocent after their death.

"Most innocent defendants with short sentences probably never try to clear their names," Gross said. "They serve their time and do what they can to put the past behind them.

"Death sentences produce exonerations at 9 times the rate for all homicide convictions".

(source: Agence France-Presse)

****************

INNOCENCE: Leading Researchers Release Report and National Registry of Exonerations in U.S.

On May 21, the University of Michigan Law School and the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University announced the start of the 1st National Registry of Exonerations and released an extensive report discussing the problem of wrongful convictions in the U.S. The Registry contains information on nearly 900 people who were falsely convicted of serious crimes, including many who were sentenced to death, and who have been exonerated since 1989. It is by far the largest collection of such cases and will be updated on an ongoing basis. The authors believe that many more such cases exist, including over 1,000 cases from "group exonerations" involving official misconduct that are discussed in the report. The report accompanying the registry, Exonerations in the United States, 1989-2012, was written principally by Professor Samuel Gross (pictured) of Michigan's Law School. It discusses the most common errors that led to these miscarriages of justice. Rob Warden, Executive Director of the Center on Wrongful Convictions, said, “The National Registry of Exonerations gives an unprecedented view of the scope of the problem of wrongful convictions in the United States. This is a good start–a milestone–but there’s a long way to go before we have a complete picture of wrongful convictions in the United States.” Prof. Gross added, “The more we learn about false convictions, the better we’ll be at preventing them – or if that fails, at finding and correcting them as best we can after the fact.”

The report notes that about 37% of exonerations occurred with the help of DNA evidence. The average time of imprisonment before exoneration was 11 years. About 62% of those exonerated were members of minorities.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

***********

Prejean: Scales tipping against death penalty

30 years into her campaign against the death penalty, Sister Helen Prejean can feel the scales tipping in her favor.

“The use of the death penalty has greatly diminished since 1999,” Prejean said. “We just have to build up the number of states (abolishing the death penalty) until we reach that tipping point, and it's not that far off.”

Prejean, 73, was in Omaha Sunday to give the commencement address for the College of St. Mary. Prior to her speech, the diminutive nun with a rich Southern drawl talked about her work at the Death Penalty Discourse Network in New Orleans, Nebraska's adoption of lethal injection and her meeting with Pope John Paul II.

Prejean, a Louisiana native, began a prison ministry in 1981 when she dedicated her life to the poor of New Orleans. While living in the St. Thomas housing projects, she became pen pals with Patrick Sonnier, the convicted killer of 2 teenagers who was sentenced to die in the electric chair of the Louisiana State Penitentiary, also known as Angola.

She turned her experiences into a book, “Dead Man Walking: An Eyewitness Account of the Death Penalty in the United States.” The book was nominated for a 1993 Pulitzer Prize. In 1995, the book was developed into a movie, “Dead Man Walking,” starring Susan Sarandon as Sister Helen and Sean Penn as a death row inmate.

5 states — New York, New Jersey, New Mexico, Illinois and Connecticut — have recently ended the death penalty, and there's a moratorium in Oregon. That leaves 32 states with the death penalty, 17 without it and Oregon on the fence.

“We've made a lot of progress in the last 2 years,” Prejean said.

Prejean said she will campaign in California, urging voters there to vote in November to abolish the death penalty.

“I'm not seeing much heart among the people of this nation for killing,” Prejean said. “I think that's one of the reasons why some states like Nebraska are turning to lethal injection. They keep trying to clean up death and make it antiseptic.”

In 2008, the Nebraska Supreme Court declared that electrocution, then the state's method of carrying out the death penalty, was a form of “cruel and unusual punishment.” Nebraska turned to lethal injection.

“A fiscal analysis would tell you that it's costing more and more money to even try putting these prisoners to death and that's hard to justify in these (economic) times,” Prejean said. “California has spent $4 billion for 13 executions. How is that fiscally responsible?”

In a private audience with Pope John Paul II during his 1999 visit to St. Louis, Prejean said she was buoyed by his determination to make the fight against the death penalty “part of the seamless garment” of the Catholic Church.

“John Paul II was insistent that the church not only stand against abortion but against the death penalty,” she said. “Life should be protected not only for the innocent but for the guilty, too.”

(source: Omaha World-Herald)

OHIO:

Death-penalty cases drop----New sentencing options and changes in attitudes mean fewer are being sent to death row

Franklin County sent 17 people to death row from 1985 to 2003, an average of nearly 1 a year.

Then things changed.

The death sentence imposed last week on Caron E. Montgomery was the county’s 1st in nearly 9 years.

The numbers have declined statewide, as well.

Since the state’s current death-penalty statute was enacted in 1981, the number of Ohioans sentenced to death fell from a record 24 in 1985 to 1 in 2009. Last year, 3 people were sent to Ohio’s death row.

“I don’t think there’s any one reason for it,” said Ohio Public Defender Timothy Young. “I think it’s a combination of reasons.”

The reasons include a change in cultural attitudes about the death penalty, the financial burden associated with trying and appealing such cases and the availability of life without parole as an alternative, he said.

Franklin County Prosecutor Ron O’Brien said his office began reassessing how it handles potential death-penalty cases in 2005.

“We’re looking at mitigating factors now, just as a judge or jury would, and not just at the crime,” he said. “We’re asking, ‘What is the realistic possibility of obtaining the death penalty in this case?’??”

Death-penalty indictments in Franklin County dropped dramatically as a result, from 34 in 2004 to 5 in 2005. Last year, 3 death-penalty indictments were filed in the county.

O’Brien said he changed his approach to the cases after working with the U.S. attorney’s office in early 2005 on the federal death-penalty case against Daryl Lawrence, who was convicted of murdering Columbus police Officer Bryan Hurst and sentenced to death by a federal jury.

O’Brien said federal prosecutors put cases through a rigorous review process before seeking death-penalty indictments.

The Lawrence case also coincided with a 2005 change in state law that allowed a life sentence without parole to be imposed for aggravated-murder cases that didn’t qualify for the death penalty. Previously, life without parole was only possible in death-penalty cases.

“Suddenly, prosecutors didn’t have to file a death-penalty indictment to get to life without parole,” Young said.

He thinks that’s among the reasons for a statewide decline in death-penalty indictments, from 98 in 2004 to 56 in 2011.

Only Cuyahoga County continues to indict a significant number of death-penalty cases. In the past 3 years, 115 were indicted there, accounting for 53 % of all death-penalty cases in the state.

The numbers are misleading because the Cuyahoga County prosecutor’s office has a committee that thoroughly reviews the death-penalty cases after they are indicted, said Assistant Prosecutor Richard Bell.

“We indict everyone equally on the merits and review the mitigating factors afterward,” he said. “We dismiss the death-penalty specifications if there is appropriate mitigation.”

Mitigating factors, such as the traumatic childhood of the defendant, are presented by defense attorneys in an effort to spare the life of someone facing the death penalty.

Bell didn’t have figures to show how often the committee’s review process results in reduced charges.

But for all those indictments, Cuyahoga County sent only 3 defendants to death row in the past 3 years.

All 33 states with the death penalty on the books now allow judges and juries to consider life without parole as an alternative, said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, D.C.

That has helped fuel a national decline in executions, from 98 in 1999 to 43 in 2011, he said.

“Juries are hesitant about the death penalty because of all the revelations about wrongful convictions,” Dieter said. “Life without parole is seen as an acceptable alternative.”

Caron E. Montgomery decided to place his fate in the hands of a three-judge panel because of concerns that a jury would more likely be swayed by the “terrible” facts of the case, said J. Scott Weisman, one of his attorneys.

But the judges still chose death for Montgomery, who pleaded guilty to the stabbing deaths of his former girlfriend and her two children, including his 2-year-old son.

Weisman expects the death penalty to be abolished eventually because it’s so expensive for the state to pursue from the trial through years of appeals.

“I’d like to think we’ll do away with it because it’s barbaric, but I think it will be because of the costs,” he said.

In the past 5 years, 5 states have abolished the death penalty, with Illinois joining the list last year, Dieter said. Even many of the states that retain it haven’t executed anyone in years.

“At some point,” he said, “the Supreme Court may have to look at how unusual it has become and decide whether it’s so outside the norm that it should be struck down.”

(source: Columbus Dispatch)

MISSISSIPPI:

Inmates riot in Mississippi prison, one guard killed

Inmates seized control of a privately owned prison in Mississippi on Sunday after riots broke out, and a guard was killed in the chaos in the low security facility, authorities said.

Adams County Coroner James Lee said the 23-year-old guard died of blunt trauma to the head during the riot at the Adams County Correctional Center, a privately owned prison that houses mostly illegal immigrants for the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

"This is an ongoing riot that still has not been rectified because the prisoners are in still in charge of the prison," Lee said, speaking at around 9 p.m. local time.

The disturbance in the 2,567-bed prison began on Sunday afternoon inside the facility in Natchez, Mississippi, the Corrections Corporation of America, which owns the prison, said in a statement.

Photographs of the scene showed white smoke lingering above the prison yard. The Natchez Democrat newspaper said a SWAT team was stationed outside the prison and, at one point, prisoners lit a fire.

The paper quoted Adams County Sheriff Chuck Mayfield as saying eight prison employees remained in the prison and authorities were working to get them out.

"I personally saw the fire start outside the prison but within the fences. ... It looked like they launched tear gas," local resident Sessions Vestal, who lives about a mile down the road from the prison, told Reuters.

5 prison employees and an inmate were injured and sent to a hospital outside the facility. Most of the prison's inmates are illegal immigrants from Mexico. Many were arrested on drug-related charges and awaiting deportation.

The company that owns the prison deployed several special response teams - both from that facility and from others it owns - to quell the riot while state and local law enforcement agencies secured the outside perimeter, the statement said.

"The disturbance is contained within the secure perimeter of the facility, with no threat to public safety," it added.

There was no immediate word on what sparked the riot.

(source: Reuters)

KUWAIT:

Kuwaiti pleads innocent in Twitter trial

A 26-year-old Kuwaiti pleaded not guilty on Monday to charges he insulted the Prophet Mohammad and the Sunni Muslim rulers of Saudi Arabia and Bahrain on social media, the first day of a high-profile and divisive court case in the Gulf state.

Charges were brought by a civil plaintiff, who called for Shi'ite Muslim Hamad al-Naqi to be put to death, saying he must be made an example of to others. The case has stoked tensions between Kuwait's Sunnis and minority Shi'ites.

Naqi's lawyer asked for his client, who has been in prison since his arrest in March, to be released on bail. The judge declined the request and adjourned the trial until next week.

Sitting in a wooden and metal cage guarded by armed guards in black balaclavas at the start of the trial, a bearded, tired-looking Naqi sat quietly clasping his hands, occasionally rubbing the back of his shaved head and looking at the floor.

Wearing a blue prison uniform and glasses, Naqi was escorted from the cage to face the judge, confirmed his personal details and entered his innocent plea.

The case has caused uproar in Kuwait, where dozens of Sunni Muslim activists and lawmakers have protested against Naqi some calling for the death penalty and accusing him of links to Shi'ite regional power Iran, something he has denied.

Shi'ites make up about 1/3 of Kuwait's 1.1 million nationals and vocal members can be found in senior positions in parliament, media and business.

Although Kuwait has largely avoided the sectarian violence and pro-democracy uprisings seen elsewhere in the region, it is concerned its sizeable Shi'ite minority may turn restive.

Kuwaiti authorities have been closely watching Shi'ite-led protests in Bahrain and unrest in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia, home to more than 2 million minority Shi'ites.

Kuwait's parliament, where opposition Islamists have grown in influence, endorsed a legal amendment this month that would make insulting God and the Prophet Mohammad by Muslims punishable by death instead of a maximum penalty of 10 years in jail.

Naqi's lawyer and Amnesty International say the death penalty cannot be applied in the Naqi case because the alleged crime took place before the change in legislation.

But civil plaintiff Dowaem al-Mowazry, who is arguing the case against Naqi, said this was a special case.

"We will ask for the implementation of the death penalty for Naqi because he insulted Allah, the Prophet Mohammad and his companions," he told Reuters after the opening of the trial.

"He will be an example for anyone who thinks he can do such a thing."

Naqi has told police that he did not write the comments and that his Twitter account was hacked. His lawyer Khaled al-Shatti argued that Naqi should be granted bail because Kuwaitis charged with similar crimes had been granted it in the past.

"He denied the charges. But even if we were to imagine hypothetically that he did say something, this would be an "opinion crime", not a crime threatening state security," he told Reuters.

(source: Yahoo News)

CANADA:

Steven Truscott fights another battle for his life

As a teenager, he faced the hangman’s noose, condemned as a child killer and a rapist. For more than 50 years, he fought to clear his name of a crime that he insisted he did not commit.

But now Steven Truscott, one of Canada’s most famous victims of a wrongful conviction, is fighting one final, daunting battle — against cancer.

Truscott, a 67-year-old grandfather, had his entire prostate removed last year in an attempt to destroy a potentially deadly tumour. He has since undergone 33 radiation treatments and doctors continue to test him for any warning signs that the cancerous cells may have returned.

“Worrying about it isn’t going to make it go away,” Truscott told the Toronto Star in an exclusive interview at his home. “I figured if the government couldn’t get rid of me, this wasn’t going to get rid of me either.”

At age 14, Truscott faced execution for the murder and rape of a classmate, Lynne Harper, in 1959 near the air force base where they lived in Clinton, Ont. His sentence was commuted to life in prison just weeks before the scheduled hanging.

That early brush with death seems to have informed Truscott’s resolve to fight his cancer. “You’re put on this earth and what’s thrown at you — you either handle it or you don’t,” he said.

Inspired by the very public battle waged by the late NDP leader Jack Layton, Truscott agreed to discuss his medical condition to send a message to Canadian men to regularly take a simple test for prostate-specific antigen (PSA), a possible early indicator of cancer.

“I’d always been healthy. I figured you don’t need the test if I feel fine,” he said. “It takes two minutes to take the PSA test. If you know someone who has died from prostate cancer, it is not a pretty picture.”

Truscott spent 10 years behind bars and then a lifetime on parole as a convicted murderer. In 2007, after a decade-long legal battle to reopen his case, the Ontario Court of Appeal unanimously overturned his conviction as “a miscarriage of justice” that “must be quashed.”

The following year, the Ontario government awarded Truscott $6.5 million in compensation. He moved into an expansive home on the outskirts of Guelph with his wife Marlene and looked forward to a comfortable life with their 3 children and 4 grandchildren.

Then, the devastating news. Truscott, who says he never spent a day in his life in the hospital, had not visited his family doctor in 2 years. When he finally booked a visit, a routine checkup and blood test found dangerously high levels of PSA.

A subsequent biopsy confirmed he had prostate cancer.

“I can remember thinking: ‘Why does this have to happen to him?’” said Marlene, Truscott’s wife of 42 years and the driving force in her husband’s battle to prove his innocence. “I was just sick, absolutely, completely sick from worry.”

Truscott, who had learned to control his emotions after years in prison and frustrated legal appeals, was more reserved — at least outwardly.

“He handled it almost stoically; none of this ‘poor me’ stuff, just about the way you would expect Steve to react,” said Mac Stienburg, who was Truscott’s prison chaplain in the 1960s and, later, his parole officer. He has remained a close family friend.

“This (cancer) would sound like peanuts in comparison with a death sentence to hang,” said Stienburg. “This paled in comparison.”

Still, when Stienburg got a late night call from Truscott, he sensed the man he had known since he was a teenage inmate was more concerned than he would admit.

“What’s God doing to me?” Stienburg remembers Truscott asking, only half-jokingly.

“I don’t know, but I’ll ask him and put in a good word,” said the former chaplain.

Last summer, Truscott underwent surgery for a prostatectomy, the complete removal of his infected gland.

It went well but Dr. Timothy Wesley-James, the urologist who performed the operation, found the cancer had infected 40 % of Truscott’s prostate and “microscopic” traces had spread locally.

“You have concerns,” Wesley-James told the Star.

Then late last year, a blood test detected PSA again — bad news because with the prostate removed the only explanation for PSA readings was that some of the cancerous cells indeed were still present. So over the winter, Truscott began intensive radiation treatments, 5 days a week for almost 2 months.

In April he walked into the office of Dr. Joda Kuk, his radiation oncologist at the Grand River Regional Cancer Centre in Kitchener, to get the latest test results.

Kuk had drawn a smiley face and the scrawled the word “YAY!” on Truscott’s medical folder: The PSA levels were undetectable.

“It was evidence that I had hit the target of cancer cells,” Kuk said.

About 40 % of men like Truscott who had high-risk features in their prostate cancer might see a recurrence of the disease, Kuk explained, but effective radiation treatment can cut that danger in half.

“The outlook is good but you monitor these patients for 15 years because it could still come back,” said Wesley-James.

The surgery, radiation and stress over the past year have taken an obvious toll on Truscott. Once a strong, fit man with the ramrod-straight bearing of a boy who grew up on an air force base, Truscott has put on weight, walks more slowly and lacks the energy he once had.

“I tire out faster,” he admits.

Marlene has also spotted a “big personality change,” noting her usually easygoing husband at times is “far more distant, more irritable.”

The Truscotts have largely stepped out of the public limelight since Steven’s acquittal in 2007 after a gruelling decade of appeals, hearings and campaigns against wrongful convictions.

The family has quietly launched the Truscott Initiative in Justice Studies at the University of Guelph, funding two scholarships for students in the field and working toward setting up a chair devoted to justice and social issues.

They still get letters and emails regularly from supporters and schoolchildren working on projects about the famous legal case.

Truscott said there is only one thing that would bring him back into the public eye: “If they ever try to bring back the death penalty,” he said, referring to occasional murmurs from some Tory politicians.

“How many wrongful convictions have there been in Canada, and how many of those people would be dead (under capital punishment)?” he asks. “I would come back for that.”

But for now, Truscott wants to think about life, not death.

He and his wife dream of spending more time with their grandchildren and taking a road trip to explore Canada.

“I was given two chances,” Truscott says, escaping a hanging death after a criminal conviction and — for now at least — a lingering death from cancer. “My cat has 9 lives, so I have 7 more to catch up.”

He breathes heavily as he rolls his 270-kilogram Kawasaki motorcycle out of his garage. So far this spring he has found the energy to take the bike out for a spin 3 times, an exhilarating jolt of freedom for the grandfather who still chafes at the memory of spending his teenage years behind bars.

“You just get out there and feel free,” Truscott says, a hint of that boyish twinkle in his eyes. “Nothing holds you back.”

(source: Guelph Mercury)

CHINA:

Cheating Chinese businesswoman gets reprieve from death sentence

A self-made Chinese businesswoman convicted of cheating investors out of millions had her death sentence commuted on Monday, state media said, following thousands of Internet pleas urging leniency.

Wu Ying, 31, the daughter of a peasant, was convicted in 2009 of cheating investors out of 380 million yuan ($60 million) by offering returns as high as 180 %, while she spent the money on a lavish lifestyle, including buying 4 BMWs and a Ferrari.

She was sentenced to death by a court in eastern Zhejiang province, a ruling that was overturned by the Supreme Court in April.

On Monday, she was handed down a death sentence "with a two-year reprieve", Xinhua news agency said, a sentence which usually translates into life in prison.

Wu's case became a touchstone issue for China's vocal Internet campaigners and newly rich private entrepreneurs who saw the original sentence as too harsh as Beijing struggles to deliver social harmony while wealth inequality soars.

Wu's humble beginnings in business started when she opened a hair salon in 1997 to become the president of her own, unregulated, investment firm, Bense Holding Group.

Many people, especially on China's vibrant microblogging sites, believed she did not deserve the death penalty for a crime that was seen as more akin to money lending than a pyramid scheme.

Beijing has frowned on such unregulated investment operations and is running a program to bring private capital into the state-controlled banking sector.

(source: Reuters)

***********

Former China police chief faces treason trial: report

The former police chief at the centre of the biggest political scandal to engulf China's communist leadership in decades will be tried for treason, a report said Monday.

Former Chongqing municipality police chief Wang Lijun, who fled to a US consulate in February reportedly seeking asylum, would be tried as early as next month, the South China Morning Post reported, quoting unnamed sources.

Wang had been the right-hand-man of Chongqing party boss Bo Xilai, who had been widely expected to ascend to the all-powerful Politburo later this year until he was ousted over a scandal involving alleged murder and corruption.

Bo is under investigation for "serious discipline violations" -- party code for corruption -- while his wife Gu Kailai has disappeared into custody accused of involvement in the alleged murder of a British businessman.

Wang reportedly confronted Bo with information related to the murder before fleeing to the US consulate in Chengdu, the capital of Sichuan province, where he spoke with US officials for several hours.

Security forces surrounded the consulate and Wang was subsequently handed over to Chinese custody, but the incident triggered the rapid unravelling of Bo's fortunes and those of his high-flying family.

The Hong Kong English-language daily reported that Wang's trial would take place in Sichuan and a "special legal team" had been established to handle the case.

Wang could face the death penalty if convicted of treason but Hong Kong-based Chinese law analyst Ong Yew-kim said he would probably only get "8 to 10 years".

Sources told the paper the swift handling of the trial would indicate the authorities want to resolve the Bo matter quickly to clear the air ahead of a once-in-a-decade leadership transition later this year

(source: Asia Pacific News)

IRAN--executions

14 Convicted Drug Traffickers Hanged In Tehran

Iran has hanged 14 people in Tehran after they were convicted of drug trafficking.

A statement from the Tehran prosecutor's office on May 21 identified them only by their initials.

The London-based Amnesty International rights group said in its annual review of death sentences and executions worldwide published in March that Iran executed at least 360 people in 2011, three-quarters of them for drugs offenses, up from at least 252 in 2010.

Tehran considers the death penalty essential for maintaining law and order, and insists that it is only applied after exhaustive judicial proceedings.

Murder, rape, armed robbery and trafficking more than five kilograms of drugs are among crimes punishable by death.

The Islamic republic is one of the world's main users of capital punishment, along with China, Saudi Arabia, and the United States.

(source: Radio Free Europe)

**************

18 NEW EXECUTIONS IN IRAN: 53 EXECUTIONS IN ONE WEEK- IHR URGES THE WORLD COMMUNITY TO REACT

According to the Iranian state media 18 people were executed in four different Iranian cities yesterday and today. Thus Iranian authorities have confirmed execution of 30 prisoners during the last seven days. In addition IHR has received reports of 23 executions that have not been announced by the official Iranian media.

Iran Human Rights strongly condemned the execution wave going on in Iran and urged the international community to react. Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, the spokesperson of IHR said: "We are puzzled by the silence of the international community despite the fact that about 50 people have been executed in Iran just in 1 week".

More than 80% of all those who are executed in Iran are convicted of drug trafficking, who are tried buy the revolutionary courts behind the closed doors.

The spokesperson of IHR asked the UN to reconsider its cooperation with the Iranian authorities and siad: "We know that the UN and several Western countries cooperate with the Iranian authorities in order to fight "drug trafficking". Many of those arrested as a consequence of this cooperation are executed. World community must condemn these executions and stop any cooperation with Iran until they are 100% assured that their cooperation doesn’t contribute to the Iranian regime’s execution policy".

14 PRISONERS EXECUTED IN TEHRAN TODAY:

According to the state run Iranian news agency ISNA 14 prisoners were executed in one of the prisons of Tehran early this morning.

All those executed today were convicted of drug trafficking. Names of those executed today will be published in a short while.

2 PEOPLE EXECUTED IN SANANDAJ (IRANIAN KURDESTAN) YESTERDAY MAY 20:

The state run Iranian news agency Fars reported that two prisoners identified as "S.R." and "V.A." were hanged in the prison of Sanandaj yesterday morning. Both the prisoners were convicted of rape and robbery.

1 PRISONER EXECUTED IN SARI (NORTHERN IRAN):

According to the official web site of the Iranian judiciary in Mazandaran, one prisoner was hanged in the prison of Sari (northern Iran) yesterday morning. The prisoner who was not identified by name, was convicted of trafficking of 50 kilos of opium, said the report.

1 PRISONER HANGED IN THE PRISON OF KERMANSHAH:

According to the Kurdish news agwncy Kurdpa, a Kurdish prisoner by the name of "Hiva Havas" was hanged in the Dizelabad prison of Kermanshah yesterday morning. The report didn’t mention on what charges the prisoner was sentenced to death, but mentioned that he had previously been arrested in connection with the 2009 post-electoral protests.

This report has not been announced by the official Iranian sources.

(source: Iran Human Rights)

MALAYSIA:

Australian faces death penalty in Malaysia

The case against an Australian man being held on drug trafficking charges in Malaysia has been referred to the country's high court.

Tests have confirmed the quantity of drugs allegedly seized from Dominic Bird exceeds the death penalty threshold.

Bird, formerly from Perth, was arrested in March after allegedly selling methamphetamine to an undercover police officer in Kuala Lumpur.

Bird entered the court shackled to 10 other prisoners, however he appeared in good spirits waving to lawyers and family.

His father struggled to hold back tears during the hearing.

Tests on drugs allegedly seized from the 32-year-old have returned a weight of 168.7 grams.

That is well in excess of the 50-gram threshold which defines trafficking under Malaysian law.

His father was sitting next to me, and his father was fighting back tears, certainly during the early part of the hearing.

And you can imagine how confronting that would be to see your child in that situation, although Dominic Bird is obviously in his early 30s, but his father clearly found that very difficult to cope with.

Bird's lawyers say they are prepared to defend him against a mandatory death penalty.

Barrister Muhammad Shafee says the defence will question the credibility of the police who conducted the undercover sting and says there is doubt over who was in possession of the drugs.

"We think there's more than enough doubt that has been raised pertaining to who actually would have been in possession of it," he said.

"And coupled with that, we are not impressed at all with the credibility of the arresting officers."

3 Australian men have been executed in Malaysia for drug trafficking in the past 25 years.

(source: Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

*****************

Alternative Bar: We are not partisan, lawyers must defend rights - Bar Council

The Malaysian Bar welcomes the clarification made by Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin that the Government is not proposing to establish an alternative body to take over the functions of the Bar Council. We trust that this puts an end to the recent attacks on the position of the Malaysian Bar and the role of the Bar Council.

The Malaysian Bar has always taken seriously its responsibilities under section 42(1)(a) of the Legal Profession Act 1976. It is a 3-fold task: (1) to uphold the cause of justice; (2) without regard to its own interests or that of its members; and (3) uninfluenced by fear or favour.

Article 14 of the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers reinforces this role that lawyers must play:

14. Lawyers, in protecting the rights of their clients and in promoting the cause of justice, shall seek to uphold human rights and fundamental freedoms recognized by national and international law and shall at all times act freely and diligently in accordance with the law and recognized standards and ethics of the legal profession.

We criticize both sides when the need arises

Calls for the Malaysian Bar not to stray into the political arena ignore the 1st part of the 3-fold task — to uphold the cause of justice. Justice is so intertwined with governance that in order to uphold the cause of justice the Malaysian Bar expresses its views on laws and policies, and works with Government, opposition and civil society in order to help shape laws and structure policies that honour the Malaysian people and serve the common good.

We criticise Government and opposition if the need arises, and collaborate with civil society when appropriate. We are neither anti-Government nor pro-opposition, but merely doing what we should and must do: upholding the cause of justice. In so doing the Malaysian Bar engages in activities associated with the governance of the nation. However, the Bar is not involved in any contestation over political power — namely activities aimed at getting or maintaining power — hence any allegation that the Bar engages in this sphere of politics is wholly unfounded.

Criticisms that the Malaysian Bar as a professional body should focus purely on professional or internal issues fail to understand that the Malaysian Bar is charged with looking beyond its own parochial and pecuniary self-interests, and to act in the name, and for the greater good, of society at large. We are partners together with the Judiciary and other officers of the court to uphold justice and the rule of law.

But the rule of law does not mean that we must not criticise or go against existing laws. That is too simplistic. There are good laws, and bad laws, and society must distinguish between the two. Like a voice in the wilderness, the Malaysian Bar has repeatedly spoken out against bad laws, such as the Internal Security Act 1960 for example, which the Malaysian Government finally abolished earlier this year.

Partisan?

As for the 3rd element, comments that the Malaysian Bar is partisan ignore the fact that the Malaysian Bar must act “uninfluenced by fear or favour”. We do not curry favour, but nor do we pander to public opinion. We speak up for truth and justice, regardless whether it is popular or convenient with Government, or opposition, or rakyat. We acknowledge that this will sometimes pit us against Government (as in our denunciation of all preventive detention legislation) or against contemporary thinking (as in our opposition to the use of the death penalty), but speak up we must. And so we have, in regard to the excessive police force our observers witnessed on 28 April 2012 during the BERSIH 3.0 public assembly.

The Malaysian Bar will continue to live up to its responsibilities as a partner in the administration of justice in this country. Our statements, reports, memoranda and resolutions should be embraced as efforts to assist the Government to improve its governance, for the betterment of the nation and the rakyat. We will disagree with the Government at times, but we trust that we can choose to disagree agreeably and without having our existence and functions called into question each and every time the Government does not like what we say.

It is regrettable that the full extent of the Malaysian Bar’s message and work are not more widely known. In this regard we remind media professionals of their responsibility to engage in fair, accurate, honest, balanced and responsible journalism, particularly in their treatment of controversial subjects and dissenting viewpoints.

It is axiomatic that lawyers are vital cogs in the machinery of justice, and unless there is an independent Bar ready and willing to defend rights that are guaranteed in society, there cannot truly be said to be freedom and rule of law.

(source: Lim Chee Wee is President of the Malaysian Bar; Malaysia Chronicle)

PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY:

Gaza court rejects death sentence appeal

The supreme court in Gaza on Monday rejected an appeal against the death sentence of a man convicted of killing a family member.

The defendant was sentenced to death on Dec. 12, 2010 after he was found guilty of killing his female cousin.

Judges unanimously rejected his appeal against the sentence, a court report said.

The court's decision is final and the sentence cannot be appealed again, the statement added.

On May 13, the court ruled against the appeal of another murder convict sentenced to death, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights said.

The number of death sentences issued by the Palestinian Authority has risen to 126 since 1994, of which 25 have been issued in the West Bank and 101 in Gaza, the rights group says.

While a de-facto moratorium on executions was put in place by the Fatah-led administration in the West Bank, the Hamas-led government does not recognize provisions that require President Mahmoud Abbas to ratify death sentences.

Rights organizations have called for an immediate moratorium on the use of the death penalty as a form of punishment as it constitutes a violation of international human rights laws and standards.

(source: Ma'an News Agency)

PAKISTAN:

Extradition pacts with Europe stalled by death penalty----Efforts to extradite Musharraf to Pakistan from UK hit roadblock due to possibility of death sentence.

With a continuing deadlock over Pakistan’s efforts to extradite former president Pervez Musharraf from the UK, Islamabad is expediting efforts to conclude extradition treaties with European countries at the earliest, according to the Foreign Office.

The move came a month after attempts to have Musharraf extradited to Pakistan hit a roadblock, as the possibility of capital punishment impedes the formulation of an agreement between the two countries. Musharraf is wanted by an anti-terrorism court in former premier Benazir Bhutto’s assassination case.

The Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) and the foreign ministry revealed on April 22 that an extradition treaty between Pakistan and the UK “remains ambivalent” because the joint judicial team assigned to finalise the accord differed over the likelihood of the ‘death sentence’.

“Efforts to conclude extradition treaties with various countries are going on,” said Foreign Office spokesperson Moazam Ali Khan. The foreign affairs ministry’s various desks, namely, Europe, South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), Middle East, North America and Central Asia are working on such efforts. “Particularly, our focus is on Europe…to expedite the efforts for concluding extradition treaties,” Khan told The Express Tribune.

At present, Pakistan has extradition treaties with 27 countries. They are the US, Algeria, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Colombia, Cuba, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, France, Greece, Iran, Iraq, Italy, Liberia, Luxembourg, Monaco, the Maldives, Netherlands, Portugal, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Turkey, Uzbekistan and Yugoslavia.

Officials of the interior and foreign affairs ministries say that Islamabad wants to sign extradition treaties with European countries under the Pakistan Extradition Act, 1972. The legal teams of both ministries after detailed interaction with officials of various countries, namely the UK, France, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland and Italy will likely make headway in the near future in this regard, they added.

Capital punishment is the main hurdle in concluding the extradition treaties, said the foreign office legal director Sher Bahadur Khan.

Interior Minister Rehman Malik has also been engaged in efforts to sign extradition treaties with various countries, particularly the UK, to bring home various absconding Pakistanis wanted by courts and law enforcement agencies particularly former president Musharraf. Help has been sought from Interpol in this regard as well.

Islamabad’s British High Commission Press Attaché Mike Girling said the British government did not comment on the ongoing discussion on the extradition treaty between the 2 countries.

(source: Express Tribune)

INDONESIA:

No death penalty for Bali bombmaker

Indonesian prosecutors have asked for a life sentence rather than the death penalty for Umar Patek, the bombmaker accused of being behind the Bali attacks that killed 202 people.

When the trial started in February prosecutors had said they would seek capital punishment for Patek, who was held last year in the Pakistani town of Abbottabad, four months before al-Qa'ida chief Osama bin Laden was killed there.

Prosecutor Bambang Suharyadi told the West Jakarta District Court that Patek had been proved guilty of premeditated murder, but they were seeking a lighter sentence because he had been remorseful and cooperative.

“We the prosecutors recommend... the defendant Umar Patek be given a life sentence,” Suharyadi told the court. “He has been polite and cooperative during the trial and regretted what he has done.”

Patek, 45, is accused of assembling bombs for the attacks on 2 nightclubs on the resort island on October 12, 2002 which killed many Western tourists, including 88 Australians, and on churches in Jakarta on Christmas Eve 2000.

Patek today repeated an apology he made earlier this month to the relatives of the dead.

“I regret what I have done... (and) I apologise to the families of victims who died - Indonesians and foreigners,” he said.

Patek is accused of being the expert bombmaker for Jemaah Islamiyah (JI), a Southeast Asian terror network linked to al-Qa'ida.

He denies he led the bombmaking for the Bali attacks, admitting to playing only a small role. He confessed to mixing the chemicals for the explosives, but claimed he did not know how the bombs would be used.

Patek allegedly used simple household tools including a rice ladle to assemble the Bali bombs, which according to the court indictment were housed in ordinary filing cabinets.

He was arrested in Abbottabad in January last year. Evidence in the trial suggested bin Laden gave JI $30,000 to wage jihad in the region and Patek might have met him in the Pakistani town - a claim he has repeatedly denied.

Patek was once the most-wanted terror suspect in Indonesia and spent nearly a decade on the run, with the US offering a $1 million bounty on his head under its rewards for justice program.

Dubbed “Demolition Man” by local media for his bombmaking prowess, Patek is charged with premeditated murder. The verdict is expected on June 21.

3 JI members - Mukhlas, Amrozi and Imam Samudra - were executed by firing squad in November 2008 for their roles in the attacks.

(source: The Australian)

PHILIPPINES:

Death penalty revisited

I knew that it was just a matter of time before the gruesome murder cases of Dr. Andrés Gumban and other hate crimes against gays would revive calls for the reinstitution of the death penalty.

I was right. Social networks are abuzz with shrill calls for the re institution of the death penalty to “strike fear in the hearts of the criminals.” The argument is without capital punishment, the crime rate likely will soar high.

Have something to report? Tell us in text, photos or videos.

The blogs even went berserk demanding that the State impose on murder suspects not just death but the most horrible torture comparable to the suffering of our Lord Jesus Christ, as depicted in Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ.”

Even a would-be lawyer Facebook friend idealized perceived real-life “Dirty Harry” who inflicted dark justice on criminal suspects. He posted his “cold truths.”

He asserted that when Pánfilo Lacson was the Chief, PNP with his summary execution ways, the number of criminal syndicates went down to almost zero. Or when Manila Mayor Alfredo Lim was still WPD and later NBI “salvage chief,” criminals went away from the city. He asserted that wherever General Jovito Palparan was assigned, “ang mga NPA nawawala. Nagsilayasan dahil takot itumba.” (The NPAs made themselves scarce for fear they might fall on the wayside).

Of course none of my Facebook friend’s heroes used their supposedly “crime fighting credentials” as bragging rights. At the risk of sounding naïve, I won’t even bother to speculate on the backstory on Mayor Lim’s recent order to investigate reports of summary executions suspected to be the handiwork of law enforcers in the nation’s capital.

The Philippine Star reported that bodies of at least 4 men have been found at the former Smokey Mountain dump in Tondo since the start of the year. The style of these extra judicial killings (EJKs) was the same. The victims are often perceived criminals or recidivists and the bodies dumped in areas where they would be easily found. The killers—suspected to be law enforcers—would leave placards judging the victims as criminals.

In fact, however, many EJK victims are innocent of any crimes. We only have to recall the murder of Dr. Gerry Ortega in Palawan, media people, judges, and activists. We won’t delve deeper into this, except to assert that EJKs failed to stem crimes but instead have created a culture of impunity. Criminals see imminent arrest and conviction a very iffy thing and feel a measure of safety when they commit murderous mayhem.

Can capital punishment deter the spike in crimes? If we are to judge the effect on executed Filipino drug mules and 74 more Filipinos facing the capital punishment for drug-trafficking cases in China, the answer would be a big fat “No.” The “positive” incentive of earning quick and easy money and the tendency of many of our kasimanwas to flout or bend the rules far outweighs the danger of arrest, conviction and execution.

In fact, a review by the National Research Council and partially funded by the US Justice Department’s National Institute of Justice asserts that “No one is well served by unsupportable claims about the effect of the death penalty, regardless of whether the claim is that the death penalty deters homicides, has no effect on homicide rates or actually increases homicides.”

Aside from the dubious value of deterrence is the possibility of foisting injustice on executed convicts who later could turn out to be innocent. When the country still had capital punishment, the Free Legal Assistance Group cited a 2004 Supreme Court decision which pegged the judicial error rate at 72 %. The high tribunal found police irregularities including the use of shortcuts, or planted and recycled evidence—in the investigation of capital crimes.

In fact, the SC revoked more than half of the death sentences it reviewed. It scrutinized 348 which affirmed a mere 158, or less than half. More could probably be absolved if the Philippine facility and expertise for DNA testing go beyond identification and parentage testing and use this cutting-edge forensic science on rape cases.

Impose the death penalty to stop criminals? Not on your life.

(source: Opinion; Benedicto Q. Sanchez, Philippine Sun-Star)

MAY 20, 2012:

NEW MEXICO:

An end to the death penalty

Robert Fry of Farmington and Timothy Allen of Bloomfield will remain the last 2 inmates on New Mexico's death row after a Santa Fe jury spared the life of Michael Astorga on Friday and instead sentenced him to life in prison for the murder of Deputy James McGrane during a 2006 traffic stop. The New Mexico Legislature repealed the death penalty in 2009, and then-Gov. Bill Richardson earned an audience with the pope by signing the bill into law. New Mexico has had only one execution since 1960.

Richardson had opposed repeal of the death penalty when he first took office. In a statement issued at the time he signed the bill, he explained why he had changed his mind, describing it as "the end of a long, personal journey for me.

"Throughout my adult life, I have been a firm believer in the death penalty as a just punishment — in very rare instances, and only for the most heinous crimes. I still believe that," he said.

After being elected governor, Richardson realized he would likely have to make a choice one day: "I would either have to take action on legislation to repeal the death penalty, or more daunting, I might have to sign someone's death warrant."

Richardson was able to avoid that dilemma until his second term, as the Legislature tried and failed several times to pass the bill. When the legislation finally landed on his desk, he said he was swayed by the finality of the death penalty and the imperfections of our court system.

"Regardless of the opinion about the death penalty, I do not have confidence in the criminal justice system as it currently operates to be the final arbiter when it comes to who lives and who dies for their crime," he said. "If the state is going to undertake this awesome responsibility, the system to impose this ultimate penalty must be perfect and can never be wrong.

"But the reality is the system is not perfect — far from it." He went on the discuss the possibility for manipulation of evidence, prosecutorial abuse and the disproportionate percentage of minorities on death row nationally.

"In a society which values individual life and liberty above all else, where justice and not vengeance is the singular guiding principle of our system of criminal law, the potential for wrongful conviction and, God forbid, execution of an innocent person stands as anathema to our very sensibilities as human beings," he said. "That is why I'm signing this bill into law."

Richardson and I didn't always see eye to eye, but on this issue his reasoning almost exactly mirrors my own. I've never opposed the death penalty on moral grounds. I simply don't trust a legal system where defendants too often get whatever justice they can afford.

I was working in Cheyenne, Wyo., in the late 1980s when Mark Hopkinson was set to be executed. Hopkinson was accused of the ordering the murders of Evanston lawyer Vincent Vehar, his wife and 14-year-old son. Unfortunately for Hopkinson, Vehar happened to be a close personal friend of Gerry Spence, arguably the greatest trial attorney of that era.

And so, for one case only, Spence switched sides and took the role of lead prosecutor to avenge the death of his friend. The theatrical attorney showed up for court wearing a bulletproof vest and escorted by bodyguards, explaining to the jury nobody was safe in a world where Vehar could be killed by a dynamite blast, according to the Casper Star-Tribune. The overmatched defense attorney never stood a chance.

Hopkinson was executed in 1992, professing his innocence until the end.

And that got me to thinking. How often are trials decided based on the skill of the lawyers? If the facts and evidence of the case were exactly the same, but the two attorneys had switched sides, would Hopkinson have been put to death? I doubt it.

(source: Editorial; Walter Rubel is managing editor of the Las Cruces Sun-News)

ARIZONA:

Federal judges: Consider victims’ pain over that of death row inmates

Some federal judges considering death penalty cases say their colleagues should take notice of the suffering of crime victims, not just the possibility that an inmate being executed may feel pain.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday refused to block an Arizona execution, rejecting a challenge that injection methods could cause unconstitutional pain and suffering for inmates.

Several 9th Circuit judges’ dissents in the case of Samuel Lopez cited the possibility of pain during injections, but 3 other judges said Friday in an amended order that such concerns are groundless and misdirected.

While there’s always going to a risk of some pain in an execution because it can be difficult to find veins, the “incomparable suffering the victim endured during the last desperate minutes of her life” must not be ignored, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski wrote for himself and 2 other judges.

Kozinski quoted from a state court ruling that said there was evidence of a “bloody struggle” throughout 59-year-old Estefana Holmes’ apartment. Holmes she was gagged, blindfolded, sexually assaulted and stabbed at least 26 times.

“The panel delicately omits these facts, as did our previous opinion, which merely referred to the crime as ‘brutal,’ but common decency surely calls on us to acknowledge that Lopez is not the victim here, and whatever pain he may suffer incident to his execution pales in comparison to the agony and terror he inflicted on a defenseless woman whose body he used to sate his lust,” Kozinski wrote.

Lopez had been scheduled for execution Wednesday, but after the 9th Circuit ruled on the execution methods issue and on a separate claim of inadequate legal representation, the Arizona Supreme Court on Tuesday rescheduled the lethal injection for late June.

That ruling was based on a claim that Lopez was denied a fair clemency proceeding.

(source: Associated Press)

GEORGIA:

Valdosta High grad on 9/11 mastermind defense team

J. Connell believes providing a fair trial to even the people charged with masterminding the 9/11 terrorist attacks emphasizes that the United States is a nation of laws, not retribution.

“It’s a tribute to American values that we understand that how we treat even those we view as our enemies is the true test of American freedoms,” said Connell, who is one of the attorneys assigned to defend the five prisoners being held in Guantanamo Bay. “We are either a nation where the government can do what it wants or we are a nation of laws.”

Earlier this month, James Connell was quoted in an Associated Press article detailing how the trials for the five Guantanamo prisoners will likely occur years from now. Upon the article’s publication, several Valdosta Daily Times readers called the newspaper’s offices to note that the Washington, D.C.-based attorney grew up in Valdosta.

Known to friends and family as J., Connell is the son of Julia Ariail and step-son of Julius Ariail of Lowndes County. His father, Jim Connell, spent several years in Valdosta but now lives near J. in the Washington, D.C., area.

Born in Rhode Island, where his father worked at the War College, Connell’s earliest memories formed in Valdosta. Jim Connell accepted a teaching position at Valdosta State, and the Connells moved to South Georgia before young J. reached his 1st year. His younger sister is Ashley Connell Meade. The family attended Christ Episcopal Church.

J. Connell attended S.L. Mason Elementary School, West Gordon, Valdosta Junior High, and Valdosta High School.

There, young Connell joined the debate team led by VHS teacher Frank Hjort. In debate, Connell realized he “liked the clash of ideas and the courtroom drama.” Though he never had Hjort as a classroom teacher, Connell selected him as his academic inspiration upon being named Star student his senior year. Connell credits Hjort’s debate team with leading him to become an attorney.

In 1989, Connell graduated Valdosta High. He enrolled in Florida State University. He attended law school at the prestigious William & Mary in Virginia. In 2000, Connell opened his law practice in Fairfax, Va.

As a defense attorney, Connell became a vigorous trial lawyer. During this time, he worked death-penalty cases.

Of the clients whom he represented in the initial trial, Connell says he was able to save them from the death penalty; however, he was unable to stop the executions of three clients whom he acquired after they had been sentenced to the death penalty. He describes his clients’ executions as “the three worst days of my life.”

Still, even though he opposes the death penalty, Connell says, “I’m not trying to convince people that the death penalty is unnecessary but convince people that it was unnecessary” in his particular cases.

In 2008, his death-penalty work attracted the U.S. Department of Defense. As part of the military commissions related to 9/11, the DOD wanted civilian attorneys to work pro bono, donating time to represent the defendants coming before the military commissions.

In 2009, when the presidency moved from George W. Bush to Barack Obama, the military commissions stalled. Connell returned full-time to his practice.

In 2011, when the Obama administration revived the military commissions, the DOD approached Connell. Knowing the time and commitment necessary from his past experiences, he turned down the offer, saying he could not fit the pro bono work into his practice. The DOD offered to hire him for the duration of the 9/11 cases. Connell accepted the offer. He resigned from his law firm and went to work full-time for the Pentagon.

Connell is part of a series of defense teams working to defend five Guantanamo (Gitmo) prisoners linked to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the hijacked plane that crashed in a Pennsylvania field.

The most infamous of these defendants is Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, who has reportedly described himself as the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. Connell does not represent him. He is lead counsel, along with an Air Force lieutenant colonel co-counsel and a defense team, for Ali Abdul Aziz Ali.

Other than saying whom he represents, Connell cannot speak about his client. Ali is accused of transferring money to the 9/11 hijackers, according to media accounts. He reportedly “helped them with plane tickets, traveler’s checks, and hotel reservations,” and “taught them about everyday aspects of life in the West, such as purchasing clothes and ordering food,” according to the 9/11 Commission report.

As Connell told AP earlier this month, he reiterates to The Times: These trials are years away. Connell will regularly work the case in his office. He regularly travels to Gitmo and other locales. In June, hearings have been scheduled to hear preliminary evidence, but these sessions will be the first on “a long road of hearings ...,” Connell says.

Given the time and the work as well as the defendants, the devastation and unforgettable images of Sept. 11, 2001, some may wonder why an attorney would accept what will likely be a thankless job?

Partly, he accepted the job because he recognizes that the DOD needed attorneys with specific skill sets: a person with extensive death penalty experience, since this will be a capital case; a person who can pass extensive top-secret clearance and background checks; a person who can either fit “such a gigantic case” into their law practice or is willing to walk away from private practice for several years.

Connell fit all of these descriptions.

As for defending people accused of being or abetting terrorists, Connell says defense attorneys are accustomed to the concept that both sides must receive legal representation, despite how the public may perceive such representation.

Connell also believes that a defense attorney can vigorously represent his client without causing additional harm to the victims and their families. He learned this working death penalty cases.

“I have a real feeling for victims even though I am working for the defense,” Connell says. “There may not be much I can do for the victims but I can do some things not to make their lives worse.”

If victims call him, Connell does not avoid them. He talks to them. He tells them what he can. He recalls one death-penalty case where he was able to arrange a requested meeting between the victim’s family and one of his clients in the hours prior to execution. He believes he can bring a similar sensitivity to the concerns of the 9/11 victims in this case.

Connell also believes that this case has a place in history as well as confirming America’s role in the world.

“It’s more important that this case is done right than any case in recent history,” Connell says.

The case may also be the only thorough examination of what Connell describes as the “torture years,” when terrorism suspects were waterboarded, etc.

Connell sees his job as not only defending his client but confirming America’s rule of law.

As for Valdosta, even with the hard work involved in this case, Connell, his wife of 14 years, their 9-year-old adopted son, and hopefully soon a newly adopted daughter, regularly visit family and friends in Valdosta, often to celebrate something as all-American as the Fourth of July.

(source: Valdosta Daily Times)

MISSISSIPPI:

Inmates: State failed to publicize lethal new drug

The Mississippi Supreme Court has on its docket an appeal by 2 groups challenging how Mississippi conducts its executions.

The lawsuit by 2 anti-death penalty organizations was filed last year on behalf of 3 inmates. 2 of the 3 have been executed.

Oral arguments have not been scheduled.

Mississippians Educating for Smart Justice and Mississippi Cure Inc. sued the state, hoping to stop the executions because the state switching to a different lethal injection drug. They said corrections officials failed to properly publicize the change as required by the Administrative Procedures Act.

In April of 2011, Hinds County Circuit Judge Bill Gowan rejected the challenge. The Supreme Court then denied a request to stop the scheduled executions while the groups appealed.

*************

Lawsuit challenges Mississippi's use of new drug in executions

A lawsuit contending that state corrections officials failed to properly publicize as required by law its switch to a new lethal injection drug is before the Mississippi Supreme Court.

The case is among dozens on the court's current docket. The court will not hear oral arguments.

The lawsuit by 2 anti-death penalty organizations was filed last year on behalf of 3 inmates. 2 of the 3 have been executed.

Mississippians Educating for Smart Justice and Mississippi Cure Inc. sued the state, hoping to stop the executions because the state switched to a different lethal injection drug. They said corrections officials failed to properly publicize the change as required by the Administrative Procedures Act.

The 2003 law requires state agencies to notify the public of proposed rule and regulation changes. The law gives citizens the right to offer opinions on proposed changes to rules and regulations, ask for hearings and request official opinions from state agencies.

In April of 2011, Hinds County Circuit Judge Bill Gowan rejected the challenge. The Supreme Court then denied a request to stop the scheduled executions while an appeal was pending.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of inmates Benny Joe Stevens, Rodney Gray and Robert Simon Jr. Stevens was executed May 10. 2011; Gray was executed May 17, 2011. Simon has appeals pending in federal court.

The Mississippi Department of Correction said in April of 2011 that it would switch to a different drug, pentobarbital, for the state's next execution because of a nationwide shortage of one drug it has used in the past.

Mississippi has used a 3-drug mixture for its lethal injections for many years. Last year, 1 of the drugs Mississippi had used in the process, sodium thiopental, became unavailable when its European supplier bowed to pressure from death penalty opponents and stopped making it. No other vendor could be found, so the drug was replaced by pentobarbital.

(source for both: Associated Press)

SAUDI ARABIA----executions

Saudi beheads 2 Pakistanis over murders

Saudi authorities on Sunday beheaded 2 Pakistanis in the holy city of Mecca after finding them guilty of 2 murders, the interior ministry said.

Bashir Afridi and Rahmulwahab Abdullah, both of them Pakistanis, murdered and robbed Mohammed Haji, a fellow Pakistani, the ministry said in a statement carried by state news agency SPA.

The 2 also killed a woman and caused the death of another, SPA reported, without revealing the nationalities of the 2 women.

His beheading brings to 28 the total number of executions in the ultra-conservative kingdom so far this year, according to an AFP tally based on official reports.

Under the AFP count, at least 76 people were beheaded in 2011 in Saudi Arabia, while rights group Amnesty International put the number of executions last year at 79.

The death penalty in Saudi Arabia applies to a wide range of offences including rape, apostasy, armed robbery and drug trafficking, as well as murder, as stipulated by Islamic Sharia law.

(source: Agence France-Presse)

IRAN----executions

2 prisoners hanged in central Iran

2 prisoners were publicly hanged in Isfahan (central Iran) early Thursday morning May 17, reported the Iranian state media today.

According to the state run Iranian enws agency Fars, 2 prisoners identified as Farshid and Bagher were convicted of raping 2 women (mother and daughter) and stealing their belongings in 2009. The execution took place in the central prison of Isfahan, said the report.

According to another Iranian news agency Mehr, Farshid was 24 year old. The report did not mention how old Bagher was at the time of committing the alleged crime.

Along with these executions, Iranian authorities have executed 14 people between May 13. and May 17. Iran Human Rights has also received reports of additional 16 executions on May 17. which have not been announced by the official Iranian sources.

(source: Iran Human Rights)

*********

Trial of Ahwazi Arabs raises concern

Amnesty International reports that 6 members of Iran’s Ahwazi Arab minority will go on trial on May 20 amid fears that they will not receive a fair trial and may face the death penalty for the charge of “enmity against God.”

The 6 detainees were reportedly arrested without charges for nearly 1 year. Amnesty International says their arrest was "in connection with their activities on behalf of Iran’s Ahwazi Arab community.”

Amnesty identifies the six as “Mohammad Ali Amouri, blogger; Rahman Asakereh, teacher; Hashem Sha’bani Amouri, teacher; Hadi Rashidi, teacher; Sayed Jaber Alboshoka and his younger brother Sayed Mokhtar Alboshoka.”

They were all arrested at their homes this February and March, in advance of the anniversary of the Arab community’s popular protests in Ahwaz in 2005.

The men are reportedly being held in Karoun Prison and, according to Amnesty International, many of them have been denied access to a lawyer.

Amnesty alleges that they were charged during “5-minute court sessions with the vaguely-worded offences of ‘enmity against God and corruption on earth’, ‘gathering and colluding against state security’ and ‘spreading propaganda against the system’.”

Under the Iranian legal system, the charges of enmity against God and corruption on earth can carry the death sentence .

(source: Radio Zamaneh)

****************

Ahwazi Arabs facing unfair trial, risk torture

URGENT ACTION

AHWAZI ARABS FACING UNFAIR TRIAL, RISK TORTURE

6 members of Iran’s Ahwazi Arab minority are due to go on trial in Iran on 20 May. The men were detained without charge for almost a year and all were arrested in connection with their activities on behalf of Iran’s Ahwazi Arab minority. It is feared they will not receive a fair trial and may be at risk of torture or other ill-treatment.

The 6 men, all from Khalafabad in Khuzestan province, south-west Iran, were arrested at their homes in February and March 2011 in advance of the 6th anniversary of widespread protests by Ahwazi Arabs in April 2005. Blogger Mohammad Ali Amouri, chemistry teacher Rahman Asakereh and teacher Hashem Sha’bani Amouri were arrested on 16 February. Teacher Hadi Rashidi (or Rashedi) was arrested on 28 February, and Sayed Jaber Alboshoka and his younger brother Sayed Mokhtar Alboshoka were arrested in March.

The men are now held in Karoun prison in the city of Ahwaz, Khuzestan province. At least four of them were denied access to a lawyer for at least 8 months after arrest. In or around February 2012, they were all charged in separate 5-minute court sessions with the vaguely-worded offences of “enmity against God and corruption on earth" (moharebeh va ifsad fil-arz), “gathering and colluding against state security” and “spreading propaganda against the system”. The charge of “enmity against God and corruption on earth” carries a possible death sentence. They are due to be tried before Branch 2 of the Dezful Revolutionary Court on 20 May 2012.

Mohammad Ali Amouri, who fled to Iraq in December 2007and was forcibly returned in January 2011, was reportedly tortured and otherwise ill-treated during his first seven months in detention. Hadi Rashidi was hospitalized after his arrest, apparently as a result of torture or other ill-treatment, and is said to be in poor health. According to their family, Sayed Jaber Alboshoka lost 10 kg and Sayed Mokhtar Alboshoka experienced depression and memory loss as a result of torture or other ill-treatment.

Please write immediately in Persian, Arabic, English or your own language:

Calling on the authorities to ensure that the men (naming them) are tried according to international fair trial standards and without recourse to the death penalty;

Urging them to make sure that the men are protected from torture and other ill-treatment, and that they are allowed regular access to lawyers of their choosing;

Calling on them to ensure that Hadi Rashidi and the other 5 men are given immediate access to adequate medical treatment.

PLEASE SEND APPEALS BEFORE 29 JUNE 2012 TO:

Leader of the Islamic Republic

Ayatollah Sayed ‘Ali Khamenei--The Office of the Supreme Leader--Islamic Republic Street – End of Shahid--Keshvar Doust Street, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran--Email: info_leader@leader.ir --Twitter: "#Iran Leader

@khamenei_ir must ensure 6 Ahwazi Arab men are tried fairly”

Salutation: Your Excellency

Head of the Judiciary

Ayatollah Sadegh Larijani

[Care of] Public Relations Office

Number 4, 2 Azizi Street intersection

Tehran,

Islamic Republic of Iran

Email: bia.judi@yahoo.com (Subject

Line: FAO Ayatollah Sadegh Larijani)

Salutation: Your Excellency?

And copies to:

Secretary General High Council for Human Rights

Mohammed Javad Larijani--c/o Office of the Head of the Judicary--Pasteur St, Vali Asr Ave

South of Serah-e Jomhouri-Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran

Email: info@humanrights-iran.ir

(Subject line: FAO Mohammad Javad Larijani)

Also send copies to diplomatic representatives accredited to your country. Please insert local diplomatic addresses below:

Name Address 1 Address 2 Address 3 Fax Fax number Email Email address Salutation Salutation

Please check with your section office if sending appeals after the above date.

URGENT ACTION

AHWAZI ARABS FACING UNFAIR TRIAL, RISK TORTURE

Additional Information

The Ahwazi Arab minority is one of many minorities in Iran. Much of Iran's Arab community lives in the south-western province of Khuzestan. Most are Shi’a Muslims but some are reported to have converted to Sunni Islam, heightening government suspicion about Ahwazi Arabs. They often complain that they are marginalized and subject to discrimination in access to education, employment, adequate housing, political participation and cultural rights.

There were mass demonstrations in Khuzestan province in April 2005, after it was alleged that the government planned to disperse the country's Arab population or to force them to relinquish their Arab identity. Following bomb explosions in Ahvaz City in June and October 2005, which killed at least 14 people, and explosions at oil installations in September and October 2005, the cycle of violence intensified, with hundreds of people reportedly arrested. Further bombings on 24 January 2006, in which at least 6 people were killed, were followed by further mass arbitrary arrests. At least 15 men were later executed as a result of their alleged involvement in the bombings.

Mohammad Ali Amouri fled from Iran to Iraq in December 2007: he was said to have been sought by the authorities for organizing protests during the widespread anti-government demonstrations in April 2005. He was arrested in the southern Iraqi city of Basra, charged with entering Iraqi territory illegally and sentenced to serve 1 year’s imprisonment in al-‘Amara prison. He completed his prison sentence (see UA 3/09, MDE 14/001/2009, 7 January 2009, http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE14/001/2009/en) and was forcibly returned to Iran in January 2011. He was arrested 20 days after his forcible return from Iraq.

Scores, if not hundreds, of members of the Ahwazi Arab minority were reportedly arrested before, during and after demonstrations on 15 April 2011. The demonstrations had been called a “Day of Rage” to mark the sixth anniversary of the 2005 mass demonstrations. At least three (according to the authorities) - and possibly many more - people were killed in the April 2011 demonstrations during clashes with the security forces, including some in the Malashiya neighbourhood in Ahvaz. Amnesty International received the names of 27 people said to have been killed. Ahwazi Arab sources have claimed the casualty figures were even higher. Amnesty International has been unable to confirm the reports as the Iranian authorities do not allow the organization to visit the country. The authorities maintain a tight control on the flow of information in and out of the province, preventing foreign journalists from visiting Khuzestan. At least four Ahwazi Arab men reportedly died in custody between 23 March and mid May 2011, possibly as a result of torture or other ill-treatment. Others – including Hadi Rashidi - were hospitalized around the same time, apparently as a result of injuries sustained from torture or other ill-treatment.

Between 10 January 2012 and the beginning of February, in the lead-up to parliamentary elections held on 2 March, between 50 and 65 people were reportedly arrested in at least three separate locations in the province; at least two deaths in custody were also reported. Some Ahwazi Arabs, mostly in Shoush, north-central Khuzestan, called for a boycott of the elections and arrests in Shoush, reportedly followed the appearance of anti-election slogans painted on walls. Others may have been pre-emptive arrests aimed at preventing any gathering of Ahwazi Arabs either on the anniversary of country-wide demonstrations held on 14 February 2011 in support of the people of Tunisia and Egypt which were violently repressed, or on the 15 April anniversary of the “Day of Rage”. In the immediate lead-up to the 15 April anniversary, from late March until mid-April 2012, at least 25 Ahwazi Arabs were reportedly arrested following protests in cities across the province.

Name: Mohammad Ali Amouri, Rahman Asakereh, Hadi Rashedi, Hashem Sha’bani Amouri, Sayed Jaber Alboshoka and Sayed Mokhtar Alboshoka

(source: Amnesty International)

VIETNAM:

Man arrested again after exoneration on rape, murder charges

A man who's appeal trial acquitted him of raping and murdering a girl after being sentenced to death has been arrested again for a new investigation into the same crime.

A source told Thanh Nien Friday that police in the southern province of Binh Phuoc had taken Le Ba Mai, 30, into custody under a decision approved by the People’s Supreme Court.

The decision, issued on May 15, said the custody was necessary for “securing an appeal trial and verdict execution,” without stating how long the detention will last.

The new arrest came nearly one year after provincial prosecutors filed an appeal that again charged Mai with murdering and raping 11-year-old Thi Ut in November 2004, and called for a new trial after Mai was acquitted in June last year.

On May 24 last year the Binh Phuoc Province’s People’s Court declared that Mai was not guilty, saying that there was insufficient evidence to charge Mai with the crime.

It also found conflicts in the testimonies of the only witness, Ut’s younger sister Thi Hang, as well as in Mai’s statements, including his so-called confession.

Critical mistakes were also made in both legal and investigative procedures, court officials said at that time.

The Binh Phuoc People’s Court held the trial after the People’s Supreme Court ordered a fresh investigation into the case in February 2007.

The Supreme Court then approved an appeal by the People’s Supreme Procuracy, the country’s highest prosecutors' office, annulling the death penalty that Mai received at the two trials held in March and August 2005.

According to the original indictment, in November 12, 2004, Mai, who was working for a farm, saw Ut and Hang picking cassava in a garden.

Mai persuaded Ut to go with him on his bike to a jackfruit garden nearby, raped her, and strangled her to death with her pants. Five days later, he was arrested and gave a full confession to the police, the indictment said.

However, Mai and his family maintained his innocence, claiming that his confession was coerced by the police. They submitted several letters to related agencies calling for a retrial.

(source: Thanh Nien News)

MAY 19, 2012:

TEXAS:

Cameron Todd Willingham Exoneration Was Written But Never Filed By Texas Judge

A Texas judge who reviewed the controversial 2004 execution of Cameron Todd Willingham planned to posthumously exonerate the father who was put to death for killing his 3 daughters in a house fire.

Scientific experts who debunked the arson evidence used against Willingham at his 1992 trial and a jailhouse witness who recanted his shaky testimony convinced District Court Judge Charlie Baird in 2010 that "Texas wrongfully convicted" him. But Baird's order clearing Willingham's name never became official, because a higher court halted the posthumous inquiry while it considered whether the judge had authority to examine the capital case.

While waiting for permission to finish the case from the Third Court of Appeals, Baird put together the document that "orders the exoneration of Cameron Todd Willingham for murdering his 3 daughters," because of "overwhelming, credible and reliable evidence" presented during a 1-day hearing in Austin in October 2010.

"You can't do anything for Willingham except clear his name," Baird told The Huffington Post. "When they tried Willingham, I'm convinced that everyone worked in good faith. The problem is that up until the execution, everything had changed so dramatically that you realized the science relied upon at trial was not reliable enough to take a man's life."

Baird's intended order never came to light because the court of appeals criticized his handling of the case and prevented him from resuming work on it before he left the bench at the end of 2010 after choosing not to seek re-election. No one asked him for it after the court of appeals blocked him, he said.

Baird, now an attorney in private practice, said he was moved to share the document with HuffPost after reading about Carlos DeLuna, a Texan who a Columbia University team said this week may have been wrongly executed in 1989.

The 18-page unissued order closely examined the arson evidence presented during the trial, including claims that investigators found patterns on the floor where an accelerant was poured and traces of it on the porch. But Baird said he was persuaded by other experts that the initial investigative techniques were out of date. The judge faulted Gov. Rick Perry and the state Court of Criminal Appeals, because they "ignored" exonerating evidence in 2004.

Baird, a Democrat, is now running for district attorney in Travis County, which includes Austin. The Willingham opinion is undated. Baird said he wrote it in the weeks after the Oct. 14, 2010, hearing. District court planner Kasey Hoke and court administrator Debra Hale told HuffPost they remember him preparing it in late 2010.

With Baird pushed to the sidelines that year, the fire that tore through Willingham home in Corsicana on Dec. 23, 1991, remained on the books as a triple homicide. Willingham escaped the burning house, but his three daughters -- a 2-year-old and 1-year-old twins -- were trapped inside and died from smoke inhalation. (His wife was out running errands for Christmas.)

Investigators concluded the blaze had been deliberately set with an accelerant. 2 weeks after the fire, they arrested Willingham, a 23-year-old high school dropout with a rap sheet that included shoplifting and driving under the influence.

Willingham, maintaining his innocence, turned down a plea deal offering him life behind bars. At his August 1992 trial, the 2 fire investigators testified for the prosecution that Willingham torched his own home. The prosecution also called a jailhouse snitch, Johnny Webb, to the stand. Webb claimed that Willingham admitted in jail after his arrest that he killed his children. The jury convicted him in about an hour.

State and federal courts upheld Willingham's conviction, and in 2003 the U.S. Supreme Court declined to get involved. During the appeals process, Baird was on the Circuit Court of Appeals that twice ruled against Willingham.

But doubts about Willingham's guilt emerged. In 2000, Webb recanted his testimony. Forensic science had evolved since his trial, too. In 2004, Gerald Hurst, a chemist, released a report days before Willingham's execution that said the testimony of the fire investigators was wrong and that the fire was accidental. The report was rushed to Gov. Perry, but he denied a request for a reprieve, allowing the state to put Willingham to death by lethal injection on Feb. 17, 2004.

(The New Yorker and the Chicago Tribune had written extensively about Willingham's case prior to Baird's involvement.)

Baird's proposed order -- which drew upon Hurst's report and the findings of other experienced arson investigators -- came as a welcome surprise to Willingham's relatives and attorneys, who continue to believe he was innocent.

"I'm very thankful he did this," said Eugenia Willingham, Todd Willingham's stepmother. "I'm sure this will have a good impact for Todd. I raised that boy and I believed him," Willingham told HuffPost. "He adored those children. I never thought he could have done that."

The fire occurred in Navarro County, but lawyers for Willingham's family brought the case to Baird under a provision of the Texas Constitution that says all courts are open for people claiming harm to their reputation. Using the same arcane provision, Baird issued the state's 1st posthumous exoneration in 2009 to Timothy Cole, who died in prison for a rape he didn't commit.

R. Lowell Thompson, Navarro County's district attorney, sought to derail the inquiry into Willingham, who was prosecuted by a predecessor. The prosecutor filed the petition with the court of appeals that froze Baird's investigation and is critical of the former judge for writing the proposed order.

"it's very surprising to me that he would enter some sort of opinion without hearing all the evidence, because none was presented by the state," Thompson told HuffPost.

Baird said Thompson had the chance to argue his side, but left the court. Thompson said he departed because he wanted to get the court of appeals to step in immediately.

"I was doing my job and he thought he was doing the right thing," said Thompson. "To me, it looked like he wasn't applying the law."

Some of the harshest criticism in Baird's writing is directed at Perry. The governor's role in refusing to postpone Willingham's execution was closely examined by The Huffington Post during his presidential campaign.

"By 2004 there was no doubt that every single indication of arson had been debunked by the scientific community," Baird wrote. "This fact was staring Governor Perry in the face; nevertheless, he refused to grant a reprieve."

Perry has stood by decision when questioned previously about Willingham. His office didn't flinch from the latest criticism.

"Nothing the Austin court could have done would change the fact that Todd Willingham was convicted and sentenced to death by a jury of his peers for murdering his 3 daughters," said a statement from his spokeswoman Lucy Nashed. "He had full access to every level of the appeals process, and his conviction was reviewed and upheld by multiple levels of state and federal courts. ... The governor reviewed all of the facts of the case and agreed with the jury, and state and federal courts that Willingham was guilty."

With Baird's opinion revealed, lawyers for Willingham's family members continue pushing for a pardon that would clear his name. Last year, the Texas Forensic Science Commission issued a report saying the evidence from the fire investigators was no longer valid.

"It's an awful shame that this opinion was sitting in his desk gathering dust and nobody could see it," said Barry Scheck, a lawyer from the Innocence Project working for Willingham's relatives. "This opinion will stand the test of time, because it faces the facts."

(source: Michael McLaughlin, Huffington Post)

**********************

Texas prison system has drugs for 23 executions----After prodding from Texas AG, prison system says it has enough drugs to execute 23 inmates

Texas prison officials disclosed Friday they have enough lethal drugs to execute as many as 23 people.

In response to this week's opinion from the state attorney general's office that said the Texas Department of Criminal Justice could not withhold information about the drug supply, the department said it currently has 46 2.5-gram vials of pentobarbital. A 5-gram dose — about 3.4 ounces — is the 1st lethal drug used during each execution in Huntsville, according to Texas execution procedures.

The prison agency said it had similar supplies of 2 other drugs also administered to condemned inmates. It did not, though, identify suppliers of the lethal drugs, which the opinion also had addressed.

Executions also involve 100 milligrams of pancuronium bromide and 140 milliequivalents of potassium chloride. Texas has 290 10-milligram vials of the pancuronium bromide — 10 are required per execution — and 737 20-milliequivalent vials of potassium chloride — 7 per punishment.

The department's written procedures call for a matching set of drugs and syringes "in case unforeseen events make their use necessary." But in a brief statement emailrd to reporters late Friday, the agency said a backup set of lethal drugs for executions "is not actually prepared, but an additional dose is available if needed."

The attorney general's opinion, dated Monday, was an answer to public information requests filed earlier this year by the Austin American-Statesman and British newspaper The Guardian.

Prison officials had argued that releasing the information could be harmful to employees and provide death penalty opponents a way to harass the drug suppliers with the hope firms would refuse to do business with the state.

"We find your arguments as to how disclosure of the requested drug quantities would result in the disruption of the execution process or otherwise interfere with law enforcement to be too speculative," Sean Opperman, an assistant attorney general, wrote in the opinion.

The prison agency had 30 days to comply with the opinion or to challenge it in court. The status of the supplier question was not immediately clear.

Opperman said that, while the attorney general's office "acknowledge(s) the department's concerns," the corrections department didn't show how disclosure of the information "would create a substantial threat of physical harm to any individual."

Department officials previously had indicated they had a sufficient supply to handle upcoming executions. At least five are scheduled for this summer, including one early next month.

Last year, one of the drugs Texas had used in the process, sodium thiopental, became unavailable when its European supplier bowed to pressure from death penalty opponents and stopped making it. No other vendor could be found, so the drug was replaced by pentobarbital.

The physical effects of pentobarbital on condemned inmates have not been noticeable during the executions, but the financial cost to the state has risen considerably. Prison officials put the cost of the previous mixture at $83.35. It's now $1286.86, with the higher cost primarily due to pentobarbital.

(source: Associated Press)

USA:

U.S. Can Boost HR Credibility by Abolishing the Death Penalty

So far this year, we have seen many headlines featuring the U.S. urging leaders of other nations to democratize and ensure its citizens basic civil and human rights. In Myanmar, the administration has been responding to the country's political transformation and is supportive of Aung San Suu Kyi’s new role in the government. In China, it has been weighing a delicate balance between maintaining good political relations while urging human rights consideration in the case of Chinese dissident Chen Guangcheng. And in Syria, it has continued to support the opposition group that is fighting against tyranny.

However, for all of its efforts in fighting injustices abroad, the U.S. has its own serious form of injustice at home – the death penalty. As an Atlantic article points out, the U.S.’s support of the death penalty puts it into the same category as the world’s worst dictatorships and autocracies, such as North Korea, Iran, and Syria; and the world’s failed or failing states, such as Somalia, Afghanistan, and Sudan.

The death penalty may be one of the greatest violations of civil and human rights, particularly when there has been a large number of cases where innocent people – often having been proven innocent too little too late – are the victims of state-sponsored execution. According to Amnesty International, “The death penalty, both in the U.S. and around the world, is discriminatory and is used disproportionately against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic and religious communities. Since humans are fallible, the risk of executing the innocent can never be eliminated.”

Since 1976, 1,264 Americans have been executed, according to The Guardian. Texas has executed the most number of people – 474. The next state with the largest number of executions is Virginia at 109, followed by Oklahoma at 96. Other states are within ranges from 0-15, 20-30, or 40-70 executions. What these numbers do not reveal to us, however, is how deeply flawed and racist the death penalty system is. A large number of cases remain incomplete, carrying clouds of doubt, at the time the accused are sent to the death chambers, and a larger proportion of the American black population find themselves on death row.

A controversial case of last year was that of Troy Davis, who was accused of killing a police officer in 1989. Despite seven out of nine key witnesses recanting their evidence and explaining that they were forced by police into giving false statements; and lack of forensic or DNA evidence, or a murder weapon typing Davis to the crime, he was kept on death row for 20 years until finally executed last September.

Davis’ case is not the only one in American history that – despite the existence of “a shadow of a doubt” during the trials – has sentenced innocent people to life in prison or death row. The Innocence Project has a compiled a dizzying list of those convicted of crimes, were incarcerated for a range of years, and were then fortunately exonerated. Some exonerations included those on death row.

With these cases in mind, our justice system has been suffered from a 180 reversal. It seems that the burden of proof has been lifted off of prosecutors and has in these cases been placed on the defense. Instead of presuming innocence until proven guilty, these cases demonstrate that some inmates may actually be presumed guilty until proven innocent. In this case, one of the most basic concepts of our system of justice has been violated. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court allows for the death penalty, with Justice Antonin Scalia explaining that “Capital cases are given especially close scrutiny at every level, which is why in most cases many years elapse before the sentence is executed. And of course capital cases receive special attention in the application of executive clemency.”

However, the Innocence Project’s records of 289 exonerated cases have shown that our justice system is not free from error; it would seem that in reality, capital cases are not given the “close scrutiny” or “special attention” that Justice Scalia mentioned. In particular, there are at least ten cases similar to that of Davis’ – those that lacked evidence and whose facts presented at trials were questionable, but which ended in the prisoner on death row being executed anyway – only to be proven innocent or carrying a strong case of innocence after their deaths. The most notorious of this type of case is that of Carlos DeLuna, who was executed even in the light that the real killer had been bragging to others that he’d committed the crime and that he let another fall for his actions.

While life sentences are just, as they allows life and time for prisoners and lawyers to appeal what may be doubtful cases, the death sentence does not allow either and should be abolished nationwide. Concrete action that everyday citizens can take include signing petitions led by organizations like Amnesty International that place pressure on representatives to take action; or joining coalitions (such as the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty or People of Faith Against the Death Penalty) that organize events and campaigns around the issue.

(source: Jessica Pham is a senior at Stanford University majoring in International Relations; policymic.com)

OHIO:

Convicted Murderer Denied Clemency

The Ohio Parole Board recommended Friday that the governor deny clemency for a man sentenced to death for killing his estranged wife and brother-in-law in a basement room at a courthouse in 1992.

Abdul Awkal is slated to be put to death June 6 in one of 11 executions scheduled over the next 2 years.

Awkal's lawyer argued the 53-year-old man suffers from severe mental health problems and should be spared, but the state said Awkal carefully planned the killings and should be executed.

The parole board voted 8-1 against recommending mercy, with most members concluding that Awkal planned the shooting and that it wasn't the result of a psychotic breakdown.

While he had asserted remorse, "he clearly blames the victims for allegedly creating the circumstances that forced him to kill them," the board said. Its decision goes to Gov. John Kasich, who has the final say on whether to grant clemency.

"This defiant killer executed his 22-year-old wife and 24-year-old brother-in-law simply because his wife was seeking a divorce," Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Bill Mason said in a statement Friday. "Awkal shook the foundations of the justice system by committing these heinous acts in the County Courthouse, a place where citizens should be assured safety."

A message seeking comment was left for Awkal's attorney.

Awkal was sentenced to death for killing his estranged wife, Latife Awkal, and brother-in-law Mahmoud Abdul-Aziz, in January 1992 in a room where the Awkals were to take up divorce and custody issues.

Their 1989 marriage, arranged by Awkal's family, had dissolved as Latife Awkal and her brothers "felt that Awkal was not a good Muslim," according to the report.

The Awkals divorced and then remarried under Islamic law in 1991, but Awkal's wife moved out and filed for a legal divorce days later after discovering she had contracted a sexually transmitted disease from him.

In the months before the shooting, Awkal bought a pistol and threated to kill his wife and her family if they didn't dismiss the divorce proceedings.

Prosecutors said Awkal also changed his address and wrote his brother a check for most of his assets before heading to court on the day of the shooting.

He was accused of chasing his wife and brother-in-law into a room, shooting them at close range and trying to flee with the Awkals' 15-month-old daughter.

A court initially found him not competent to stand trial because of his severe depression.

He was sent to a mental health center and put on antidepressant and anti-anxiety medications before the court found him competent for trial, where he was convicted of aggravated murder.

In an interview this month with the parole board, Awkal admitted his actions were wrong. He spoke of having a previous nervous breakdown and said that he had not cheated on his wife but that she had been with other men. He said he "snapped" at the courthouse when his wife prevented him from holding his daughter, and he denied using the child as a shield when he tried to flee and was shot by officers.

One member of the parole board dissented in its vote, citing concerns about Awkal's mental state, his history of apparent mental breakdowns and the usefulness of expert testimony in the case.

(source: Associated Press)

MISSOURI:

Missouri finds a drug option for executions----Alternative anesthetic lets Missouri develop new protocol for lethal injections, the 1st of its kind.

The state of Missouri is back in the execution business with a drug that’s never been used to put prisoners to death in the United States.

Stymied by a chemical shortage affecting every death-penalty state, the Missouri Department of Corrections said this week that it now will carry out death sentences with propofol, a widely used surgical anesthetic that also was a factor in singer Michael Jackson’s death.

Attorneys representing some of the state’s death row inmates learned of the plan Thursday after corrections officials met with some inmates and informed them of the new protocol.

Defense attorneys said it’s too early to say what, if any, legal challenges might be mounted in regard to the new 1-drug execution protocol that replaces Missouri’s previous 3-drug cocktail.

“It’s something we will have to look at very carefully,” said Joseph Luby, an attorney with the Death Penalty Litigation Clinic in Kansas City.

“Propofol has no track record in executions.”

Missouri is the first state to formally adopt the use of propofol, also known by the brand name Diprivan, for use in lethal injections, said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, D.C.

“No one has used it yet,” Dieter said. “Other states may have considered it.”

Deborah Denno, a law professor at Fordham University in New York and nationally known expert on lethal injection issues, called it a “pretty extraordinary development” that raises many questions.

“I would anticipate legal challenges,” she said.

Missouri’s last execution took place in February 2011. Since shortly after that, the state has been unable to obtain the anesthetic that puts inmates to sleep before they are injected with two other chemicals that stop the lungs and heart. Officials also had been unable to obtain an alternative drug that some states had adopted to take its place.

With news that the corrections department had obtained a different drug, Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster on Thursday asked the state Supreme Court to set execution dates for 19 inmates. They include Michael Taylor, one of the killers of Ann Harrison, a Kansas City teenager kidnapped in 1989 while waiting for the school bus in front of her house, and Allen Nicklasson, convicted of kidnapping and killing Excelsior Springs businessman Richard Drummond in 1994 after Drummond stopped to help Nicklasson and a co-defendant when their car broke down.

Koster said in his motion that there are no legal impediments or stays now in place to stop the executions.

“Unless this court sets an execution date after a capital murder defendant’s legal process is exhausted, the people of Missouri are without legal remedy,” Koster said in his motion.

According to Supreme Court procedures, lawyers for the inmates must be given the opportunity to file responses before the Supreme Court sets execution dates.

“There is no timetable as far as when the court would rule (on dates),” said spokeswoman Beth Riggert. “The court rules when it deems it appropriate.”

Missouri and every other state using lethal injection once used the same 3-drug mixture that employed sodium thiopental to anesthetize prisoners. The drug has been employed in all 68 executions Missouri has carried out since 1989.

Inmates in Missouri and across the country had filed numerous legal challenges to the method, alleging that it created the risk of inflicting cruel and unusual punishment if not administered properly. However, the U.S. Supreme ruled in 2008 that the method was not unconstitutional.

In early 2010, shortages of sodium thiopental began cropping up, and in early 2011 the only domestic supplier announced it would no longer manufacture the drug.

States also had difficulty obtaining it from foreign sources, and on March 27, a federal court in Washington, D.C., banned any importation of sodium thiopental and ordered the Food and Drug Administration to contact every state that it believed had any foreign-manufactured thiopental and instruct them to surrender it to the FDA. It also permanently prohibited importation of the drug.

With thiopental in short supply, some states began to substitute another anesthetic, pentobarbital, for use in the 3-drug method.

In February 2011, Ohio began using pentobarbital by itself to execute prisoners. Earlier this year, Arizona became the 2nd state to switch to 1-drug executions using pentobarbital.

Dieter, with the death penalty information center, said pentobarbital has been used, either by itself or in combination with other drugs, in the last 45 executions in the United States.

But last July, its Danish manufacturer announced that it was imposing restrictions on how pentobarbital was distributed to prevent its use in executions.

Since its on-hand supply of thiopental expired in March 2011, Missouri had been unsuccessful in finding it or pentobarbital.

In announcing its new protocol this week, Missouri Department of Corrections officials did not comment on when they obtained the new drug or where it was obtained.

According to Missouri’s new written protocol, inmates will be injected with 2 grams of propofol. An area anesthesiologist said that amount is 10 times the dosage that would be used in a surgical setting for a 220-pound patient.

According to Missouri’s new protocol, the chemical will be prepared by a doctor, nurse or pharmacist. An intravenous line will be inserted and monitored by a doctor, nurse or emergency medical technician. Department employees will inject the chemicals.

Doctors say the drug is used widely in medical settings and does not have some of the side effects, like post-operative nausea and vomiting, of previously used anesthetics. It was developed in England in the late 1970s.

Currently, only 1 execution date is pending in Missouri. Michael Tisius, convicted of killing 2 jailers in Randolph County, is scheduled to be put to death Aug. 3.

An attorney representing Tisius could not be reached for comment Friday.

(source: Kansas City Star)

***************

Koster urges Supreme Court to set executionsMissouri AG questions why dates have not been set

Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster is urging the state Supreme Court to move forward with the execution of several condemned killers or explain why it won’t.

Koster filed a motion on Thursday seeking execution dates for 9 men. The motion also questions why the court has not set execution dates for 10 others whose execution dates were previously requested.

“Silence is not an option in this matter any longer,” Koster said in an interview on Friday. “The court needs to give us the word that we can move forward with these, or they need to articulate why not.”

Beth Riggert, spokeswoman for the Missouri Supreme Court, declined to speculate on why execution dates have not been set for the 10 earlier inmates. As for the 9 new ones, she said each has 5 business days to respond to Koster’s call for execution dates.

“The court will rule when it deems it appropriate,” she said.

Meanwhile, Missouri’s next execution will apparently use a new process. Previously, the state used a three-drug protocol. But a shortage of 1 of those drugs, sodium thiopental, has prompted the state to go to a single-drug method.

Between 1989, when executions resumed in Missouri, and 2005, the state put to death 66 convicted killers. But in the 7 years since then, only 2 men have been executed — Dennis Skillicorn in 2009 and Martin Link last year.

Other states have seen similar reductions. Nationwide, there were 98 executions in 1999, but just 43 in 2011, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. So far in 2012 there have been 18.

In Missouri, the attorney general typically requests an execution date after traditional court appeals are exhausted. In years past, the state Supreme Court would then establish a date, setting in motion last-minute court appeals as well as a clemency request before the governor.

But it has been 6 years since Koster’s predecessor, now Gov. Jay Nixon, requested an execution date for Jeffrey Ferguson. Execution dates for 5 inmates have been pending since 2007.

Koster acknowledged that 2 issues may have made the Supreme Court reluctant to move forward.

Death penalty opponents have filed several claims that lethal injection violates a constitutional guarantee against cruel and unusual punishment, saying it potentially causes extreme pain that the drug-induced inmate cannot articulate. A 2010 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court cleared the use of the drugs.

Then a shortage of 1 of the 3 drugs emerged. Some states halted executions because of the inability to obtain sodium thiopental, which renders the inmate unconscious. After that pancuronium bromide is administered to stop breathing and potassium chloride to stop the heart.

Missouri has revised its protocol and will now use just one drug, propofol (marketed as Diprovan), which will be administered intravenously, Dave Dormire, director of the Missouri Department of Correction’s Division of Adult Institutions, said in a statement on Friday. Corrections officials did not say when the new protocol was adopted.

Koster also noted that there has been a change in “political sentiment” toward the death penalty, with an increasing number of states reluctant to carry it out and prosecutors becoming more reluctant to seek it. Still, he said that as long as it is law in Missouri, there is an obligation to move forward with executions.

(source: Associated Press)

***********************

Loggins Sentencing Hearing Monday; Facing Life in Prison or Death Sentence

A Pacific man who murdered his girlfriend then mutilated her body will learn Monday if he will spend the rest of his life in prison or face execution.

Circuit Judge Gael Wood has scheduled a 2:30 p.m. sentencing hearing Monday for Vernell Loggins Jr. who was found guilty earlier this year of 1st-degree murder and armed criminal action in the Nov. 3, 2009, slaying of Stephanie Fields, Pacific.

After finding Loggins guilty a Franklin County jury deliberated more than five hours before imposing the death sentence in the case.

Judge Wood could agree with jury and order that Loggins be executed or he could sentence the man to life in prison with no chance of parole.

Sentencing had been set for April 17, but Judge Wood continued the case to May 21 and directed attorneys on both sides to submit briefs over concerns raised by a Missouri Supreme Court judge in a 1988 death sentence case.

Judge Wood has had those briefs under review for about the last 2 weeks.

He ordered the briefs after researching an issue regarding the Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Gerald Smith.

Smith, who was found guilty of murdering a woman in 1981, was sentenced to death in the case. On appeal, the Missouri Supreme Court affirmed Smith’s conviction and the death penalty ruling. He was executed in 1990.

Judge Charles Blackmar concurred with the other justices, but in a separate opinion he raised a concern about the death penalty aggravator that was applied in the case — depravity of mind — which is the same as in the Loggins ruling.

“I doubt very much that a finding based on ‘depravity of mind,’ without ‘torture,’ would suffice to authorize a death sentence,” Judge Blackmar wrote in his opinion.

The prosecution team cited a number of rulings in death sentence cases since the 1988 case and concluded in its brief that Missouri’s death penalty law “has repeatedly been found constitutional. The jury found beyond a reasonable doubt that the statutory aggravating circumstance alleged in this case did, in fact, exist.”

The defense team, likewise, cited a number of cases and argued in its conclusion that the aggravator cited is “vague and so broadly constructed that it fails to provide clear and specific direction to the sentencer, resulting in the arbitrary and capricious imposition of a death sentence” in violation of Loggins’ rights.

The Murder

Authorities said Loggins stabbed Fields 25 times, then cut off her head and hands, placed them in a plastic bag and threw them in the Meramec River east of Eureka. Searchers later found the bag containing the head and hands where it had washed up on the riverbank.

Maintenance workers at the Monroe Woods apartment discovered Fields’ body Nov. 3, 2009, in a plastic trash can that had been placed near a dumpster.

The St. Louis Area Major Case Squad was activated shortly after Fields’ body was found in the trash can and within hours had identified Loggins as a key suspect. When investigators entered the apartment they found a “substantial amount of blood” along with pieces of skin and other tissue.

The last time a defendant in a Franklin County murder case was executed was Aug. 31, 1990. It was nine years after the defendant was tried and found guilty.

(source: The Missourian)

US MILITARY:

Soldier faces murder charges in deaths of 5 comrades at Iraq mental health clinic

Murder charges have been filed against a sergeant accused of killing 4 other soldiers and a Navy officer in May 2009 at a mental health clinic in Iraq, the Army said Friday.

The charges against Sgt. John Russell were referred Wednesday and announced Friday in a statement from Joint Base Lewis-McChord. He faces 5 charges of premeditated murder, 1 of aggravated assault and 1 of attempted murder.

If convicted, he could face the death penalty.

The charges result from an investigation into the shooting at the Camp Liberty Combat Stress Center near Baghdad. No date for the court-martial has been set. Russell is being held at the base about 40 miles south of Seattle. Russell is from Sherman, Texas, and is now about 47 years old, said Lt. Col. Gary Dangerfield. The delay since the killings has been filled with the process of determining whether Russell is fit to stand trial.

Russell has an Army defense attorney but it is standard procedure for them not to comment to the media, Dangerfield said.

The shooting was one of the worst instances of soldier-on-soldier violence in the Iraq war and raised questions about the mental health problems for soldiers caused by repeated tours of duty.

“I don’t know of any other worse blue-on-blue in Iraq,” Dangerfield said.

A hearing on possible charges was held in August 2009 at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. 2 evaluations presented during that hearing said Russell suffered from severe depression with psychotic features and chronic post-traumatic stress disorder. A March 2011 evaluation said the major depression with psychotic features was in partial remission.

Russell was nearing the end of his third tour when his behavior changed, members of his unit testified in 2009. They said he became more distant in the days before the May 11, 2009, attack, and that he seemed paranoid that his unit was trying to end his career.

On May 8, Russell sought help at a combat stress clinic at Camp Stryker, where his unit was located. On May 10 Russell was referred to the Camp Liberty clinic, where he received counseling and prescription medication to treat his symptoms.

Witnesses said the following day they saw Russell crying and talking about hurting himself. He went back to the Camp Liberty clinic, where a doctor told him he needed to get help or he would hurt himself. Russell tried to surrender to military police to lock him up so he wouldn’t hurt himself or others, witnesses said.

Military prosecutors say Russell left the clinic and later returned with a rifle he took from his unit headquarters and began firing. He was arrested afterward.

Killed in the shooting were Navy Cmdr. Charles Springle, 52, of Wilmington, N.C., and four Army service members: Pfc. Michael Edward Yates Jr., 19, of Federalsburg, Md.; Dr. Matthew Houseal, of Amarillo, Texas; Sgt. Christian E. Bueno-Galdos, 25, of Paterson, N.J.; and Spc. Jacob D. Barton, 20, of Lenox, Mo.

Russell deployed to Iraq with the 370th Engineer Company, 54th Engineer Battalion from Bamberg, Germany. In Iraq the 54th was assigned to the 555th Engineer Brigade, based at Lewis-McChord, which is responsible for the court martial.

(source: Associated Press)

FLORIDA:

How to fix Florida's death penalty law

Before reading this, you should know that I am an opponent of the death penalty. It should be abolished immediately.

However, since I live in the conservative South and it isn't going away any time soon, I have to be realistic. So long as abolition is off the table, I must consider any policy that at least reduces how often capital punishment is applied. This requires finding new ideas that might appeal a greater base of people, rather than just those who already believe the government should not be trusted with the power of executing its own citizens.

So this time I would like to appeal to those who believe in "personal responsibility."

Recently, I was watching "Game of Thrones" on HBO and was introduced to what I will call the "Ned Stark Rule" of capital punishment. Basically, it boils down to this quote from the show: "The man who passes the sentence should swing the sword."

Maybe this is not a new idea, but it got me thinking that that those who sit in judgment are too far removed from the sentence to feel personal responsibility for it. This distance leads to cavalier attitudes and "liberal" application of the sentence, especially here in the South and especially when the victims are white and the alleged perpetrator is not.

What is needed is a way to put those who judge in front of the incredible responsibility they are being asked to wield. Perhaps then, they will think a bit harder about what the penalty really means and whether or not they really want to apply it.

The solution is simple: The acting governor must be the one to execute the sentence. That means this person must be in the room with the inmate and push the button that leads to the execution, whether it be by lethal injection or electric chair. The governor must stand there and watch the person die and have this death on his conscience. He must eventually go before whichever god they pray to and justify the action.

Now, you could argue that it should be the jury or the judge and not the governor, since the governor did not actually pass the sentence and may not have even been governor when it was handed down. However, jurors or judges come and go and won't likely be around when the sentence is executed. And, in the end, it is the governor who has final say over who lives and who dies. Therefore, the governor must "swing the sword."

When faced with the prospect of actual blood on their hands — not just an inkstain from the wave of a pen in some room in Tallahassee — a governor might take a personal interest in whether or not the sentence was passed fairly. And if the inmate was truly a monster and the governor can sleep at night, then so be it.

Now, before you say that the governor doesn't have the time to do this, can you think of anything more important than the government deliberately taking the life of a fellow citizen? This responsibility — above all others — warrants personal attention and should not be cowardly delegated to subordinates.

Let's face it, a person has no business being governor and wielding the power associated with the position if he cannot do his own dirty work. Besides, how time-consuming can it be to travel to Starke (no pun intended) a few times a year? Anybody up for amending the Florida Constitution to reflect this change?

(source: Tom Lyons lives in Gainesville; Gainesville Sun)

*****************

Calhoun sentenced to death

Johnny Mac Sketo Calhoun was sentenced to death Friday for the murder of Mia Shay Brown after being convicted at trial earlier this year.

The jury recommended the death penalty, and Judge Christopher agreed.

In an order describing how he reached his decision, Patterson wrote, “Mia Chay Brown burned to death in a fiery tomb, only to be found by chance 3 days later.” He found that Calhoun acted with cold, calculated premeditation when he put her in the trunk of a car and set the car on fire in a wooded area in rural Alabama after kidnapping her from the Esto store where she worked.

Paterson has the power to overturn the jury’s decision if the judge sees there was an error, however this rarely happens. Patterson found mitigating circumstances presented by the defense during a recent hearing were not enough to outweigh the aggravating circumstances.

Brown had been missing for several days before her body was recovered. Calhoun was arrested at a trailer he owned. He told investigators with the Holmes County Sheriff’s Office that he had been kidnapped by an unknown man, and he’d spent several days hiding out in the woods after escaping.

Patterson’s order called Calhoun “deliberately ruthless,” and noted Brown was still alive after 14 hours with Calhoun.

“He had ample opportunity to release the victim, but instead after ample reflection acted out his plan,” Patterson wrote.

The final sentencing came 5 minutes into the court session with Paterson stating that for the 1st-degree murder of Brown, Calhoun would be sentenced to death and for the 2nd charge of kidnapping he would serve 100 years imprisonment to be served in the Florida Department of Corrections.

“The defendant shall be remanded to the Florida Department of Corrections for execution of his sentence,” Paterson said. “May God have mercy on your soul.”

(source: Panama City News Herald)

INDIA:

No bail for Italian sailors in India despite envoy protests

An Indian court denied bail on Saturday to 2 Italian sailors charged with the murder at sea of 2 Indian fishermen they mistook for pirates, hours after Rome recalled its ambassador from New Delhi in an increasingly surly diplomatic row.

The court rejected the bail pleas on grounds the 2 men might try to escape, said a public prosecutor in the southern state of Kerala, where the men are detained.

"The judge accepted the prosecution's apprehension that the accused may escape from the country and tamper with the evidence," D. Mohanraj, a prosecutor handling the case, told Reuters. A lawyer for the defence said they would appeal.

In a further escalation of the spat, India's ambassador in Italy was summoned to the foreign ministry which "firmly signalled the unacceptable judicial developments related to the Italian sailors," the ministry said in a statement.

India says the case of marines Massimiliano Latorre and Salvatore Girone is a matter for the courts and cannot be influenced by political or diplomatic pressure. Italy wants the men tried at home and says the government should intervene.

Italy called back its ambassador for consultations shortly after murder charges were formalised on Friday to express "profound displeasure" with the Indian government's handling of the case.

"We are sending a strong signal to avoid damaging our relationship," said Italy's deputy foreign minister, Staffan de Mistura, on his third mission to India to push for the sailors to be released into Italian custody.

The ambassador was recalled after three telephone calls by Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti to his Indian counterpart Manmohan Singh, a visit by Italy's defence minister and his own missions to India, de Mistura told Reuters from Kerala.

An official at India's foreign ministry, who asked not to be identified, said it was unusual that a person of de Mistura's rank would spend so much time on a case of this nature.

"It does not bother us, but he needs to understand that it is not a U.N. job in Iraq or Afghanistan, where hands-on diplomacy might help," the official said.

"It doesn't work here like that, he needs to understand we are slow, things move through a glacial process, but that's how it is, diplomatic pressure won't work."

PIRATE ATTACKS

The 2 sailors were stationed on a merchant ship passing the southern Indian coast and were tasked with protecting it from pirate attacks. They fired warning shots at the fishing boat on February 15, believing it to be a pirate vessel, they said.

Investigators say the fishing boat was unarmed and the shots killed the 2 fishermen, who were part of a larger crew.

Italy says the incident occurred in international waters and that jurisdiction over the marines should lie with Rome. In April, it paid $190,000 to each of the victims families as compensation. In return, the families dropped their cases against the marines, but the state's case continues.

Latorre and Girone are expected to be moved from prison to a juvenile detention facility in the next few days. The next hearing in the case is due on May 25, Kerala's deputy public prosecutor said on Friday.

Attacks on ships have increased in the eastern side of the Arabian Sea, as better security around the Horn of Africa has pushed Somali pirates to make raids as far over as the Maldives. The waters close to India are generally considered safer.

The marines were charged with murder soon after the incident in February. Under Indian law, initial charges are formalised by police after investigation and before a trial can begin.

One of the murder charges carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment, but another can be punished by death, though the central government would have to approve that. India has not used the death penalty for several years.

(source: Reuters)

IRAN:

In memory of Farzad Kamangar, Iranian Kurdish teacher----Kamangar, a teacher in Iran's Kudistan region, was hanged in May 2010 for being "an enemy of God"

This month marks the 2nd anniversary of the execution of a primary school teacher, who paid with his life for refusing to make televised confession about a crime he didn't commit.

Farzad Kamangar was 31 when he was detained by the security forces in July 2006 for allegedly collaborating with the Kurdish opposition groups. The government accused him of being "an enemy of god". His mother believes that her son's only crime was his 'Kurdishness' and his lawyer Khalil Bahramian maintained that "there was not a shred of evidence" against him.

Interrogators in numerous prisons where Farzad was held for four years, put him through severe physical and mental torture to break his resistance. Farzad's letters and articles about the inhumane conditions inside prison helped to bring international condemnations from many organisations including UNICEF and the Education International which represents teachers across the globe.

When the authorities realised that they could not break Farzad under torture, they decided to silence him for ever. In the early hours of the 9th May 2010, Farzad and four other prisoners were lead to the gallows. Contrary to Iranian law his lawyer and his family were not informed. Within a few minutes, his lifeless body was hanging from a noose in Evin prison in Tehran.

His death was another reminder to the Iranian people that the Islamic Republic maintains its grip on power through creating a climate of fear and disregarding its own laws.

Even in death, Farzad managed to unite the people of Iran as the Kurdish region went on strike and many mourned his death across the country and in the diaspora. Fearing more unrest, the Islamic Republic, contrary to the basic tenets of Islam, refused to hand over his body and those of his co-defendants, depriving their families of a dignified burial for their loved ones.

In his last message smuggled out of prison, Farzad wrote: "Is it possible to be a teacher where there is a drought of justice and fairness and not teach the alphabet of hope and equality?"

(source: The Guardian)

CHINA:

Gambler Gets Death for Murdering Children

A gambling addict received the death penalty Thursday for murdering 2 kids in Beijing last year.

The Beijing Municipal No. 1 Intermediate People's Court also stripped Wen Quan, 43, of his political rights for life and ordered him to hand over 1.4 million yuan (221,293 U.S. dollars) in compensation to the victims' families.

The court found that Wen kidnapped a 5-year-old boy and a 6-year-old girl from his community in Xicheng district on May 21, 2011. He suffocated them to death on separate occasions and dumped their bodies.

The jobless Wen confessed that he was angry after losing 2 million yuan of his life-savings through gambling online. He was envious of his neighbors as he considered their lives better than his, and decided to murder the 2 children next door before killing his own son and committing suicide.

He said that on the day of the murder he gambled online again but lost another 300,000 yuan. He killed the 2 children as he planned, but did not have the heart to kill his own son, he said.

(source: CRI English)

NORTH KOREA:

Korea 'executes 3 people found guilty of cannibalism'----North Korea has publicly executed at least 3 people in recent years after they were found guilty of cannibalism, according to a think tank in Seoul

Some of the 230 defectors interviewed by the Korean Institute for National Unification told of witnessing executions of people who had either eaten or sold human flesh.

There were reports of outbreaks of cannibalism in the isolated state in the late 1990s after a disastrous famine led to the deaths of an estimated 2 million people, but the new reports are more recent, according to the Yonhap news agency.

The most recent case occurred in 2011 in the town of Musan, a defector told the institute, while a father and his son were executed by a firing squad in the town of Doksong in 2006 after being found guilty of consuming human flesh.

In a 3rd case, a man was executed in Hyesan in December 2009 for killing a girl and eating her. The man reportedly resorted to cannibalism after supplies to the city dwindled in the wake of the government's disastrous efforts to reform the currency triggered rampant inflation and worsened already critical food shortages.

The study is to be published in South Korea next week, but appears to corroborate North Korean police documents that were smuggled out of the country by the missionary group Caleb Mission and detailed several more cases of cannibalism.

In one case, a starving man used an axe to kill a work colleague, ate some of the flesh and sold the rest in a local market as mutton.

Pyongyang has been accused of using food supplies as a weapon to cow its own people, effectively turning a blind eye to illegal markets when food is scarce but then cracking down on private sales again and limiting deliveries when supplies are more abundant.

It is also accused of failing to pass on food aid that it receives from international aid agencies to those most in need.

A survey of 500 refugees from the regime conducted by the Network for North Korean Democracy and Human Rights in March 2011 showed that 391 had never received food aid and, of the 109 who had been given food, 29 said they had been forced to hand it over to North Korean officials when the aid agency's representatives had departed.

China is also investigating allegations that capsules of drugs being smuggled into South Korea contain the powdered remains of dead babies.

(source: The Telegraph)

MAY 18, 2012:

TEXAS:

Citing Carlos DeLuna, Protesters Call on Dallas DA Craig Watkins to Abandon the Death Penalty

Rick Halperin, head of SMU's human rights program, has been saying for years what became nationally recognized this week: "Yes, America, We Have Executed an Innocent Man," to borrow a headline from the Atlantic. Halperin has spent his career doing the academic equivalent of banging his head against the wall trying to get people to recognize that it is possible to kill innocent prisoners and hosting event after event with death penalty exonerees sharing their stories.

Finally, a lengthy report released this week by Columbia University's law school concludes what Halperin's been saying all along: America killed an innocent prisoner in 1989. Or, more specifically, Texas killed an innocent prisoner in 1989.

That man's name is Carlos DeLuna, as the signs of anti-death penalty demonstrators outside the Dallas County Courthouse read this morning. Flaws in his case lead to his wrongful conviction and eventual death at the hands of the state. Halperin gathered a small crowd, in the face of this revelation, to plea that District Attorney Craig Watkins stop seeking death sentences for people charged with capital crimes.

Halperin made it clear that life without parole is often an appropriate punishment -- just not death. "A death sentence is many things, but it can never be equated to justice," Halperin said, demanding that Watkins do his job of "seeking justice."

Watkins has said many times, including in an interview with Unfair Park, that he is conflicted about the death penalty, but that he feels bound by duty to pursue it in cases that warrant the ultimate punishment. Halperin doesn't buy it.

"It's preposterous for a grown man who happens to be a District Attorney to be conflicted about the death penalty," he says. "This man needs to come out one way or the other."

The Columbia report on DeLuna has "profound ramifications" in Dallas, Halperin says, since Watkins' policies have made the county ground zero for exonerations, leading the charge in releasing wrongfully convicted prisoners. The current count is 33.

Halperin hopes the Columbia report will be a "catalyst to renewed and wider debate on the death penalty." While Columbia report has catapulted his message to a national stage, he's strengthening his cause locally, on the steps of the courthouse, with drivers speeding by and news cameras zooming in.

"It says something pretty dark and disturbing about us," Halperin says of the death penalty and the lost life of an innocent man. Several supporters of Ben Spencer, including his mother, held signs supporting the man many believe to be innocent of the murder that landed him behind bars. Others held signs listing the names of Dallas exonerees, the others on death row who may be innocent, and those executed in Texas despite evidence of innocence.

Halperin's message and the cases listed on the signs serve to show that Columbia's report, "Los Tocayos Carlos: An Anatomy of a Wrongful Conviction," may have prequels that have never been published. And that's why, Halperin says, "One is too many ... Carlos DeLuna is too many."

(source: Dallas Observer)

************************

Texas Executed The Wrong Man Because He Looked Like The Real Murderer

Last year, Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) admitted that he “never struggled . . . at all” with whether someone his state executed might have been innocent. Yet a new book written by Columbia Law Professor James Liebman shows that Carlos DeLuna, executed by Texas in 1989, was innocent. According to Liebman, DeLuna was wrongfully convicted and executed for the murder of Wanda Lopez following a botched investigation. DeLuna and the man believed to have committed the murder, Carlos Hernandez, looked so much alike that they were mistaken for each other in photographs by family members.

However, DeLuna, who was clean-shaven and wearing a white shirt, did not fit the description of the eyewitness who said that the murderer was wearing flannel and had a mustache. Police arrested DeLuna anyway and failed to do a formal lineup. Police also failed to formally examine the crime scene, ignoring foot and fingerprints, not taking blood samples, and allowing the scene to be cleaned by gas station employees.

Not only did DeLuna maintain his innocence throughout the investigation and his subsequent incarceration, he told investigators that he knew Hernandez had committed the crime. DeLuna was ignored, and during his trial prosecutors ridiculed his claim:

They told the jury that police had looked for a “Carlos Hernandez” after his name had been passed to them by DeLuna’s lawyers, without success. They had concluded that Hernandez was a fabrication, a “phantom” who simply did not exist. The chief prosecutor said in summing up that Hernandez was a “figment of DeLuna’s imagination”.

By the end of [a] single day the investigator had uncovered evidence that had eluded scores of Texan police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers and judges over the six years between DeLuna’s arrest and execution. Carlos Hernandez did indeed exist.

Hernandez had a criminal background that included several violent assaults. He eventually died in prison after attacking his girlfriend with a knife.

DeLuna is not the only man to be wrongfully convicted and executed by the state of Texas. There is persuasive evidence that Cameron Todd Willingham, convicted in the death of his three daughters and executed in 2004, was innocent and DNA tests have undermined the evidence used to convict and execute Claude Jones. Texas continues to lead the nation in executions, accounting for over one-third of US executions since 1976, despite the fact that there were 41 DNA exonerations there from 2002-2011.

Moreover, DeLuna’s case highlights the difficulties inherent in the permanence of the death penalty — despite conservative efforts to dismiss these difficulties. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said in 2005 that there was not “a single case—not one—in which it is clear that a person was executed for a crime he did not commit.” It’s now hard to doubt that’s not true.

(source: Hispanically Speaking News Network)

**********************

video: see: http://therealnews.com/t2/component/hwdvideoshare/?task=viewvideo&video_id=73704

************************

Texas prisons must disclose execution drug details

Texas prison officials must disclose information about who supplies lethal drugs for executions and how much of the drugs the Department of Criminal Justice has on hand, the state attorney general's office ruled.

The opinion this week came in response to public information requests filed earlier in the year by the Austin American-Statesman and the British newspaper The Guardian.

Prison officials had argued that releasing the information could be harmful to employees and provide death penalty opponents with an avenue to harass the drug suppliers in the hope those firms would refuse to do business with the state.

"We find your arguments as to how disclosure of the requested drug quantities would result in the disruption of the execution process or otherwise interfere with law enforcement to be too speculative," Sean Opperman, an assistant attorney general, wrote in the opinion.

Texas Department of Criminal Justice officials did not immediately respond to a phone message left by The Associated Press seeking comment. The Austin paper, which first reported about the ruling Thursday, said prison officials said they hadn't seen the opinion yet and couldn't comment on it.

The prison agency has 30 days to comply with the opinion or to challenge it in court, under state guidelines.

Opperman said that while the attorney general's office "acknowledge(s) the department's concerns," the corrections department didn't show how disclosure of the information "would create a substantial threat of physical harm to any individual."

Department officials have indicated they have a sufficient supply to handle upcoming executions. At least 5 so far are scheduled for Texas into the summer, including 1 early next month.

Last year Texas had to change from sodium thiopental, one of the drugs used in the process, when it became unavailable after its European supplier bowed to pressure from death penalty opponents and stopped making it. No other vendor could be found and pentobarbital was used as a replacement.

The physical effects of the new drug on condemned inmates have not been noticeable at executions in Huntsville but the financial cost to the state has risen considerably. Prison officials put the cost of the previous drug mixture, which also used pancuronium bromide and potassium chloride, at $83.35. It's now $1286.86, with the higher cost primarily due to pentobarbital.

About 3.4 ounces of solution containing 5 grams of pentobarbital is used in the lethal injection process, followed by lethal doses of the other two drugs. In addition, the department's written procedures call for a matching set of drugs and syringes "in case unforeseen events make their use necessary."

(source: Associated Press)

***************

Female faces death sentence

Jury finds Kimberly Cargill guilty of capital murder; Sentencing begins Monday

Kimberly Cargill has been found guilty of capital murder in the death of her child's babysitter. The sentencing phase of the trial begins Monday.

A verdict may be reached today in the case of Kimberly Cargill, the Whitehouse woman accused of killing her child's babysitter.

29 year old Cherry Walker was killed in June of 2010, once day after she was subpoenaed to testify in a custody hearing over Cargill's 4 year old son.

Cargill is charged with her murder.

If convicted, she faces the death penalty.

(source: KETK News)

***********************

Texas high court orders state to pay ex-inmate $2 million

The Texas Supreme Court ordered the state Friday to pay about $2 million to an ex-inmate who spent 26 years in prison for murder before his conviction was overturned.

Billy Frederick Allen's attempts to get the money have been watched as a key case in developing standards for when ex-prisoners should be compensated. State Comptroller Susan Combs resisted paying Allen, arguing his conviction was overturned because of ineffective lawyers, not because he had proven his innocence.

But the state Supreme Court said the criminal courts showed Allen had a legitimate innocence claim and he should be paid.

Allen was convicted of 2 1983 Dallas-area murders. He was freed in 2009 and sued the state for compensation for wrongful imprisonment.

Texas' compensation law is the most generous in the U.S., according to the national Innocence Project. Freed inmates who are declared innocent by a judge, prosecutors or a governor's pardon can collect $80,000 for every year of imprisonment, along with an annuity.

What makes Allen's case different is that he didn't have an innocence declaration. What he had instead was a Court of Criminal Appeals ruling that reversed his conviction based on ineffective counsel that also determined that the evidence against him was too weak to for a reasonable jury to convict him.

Although prosecutors dismissed the charges, they said they still considered him a suspect and have kept the case open.

DNA evidence has led to most of Texas' exonerations. But with DNA testing essentially standard in most cases now and the number of DNA-based exonerations expected to dwindle, more former inmates like Allen -- whose case has no DNA evidence -- are likely to account for more compensation cases.

(source: Associated Press)

MISSOURI:

AG requests execution dates for 9 men on death row

Attorney General Chris Koster has requested the Missouri Supreme Court set execution dates for 9 men on death row.

Capital Murder Cases

Attorney General Chris Koster submitted for filing motions in the Missouri Supreme Court regarding the following capital murder cases:

State v. David Barnett

State v. Cecil Clayton

State v. Andre Cole

State v. Paul Goodwin

State v. Herbert Smulls

State v. Walter Storey

State v. Leon Taylor

State v. Michael Worthington

State v. David Zink

According to the website missourideathrow.com, Koster has requested the dates indicating no more legal impediments remain to keep the Supreme Court from setting dates.

"Missouri does not know the cost of executions yet we now have 19+ men waiting execution. We can't find the money in the budget for education, public safety, roads etc. and yet are willing to stay with a public policy that is likely costing the state millions. Missouri would do well to end the death penalty and to focus resources instead on solving more cases of violent crime, taking violent offenders off the streets and providing meaningful support for victims and their families," Kathleen Holmes, state coordinator of Missourians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, said in a release.

Dave Dormire, director of the Division of Adult Institutions for the Missouri Department of Corrections, announced a new one-drug protocol (propofol) for lethal injection. This 1-drug protocol replaces the 3-drug protocol previously used by the state.

This change was necessary, according to Dormire. Sodium thiopental, 1 of the 3 drugs previously used in executions, is no longer available.

(source: KCTV News)

CALIFORNIA:

Innocent & Executed: It Could Have Been Me

Texas executed an innocent man in 1989. That is the stunning conclusion of "Los Tocayos Carlos," a groundbreaking article published Monday in The Columbia Human Rights Law Review. As "Los Tocayos Carlos" meticulously documents, Carlos DeLuna was wrongfully convicted and executed for a crime he did not commit.

The news shook me to my core. It could have been me.

I was wrongfully convicted when I was 16 years old and served 20 years in prison before proving my innocence. That mistake took two decades from me, but it took Carlos DeLuna's life.

As I've read about the tragic story of Carlos' death, I'm struck by the parallels between our two lives. Carlos and I could have been brothers -- we come from similar backgrounds and we were both caught up in a criminal justice system that seemed stacked against us as poor young men. But the similarities go deeper.

We were both victims of mistaken identity. Carlos was identified by a single, uncorroborated witness who saw the suspect at night; my identification came by an error-filled photo line-up. In both of our cases, there was no forensic evidence to back up the witnesses.

Also disturbingly familiar was Carlos' struggle to prove his innocence. Both of us spent every day of our lives after our convictions trying to prove that we were innocent, and neither of us could do it alone. Proving that I was not a killer took 20 years and a team of dedicated lawyers, professors, and nonprofit organizations. Without them, I would still be in prison today. Proof of Carlos' innocence has only come out now, 29 years after the crime and 2 decades after he was executed, because of the painstaking work of professors and students at The Columbia Human Rights Law Review.

Most chilling, though, is the stark difference. My innocence was proven in time. Carlos DeLuna's was not.

Doubts always existed in Carlos' case, but it took 29 years and what some are calling the most comprehensive criminal investigation in U.S. history to produce this report and finally bring justice to Carlos DeLuna's name. More than two decades too late -- it only took 6 years for the courts to deny his appeals and execute him.

Since proving my innocence, I've spent my time with family and friends and each moment has been so full of joy. I am a student at Loyola Marymount University and I work as an advocate for the SAFE California Act to replace the death penalty in California.

Now I can't help thinking about Carlos DeLuna's family and friends. How can they ever have justice knowing that someone they loved was executed for a crime he did not commit? I think about the joys of freedom and vindication that he was never able to feel, and the accomplishments he was never able to achieve.

Every wrongful conviction is a tragedy, but the death penalty makes that tragedy irreversible. I am living proof that cases like Carlos DeLuna's are not isolated, they are the inevitable result of an imperfect system. As long as we have a death penalty, we risk executing innocent people like Carlos DeLuna. Please join me in the effort to replace California's death penalty.

(source: Franky Carrillo.Exonerated of murder after 20 years in prison, Huffington Post)

KENTUCKY:

Ky. death row inmate wants hip surgery----Officials worry about fallout

A condemned killer's fight to receive surgery for agonizing hip pain pushed Kentucky officials into an uncomfortable debate over security, politics and even the possibility of inviting scorn from Fox News pundits.

Emails and memos obtained by The Associated Press show corrections officials struggling for a year to reconcile their duty to provide medical care with the political ramifications of spending tens of thousands of dollars for surgery on a man they plan to execute. A key problem would turn out to be security issues that led several hospitals to balk at treating inmate Robert Foley, who still hasn't had the surgery.

"Hip replacement for an inmate who has exhausted all appeals and will soon be executed?" Kentucky State Penitentiary warden Phil Parker wrote in an email on Nov. 22, 2010. "I can see this making Fox News on a slow news day, maybe even on a busy news day. In fact, I bet (Fox News host Bill O'Reilly) would love to put this in his 'Pinheads' commentary. Just a thought to consider before it goes too much further."

Prison officials also made contingency plans to call off the surgery if Gov. Steve Beshear set an execution date, and they considered whether to consult with him about the procedure.

"I think it is that important and all this may have political consequences," Parker wrote a year before Beshear's re-election. Ultimately, Beshear's spokeswoman said he wasn't contacted about it.

Foley, 55, was convicted of killing six people in eastern Kentucky in 1989 and 1991, making him the most prolific killer on the state's death row. His status as an extremely dangerous prisoner was a key factor in the state's difficulty finding a surgeon and hospital, according to the documents obtained through a public records request and a lawsuit filed by Foley.

Foley still hasn't had the surgery, with Parker lamenting in an email they had no options after an exhaustive search.

State officials deny that politics played a role, and there's no evidence in the documents that political considerations prevented the surgery.

A spokeswoman for the Kentucky Justice Cabinet — which oversees corrections and law enforcement — declined to comment because of the pending lawsuit.

Foley's attorney, Jamesa Drake, said the state needs a way to care for condemned inmates, even those with complex needs. Foley, who has been on death row since 1993, is unable to get around without help because he's at risk of a dangerous fall, Drake said.

"If you're on death row, it's just like anybody else," Drake said. "If you need a new hip, you need a new hip. It hurts."

The Department of Corrections acknowledged his degenerative hip in a response to the lawsuit, but also said he has been receiving adequate care. The federal lawsuit filed in March is pending.

Corrections Department attorney Brenn Combs wrote to Drake that the Department of Corrections couldn't enter into a legal agreement about the hip surgery because it would impose requirements exceeding "our legal duty regarding inmate health care."

"The Department is not interested in doing that and, like me, nobody else here can see a way that it would help inmate Foley," Combs said in a Nov. 14 email.

It's not unusual for inmates to receive treatment outside of prison, and Foley has twice left death row for other surgical procedures.

Foley first complained to prison officials about the persistent pain in his right hip in September 2010, saying his leg sometimes "gives out on him," according to the lawsuit.

Foley initially didn't want the surgery and tried to fashion his own hip brace out of "flip flops and other everyday items." Foley said the brace helped with the pain in an affidavit signed in February, but prison officials confiscated it.

After Foley agreed to the surgery, officials searched for a doctor to perform the $56,000 operation. At the time, Foley was under a death warrant signed by Beshear.

"If and when an order is received to execute Foley, I will contact (then-prison medical director Dr. Scott Haas) to try to stop all medical procedures related to his hip replacement," Parker wrote.

No execution date was set, and a judge later halted lethal injections as the state weighs execution procedures. It's not clear when executions could resume.

While looking for a hospital, corrections officials increased Foley's pain medication and looked into the logistics of moving him.

But prison nurse Chanin Hiland wrote in a September 2010 email to Haas that orthopedists in Paducah, Madisonville and Murray had been contacted, and "none of them want any part of this."

"The farther we have to go, the more security will have to be sent with him; although, it is obvious he will not be running anywhere soon," Hiland wrote. Foley's hepatitis C infection was a further risk factor.

In November of that year, Parker and Haas asked Corrections Commissioner LaDonna Thompson for advice on security. Parker also wrote Hass about his concerns about publicity and whether he could be safety housed outside the prison system.

The difficulty in finding a surgeon illustrates the "gray area" between the law's requirement of treatment for inmates and a hospital's ability to turn down those patients, said Rebecca Walker, an associate professor of social medicine at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill.

"Everyone would probably agree he ought to get his care somewhere. It's a collective responsibility," Walker said in a phone interview. "Who does it is the question."

After finding a doctor to perform the surgery, Foley and corrections officials thought they had found a hospital when Frankfort Regional Medical Center initially agreed. Corrections officials and the hospital set the surgery for Feb. 28, 2011 and conducted preoperative testing.

During a meeting between corrections officials and hospital staff on Feb. 22, 2011, hospital CEO Chip Peal said he hadn't been aware the surgery was scheduled for less than a week later. A memo by Parker summarized security measures and noted that Peal needed others' approval.

Peal returned to the meeting after 30 minutes and said the surgery was off.

"CEO Peal stated that they never had a patient at the hospital that required security and that he felt this was too high a profile person to be the first," Parker wrote.

At that point, corrections officials were left with few options.

"After over a year of exhaustive search for a surgeon and hospital, this was our last hope," Parker wrote to Thompson and Deputy Commissioner Jim Erwin on Feb. 23, 2011. "I expect future legal action in this matter, however, we know of no other options at this time."

(source: Associated Press)

OHIO:

Ohio board recommends no mercy for killer of 2

The state parole board is recommending against clemency for a condemned Ohio inmate who killed his estranged wife and brother-in-law in a room at a court in 1992.

Abdul Awkal is scheduled to be executed June 6 for killing his estranged wife and brother-in-law in a Cuyahoga County room where the Awkals were taking up divorce and custody issues.

Awkal's lawyer says the man suffers from severe mental health problems and should be spared. The state says Awkal carefully planned the killings and should be executed.

The parole board voted 8-1 against mercy for Awkal. Board members concluded Awkal planned the shooting and that it wasn't the result of a psychotic breakdown.

Gov. John Kasich has the final say on clemency.

(source: Associated Press)

FLORIDA:

Death penalty sought in Winter Haven triple shooting

Prosecutors will seek the death penalty against Joshua Davis, 32, who is accused of shooting and killing 2 Polk State students and injuring a 3rd.

The suspect in a deadly triple shooting in Winter Haven could face the death penalty if he is convicted.

According to Bay News 9's partner paper, the Ledger, prosecutors will seek the death penalty against Joshua Davis, 32, who is accused of shooting and killing 2 Polk State students and injuring a 3rd.

Investigators said Davis invited Christian Rodriguez, Joseph Palacios and Esteban Zavala to his apartment on the evening of April 24, then opened fire on the 3 men.

Rodriguez and Palacios, both 19, died. Zavala, 20, was hit but survived.

Police said the shooting took place in front of Davis' 7-year-old daughter.

Davis is facing 2 counts of 1st-degree murder, 1 count of attempted 1st-degree murder and 1 count of child abuse.

(source: BayNews9)

USA:

How many innocent people has the US executed?

As a report reveals the innocence of a man put to death in Texas in 1989, we examine the US' use of capital punishment.

More than 2 decades after the US state of Texas executed Carlos DeLuna, an investigative study has revealed that he was in fact innocent.

DeLuna was put to death in 1989 for stabbing and killing a petrol station cashier, Wanda Lopez, in 1983.

Now a team from Columbia University claim to have proven DeLuna's innocence. James Liebman, a law professor, and his students say DeLuna's conviction was the result of a poor police investigation, unreliable eyewitness testimony and a weak defence.

"There was no DNA that was ever found or used in this case. [The] team went to Corpus Christi in 2003 to try to get the physical evidence from the case to run a DNA analysis but that physical evidence had been checked out of the prosecutor's office and lost." - Shawn Crowley, the co-author of Los Tocayos Carlos

Their report concluded that the murderer was Carlos Hernandez, a man who bore a striking resemblance to DeLuna.

Over the last 2 decades support for capital punishment in the US has been on the decline.

Nonetheless, despite the work of many groups that have raised questions about the fairness of the American justice system, around 60 per cent are still in favour of the death penalty.

Today, there are more than 3,200 people on death row. So far this year, 18 people have been executed.

But the number of death sentences is dropping every year, and more than a dozen US states have now abolished capital punishment.

Death penalty opponents say there is no way to know how many innocent people have been executed in the US.

Over the last 40 years, more than 130 have been released from death row.

"If I was to rewrite the laws I would add many procedural safeguards against the possibility of making [an] error, like requiring DNA, changing the standard of proof from beyond a reasonable doubt to any doubt whatsoever and requiring a [competent] defence lawyer…." - Bruce Fein, a constitutional lawyer

Nate Fields is among those exonerated inmates. In 2009, he was acquitted of a double murder after spending almost 20 years in prison, including more than 11 years on death row.

Among other things, this is what Fields told Al Jazeera after reading about Columbia University's investigation into the DeLuna case: "The main reason why the death penalty should be abolished is because of the human factor and that is going to continue to play out as long as we have the death penalty. As humans we are going to make mistakes. Just because there are 12 people in the jury doesn't mean they can't get it wrong, they can - because of the human factor - . With the death penalty you can't bring a man back from the graveyard."

So, what are the flaws in America's implementation of capital punishment?

Joining presenter Shihab Rattansi on Inside Story Americas to discuss this are guests: Shawn Crowley, the co-author of Los Tocayos Carlos, the report that seeks to establish that Carlos DeLuna was innocent; Bruce Fein, a former US associate deputy attorney-general and a constitutional lawyer; and Richard Dieter, the executive director at the Death Penalty Information Center.

"Most of our criminal justice system is based on plea-bargains and compromises but the death penalty once it's carried out can't be taken back, we have no room for error so it is a systemic problem as well as a procedural one." Richard Dieter, the executive director at the Death Penalty Information Center

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE CARLOS DELUNA CASE:

•DeLuna was accused of killing a petrol station clerk, Wanda Lopez, in 1983. He was executed in Texas in 1989

•A Columbia Law School report on the execution found significant problems with the conviction, particularly that it was based on the testimony of a single, unreliable eyewitness

•The report says another man had admitted to killing Lopez, that DeLuna had an ineffective defence lawyer and that he had suffered during his execution due to a problem with the injection

•The 5-year investigation into DeLuna's case found him not guilty of the crime he was executed for, and suggested that police had botched the investigation

THE DEATH PENALTY IN THE US:

•More than 3,200 people remain on death row

•About 60 % of Americans support the death penalty, although support has dropped in the last 20 years

•So far 18 people have been executed in 2012, while 43 people were executed in 2011

•More than 1/3 of all executions took place in Texas, which has executed 482 people since reinstating the death penalty in 1982

•Out of the 51 US states, 17 have abolished the death penalty

•China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Iraq conducted the most executions in 2011, the same year the US ranked 5th worldwide

•The US is the only Western country that imposes the death sentence

(source: Al Jazeera)

***********************

Is the Death Penalty Ever Justified?

Yemen, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Libya, Syria, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia, China, Sudan.

No, this is not a list of countries with records of human rights abuses; nor is it a list of countries with ruthless dictators; nor is it a list of countries the United States has condemned at some point within the past few months.

Actually, it's an incomplete list. Add the U.S., and you are one step closer to completing a list of countries that kill their own people.

Every country mentioned currently allows its citizens to be sentenced to death. Only China, Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia execute more people than the U.S. does, and they are all on a list of only 20 nations who performed executions in 2009.

But, to be fair, executions are handed out with a somewhat honorable intention: to deter, and ultimately reduce, crime. It is reasonable, then, to question whether or not that works.

Indeed, the numbers do not add up. There is no evidence suggesting that increasing executions leads to a reduction in crime. In fact, as executions increased in the late '80s, the number of crime rose along with them. Similarly, both the number of crimes and the number of executions have fallen in the past decade. If anything, the evidence concludes that increasing executions might actually correlate with higher crime.

Regardless, the only thing being accomplished by the death penalty is death itself. A country that brutally murders its citizens seems as far from developed or democratic as it can possibly be. If the United States is the beacon of freedom and justice that it claims to be, it would abolish the death penalty tomorrow.

Not to mention the unintended consequences that come with any policy, and are not easy to undo when it comes to the death penalty. A recent New York Times editorial tells the tale of Carlos DeLuna, an alleged murderer executed by the state of Texas in 1989. According to studies involving the case, DeLuna was likely innocent. It would be foolish to believe that DeLuna's case is isolated.

At the very least, our system needs to start holding people accountable. The prosecutors in DeLuna's case reportedly withheld crucial exculpatory evidence that led to his conviction and ultimate death -- an unfortunate tactic that is widespread and goes unpunished. Prosecutors who act in such a way are, unquestionably, more guilty of murder than the innocent people they target.

Last August, Governor Rick Perry of Texas lambasted the Syrian government for threatening the safety of its own people. The next month, he received a roaring ovation after bragging about his authorization of 234 executions, the most in history.

Well, Mr. Perry, what's the difference?

(source: Jess Coleman; Student, New York City Lab School, Huffington Post)

***********************

Judge might split Guantanamo trial of 9-11 suspects

A U.S. military judge is considering splitting up the trial of five Guantanamo prisoners accused of plotting the September 11 attacks because of conflicts in scheduling and strategy, lawyers in the case said on Friday.

The defendants, including the professed mastermind of the hijacked plane attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, are to appear in court at the Guantanamo Bay U.S. naval base in Cuba on June 12 for the next pretrial hearing in the death penalty case.

Lawyers for 2 defendants have asked to delay the hearing because of scheduling conflicts while lawyers for another do not want a delay.

The judge, Army Colonel James Pohl, ordered prosecutors to file legal briefs by May 24 showing cause why the case should not be severed. He did not indicate how many separate trials he is considering.

"The judge already is seeing that with 5 different clients and 5 defense teams, scheduling is going to be very difficult," said James G. Connell III, an attorney for defendant Ali Abdul Aziz Ali, who is Mohammed's nephew.

The defendants are accused of charges that include conspiring with al Qaeda, attacking civilians in violation of the laws of war and murdering 2,976 people.

It is the first multi-defendant prosecution in the Guantanamo tribunals and the various defense teams might pursue different strategies that could benefit one defendant at the expense of another.

"What is mitigating for some people might be aggravating for other people," Connell said.

Mohammed is the best known among the defendants and the self-described mastermind. The others - Ali, Yemeni captives Walid bin Attash and Ramzi Binalshibh and Saudi prisoner Mustafa Ahmed al Hawsawi - are accused of helping provide money and training for the hijackers.

Hawsawi's attorney, Navy Commander Walter Ruiz, said he had not decided whether to ask for a separate trial.

"Any trial whether joint or severed needs to be before a properly constituted court and with properly resourced counsel (something which the government has decidedly failed to do at this juncture)," Ruiz said by email.

(source: Reuters)

MARYLAND:

From death row to freedom----A 2nd chance for Kirk Bloodsworth

Kirk Bloodsworth can still hear the sound of the 400-pound prison cell door closing on his life. Charged with the brutal rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl, he was convicted and sentenced to die in Maryland's gas chamber.

Bloodsworth spent nearly 9 years in prison – 2 of those years on death row – for a crime he didn't commit. It was a crime that shocked the Baltimore, Md., area, dominating the news during the summer of 1984.

Overnight, Bloodsworth went from an anonymous, hard-working Cambridge, Md., waterman to a hated man fingered by five witnesses for the girl's murder.

He's also the 1st death-row inmate in the United States to be exonerated post-conviction by DNA testing. Although commonplace now, at the time of his trial, advanced DNA testing was not a common investigative technique. A tiny semen spot left by a depraved criminal saved Bloodsworth's life.

Bloodsworth told his dramatic story to members of Epworth United Methodist Church May 4 as an outreach program hosted by Epworth's Social Justice Pathway. The United Methodist Church went on record to oppose the death penalty at its 1954 General Conference and has upheld that stand ever since.

A horrific crime against a young girl

Dawn Hamilton's body was found in a wooded area. She had been violated with a stick, her head was crushed with a rock and her throat had been stepped on. “And that's the edited version of what happened to her,” Bloodsworth said. Her real killer would not be brought to justice for another decade.

Bloodsworth said he was at least three miles from the wooded area around Becky's Pond in Rosedale, Md., July 25, 1984, when young Dawn was killed. “She was playing hide and seek with friends and couldn't find them. She ran across two young boys who wouldn't help her, and she ran into a man who spoke up and said he would help her find her friends. She never came back home,” he said. Her body was found that same day; her underpants were hanging from a nearby tree.

BY THE NUMBERS

2.3 million: People in prisons

3,000: People on death row

1,300: Number of executions since 1976

289: Post-conviction DNA exonerations

17: People exonerated through DNA who served time on death row

16: Number of executions in Delaware since 1976

13.5: Average years served by exonerees

[source: The Innocence Project]

Then came a perfect storm of mistaken identity and a prosecution team bent on a quick conviction that overcame the 24-year-old Bloodsworth before he had time to react. “The trial was only 2 weeks, and one witness after another pointed to me,” he said. “The gavel came down on me – death and double life sentences,” he said.

Something terrible is about to happen

In 1984, Bloodsworth was recently married and had just been discharged from the U.S. Marine Corps. He had taken up his father's profession, making a living on the waters and tributaries of the Chesapeake Bay. “But my wife was not ready for that lifestyle of me working 16 hours a day, and she moved back to Essex,” he said.

His marriage was on the rocks, but Bloodsworth said he was determined to give it one more shot as he hitchhiked to Essex near Baltimore on July 4 to be with his wife and find a new job. It was a decision he would regret for many years to come.

Bloodsworth left the Baltimore area about the time of the murder; after visiting his wife he returned home to Cambridge. “There was a knock at the door at 2:45 a.m.; it was the Baltimore County Police with a warrant for my arrest for 1st-degree murder. It was the last time I was to see my home for 8 years, 10 months and 19 days,” he said.

He was arrested on a Thursday and faced a lineup on Monday. “Police had already said we arrested a suspect and his name is Kirk Bloodsworth,” he said. “One of the witnesses said he recognized me from TV. The two little boys did not identify me in the lineup, but their parents called back two weeks later and said the boys make a mistake.”

He was connected to the crime by a neighbor, who called police and said Bloodsworth looked like a composite sketch police had released. 5 people, including the two young boys, identified Bloodsworth as the man they saw with the victim or near the crime scene.

Bloodsworth said he didn't come close to matching the description provided by witnesses who saw a man that day in the wooded area near Hamilton's home. That description was for a skinny man who was 6 feet, 5 inches tall with curly blond hair and a bushy mustache. Bloodsworth was 6 feet tall with red hair and glasses and was missing a tooth back then.

As it turned out, the real killer was 5 feet, 6 inches tall and weighed 160 pounds.

Bloodsworth said there was not one shred of physical evidence linking him to the crime, but comments he made were twisted around to make him appear guilty.

A statement he made to friends and relatives in Cambridge would also haunt him. When he returned to Cambridge after spending a few weeks in the Baltimore area, he told others he came home because he had done something terrible.

That “something terrible” was forgetting to get his wife the taco salad she wanted. “It's true that everything you say can and will be used against you,” Bloodsworth said.

An inmate locked away

Bloodsworth was sent to the Maryland Penitentiary in 1985, one of the most notorious prisons in the country during the 1980s. “When I came in I could hear the cat calls from the other prisoners. They said they knew what I did, and they were going to do the same to me over and over. I was one of the most hated men there,” he said.

His new home was three steps long and as wide as his outstretched arms.

He talks about filling his ears with paper to keep the cockroaches out and flooding the cell's floor to keep cool in the summer. He saw an inmate get hit in the head with a sock full of batteries and another get stabbed over a snack cake. One of his best friends in prison stabbed himself in the eyes with pencils. Asked how he could survive under such deplorable conditions, Bloodsworth said, “I'm a Marine, so I could take a lot of stuff. It was like war. I did the best I could.”

“What I do right now – talking to people – helps me, and the more I talk, the better I feel,” he added.

Religion had always been an important part of his life, and he converted to Catholicism while in prison.

A 2nd chance at life

Bloodsworth had a 2nd chance in the courtroom in 1987 when he was granted another trial on an appeal. This time, the judge still found him guilty but removed the death sentence giving him three life terms.

After his 2nd trial, Bloodsworth started a seven-year stint working in the prison library. “I read everything I could get my hands on,” he said.

One book he read changed his life. It was about new, advanced DNA fingerprinting used to find a criminal in a town in England. “If the test could be used to convict, why couldn't it be used to free someone?” he asked himself.

In April 1989, he wrote a letter to Judge James Smith requesting a DNA test. Three years would go by from the time he wrote the first letter until a lawyer would step up to assist him. Attorney Robert Morin responded to a phone call from Bloodsworth and agreed to represent him pro bono. It was Morin who was able to push hard enough to get the test done.

But first, he had to locate the evidence, which was not in the Towson County Courthouse evidence locker where it should have been. Ultimately, it was found in a closet, Bloodsworth said.

In April 1993, a California lab found a spot of semen on Hamilton's underwear, and it didn't match Bloodsworth's DNA. 2 months later an FBI lab confirmed the test, exonerating Bloodsworth of the crime.

The state dropped the case, and at 8:45 a.m. on June 28, 1993, he stepped out of prison a free man. This time he rode away in a limousine stocked with food and drink. He also received a $300,000 award from the state, most of which went to legal fees.

He was granted a full pardon by Gov. William Donald Schaefer in 1994.

Since his release from prison, he has testified before Congress, had a book written about his ordeal and appeared on several national TV shows including the former Oprah and Larry King Live shows. The book “Bloodsworth: The True Story of the First Death Row Inmate Exonerated by DNA” details his story.

Dawn gets her justice

When he read that Baltimore County Assistant State's Attorney Ann Brobst was not convinced of his innocence, he began a campaign to find the child's killer. In an ironic twist, it turned out the killer, Kimberly Shay Ruffner, was in the Maryland Penitentiary the same time as Bloodsworth was there. Ruffner had been sentenced to 45 years for the rape of an Essex woman. It wasn't until 2003 that a DNA match was confirmed linking Ruffer to the murder of Dawn Hamilton.

“He pleaded guilty saying he was high on drugs and was given a life sentence; Dawn finally had justice,” he said.

Although Bloodsworth didn't talk about it at Epworth Church, his life out of prison has been filled with pitfalls. An internet search of the many stories written about him reveals the difficulties he has suffered since his release from prison nearly 20 years ago. Bouts with drinking and depression, failed relationships and a succession of jobs greeted him the first few years from behind prison walls. He said it was hard to shake the “stigma” of the horrific crime hanging over him. He eventually returned to the life of a waterman where he was able to find solace.

Bloodsworth now lives in the Washington, D.C., area where he has become a spokesman for the Witness to Innocence program as an advocate against the death penalty. He has also been an ardent supporter of the Innocence Protection Act since its passage by Congress in February 2000. The act established the Kirk Bloodsworth Post-Conviction DNA Testing Program, a program that helps states defray the costs of post-conviction DNA testing. Bloodsworth said five inmates have taken advantage of grants to get testing.

Currently, there are 2.3 million inmates in U.S. prisons and 3,000 serving time on death row. Bloodsworth said of the nearly 150 exonerated death row inmates, 17 were released due to DNA testing.

The Delaware Citizens Opposed to the Death Penalty and The Repeal Delaware Project sent representatives to the program at Epworth.

For more information on the Witness to Innocence program, go to www.witnesstoinnocence.org.

(source: Cape Gazette)

OKLAHOMA:

Death penalty sought in Oklahoma double killing

Prosecutors say they'll seek the death penalty against a Muldrow man charged in the shooting death of his parents. Kevin Statham was arraigned this week on 2 counts of 1st-degree murder and 1 count of being a felon in possession of a firearm. He's charged in the July shooting deaths of Helen and Paul Statham.

A local newspaper reports that Statham said nothing during his brief court appearance. A judge entered a not-guilty plea on Statham's behalf.

Statham is being held without bond. Judge Jon Sullivan scheduled an Oct. 29 jury trial.

Statham was arrested in North Dakota shortly after the shooting deaths. He was brought back to Oklahoma in October to face the charges.

(source: The Oklahoman)

NEW MEXICO:

Jury: Michael Astorga will not face death penalty, receives life in prison

A Santa Fe jury said it could not reach a unanimous decision on issuing the death penalty to Michael Astorga. He is sentenced to life in prison for the 2006 shooting death of Bernalillo County Sheriff's Office deputy James McGrane.

His defense team of Gary Mitchell and Santa Fe attorney Tom Clark will appeal last year's conviction.

A Santa Fe jury is on the brink of making what may be the last death penalty verdict in state history.

Michael Astorga was found guilty last year in the 2006 killing of Bernalillo County sheriff's deputy James McGrane. Astorga faces life in prison or death because his crime occurred before New Mexico lawmakers repealed the death penalty in 2009.

The jury on Friday morning asked the judge in the case if they could have police protection after the verdict was read, indicating they may be close to announcing their decision.

Defense attorney Gary Mitchell asked for, and was denied, a mistrial saying the jury was acting out of fear.

The death penalty phase of the case was moved to Santa Fe because a judge ruled an impartial jury pool was not possible in Albuquerque due to extensive media coverage there.

On Tuesday, that Santa Fe jury decided there were aggravated circumstances in the 2006 shooting death of McGrane, thus making the death penalty an option. Deliberations on life in prison or death have gone on since Wednesday.

Mitchell maintained throughout the death penalty portion of the case that his client never even committed the crime, let alone should be put to death because of it.

New Mexico has executed 1 person since 1960 -- convicted child killer Terry Clark in 2001. There are 2 other inmates currently on death row in the state.

(source: The New Mexican)

******

NM jurors in death penalty case ask about 'safety'

Santa Fe jurors deliberating whether to sentence a man convicted of killing a Bernalillo County Sheriff's deputy to death are worried about their safety.

Jurors asked Friday a judge in the sentence phase of Michael Astorga's trial what arrangements have been made to ensure their safety after they deliver a verdict.

The jury is in its 3rd day of deliberations to determine whether Astorga gets life in prison or the death penalty for the 2006 murder of Deputy James McGrane. He is eligible for the death penalty since the crime occurred before the state's repeal.

A judge also denied a motion Friday by Astorga attorney, Gary Mitchell, to declare a mistrial over jurors' fears.

(source: Associated Press)

US MILITARY:

Sgt. John Russell Will Face Death Penalty for 2009 Camp Liberty Massacre, Army Decides

Joint Base Lewis-McChord officials today announced that Sgt. John M. Russell, accused of murdering five fellow service members in Iraq two years ago, has officially been charged with the massacre and will face the death penalty if convicted at court-martial, despite a judge's earlier recommendation that Russell not face execution because he is mentally ill.

Base spokesperson Joseph Kubistek says the Army's General Court-Martial Convening Authority this week referred the following charges for court-martial under the Uniform Code of Military Justice:

5 specifications of premeditated murder; one specification of aggravated assault; one specification of attempted murder.

"If convicted of all charges," Kubistek says, "the maximum possible punishment is death."

As recounted in a 2009 SW cover story, Russell, now 47, attached to a Germany-based U.S. engineering battalion under Fort Lewis Stryker command, was on his 3rd tour in Iraq and had turned suicidal.

His commander confiscated his rifle and put him on unit watch, with a soldier-buddy to keep him company. But Russell obtained a gun and drove to a military stress center at Camp Liberty, killing 4 soldiers and a Navy officer.

Last year, Col. James Pohl, chief judge of the Guantanamo Bay war crimes court and investigating officer into the Ford Hood massacre by Major Nidal Malik Hasan, presided over Russell's competency hearings, finding that Russell has an "undisputed mental disease or defect" that makes "the death penalty inappropriate in this case."

The Army has not explained why it has decided to seek the penalty anyway.

Russell is being defended by Texas attorney James Culp, who last month told us he's being stalled by the Army and has sought removal of the colonel overseeing the case after an angry episode between the defense and prosecution teams at JBLM, where Russell is being held. No date has been set yet for the court-martial.

(source: Seattle Weekly)

*************

JBLM Sgt. John Russell Faces Death Penalty in Court Martial ---- Russell allegedly shot 5 military personnel on May 11, 2009 at the Camp Liberty Combat Stress Center in Iraq. He deployed with the the 370th Engineer Company, 54th Engineer Battalion from Bamberg, Germany, which later was assigned to JBLM.

The General Court-Martial Convening Authority this week referred court-martial charges against Sgt. John Russell, to a General Court-Martial empowered to adjudge a capital sentence. No trial date has been set.

Charges against Sgt. Russell include:

•Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 118 - Premeditated Murder; 5 specifications of murder

•UCMJ, Article 128 – one specification of Aggravated assault

•UCMJ, Article 80 -- one specification of attempted murder

If convicted of all charges (and specifications), the maximum possible punishment is death.

These charges result from an investigation into Sgt. Russell's alleged shooting of five military personnel on May 11, 2009 at the Camp Liberty Combat Stress Center in Iraq. Sgt. Russell is currently in pretrial confinement at the Northwest Joint Regional Confinement Facility at JBLM.

Sgt. Russell deployed to Iraq with the 370th Engineer Company, 54th Engineer Battalion from Bamberg, Germany. Once in theater, the 54th was assigned to a unit from Joint Base Lewis-McChord.

The charges are merely accusations and Sgt. Russell is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

(source: Patch.com)

IDAHO:

Duncan now wants to appeal his death sentence

Notorious multiple murderer Joseph Duncan was back in a Boise courtroom on Friday morning, as lawyers and a federal judge wrangled over setting a date for a new hearing into whether Duncan was mentally competent when he waived appeals of his triple death sentence for torturing and murdering a 9-year-old North Idaho boy.

Duncan, brought to Boise from federal death row in Terre Haute, Ind., his hair close-cropped and graying and wearing a baggy white T-shirt, left all the talking to his attorneys on Friday morning. But in December of 2010, he submitted a hand-written, 2-page letter to the court saying he now wants to appeal after all.

Duncan in the past has strongly opposed contentions that he wasn’t mentally competent to make that decision in 2008. He underwent two lengthy mental evaluations before U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge ruled him competent and allowed him to dismiss his lawyers in that sentencing trial and represent himself; he already had pleaded guilty to all charges. The lawyers filed an appeal to the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals against Duncan’s wishes, arguing he was mentally incompetent.

“I have been very stubborn about not appealing my death sentence,” the condemned killer wrote. “My belief is that if I appeal, then I am acknowledging the system’s authority to commit murder.”

But he wrote that more recently, his younger brother had died, making Duncan his mother’s only surviving son. “It would be utterly cruel, and indeed, inhuman, for me not to consider my mother’s love when deciding what to do in regard to my own life,” Duncan wrote. “So I hereby inform you, and any others concerned, that I withdraw my waiver of appeal, and consent fully to all efforts and advice given by my attorneys to appeal.”

He added, “I love my mother, and if I could only regret one thing, it would be how I have hurt her. I am the biggest fool that I know.”

In 2008, a federal jury sentenced Duncan to death for the kidnap, torture and murder of 9-year-old Dylan Groene. He also received 9 life sentences for a murderous rampage in 2005, in which he killed 3 members of Dylan’s family in order to kidnap and molest the family’s 2 youngest children; only Dylan’s then-8-year-old sister, Shasta, survived.

Since then, Duncan also has been convicted of kidnapping and murdering a 10-year-old California boy, drawing 2 more life sentences; in that case, after weeks of expert testimony, the court ruled him mentally competent.

In the Idaho case, however, the judge never held a competency hearing in open court, meaning all the information on Duncan’s mental competency remained secret. The 9th Circuit ruled that without such a hearing, there was “reasonable doubt” about Duncan’s competency, and ordered Lodge to hold a “retrospective” competency hearing on Duncan’s mental state in 2008.

If, after the hearing, Lodge rules that Duncan was competent when he waived his right to appeal, the death sentence stands. But if not, Lodge would then have to hold another hearing to determine if Duncan was mentally competent when he waived his right to an attorney in his 2008 sentencing trial and instead represented himself. That could force a replay of the whole sentencing trial.

In his closing statement in that trial in 2008, Duncan told the jury, “You people really don’t have any clue yet of the true heinousness of what I’ve done.” While on the run from a child-molesting charge in Minnesota in 2005, Duncan said he’d plotted terrible crimes targeting random children, from invading day-care centers to kidnappings at campgrounds. “I was not searching for a child but rather I was on a rampage,” he said. “My intention was to kidnap and rape and kill until I was killed, preferring death easily over capture.”

He traveled across 8 states looking for child victims before attacking the Groene family in their home along I-90 at Wolf Lodge, just east of Coeur d’Alene.

On Friday, federal defender Dick Rubin told the court that Duncan now wants to be represented by an attorney for the competency hearing, and said Duncan shouldn’t answer any questions until his new attorney is appointed. He asked the court to appoint Michael Burt of San Francisco, a death penalty defense attorney who specializes in cases involving mental health.

However, Burt told the court Friday that he has another trial in the fall, and wouldn’t be available for Duncan’s competency hearing until December. Lodge had asked the attorneys to be ready for the hearing by this July, but prosecutors said they had other cases and wouldn’t be ready until October.

“The court’s not going to agree to that,” Lodge said. “This has drug on. Memories get faulty.” He told the attorneys for both sides, “October-November is the latest. How you work that out is up to you.”

Calling a 2-week recess, Lodge said, “We’re going to get the matter resolved.”

(source: Spokesman-Review)

**************

Duncan begins review of Idaho death penalty case

A man convicted of killing children in Idaho and Southern California has returned to U.S. District Court in Boise to prepare for a review of part of his death penalty case.

Joseph Edward Duncan III was in court Thursday while U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge began the process of selecting an attorney to represent him in a competency hearing. An appellate court ordered the hearing last year after Duncan's former attorneys argued he wasn't competent to waive his appeals.

Duncan was sentenced to death for the 2005 murder of 9-year-old Dylan Groene. Prosecutors said Duncan snatched Dylan and his sister from their Coeur d'Alene home after killing 3 family members.

Duncan also was convicted in California in 2011 of killing 10-year-old Anthony Martinez near Beaumont in 1997.

He also confessed, but wasn't charged, to killing 2 Washington girls.

(source: KESQ News)

NORTH CAROLINA:

Behind the Barbed Wire: Inside Central Prison Death Chamber

It’s arguably one of the most debated topics in our country. The death penalty

Recently there have been several cases in our state, including some right here in the east, where the people charged with a crime could face the ultimate punishment.

In Farmville, 3 men charged with the murders of 3 convenient store workers back in April, could be facing the death penalty.

In Wake County, if Jason Williford is found guilty for the murder of school board member Kathy Taft, he could face a death sentence.

But recently, several sets of legal challenges have put the death penalty nearly on hold in our state.

9 On Your Side decided to take you on an inside tour of Central Prison inRaleighfor a rare look at the execution chamber.

It’s a place you never want to find yourself in but currently in North Carolina there are 156 prisoners on death row.

The video will give let you see what it’s like behind the barbed wire, and walk through an inmate’s final steps before execution.

Central Prison is the 1st prison built in North Carolina and home to the state's death row inmates.

The facility is enclosed by guard towers, and double fencing wrapped in razor wire.

Inside, iron doors echo through the halls.

More than 1,000 inmates have been sent to death row since the state assumed responsibility for executing criminals.

After an execution date is set, the inmate is moved to the death watch room where they are under 24-7 supervision.

A tiny cell is where they will spend their last three to 7 days.

Inside each cell is a bed and just inches away, a toilet a sink.

The inmates will spend their entire day locked inside the cell, with an exception of 15 minutes for a shower.

On the day of the execution, witnesses file into this viewing room.

A small group of chairs face a thick piece of glass, separating the witnesses from the execution chamber.

Family of the inmate, as well as some of the family of the victim of the crime, is allowed to watch the execution.

When the time arrives, the inmate will make a final walk across the hall from the death watch room, to room 111...the execution chamber.

The room is the prison's former lethal gas chamber.

In 1998, a statutory amendment made lethal injection our states only method of execution.

Finally the inmate is restrained to the gurney.

2 IVs are inserted into the inmate’s arms, and they are covered with a sheet.

After informing the witness the warden enters the chamber and gives the final order and the inmate is executed.

Our state has executed 43 inmates since 1976, the last one was in 2006.

Experts say because of the legal litigation facing the death penalty, there's no telling when or if the remaining inmates on death row will carry out there sentence.

(source: WNCT News)

INDIANA:

State renews Corcoran penalty

18 months ago, the U.S. Supreme Court sent Joseph Corcoran’s case back to the lower courts for the second time, effectively reinstating the death penalty against him.

But a few issues remained unresolved in Indiana’s fight to execute Corcoran, 37, who killed at least four people before he turned 23.

On Thursday, in U.S. District Court in South Bend, Judge Jon E. DeGuilio heard arguments about three of the remaining issues – whether Allen Superior Court Judge Fran Gull improperly used “non-statutory” factors against Corcoran when she sentenced him to death; whether she failed to properly consider factors in his favor; and whether Indiana’s death penalty statute is unconstitutional.

DeGuilio took the matter under advisement, and when Indiana Deputy Attorney General Steve Creason reminded him that the case has been pending since 2005, he said he would rather get it right than have the attorneys get a quick ruling.

Should DeGuilio rule in favor of the state’s desire to enforce the death penalty, the courts will then likely have to consider Corcoran’s remaining claim, whether he is incompetent because of his mental illness and should be spared the death penalty.

Corcoran shot and killed his brother, James Corcoran, 30; his sister’s fiancé, Robert Scott Turner, 32; and two of his brother’s friends, Timothy G. Bricker, 30, and Douglas A. Stillwell, 30, at a Bayer Avenue home in July 1997.

Creason said in court Thursday that Corcoran, in the years since his conviction, has bragged about fatally shooting his parents with a shotgun in Steuben County in 1992, a crime for which he was charged and acquitted.

The state of Indiana can request the death penalty if a defendant is found to have committed murder with at least one “aggravating circumstance,” such as the age of the victim, multiple victims, while committing another crime, or killing a law enforcement officer.

In Corcoran’s case, Gull found that one of the aggravating circumstances existed, specifically the multiple victims. But when she sentenced Corcoran to death, she noted a number of factors against him – the innocence of the victims, the heinousness of the crime and the likelihood Corcoran would kill again.

Corcoran’s attorneys – Lawrence Komp and Alan Freedman – argued that in her first sentencing order, and another one later ordered by the higher courts, Gull improperly considered those factors in sentencing Corcoran to death.

But Creason, Indiana deputy attorney general, said Gull was right to note those in explaining her decision, not why Corcoran may have qualified for the death penalty under Indiana law. He noted an Allen Superior Court jury unanimously recommended the death penalty.

The U.S. Constitution requires trial court judges, such as Gull, to specifically review the nature of the crime and the character of the defendant in figuring out the right sentence, Creason said.

“The fact that she did that, can’t be a (constitutional) violation,” he said.

DeGuilio must also consider whether Gull failed to consider specific factors in Corcoran’s favor when she sentenced him. Corcoran’s attorneys argue that when Gull said she found factors such as Corcoran’s age and good behavior in the jail to not be “mitigating,” she must not have considered them.

“In this case the trial court didn’t listen,” Komp said. “Saying ‘it’s not mitigating’ is not considering it.”

Creason argued Gull did consider them and didn’t give them any weight.

“This is essentially an argument about semantics,” Creason said. “She listened and found it didn’t matter.”

Corcoran’s attorneys also argued that Indiana’s death penalty statute is unconstitutional because it does not differ enough from how defendants can be eligible for both the death penalty and life in prison without parole.

Creason said all the U.S. Constitution requires is that who is eligible for the death penalty – which in Indiana includes life in prison without parole – be a smaller number than those who have committed murder.

“It’s not death or nothing,” he said, adding that the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals found this particular argument by Corcoran’s attorneys to be frivolous.

After his conviction and death sentence in 1999, Corcoran failed to file a petition in a timely manner to have the trial court review his case, refusing to sign the paperwork because he believed he should be put to death for his crimes, court documents said.

Then in 2003, after it was determined he was a paranoid schizophrenic who understood his legal position, Gull found him capable of making the decision to refuse appeals, a decision the Indiana Supreme Court upheld.

Corcoran changed his mind in early 2005 and tried unsuccessfully to seek a trial court review of his case. He then filed a petition in federal court but changed his mind again, saying he never wanted to appeal his sentence, court documents said.

Against Corcoran’s wishes at the time, the late U.S. District Judge Allen Sharp overturned the death sentence, ruling that then-Allen County Prosecutor Robert Gevers inappropriately punished Corcoran by pursuing the death penalty against Corcoran because, as a defendant, Corcoran demanded a jury trial instead of a trial by judge.

According to Sharp, the decision violated Corcoran’s Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial and right to have criminal charges clearly explained.

But the 7th Circuit overturned Sharp’s decision in 2008, saying it is constitutionally permissible to use threat of more serious punishment to encourage a plea.

But when the 7th Circuit issued its 2008 ruling, it dealt only with the Sixth Amendment question that Sharp had ruled on. In an October 2009 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court determined the appellate court should have addressed all of Corcoran’s claims, and it sent the case back for another ruling.

In January 2010, the 7th Circuit handed the case back to the state courts, ordering the state court to hold a resentencing hearing to correct errors it said it found in Gull’s original sentencing order. The Indiana attorney general appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which reviewed the case again this month.

In November 2010, the nation’s highest court said the 7th Circuit erred when it said the sentencing order violated state law, which the state’s highest courts said it did not.

Federal courts cannot review state court cases because of allegations of state law violations, only for violations of federal law, according to court documents.

(source: Journal Gazette)

IRAN:

Iran Should Return Bodies of Execution Victims, Giving Closure to the Families

“I recall the words Kak (brother) Farzad whispered in my ears in our last phone conversation: ‘human rights have no borders. We have to eliminate borders. This is our duty; me from within prison and you from outside’.” (Kurdistan Peace ambassadors in Evin, Kaveh Kermanshahi in Farzad Kamangar Memorial website)

2 years have gone by since that terrible morning of May 9, 2010 when the human rights community woke up to the news of the execution of Farzad Kamangar, the 34 year-old Sunni teacher and human rights activist from Iranian Kurdistan. Kamangar, and four other political prisoners. Farzad Kamangar had been in detention since 19 August 2006, was secretly hanged and buried in an unknown location. He was executed for his alleged membership in an armed opposition group (PKK) and “Enmityenmity with God” following a judicial process that makes a mockery of justice. For a ruling elite that thrives on discrimination, the choice of a member of a vulnerable ethnic and religious minority was easy and, it hoped, inexpensive in terms of bad publicity.

On May 9th, many of us in the Iranian human rights community felt overwhelmed and powerless in the face of evil and cruelty. A national and international campaign calling for the release of Kamangar was thought to have succeeded in preventing his execution. The campaign had taken momentum when Kamangar drew attention, in a letter dated 23 November 2007, to the circumstances of his arrest and how he was tortured in various detention centers:

“In July 2006, I came to Tehran to follow upon my brother's medical treatments. My brother is a Kurdish political activist. I was arrested and immediately transferred to an unknown location. - They also subjected me to foul language, insults, and beatings because of my religious beliefs - They flogged me to a pulp because of the Kurdish ring tone I had on my mobile phone. … My left foot was severely injured during the time I spent in this place. Also, I fell unconscious as a result of being repeatedly hit in the head and subjected to electric shocks, and when I regained consciousness, I had lost my sense of balance. ….”

During his 4 years of detention, various interrogators repeatedly tortured Kamangar in Sanandaj, Tehran, and Kermanshah. A former political prisoner and medical doctor, Dr. Kamiar Ala’i, who spent some time in the same ward with Kamangar’s in Tehran, reported his observations:

“In Kermanshah Dizelabab Prison, they had beaten him a lot. …They had broken his jaw and all his upper teeth were smashed. They had given him electrical shock and he would jump up a meter if anyone got close to him and touched his side.”

It took more than a year for the authorities to formally charge Kamangar, and 7 minutes for the Branch 30 of Tehran’s Revolutionary Court to read his indictment, assess the evidence, and hear his defense.

Kamangar smuggled several detailed and strongly worded letters out of his prison, reporting on what had happened to him and calling for the respect of his rights. He rejected the charges of membership in a political organization and carrying explosives, stressing that the evidence used against him was fabricated. His lawyer also made statements to the effect that the court had no evidence at all. When Kamangar tried to get legal remedy for the torture he had been subjected to, authorities ignored him. Further, the judiciary informed him that his file was lost.

The death sentence came as a shock to Kamangar and those who knew that he did not support armed action. On 4 February 2010, he appealed to Sadegh Larijani, the Head of the Islamic Republic’s Judiciary, reporting the various breaches of due process of law in his case and reminding him that before his trial, he had been cleared of all charges. “In the seven-minute hearing ...,” he wrote, “I was stunned to hear the judge say: ‘The Intelligence Ministry has called for your execution. You should go and appease them.’”

Why such fury against a civil society activist who was known for his peaceful activities? Why do authorities continue to deny his family the right to know where he is buried? Perhaps the Islamic Republic needed to show its might to protesters in the run-up to the anniversary of the 2009 contested presidential election. Kamangar had infuriated his captors by not confessing under repeated torture and by continuing to call for his rights from within his cell. His execution was a clear warning to Kurdish civil society.

The message was heard but those who executed Farzad Kamangar in order to silence him did not succeed. Today, Iran’s civil society sees him as an example of courage and commitment:

“He had a unique softness in his emotions and his writings. He was one of those loveable myths. Someone who liked to help those who were deprived from education; those who could build the future of this region [Kurdistan] of the Country” (Former cellmate Kamiar Alaei)

No doubt, with the loss of Farzad Kamangar, several generations of Kurdish students have lost a dedicated teacher and the human rights community has lost a courageous activist, but Kamangar’s cause and his memory remain strong. A search of his name on the Internet brings up his photos, voice, videos, and letters, none of which were available before his arrest. No doubt, as long as discrimination persists in law and practice in Iran, there will be others like Kamangar.

to 'citizenship'; a right that stands against seclusion and exclusion.” (Farzad Kamangar’s letter: We are all people, 10 April 2010)

Kamangar was not the only political prisoner taken to the gallows and secretly and unlawfully hanged on May 9th, 2010. With him, four other political prisoners, Shirin Alam-Holi, Ali Heydarian, Farhad Vakili, and Mehdi Eslamia were also executed in secret and buried in an unknown location. They were all accused of "enmity against God" for carrying out "terrorist acts"; they had all protested against the violation of due process of law in their cases and the harsh treatment and torture they had been subjected to.

(source: iranrights.org)

CHINA:

China jails smuggler Lai Changxing for lifeThe BBC's Martin Patience: "Mr Lai is facing life in prison and has been stripped of all his assets"

Lai Changxing has been jailed for life for running a multi-billion dollar smuggling ring, Chinese media say.

Xinhua news agency said Lai, extradited from Canada, was convicted and sentenced by a Fujian court.

The 53-year-old was accused of bribing officials and smuggling goods including cars, cigarettes and oil in one of China's biggest political scandals.

He fled to Canada in 1999 and avoided extradition for 12 years by arguing he faced torture and execution in China.

Beijing promised Canada he would not be executed and he was deported in 2011.

Canada usually forbids the extradition of suspects to countries where they might face the death penalty, and the case severely tested diplomatic relations between the 2.

Lai Changxing operated his smuggling ring from the port city of Xiamen. He led a luxurious lifestyle, reportedly being driven around in a bullet-proof Mercedes Benz.

The enterprise is said to have made billions of dollars in avoiding custom revenues. But scores of officials were on his payroll - exposing the extent of corruption in China.

According to reports, he had a luxurious mansion where he plied officials with alcohol and prostitutes. The crime boss is also believed to have high-level contacts among China's military and political elite.

Lai fled to Canada after his huge smuggling ring was smashed by the authorities in the 1990s. He fought a decade-long legal battle to remain in Canada.

The case strained relations between the 2 countries. But Beijing got its man after it promised Canada that Lai would not be executed if found guilty.

"The trial shows China's firm resolve in fighting crime and corruption," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman, Hong Lei, said during a regular press briefing.

"This case also shows that China and Canada have important law enforcement co-operation."

Smuggling operation

The sentence was handed down by the Intermediate People's Court of Xiamen - the city at the heart of Lai's operations - after a trial which began in early April.

The court said Lai's income that was obtained illegally would be confiscated, Xinhua reports.

Lai was accused of running a huge smuggling operation from 1991 to 1999.

He established a complex network to cheat import tariffs of 13.99bn yuan ($2.21bn) on goods worth 27.39bn yuan, the court said.

The goods included cigarettes, cars, heating and cooking oil, textiles and chemicals.

It also said Lai and his associates bribed 64 government officials with amounts totalling 39.13m yuan.

Some 300 people were punished for their involvement in the operation.

"The sums involved are unusually large, and the details are extraordinarily serious," the court said, according to the Xinhua report.

It is not clear whether Lai is planning to appeal.

(source: BBC News)

TEXAS:

Death penalty opponent to lean on Dallas DA----SMU professor acting after report suggests innocent man died

The Columbia Human rights Law Review opened up a new can of worms on the death penalty in Texas this week with its book-length examination of the 1989 execution of Carlos DeLuna.

The bottom line, according to the report, is that the state executed the wrong man for the stabbing death of 24-year-old Wand Lopez in a Corpus Christi convenience store. Researchers say prosecutors bypassed another person who bragged of killing Lopez.

On the heels of that report, death penalty abolitionist Rick Halperin, a professor at Southern Methodist University, told the website Dallas South News he would be on the courthouse steps in Dallas on Friday to lean on Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins to stop seeking lethal injection in capital cases.

Asked Thursday whether Watkins had read the Columbia report and, if so, would altter his stance on the death penalty, spokeswoman Jamille Bradfield relwased this terse statement: "We are declining comment."

"This report highlights only the tip of the iceberg," Halperin says. "The DeLuna case is not a singular aberration of a person who has been wrongfully convicted and executed in Texas. In fact, there have been and remain numerous innocent people who have been sent to death row and executed, or people currenly on death row waiting to be executed."

Halperin notes that the community need only consider the Dallas County Jail, where 32 men have been released after being wrongfully convicted. Others such as Ben Spencer remain.

Spencer has been in jail 22 years, and "despite the judge who sentenced hm now admitting he belives Ben is innocent, Watkins won't re-open the case, which defies his own comments that the main job of a DA is to do justice," Halperin says. "But seeking death and leaving innocent people in jail is not justice. It's morally unacceptable and violative of people's rights and dignity."

Dallas County leads the U.S. in the number of people exonerated after being wrongfully convicted, Halperin says. "These are not death row cases but they're symptomatic of continued mistakes within the criminal justice system. Craig Watkins keeps saying that he is morally opposed to the death penalty, yet he continues to go into the courtroom to seek death. Either he is or isn't for the death penalty. This is an opportunity for him to deliver consistency and stop being hypocritical about what he says and how he acts."

As the Dallas Morning News has reported many times, Watkins' view on capital punishment swings like a pendulum. When first taking office in 2007, Watkins declared that he personally opposed the death penalty on moral and religious grounds.

Recently, he reveled that his own great-grandfather had been executed by the state and said the state needed to look into reforms.

TIMELINE: Craig Watkins' evolving position:

January 2007----The newly elected DA told The News' editorial board that he would not shy away from employing the death penalty to seek a new trial for Thomas Miller-El, whose 1986 death penalty conviction had been overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court over concerns that prosecutors had intentionally excuded minorities from his jury. "He [Miller-El] needs to be on death row. He should have been dead a long time ago," Watkins said. The following year, Watkins' office agreed to a plea deal that took the death penalty off the table but sent Miller-El to prison for life.

November 2007----Newsweek reported that Watkins was not sure how he felt about the death penalty and that "it depends on which day you ask me."

September 2008----Troubled that innocent people had ben imprisoned by faulty prosecutions, Watkins announced that his office would re-examine nearly 40 death penalty convictions and would seek to halt executions, if necessary, to give the reviews time to proceed. "It's not saying I'm putting a moratoium on the death penalty," he said. "It's saying that mayabe we should withdraw those dates and look at those cases from a new perspective to make sure that those individuals that are on death row need to be there and they need to be executed."

August 2009----Watkins said a particularly cold-blooded Dallas county double killing had made him rethink hsi position. While still conflicted, he said, "I'm starting to change a little bit....You know this guy didn't have any remorse whatsoever. And maybe it's true that there are just people out there that need to be dealt with in this way."

August 2010----Watkins, while mired in a rough re-election race, said he had changed his mind about capital punishemt. "I came in with a certain philosophical view. I don't have that anymore." he told the News. "From a religious standpoint, I think it's an archaic way of doing justice. But in this job, I've seen people who cannot be rehabilitated." Watkins said he still had concerns that prosecutors somewhere might send the wrong person to death row. But he said that even when he was opposed to the death penalty, he still allowed his office to seek it when warranted. "I cannot argue against it morally, but I car argue against it broadly," Watkins said. "Given the DNA exonerations, there's a chance we've executed someone in Texas who did not commit crime."

February 2012----Watkins made this extrraordinary revelation in passing at a news conference: His great-grandfather was executed byt he state of Texas. He balked at explaining his reason for the disclosure to the newspaper but later told The Associated Press that he was calling on state legislators to review death penalty procedures to ensure that they were fairly administered. "I don't know if I'm the voice to that," he told the AP. "I just know, here I am, and I have there experiences." He later told The News that the spark for such a debate "is going to come from someone in a district attorney's seat."

(sources: Dallas Morning News & Dallas South News)

*****************

Carlos DeLuna And Cameron Todd Willingham: The Sad Similarities

During the Supreme Court's 2006 adjudication of Cameron v. Marsh, Justice Antonin Scalia had this to say about what would happen if an innocent person was put to death by the criminal justice system: "If such an event had occurred in recent years, we would not have to hunt for it; the innocent's name would be shouted from the rooftops."

The last time I had the occasion to dredge up that bit of Scaliana, it was in reference to Cameron Todd Willingham, who was executed in 2004, wrongly accused of setting a fire in his home that claimed the lives of his children. The Willingham case had become newsworthy again in 2011 because of Texas Gov. Rick Perry's possible ascension to the presidential stage and a new documentary, "Incendiary: The Willingham Case," which chronicled the deeply flawed evidence used to convict Willingham and the political pressure exerted by Perry and his political allies to quash an investigation that was on its way to proving Willingham's innocence.

As such, the Willingham case hasn't resulted in much shouting from the rooftops. But if the Columbia Human Rights Law Review has anything to say about it, that won't happen a second time. Under the leadership of James Liebman, a Columbia law professor, the Review has devoted its entire issue to another man put to death in Texas for a crime he didn't commit: Carlos DeLuna.

The details of the crime, DeLuna's arrest and subsequent prosecution as well as the later investigation into DeLuna's innocence have already been chronicled on this site by Michael McLaughlin, so be sure to read the whole thing. But to briefly summarize, on Feb. 4, 1983, Wanda Lopez, a cashier at a Shamrock gas station in Corpus Christi, Texas, was stabbed to death with a buck knife during a robbery. Police who were sent to canvass the scene of the crime and its immediate vicinity found Carlos DeLuna nearby, hiding under a parked pickup truck. DeLuna was apprehended and brought back to the Shamrock, where he was fingered by an eyewitness as the man seen fleeing the scene.

There were, however, discrepancies among the reports from the other eyewitnesses, who described the assailant as a Hispanic man with a mustache, wearing a gray flannel shirt. DeLuna, when apprehended, was clean-shaven and wearing a white dress shirt. DeLuna eventually offered an explanation for the discrepancy: The real killer was Carlos Hernandez, whom DeLuna knew. (Knew and feared: DeLuna did himself no favors by waiting to accuse Hernandez; he stayed mum for months because he was afraid of reprisals.)

According to DeLuna, Hernandez had spent the evening with DeLuna at a nearby bar during the night of the crime. While they were together, Hernandez excused himself to go to the Shamrock. DeLuna was under the impression that he was going to purchase something from the store. When Hernandez did not return, DeLuna went looking for him. He told the jury at his trial that when he arrived at the Shamrock, he saw Hernandez inside, attacking Wanda Lopez. DeLuna, who had a record (for sexual assault), was out on parole and afraid that being caught drinking would get him sent back to jail, ran from the scene.

Police gave DeLuna's story short shrift, calling Hernandez a "figment of [his] imagination," and no effort was made to chase down the possibility that the wrong man had been apprehended. And it didn't help matters that DeLuna had more than a passing resemblance to Hernandez. DeLuna would eventually be convicted of the murder and executed by lethal injection on Dec. 8, 1989, declaring his innocence to the very last.

As McLaughlin reports, James Liebman started delving into the case "roughly ten years ago." His initial findings formed the basis of a 3-part series published by the Chicago Tribune in 2006. This recent issue of the Columbia Human Rights Law Review provides the culmination of this mammoth effort.

Obviously, the Lopez murder is distinct in many ways from the Willingham case. Most importantly, in DeLuna's case, an actual crime had been committed. In Willingham's instance, when fire scientists applied their forensic expertise to the available evidence, they were able to demonstrate that the prosecutors, having relied on what amounted to folklore about how fires spread, had failed to make their arson case. The science plainly suggested that an accidental fire had occurred.

Another key difference is that the DeLuna case has not become consumed by the same intense, top-down political pressuring and posturing that came to the fore during the investigation into Willingham's execution.

But the similarities are depressing enough. As Liebman found, the investigation into Lopez's murder was a badly bungled mess. In fact, as the Guardian's Ed Pilkington reports, it only took Liebman a single day to begin destroying the prosecution's case against DeLuna:

4 years after DeLuna was executed, Liebman decided to look into the DeLuna case as part of a project he was undertaking into the fallibility of the death penalty. He asked a private investigator to spend one day -- just one day -- looking for signs of the elusive Carlos Hernandez. By the end of that single day the investigator had uncovered evidence that had eluded scores of Texan police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers and judges over the six years between DeLuna's arrest and execution. Carlos Hernandez did indeed exist.

Liebman's investigator tracked down within a few hours a woman who was related to both the Carloses. She supplied Hernandez's date of birth, which in turn allowed the unlocking of Hernandez's criminal past as the case rapidly unravelled.

So, not only was Carlos Hernandez not a figment of anyone's imagination, he had a record. And that record was pretty specific, according to the Guardian:

Several of the crimes that Hernandez committed involved hold-ups of Corpus Christi gas stations. Just a few days before the Shamrock murder he was found cowering outside a nearby 7-Eleven wielding a knife -- a detail never disclosed to DeLuna's defence.

He also had a history of violence towards women. He was twice arrested on suspicion of the 1979 murder of a woman called Dahlia Sauceda, who was stabbed and then had an "X" carved into her back. The first arrest was made four years before DeLuna's trial and the second while DeLuna was on death row, yet the connection between this Hernandez and the "phantom" presented to DeLuna's jury was never made.

It gets worse, according to these 2 passages from the Guardian:

In October 1989, just two months before DeLuna was executed, Hernandez was se[n]tenced to 10 years' imprisonment for attempting to kill with a knife another woman called Dina Ybanez.

Hernandez himself frequently told people that he was a knife murderer. He made numerous confessions to having killed Wanda Lopez, the crime for which DeLuna was executed, joking with friends and relatives that his "tocayo" had taken the fall. His admissions were so widely broadcast that even Corpus Christi police detectives came to hear about them within weeks of the incident at the Shamrock gas station.

So how did it come to pass that Hernandez was never treated as a suspect in Lopez's murder? I saved this key detail from the Guardian's report for last:

Over the years he was arrested 39 times, 13 of them for carrying a knife, and spent his entire adult life on parole. Yet he was almost never put in prison for his crimes -- a disparity that Liebman believes was because he was used as a police informant.

So DeLuna, just like Willingham, appears to have been partially victimized by some scandalously bad police procedures.

But the most striking similarity I see between these two cases is that in the end, the lives of those involved just weren't important enough to anyone tasked with ensuring that justice was done. Willingham was an unemployed, impoverished knockabout with a bad reputation. DeLuna was a Hispanic parolee with a criminal record. Those who perished in these incidents were mostly invisible denizens of the lower-class fringes -- a couple of children born into grueling poverty, a gas station attendant. What they'd amounted to -- in life -- didn't seem enough to inspire much of an effort to provide a fully professional investigation of their deaths. In the end, neither case demanded a titanic amount of effort to arrive at the truth. Just a nominal amount of mere curiosity.

This is precisely what Liebman observed in an interview with the San Antonio Express News:

“This case changed my whole view ... I had thought the problem cases were ones where you have an out-of-town defendant, a scary person who commits a really bad crime that grabs the whole community ... Now, I think the worst cases are those that likely happen every day in which no one cares that much about the defendant or the victim.”

And that's why you don't hear DeLuna's name being shouted from the rooftops.

(source: Jason Linkins, Huffington Post)

IDAHO----new execution date

Idaho judge sets Leavitt execution for June 12

A 7th District Judge has signed a death warrant for condemned inmate Richard Albert Leavitt, ordering that he be executed by lethal injection.

Barring any last-minute court intervention, Leavitt will be put to death on June 12.

Leavitt was convicted in the July 18, 1984, brutal death of Danette Elg in Blackfoot. Prosecutors said he stabbed her repeatedly with exceptional force, and then cut out her sexual organs. Leavitt’s defense attorneys have argued that he sustained brain damage and has a mental disorder that contributed to his actions.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to consider Leavitt’s appeal Monday, and Judge Jon Shindurling signed the death warrant today.

If Leavitt’s execution moves forward as planned, he will become the second person executed by the state in the last seven months. Paul Ezra Rhoades, who was convicted of killing three people in eastern Idaho in 1987, was put to death on Nov. 18, 2011.

Before Rhoades’ death, executions were rare in Idaho, with only one other inmate put to death in the last half-century. But they could become much more common, with Idaho Department of Correction officials predicting last year that there could be as many as four people executed before the end of 2013.

Leavitt’s defense attorneys have tried several times to get the death penalty overturned. In 2007, U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill agreed after concluding defense attorney David Parmenter was ineffective for failing to investigate if brain damage found years later could explain Leavitt’s personality disorders at the time of the crime. But in a divided opinion issued in 2011, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Winmill and put Leavitt back on death row.

Leavitt, who has long maintained his innocence, was arrested after authorities discovered Elg’s body in her blood-spattered bedroom four days after she’d been killed. During his trial, a court-appointed psychologist who examined Leavitt said he had an antisocial personality disorder and intermittent explosive disorder, which would cause him to lose control of aggressive impulses.

Former district Judge H. Reynold George noted that Leavitt came from a law-abiding family, was married and steadily employed before his arrest and that while he had a criminal record, it mostly contained misdemeanors and traffic infractions.

Still, George said at the sentencing, those mitigating factors were only “feathers on the scale when balanced against the grossly inhumane act of murder that went beyond all decency.”

In April, Leavitt was 1 of 4 death row inmates to sue the state, contending Idaho’s new execution procedures give too much power to prison officials, create a risk of severe pain and would allow unqualified workers to carry out medical procedures. In the lawsuit Leavitt, Thomas Creech, James Hairston and Gene Stuart ask a judge to stop all executions until the problems are fixed.

That lawsuit is still active; the state has asked U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge to throw it out because Idaho’s protocol matches the procedures in other states that have been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.

(source: Associated Press)

**********************

Out of appeals; death row inmate learns of execution date

On Thursday at around 4:00 p.m., Idaho death row inmate Richard Leavitt was served his official death warrant. He is set to be executed by lethal injection, June 12th.

In just 7 months, Idaho will have 2 executions.

53-year-old, Richard Leavitt has been behind bars since 1985 for the murder of an eastern Idaho woman. Leavitt was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder and mutilation of 31-year-old Danette Elg of Blackfoot.

A 7th District Court judge signed the death warrant early Thursday; Leavitt was moved to an isolation cell at the Idaho Maximum Security Institution, which is policy.

Years of appeals followed the murder conviction. Attorneys claimed Leavitt suffered a brain injury which made him unstable at the time of the murder.

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear his final appeal. The Idaho Attorney General's office says Leavitt came to the end of his road of appeals.

“It takes a long time for justice to be done in a capital case,” said LaMont Anderson with the Idaho Attorney General’s office. “But at the same time we can’t be too speedy because we do want to make sure that it is justice that is done and that we are doing the right thing in these cases.”

In July of 1984, Elg was found stabbed 15 times and her body was sexually mutilated. Police said the 2 were acquainted and even days before her murder, Elg reported Leavitt was prowling around her Blackfoot home.

Upon her disappearance, Leavitt expressed concern to police, so much concern; police records indicated he was allowed to enter Elg's home with police where her body was found.

14 people are now on Idaho's death row, including Leavitt.

Paul Rhoades was put to death in November of last year, for the 1987 murders of two women. Until that execution, Idaho had not carried out the death penalty since 1994.

(source: KTVB News)

VIRGINIA:

Roanoke County prosecutors to seek death penalty in slaying of woman----Carey Shane Padgett faces capital murder charges in the death of Cara Marie Holley, who was beaten to death in July 2010.

Prosecutors will seek the death penalty against Carey Shane Padgett, the man facing capital murder charges in the death of Cara Marie Holley.

"We have given notice of an intention to do that," Roanoke County Commonwealth's Attorney Randy Leach said Thursday. "We are proceeding as if we're going forward seeking the death penalty."

That word came soon after a Circuit Court hearing at which Judge James Swanson granted a motion by Padgett's lawyers to hire an expert who would evaluate the degree of danger Padgett poses.

For Padgett to be sentenced to death, a jury would have to find either that he is a future danger to society or that the crimes he committed were vile, "horrible or inhuman in that it involved torture, depravity of mind or an aggravated battery to the victim," by legal definition.

"You don't need an expert to tell you about his behavior," Leach told the court during the hearing.

"If it's required by due process, it's a path I'm required to take," Swanson said.

Padgett's lawyers, who did not immediately return calls Thursday, told Swanson they had approached a prison violence risk assessment expert whose rate is $400 an hour and who anticipated needing 24 hours of preparation time, totaling $9,600, not counting the time required for testimony.

Earlier this year, his defense was also granted permission to have a doctor evaluate Padgett's possible intoxication from the drugs mephedrone and salvia divinorum. Salvia is a psychoactive herbal drug and mephedrone is a synthetic stimulant found in drugs known as bath salts.

Padgett, 23, appeared in court wearing a dark yellow prison uniform and orange-and-maroon sneakers. He affirmed to the judge that he understood the motion. The motion has been sealed, a Circuit Court clerk said Thursday.

Padgett told police in July 2010 that he smoked marijuana with 18-year-old Holley - whom he called a friend - in a Roanoke County field, then beat her with a tire iron and buried her body in a wooded area in Franklin County, according to a warrant.

He is charged with capital murder as well as rape, robbery, forcible sodomy and abduction.

Padgett's trial is scheduled to begin in late October.

(source: Roanoke Times)

NORTH CAROLINA:

Prosecutors will learn how to fight Racial Justice Act

A month after a Cumberland County judge ruled for the defendant in the 1st case under the Racial Justice Act, about 60 prosecutors from across North Carolina are coming to Forsyth County today to learn how to fight motions filed under the law.

Forsyth County prosecutors are preparing for 2 pending motions under the Racial Justice Act, a law adopted in 2009 that allows defendants and death-row inmates to use statistics and other evidence to prove that race played a significant role in their cases.

The motions filed under the act deal with statistics from a study by 2 Michigan State University law professors finding racial disparities in the application of the death penalty. Successful motions can lead to changing a death sentence to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Forsyth County prosecutors are consulting with statistical experts and other witnesses who might be used in other Racial Justice Act cases across North Carolina. Forsyth County District Attorney Jim O'Neill said giving other prosecutors a chance to hear those experts in a one-day session saves money.

He declined to comment on specifics of the training because it deals with pending litigation, but he said in general that the Racial Justice Act has resulted in expensive legal actions.

O'Neill said he and other prosecutors tried to warn legislators that the Racial Justice Act would cost millions of dollars in taxpayer money, to no avail.

"This training session is my attempt to save at least some money for the taxpayers," he said.

He said any training session expenditures, such as traveling expenses for witnesses, will be billed to the N.C. Administrative Office of the Courts, as would be done in any other criminal case. He said he does not know the cost yet.

The training session, to be held at an undisclosed location, is not open to the public.

O'Neill and other prosecutors have opposed the Racial Justice Act, calling it a backhanded attempt to end the death penalty. They have also said the law would clog the court system. More than 95 percent of the people on death row have filed under the act.

Last month, Cumberland Superior Court Judge Greg Weeks commuted Marcus Robinson's death sentence to life in prison without the possibility of parole after finding that race played a "persistent, pervasive and distorting role" in jury selection.

Robinson, who is black, was convicted of killing 17-year-old Erik Tornblom, who was white.

Forsyth County held the first hearing ever under the Racial Justice Act last year when Judge William Z. Wood ruled that the law was constitutional in the cases of Carl Stephen Moseley and Errol Duke Moses. Their cases likely will not be heard until 2014.

Peg Dorer, executive director of the N.C. Conference of District Attorneys, said the Racial Justice Act cases are unusually complex because they deal with statistics.

"It has nothing to do with the facts of the case," she said. "It has to do with statistical cases in the study."

Tye Hunter, executive director of the Center for Death Penalty Litigation in Durham, said he has no problem with prosecutors having a training session but hopes they also deal with the racial disparities the Cumberland judge said are inherent in the death penalty.

"I think what Judge Weeks said in his order was that he hoped this would be an opportunity for prosecutors to look at what they had done in the past and avoid making the same mistakes in the future," he said.

(source: Winston-Salem Journal)

WASHINGTON:

Allen Eugene Gregory Gets the Death Penalty ... Again

A Pierce County jury has given 39-year-old Allen Eugene Gregory the death penalty. Again.

In 2001 a jury convicted Gregory of 1st-degree aggravated murder stemming from the brutal 1996 killing of 43-year-old Tacoma bartender Geneine "Genie" Harshfield - who was tied up, raped and stabbed in the kitchen of her home some 16 years ago. Most damning for the defendant's chances in court, Gregory's DNA was eventually matched to the crime scene.

The Pierce County Prosecutor's Office provides this description of the crime:

On July 27, 1996, 43-year-old Genie Harshfield failed to appear for her shift as a bartender at a Tacoma restaurant. A concerned coworker went to Harshfield's home and found her body in the bedroom. Harshfield was lying face down on her bed, naked with her hands bound behind her back. She had been stabbed 3 times in the back and her throat was slit. The medical examiner found evidence of sexual assault and determined Harshfield's cause of death was multiple sharp force injuries and blunt force trauma to the head.

Gregory lived across from the victim at the time of the murder. He gave detectives inconsistent information about his whereabouts during the time of the murder. DNA analysis of semen found at the scene indicated a likelihood of fewer than one in 180 billion that Gregory was not the source.

But in 2006 the Washington Supreme Court overturned Gregory's death sentence, citing judicial and prosecutorial error. In 2000 Gregory was convicted of 3 counts of 1st-degree rape, information that his 2001 jury was privy to in deciding to sentence Gregory to death in the murder of Harshfield. However, the 2000 rape conviction was later overturned by the Washington State Supreme Court, which ruled the court abused its powers when it refused to review evidence related to the victim's history of drug use that could have aided Gregory's defense. Since the jury in Gregory's 2001 aggravated 1st-degree murder trial heard evidence of his now-invalid rape conviction during sentencing, and it likely impacted the decision to hand down his initial death sentence, that death sentence was also overturned.

While the conviction stood, prosecutors in Pierce County were left with a decision: Try for the death penalty again, or go another route?

If you've read this far you're obviously well aware of their decision. The Pierce County Prosecutor's Office, led by Deputy Prosecutor John Neeb (who also tried Gregory's 2001 murder trial), decided to retry the penalty phase of the case and once again aim for the death penalty.

Yesterday, as the culmination of a penalty trial that started in March, Neeb and the Pierce County Prosecutor's Office got the decision from the jury they were hoping for.

"I tried the case the 1st time. In our opinion, it was a fair trial and a fair conviction," says Neeb. "There's nothing different this time."

The task required the rehashing of a mountain of powerful evidence, including gruesome crime-scene photos and autopsy reports. While going through the process again was difficult, Neeb says Harshfield's mother staunchly supported once again trying for the death penalty.

"The victim's family's wishes are always important," says Neeb. "In [Harshfield's mother's] opinion [the death penalty] was appropriate. She never wavered about this office going forward with the case."

One of Gregory's attorneys, Zenon Olbertz, told Tacoma's News Tribune in the aftermath of yesterday's court ruling that this moving evidence played a part in the jury's ultimate decision to sentence his client to death once again.

From The News Tribune:

Olbertz said outside court he thought jurors could not get past the terrible act his client committed and see him as a human being. Crime scene and autopsy photos admitted for the trial were horrific, he said.

"I think they're supposed to get beyond that, but it's kind of blinding," Olbertz said.

Neeb, by contrast, is pleased by yesterday's ruling.

"The results are what matter," he says.

Gregory is now scheduled to have his death warrant signed by Superior Court Judge Rosanne Buckner on June 13. The case, of course, is subject to appeal once again, meaning there's a strong possibility this isn't the last we've heard of it.

(source: Seattle Weekly)

USA:

Solitary confinement for the mentally ill challenged in courts, report says

A clash is brewing nationwide between prison wardens and inmate advocates over long-term detentions of mentally ill prisoners in solitary confinement, according to an Associated Press report. The report highlights several recent cases.

Advocates in several states are fighting over cases of mentally ill inmates being held in long-term solitary confinement.

They include a $22 million jury award to a New Mexico prisoner who "extracted a tooth by hand, rocking it back and forth in the socket for hours, after going without medical or dental care while in solitary confinement for 2 years."

Advocates for other mentally ill inmates have failed to persuade judges that staying locked away for as much as 23 hours a day amounts to cruel and unusual punishment. According to the report, prison officials say keeping some mentally ill inmates in long-term isolation amounts to a safety benefit, both for the prison population and the inmates who are deemed dangerous enough to be kept in "administrative segregation."

Advocates, however, including the American Civil Liberties Union, say it only exacerbates the troubles of mentally ill inmates. Activists are pushing the issue in several states, the report says. It is unclear just how many of the nation's inmates are held in long-term solitary confinement.

The arguments against solitary confinement for the mentally ill appears similar to a debate over the death penalty for the mentally ill. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2002 that executing mentally retarded criminals amounts to cruel and unusual punishment.

In 2007, the high court found that courts weighing execution need to consider whether a condemned inmate is so out of touch with reality that he can't understand the link between the crimes and the ultimate punishment, or the point of it.

(source: New Orleans Times-Picayune)

CALIFORNIA:

Shaw family urges death penalty for Espinoza

Prosecutors are urging jurors to recommend the death penalty against Pedro Espinoza, a gang member convicted of murdering high school football star Jamiel Shaw II.

Espinoza's gang affiliation makes him eligible for the death penalty. He was also reportedly in the country illegally when he murdered Shaw. The prosecution is seeking the death penalty with the support of Shaw's family.

For three days, probation officers and jail personnel described Espinoza as a persistent troublemaker, attacking other inmates and deputies more than a dozen times.

His defense team says Espinoza was neglected and abused as a child. That's a stark contrast to how Shaw, 17, was raised.

Jamiel Shaw II was gunned down just three doors away from his Arlington Heights home after leaving a friend's house in 2008. He was confronted by Espinoza, who thought he was a member of a rival gang.

Shaw had been attracting attention for his athletic talents from schools like Rutgers and Stanford at the time of his death.

The parents say the death penalty for Espinoza is justified, and ask that it be done without years of delay.

Shaw's mother Anita, an Army sergeant, was in Iraq when she was notified of her son's death.

"He came in and he killed him quickly, so let his death be quickly," said Shaw. "Listen to all the stuff that he has done while my son was doing nothing but good. His life speaks for what he deserves. He's guilty. He deserves death."

(source: Los Angeles News)

PAKISTAN----stay of execution

Zardari stays Pakistan's 1st hanging in 4 years

President Asif Ali Zardari on Thursday stayed the hanging of a man convicted of killing a lawyer, putting off the first execution scheduled since an informal moratorium was put in place in Pakistan nearly 4 years ago.

The stay order issued by the President was received by jail officials in the southern port city of Karachi on Thursday morning.

The execution of Behram Khan was scheduled for May 23.

DIG (Prisons) Nusrat Mangan said the stay order postponed Khan's hanging till June 30.

An anti-terrorism court gave the death sentence to Khan nearly a decade ago after he was found guilty of murdering lawyer Mohammad Ashraf within the Sindh High Court complex in April 2003.

Khan's mercy petition had been rejected earlier this month, following which the anti-terrorism court issued a black warrant for his execution at 4:30 am on May 23.

Rights groups, including the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and Human Rights Watch, had urged the Pakistan government to halt the scheduled hanging of Khan.

The HRCP had expressed "alarm" at the scheduled hanging and called on the government to announce a "formal moratorium on executions".

"The Pakistani government has rightly not carried out executions since 2009," said Ali Dayan Hasan, Pakistan director of Human Rights Watch.

"Instead of resorting to this barbaric practice, the government should declare the moratorium officially, commute all existing death sentences, and then abolish the death penalty for all crimes".

On April 15, 2003, Khan and policeman Pir Bux entered the Sindh High Court intending to kill Qurban Ali Chauhan, the lawyer for an accused under trial for the killing of Khan's uncle.

Khan killed Ashraf in a case of mistaken identity.

The anti-terrorist court sentenced Khan to death on June 25, 2003 while Pir Bux was sentenced to life imprisonment for abetting the murder.

HRW said the number of people executed every year in Pakistan under military rule was among the highest in the world.

Indian death row prisoner Sarabjit Singh is among those who benefited from the Pakistan government's decision to suspend executions.

(source: PTI)

SOMALILAND:

Somaliland military court sentences 17 civilians to death

A military court in Somalia's autonomous northern region of Somaliland has sentenced 17 civilians to death for attacking a military base, the BBC reports.

According to the report, 30 armed members of a clan attacked soldiers in a camp on Tuesday. 7 people, including 3 soldiers, were killed in the resulting firefight.

Following the attack, 28 people were arrested and held overnight. A military trial followed, in which 3 people were acquitted and the trial of 3 others was postponed.

5 minors were given life sentences, and the remaining 17 civilians were sentenced to death, after reportedly confessing to conducting the attacks.

According to the BBC, the attackers claimed the military had built on land that they had owned for generations. An attack on Somaliland's military carries a mandatory death penalty for adults, the BBC says.

Somaliland, a breakaway, semi-desert territory on the coast of the Gulf of Aden, has been spared by much of the violence plaguing Somalia, but the BBC says land disputes are common.

(source: MSNBC News)

IRAQ:

Ex-guards testify against Iraqi vice president in death squad trial

Former bodyguards for Iraq’s fugitive vice president have testified that they were ordered to kill security officials and plant roadside bombs as a politically charged terror trial against the Sunni leader got under way.

Vice President Tariq Al-Hashemi, who was in Turkey but faced trial in absentia, has denied all charges against him. If convicted, he could face the death penalty.

The case threatens to paralyze Iraq’s government by fueling simmering Sunni and Kurdish resentments against Shiite Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki, who critics claim is monopolizing power. Al-Hashemi is an ardent critic of Al-Maliki, whose government issued a warrant for the vice president’s arrest the day after US troops left Iraq last December.

Al-Hashemi has been accused of playing a role in 150 bombings, assassinations and other attacks from 2005 to 2011, according to the judicial council. The Iraqi government alleges that Sunni death squads were largely composed of his bodyguards and other employees.

The charges against the vice president span the worst years of bloodshed that followed the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq as retaliatory sectarian attacks between Sunni and Shiite militants pushed the country to the brink of civil war. He has been in office since 2006. The testimony focused on more recent years, when violence ebbed but insurgents continued to attack security forces and other targets in a bid to undermine the Iraqi government in the run-up to the US withdrawal in December.

Bodyguard Odai Ghazi Amin, who served in the Iraqi Army under Saddam Hussein, said he joined Al-Hashemi’s staff in 2008 and was ordered by the vice president’s son-in-law in 2009 to escort bomb-planting missions on roads across Baghdad. In 2011, Amin said he was told to assassinate an army general and a lawyer — orders he tried to avoid by asking for a job transfer. But he said he was threatened by the son-in-law, who ran Al-Hashemi’s office, that he would be killed and his family in danger if he refused the deadly missions.

Last September, Amin testified, he was summoned to meet with the vice president. “Al-Hashemi told me that he is going to assign me to kill some officers who work against the interests of the state and to carry out operations on security checkpoints,” Amin said.

Amin testified that after the meeting, Al-Hashemi’s son-in-law Ahmed Qahtan, who also faces terror charges, gave him and 2 other bodyguards silenced guns and told them to assassinate army Brig. Gen. Talib Balaasim.

The bodyguards tracked down Balaasim in western Baghdad, and Amin testified that he killed the general, in a Sept. 26 drive-by shooting before returning to Al-Hashemi’s office in the heavily guarded Green Zone. “About two days after the attack, Al-Hashemi received us (in his office) and said to us, ‘God bless your efforts,’” Amin testified. He said the bodyguards shared a $3,000 payment. Amin’s account was later contradicted by testimony from another bodyguard, Yassir Saadi Hassoun. Hassoun said he and his brother opened fire on Balaasim, not Amin.

A 3rd bodyguard, Ahmed Al-Jubouri, described a November 2011 shooting that killed national security official Ibrahim Saleh Mahdi and his wife. Al-Jubouri said Mahdi was ordered killed because he had become “a source of annoyance” to Al-Hashemi.

Al-Hashemi is in Turkey, where he has said he is receiving medical treatment. His spokesman, Fahad Al-Turki, said Al-Hashemi was not available to comment on Tuesday’s proceedings. Ahmed Qahtan also is in Turkey. He has hotly denied the charges, and accuses the government of torturing his bodyguards to obtain confessions from them. The Iraqi judiciary last month investigated and dismissed his claims.

The vice president believes he will not get a fair trial in Baghdad’s criminal court, and has asked that the case be heard by a special tribunal appointed by parliament.

His allies see the trial as another political power battle in Iraq.

“As far as I’m concerned, the issue of Al-Hashemi is more political than a legal one,” said Sunni lawmaker Hamid Al-Mutlaq of the Iraqiya political bloc that opposes Al-Maliki.

The trial was scheduled to resume on Sunday.

SINGAPORE:

OPEN LETTER: CLEMENCY FOR YONG VUI KONG

Mr. K. Shanmugam

Law Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs

The Treasury,

100 High Street, #08-02

Singapore 179434

Dear Minister

OPEN LETTER: CLEMENCY FOR YONG VUI KONG URGENTLY REQUESTED

Amnesty International and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) urge Singapore’s Cabinet to advise the President to grant clemency to Yong Vui Kong, a young Malaysian who faces imminent execution for drug trafficking. Clemency granted by the President, following advice from the Cabinet, is Yong’s last hope.

On 4 April, Singapore’s Supreme Court rejected Yong Vui Kong’s third and final appeal submitted by his lawyer, M. Ravi. The appeal argued that Yong Vui Kong was subjected to unequal treatment before the law when the Attorney-General’s Chamber decided not to prosecute the alleged mastermind of the drug operation, a Singaporean who was Yong Vui Kong’s former boss. He remains free from prosecution now that all 26 charges against him were withdrawn by the Attorney-General’s office. Yet his former employee, Yong Vui Kong, has spent almost four years on death row and now faces imminent execution.

Yong Vui Kong was 19 when first arrested in 2007 for possessing 47g of heroin. In 2008 Singapore’s High Court sentenced him to death under the Misuse of Drugs Act – which provides a mandatory death sentence for anyone caught with over 15g of heroin. The law strips the judiciary of discretion to pass a lesser sentence, or to individualize the sentence in conformity with the degree of culpability of the accused.

In 2005 the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions said that Singapore’s execution of another prisoner sentenced to death for trafficking heroin, Nguyen Tuong Van, would violate international legal standards relating to the imposition of the death penalty. “No international human rights tribunal anywhere in the world has ever found a mandatory death penalty regime compatible with international human rights norms,” the Special Rapporteur stated.

In resolution 2005/59, adopted on 20 April 2005, the UN Commission on Human Rights urged all states that still maintain the death penalty “to ensure- that the death penalty is not imposed- as a mandatory sentence”.

Amnesty International and ADPAN urge Singapore to follow the worldwide trend among common-law countries to ban the use of the mandatory death penalty. The US Supreme Court struck down mandatory penalty in 1976, ruling in Woodson v. North Carolina that “fundamental respect for humanity - requires consideration of the character and record of the individual offender and the circumstances of the particular offense.” In 1983, the Indian Supreme Court ruled that the penalty was unconstitutional in Mithu v. Punjab, stating that ““[t]he legislature cannot make relevant circumstances irrelevant, deprive the courts of their legitimate jurisdiction to exercise their discretion.” More recently, in Attorney-General vs Kagula, the Supreme Court of Uganda in 2009 struck down the mandatory death penalty because it prevented courts from considering all specific circumstances of the defendant and of the crime.

Yong Vui Kong’s case has sparked widespread concern around the world. In his own country, Malaysia, Foreign Minister Anifah Aman and Malaysian legislators requested the Singaporean authorities to grant clemency in 2010.

The President of Singapore can only grant a presidential pardon upon the advice of the Cabinet. Clemency for a death sentence has only been granted 6 times since independence in 1965. Amnesty International and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network call on you and other members of the Cabinet to ensure respect for international legal standards by recommending the commutation of Yong Vui Kong’s death sentence.

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases and without reservation. ADPAN is an independent regional network comprising lawyers, NGOs and civil society groups from 24 countries including Singapore. It campaigns for an end to the death penalty across the Asia-Pacific region.

More than 2/3 of states have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice. Death sentences and executions are decreasing globally and in Asia. Out of 41 countries in the Asia-Pacific, 28 have abolished it in law or in practice. 5 out of the 10 ASEAN-member states have also abolished the death penalty in law or in practice. Singapore is one of the few remaining countries in the region that still carries out executions.

Amnesty International and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network are appealing to the Singapore authorities to stop the execution of Yong Vui Kong, to establish a moratorium on the death penalty and to suspend executions.

Sincerely yours,

Donna Guest

Asia Deputy Director International Secretariat

Amnesty International

M. Ravi

Counsel for Yong Vui Kong

ADPAN member

(source: The Online Citizen)

MAY 17, 2012:

IDAHO----impending execution

Idaho set to execute 2nd death row inmate within a year

A 7th District Judge has signed a death warrant for condemned inmate Richard Albert Leavitt, ordering that he be executed by lethal injection.

Barring any last-minute court intervention, Leavitt will be put to death on June 12.

Leavitt was convicted in the July 18, 1984, brutal death of Danette Elg in Blackfoot. Prosecutors said he stabbed her repeatedly with exceptional force, and then cut out her sexual organs. Leavitt's defense attorneys have argued that he sustained brain damage and has a mental disorder that contributed to his actions.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to consider Leavitt's appeal Monday, and Judge Jon Shindurling signed the death warrant Thursday.

If Leavitt's execution moves forward as planned, he will become the second person executed by the state in the last 7 months. Paul Ezra Rhoades, who was convicted of killing three people in eastern Idaho in 1987, was put to death on Nov. 18, 2011.

Before Rhoades' death, executions were rare in Idaho, with only one other inmate put to death in the last half-century. But several death row inmates appear to be reaching the end of the appeals process, and last year Idaho Department of Correction officials predicted there could be as many as four people executed before the end of 2013.

Leavitt's defense attorneys have tried several times to get his death penalty overturned. In 2007, U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill agreed after concluding defense attorney David Parmenter was ineffective for failing to investigate if brain damage found years later could explain Leavitt's personality disorders at the time of the crime. But in a divided opinion issued in 2011, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Winmill and put Leavitt back on death row.

Leavitt, who has long maintained his innocence, was arrested after authorities discovered Elg's body in her blood-spattered bedroom four days after she'd been killed. During his trial, a court-appointed psychologist who examined Leavitt said he had an antisocial personality disorder and intermittent explosive disorder, which could cause him to lose control of aggressive impulses. | What's it like on Death Row?

Former district Judge H. Reynold George noted that Leavitt came from a law-abiding family, was married and steadily employed before his arrest and that while he had a criminal record, it mostly contained misdemeanors and traffic infractions.

Still, George said at the sentencing, those mitigating factors were only "feathers on the scale when balanced against the grossly inhumane act of murder that went beyond all decency."

In April, Leavitt was one of four death row inmates to sue the state, contending Idaho's new execution procedures give too much power to prison officials, create a risk of severe pain and would allow unqualified workers to carry out medical procedures. In the lawsuit Leavitt, Thomas Creech, James Hairston and Gene Stuart ask a judge to stop all executions until the problems are fixed.

That lawsuit is still active; the state has asked U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge to throw it out because Idaho's protocol matches the procedures in other states that have been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.

(source: Associated Press)

CONNECTICUT:

Dr. Petit blasts Roraback on death penalty, backs Wilson-Foley

Dr. William Petit, who has been an outspoken advocate of the death penalty since his wife and two daughters were murdered and their killers put on Connecticut’s Death Row, blasted 5th District Congress candidate Andrew Roraback Thursday and expressed continued support for his Republican rival, Lisa Wilson-Foley.

Petit was upset with comments Roraback made about the death penalty on WNPR’s “Where We Live” program Wednesday morning.

Roraback explained why he has always opposed Connecticut’s death penalty, but voted against repeal this year because he felt the bill, which still called for the execution of the 11 men on death row, was “disingenuous.”

First of all, he said, there’s no way that the courts would allow those men to be executed after Connecticut banned the death penalty “going forward.”

Second, he said, it was wrong to say we are claiming the “moral high ground” on the death penalty by starting with calling for the government to kill 11 people.

Roraback referenced the Petit case a few times during his remarks, because that’s the reason that Gov. Dannel Malloy and some legislators gave for wanting to exempt the existing Death Row inmates from repeal.

“Sen. Roraback cited the plight of our family as a reason the law was “disingenuous,” since the effect of the new law would not lead to justice for current Death Row convicts,” Dr. Petit and Hanna Petit Chapman said in a written statement posted on The Laurel blog. “We are very disappointed and hurt that Sen. Roraback would use our family name without our permission to provide him political cover when the repeal legislation was essentially the same bill he supported in 2009 – which he admitted in the interview.”

The statement went on to push Wilson-Foley’s candidacy:

“One of the many reasons we support Lisa Wilson Foley is her consistency on this issue. Sen. Roraback’s attempt to interpret our emotions is simply politics. When we met with Sen. Roraback, we respected his initial position to oppose the Death Penalty. His comments Wednesday, in our minds, cast doubt on whether Sen. Roraback has any core convictions on important issues. As Republicans from Plainville, we are supporting Lisa Wilson Foley because she is the best qualified to represent us in Washington, based in part, on her core principles.”

There was more than one connection between Wilson-Foley and Roraback’s appearance on WNPR Wednesday. Originally, she was scheduled to appear on the program on that day, but her campaign canceled with 2 days notice because they objected to host John Dankosky’s plan to ask her about the controversy surrounding her connections to former Gov. John Rowland.

(source: Register Citizen)

TEXAS:

Death penalty study: Wrong man killed----Carlos DeLuna, executed in 1989 for the murder of a Corpus Christi woman, was innocent

Carlos DeLuna, executed in 1989 for the murder of a Corpus Christi woman, was innocent, a 400-page report released Tuesday states.

The Columbia Human Rights Law Review report detailed the events of his July 1983 trial for the death of Wanda Lopez and how he was wrongly executed. Columbia Law School professor James Liebman and students conducted the study to contribute to a public debate of the death penalty, specifically arguing that it is an ineffective form of punishment, Liebman said.

The DeLuna case was chosen after Liebman did a study on courts across the country and how they handled legal error. Executions piqued his interest, and he started looking at Texas death penalty cases. "One of the very first cases we came across was the Carlos DeLuna case, who said all along that another man murdered the woman," Liebman said.

DeLuna was convicted of fatally stabbing Lopez on Feb. 4, 1983, during the robbery of a Corpus Christi convenience store. He testified at his trial, claiming a man named Carlos Hernandez killed Lopez.

The Columbia study asserts that Hernandez committed the crime.

"On evidence we pulled together on this case, there is no way a jury could have convicted De-Luna beyond a reasonable doubt, but they could've convicted Hernandez beyond a reasonable doubt," Liebman said.

After deliberating for about six hours, a Nueces County jury of 7 men and 5 women found DeLuna guilty.

Jurors also determined it was probable DeLuna, who had been accused of attempted rape in 1982, would commit future acts of violence. DeLuna maintained his innocence until he was executed Dec. 7, 1989.

"I want to say I hold no grudges," DeLuna said minutes before he was injected. "I hate nobody. I want my family to know I love them. I want to tell everyone on death row to keep the faith up, to keep going. Everything will be all right."

The Columbia study, "Los Tocayos Carlos," created a stir Tuesday when it was released, drawing criticism from the case's lead prosecutor and one of DeLuna's defense attorneys. Both said they never were contacted by researchers, although Liebman said he spoke with defense attorney James Lawrence twice.

Lead prosecutor Steve Schiwetz, who said he was reading the report Tuesday afternoon, said he does not understand why researchers did not speak with the people who were directly involved with the case and came to his own conclusion as to why.

"They have done a pretty good job of collecting evidence," he said. "I'm not sure if they are great at evaluating it."

Schiwetz said the goal of the report is to raise questions about the death penalty.

"I'm not terribly hostile to the idea, but these guys are on a mission," he said. "We can compare it to the abolitionists and these guys didn't bother asking for anyone else's opinion."

Since DeLuna's conviction, many people have asked Lawrence if he thought DeLuna was innocent, and his response was "not 100 %."

Lawrence said his biggest problem with defending DeLuna was that he was facing the death penalty and still couldn't point out who he believed was the real killer.

During DeLuna's trial, Lawrence presented him with a photo lineup and asked DeLuna to identify Hernandez. DeLuna wouldn't.

"We talked to DeLuna and said, 'Which guy did it? This is your life,'" Lawrence said. "And he refused to tell us which one was Hernandez, and we kept asking why and he said he was too afraid of him."

When DeLuna took the stand, he told jurors he didn't do it but knew who did, accusing Hernandez. The Columbia study asserts that Hernandez later bragged of killing Lopez. The report claims DeLuna and Hernandez shared similar characteristics, and eyewitnesses couldn't tell the difference between the 2.

Hernandez died in a northeast Texas prison in 1999, according to the Columbia study.

But Schiwetz said after looking into DeLuna's false claims of innocence, he knew the truth. "DeLuna, the wouldbe serial rapist, was the same person who killed Wanda," he said.

Former District Attorney Grant Jones, who sought the death penalty for DeLuna, has since changed his mind about executions.

"I can't answer the question if a mistake was made," he said, "but if it was, then an innocent man was executed."

While Jones declined to talk about DeLuna's case, he said that when he was a prosecutor, he believed the death penalty was the best punishment for some crimes. He no longer believes that. "One of the benefits of our judicial system is the appeal system to correct our mistakes," Jones said. "The problem with the death penalty is once it's carried out and there is a mistake you can't go back and correct it."

The death penalty no longer serves as just punishment when attempting to determine absolute truth, he said.

"Only 1 person knows if Carlos DeLuna was guilty, and that is God," he said.

Gov. Rick Perry on Tuesday declined to talk about the execution that occurred more than 20 years ago, but defended the legality of the death penalty.

"The U.S. Supreme Court has determined that Texas' system (and other states) is just and that opinion still stands," he said through a spokeswoman.

(source: CorrectionsOne)

USA:

Year of Healing Proclamation honors 1862 Dakota Conflict

Members of Twin Cities American Indian Movement (TCAIM), the Episcopal Church of Minnesota, the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party (DFL), and the Native American community at large have partnered to author a Year of Healing Proclamation in honor of the 150th anniversary of the U.S.-Dakota Conflict of 1862.

The proclamation states that, "after one hundred and fifty years of Indigenous People living in an environment of fear, grief, anger and vengeance following the U.S - Dakota Conflict of 1862, the Year 2012 shall be declared the Year of Healing in Minnesota and in so declaring bring attention to the history and current situation of the Indigenous People for the purpose of breaking a vicious cycle of hatred and fostering a spirit of healing among all who call Minnesota their home."

The U.S.-Dakota Conflict is a tragic event in the history of Minnesota. According to resources published by the Minnesota Historical Society and the University of Kansas City-Missouri, the conflict began in August of 1862 after the Dakota were denied their treaty-protected annuity rights.

Because the tribe depended on these resources for survival, several bands decided to go to war with the United States government. By September of 1862, after the deaths of over 500 American soldiers and an unknown number of Dakota, 2,000 Dakota men, women and children were taken into custody by the American government. A military tribunal put 393 Dakota to trial for war crimes and eventually condemned 38 of them to death. These Dakota men were killed in Mankato on December 26, 1862 in what remains the largest mass execution in the history of the United States.

The rest of the 1,600 women, children, and elderly captured by U.S. Forces were marched to Fort Snelling near Saint Paul, where they spent the winter as prisoners of war in what many describe as a concentration camp.

In May of 1863, the Dakota who survived the camps were forced to relocate to areas in present-day Minnesota, Nebraska, North and South Dakota, and Canada. It is estimated that as a result of the U.S.-Dakota Conflict, 6,000 Dakota people were uprooted from their original homelands.

"They were denied the right to trial and the right to rations. They were raped, abused, tortured, and then shipped off into exile," said Robert Thunder-Reid, a member of TCAIM and a civil rights activist for North and South America.

Thunder-Reid feels that this displacement and violence is still negatively impacting Native people today.

"What it comes down to is inter-generational trauma, stemming what happened in the past," he said.

Thunder-Reid, one of the initiators and authors of the proclamation, began work on the document about a year ago, along with Father Two Bulls of All Saints Episcopal Indian Mission, community member John Lapointe, and members of the DFL. He brought the required number of signatures to the state central committee of the DFL, where it was passed. Thus far, Senators Keith Ellison, Al Franken, and Amy Klobuchar, the City Councils and mayors of both Minneapolis and Saint Paul, the Archbishop of the Episcopal Church of Minnesota, and the El Capitans of Indigenous people of Venezuela have all signed letters in support of the proclamation.

"[Y]our efforts along with others in your community are bringing us together for much-needed reflection and healing," writes Sen. Ellison in his letter.

Along with reflecting on the history of the event and educating the public about the atrocities committed during the Conflict, the eventual goal of the proclamation is to seek a presidential pardon for the 38 Dakota men who were executed.

"The more senators and the more people we petition and we get to sign on, the more success we will have," said Thunder-Reid.

To raise awareness in the community about the U.S.-Dakota Conflict and the proclamation, Thunder-Reid and Father Two Bulls are sponsoring a series of free public events at All Saints Episcopal Indian Mission in May, including roundtable discussions and screenings of the film Dakota 38, produced by Smooth Feather Production.

In the end, Thunder-Reid hopes that the proclamation will shed light on other issues that plague Native communities, such as prescription drug abuse and homelessness.

"If we get this resolution passed, we can use it as a platform to address the other crises going on in our community," he said.

(source: Circle News)

*******************

The Death Penalty is the Tip of America's Human Rights Iceberg

There's a buzz about the death penalty in America these days. And nearly all of the conversation focuses not on how to maintain the practice, but rather on abolition.

Connecticut just decided to repeal the death penalty, following the lead of Illinois, New Mexico and New Jersey in recent years. Meanwhile, California voters will vote on a ballot measure that would eliminate one-quarter of the nation's death row.

Faced with the high cost, lack of deterrent effect and the inevitability of executing innocent people, some states are taking another look. Moreover, given the appalling specter of prosecutors striking black jurors and other forms of racial misconduct, North Carolina and Kentucky have enacted racial justice legislation to overturn racially biased death sentences.

With the European Union enacting an export ban on lethal injection chemicals to the U.S., states are scrambling to find out how to kill people. With diminished supplies, states are faced with the option of suspending executions altogether, or like a violence addict, purchasing the poisons on the black market. In other cases such as Ohio, they have abandoned the commonly-used, three-drug protocol in favor of a single drug such as pentobarbita l-- a more commonly found substance used to euthanize animals.

And so, as people are still put down like dogs in the land of the free -- despite the momentum for abolition -- capital punishment represents America's human rights blind spot. But really, this is about more than executions. Rather, it speaks to a nation that often pays lip service to upholding human rights, but debases and denigrates human life through its actions. The result is a callous culture of violence, neglect and disregard.

The U.S. ranked 5th in the world in capital punishment last year, in league with China, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Iraq. A world leader in executions, America is the world's foremost leader in prisons. The U.S. claims 1/20 of the global population, but 1/4 of the world's prisoners. A majority of these prisoners are poor and of color, poorly educated, poorly represented in the courtroom and failed by the system. The warehousing of people is big business, an unseemly union of criminal justice policy and profit motive.

Is it an accident that the world's prison leader also ranks near the bottom in income inequality, boasts the largest income inequality in the developed world? Hardly not. Inequality in the land of opportunity is far more than in Europe, Canada, Australia and South Korea, but also more than nearly all of Asia, West Africa and North Africa. The top 1 % of Americans enjoy far more than elsewhere in the West in terms of executive pay and policies favoring the rich. This, as America's 99 % receive far less government support for health insurance, daycare, pensions and education.

Meanwhile, as the U.S. preaches democracy to the rest of the world, it enacts voter ID laws that could potentially disenfranchise millions of citizens. Harder to vote, yet easier to purchase a gun. Leading the industrialized nations in handgun proliferation and firearms deaths, America is truly what Martin Luther King called "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today." Lax gun laws, "shoot to kill" legislation and laws allowing concealed weapons in schools, churches, sports arenas and bars reflect the power of corporate arms manufacturers in U.S. politics. Made in America, the violence is exported to Mexico in the form of illegal weapons fueling the drug war carnage.

And this culture of violence extends to the death penalty, in a country conditioned by years of dehumanization, normalized through slavery and Jim Crow lynching. The death penalty is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to human rights violations in the U.S. It might be the most disturbing example of the human rights challenges facing the nation, and the challenges are many.

(source: David A. Love is the Executive Director of Witness to Innocence, a national nonprofit organization that empowers exonerated death row prisoners and their family members to become effective leaders in the movement to abolish the death penalty; Huffington Post)

PENNSYLVANIA:

The death penalty costs taxpayers more than life in the klink

What a shame that Pennsylvania still has the death penalty.

However people feel about the moral justification for execution, it means taxpayers must pay through the nose for people like Michael Parrish for years, most likely decades, to come, because they cost more sentenced to die than to live indefinitely in prison.

The 26-year-old, who shot to death his 21-year-old girlfriend and their 19-month-old son in 2009, will appeal and appeal, his bearded face appearing again and again in the news as his case winds through the interminable legal process. The convert to Islam will invoke Allah, as he did when he received his sentence, as if that declaration trumps his murderous past. And we'll have to see photos of a slowly aging Parrish wearing a white kufi cap, with staring eyes and impassive expression, time after time as his lawyers argue for clemency or a new trial or whatever it takes to avert execution.

In our view, it would be far better to sentence someone like this to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Study after study shows that at every phase of a case, a capital murder case costs far more, typically hundreds of thousands of dollars more, than murder cases that don't involve the death penalty. Sentencing the worst criminals to life at least would ensure taxpayers wouldn't be on the hook for the inevitable and costly appeals that accompany capital cases as defendants and advocates seek to avert the ultimate punishment for their crimes.

Parrish is now one of 206 Pennsylvanians on death row. He'll likely sit there a long time. The last execution in the Keystone State was the Philadelphia rapist and murderer Gary Heidnik, who was put to death in 1999. The last Monroe County resident to receive the death penalty was Manuel Sepulveda, whose conviction in a 2001 double murder earned him the sentence in 2004. He's now 32. So now Monroe County has two double murderers on death row.

Many arguments against the death penalty, including those made by this newspaper, raise the possibility of error and cite numerous documented cases in which convicted defendants have been exonerated later, often by incontrovertible DNA evidence. Several states no longer have the death penalty out of concern that it could result in the execution of an innocent.

That moral argument is compelling. But it doesn't sway everyone. Maybe money will. The heavy cost of capital cases offers a fiscal incentive to abolish the death penalty.

And just think. Without the threat of lethal injection hanging over him, the odious Parrish wouldn't have a public platform to hint that his religious conversion somehow negates his heinous crimes.

(source: Pocono Record)

OHIO:

Supreme Court rejects death-row inmate's appeal----Toledoan again faces execution in 1986 slayings of 2 women

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear an appeal from an Ohio death-row inmate who, during his lengthy legal battle, won an overturning of his conviction, only for it to be reinstated.

William T. Montgomery, 46, of Toledo was convicted in the 1986 murders of 2 South Toledo roommates, a conviction that more than 20 years later was overturned by a federal judge in 2007.

After 4 years of legal arguments, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the decision and ordered a new trial.

It was the 2011 decision that Montgomery's defense attorney had hoped the Supreme Court would hear. However, with the high court's decision, Montgomery will again face execution now that his appeals are exhausted.

"Review in the Supreme Court is very difficult to obtain," lawyer Rick Kerger said. "I can't say I'm surprise but I'm am very disappointed. We thought we had some good issues."

Montgomery was sentenced to death for the aggravated murder and aggravated robbery of Debra Ogle, 20, and to prison for the murder of Cynthia Tincher, 19.

His conviction was overturned when a federal judge in Cleveland ruled that a police report kept from the defense during his trial could have changed the outcome.

That decision was upheld in 2009 by a panel of the federal appellate court in Cincinnati in a 2-1 decision but was overturned two years later when the entire appellate court heard the case.

With an 11-5 vote, the court once again instituted the death penalty for Montgomery, saying it disagreed that the report would have undermined the state's case that he was the triggerman. In that police report, witnesses claimed to have seen Ms. Ogle alive on March 12, 1986, four days after she'd been reported missing and presumed dead.

The witnesses who were involved in that report have since written an affidavit claiming a mistake and that they had seen the victim's sister.

Lucas County Common Pleas Judge James Bates, who at the time was the assistant prosecutor assigned to the case, said the Supreme Court's decision not to hear the appeal was like a "personal vindication."

Noting that he could discuss the case because he was an attorney and not a judge at the time it was tried, Judge Bates said that the work of the prosecution team, which had been attacked, was now validated.

"In my opinion, there was a certain manipulation of facts that was done by the defense, which was corrected by the Court of Appeals in Cincinnati," he said. "More importantly I'm happy for the friends and families of the victims who have had to live with this for so many years."

Judge Bates said the mothers of the victims were notified of the denial and were relieved. Jane Ogle, Ms. Ogle's mother, could not be reached for comment.

Montgomery has remained on death row pending the appeals. No execution date is pending.

(source: Toledo Blade)

********************************

Ohio death penalty review committee meets again

A state Supreme Court task force analyzing the effectiveness of Ohio's capital punishment law planned another meeting Thursday as part of its yearlong review.

Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O'Connor has convened the task force while making it clear it won't debate whether the state should have the death penalty.

The committee of prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges and death penalty experts are looking at a variety of issues, from how the law affects minorities to the role of clemency.

The committee is also studying whether death sentences are proportional, meaning that any one death sentence is similar to others that have also been handed down.

O'Connor says the committee's goal is to produce a fair, impartial and balanced analysis of the state's 30-year-old law.

(source: Associated Press)

VIRGINIA:

4th Circuit Considers Justin Wolfe Death Row Case ---- Virginia has appealed a federal judge’s decision to vacate the convictions and sentences regarding Daniel Robert Petrole Jr.’s 2001 murder.

Virginia’s appeal of a federal court decision to vacate the conviction and sentence of Justin Michael Wolfe—who a Prince William County jury sent to death row in 2002 for murder-for-hire—goes before the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond on May 17.

Owen Merton Barber IV, of Centreville, testified before a federal judge in 2010 that he made up his testimony against Wolfe, of Chantilly, under pressure from prosecutors and his own defense attorney. Barber followed Daniel Robert Petrole Jr. for more than an hour before blocking his car along a dead-end street in front of Petrole’s Bristow home and killing him.

In his order vacating the convictions, U.S. District Court Judge Raymond A. Jackson said prosecutors withheld exculpatory information from Wolfe that could have been used to prove his innocence at trial and called procedures by the prosecutors “abhorrent to the judicial process.”

Besides the murder-for-hire, Jackson vacated sentences for marijuana distribution and use of a gun in the commission of a felony, a sentence Wolfe received because the triggerman used a gun. Wolfe was not present at the murder.

“The Commonwealth deprived Wolfe of a fair trial by improperly withholding material exculpatory evidence and committing other violations of his constitutional rights,” Wolfe’s attorneys wrote in his brief to the appeals court, adding that prosecutors had “conviction-at-all costs mentality that infected Wolfe’s trial.”

34 attorneys, judges and law professors, have urged the 4th Circuit to uphold Jackson’s ruling in the case. They said that the evidence prosecutors withheld “an unacceptable risk that an innocent man may have been sentenced to death.”

The state argues it has ample evidence to convict Wolfe on circumstantial evidence, a claim disputed by the defense and even by statements made by Prince William Commonwealth’s Attorney Paul B. Ebert at Barber’s sentencing.

“But for his testimony, Mr. Wolfe probably would not have been prosecuted," Ebert said in 2002, referring to Barber’s testimony against Wolfe.

The state’s brief argues that it was not given adequate time to refute evidence presented by Wolfe during his evidentiary hearing in November 2010 before Jackson.

“No responsible prosecutor, much less the Director, reasonably could have been expected to guess what Wolfe would allege, or defend against such undisclosed claims,” the brief states.

Wolfe’s appeal had centered on an inadequate correspondence of exculpatory information, Barber’s recantation and information presented at trial that Wolfe’s attorneys believe prosecutors knew to be untrue.

The state also makes puzzling conclusions. For example, the fact that Wolfe revealed the name of his drug supplier to Barber, according to the brief, is itself evidence of a murder plot.

“There was no reason to reveal Petrole’s identity to Barber except to arrange for his elimination,” the 4th Circuit brief states.

Yet evidence presented during the 2010 hearing shows that Petrole knew not only the person directly above him in the drug conspiracy hierarchy, but also that person’s supplier.

The state brief states that “Wolfe does nothing to improve the district court’s pure speculation that someone, somewhere, other than Wolfe, might have wanted Petrole dead.”

In fact, evidence not disclosed to Wolfe prior to trial suggests Petrole's roommate/drug partner cut Petrole's supplier out of a deal by going directly to the next person up the chain. Other evidence presented during the evidentiary hearing indicates that Petrole was fearful of retribution for that act, despite not having approved.

Ebert said in the 2010 hearing that it was not information deemed credible enough to be exculpatory.

"There was never a rift between Mr. Petrole and anyone else to my knowledge," Ebert said at first. Then, when pressed further about the disagreement, he said, "I do remember there was some talk about that. I don't see anything exculpatory about it. Danny did not want to be part of any cutting out. That's why I did not think it was exculpatory."

It’s unclear whether Barber’s roommate at that time, Jason Coleman, might have known Petrole and some of his associates. Coleman at one point worked with Petrole’s longtime girlfriend, providing another potential link between Barber and Petrole.

Coleman also provided the weapon used to kill Petrole, received a car from Barber as he left town after the murder and was the last person to see Barber before he fled. Coleman and Barber’s close friend at the time, J.R. Martin—who loaned Barber his car the night of the murder—were the first to give Wolfe’s name to the police after the murder.

"We had pretty much established what we needed to look at in this case," Conway said in 2010. "At the time, we already had information from Mr. Martin's and Mr. Coleman's statements."

Barber claimed in the 2010 hearing and in his 2005 affidavit that Martin was in the car with him that night. Martin denies being in the car, but acknowledges being with Barber before and after the murder. Martin also knew details of Barber’s ride that night, such as items he threw out the window, that he said Barber disclosed.

The defense has hinted at multiple alternate potential scenarios in the case, including a robbery gone wrong or a murder ordered by someone else in Petrole’s drug distribution circle. The prosecution dispels such suggestions as not credible, while the defense argues it never had a chance to pursue them adequately because of the lack of exculpatory evidence disclosed.

“Not only does the information fail to establish any prior relationship, it cannot be material where there is absolutely no evidence that Barber had any motive to kill Petrole other than for hire by Wolfe,” the state’s brief for the 4th Circuit reads.

Barber would not tell Judge Jackson why he followed Petrole that night other than to say Martin and Coleman asked him to.

Coleman and Martin have denied any involvement other than providing the car and the weapon used, and the both deny any knowledge of Barber’s plans. Coleman testified on Wolfe’s behalf at the 2010 hearing, while Martin testified for the state.

As to how investigators had Wolfe’s name, Det. Sam Newsome acknowledged in a police report that he gave Wolfe’s name to Barber on the plane back from San Diego where Barber had fled. However, there was a letter in Barber’s hotel room that had not been mailed asking Wolfe for money before that flight home with the detective.

“Wolfe identifies no information in the possession of prosecutors to show that Detective Newsome’s information caused Barber to fabricate his testimony and no evidence whatsoever of any coercion,” according to the state’s 4th Circuit brief.

Except, that is, for Barber’s testimony to Jackson.

"They said they wanted the truth, but at the same time, they said this is what we want you to say to avoid the chair," Barber said. "It was basically, 'you're going to testify against Justin or you're going to get the death penalty.'"

The state brief asserts that Barber had no answer for why he killed Petrole at the 2010 hearing, but he told the judge that Coleman and Martin had asked him to go see Petrole.

The state brief questions Wolfe’s alternate theories because he has not proven any of them, putting the onus on Wolfe, not only to disprove his guilt, but also to find the actual guilty party.

The state argues that prosecutors turned over all exculpatory information, but Ebert testified that he resists giving too much information to defendants because they “are able to fabricate a defense around what is provided."

Wolfe’s attorney had a harsh assessment of the state’s brief.

“Rather than explain why it is constitutional to imprison and execute a man whose conviction is known to rest on material perjury, the Commonwealth seeks to distrct the Court with a series of manifestly erroneous procedural objections and half-arguments,” the brief states.

“That is unworthy of the responsibility to administer justice entrusted to the Commonwealth by the People. More importantly, it should be fatal to the Commonwealth’s appeal."

(source: Patch.com)

*******************

Appeals court hears case of Va. death row inmate whose murder-for-hire conviction was tossed

A murder-for-hire conviction and death sentence should be reinstated against a Prince William County man because evidence withheld by prosecutors would not have made any difference at this trial, a lawyer for the state told a federal appeals panel Thursday.

But an attorney for Justin Michael Wolfe argued that a federal judge got it right when he ruled that his client was wrongfully convicted in the 2001 slaying of his marijuana supplier, Daniel Petrole Jr. The triggerman, Owen Barber IV, in 2005 recanted his original testimony that Wolfe hired him to kill Petrole.

After a 4-day evidentiary hearing last year, U.S. District Judge Raymond A. Jackson of Norfolk found Barber’s recantation credible and ruled that prosecutors improperly suppressed several pieces of evidence, including a report by a police officer who flew to California to bring Barber back to Virginia. The report says the officer told Barber he might avoid the death penalty if he implicated Wolfe in the slaying.

Katherine Burnett, a senior assistant attorney general, said the report had no value to the defense and therefore did not have to be disclosed. However, Wolfe attorney Ashley Parrish said defense attorneys were entitled to question the prosecution’s star witness about the contents of the document.

“When the prosecution decides to tie its case to one witness, any evidence that calls his credibility into question is material,” he said.

Burnett said that even without Barber’s testimony, there was sufficient evidence to convict Wolfe — including his own testimony, which she said “corroborated 90 % of the commonwealth’s case.”

Parrish said Wolfe, 31, admitted involvement in the drug conspiracy but vehemently denied responsibility for Petrole’s murder.

Barber took back his recantation in two subsequent affidavits, but was questioned along with other witnesses — including Wolfe’s prosecutors — at last year’s evidentiary hearing. Parrish said Jackson’s finding on the credibility of the witnesses is entitled to substantial deference by the appeals court.

In last year’s ruling, Jackson wrote that the actions of Prince William prosecutors were “not only unconstitutional in regards to due process, but abhorrent to the judicial process.”

Prosecutors have denied any wrongdoing and said that if the conviction were vacated they may try Wolfe again.

Burnett said there was no evidence that “the prosecution deliberately presented any false evidence in this case,” but appeals court Judge Robert King noted that Prince William prosecutors — unlike many others — do not have an “open file” policy in which the defense is given access to everything.

“What’s held back is knowingly and intentionally withheld,” he said.

Burnett said prosecutors must only disclose material evidence, and an open file policy is not required by the Constitution.

The Wolfe and Barber cases exposed a multimillion-dollar drug ring run by young people barely out of high school in the wealthy northern Virginia suburbs. According to trial testimony, Wolfe was making $10,000 to $15,000 a month selling high-grade marijuana he bought from Petrole. At the time of Petrole’s death, Wolfe owed him about $60,000.

Barber agreed to plead guilty to 1st-degree murder and testify against Wolfe in exchange for a life sentence.

Wolfe’s mother, Terri Steinberg, broke into tears and hugged family members and friends after Thursday’s hearing.

“We’re hopeful,” she said in an interview outside the courtroom. “We just pray that this court affirms Judge Jackson’s decision and this nightmare can end for my family. It’s been hard on the Petrole family too.”

The appeals court typically rules several weeks after hearing arguments.

(source: Associated Press)

FLORIDA:

Prosecutors Seeking Death Penalty for Man Charged in Coral Gable Double Homicide ---- Man charged with killing of two people inside a Coral Gables office was indicted by a grand jury Wednesday, court officials said

The Miami man charged with torturing and killing 2 people found dead inside a Coral Gables office last month could face the death penalty, according to prosecutors.

Jose Rojas, 43, was indicted by a grand jury Wednesday morning at the Miami-Dade County Courthouse, court officials told NBC 6. They said the state also announced their intention to seek the death penalty.

Rojas is accused of killing 59-year-old Frances C. Venezia and 78-year-old Robert A. James inside a business at 801 Monterrey Street April 27, according to police. The victims suffered from blunt trauma and were found with their hands and feet bound, their mouths covered with rags and multiple cuts, police said.

Authorities said Rojas bound and duct-taped the victims and forced Venezia to write him a check from her checking account.

He then struck the Venezia with a mop stick after she started screaming, according to the arrest affidavit. Since the woman would not stop yelling, the man also began to scream, Rojas told officials.

The report said Rojas told officials he did not remember what happened next but remembered pools of blood in the office and on himself.

Rojas has been charged with 2 counts of 1st-degree murder, 2 counts of armed kidnapping and 1 count of attempted armed robbery, according to an arrest affidavit.

Rojas' sister, Vivian Ortero, released a statement earlier this month, saying the family was devastated by the incident.

"My brother Jose is a good husband and a wonderful father who has never been a violent man. All we know is he was going through a difficult time and we will continue to support him," Ortero said.

"Our deepest condolences go out to the victim's family and we will keep everyone involved in this tragedy in our prayers."

Rojas remains in jail on no bond. His trial is set to begin August 20.

The name of his attorney was not immediately known.

(source: nbcmiami.com)

CONNECTICUT:

Connecticut governor signs death penalty repeal bill

In what he called “a moment of sober reflection, not celebration,” Connecticut Gov. Dannel P. Malloy signed into law, April 26, a bill outlawing the use of capital punishment in the state.

The law, which took effect immediately, makes life imprisonment without the possibility of release the highest punishment possible in Connecticut.

The death penalty could be carried out, however, in the cases of 11 prisoners currently on death row in the state.

Hailing the signing as a “historic occasion,” Archbishop Henry J. Mansell of Hartford said, “The Catholic Church opposes the death penalty and has been fighting for its elimination for many years.”

Michael C. Culhane, executive director of the Connecticut Catholic Public Affairs Conference, noted that Connecticut now becomes the 17th state to abolish the death penalty.

“The conference is simply delighted to be part of this successful repeal effort which upholds a basic teaching of the Church regarding the sacredness of human life,” he added.

The conference, representing the state’s bishops, had backed the legislation, saying, “Repealing the death penalty is in agreement with the pro-life teachings of the Catholic Church and is good public policy.”

Malloy, a Democrat and a Catholic, called capital punishment “one of the most compelling and vexing issues of our time.”

Connecticut is the 5th state in 5 years to end use of the death penalty, following legislative action in Illinois, New Mexico and New Jersey, a court decision in New York state and a moratorium declared by the governor in Oregon.

Voters in California are expected to decide in November whether the death penalty should be repealed there.

(source: Catholic News Service)

CALIFORNIA:

Sole survivor in 2005 East Oakland triple homicide takes stand in death penalty case

Taking the stand in Alameda County's only pending death penalty case, the sole survivor in the 2005 shooting that left her sister, a friend and a man she considered her husband dead said she'll never forget the killer's face, and it was a man she knew through drug circles as "Shulk."

Elizabeth Martinez, 34, said she locked eyes with David "Shulk" Mills as he pulled a pistol from his waistband and began firing into the car she was sitting in with James Martin, 28; her sister, Rebecca Martinez, 22; and Dale Griffin, a 36-year-old man with whom she'd been in a relationship since her teenage years.

She was sitting in the back seat next to Griffin, who was struck in the back of the head by one of the first shots fired.

Martinez cried as she described the gunman moving around the car, next killing Martin as he sat in the driver's seat and her sister at his side.

Elizabeth Martinez was also hit -- 1 bullet went into her cheek and shattered her jaw, another went into her chest and lodged against a bone in her back, and 2 more grazed her as they went by.

2 dogs in the car were also struck, 1 fatally.

Martinez testified on Tuesday that she rushed to a neighbor's house for help after the shooting, spitting up a bullet and telling arriving officers that "Shulk shot us."

Martinez had met Mills at an East Oakland home where her sister was living with her boyfriend, Alex Lomas, 3 or 4 months before the March 10, 2005, shooting. Mills had shown up with his brother-in-law to buy methamphetamine, Martinez said.

She had seen both Mills and his brother-in-law numerous times since, and the group did drugs together.

Martinez acknowledged on the stand that she has been addicted to heroin for half her life, and appeared in a yellow Santa Rita Jail uniform because she had failed to attend drug counseling that was a condition of her probation related to a vehicle theft.

Defense attorney William Linehan said she was living in a haze at the time of the shooting, either on drugs, coming off drugs or looking for drugs.

He said that kind of lifestyle is conducive to "distorted memories" and added that drug addicts are often untruthful to get what they want.

"So you are familiar with what it takes to lie," he said. "You are good at it, aren't you?"

He pointed to discrepancies in Martinez's testimony at the preliminary hearing, when she said she had not taken any drugs on the day of the shooting, and her testimony this week, when she acknowledged smoking methamphetamine and shooting heroin sometime about 3 p.m. that day.

"Why did you lie to the judge?" Linehan said, going on to ask Martinez if she had done so because it would make her testimony more believable.

"If you're asking me about whether I'm lying about who shot my sister, no, I'm not lying about that," Martinez said.

She said the line of questioning was making her agitated, and said, "Can we move on to something else, like why he shot my sister?"

Linehan and his defense colleague, William DuBois, said the killings were not the work of Mills, but connected to Alex Lomas, who had recently been arrested on a theft charge and was in jail.

In the days before the shooting, Rebecca Martinez declined a request by Lomas to bail him out, and had begun dating Martin, a former boyfriend.

In the hours before the shooting, Lomas' brother had gone to the apartment and told Martinez she was no longer welcome to stay there. The victims then went to the home of Mills' father to get back a gun that Elizabeth Martinez said had been stolen from the home. They were shot in front of the house on St. Elmo Drive in East Oakland.

The trial continues Thursday. Testimony in the guilt phase is expected to last into June, and could be followed by a penalty phase related to special circumstances and the death penalty.

(source: San Jose Mercury News)

***********

Since When Don't We Put a Price Tag on Justice?

Faced with unassailable evidence that the death penalty in California costs hundreds of millions of dollars per year, death penalty supporters tend to respond with what is intended to be a conversation stopper: "You can't put a price tag on justice."

But wait a minute. Don't we already? Only in a world with unlimited resources could we run government programs with no regard for their price tags. Unfortunately, that is not where we live today. Consider Governor Jerry Brown's latest budget proposal as reported by the New York Times:

Struggling to contain mounting state budget shortfalls, Gov. Jerry Brown on Monday proposed $8.3 billion in spending cuts, including slashing state employees pay and spending on social programs and prisons. He warned that California would have to impose another $6 billion in cuts on public schools and higher education if voters fail to approve his initiative this fall to raise sales and income taxes.

My kids go to public school in California and I teach at a public law school. I would love to be able to say, "You can't put a price tag on an education." But that would be ridiculous. It happens all the time.

The implication in the death penalty context, of course, is that only the most heartless among us would relish telling the mother of a murder victim that the person who killed her child is not going to be executed because, well, it just costs too much.

But here's what we need to remember: about half of all rapes and murders in California go unsolved. A 2009 survey asked law enforcement officials what interfered with effective law enforcement. The number one answer was lack of resources. (Last on the list was "insufficient use of the death penalty.") Thousands of rape kits across the state sit unexamined, because there is no money to conduct DNA testing.

The victims of unsolved murders and rapes are no less deserving of justice than the victims of solved crimes. The SAFE California initiative that will be on the ballot in November would eliminate the death penalty, save $1 billion that we desperately need over the next 5 years, and create a "$100 million fund to be distributed to law enforcement agencies to help solve more homicide and rape cases."

The next time you hear someone say that you can't put a price tag on justice, ask them if they would say the same thing to the family members of victims of the 1,000 murders that go unsolved in California each year.

I'd love to live in a California with no price tags. Until then, the price tag on the death penalty is busting our state's budget.

(source: Ty Alper, Law Professor, Huffington Post)

NEW MEXICO:

Astorga death sentence trial to resume Thursday

The Santa Fe County jury wrapped up a day of witnesses testimony in the convicted deputy-killer Michael Astorga's sentencing trial.

On Wednesday, the families of the victim and the killer testified in court, and at last the jury will decide whether it is the death penalty for Astorga or life in prison.

Throughout the entire trial, Astorga has stated he is the wrong guy – an innocent man railroaded by revenge-driven cops.

2 years ago, a different jury convicted him of murdering Bernalillo County Sheriff's Deputy James McGrane during a routine traffic stop in Tijeras.

During Wednesday's testimony, Astorga's wife, Marcella, told the jury about their oldest son visiting his father in prison.

"Your son just wants to kiss his dad, or hold him or hug him," Marcella said through tears. "They'll be times when he'll go 'Mom, I don't want to go back there. They won't let me touch my dad, I can't play with him.'"

McGrane's sister reminded the jury that her family has to visit her brother in the graveyard.

"For those of you that thought grief and pain lessen over time, think again," she said. "When someone you love so much is killed, the pain and grief never goes away. It just becomes something that you accept as part of your life."

Astorga's laywer, Gary Mitchell, said the jury should disregard the death penalty since the State of New Mexico abolished it in 2009. Prosecution reminded the jury that the death penalty was still in effect when McGrane was killed in 2006.

One thing the jury has not heard about is Astorga's other murder conviction. He was a wanted man for the murder in March of 2006 when Deputy McGrane pulled him over.

The jury will resume Thursday.

(source: KOB News)

IRAN:

26 PRISONERS EXECUTED IN IRAN: 10 OFFICIAL AND 16 UNOFFICIAL EXECUTIONS IN 3 PRISONS

According to the official and unofficial reports 26 prisoners were executed in three different Iranian prisons yesterday and today.

10 of the executions were announced by official Iranian media while 16 other executions were reported by a rights group.

7 PRISONERS, AMONG THEM 1 WOMAN, EXECUTED IN KERMANSHAH (WESTERN IRAN):

According to the official site of the Iranian judiciary in Kermanshah 7 prisoners were hanged in the central prison of this city early yesterday morning, May 16.

All the prisoners were convicted of drug-related charges said the report.

According to the report the prisoners executed yesterday in Kermanshah are identified as:

"A. A." (woman) for keeping and carrying 27 kilograms of heroin, "R. A." for participation in keeping and carrying 100 kilograms of morphine and 254 kilograms of opium, "Kh. Sh." for participation in keeping and carrying 57 kilograms of opium, "M. B." for participation in keeping and carrying 69 kilograms of opium, "A. S." for participation in keeping and carrying 4 kilos and 548 grams of morphine, "M. S."For participation in keeping and carrying narcotics (not specified in the report), and "M. Kh." for participation in keeping and carrying 1529 grams of crack.

3 PRISONERS HANGED IN THE PRISON OF ARDEBIL (NORTHEASTERN IRAN): The official website of the Iranian judiciary in Ardebil (northeastern Iran) reported about execution of three prisoners in the prison of Ardebil this morning, Thursday May 17. According to the report the prisoners were convicted of buying and carrying 105 grams of heroin, 498,15 grams of heroin and 160 kilograms and 493 grams of opium. None of the prisoners were identified by their names.

16 PRISONERS (AMONG THEM 4 WOMEN) WERE HANGED IN THE PRISON F YAZD (CENTRAL IRAN) ACCORDING TO UNOFFICIAL REPORT:

According to a report by the group "Human Rights and Democracy Activists in Iran" (HRDAI), 16 prisoners were hanged in the prison of Yazd early this morning Thursday May 17. According to the report there were 4 women among the prisoners executed today. The report also said that 5 of the 16 prisoners were Afghan citizens. One of the Afghan prisoners executed today was identified by "Mohammad Damardeh" (25 year old) son of Nour Mohammad originally imprisoned for illegal immigration to Iran but later the case changed to drug trafficking, said the report.

The executions in Yazd have still not been confirmed by the official Iranian sources.

Iran Human Rights (IHR) strongly condemns yesterday and today’s mass executions in the Iranian prisons. Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, the spokesperson of IHR urged the international community to show strong reaction to the executions in Iran. He said: "The world must not get used to the executions in Iran. Most of the people executed in Iran haven’t been through fair trials and each of the executions must be condemned by the international community".

(source: Iran Human Rights)

*********

Iran to execute 4 men convicted of sodomy

The Iranian judiciary this week upheld the death penalty for 4 men convicted of sodomy, according to the Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA).

The agency distributes reports in Persian from human rights reporters throughout Iran.

According to the report, the four men – named as Saadat Arefi, Vahid Akbari, Javid Akbari, and Houshmand Akbari, all from the city of Charam in Iran’s remote southeastern province of Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad – were convicted of sodomy (“lavat” in Farsi).

Lavat refers to male same-sex relations and in Iranian law is defined as “an act of congress between males whether in the form of penetration or the rubbing of thighs.”

Under the Iranian legal system, which is based on Shi’a Islamic law but retains aspects of civil law, eight crimes including murder, rape, drug trafficking and sodomy can be capital offenses.

Under Islamic penal law, sodomy – like rape and adultery – is a “hadd” crime (from the Arabic word meaning “limit”). In cases where penetration has occurred, and where both partners are “mature, of sound mind, and acted of free will,” lavat is punishable by death, usually hanging.

Human rights and gay activists slammed the ruling.

In an email to The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday, David Keyes, executive director of the NGO Advancing Human Rights, wrote: “When the Iranian president came to New York, he said there were no gays in Iran, but four men are about to be hung in Iran for being gay. Putting someone to death for their sexual preference tells you everything you need to know about the Iranian theocracy.”

UK gay online media outlet Pink News cited Iranian human rights lawyer Mehri Jafari as saying he was “horrified and saddened” by the events. “Not only with regards to the execution which is about to take place, but the fact that is beyond our control,” he said.

Jafari noted that the province where the 4 defendants are from, Kohgiluyeh and Boyer- Ahmad, is one of the most undeveloped in Iran.

“It is obvious that a lack of access to lawyers and a fair trial can be considered a serious issue in this case,” he said. “After this announcement it is very likely that the execution will be carried out soon, and the remote location makes it difficult to exert any influence on the process.”

Stuart Appelbaum, a leading US gay rights activists and head of the Jewish Labor Committee, called for protests against the Iranian court ruling.

“Civilized people throughout the world must stand up and let their voices be heard about this barbarism and inhumanity – regardless of their views on gay rights.

“We must demand that Iran prevent these murders from occurring. Anything less diminishes our own humanity,” Appelbaum told the Post.

Gay Israeli journalist Yoav Sivan told the Post that European countries should “show leadership” about Tehran’s treatment of homosexuals.

Jayson Littman, founder of the gay pro-Israel organization Out! for Israel called on the the international LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) activist community to highlight “the persecution of LGBT people in all areas of the Middle East, specifically Iran,” and to help gay Iranians fleeing the regime find asylum in the West.

(source: Jerusalem Post)

******************

Disses and Death Threats----Rapper in Germany Fears for Life after Fatwa; Cologne-based rapper Najafi has drawn the wrath of Shiite Muslims after publishing a song that appeared to make fun of the 10th imam. Following a fatwa by an Iranian ayatollah, he has received death threats, and there is a $100,000 bounty on his head. Now he is under police protection but insists he will keep making music.

It's every rapper's dream: You stick it to the world, not caring what people think or say about you. If they hate you, they should go ahead and diss you, the more the better. No one can tell you what to do. After all, isn't that what rap is all about?

That dream came true last week for an Iranian rapper living in exile in Cologne. But in the tough reality of life, the dream has turned into a nightmare for Shahin Najafi. Najafi rapped about a man who has been dead 1,143 years: the 10th imam, Ali al-Hadi al-Naqi. He implored the imam to return to modern-day Iran to sort out the regime there. Of course, to a certain extent he also poked fun at the imam -- the sort of thing a rapper does in a world that's becoming more and more difficult to provoke. Najafi also designed an image for YouTube: a dome of a mosque in the shape of a women's breast, with the nipple at the very top.

He wanted to be provocative. It was rap, after all. The song's message was hard-hitting and crass.

What he provoked, however, was not the usual outcry on the Internet, but a response from the Grand Ayatollah Lotfollah Safi Golpayegani in the Iranian city of Qom. It was a religious opinion, one that Persian newspapers have turned into headlines, albeit with a few weeks' delay. The ayatollah expressed himself in broad terms, not even mentioning Najafi by name. But anyone who wants to can easily interpret the ayatollah's opinion as a call to murder. And that is now Najafi's problem, because there are many who want to read it that way.

The Next Salman Rushdie

Hardly anything can become as emotionally charged in the cultural struggle between the enlightened and the orthodox as an apostasy fatwa practically asking for somebody's execution. Hardly anything is as capable of stimulating emotions and the masses. And, for this reason, hardly anything is more likely to be used as justification for a propaganda war where both sides are convinced they are right. The West wants to defend freedom of expression, while the radical religious culture wants to defend its faith.

Whether or not this was indeed the intention of the ayatollah from Qom, Najafi has been a target since last week. He is the next Salman Rushdie. He must now fear for his life and give up his old way of living. He is the next supposed heretic against whom hatred can be channeled and who can be used to stir up hatred. And he is the next living martyr for fundamental liberal values, the freedom of art and the tolerance of dissenters. Last week, after the Iranian media had taken up the case on such a large scale, the American and the Israeli media followed suit.

Last Friday, Najafi was under police protection in an undisclosed location in Germany. Officials at the Interior Ministry of the western state of North Rhine-Westphalia said tersely that the situation is seen as "very serious."

3 days earlier, the musician had gone to the police in Cologne and filed a criminal complaint against the grand ayatollah, for incitement to commit murder. The police launched an investigation and advised Najafi to go into hiding overnight. What followed was a telephone marathon among various police and intelligence agencies discussing how serious the perceived threat was, always with the same outcome: that Najafi needed personal protection immediately. He has been under protection since then and is only accepting phone calls at prearranged times set up by his manager.

Bounty on the Internet

"My security is being taken care of," he says, speaking with a strong Persian accent, but notes that there is nothing more he can say about the issue. He is now living in an exile within an exile. At least he managed to take along his guitar, although now he can only play it for himself. He was forced to cancel his planned European tour.

"At first I thought it was nonsense. I couldn't believe it. Only when I saw the $100,000 (€77,000) bounty on my head on the Internet did I truly understand that this was serious," he says. One can tell by his voice how stunned he is.

The song that has turned his life into a nightmare has been making the rounds among young people in Iran for weeks. It's being secretly passed on by those who had pinned their hopes on the green movement three years ago, hopes for an end to the regime and an opening to the West. When those hopes were dashed, all that these people had left was the underground culture. It's where Najafi has a name and where his audience comes from, even though -- or perhaps because -- he left his country in 2005, after singing a satirical song called "I Have a Beard." But the mullahs weren't laughing, and they sentenced Najafi to three years in prison and 100 lashes. But he managed to escape before the sentence was carried out.

And now this song. It's called "Naqi," in reference to the name of the 10th imam, Ali al-Hadi al-Naqi, born in Medina in 829. According to legend, he died in 868 after being poisoned. For devout Shiites, the 10th imam is a model of virtue, wisdom and the willingness to make sacrifices. Like all of the so-called Twelve Imams, he is seen as a direct descendant of the Prophet Muhammad. An incident on Feb. 22, 2006 shows how holy his memory is to the Shiites. On that day, Sunnis in the Iraqi city of Samarra blew up the mosque containing the grave of the imam. It marked the beginning of the Iraqi civil war, which claimed more than 10,000 lives.

When it comes to the imam, the fanatics are not to be trifled with. Nevertheless, Najafi clearly relished calling upon the imam in his song, which is perhaps comparable with one of the most famous songs in pop history, Janis Joplin's "Mercedes Benz," in which the singer asks the Lord to buy her a Mercedes Benz. In the Western hemisphere, it's a great line. But for many a devout Muslim, it's a display of the sort of nonchalance that deserves death.

Global Death Sentence

Najafi's lyrics are ambiguous, which is typical of Persian writings, jokes and poems, which are filled with innuendo and double or even triple meanings. At first, "Naqi" sounds like an appeal to the 10th imam, a plea for help. At the same time, the verses blend the sacred and the profane in such a disrespectful manner that it quickly becomes clear that the author is taking neither the imam nor the religion seriously.

In his verses, for example, Najafi pokes fun at a "cardboard Khomeini" and swears by everything under the sun, from Viagra to pita bread to national pride and honor. He throws it all into a pot, mixes it up and ends up with an all-encompassing critique of the regime -- not just of the mullahs and the state religion, but also of everything that, in Najafi's view, is going wrong in Iran.

From the regime's perspective, however, the only one who is in the wrong is Najafi. On April 23, the 93-year-old cleric Lotfollah Safi Golpayegani was asked in Qom what his judgment was of "a few people who consist primarily of anti-revolutionaries living abroad" who were "insulting and disparaging" the imam. Safi Golpayegani is one of the country's 19 grand ayatollahs, a man who issues decisions on religious controversies, but who is also a loyal supporter of the Islamic revolution in Iran. He replied: If they have disparaged and insulted the honored person, they are apostates.

If, the ayatollah said. He didn't say that Najafi had done such a thing. In fact, it isn't entirely clear whether he was actually thinking of Najafi when he made his pronouncement. Nevertheless, an apostate can be subject to the death penalty. And sure enough, the video accompanying the song had hardly appeared on YouTube in early May before Iranian newspapers loyal to the regime suddenly remembered the ayatollah's vague declaration -- and turned it into a death sentence, one that is valid worldwide.

'Najafi Is in Mortal Danger'

It makes the whole world a dangerous place for Najafi. "Grand Ayatollah Golpayegani is an important religious authority. For his devotees, his fatwa is compulsory," says Ralph Ghadban, who has been an Islam scholar at the Protestant University of Applied Science in Berlin for many years. The consequence, Ghadban explains, is that "if one of these religious devotees lives in Germany, he is compelled to carry out the fatwa immediately. That's when the situation becomes very serious."

Rauf Ceylan, an expert on Islam in the western city of Osnabrück, also sees the situation as extremely explosive. "Najafi is in mortal danger. There are also radicalized Shiites here, and it can't be ruled out that individual perpetrators could make it their business to carry out the fatwa."

Assassination Order

This was presumably the case in the Azerbaijani capital Baku last November, when an unknown assailant stabbed journalist Rafiq Tagi six times. Tagi died in a hospital four days later, but he still had enough strength to say whom he held responsible for the attack: Iranian agents and Muslim fundamentalists. He had written an article in 2006 in which he argued that Islam and democracy were incompatible. But he had also included a few references to the Prophet Muhammad that were perceived as critical. Soon afterwards, several Iranian ayatollahs issued fatwas in which Tagi was sentenced to death.

Salman Rushdie did survive, but after the assassination order was issued, his life no longer resembled the life the writer had led -- and loved -- until then. On Feb. 14, 1989, the Iranian revolutionary leader Ayatollah Khomeini called for Rushdie's assassination, for the alleged crime of blasphemy. The fatwa was triggered by the novel "The Satanic Verses," in which Rushdie described the Prophet Muhammad as a power seeker, and also allegedly insulted his wives.

A bounty of several million dollars was placed on the author's head. He lived under police protection for years, and a Japanese translator of his book was murdered. No German publishing house dared to publish "The Satanic Verses" on its own. Only when several publishers joined forces to form the "Article 19" publishing house was the book published, under the sponsorship of many prominent individuals, including author Hans Magnus Enzensberger and politician Norbert Blüm.

For years, Rushdie lived with the strictest of security precautions, always in the expectation that every day would be his last. Then, in 1998, the Iranian government distanced itself from the death threat, but in that same year a Tehran foundation increased the bounty. It wasn't until June of 2001 that then President Mohammad Khatami described the Rushdie affair as "completely finished." But is it really? Rushdie still receives threats regularly, without knowing whether they are meant seriously.

Validating Prejudices

And now Najafi is in the same position. Agitators on the Internet are already wishing him death and eternal damnation, and the wave is only beginning to build. On several Facebook pages, users have called for his execution. The calls are accompanied by various provocative images, including a photo of the rapper's head in crosshairs, and a doctored image of a bullet hole in his neck and another of his head mounted on the outline of a dog.

On the other side are the cohorts of outraged bloggers who formed their opinions about the Islamic world long ago: the Tundra Tabloids, a Scandinavian blog critical of Islam, conservative Catholic websites and, of course, the Republican bloggers aligned with the Tea Party in the United States. They too are using the Najafi case as a model and a means of validating their prejudices, and the wave they have triggered is also beginning to build.

Who Najafi is, and what he wants, isn't even important anymore. For both sides, the rapper from Cologne is merely a pawn in a chess game. The more he moves to the center of the board, the more dangerous his life becomes. His last defense is now the police.

No one, including Najafi, knows how this will continue in the long term. In fact, Najafi is so much in the dark about the future that he doesn't even worry about it at the moment. Until now, he was an Iranian exile who could make ends meet as a musician, because his fellow Iranians in America and Europe supported him, and he was able to go on tour and earn money. And now? Should he stop being a performer? Friends have told him that prisoners have scribbled some of the lyrics of his songs on prison walls in Iran, says Najafi. And now Najafi himself is in a prison of sorts.

'I Can't Hide'

"I'll keep going. I know that," he told SPIEGEL. "I can't hide. I just have to be careful. I have to perform. I'm a musician. But that's a problem now."

Is he afraid for his life? Najafi says nothing.

Does the fatwa reach all the way to Germany? "How should I know?" he asks, taking a deep breath. "They don't joke around." Then there is a long moment of silence on the line.

(source: Der Spiegel)

SAUDI ARABIA----execution

Saudi man is beheaded after killing a Bangladeshi national in the Kingdom, brining the total number of executions this year to 26

Saudi authorities on Thursday beheaded a man for murdering 1 Bangladeshi man and stabbing another during a bid to rob them, the interior ministry said.

Sultan al-Sahli, a Saudi, was convicted of killing one of the Bangladeshis with a blow to the head, and stabbing and wounding the other, said the ministry, cited by state-run SPA news agency.

Sahli wanted to steal their mobile phones and money, it said.

His beheading brings to 26 the total number of executions in the ultra-conservative kingdom so far this year, according to an AFP tally based on official reports.

Under the AFP count, at least 76 people were beheaded in 2011 in Saudi Arabia, while rights group Amnesty International put the number of executions last year at 79.

The death penalty in Saudi Arabia applies to a wide range of offences including rape, apostasy, armed robbery and drug trafficking, as well as murder, as stipulated by Islamic Sharia law.

(source: Ahram.org)

CHINA:

In China, British expatriate's death prompts calls for open trial-----Friends and foes say Gu Kailai, the high-profile suspect in Neil Heywood's death in Chongqing, deserves an open trial that follows the rule of law.

The country's most famous murder suspect may have laid bare divisions in Chinese society, but friends and foes alike are united in their demand that her trial be a test case for justice in a system notorious for secrecy and flouting of the rule of law.

More than a month after state media announced that Gu Kailai, the 53-year-old wife of ousted Politburo member Bo Xilai, was under suspicion in the death of a British business associate whose body was found in a hotel room in November, her family has had no word of her whereabouts, an old family friend said.

"The family is in a bad position. [The government] didn't tell them where she is. They don't know what will happen to her," said the friend, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject. He said he saw Gu's 90-year-old mother and a sister last week.

The friend said he was concerned that Gu, who is accused of poisoning Neil Heywood, doesn't have a lawyer and may not be able to mount a defense. "I hope China will follow the law and let the world know what is happening with this case," he said.

Under Chinese law, formal charges should be filed within 30 days of a suspect being detained. However, as a member of the Communist Party, Gu is probably held under a secretive form of extralegal detention known as shuanggui, in which suspects are first investigated by the party disciplinary committee before the case is referred to regular judicial authorities.

Chen Ziming, an activist during the 1989 pro-democracy demonstrations at Tiananmen Square and now a prominent intellectual in Beijing, says there is rare agreement across the political spectrum about how Gu should be handled.

"For once there is a common cause between the left and the pro-democracy camp, that this case should be dealt with in open court," said Chen, who also wrote an editorial on the subject. "What Bo Xilai did … was a threat to the rule of law, but there is no reason his family should suffer retribution. To the contrary, her trial should serve as a model."

One reason for the delays in Gu's case might be the parallel judicial system, known as shuanggui, used for high-ranking party members who are usually held in guesthouses or hotels, more pleasant conditions than those of conventional defendants, but not allowed access to lawyers or family.

Liu Xiaoyuan, a lawyer for the dissident artist Ai Weiwei, is among those who have called for an open trial in postings on Twitter and Chinese microblogs.

"This is a very important case for the Chinese public. She is the wife of a party official and the victim is a foreigner," Liu said. "Now it is already over 30 days since she was detained, and there should be formal charges filed."

The irony is that the people now expressing concern for Gu were vocal critics of the Maoist campaigns that her husband led in the city of Chongqing, where he was party secretary. Li Zhuang, a prominent Beijing lawyer who was persecuted by Bo after defending suspects in Chongqing, suggested last month that he would be willing to come to her defense.

"It would make people appreciate the role of lawyers in a modern and civilized world," Li wrote on his microblog.

Trials are supposed to be open in China, although the public is frequently excluded when prosecutors cite national security or privacy.

Hardly any information has been released publicly in what is China'smost sensational murder investigation. Heywood, 41, a longtime expatriate married to a Chinese woman, was found dead in a Chongqing hotel room. His death was initially attributed to a heart attack triggered by excessive alcohol consumption, and his body was cremated, with the ashes repatriated to London for burial.

But in early February, a top police official, Wang Lijun, fled to a U.S. Consulate claiming that Heywood had been poisoned and that Bo had tried to cover up the killing because of his wife's involvement. On April 10, the official New China News Agency reported that Gu and a staff member in her household, Zhang Xiaojun, "are suspected of committing murder and have been transferred to relevant judicial departments."

The official dispatch said there had been a business dispute, while leaked reports in other Chinese-language media said that Heywood was helping Gu funnel money out of the country in violation of Chinese law.

Gu's friend said her family suspected that the murder case had been concocted by Wang Lijun. He said the family knew Heywood, who had helped Bo and Gu's son, Bo Guagua, get into Harrow, a British boarding school. But no, he said, "they don't believe she killed Neil Heywood."

A murder conviction in China usually carries the death penalty.

Gu was a prominent figure in her own right, a lawyer who had headed a large practice representing foreign investors in China. Her late father, Gu Jingsheng, a general, was one of Mao Tse-tung's early supporters.

At her family's home in Beijing, a traditional walled compound behind a large red gate, uniformed soldiers of the People's Liberation Army on Tuesday said the house was under "military control" and visitors could not enter. The family hasn't commented publicly on Gu's case.

"They are from the elite," Chen said. "They are hoping they can rely on their connections and the older generation of leaders to help them, but if they want the public's voice in their support, we will be there."

(source: Los Angeles Times)

MALAYSIA:

Mexican brothers get death sentence

3 Mexican brothers were sentenced to death on drug trafficking charges following their 2008 arrest at a methamphetamine factory.

The Gonzalez Villarreals -- Luis Alfonso, 44, Simon, 37 and Jose Regino, 33 -- were sentenced to death by the Kuala Lumpur High Court along with a Malaysian and a Singaporean.

The suspects were arrested at a factory in southern Malaysia, with police seizing almost 30 kilograms (66 pounds) of methamphetamine and chemicals used to produce the drug.

"The court finds all 5 accused are guilty of the charge against them," High Court Judge Mohamed Zawawi Salleh said, announcing the verdict.

"All 5 accused were aware and were involved in the activity of drug making... The offence is serious," he added.

Drug trafficking carries the mandatory death penalty by hanging in Muslim-majority Malaysia, though executions are not made publicly known and activists say few people are thought to have been put to death in recent years.

The lawyers for the 5 men said they would appeal the verdict, which can take years to go through the Court of Appeal and if necessary the Federal Court.

The 3 brothers are believed to be the first Mexicans sentenced to death for drug trafficking in Malaysia.

The 3, wearing jeans, T-shirts and sandals, handcuffed to each other and each carrying their belongings in a white bag, looked ashen faced and shaken after the verdict was read out.

"We are very sad. We thought we are going to be acquitted," the eldest brother, Luis Alfonso, said in Spanish.

Lawyers for the Mexican brothers had argued that the evidence was tampered with.

The accused also testified they were merely workers taken to the drug factory to clean it and were unaware of any illegal activity there.

The 2 others sentenced to death were Malaysian Lee Boon Siah, 47, and Singaporean Lim Hung Wang, 55.

Hundreds of Malaysians and foreigners -- including many from Iran -- are on death row in Malaysia, mostly for drug trafficking.

(source: Agence France-Presse)

MAY 16, 2012:

TEXAS:

The Wrong Carlos: Texas' Fatal Error----Groundbreaking Columbia law school study sets out in shocking detail the flaws that led to Carlos DeLuna's execution in 1989.

A few years ago, Antonin Scalia, 1 of the 9 justices on the US supreme court, made a bold statement. There has not been, he said, "a single case - not one - in which it is clear that a person was executed for a crime he did not commit. If such an event had occurred - the innocent's name would be shouted from the rooftops."

Scalia may have to eat his words. It is now clear that a person was executed for a crime he did not commit, and his name - Carlos DeLuna - is being shouted from the rooftops of the Columbia Human Rights Law Review. The august journal has cleared its entire spring edition, doubling its normal size to 436 pages, to carry an extraordinary investigation by a Columbia law school professor and his students.

The book sets out in precise and shocking detail how an innocent man was sent to his death on 8 December 1989, courtesy of the state of Texas. Los Tocayos Carlos: An Anatomy of a Wrongful Execution, is based on six years of intensive detective work by Professor James Liebman and 12 students.

Starting in 2004, they meticulously chased down every possible lead in the case, interviewing more than 100 witnesses, perusing about 900 pieces of source material and poring over crime scene photographs and legal documents that, when stacked, stand over 10ft high.

What they discovered stunned even Liebman, who, as an expert in America's use of capital punishment, was well versed in its flaws. "It was a house of cards. We found that everything that could go wrong did go wrong," he says.

Carlos DeLuna was arrested, aged 20, on 4 February 1983 for the brutal murder of a young woman, Wanda Lopez. She had been stabbed once through the left breast with an 8in lock-blade buck knife which had cut an artery causing her to bleed to death.

From the moment of his arrest until the day of his death by lethal injection six years later, DeLuna consistently protested he was innocent. He went further - he said that though he hadn't committed the murder, he knew who had. He even named the culprit: a notoriously violent criminal called Carlos Hernandez.

The 2 Carloses were not just namesakes - or tocayos in Spanish, as referenced in the title of the Columbia book. They were the same height and weight, and looked so alike that they were sometimes mistaken for twins. When Carlos Hernandez's lawyer saw pictures of the two men, he confused one for the other, as did DeLuna's sister Rose.

At his 1983 trial, Carlos DeLuna told the jury that on the day of the murder he'd run into Hernandez, who he'd known for the previous five years. The 2 men, who both lived in the southern Texas town of Corpus Christi, stopped off at a bar. Hernandez went over to a gas station, the Shamrock, to buy something, and when he didn't return DeLuna went over to see what was going on.

DeLuna told the jury that he saw Hernandez inside the Shamrock wrestling with a woman behind the counter. DeLuna said he was afraid and started to run. He had his own police record for sexual assault - though he had never been known to possess or use a weapon - and he feared getting into trouble again.

"I just kept running because I was scared, you know." When he heard the sirens of police cars screeching towards the gas station he panicked and hid under a pick-up truck where, 40 minutes after the killing, he was arrested.

At the trial, DeLuna's defence team told the jury that Carlos Hernandez, not DeLuna, was the murderer. But the prosecutors ridiculed that suggestion. They told the jury that police had looked for a "Carlos Hernandez" after his name had been passed to them by DeLuna's lawyers, without success. They had concluded that Hernandez was a fabrication, a "phantom" who simply did not exist. The chief prosecutor said in summing up that Hernandez was a "figment of DeLuna's imagination".

Four years after DeLuna was executed, Liebman decided to look into the DeLuna case as part of a project he was undertaking into the fallibility of the death penalty. He asked a private investigator to spend one day - just one day - looking for signs of the elusive Carlos Hernandez.

By the end of that single day the investigator had uncovered evidence that had eluded scores of Texan police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers and judges over the six years between DeLuna's arrest and execution. Carlos Hernandez did indeed exist.

Liebman's investigator tracked down within a few hours a woman who was related to both the Carloses. She supplied Hernandez's date of birth, which in turn allowed the unlocking of Hernandez's criminal past as the case rapidly unravelled.

With the help of his students, Liebman began to piece together a profile of Hernandez. He was an alcoholic with a history of violence, who was always in the company of his trusted companion: a lock-blade buck knife.

Over the years he was arrested 39 times, 13 of them for carrying a knife, and spent his entire adult life on parole. Yet he was almost never put in prison for his crimes - a disparity that Liebman believes was because he was used as a police informant. "Its hard to understand what happened without that piece of the puzzle," Liebman says.

Several of the crimes that Hernandez committed involved hold-ups of Corpus Christi gas stations. Just a few days before the Shamrock murder he was found cowering outside a nearby 7-Eleven wielding a knife - a detail never disclosed to DeLuna's defence.

He also had a history of violence towards women. He was twice arrested on suspicion of the 1979 murder of a woman called Dahlia Sauceda, who was stabbed and then had an "X" carved into her back. The first arrest was made four years before DeLuna's trial and the 2nd while DeLuna was on death row, yet the connection between this Hernandez and the "phantom" presented to DeLuna's jury was never made.

In October 1989, just two months before DeLuna was executed, Hernandez was setenced to 10 years' imprisonment for attempting to kill with a knife another woman called Dina Ybanez. Even then, no one thought to alert the courts or Texas state as it prepared to put DeLuna to death.

Hernandez himself frequently told people that he was a knife murderer. He made numerous confessions to having killed Wanda Lopez, the crime for which DeLuna was executed, joking with friends and relatives that his "tocayo" had taken the fall. His admissions were so widely broadcast that even Corpus Christi police detectives came to hear about them within weeks of the incident at the Shamrock gas station.

Yet this was the same Carlos Hernandez who prosecutors told the jury did not exist. This was the figment of Carlos DeLuna's imagination.

Many other glaring discrepancies also stand out in the DeLuna case. He was put on death row largely on the eyewitness testimony of one man, Kevan Baker, who had seen the fight inside the Shamrock and watched the attacker flee the scene.

Yet when Baker was interviewed 20 years later, he said that he hadn't been that sure about the identification as he had trouble telling one Hispanic person apart from another.

Then there was the crime-scene investigation. Detectives failed to carry out or bungled basic forensic procedures that might have revealed information about the killer. No blood samples were collected and tested for the culprit's blood type.

Fingerprinting was so badly handled that no useable fingerprints were taken. None of the items found on the floor of the Shamrock - a cigarette stub, chewing gum, a button, comb and beer cans - were forensically examined for saliva or blood.

There was no scraping of the victim's fingernails for traces of the attacker's skin. When Liebman and his students studied digitally enhanced copies of crime scene photographs, they were amazed to find the footprint from a man's shoe imprinted in a pool of Lopez's blood on the floor - yet no effort was made to measure it.

"There it was," says Liebman. "The murderer had left his calling card at the scene, but it was never used."

Even the murder weapon, the knife, was not properly examined, though it was covered in blood and flesh.

Other photographs show Lopez's blood splattered up to three feet high on the walls of the Shamrock counter. Yet when DeLuna's clothes and shoes were tested for traces of blood, not a single microscopic drop was found. The prosecution said it must have been washed away by the rain.

There appeared to have been an unseemly scramble to wrap up the crime scene. Less than two hours after the murder happened, the police chief in charge of the homicide investigation ordered all detectives to quit the Shamrock and allowed its owner to wash it down, sweeping away vital evidence that could have saved a man's life.

The exceptionally lax treatment of evidence continued even beyond the grave. When Liebman asked to see all the stored evidence in the case, so that he could subject it to the DNA testing that was not available to investigators in 1983, he was told that it had all disappeared.

Having lived and breathed this case for so many years, Liebman says the most shocking thing about it was its ordinariness. "This wasn't the trial of OJ Simpson. It was an obscure case, the kind that could involve anybody. Maybe those are the cases where miscarriages of justice happen, the routine everyday cases where nobody thinks enough about the victim, let alone the defendant."

The groundbreaking work that the Columbia law school has done comes at an important juncture for the death penalty in America. Connecticut last month became the 5th state in as many years to repeal the ultimate punishment and support for abolition is gathering steam.

In that context, Liebman hopes his exhaustive work will encourage Americans to think more deeply about what is done in their name. All the evidence the Columbia team has gathered on the DeLuna case has been placed on the internet with open public access.

"We've provided as complete a set of information as we can about a pretty average case, to let the public make its own judgment. I believe they will make the judgment that in this kind of case there's just too much risk."

As for the tocayos Carloses, Carlos Hernandez died of natural causes in a Texas prison in May 1999, having been jailed for assaulting a neighbour with a 9in knife.

Carlos DeLuna commented on his own ending in a television interview a couple of years before his execution. "Maybe one day the truth will come out," he said from behind reinforced glass. "I'm hoping it will. If I end up getting executed for this, I don't think it's right."

(source: readersupportednews.org)

CALIFORNIA:

Appeals for Last 2 Inmates Executed in California Cost $1.76 Million

Records obtained by the Bay Area News Group in California show that the appeal costs for the last 2 men executed in the state were $1.76 million. At that rate, the cost of carrying out the executions of the 724 inmates still on death row could exceed $700 million if the death penalty is not repealed in November. Records show that the state and federal appeals for Clarence Ray Allen, the oldest and most recent death row inmate executed in the state, cost more than $761,000. Appeals for Stanley “Tookie” Williams cost the public nearly $1 million. These costs do not include the state's expenses in defending the convictions, the trial costs, or the extra costs attributed to death-row incarceration. If the death penalty is repealed by ballot initiative in November, some of the money saved will be used for pursuing unsolved cases. Moreover, those convicted of murder will be required to work and make compensation to victims' families. Carlos Moreno, who reviewed such appeals as both a California Supreme Court justice and Los Angeles federal judge said it would not be easy to reduce the costs: "That's what it costs," Moreno said. "I've seen it. I don't think we're overly generous." Jeanne Woodford, a former warden at the San Quentin prison where death row is housed, said, "We're spending this amount of money for a handful of people and it doesn't really do anything for public safety." (source: Death Penalty Information Center)

OHIO:

Critics accuse Ohio prosecutor of using death penalty threat as bargaining chip

Within days of a drug-related slaying in suburban Cleveland, six men were indicted on charges that carried the possibility of a death sentence. 6 months later, all had been allowed to plead to lesser charges, including four who received probation and never went to prison.

In short, the men quickly went from facing the possibility of being strapped to a gurney and having 5 grams of pentobarbital injected into their veins, to prison sentences more typical for robbers and thieves.

“It probably was a negotiating tool,” said defense attorney Reuben Sheperd, who represented defendant Alex Ford. “You’ll be more motivated than you were in other circumstances.”

Such scenarios are typical in the county home to Cleveland, where prosecutor Bill Mason pursues dozens of offenders on capital charges each year at added expense to taxpayers and at the risk of some defendants ending up on death row for charges that would be minor elsewhere, even as the number of death penalty prosecutions plummets in Ohio and nationwide, according to an analysis of records by The Associated Press.

Elsewhere in Ohio, prosecutors are pursuing only the most heinous crimes as death penalty cases and are refusing to plea bargain, or are using a 2005 law that allows them to seek life with no chance of parole and never place capital punishment on the table.

Mason denies he uses the death penalty as a negotiating tool but also says he never rules out the possibility of lesser charges as more information about a case comes to light.

The 2010 case in the suburb of Parma cost Cuyahoga County taxpayers more than $120,000 — the price of the experts and attorneys appointed because the cases involved the death penalty.

Defense attorneys have long complained about the high number of capital indictments in Cuyahoga County, a practice that precedes Mason but that he continued after first taking office in 2000. But now one of the state’s most conservative and pro-death penalty prosecutors is weighing in.

Joe Deters, prosecutor in Hamilton County, renewed questions about Cuyahoga County’s approach during meetings of an Ohio Supreme Court task force. The group, which meets again Thursday , is looking for ways to improve the state’s death penalty law.

“To use the death penalty to force a plea bargain, I think it’s unethical to do that,” Deters said in an interview.

Hamilton County, home to Cincinnati, has sent the most inmates to Ohio’s death row — 61 over 30 years — though the county has indicted fewer than 200 people in 3 decades. Deters doesn’t accept plea bargains once he decides to pursue a death penalty case.

Mason says a committee of assistant prosecutors reviews the evidence of each death penalty case and encourages defense attorneys to produce reasons that could weigh against the death penalty.

“When we seek the death penalty it is not to secure a plea bargain, but instead to equally apply the law,” Mason said.

Despite the higher number of capital indictments, Mason’s record of winning death sentences is no better than other counties, some of them smaller than Cuyahoga, with about 1.3 million residents.

(source: Associated Press)

NEW MEXICO:

Astorga sentence testimony gets personal

Witnesses are on the stand again in the Michael Astorga death penalty hearing offering starkly different opinions on whether he should live or die.

But these weren't just any witnesses: They were family members of slain Deputy James McGrane Jr. asking the jury to execute his killer and friends and family of Astorga who want his life spared.

A District Court jury in Albuquerque convicted Astorga of the murder in 2010, and a new jury is now will determine whether he is sentenced to death or to life in prison.

The sentencing hearing was moved to Santa Fe due to the extensive media attention given the case in Bernalillo County.

Rita and James McGrane Sr. and their daughter spoke about the night in 2006 when Astorga killed the Bernalillo County sheriff's deputy during a nighttime traffic stop near Tijeras.

McGrane's father testified that when he saw the sheriff at his door, no one had to tell him what had happened.

He then had to tell his wife and daughter.

His son, he added, had been proud to be a New Mexico State Police officer before joining the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Department.

Ida Tingley, McGrane's sister, said her brother's death changed the course of their lives forever leaving pain and grief that never go away.

Rita McGrane described James--Jimmy, she calls him--as a happy and loving son and that she visits his grave several times a week. She continues to have nightmares of her son dead on the highway, she added.

After that, the defense started calling its own witnesses whose testimony they hope will save Astorga from death by lethal injection.

A private investigator hired to look into his background told the court Astorga's younger years were turbulent, that he was born to a 16-year-old mother. He had almost no male role models growing up and was mostly raised by his grandmother, investigator Tom Garrity testified.

He also was placed in special education from kindergarten on and was married while completing high school.

Friends and family of Astorga also testified late Wednesday morning talking about how he helped a friend's family when it was in financial trouble. His step-mother Rosemary Astorga blew Astorga a kiss as she took the stand to tell the jury everyone is human and makes mistakes.

Astorga's current wife, Marcella, testified the elder son is becoming old enough to wonder what's going old enough wonder what's up with his father and why they are separated by glass when they visit.

She also said their last name was causing their son trouble in school, and that the principal had gone out of her way to attack her son. At that, point, however, District Judge Neil Candelaria stopped her from saying anything more on that topic.

When her testimony finished, Candelaria recessed court for lunch.

Additional testimony is scheduled for the afternoon session.

(source: KRQE News)

TEXAS:

New Proof of an Old Fear: Execution of the Innocent

The State of Texas, long the nation's leader in executions, has now earned the dubious title of the state most likely to execute the innocent. In 2004, Texas executed Cameron Todd Willingham, despite compelling evidence that he was actually innocent of the arson which caused the death of his three small children. Now, newly assembled evidence suggests that Carlos DeLuna, executed by Texas in 1989, was also innocent. A team of researchers from Columbia Law School today released a new report about DeLuna's case, Los Tocayos Carlos: An Anatomy of a Wrongful Conviction. The full report, along with video clips and interviews about the case, are available at the Columbia Human Rights Law Review's website.

In 1983, Wanda Lopez was a 24-year-old single mother working at a gas station in Corpus Christi, Texas, when she was tragically stabbed to death. The central proof against DeLuna was the testimony of a single eyewitness (mistaken eyewitness identifications are the single largest cause of wrongful convictions). In DeLuna's case, the eyewitness described the murderer as a Hispanic man with a full mustache. Although the eyewitness identified DeLuna — who had no mustache — after DeLuna was arrested, the witness later admitted that he was uncertain about the identification.

Worse than the mistaken identification is the failure of the police to investigate evidence pointing to a different killer, and the failure of the police and prosecutors to turn over or even acknowledge the evidence existed. From the time of his arrest until the time of his execution, DeLuna insisted on his innocence, saying that the crime was committed by an acquaintance named Carlos Hernandez. Hernandez had a long history of violent knife assaults against women and had bragged that he killed Wanda Lopez and that his "tocayo" (meaning a person with the same name) took the fall. The two men looked so much alike that even friends and family couldn't easily tell their photos apart.

Although the police had leads that pointed to Hernandez — who later died in prison — as the killer, they failed to give that information to the defense. The prosecution argued in court that Hernandez was just a figment of DeLuna's imagination. The new report documents these failures and others, and presents compelling evidence of Hernandez's guilt. It shows the numerous systemic breakdowns that allowed Texas to convict, and then execute, an innocent man.

Get Involved

End the Death Penalty

Act Now

The problem of executing the innocent is not confined to Texas, as anyone who followed the Troy Davis case knows only too well. As Justice Antonin Scalia has bluntly told us, we cannot rely on our Constitution to protect the innocent from execution. The only guarantee that this tragedy will not be repeated is to end the death penalty.

(source: ACLU Blog)

***************************

A Routine Execution in Texas

Carlos DeLuna, who was executed in 1989 by the state of Texas, was almost certainly wrongly convicted of stabbing a young woman to death with a knife in a gas station robbery in Corpus Christi. Carlos Hernandez, who died in a Texas prison while serving time for stabbing someone else, almost certainly killed the young woman and repeatedly told others that he had committed the murder.

This case is the subject of an extraordinary project at Columbia Law School, which this week released a book-length account — called “Los Tocayos Carlos,” or the namesake Carlos — detailing the errors in the investigation and prosecution of Mr. DeLuna from the moment of his arrest.

Texas has executed 482 people since it reinstated the death penalty in 1982, 4 times the number of any other state. A grievous injustice was very likely done in the DeLuna case. But the errors documented by Prof. James Liebman and his team are routinely found in other capital cases in Texas and other states.

In 2006, The Chicago Tribune presented evidence casting doubt on Mr. DeLuna’s conviction, based largely on Professor Liebman’s initial research. This account, based on new evidence and a 30-month inquiry, supports an even firmer conclusion that Texas executed an innocent man.

It shows grossly inadequate police work that missed critical evidence; unreliable evidence, like witnesses’ patently unfair identification of Mr. DeLuna as he was handcuffed in a police car; repeated prosecutorial misconduct, like failure to turn over exonerating evidence; and incompetent counsel, who did scant investigaton to find support for their client’s claim of innocence and put on no mitigating evidence at the penalty phase of the trial to avoid a death sentence.

Carroll Pickett, a chaplain in the Texas prison system, presided over Mr. DeLuna’s execution among the 95 executions that he witnessed. After he left the prison system, he declared his opposition to capital punishment as “a blight on our society” and a failure as a form of sanction. The new examination of Mr. DeLuna’s case provides further evidence that he is right.

(source: Editorial, New York Times)

OHIO:

Death penalty for Ohio man in triple stabbing----A 3-judge panel on Tuesday handed down a death penalty verdict for an Ohio man after he pleaded guilty to killing a woman he lived with and her 2 children on Thanksgiving Day in 2010.

A 3-judge panel on Tuesday handed down a death penalty verdict for an Ohio man after he pleaded guilty to killing a woman he lived with and her 2 children on Thanksgiving Day in 2010.

The Franklin County death verdict for Caron Montgomery of Columbus was the county's first in a decade and also a relatively rare case of a death penalty verdict following a guilty plea.

The panel will formally sentence Montgomery to death May 22. On Tuesday, the judges found that the circumstances of the crime outweighed evidence that Montgomery presented as to why he should be spared, and that a death sentence was the appropriate punishment.

The 3-judge panel "followed the law and rendered their verdict based upon the overwhelming evidence presented," Prosecutor Ron O'Brien said in a statement. Montgomery's attorney, Scott Weisman, declined to comment.

Montgomery, 38, pleaded guilty earlier this month to multiple counts of aggravated murder and single counts of murder and domestic violence.

Police found Tia Hendricks and her 2-year-old and 10-year-old children stabbed to death inside Hendricks' Columbus apartment the day after the killings.

At least 7 defendants have received the death penalty after pleading guilty before such panels over the past 30 years in Ohio, including another Franklin County man, Michael Turner, who pleaded guilty in 2002 to killing his estranged wife and her boyfriend.

That's compared to dozens of cases where 3-judge panels found defendants guilty and then sentenced them to death.

Turner remains on death row. 4 of the 7 defendants who pleaded guilty have since been executed.

(source: Associated Press)

ARIZONA----stay of imminent execution//new execution date set

Arizona's high court issues stay of execution

Questions about the competency of Gov. Jan Brewer's recent appointees to the state clemency board prompted the Arizona Supreme Court to stay today's scheduled execution of death-row prisoner Samuel Lopez, saying he is entitled to a fair hearing before the board.

The state high court's decision late Tuesday was not a permanent reprieve for Lopez, who was sentenced to death for the 1986 rape and murder of a Phoenix woman. The justices set a new execution date of June 27, allowing time for issues raised by the recent clemency-board appointments to be worked out.

Lopez's defense team claimed that he was denied a fair clemency hearing on May 7 because three members of the Arizona Board of Executive Clemency were improperly appointed and had not undergone mandatory training.

The high court in its order Tuesday only acknowledged the lack of training and set the new execution date to allow the instruction to take place.

Lopez's attorney walked out of last week's clemency hearing in protest, claiming that the board was not qualified to hear the case. On Monday, a Maricopa County Superior Court judge agreed in part and set a July hearing date to examine the matter.

Lopez's attorneys then took their concerns to the Arizona Supreme Court, the only state court that could stop the execution.

Word of the stay came after other motions failed in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Earlier Tuesday, a 3-judge appeals panel denied a motion claiming that Lopez's attorneys had failed to present adequate mitigating evidence during his trials and early appeals.

A separate 3-judge panel of the 9th Circuit criticized the Arizona Department of Corrections for repeatedly altering its manner of execution with each prisoner -- what the judges referred to as a "rolling protocol" -- but a majority did not think it merited a stay of execution. A key issue was the department's apparent inability to insert catheter lines into the arm veins of the condemned prisoners. Generally, when that fails, a doctor inserts a line surgically into an artery in the prisoner's groin.

The judges did not think the lapses in protocol rose to the level of "cruel and unusual punishment" forbidden by the U.S. Constitution. One dissenting appeals judge, however, objected to the secrecy the department maintains in its executions and called on the media to push for access to observe the pre-execution procedures, as has been done in other states.

Lopez's final appeal rested with the Arizona Supreme Court. In addition to raising questions about whether three members of the clemency board were qualified to hear Lopez's case, his attorney alleged that the new board members' appointment interviews had violated Open Meeting Law by taking place behind closed doors and that one member was a lobbyist for a police association that advocates the death penalty.

The Arizona Attorney General's Office maintained that by walking out of the meeting, Lopez's attorney had waived the prisoner's right to the hearing.

In its ruling Tuesday, the Supreme Court focused only on the training issue.

Lopez was convicted of first-degree murder, kidnapping, two counts of sexual assault and burglary. According to court records, on Oct. 29, 1986, Estefana Holmes, 59, was found gagged and blindfolded in her apartment, bloodied and disheveled, as if there had been "a terrible and prolonged struggle." She had been raped and sodomized and stabbed more than 20 times before her throat was slit.

Lopez was sentenced to death in 1987, and though the death sentence was initially overturned on appeal, he was sent back to trial and sentenced to death again.

(source: Arizona Republic)

CONNECTICUT:

Killer of 3 says he considers requesting death

A man on Connecticut's death row for the murder of a suburban mother and her 2 daughters says he believes the only way he will be put to death is if he volunteers for the lethal injection.

Joshua Komisarjevsky, who was condemned to die for a brutal 2007 home invasion, told The Associated Press in an interview that he considers volunteering to be executed on his darkest days, but not on other days.

In the last half-century, Connecticut has executed only one inmate — a serial killer who was put to death in 2005 after voluntarily waiving his appeals.

"I don't think I'll be executed against my will," Komisarjevsky said in his first interview since he was convicted last year. "I think if I volunteer, the state will execute me."

Wearing a yellow prison jumpsuit, Komisarjevsky kept direct eye contact during the one-hour interview Monday, smiling at times as he spoke by telephone from behind a glass window at Northern Correctional Institution in Somers, Conn. He had the same short hair and facial stubble that he had during the trial, but the once-slender inmate has since put on 30 or 40 pounds, which he blamed on depression and lack of movement.

He said he tries not to think about the crime, he suffers no nightmares and has nothing to say to the only survivor of the attack. He said there isn't anything he could say to Dr. William Petit "that will restore the lives lost."

He also declined an opportunity to express remorse for the killings.

"I guess my reaction is not the reaction society expected," Komisarjevsky said.

Cynthia Hawke-Renn, the sister and aunt of the victims' told NBC she wasn't expecting Komisarjevsky to say he was sorry.

"He doesn't have nightmares, but I have nightmares and I can't stop thinking about it," she said. "I wish I could. And I think it's really sad that he doesn't have a conscience and have remorse and apologize to my brother-in-law or my parents."

By turns jovial and introspective, Komisarjevsky made references to an afflicted conscience but said he fills his time in solitary confinement by drawing, watching television and reading and responding to hate mail as well as notes from supporters.

"Some days you're just overwhelmed by the isolation and the difficulties in communicating with loved ones, dealing with your own crisis of conscience," Komisarjevsky said.

Komisarjevsky, 31, was convicted last year in a crime that unsettled notions of suburban safety and featured prominently in Connecticut's death penalty debate.

He and his co-defendant, Steven Hayes, were convicted of killing Jennifer Hawke-Petit and her daughters. Hayes raped and strangled Hawke-Petit, while Komisarjevsky sexually assaulted her 11-year-old daughter, Michaela. Michaela and her 17-year-old sister, Hayley, were tied to their beds and died of smoke inhalation after the house was doused in gas and set on fire.

Last month, Connecticut Gov. Dannel P. Malloy signed a new law that ends the state's death penalty for future crimes, but it does not apply to those already on death row — a provision that makes it possible for Komisarjevsky and Hayes to still face the possibility of death.

"In order for some to swallow this bitter pill, it was inevitable that we would be left out," Komisarjevsky said.

Asked if would consider volunteering to be put to death, Komisarjevsky said: "I have my days. I think everybody on death row has their days. Some days you'd consider it. Some days you don't."

Komisarjevsky's lawyers are expected to file an appeal. But if he waived his appeals, that would remove a major obstacle to execution.

Komisarjevksy said he has not spoken to Hayes, but has seen him passing by on death row, where 11 inmates are each held in individual cells. During separate trials, Komisarjevksy and Hayes each blamed the other for escalating the crime.

"Frankly, we don't have anything to talk about," Komisarjevsky said. "I'm sort of taking the stance let bygones be bygones. I know what I'm culpable for and he knows what he's culpable for."

Among the ways he occupies his time is by drawing. He said one of his works depicts a biblical scene of Daniel in the Lion's Den that he did for a friend.

Komisarjevsky said he gets 2 hours per day of recreation time, but he has a television in his cell that gets several channels including the Spanish-language network Telemundo.

"No hablo espanol, so that doesn't do me much good," Komisarjevsky said with a laugh.

Komisarjevsky declined to comment directly about the crime, citing the advice of lawyers.

In an audiotaped confession played for the jury in his trial last year, Komisarjevsky admitted that he spotted Hawke-Petit and 11-year-old Michaela at a supermarket and followed them to their house in Cheshire, a suburb of New Haven. After going home and putting his own daughter to bed, Komisarjevsky and Hayes returned to the Petit house in the middle of the night, while the family was sleeping, to rob it.

William Petit was beaten, tied up and taken to the basement. He managed to escape and hop, roll and crawl across a yard to a neighbor's house for help.

Petit advocated keeping the death penalty in Connecticut and last year successfully lobbied state senators to hold off on repeal legislation while Komisarjevsky was still facing a death penalty trial.

Petit declined to comment through a spokesman.

"July 23, 2007, was our personal holocaust," Petit said after Komisarjevsky was sentenced to death, referring to the day his family was killed. "A holocaust caused by 2 who are completely evil and actually do not comprehend what they have done."

(source: Associated Press)

USA:

Guantanamo 9/11 Trial: Senior U.S. Officials Sought To Testify

Defense teams in the Sept. 11 case at Guantanamo are asking a military judge to order senior U.S. government officials to testify at the U.S. base in Cuba as part of a motion to dismiss charges, a lawyer for one of the defendants said Tuesday.

The motion to dismiss includes a request to compel testimony from eight "top officials" from the administrations of President Barack Obama and President George W. Bush, said Navy Cmdr. Walter Ruiz, who represents Saudi defendant Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi.

Ruiz declined to identify the officials, and the motion has not been released pending a security review. A Pentagon spokesman also declined to release the list until it has been cleared for release.

Lawyers for 3 of the 5 Guantanamo prisoners charged with aiding and planning the Sept. 11 attacks have joined the motion, which seeks a dismissal of the charges under what is known in the military legal system as "unlawful influence," or an improper attempt to sway the case.

Ruiz said American officials have made statements that have "tainted the entire process" of prosecuting the five Guantanamo prisoners, who include the self-proclaimed mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

"In the military, a commander of an installation or of a ship can't make public statements about what they believe to be the person's guilt or innocence and what kind of punishment they ought to get," Ruiz said in a telephone interview. "The only difference in this case is you have basically higher ranked officers and administration officials who are making much more public statements about the process and the expectations of the process."

Mohammed and his 4 co-defendants were arraigned May 5 on charges that include terrorism and murder and could get the death penalty if convicted.

Lawyers for Mohammed and Walid bin Attash have not joined the motion to dismiss but might do so later, Ruiz said.

It was not clear when the judge might rule on the request. The next hearing in the case had been scheduled for June 12 but several of the defense teams have requested a postponement.

(source: Huffington Post)

NEW MEXICO:

Jury gives guilty decision in NM deputy killed case; Death penalty hearing set for Astorga

A Santa Fe jury decided Tuesday that a man convicted of killing a Bernalillo County Sheriff's deputy is guilty of aggravated circumstances in the murder, setting up a hearing for a possible death penalty.

The guilty decision Tuesday means that the jury now has to hear testimony about whether Michael Astorga should get the death penalty for the crime. The hearing is slated to begin Wednesday in Santa Fe.

Astorga was convicted of the 2006 killing of Deputy James McGrane during a traffic stop. He faces life in prison or death, even though New Mexico repealed the death penalty in 2009. He is eligible for the death penalty since the crime occurred before the repeal.

Astorga's attorney, Gary Mitchell, had argued that there was no evidence that Astorga's pickup truck was ever pulled over the night McGrane was killed in the mountains east of Albuquerque.

But District Attorney Kari Brandenburg argued that Astorga lied on the stand about possessing a gun, and she mocked what she called his "psychic abilities" that led him to flee to Mexico before he was identified as a suspect.

The state Supreme Court ruled that Astorga was eligible for the death penalty since the crime occurred before the repeal. The court ruled that the repeal applied to crimes committed after July 1, 2009, when it took effect.

New Mexico has executed 1 person since 1960 — child killer Terry Clark in 2001. Two other inmates remain on death row in the state.

In another trial, jurors in Las Cruces found Astorga guilty of 2nd-degree murder, tampering with evidence and being a felon in possession of a firearm in connection to the death of 27-year-old Candido Martinez over a car back in 2005. That trial moved to Las Cruces after a judge ruled Astorga wouldn't get a fair trial in Albuquerque.

(source: Associated Press)

PENNSYLVANIA:

Convicted killer Parrish heads for Pennsylvania's death row

Given the opportunity to address the court before being sentenced to death Tuesday, Michael Parrish stood and in a clear voice declared: "I bear witness that Allah is the one and only true God and Muhammad is His messenger."

Wearing the kufi and long beard customary to the Islamic faith, Parrish then made a statement in Arabic before again taking his seat between Monroe County Public Defender Wieslaw Niemoczynski and defense attorney James Gregor.

Michael Parrish joins 205 other death row inmates in Pennsylvania. Executions are carried out by lethal injection at the State Correctional Institution at Rockview, Centre County.

The last Monroe County resident sentenced to death prior to Parrish was Manuel Sepulveda. Sentenced in 2004 for brutally murdering 2 men with a shotgun, ax and rope in Polk Township in 2001, Sepulveda, 32, is still on death row.

The last inmate executed in Pennsylvania was Gary Michael Heidnik. In late 1986 and early 1987, Heidnik, 56, kidnapped 5 women and raped and tortured them in his Philadelphia basement, killing 2 of them. He was sentenced in 1989 and executed in 1999.

County President Judge Margherita Patti Worthington then sentenced Parrish to death for the July 2009 fatal shootings of his girlfriend, Victoria Adams, 21, and their son, Sidney Parrish, 19 months, in their Effort home.

The sentence will be carried out after all of Parrish's appeals have been exhausted in state Supreme Court, a process that could take years or even decades, District Attorney David Christine said.

Once the appeals process is completed, a date of execution by lethal injection will be set and the governor will sign off on the order.

Addressing the court on the family's behalf moments before the sentence was imposed, a tearful Ann Adams Wagner, Adams' aunt, read a prepared statement.

Wagner described her niece as a loving, devoted mother who was by Sidney's side from his birth, through his heart transplant and as he was just starting to explore the world around him as a toddler.

"I still don't understand how someone can do something like this, especially to their own child," Wagner said. "In a split second, so many lives were shattered and crushed. Michael took not only 2 lives, but a third, the life of the child whose heart was donated to save Sidney's life.

"Our wish is that (Parrish) be sentenced to life without parole so that he can think every day about what he did," Wagner said. "Giving him a needle and putting him to sleep is the easy way out for him."

Under Pennsylvania law, the judge must impose whatever sentence the jury deems appropriate, be it death or life in prison without parole, Christine said. Though the prepared statement read in court indicated the family preferred life without parole for Parrish, the family later said they were pleased the judge had imposed the death penalty.

"It gave me a good feeling," said Adams' father, Malcolm Adams.

Victoria Adams' mother, Kim Adams, said she was "ecstatic."

"When the judge said, 'May God have mercy on your soul,' I thought, 'He has no soul,'" she said.

Joseph Parrish, the defendant's father, testified on his behalf during the trial. He was at his son's sentencing Tuesday.

"There are no winners here, only losers," the senior Parrish said. "Everybody lost."

(source: Pocono Record)

NIGERIA:

Senate Refuses to Intervene on Death Sentence Passed on 16 Nigerians in Indonesia

16 Nigerians sentenced to death for drug trafficking in Indonesia may eventually have to face the hangman’s noose as the Senate in their home country, Nigeria, has said it can do nothing to intervene in their plight.

Over 300 Nigerians are said to be serving various jail terms in Indonesian prisons for peddling hard drugs while 16 of them are on death row.

During a sitting of the senate yesterday, Senator Mathew Nwagwu, who chairs the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs, raised a motion concerning the plight of the Nigerians.

He had argued that the persons numbering 16, were languishing in Indonesian jails, and called for an intervention of the government to either reduce or review the cases against them.

He said, “I have called Minister of Foreign Affairs and he assured me that he will get in touch with our mission in Jakarta, although he was of the opinion that most of the issues related to drug related offences. I wish to suggest that we invite the Minister of Foreign Affairs to address the Senate on what is happening and what can be done to reduce and review some of these cases.”

However in response, the Senate President, David Mark dismissed the motion saying there was little or nothing the government could do to save them, since their actions were in complete violation of the laws of Indonesia.

Mark said the prisoners had themselves to blame because they knew the consequences of trafficking in drugs, yet went ahead to commit the crimes.

“Unfortunately in the Sixth Senate we took up this matter and we sent a delegation to Indonesia. I think it was Uche Chukwumerije who raised the issue; to Indonesia, Singapore and China and they brought a report back that all the people on death row were people who had gone for trafficking in drugs. And they had exhausted all the legal system possible,” he said.

The laws of Indonesia clearly state that the penalty for drug trafficking in some stipulated quantities is death. The same goes for countries like Saudi Arabia, Singapore and China. According to China’s criminal law, trafficking of more than 50 grams of heroin can warrant the death penalty. Malaysia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates also have strict punishments for drug trafficking, sometimes resulting in death penalty. Hundreds of Nigerians are languishing in prisons either awaiting execution or serving life jail sentences in such countries.

These people went against the laws of those countries and must be made to face the punishment for their offences. However, what is sad is that they wouldn’t have been sentenced to death if they had committed similar offences in their home country as the death sentence is not passed for drug related offences in Nigeria.

Although Nigeria is one of the 58 countries still practicing the death penalty, it does not sentence people to death for drug trafficking. Civil rights groups and non-governmental organizations have not relented in their call for the abolition of the death penalty in countries that still practice it.

(source: bellanaija.com)

IRAQ:

Iraqi VP's ex-guards say they had orders to kill

Former bodyguards for Iraq's fugitive vice president testified Tuesday that they were ordered to kill security officials and plant roadside bombs as a politically charged terror trial against the Sunni leader got under way.

Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi, who was in Turkey but faced trial in absentia, has denied all charges against him. If convicted, he could face the death penalty.

The case threatens to paralyze Iraq's government by fueling simmering Sunni and Kurdish resentments against Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who critics claim is monopolizing power. Al-Hashemi is an ardent critic of al-Maliki, whose government issued a warrant for the vice president's arrest the day after U.S. troops left Iraq last December.

Al-Hashemi has been accused of playing a role in 150 bombings, assassinations and other attacks from 2005 to 2011, according to the judicial council. The Iraqi government alleges that Sunni death squads were largely composed of his bodyguards and other employees.

The charges against the vice president span the worst years of bloodshed that followed the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq as retaliatory sectarian attacks between Sunni and Shiite militants pushed the country to the brink of civil war. He has been in office since 2006.

Tuesday's testimony focused on more recent years, when violence ebbed but insurgents continued to attack security forces and other targets in a bid to undermine the Iraqi government in the run-up to the U.S. withdrawal in December.

Bodyguard Odai Ghazi Amin, who served in the Iraqi army under Saddam Hussein, said he joined al-Hashemi's staff in 2008 and was ordered by the vice president's son-in-law in 2009 to escort bomb-planting missions on roads across Baghdad.

In 2011, Amin said he was told to assassinate an army general and a lawyer — orders he tried to avoid by asking for a job transfer. But he said he was threatened by the son-in-law, who ran al-Hashemi's office, that he would be killed and his family in danger if he refused the deadly missions.

Last September, Amin testified, he was summoned to meet with the vice president.

"Al-Hashemi told me that he is going to assign me to kill some officers who work against the interests of the state and to carry out operations on security checkpoints," Amin said.

Amin testified that after the meeting, al-Hashemi's son-in-law Ahmed Qahtan, who also faces terror charges, gave him and 2 other bodyguards silenced guns and told them to assassinate army Brig. Gen. Talib Balaasim. The bodyguards tracked down Balaasim in western Baghdad, and Amin testified that he killed the general, in a Sept. 26 drive-by shooting before returning to al-Hashemi's office in the heavily guarded Green Zone.

"About 2 days after the attack, al-Hashemi received us (in his office) and said to us, 'God bless your efforts,'" Amin testified. He said the bodyguards shared a $3,000 payment.

Amin's account was later contradicted by testimony from another bodyguard, Yassir Saadi Hassoun. Hassoun said he and his brother opened fire on Balaasim, not Amin.

A 3rd bodyguard, Ahmed al-Jubouri, described a November 2011 shooting that killed national security official Ibrahim Saleh Mahdi and his wife. Al-Jubouri said Mahdi was ordered killed because he had become "a source of annoyance" to al-Hashemi.

Al-Hashemi is in Turkey, where he has said he is receiving medical treatment. His spokesman, Fahad al-Turki, said al-Hashemi was not available to comment on Tuesday's proceedings. Ahmed Qahtan also is in Turkey.

He has hotly denied the charges, and accuses the government of torturing his bodyguards to obtain confessions from them. The Iraqi judiciary last month investigated and dismissed his claims.

The vice president believes he will not get a fair trial in Baghdad's criminal court, and has asked that the case be heard by a special tribunal appointed by parliament.

His allies see the trial as another political power battle in Iraq.

"As far as I'm concerned, the issue of al-Hashemi is more political than a legal one," said Sunni lawmaker Hamid al-Mutlaq of the Iraqiya political bloc that opposes al-Maliki.

Al-Hashemi's trial has also strained relations between Iraq and several of its mainly Sunni neighbors, including the Gulf states and Turkey.

Earlier this month, Interpol issued a so-called "red notice" on al-Hashemi, which puts member countries on alert that he is wanted for arrest in Baghdad. But Turkey, which has provided sanctuary to al-Hashemi and is on tense terms with his opponents in the Iraqi government, is hesitant to pursue the Sunni vice president.

The trial was scheduled to resume on Sunday.

Underscoring the continued violence in Iraq, a suicide bomber drove an explosives-rigged fuel truck into the front gate of an army post in the northern city of Mosul, a former al-Qaida stronghold, wounding 15 people, authorities said.

(source: CBS News)

INDONESIA:

Aussie 'forced' to smuggle drugs to Bali

An Australian man accused of trying to import a large quantity of drugs into Bali in his stomach will claim he was forced into the high-risk mission, which could see him sentenced to death if found guilty.

Edward Myatt faced court for the first time on Wednesday since his arrest in February at Bali's Ngurah Rai Airport, where he was allegedly caught with 1.1kg of hashish and four grams of methamphetamines in plastic casings he'd swallowed.

The 54-year-old showed no emotion and said little as the indictment against him was read out in the Denpasar District Court.

He faces 3 charges, including trafficking and 2 counts of possession.

Myatt, from Ballarat, Victoria, but who has lived in England for several years, could be sentenced to death if convicted on the drug-trafficking charge.

The possession charges carry a maximum penalty of life in jail.

He was not required to enter a plea on Wednesday.

Authorities remain convinced he was part of an international drug-smuggling syndicate and may have successfully imported drugs into Bali in the past.

Myatt has allegedly told investigators he bought the drugs in Delhi from a man he knew as "Dr Steve" after travelling to India from Yorkshire, England, where he had been living.

He then allegedly separated the drugs into smaller quantities and wrapped them in 72 plastic casings at his hotel before swallowing them and travelling to Bali.

But his lawyer, Maya Arsanti, told AAP outside the court that he only made the trip under pressure from another man, identified as Roger, who he knew in India.

"Roger forced him to do this," Ms Arsanti she said after the hearing.

Ms Arsanti did not give any more details about the mysterious "Roger", but said the claim will form a major part of the defence's case.

She added that Myatt, a yoga instructor, was a long-term user of drugs.

If this is accepted by the prosecutors and judges, it could see him given a lighter sentence.

People caught with drugs in Indonesia are often treated more leniently by the courts if they can prove they have an addiction.

Bali's chief prosecutor, Gusti Gede Putu Atmaja, however, said he would explore the allegations from narcotics officers that Myatt's trip to Bali in February was not his first as a drug courier.

"That's what we want to find out. I hope not, for his sake," Mr Atmaja told AAP.

"We will find out if this is the 1st time or 2nd time, or one of many."

Mr Atmaja added he was yet to form an opinion about what kind of sentence would be sought, but said that the evidence against Myatt was overwhelming.

"This is a strong case," he said.

The trial continues next Thursday.

(source: Sydney Morning Herald)

PAKISTAN:

On death row: President rejects mercy plea as activists oppose execution ---- Lawyer­s say that their support of the execution is not fraternal but for justice

While Behram Khan counts down the last 8 days of his life, his execution on May 23 remains a topic of debate between the legal fraternity, who want to make an example out of him, and human rights activist who have appealed for a stay order against the death sentence.

Khan was found guilty of killing advocate Mohammed Ashraf on April 15, 2003 in the courtroom of Justice Zawar Hussain at the Sindh High Court (SHC).

Last Thursday, an Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) issued a black warrant for the execution after President Asif Ali Zardari rejected his mercy petition. If Khan is hanged, his execution would be the 1st one since the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) came into power in 2008.

Against death penalty

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan’s (HRCP) chairperson, Zohra Yusuf, while expressing hope that the president would issue a stay, called for the abolition of the death penalty altogether.

“Usually the president first rejects the mercy plea and then at the last moment stays the execution,” she said. “But all that time the prisoner is in limbo.”

According to the HRCP, there are 8,000 prisoners on death row who have written to the president to ask for a stay on Khan’s execution.

“To give Khan capital punishment just because he killed a lawyer is not justified,” said Iqbal Haider, a human rights activist. In his opinion, the president rejected the mercy petition only to please lawyers. He pointed to Governor Salmaan Taseer’s murderer and asked why Mumtaz Qadri was not awarded the same punishment.

“If the government wants to hang people, it should start with the executions of those who are involved in the brutal murder of its party member.”

No mercy

On the other hand, lawyers made it clear that they were in favour of the execution.

The SHC advocate and former general secretary of the Karachi Bar Association (KBA), Haider Imam Rizvi, clarified that he did not support the execution just because the victim was a lawyer. “If the man had thrown acid on someone, I would have still supported the punishment. The fact remains that shooting a lawyer in courtroom is a violation of law and thus, he should definitely be hanged.”

The KBA president, Mehmoodul Hasan, said that until and unless people like Khan are hanged, crime won’t go down. “The prosecution and investigation in some cases are weak, but in this case, witnesses were present. Every life, including a lawyer’s, is precious.”

The president’s spokesperson, Farhatullah Babar, was unavailable for comment.However, PPP Sindh general secretary Taj Haider said that it was up to the president to pardon or reject any plea. However, he believes that the petition was rejected because of the nature of the case.

“If those who attack lawyers just get away with a few years in prison, the whole justice system will collapse. If such murderers are not punished, then no lawyer will step forward to fight cases.”

The Sindh law and prisons minister Ayaz Soomro concurred. “If a man comes into courtroom, shoots a lawyer and is not punished, then it will set a wrong example to others.”

(source: Express Tribune)

*********************

Halt Execution of Lawyer’s Killer ---- Don’t Break 3-Year Moratorium on the Death Penalty

The Pakistani government has rightly not carried out executions since 2009. Instead of resorting to this barbaric practice, the government should declare the moratorium officially, commute all existing death sentences, and then abolish the death penalty for all crimes.

The government of Pakistan should halt the scheduled hanging on May 23, 2012, of Behram Khan for the murder of a lawyer in 2003.

On May 10, Judge Ghulam Mustafa Memon of Karachi’s Anti Terrorist Court directed officials at the central prison in Karachi to hang Khan, who has been on death row since June 2003. Khan had been convicted of the killing of the lawyer, Mohammad Ashraf, on the premises of the Sindh High Court in Karachi. The hanging would end Pakistan’s unofficial moratorium on the death penalty in place since 2009.

“The Pakistani government has rightly not carried out executions since 2009,” said Ali Dayan Hasan, Pakistan director at Human Rights Watch. “Instead of resorting to this barbaric practice, the government should declare the moratorium officially, commute all existing death sentences, and then abolish the death penalty for all crimes.”

On April 15, 2003, Khan and Police Sub-Inspector Pir Bux entered the Sindh High Court intending to kill Qurban Ali Chauhan, the lawyer for an accused under trial for the killing of Khan’s uncle. Khan killed Ashraf in a case of mistaken identity. An anti-terrorist court sentenced Khan to death on June 25, 2003. Pir Bux was sentenced to life in prison for abetting the murder.

An appeal against the execution sentence in the Sindh High Court was rejected, as was a subsequent appeal in the Supreme Court of Pakistan. A mercy petition filed with President Asif Zardari was also rejected earlier in May, leading to the order by Memon.

Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all circumstances as an inherently irreversible, inhumane punishment. A majority of countries in the world have abolished the practice. On December 18, 2007, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution by a wide margin calling for a worldwide moratorium on executions.

In June 2008, Human Rights Watch wrote to Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani urging action to abolish the death penalty and to impose a moratorium pending abolition. In a meeting with Human Rights Watch the following month, Gilani agreed to enforce a moratorium on executions. Soon after military ruler Gen. Pervez Musharraf was ousted from office in 2008, Pakistan imposed a widely hailed de facto moratorium on judicial executions.

“Under military rule, the number of people executed every year in Pakistan was among the highest in the world,” Hasan said. “It would be a tragedy if Behram Khan’s execution goes ahead and derails one of the government’s most tangible human rights successes.”

(source: Human Rights Watch)

MAY 15, 2012:

MISSISSIPPI----impending executions

Mississippi seeking to execute 3 men in 3 days next month

Mississippi could execute men on 3 consecutive days in June.

Attorney General Jim Hood's office is asking the state Supreme Court to set execution dates for 3 men, 1 each on June 12, 13 and 14.

Hood's office made the request Monday after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear appeals of Henry Curtis Jackson Jr., Gary Carl Simmons Jr. and Jan Michael Brawner.

State law says that the state Supreme Court has to set an execution date within 30 days after appeals are exhausted. June 14 would be the 30th day after Monday's denial, if no other court intervenes.

Gov. Phil Bryant would also have the option to pardon the men or commute their sentences, although Bryant has vowed not to use the pardon power after former Gov. Haley Barbour caused an uproar by pardoning a large number of people at the end of his term.

Lawyers for Brawner are already seeking another appeal before the state Supreme Court, saying that his lawyers failed to present evidence showing mitigating factors against a death sentence, including a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Tara Booth, a spokeswoman for the Mississippi Department of Corrections, said that the state has never executed 3 people in one week, and said she didn't think the attorney general had ever requested 3 executions in 1 week. Booth said the department was capable of conducting three consecutive executions at the Mississippi State Penitentiary at Parchman.

In March, Mississippi executed 2 men in one week. Larry Matthew Puckett was put to death on March 20 and William Mitchell was put to death on March 22. In May 2010, the state executed men on 2 consecutive days.

Mississippi has 53 people on death row, 51 men and 2 women. The pace of executions is picking up in Mississippi. If all 3 executions go forward, the state will have executed 21 people since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. Of those, 11 will have been executed since 2010.

Jim Craig, a veteran defender of Mississippi death row inmates, said case law gives the state Supreme Court "wide discretion" in setting execution dates. He said he hopes the justices stretch out the dates.

"I hope our Court does not set three executions within the same week, or for that matter two weeks," Craig wrote in an email. "It would be unfair to the survivors of the victims, the family members of the prisoners, and the prisoners themselves to have their pain and loss minimized by an 'assembly line' series of executions. It would also unfairly compress the time for Gov. Bryant to consider clemency in each case."

In briefs filed with the state Supreme Court, the attorney general's office said Jackson should be executed 1st because his crime is the oldest, followed on June 13 by Simmons and lastly by Brawner on June 14 because his crime is the most recent.

Jackson, 47, was convicted of stabbing 2 nieces and 2 nephews, ranging in age from 2 years to 5 years, at his mother's home near Greenwood in 1990. He also was convicted of stabbing his adult sister and another niece, who both survived. Prosecutors said Jackson, who was 26 at the time, planned to steal his mother's safe and kill the victims when he went to the house that day asking for a cigarette and money. He was convicted and sentenced to death on 4 counts of capital murder after a trial in September 1991. The trial was held in Copiah County after Jackson's defense attorney requested a change of venue.

In 1998, the state Supreme Court ordered Leflore County to hire an appellate lawyer on Jackson's behalf. That precedent, and other counties ordered to incur such expense afterward, aided the creation of a statewide system of appeal lawyers

Simmons, 49, was convicted for shooting and dismembering Jeffrey Wolfe. Wolfe was killed in August 1996 after he came to Simmons' Pascagoula home to collect on a drug debt, according to court records. Timothy Milano, Simmons' co-defendant and the person authorities said shot Wolfe, was convicted on the same charges and sentenced to life in prison.

Simmons worked as a grocery store butcher when he and Milano were charged with killing Wolfe. Police said the pair kidnapped Wolfe and his female friend and later assaulted the woman and locked her in a box. Police found parts of Wolfe's dismembered body at Simmons' house, in the yard and at a nearby bayou.

Brawner, 34, was convicted of the 2001 killings of his 3-year-old daughter, ex-wife and former father-in-law and mother-in-law in Sarah, a rural Tate County community west of Senatobia.

Brawner went to the Craft home after learning that his former wife planned to stop him from seeing their child, trial testimony showed. He also had no money and contemplated robbing his former in-laws, who had loaned him money in the past, according to testimony. Brawner admitted to the killings at trial and told a prosecutor that he deserved death.

(source: Associated Press)

LOUISIANA:

Angola inmates are taught life skills, then spend their lives behind bars

People always said Johna Haynes was lucky because of the white hair that sprouted from the crown of his head since he was a baby. He acquired the nickname "Patch" from New Orleans police officers, who came to know him all too well. At 31, the patch has turned into a bald spot, the pale strands now dispersed throughout his close-cropped dark hair, leaving him prematurely gray. "And still lucky?" someone asked.

He looked around incredulously at his surroundings -- a late summer Sunday afternoon in the Louisiana State Penitentiary's west yard, men playing basketball and lifting weights, stray cats sunning themselves on concrete ledges, an idyllic scene if one did not look to the barbed wire fences in the distance.

"I'm lucky I'm alive," he finally said.

Something -- the white patch, divine intervention or just plain luck -- spared Haynes from a violent death, the fate of his brother, stepfather, stepbrother, cousin and innumerable friends. It did not spare him from another well-traveled path out of the Florida public housing complex: the winding, achingly bucolic bus ride to the penitentiary commonly known as Angola, where his own father served more than a decade and where Haynes is slated to spend the rest of his life without the possibility of parole.

Haynes estimates he stole at least 160 cars and committed at least 130 robberies in a brief, prolific criminal career before he was locked up forever at the age of 21. When he worked at a Shoney's restaurant in Metairie, he never once took the bus -- he always arrived in style on stolen wheels. The guns he took from parked cars at Carnival parades or the Bayou Classic became the guns he carried while selling drugs and the guns he used to rob people.

He was shot at many times and watched others die, but he was never hit. Nor, he said, has he ever killed anyone. His dangerous lifestyle caught up to him in a different way -- life without parole for pointing a gun at a man and making off with his car and valuables. 2 previous convictions, for stealing a car and for trying to escape from police custody, made Haynes a habitual offender. A young thug was off the streets for good.

Louisiana leads the nation in the percentage of its citizens serving life without parole, fueling the state's world-leading incarceration rate. Angola is clogged with prisoners who will grow old and die there. Like Haynes, many arrived as young African-American men from rough neighborhoods who wrote themselves a ticket to either prison or an early death by embracing the lawless ethos of their peers.

Some criminal justice experts believe life without parole should be reserved for heinous murders, solely as an alternative to the death penalty. The U.S. Supreme Court recently did away with the sentence for juveniles who have not committed murder; Haynes was barely out of his teens during his final armed robbery.

Yet it may have been Angola, and a life sentence, that saved Johna Haynes. Now, he wants a chance to show that he has changed.

Slow transformation

A gun-toting menace does not transform overnight into a model inmate with a Bible in his back pocket.

Wilbert Rideau, the condemned murderer turned world-famous prison journalist who was freed in 2005, writes in his memoir that his own awakening at Angola came about gradually. Through reading books, he discovered a world beyond the brutal, impoverished one he knew.

Arriving at Angola in August 2002, Haynes spent more than a year laboring in the fields and living in a tiny cell among the worst of the worst. Good behavior eventually made him eligible for a spot in the main prison, with its dormitory-style sleeping quarters, vocational classes and inmate-led clubs. Once considered the bloodiest prison in the country, Angola is now known for giving lifers, who make up nearly three-quarters of its population, the chance to build meaningful lives behind bars, even as they are unlikely to taste freedom again.

Murderers and rapists have embraced the prison's wholesome, Christian-influenced values. Cursing is banned for inmates and staff alike. Violence is rare in the minimum- and medium-security dormitories where most of the 5,100 inmates live. The men make wooden toys for needy children, teach each other the piano or banjo, preach through self-run religious organizations and entertain the public at the famous twice-yearly rodeo.

A 7th-grade dropout, Haynes completed his GED certificate and studied auto mechanics. He began reading on his own, partaking of the "locker library" run by literary-minded inmates who trade well-worn paperbacks out of the metal chests that hold all their earthly possessions. He became a devout Christian.

As with Rideau a generation ago, it was not any one moment but an accumulation of small moments that made the armed robber into the bookworm. It took being in prison, completely cut off from his old ways, for Haynes to realize that the law of the jungle -- preying on the weak, selling drugs, getting killed over a few hundred dollars or a down jacket -- was not the way most people lived.

Letter from an inmate

Haynes is now a sophomore in the Angola Bible college, an extension of the New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary -- the only bachelor's program open to prisoners, leading to a B.S. in Christian ministry. He hopes his four children -- a son, two daughters and a stepdaughter -- will have the future he did not.

"The change I've undergone is for the best, because had I not straightened up I would most likely be as many of my friends who are deceased," Haynes wrote in a letter. "It hurts me to know that a lot of them lost their lives before they even got to see life. But that pain has an element of positivity to it because I use it as fuel to power my dreams."

Getting an education

Angola is like a 9th Ward reunion. The man who used to sleep in the bunk above Haynes was a classmate from Carver Elementary. Haynes' uncle is a fellow inmate. More than a dozen friends from the old neighborhood are now permanent companions at "The Farm."

At Haynes' urging, his 2 younger brothers moved to rural north Louisiana after Hurricane Katrina to escape the temptations of the street. Dwight Haynes made a new life for himself in Winnsboro.

The other brother, June, went back to New Orleans and was shot dead last February, at age 21. Johna Haynes called the killing "the worst thing that's happened to me since I've been living."

"There's always periods in your odyssey where you feel like, 'Man, I'm ready to leave this alone. I want to be with my kids. I want to have a family. I'm tired of looking behind my back,'?" Haynes said. "But you just don't have the education to get a job that's going to provide for you. That I'm going to be a CEO today? You can't say that. You can be a laborer; you can be a burger flipper or something like that."

In prison, Haynes is finally getting the education that could have led to a better job on the outside. Heading to a tutorial for an electrician certification exam, Haynes grabbed a book to supplement the Bible he always carries. "I need something to read if there's any down time," he explained. His possessions, spread on his narrow bunk, could be cleaned up later. No one would steal from him, he said, since he has long ago established his reputation as someone not to be messed with.

A husky 6 feet 2 inches tall and weighing 280 pounds, Haynes has a broad face that breaks easily into a bemused grin when recounting the absurdities of his former criminal lifestyle. A tattoo of his mother's name, Rachel, is visible above the neckline of his prison-issue white T-shirt. Janay, for his oldest daughter, is inked on his left arm, near a long scar where he was stabbed as a teenager in a fight over a girl. In 10 years, he has left the 18,000-acre prison once, to receive treatment for a stomach ailment.

To stay abreast of new technology and avoid becoming a Rip Van Winkle if he is ever released, he saves news clippings about Facebook and Twitter. He reads a trade magazine for chief financial officers, in case he achieves his dream of running a mobile car detailing and air-conditioning repair business. The flashcards he keeps in his jeans pockets are covered with words he wants to remember: "verve," "esplanade," "tetchy," "detritus," "paleontologist," "saké."

When he was running the streets, he had no need for books. Now, his body trapped, the life of the mind beckons. Cicero, Khalil Gibran, George Bernard Shaw and the 18th century theologian Jonathan Edwards are a refuge from the humiliating routines of prison life -- stopping whatever you are doing to be counted 3 times a day; eating beans, rice and cornbread when you crave a pork chop; sleeping in an un-air-conditioned dorm with 80 other men at the height of Louisiana summer. Over the years, Haynes has scrounged a few extra towels to stuff under his bedsheet, making the stiff plastic mattress a touch more comfortable.

"I saw the cherry blossoms from Angola; reading is my escape," he wrote of the Japanese novel "The Makioka Sisters," set in pre-World War II Osaka.

'A more moral person'

By Haynes' own reckoning, he would have remained a thug at heart, ready to resume terrorizing innocent New Orleanians, had he received a shorter sentence at a prison that did not offer as many opportunities for self-improvement. He is unexpectedly candid in acknowledging that he needed a life sentence to appreciate the value of his life. But there needs to be an out, he said, a way to show that, after 10, 20 or 30 years behind bars, he is no longer a threat to society.

Louisiana lifers used to get out on parole after serving 10 years and 6 months. The law was changed in 1979 to "life means life." Since then, Angola has been filling up with men who, barring a rare reprieve, will spend the rest of their lives there. The pardon board only intervenes in extraordinary cases, and even then, governors are reluctant to sign the release papers, fearing a politically damaging relapse.

"See, a lot of time when dudes come to prison, if their sentence is short, they can't wait to go home," Haynes said. "You have to put the person in the situation where it's like cornering a cat. You're going to go into this corner, and the only way you're going to come out is as a changed person. If I'd had 5 years or 10 years, I don't think I would have made this type of change."

For Haynes and others like him, change means scrapping a violent, revenge-filled moral code reminiscent of the Hatfields and McCoys. The code requires that he kill anyone who disrespects him or his family. It allows, even expects, that he steal: "If I want it and he got it, I'm 'a get it' (from him)," in Haynes' words.

Yet Haynes recalls simple acts of kindness from his youth in New Orleans, the nation's most murderous city. He looked after a paralyzed neighbor, giving beer and massages to the wheelchair-bound man. He entered narrow passageways ahead of his companions to protect them from any gunfire that might be directed at him.

Troy Delone, one of Haynes' closest friends at Angola, has become a religious man and a scholar in prison. When the two met in 2003, they were close in age, both from New Orleans housing projects, both deciding whether to try something new or keep bucking the system.

"Should I put myself in prison, while in prison? Stay in the cell blocks, Camp J -- when is this going to stop?" as Delone put it, referring to the maximum-security parts of Angola where troublemakers reside with limited access to recreation or education.

Delone, 33, is a senior in the Bible college and a mentor in the Orleans Parish Criminal Court's re-entry program for young offenders. He is serving 2 sentences of life without parole for a pair of armed robberies.

"Although he wasn't that much on a positive road, he was always intelligent, book-wise," Delone said of his friend. "Since then, he's enhanced that. He's grown spiritually and become a more moral person. More of the old Johna is diminishing, and he's becoming a new person."

Delone himself has changed so much in speech and manner that his street cred has diminished. The younger inmates he mentors regard him with wariness until he convinces them that he grew up in the Iberville projects and used to be just like them.

The other day in class, Haynes impressed John Robson, the college's director, with an impassioned speech about the corrupt values he once lived by. A 2nd-year student in a class of 100, he is a standout.

"He is really articulate. He is exceptional in his articulation, very transparent. He's a blue-chipper," Robson said.

Born to a life of crime

Although he barely knew his father, Haynes followed square in the old man's footsteps. When he was born on Jan. 19, 1981, his father, Melvin Jones, was serving time at Angola for killing a man in a bar fight. When Haynes entered prison himself, his then-girlfriend was pregnant with his son, Johna Jr., now 10.

Haynes' role model growing up was an older cousin named Turk, who schooled him in the ways of the street. By the time Turk died at 19 in a hail of semiautomatic fire, he had taught his protege well. Young Johna knew how to steal without the slightest prick of conscience, to keep a handcuff key in his pocket in case he was arrested, to target Dodges, Chryslers and Jeeps because they did not need to be hot-wired but could be started with a screwdriver in the ignition. He sold his first drugs at 11, pocketing a commission from a crack dealer who feared the buyers were undercover agents. At 13 and 14, he was peddling rocks with Turk in the Calliope housing project.

His mother, Rachel Haynes, who gave birth to him when she was 14, stayed in an abusive relationship with Johna's stepfather for years before striking out on her own. She raised 5 children on welfare and then on a restaurant cook's meager salary.

Johna, her oldest, was a bright student, but finishing his assignments early only gave him more time to goof off in class. After he dropped out in7th grade, the authorities made him enroll in alternative schools, but he never lasted long.

"I was a single parent. I did the best I could. He was always in trouble," Rachel Haynes said. "I told him, 'Johna, you have to stop. The streets are going to catch up to you.' ... I wish he would have changed when he was out here and I was begging him to change."

Stints in Orleans Parish Prison did nothing to scare Johna straight. At 18, riding in a stolen car on the way to a party, he tried to rob two men of their gold jewelry using a pellet gun. One of the victims had a real gun and shot Haynes' 13-year-old friend. Even though he knew the police would come looking for him, Haynes kept vigil at the hospital for his young friend, who died that night.

In the squad car, Haynes' handcuff key served its purpose. He jimmied the lock and made a run for it. He was never prosecuted for the attempted pellet gun robbery but was sentenced to a year for the attempted escape.

"I'm really not sure how many cars I stole. A number like 160 is pretty high, but it might be low," Haynes wrote recently. "I remember a time when I was counting all the people I've robbed -- I got up to 134 or 130. I hate these numbers! But guess what, I have no secrets. I appreciate where I've been, it just makes where I'm headed more beautiful. As for the cars, I'll go with the 160, though it's modest."

On June 11, 2001, nearly a year after his release from prison, Haynes shoved a lady's stocking over his head and pulled a gun on a man named Curtis Aubry outside an auto body shop on St. Roch Avenue. He grabbed Aubry's possessions -- 2 rings, a watch, a bracelet and $500 -- and took off in Aubry's car.

"It's like once you do it, it's addictive, it gratifies. Why sell drugs for 12 hours when you could steal it from someone?" Haynes said, recalling his former mindset.

After a half-day trial, an Orleans Parish jury found the 20-year-old guilty of armed robbery. Judge Julian Parker gave him the maximum -- 99 years without parole -- before then-District Attorney Harry Connick's office upped the ante, charging him as a triple offender. On May 24, 2002, Parker resentenced him to life without parole.

4 days after Haynes committed his final armed robbery, the law changed. Louisiana legislators decided the two prior offenses on a multibill had to be more serious than those Haynes had racked up for auto theft and the escape attempt. The change did not apply to crimes that occurred before that date.

For Haynes, the downgrade would have made little difference, even had it applied retroactively. Ninety-nine years without parole for the armed robbery -- a crime he admits he committed -- still would have put him behind bars for the rest of his life.

Aging population

Burl Cain is perhaps the most famous prison warden in the country because of the many films and books documenting life at Angola. Short and heavyset, his square face topped by a thatch of white hair, he delivers bon mots in a thick Louisiana drawl.

"Thug," "pure rogue" and "animal" are some of the terms he uses to describe many of the newly convicted criminals entering his prison.

Yet he is a firm believer that "really horrible people" can change. Even Telly Hankton, who recently shocked New Orleans with the audacity of his brutal revenge killing and attempts to tamper with the justice system, could become a new man at Angola.

"I won't be here, but in 25 or 27, 28 years, it'll be interesting to see what he's like," Cain said of Hankton.

Angola Prison Warden Burl Cain talks about overcrowding, high prison sentences and the rising cost of an aging prison population.

Louisiana is 1 of 6 states where all life sentences are handed down without the chance of ever going before a parole board. 1st- and 2nd-degree murderers automatically receive life without parole, on the guilty votes of as few as 10 of 12 jurors.

Nearly 12 % of Louisiana inmates, or more than 4,500 people, are serving life without parole -- the highest proportion in the nation, according to a Sentencing Project report. While most have committed violent crimes, nearly one in 10 are locked up forever on drug or other nonviolent offenses. 3 in 4 are African-American men.

In Texas, less than 1 % of state prisoners are serving life without parole; the figure in Tennessee is 1.3 %.

Cain sides with those who find the sentence morally objectionable because it assumes a person cannot be rehabilitated. Lifers like Johna Haynes should get periodic hearings before a parole board, Cain said -- by no means a guarantee of release, but a chance to prove that a drastic transformation has taken place, provided the victim does not voice strong objections.

"I absolutely don't believe in it," Cain said, "because when you say, 'Life without parole,' you've given up on the criminal and said, 'You cannot be helped and therefore you're going to stay in jail until you die.'?"

At Angola, a new arrival cannot be housed unless someone else is transferred out or dies. With 3/4 serving life without parole and 1/4 at least 50 years old, medical costs are skyrocketing at the same time the budget is shrinking due to state cutbacks. The much-praised hospice program, where younger inmates care for the dying, was born of necessity. At an average of $63.15 a day, a lifer who enters prison in his early 20s will cost taxpayers over $1 million if he lives past age 70.

Once a slave plantation, Angola is still a working farm, with thousands of acres of corn, peas, squash, beans and other crops under cultivation. But there are no longer enough able-bodied inmates to work the fields -- only about 300 or 400, compared with 1,000 in past decades. The rest are too old or have graduated to other work assignments. Last year, Angola had to import workers from another state prison to bring in the harvest.

"I'm worried about prison being a place for predators and not dying old men," Cain said. "That's what it's really for, and I want predators, sleeping in these beds, that's going to hurt you -- instead of a bunch of old men that's creeping around on their last legs costing my budget a fortune."

Cain occasionally advocates for inmates before the pardon board, but only a select few he believes have zero chance of committing another crime. By the time a man is into his 50s, "criminal menopause" has set in, with statistics showing older parolees much less likely to become repeat offenders. Known for infusing Angola with religion, Cain said Christianity provides a convenient package of values but is not the only path to change.

Rehabilitation is a slow process. It takes at least 10 years for change to take root, Cain said, and more like 20 to 25 to completely exorcise the criminal within. By that measure, Haynes is only halfway there. Even if he truly changes, his path to freedom is narrow. The law that allowed for his life sentence is no longer on the books, but at every stage, the odds are heavily stacked against tampering with a court's verdict.

For tough-on-crime advocates, long sentences remove dangerous people like Johna Haynes from the streets, while also acting as a deterrent. People are capable of changing, but they should not be released from the penalty they brought on themselves, said Irv Magri, a former New Orleans police officer and president of the victims rights group Crimefighters.

"It may be harsh, but if you could pass a bill requiring life imprisonment for anyone pushing heroin or cocaine above a certain number of grams, I'm telling you, your crime rate is going to drop tremendously. They're going to go somewhere else," Magri said.

Hope for his children

In ornate, left-tilting script, Haynes writes letters to his four children, taking care with his grammar and spelling to set a good example. He urges them to stay in school and out of trouble, to aspire to college and a good career, to not let the many family tragedies get them down.

They rarely write back. Instant gratification from video games and text messages is much closer at hand. He settles for annual visits at the prison's Returning Hearts family day. His mother, who does not own a car and says she has not been able to arrange transportation, has not seen her son since he got married at Angola in 2005, a few months before Katrina. She has troubles of her own, recently serving time on a heroin charge and dealing with the shooting death of her youngest son, June.

Haynes and his former wife Esther, who is Johna Jr.'s mother, have since divorced, though he still considers her his "ideal."

Janay, the daughter he had before he met Esther, is attending high school in Philadelphia, where she settled after Katrina.

Domonique -- Esther's daughter and Hayne's stepdaughter -- is a senior at Warren Easton High School. She aspires to be an attorney and interned for Orleans Parish Juvenile Court Chief Judge Ernestine Gray last summer.

Kayla, Haynes' youngest daughter, also wants to be an attorney, but at 14, she has not been attending school. She experienced the juvenile justice system from the defendants' side after stabbing another girl on the school bus. Two of her uncles, including Haynes' brother June, died within a year of each other. There is only so much her father can do from prison, but his words carry weight because of his own troubled past.

"I think the only thing I can do while I'm in prison is write to her and encourage her," Haynes said. "When I talk to her, she listens. We have this bond, this connect, between each other. She knows what I'm saying is true, what I'm saying is real."

Between his studies, church and rehearsals for his gospel rap group, Haynes has little spare time. He usually plays on prison basketball teams but has been sidelined due to an Achilles injury. He is a regular at the law library, researching cases that might move his appeal forward, though success, especially without an attorney, is an extreme long shot.

Believing he will leave Angola someday requires a leap of faith. Does he ever picture himself as one of those elderly inmates in a wheelchair, a common sight at the prison? No, that would be too dangerous. He believes because he has to, because if he stops believing, he might stop his relentless quest to learn more, to become better, to guide his children in the right direction, to keep the old Johna at bay.

Never mind that during a decade behind bars, his lucky patch has vanished, leaving only scattered strands of gray. According to his newfound religion, God protected him on the streets of New Orleans when bullets flew, God is watching him behind the gates of Angola, and God will rescue him from the unyielding weight of life without parole when the time comes.

"I was a terrible kid. I was terrible," Haynes said. "I look back on it and I say, 'Man, God had to be with me,' because there was a lot of times I should have been dead, a lot of times I've been shot at, a lot of things I did, that I didn't want to be living. But God sees otherwise."

(source: The Times-Picayune)

ARIZONA----impending execution

Arizona high court urged to let execution proceed

Arizona prosecutors are asking the state Supreme Court to let an execution be conducted as scheduled Wednesday despite the inmate's claims that he's been denied a chance for a fair clemency hearing.

Attorneys for inmate Samuel Villegas Lopez cite a trial judge's ruling that Lopez may not have received a fair shot at a clemency hearing because of questions of whether some members of the state clemency board received training or met qualifications to serve.

Prosecutors' response says Lopez's defense team declined to participate when a clemency hearing was to be held and that any alleged flaws in the board's makeup are minor and don't prevent it from doing its job.

Lopez is scheduled to be executed for the 1986 murder of Estefana Holmes.

An Arizona death-row inmate is asking the state Supreme Court to block his execution Wednesday so a lower court can consider whether the inmate's rights to a fair clemency hearing have been violated.

Attorneys for inmate Samuel Villegas Lopez cited a trial judge's ruling Monday that Lopez may not have received a fair shot at a clemency hearing because of questions of whether some members of the state clemency board received training or met qualifications to serve.

The members in question were recently appointed by Gov. Jan Brewer.

Lopez "is entitled to develop those claims and obtain meaningful resolution of them before the state of Arizona executes him," two of the inmates' attorneys said in their motion filed Monday night. A judge scheduled a July hearing on whether three new members need the training before hearing clemency cases and whether one had met qualifications before being appointed.

The clemency board has 5 members.

Lopez is scheduled to be executed at a state prison in Florence for the 1986 murder of Estefana Holmes. The Phoenix woman was raped, robbed and stabbed in what authorities described as a "terrible and prolonged struggle."

Lopez would be the 4th person executed by Arizona this year.

Meanwhile, 2 3-judge panels of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco on Tuesday each denied an appeal filed on behalf of Lopez. One challenged the state's execution procedures, and the 2nd argued that he was denied effective legal representation.

In state court, Judge Joseph Kreamer of Maricopa County Superior Court said Monday that he only had authority to rule on whether there were grounds to schedule the July hearing - not to postpone the execution scheduled by the state high court.

Kreamer said the main issue for that hearing is whether the three new board members needed to complete 4 weeks of required training before hearing clemency requests. Kreamer said Lopez has a strong chance of winning on that issue and on whether another new member demonstrated interest in the corrections process, a qualification required under state law.

The judge's decision to order the July hearing stems from a lawsuit filed last week by Lopez's lawyers, who argued the state's clemency process is flawed. They claimed that the board's makeup was revamped to avoid having clemency recommendations in high-profile cases land on the desk of Brewer, and asked that the clemency board be reconstituted.

Earlier that week, a Lopez lawyer challenged the validity of a hearing for his client and then walked out.

Brewer's spokesman has said the governor did not reappoint several board members whose terms had expired because she wanted "fresh insight and fresh blood" on the board.

Assistant Attorney General Kent Cattani said after Monday's hearing the state would oppose the stay request. Cattani and a lawyer representing individual state officials said any violations of the state's clemency processes are relatively minor and not serious enough to postpone an execution.

Solicitor General David Cole told Kreamer that state law doesn't specify that the required training has to take place before board members start hearing cases.

The judge said to think otherwise would negate the purpose of the training requirement.

(source: Associated Press)

MONTANA:

‘I’m good to go’: Ronald Smith, Canadian on death row in U.S. ready for any fate

For a man who has spent nearly 30 years fighting his death sentence, Ronald Smith is surprisingly comfortable with the prospect of being executed.

As a Montana parole board weighs Smith’s bid to commute his death sentence to life in prison without parole, the double murderer from Alberta says he’s not worried about his own fate.

“Personally, I’m good to go with this thing,” he says during an interview this month inside Montana State Prison, a sprawling facility tucked in the foothills just outside Deer Lodge. “The only people that I’m concerned about if it goes the other way is my family. This is going to have a huge detrimental effect on them, and that bothers me a lot,” he said.

With only 2 inmates currently awaiting execution in Montana, the state doesn’t have a death row in the physical sense. Smith is confined in 1 of 2 maximum-security units on the prison grounds, a squat concrete box with only small windows to let in light from the outside.

Policy dictates death row inmates are kept in maximum security because they are seen as having “nothing to lose,” but Smith has long been considered a model prisoner.

It emerged during Smith’s clemency hearing that an official once recommended moving Smith to a lower-security cellblock until it was discovered he was facing the death penalty. Policy notwithstanding, some prison staffers say privately Smith’s track record inside doesn’t justify keeping him locked in a cell 23 hours a day.

Nevertheless, policy is strictly observed by everyone as correctional officers handcuff Smith, 54, and lead him from his upper-tier cell to a manager’s office for the interview.

Smith remains handcuffed during the visit and an officer stands watch in the doorway behind him.

“How are you doin’, Ron?” one asks Smith during the move.

“Same old, same old,” Smith answers.

The journey that landed Smith on death row in the United States began on a summer day in 1982 when he and two friends, Rod Munro and Andre Fontaine, decided to get out of Red Deer, Alta., and head south. Under the cover of night, they sneaked across the border into Montana.

The trio of drifters ended up at a bar in East Glacier Park on the Blackfeet Indian reservation, where they met Harvey Mad Man and Thomas Running Rabbit, who were cousins. The men then spent a friendly afternoon shooting pool and drinking beer.

The groups parted ways at the bar but met up again on the highway, where Mad Man, 23, and Running Rabbit, 19, spotted the Canadians hitchhiking and offered them a ride.

The generous gesture was met with treachery from Smith and his companions, who had discussed stealing the car.

Smith says his recollection of the murders is hazy because he was drunk and high on LSD, but in one previous account the plan was set in motion during a bathroom break at the side of a lonely highway near the Marias Pass: Smith pulled a sawed-off rifle he had smuggled across the border and Munro brandished a knife. They marched Mad Man and Running Rabbit into the dense brush, where Smith shot them both in the head.

Smith and Munro initially faced the death penalty, but prosecutors offered them both life in prison if they pleaded guilty. Munro took the deal, but Smith turned it down and asked for the death penalty.

A judge quickly granted Smith’s request, which met with little opposition from the public defender assigned to represent him.

Smith changed his mind in the weeks that followed, and has spent 3 decades trying to get the state to change its mind.

“I was looking at a life sentence. All I could think of is, ‘I have no interest in spending another 20 years sitting in prison,’” Smith says.

The irony isn’t lost on Smith, who chuckles and allows a brief smile to flash across his face.

“It’s a little bit odd considering how long I’ve been here, but that was the thought process: I had no interest in spending my life sitting around.”

And so, a man who asked for a death sentence because he couldn’t face the prospect of growing old in prison now seeks to live the remainder of his natural life behind bars.

It’s just 1 paradox in a case replete with them.

Consider Smith’s family, described by one witness as dysfunctional and “fragmented” in the years immediately following the killings. Somehow, from behind the walls of a prison hundreds of kilometres away, Smith has managed to forge positive relationships with his father, sisters, daughter and grandchildren.

Then there are the politics of the case: a Canadian government nominally opposed to capital punishment has offered only grudging support for Smith’s clemency bid. Meanwhile, a retired prison guard who worked 32 years for Smith’s jailer and would-be executioner testified he supports the clemency application and has reconsidered his support of the death penalty.

Only one thing has remained straightforward amid the legal appeals and political machinations: the unwavering desire of the victims’ families, Blackfeet tribe members and prosecutors to see Smith’s death sentence finally carried out.

“This man needs to be executed,” said William Talks About, an uncle who discovered the decomposed bodies of Mad Man and Running Rabbit after more than 6 weeks of searching by dozens of family members and volunteers.

“30 years is too long for the state and the taxpayers to be taking care of him."

The case is now in the hands of a three-person parole panel, which has retired to weigh the evidence given by more than 30 witnesses who testified during last Wednesday’s clemency hearing at the Powell County courthouse in Deer Lodge.

The board has 30 days after the hearing to deliver a non-binding recommendation to Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer, who will ultimately decide if Smith will be executed by lethal injection. The board has said it will announce its recommendation the week of May 21.

Smith will pass the time awaiting news about his fate the same way he has passed almost every day for nearly 30 years: spending 23 hours in his cell, with 1 hour a day to shower and exercise by himself in a common area.

“It’s pretty blah, actually. I work out, I write letters, I watch TV, I read when I can get the books. You fill your day up with pretty much anything you can,” he says.

For a man destined to spend the rest of his life behind bars — however long or short that may be — fantasy novels that allow him to escape, if only mentally, are frequent choices.

“I’m into the fantasy world, books that if it’s a good storyline, you can involve yourself and pretty much lose yourself,” says Smith, naming Robert Jordan as a favourite author.

Over the years, Smith finished high school and is a few credits short of a 2-year associate degree. He also trained himself in paralegal work, which Smith describes as a constructive outlet for his energy.

Although Smith has no physical contact with other inmates, they can talk between their cells or send “kites” — tossed written messages that are retrieved by the recipient or someone who agrees to pass it along.

Smith says he helped clear an inmate facing institutional charges and win compensation for another whose property was lost by prison staff.

“It’s quite an uplifting feeling to be able to do that,” he says.

Above all, Smith looks forward to contact with his family in Alberta, who visit once or twice a year. In between, there are weekly phone calls.

“Short of actually being there to give them a hug, I’m there more so than you might be able to imagine. It’s still playing the big brother role, giving them a shoulder to cry on, somebody to talk to, offering advice,” he says.

Some argue Smith’s tightly controlled environment leaves little room for violence or misconduct, but a psychologist who testified on his behalf said his good behaviour is unusual among inmates facing the death penalty.

“A high number commit suicide or go insane,” said Dr. Bowman Smelko.

Over the years, the federal government had lent its voice to Smith’s cause, based on Canada’s official position to the death penalty since abolishing capital punishment in 1976.

At one time, the former Liberal government was working to have Smith returned to Canada under a bilateral treaty that allows prisoners to finish their sentence in a Canadian institution.

That changed with the election of the Conservatives in 2006, with Prime Minister Stephen Harper saying that supporting clemency would send the “wrong signal” at a time when it was implementing a tough-on-crime agenda in Canada.

In 2009, the Federal Court of Canada ordered the government to continue support for Smith. Its response was a brief letter to Montana officials from Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird asking them to commute Smith’s sentence but adding the Canadian government “does not sympathize with violent crime,” and the request “should not be construed as reflecting a judgment on Smith’s conduct.”

Baird’s terse missive may have complied with the letter of the ruling, but Smith and his supporters criticized the Conservatives for failing to live up to its spirit.

“It’s like a petulant child: ‘We’re being forced into this, but whatever you want to do, go ahead.’ I don’t think it benefits me, but I don’t think it really hurts me, either. We can present a good enough argument to show I’m not the same person I was 30 years ago. I think that’s going to be of more benefit than anything the Canadian government does, did or did not do,” Smith says.

The controversy flared anew at Smith’s clemency hearing, when a Canadian consular official was added to the list of defence witnesses at the last minute. The official was apparently supposed to read a new, presumably more supportive letter to the parole board, but did not testify. Smith’s lawyers allege the government once again reneged on its duty to help.

In large measure, Smith’s clemency bid rests on demonstrating what Montana law calls an “extended period of exemplary behaviour” and evidence of remorse.

Smith and his lawyers feel they have met that test, and Smith issued a direct apology to the families of Mad Man and Running Rabbit during his clemency hearing.

But the parole board will also consider the circumstances of the crime itself and the impact it had on the victims and their loved ones.

Smith killed Mad Man and Running Rabbit, but a dozen family members told the parole board the crime hastened the deaths of victims’ grandmother, their mothers and other relatives.

Running Rabbit had a young daughter and an infant son who grew up without him.

While Smith can enjoy visits with his daughter and grandchildren, all Jessica Crawford and Thomas Running Rabbit IV have left of their father is a grave marker.

“I have a great deal of jealousy toward what (Smith’s daughter) has and I don’t,” Crawford told the parole board.

“I want what she has. I want what he took.”

Smith’s lawyers also argued he was poorly represented at trial by an inexperienced and indifferent public defender.

Munro was “equally culpable,” said Don Vernay, yet the plea agreement he accepted allowed him to finish his sentence in Canada. He is now free on parole while Smith sits on death row. (Fontaine, who co-operated with investigators and didn’t have a hand in the killings, has long since finished serving the five-year sentence he received.)

Former prosecutors say Smith received fair trials, each of which ended in the same result: a death sentence.

The punishment fits the crime, and justice for Mad Man and Running Rabbit’s relatives — living and dead — dictates the death sentence is carried out, former state attorney Tom Esch told the parole board.

“To bestow mercy now is not justice,” he said.

(source: Postmedia News)

NEBRASKA:

Neb. lawmakers want fresh look at execution method

Some Nebraska lawmakers say questions about the state's supply of a lethal injection drug should prompt the state to reconsider its execution protocol.

Nebraska's protocol was developed by the state Correctional Services department and approved by the governor. It calls for the administration of 3 drugs, including sodium thiopental, which is hard to obtain in the United States.

Nebraska has twice obtained supplies of the drug. The 1st batch, obtained from an India-based drug company in January 2011, was ruled to have been illegally imported. Questions are mounting about the importation of the 2nd batch, delaying executions.

Omaha Sen. Brad Ashford told the Lincoln Journal Star (http://bit.ly/KeUsKE) that if there are problems with Nebraska's method of execution, then lawmakers are obligated to re-examine it.

"If any system was this dysfunctional anywhere else in state government, we would have a committee, we would have a commission, we would have subpoena power and we'd do all sorts of things," said Ashford, who chairs the Judiciary Committee, which considers measures related to the courts. "But because it's the death penalty, there is a reticence to look closely at it. I think we should. I think it's our obligation."

Omaha Sen. Scott Lautenbaugh, another committee member, agreed. He told the newspaper he'd be willing to take another look at the protocol approved in 2010, after the state changed its method of execution from electrocution to lethal injection.

A Swiss pharmaceutical company has issued a voluntary recall of the drug, saying the product was "illegally diverted from the company's supply chain." Nebraska state officials have said they obtained the supply in a legitimate manner and will not return it.

In March, a U.S. judge found the FDA wrongly allowed other states to import the drug. The judge ordered the federal agency to immediately notify any state correctional department with foreign-manufactured thiopental that its use is prohibited by law, and that the drug must be returned to the FDA.

The Nebraska attorney general's office has refused a request from the FDA to turn over Nebraska's batch of sodium thiopental. The attorney general instead suggested the FDA appeal the federal judge's ruling.

Correctional Services Director Bob Houston has said the execution protocol would not be changed, as it has in other states dealing with similar drug problems. Those states have switched to a 1-drug protocol that relies on barbiturate pentobarbital.

Omaha Sen. Steve Lathrop, vice chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said he worries that changing the protocol will bring new challenges, such as a new round of appeals from death row inmates.

"The big issue with the protocol is whether it is a humane way to kill someone," he said. "The current protocol essentially puts someone to sleep, then the other drugs stop their breathing and heart. A 1-drug shot in the arm may not work the same way."

Lathrop suggested Nebraska may want to abolish the death penalty altogether.

"The system encourages decades of litigation while the victim's families wait for finality," he said. "For the sake of the victim's families who deserve the finality of a true life sentence, and for taxpayers whose hard-earned taxes are paying for this litigation, the death penalty should be repealed and replaced with incarceration until dead."

(source: The Independent)

PENNSYLVANIA----2 new death sentences

Jury gives death penalty in case of slain rapper

It took a Lancaster County jury 8 hours to decide Jakeem Towles should die for killing a young hip-hop artist 2 years ago in Columbia.

At 4:10 p.m. Tuesday, the jury foreman, a man in his 40s, confirmed aloud the decision that was written on a verdict sheet: death.

Towles, in silence, held his hand to his chin and stared down — a stature he maintained for most of the 7-day trial regarding the death of Cornell "Young E-Z" Stewart.

The courtroom gallery, however, exploded in noise.

Towles' family members shrieked and cried loudly, prompting deputy sheriffs to physically remove them.

One deputy hopped over a bench to reach Towles' supporters, some of whom flailed and screamed.

On the way out, Towles' teenage sister screamed at Stewart's supporters: "He's dead! He's dead!"

Towles, now 22, is the 1st person sentenced to death in Lancaster County since 20-year-old Abe Sanchez in 2009. Sanchez was convicted of killing 65-year-old Ray Diener during a botched robbery at Diener's West Donegal home in 2007.

The jury that labored 8 hours over 2 days in deliberation was visibly distraught Tuesday afternoon.

None of the them looked directly at Towles as they were led into the courtroom.

When asked by county Judge Howard Knisely for the verdict, the foreman bowed, exhaled and spoke.

A woman on the panel struggled to speak when Knisely asked each juror if they agreed with the verdict. All 12 said they did.

A male juror was consoled by another male juror, and asked if he was okay. The distraught juror nodded that he was.

Towles never looked directly at the panel, even as the judge polled them one-by-one.

Towles had a quiet exchange with defense lawyer Sam Encarnacion, only nodding his head.

Stewart's family bowed and cried quietly while holding one another. Stewart's brother leaned forward and rocked nervously.

Both sides were at the courthouse all day Tuesday awaiting the decision.

Just before 4 p.m., the jury informed a bailiff they had come to unanimous agreement.

(source: Lancaster Intelligencer Journal)

*********************

Parrish Heading to Death Row

A man was ordered to death row Tuesday afternoon in Monroe County.

Michael Parrish of Effort, convicted of shooting to death his girlfriend and toddler son, was formally sentenced to death.

Just before the judge sentenced the convicted killer, he made a statement to the court.

Half of the statement was in another language. In Arabic Parrish told reporters, “Peace be upon you,” as he was escorted into the courtroom for his formal sentencing.

Last month, a jury found Parrish guilty of shooting Victoria Adams and their young son, Sidney, in 2009. The murders happened at the couple’s home near Effort.

That same jury decided Parrish should get the death penalty for his crimes.

Now it was the judge’s turn to formally sentence Parrish.

In court, only 1 family member spoke on behalf of the victims’ family.

The judge then asked if Parrish would like to make a statement and he did.

First in English, then he translated what he said into Arabic.

He told the judge, “I bear witness that Allah is the only one true God and Muhammad is his messenger,” stated Parrish.

Then the judge formally sentenced Parrish to death row. “May God, in His infinite wisdom, have mercy on your soul,” said President Judge Margherita Worthington.

“It was really nice to hear the judge say sentenced to death. That really gave me a good feeling,” said Malcom Adams, Victoria’s father.

The family member who spoke inside the courtroom was Victoria’s aunt, who was also pleased with the death sentence, however she told the judge she would prefer life in prison for the convicted killer.

“So he could sit there and think about what he did for the rest of his life,” said Anne Adams Wagner.

“I wanted to hear an apology. I wanted to hear something, some kind of remorse from him, and there was nothing,” said Kim Adams, Victoria’s mother.

“He apologized in a 4 page letter shortly after being taken into custody. His apology is of long standing. He felt that after careful reflection, what he said in court was the most appropriate thing to say at this time,” said Parrish’s attorney Wieslaw Niemoczynski.

“Out of everything here there’s no winners, there’s all losers. Everybody lost. That’s it,” said Joseph Parrish, Michael Parrish’s father.

“The good thing is he’s on death row and is safe from the public and will perpetrate no more evil on law-abiding citizens,” said Monroe County District Attorney David Christine.

According to the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections website there are 202 people listed on death row, not including Parrish.

The last person executed in Pennsylvania was Gary Heidnik in 1999.

(source: WNEP News)

WASHINGTON:

Share on twitterShare on emailMore Sharing Services0Jury again chooses death penalty in Tacoma rape, murder ---- A Pierce County jury on Tuesday decided Allen Eugene Gregory should die for raping and murdering Tacoma resident Geneine Harshfield in 1996.

A Pierce County jury on Tuesday decided Allen Eugene Gregory should die for raping and murdering Tacoma resident Geneine Harshfield in 1996.

The jury of 8 women and 4 men deliberated over part of 2 days before reaching the decision, which was announced before lunch in the courtroom of Superior Court Judge Rosanne Buckner.

Gregory, 39, gave no reaction as Buckner read the verdict form and chatted quietly with his lawyers as they filled out paperwork.

Harshfield’s mother, Lee Peden, cried quietly in the front row of the gallery. Deputy prosecutor John Neeb turned and gave her a quick nod. It will be up to Buckner to officially impose the death sentence at a hearing June 13. She ordered Gregory jailed without bail until then.

It was the 2nd time a Pierce County jury decided Gregory should die for what he did to Harshfield, 43, in the kitchen of her home 16 years ago. Police said she was tied up, raped and slashed and stabbed with a knife.

Police later matched his DNA to the crime scene.

Gregory was convicted of killing Harshfield and first sentenced to death in 2001. 5 years later the Washington State Supreme Court ratified Gregory’s murder conviction but overturned his death sentence, citing judicial and prosecutorial error.

Prosecutors decided shortly thereafter to try again for a death sentence, and Gregory’s penalty trial began in March.

Neeb and defense attorneys Zenon Olbertz and Brett Purtzer delivered closing arguments Monday.

Peden sat through every day of testimony in Gregory’s most recent trial. She said Tuesday it was difficult to hear again the brutal details of her daughter’s death and to be reminded of her loss.

“This certainly slammed it right back to the forefront again,” she said. “You’re just not supposed to bury your children.”

Peden said the end result was what she wanted. The jury’s only other choice was to give Gregory life in prison without the possibility of parole. “I thought the verdict was right the first time,” she said. “I think it’s right this time.”

Olbertz said outside court he thought jurors could not get past the terrible act his client committed and see him as a human being. Crime scene and autopsy photos admitted for the trial were horrific, he said.

“I think they’re supposed to get beyond that, but it’s kind of blinding,” Olbertz said.

(source: The News Tribune)

VIETNAM:

US-Vietnamese prisoner's wife appeals for US help

The wife of a US citizen held in Vietnam urged Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Tuesday to push for his release, as a senior US official said Hanoi's respect for human rights is deteriorating.

A House of Representatives panel heard the plea from Mai Huong Ngo, the wife of Nguyen Quoc Quan who was reported arrested on April 17 in Ho Chi Minh City.

"I come here to appeal for your assistance in securing my husband's release from arbitrary detention in Vietnam," Mai Huong Ngo told the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission panel.

Her voice breaking at times during the testimony, Ngo personally appealed to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the US ambassador to Hanoi, David Shear, to "call for the immediate release of my husband."

She was due later to meet with Michael Posner, the assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights and labor who told the commission that Vietnam's "respect for human rights continues to deteriorate."

Ngo said US consular staff have visited her husband once and were due to visit him again at the end of May. She said he needed cooler clothes to make him more comfortable in the hot weather.

State media said Quan, also known as Richard Nguyen, was detained at Tan Son Nhat airport upon "trying to enter Vietnam to instigate a demonstration and undermine celebrations" on the anniversary of the 1975 fall of Saigon.

The Vietnam News Agency (VNA) said he will be detained for 4 months pending an investigation for the charge of "terrorism against the people's administration," which could lead to the death penalty if convicted.

Communist Vietnam, however, has never executed a foreign citizen for political charges.

The 59-year-old Nguyen, a member of the outlawed Viet Tan Party, received a 6-month jail sentence for terror charges and was deported out of Vietnam in May 2008, VNA said.

Viet Tan, the Vietnam Reform Party, describes itself as non-violent and pro-democracy group. Vietnam however labels it as "terrorist."

Posner said Vietnam continues to "unjustly detain and imprison individuals for exercising their basic human rights," estimating the government holds around 100 "prisoners of conscience."

He also charged that there is growing restrictions on the print media, television and the Internet, citing recent decrees that "stifle an already restricted press."

Posner complained about legal provisions that allow the government to target peaceful protesters and outlaw "propaganda," which he said was used against a musician who posted a political song on the internet.

He also said the United States is concerned about harassment of Christian groups and disputes with Buddhist groups, even though Vietnam's constitution guarantees freedom of religion.

Activist Vo Van Ai told the panel that many Americans "believe that the strengthening of US relations with Hanoi means that human rights are improving in Vietnam."

"But this is far from the case," according to the president and founder of Que Me: Action for Democracy in Vietnam.

"The government has pursued a systematic crackdown on freedom of opinion, expression, religion and assembly," he said.

"Arbitrary detention, torture and harassments are the daily lot of citizens who express opinions in contradiction with the ruling Communist Party of Vietnam," he said.

President Barack Obama's administration has frequently urged Vietnam to make progress on human rights but it has nonetheless rapidly expanded relations, which both sides have sought amid the rise of China.

During a speech in Hawaii in November, Clinton said that Vietnam must improve its human rights record if it seeks better relations as the two countries held talks on the issue.

(source: Agence France-Presse)

INDIA:

Will life term now mean 30 years in jail?

Increasingly reluctant to award death penalty even in the "rarest of rare cases" involving unspeakable brutality, the judiciary appears to be gradually enhancing the spell of life term to not less than 30 years in order to meet society's cry for adequate punishment for heinous crimes.

Those sentenced for life, strictly speaking, are supposed to spend their remaining years behind bars. In practice, however, life imprisonment means incarceration for 14 years when lifers become entitled to remission of the rest of the sentence as per Prison Manual provisions.

That might change as the apex court seeks to balance the growing judicial aversion towards imposing death sentences with the need to deter heinous crimes. In potentially trendsetting verdicts, an SC bench of Justices B S Chauhan and F M I Kalifulla set the 30-year imprisonment benchmark for 2 accused - a father who raped and killed his 4-year-old daughter and the other who brutally killed his girlfriend after she refused to abort her pregnancy.

Justice Chauhan wrote the judgment for the bench in punishing the father while Justice Kalifulla imposed the 30-year prison term on the boy who killed his girlfriend for her refusal to abort the fetus after having lured her away to Haridwar with the promise to marry her.

The common thread in the two judgments separated by three days, one on May 8 and the other on May 11, was the well-settled principle "life sentence is the rule and death is an exception", and that the application of "rarest of rare case" principle differed from case to case.

In the May 8 judgment awarding 30-year jail term to the accused father, Justice Chauhan said, "We are of the considered opinion that the case does not fall within the rarest of rare cases. However, considering the nature of offence, age and relationship of the victim with the appellant and gravity of injuries caused to her, appellant cannot be awarded a lenient punishment. Thus, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we set aside the death sentence and award life imprisonment. The appellant must serve a minimum of 30 years in jail without remission, before consideration of his case for premature release."

In the May 11 judgment, Justice Kalifulla explained that the "rarest of rare case" principle could be applied in a "deliberately planned crime, executed meticulously in a diabolic manner, exhibiting inhuman conduct in a ghastly manner touching the conscience of everyone, thereby disturbing the moral fiber of society", which would call for imposition of capital punishment in order to ensure that it acted as a deterrent.

The bench of Justices Chauhan and Kalifulla was convinced that the boyfriend, Sandeep, deserved no leniency given the manner in which the young woman became a victim of the "avaricious conduct and lust" of the appellant and the manner in which her life was snatched away by causing multiple injuries all over her body with all kinds of weapons.

The bench said, "Imposition of death penalty to the accused Sandeep was not warranted and while awarding life imprisonment, we hold that accused Sandeep must serve a minimum of 30 years in jail without remission before consideration of his case for premature release."

In the Swami Shraddhanand case, the apex court had set aside the death penalty but ordered that the accused would remain in prison till the end of his life. There are other instances where the court has specified that the accused must spend at least 20 years in prison before being entitled for remission.

But these 2 consecutive judgments asking the accused to spend a mandatory 30 years in prison has set the bar up in murder cases where the court awards life sentence while setting aside death penalty given to him by the trial court and upheld by the high court.

Times View

The world over, the trend is towards abolishing the death penalty. We have advocated that India too should move in that direction, except in cases of crimes like terrorism. What complicates the debate, however, is the fact that a life sentence in India has more often than not actually meant 14 years. We have consistently argued that life must mean life. Where the courts feel 14 years is sufficient punishment for a crime, they should spell it out as a 14-year sentence. And life sentences should mean imprisonment till death. That would strengthen the case for doing away with the death penalty without seriously harming the idea of punishment as deterrent. Seen in this context, the move from 14 years to 30 years is a step in the right direction, but perhaps not enough.

(source: The Times of India)

DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO:

British man charged over African massacre after discovering bodies

A pilot from North Yorkshire is being held in prison in Africa after discovering 'bodies with machete wounds'.

David Simpson, moved from his home near Pickering to the Central African Republic 2 years ago to work on a game reserve.

However, the 24-year-old was arrested 6 weeks ago after stumbling upon a gruesome scene, in which he reported to the local police that he had discovered 18 mutilated bodies.

His family says Mr Simpson, who works as a manager and pilot for a Swedish safari company, is now being treated as an official murder suspect following his arrest. He is being held along with his boss, Swede Erik Mararv, and 10 Central Africans.

Mr Simpson says that he is innocent, but could face the death penalty if found guilty.

He told the Daily Mail in a mobile phone conversation: "It's like a nightmare. I just want this to be over".

Mr Simpson's family have told ITV Tyne Tees that he has spent time in a crowded cell though his conditions have now improved.

His brother Paul told ITV News reporter Geraint Vincent, that the Foreign Office has not done enough to aid his release.

The Foreign Office has responded:

“Consular staff have visited Mr Simpson regularly since his arrest and are also in regular contact with his family in the UK. We have asked the CAR authorities for assurances that the legal process will be followed and for the matter to be concluded as swiftly as possible.

Following the incident, his family set up a Facebook group to campaign for his release, which now has more than 3,000 members.

Many commentators have linked the killings to supporters of the Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

(source: ITV)

ZAMBIA:

2 Ex-Soldiers to Hang

2 former Zambia Army soldiers have been sentenced to death for the brutal killing of 2 Finance Bank employees and stealing more than K900 million which was being transported to Kaoma.

The 2 former staff sergeants, Festus Shandulu and Namushi Ngundamai, who were based at Luena Barracks, ambushed a vehicle in 2009 which was transporting cash meant for Government workers' salaries and shot dead Chisala Chishimba, a driver, and Chrispin Mushele, a bank teller.

The duo also got away with K958,550,000 from John Kaunda, an employee of Finance Bank.

Delivering his judgment in Lusaka, Kabwe-based High Court Judge, Freddie Sikazwe, said the bloody attack resulted in the death of 2 innocent people who were carrying out their duty.

Mr Justice Sikazwe said that there was, therefore, no other punishment for aggravated robbery when a weapon is used more so that the soldiers shot dead 2 people.

"I have no other option other than sentencing you to death by hanging until you are pronounced dead," Mr Justice Sikazwe said.

Mr Mushele and Mr Chishimba were killed at Namusheshe area on their way from Mongu to collect money for civil servants in Kaoma.

Shandulu and Ngundamai, who were charged with 2 counts of murder and 1 count of aggravated robbery while armed with an AK47 rifle, shot dead the duo while they were in their vehicle seats.

"I have no doubt this type of robbery was organised by a band of expert armed robbers as could be seen from the way the murder and aggravated robbery was committed.

"Mr Chishimba and Mr Mushele were shot dead in cold blood and whoever killed them must have known that such an act would cause death or grievous bodily harm," the judge said.

Mr Justice Sikazwe noted that the witnesses were reliable and as such the prosecution proved the offences against Shandulu and Ngundamai beyond reasonable doubt.

He said it was not in dispute that the money found in different situations was part of the one snatched from the cash-in-transit van.

"The AK47 rifle, GC 1674 and 30 live ammunition which were recovered in the bush where Shandulu led a team of police officers were part of the guns used to shoot the occupants of the cash-in-transit van," Mr Justice Sikazwe said.

He said there was overwhelming evidence that the armed men who snatched the money were the same ones who murdered the 2 bank employees.

The Zambian Constitution under Part III on the Protection of Fundamental Rights and Freedom of the Individual allows for death penalty.

Article 12 in this section, dealing with the protection of the right to life, clause (1) states that: "No person shall be deprived of his life intentionally except in execution of the sentence of a court in respect of a criminal offence under the law in force in Zambia of which he has been convicted".

The Technical Committee on Drafting Zambia's next Constitution has upheld the death penalty.Zambia, has, however, not witnessed any hanging of convicts since 1997.

Then president, Frederick Chiluba authorised hanging of 8 prisoners, the only executions he assented to during his 10 years in office.

(source: All Africa News)

TEXAS:

Carlos De Luna Execution: Texas Put To Death An Innocent Man, Columbia University Team Says

One of the strongest arguments against the death penalty is the frightening chance of executing an innocent person. Columbia University law professor James Liebman said he and a team of students have proven that Texas gave a lethal injection to the wrong man.

Carlos De Luna was executed in 1989 for stabbing to death a gas station clerk in Corpus Christi 6 years earlier. It was a ghastly crime. The trial attracted local attention, but not from concern that a guiltless man would be punished while the killer went free.

De Luna, an 8th grade dropout, maintained that he was innocent from the moment cops put him in the back seat of a patrol car until the day he died. Today, 29 years after De Luna was arrested, Liebman and his team published a mammoth report in the Human Rights Law Review that concludes De Luna paid with his life for a crime he likely did not commit. Shoddy police work, the prosecution's failure to pursue another suspect, and a weak defense combined to send De Luna to death row, they argued.

"I would say that across the board, there was nonchalance," Liebman told The Huffington Post. "It looked like a common case, but we found that there was a very serious claim of innocence."

Police and prosecutors treated the killing of Wanda Lopez at the Sigmor Shamrock gas station on February 4, 1983, like a robbery gone bad. A recording of the chilling 911 call from Lopez, a 24-year-old single mom working the night shift, captured her screaming and begging her killer for mercy.

De Luna, then 20, was found hiding under a pickup truck a few blocks from the gory crime scene. A wad of rolled-up bills totaling $149 was in his pocket.

Eyewitness testimony formed the bedrock of the case against him. Now, that testimony is perhaps most contested aspect of his conviction.

Cops brought De Luna back to the Shamrock. A customer filling his tank before the murder told police that De Luna was the man he saw putting a knife in his pocket outside the store. Another customer who rushed to the store's entrance when he heard Lopez struggling identified De Luna as the man who emerged. A married couple saw a man running a few blocks away and later identified De Luna in police photos shown to them.

With De Luna's record of numerous arrests for burglary and public drunkenness, plus a conviction for attempted rape and auto theft, it seemed like police had found the perp. But Liebman said De Luna took the fall in a case of mistaken identity.

Among the key findings in the Columbia team's report:

•The eyewitness statements actually conflict with each other. What witnesses said about the appearance and location of the suspect suggest that they were describing more than one person.

•Photos of a bloody footprint and blood spatter on the walls suggest the killer would have had blood on his shoes and pant legs, yet De Luna's clothes were clean.

•Prosecutors and police ignored tips unearthed in the case files that Carlos Hernandez, an older friend of De Luna, who had a reputation for wielding a blade, had killed Lopez. The defense failed to track down Hernandez, who bore a striking resemblance to De Luna.

"If a new trial was somehow able to be conducted today, a jury would acquit De Luna" said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, who read a draft of Liebman's report. "We don't have a perfect case where can agree that we have an innocent person who's been executed, but by weight of this investigation, I think we can say this is as close as a person is going to come."

In 1983 and during the appeals process, officials handling De Luna's case saw the opposite -- a slam-dunk conviction. The prosecution and the court-appointed defense lawyer didn't put much stock in De Luna's claim that Hernandez plunged a knife into Lopez's chest. Record-keeping was so lax there's no clear evidence the gas station was robbed during the slaying, Liebman said.

In trying to clear his name, De Luna didn't help himself. For months after his arrest, he refused to reveal the name of the real killer, because he feared Hernandez. His credibility plummeted when other parts of his alibi for the night of the murder were disproven by the prosecutor.

The fateful night began, according to De Luna, when he went to a skating rink, where he met Hernandez and two sisters. De Luna admitted that he was near the gas station later, but said he was across the street in a bar. While he nursed his drink, Hernandez bought cigarettes in the Shamrock. He said he emerged from the bar to see Hernandez fighting with Lopez. Hearing police sirens, he said he fled, because he didn't want to get into trouble.

The prosecution, however, discredited De Luna's version of events. One of the sisters who was allegedly with him at the rink testified that she was at her baby shower that night.

"I had blown his alibi to bits," said Steve Schiwetz, one of the prosecutors.

A guilty verdict was reached with little delay. The capital murder trial lasted 6 days in July 1983.

"I'm open to the argument that somebody named Carlos Hernandez really did it," said Schiwetz, "but everything I know confirms the original impression that De Luna did it."

The apparent random targeting of Lopez wasn't Hernandez's style, Schiwetz said. Hernandez's tendency was to unleash violence on the his girlfriends and wife, not strangers, he said. In 1986, Hernandez was accused of murdering another woman with a knife, but the case was dismissed.

Several of Hernandez' family members interviewed for the Columbia University report said pictures of the murder weapon found at the gas station looked like the knife Hernandez habitually kept with him. In all of De Luna's numerous arrests, police never found him carrying a blade, according to the Columbia report.

The relatives' portrait of Hernandez's disheveled appearance gelled with a description of the suspect seen fleeing the convenience store. Witness Kevan Baker said the killer looked like a "derelict," wearing a flannel jacket and gray sweatshirt. Hernandez's relatives said he often wore a flannel coat. De Luna was fastidious with his appearance and always wore black slacks and dress shirts, the report said.

Liebman sought more scientific proof. Fingerprints taken from the knife and cigarette pack found at the crime scene were sent to a former Scotland Yard investigator for comparison with Hernandez's prints. But the evidence had been so poorly collected by police, Liebman said, that the results were inconclusive.

The Columbia University team's report, more than 400 pages long, also is a biography of the central players, emphasizing the troubled upbringings and hard-drinking adulthoods of De Luna and Hernandez.

Liebman learned about De Luna roughly 10 years ago, when he began examining convictions in which a single eyewitness testified. As he and a student delved into the files, they became convinced De Luna wasn't guilty.

They turned over their findings to the Chicago Tribune which published a three-part series in 2006 that found evidence suggesting Hernandez killed Lopez. Multiple people told the Tribune that Hernandez -- who died in 1999 in prison from cirrhosis of the liver -- had confessed to killing her.

Revisiting questions about Lopez's death would be too painful, her nephews said.

"That's something our family has had to deal with," Louis Vargas told The Huffington Post. "We've had closure with it and we don't want to reopen it. We believe the justice system did what it had to do."

One of De Luna's attorneys, James Lawrence, told HuffPost he doesn't count him among the clients who've been wrongfully accused of capital crimes.

"The fact that he wouldn't help us and this was his life on the line -- that's the one thing that kept bothering the living daylights out of me," Lawrence said.

Since the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976, there have been 1,295 executions, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. Texas leads with 482 executions.

The ease with which De Luna was prosecuted and the obscurity of his death are what makes his case so important, said Liebman.

"There are many cases out there that nobody has ever looked at and are probably at risk of innocence," said Liebman. "It's a cautionary tale about the risks we take when we have the death penalty."

(source: Michael McLaughlin, Huffington Post)

***************

The wrong Carlos: how Texas sent an innocent man to his death----Groundbreaking Columbia law school study sets out in shocking detail the flaws that led to Carlos DeLuna's execution in 1989

A few years ago, Antonin Scalia, one of the 9 justices on the US supreme court, made a bold statement. There has not been, he said, "a single case – not one – in which it is clear that a person was executed for a crime he did not commit. If such an event had occurred … the innocent's name would be shouted from the rooftops."

Scalia may have to eat his words. It is now clear that a person was executed for a crime he did not commit, and his name – Carlos DeLuna – is being shouted from the rooftops of the Columbia Human Rights Law Review. The august journal has cleared its entire spring edition, doubling its normal size to 436 pages, to carry an extraordinary investigation by a Columbia law school professor and his students.

The book sets out in precise and shocking detail how an innocent man was sent to his death on 8 December 1989, courtesy of the state of Texas. Los Tocayos Carlos: An Anatomy of a Wrongful Execution, is based on 6 years of intensive detective work by Professor James Liebman and 12 students.

Starting in 2004, they meticulously chased down every possible lead in the case, interviewing more than 100 witnesses, perusing about 900 pieces of source material and poring over crime scene photographs and legal documents that, when stacked, stand over 10ft high.

What they discovered stunned even Liebman, who, as an expert in America's use of capital punishment, was well versed in its flaws. "It was a house of cards. We found that everything that could go wrong did go wrong," he says.

Carlos DeLuna was arrested, aged 20, on 4 February 1983 for the brutal murder of a young woman, Wanda Lopez. She had been stabbed once through the left breast with an 8in lock-blade buck knife which had cut an artery causing her to bleed to death.

From the moment of his arrest until the day of his death by lethal injection 6 years later, DeLuna consistently protested he was innocent. He went further – he said that though he hadn't committed the murder, he knew who had. He even named the culprit: a notoriously violent criminal called Carlos Hernandez.

The 2 Carloses were not just namesakes – or tocayos in Spanish, as referenced in the title of the Columbia book. They were the same height and weight, and looked so alike that they were sometimes mistaken for twins. When Carlos Hernandez's lawyer saw pictures of the two men, he confused one for the other, as did DeLuna's sister Rose.

At his 1983 trial, Carlos DeLuna told the jury that on the day of the murder he'd run into Hernandez, who he'd known for the previous five years. The 2 men, who both lived in the southern Texas town of Corpus Christi, stopped off at a bar. Hernandez went over to a gas station, the Shamrock, to buy something, and when he didn't return DeLuna went over to see what was going on.

DeLuna told the jury that he saw Hernandez inside the Shamrock wrestling with a woman behind the counter. DeLuna said he was afraid and started to run. He had his own police record for sexual assault – though he had never been known to possess or use a weapon – and he feared getting into trouble again.

"I just kept running because I was scared, you know." When he heard the sirens of police cars screeching towards the gas station he panicked and hid under a pick-up truck where, 40 minutes after the killing, he was arrested.

At the trial, DeLuna's defence team told the jury that Carlos Hernandez, not DeLuna, was the murderer. But the prosecutors ridiculed that suggestion. They told the jury that police had looked for a "Carlos Hernandez" after his name had been passed to them by DeLuna's lawyers, without success. They had concluded that Hernandez was a fabrication, a "phantom" who simply did not exist. The chief prosecutor said in summing up that Hernandez was a "figment of DeLuna's imagination".

4 years after DeLuna was executed, Liebman decided to look into the DeLuna case as part of a project he was undertaking into the fallibility of the death penalty. He asked a private investigator to spend one day – just one day – looking for signs of the elusive Carlos Hernandez.

By the end of that single day the investigator had uncovered evidence that had eluded scores of Texan police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers and judges over the 6 years between DeLuna's arrest and execution. Carlos Hernandez did indeed exist.

Liebman's investigator tracked down within a few hours a woman who was related to both the Carloses. She supplied Hernandez's date of birth, which in turn allowed the unlocking of Hernandez's criminal past as the case rapidly unravelled.

With the help of his students, Liebman began to piece together a profile of Hernandez. He was an alcoholic with a history of violence, who was always in the company of his trusted companion: a lock-blade buck knife.

Over the years he was arrested 39 times, 13 of them for carrying a knife, and spent his entire adult life on parole. Yet he was almost never put in prison for his crimes – a disparity that Liebman believes was because he was used as a police informant. "Its hard to understand what happened without that piece of the puzzle," Liebman says.

Several of the crimes that Hernandez committed involved hold-ups of Corpus Christi gas stations. Just a few days before the Shamrock murder he was found cowering outside a nearby 7-Eleven wielding a knife – a detail never disclosed to DeLuna's defence.

He also had a history of violence towards women. He was twice arrested on suspicion of the 1979 murder of a woman called Dahlia Sauceda, who was stabbed and then had an "X" carved into her back. The first arrest was made 4 years before DeLuna's trial and the 2nd while DeLuna was on death row, yet the connection between this Hernandez and the "phantom" presented to DeLuna's jury was never made.

In October 1989, just two months before DeLuna was executed, Hernandez was setenced to 10 years' imprisonment for attempting to kill with a knife another woman called Dina Ybanez. Even then, no one thought to alert the courts or Texas state as it prepared to put DeLuna to death.

Hernandez himself frequently told people that he was a knife murderer. He made numerous confessions to having killed Wanda Lopez, the crime for which DeLuna was executed, joking with friends and relatives that his "tocayo" had taken the fall. His admissions were so widely broadcast that even Corpus Christi police detectives came to hear about them within weeks of the incident at the Shamrock gas station.

Yet this was the same Carlos Hernandez who prosecutors told the jury did not exist. This was the figment of Carlos DeLuna's imagination.

Many other glaring discrepancies also stand out in the DeLuna case. He was put on death row largely on the eyewitness testimony of one man, Kevan Baker, who had seen the fight inside the Shamrock and watched the attacker flee the scene.

Yet when Baker was interviewed 20 years later, he said that he hadn't been that sure about the identification as he had trouble telling one Hispanic person apart from another.

Then there was the crime-scene investigation. Detectives failed to carry out or bungled basic forensic procedures that might have revealed information about the killer. No blood samples were collected and tested for the culprit's blood type.

Fingerprinting was so badly handled that no useable fingerprints were taken. None of the items found on the floor of the Shamrock – a cigarette stub, chewing gum, a button, comb and beer cans – were forensically examined for saliva or blood.

There was no scraping of the victim's fingernails for traces of the attacker's skin. When Liebman and his students studied digitally enhanced copies of crime scene photographs, they were amazed to find the footprint from a man's shoe imprinted in a pool of Lopez's blood on the floor – yet no effort was made to measure it.

"There it was," says Liebman. "The murderer had left his calling card at the scene, but it was never used."

Even the murder weapon, the knife, was not properly examined, though it was covered in blood and flesh.

Other photographs show Lopez's blood splattered up to three feet high on the walls of the Shamrock counter. Yet when DeLuna's clothes and shoes were tested for traces of blood, not a single microscopic drop was found. The prosecution said it must have been washed away by the rain.

There appeared to have been an unseemly scramble to wrap up the crime scene. Less than 2 hours after the murder happened, the police chief in charge of the homicide investigation ordered all detectives to quit the Shamrock and allowed its owner to wash it down, sweeping away vital evidence that could have saved a man's life.

The exceptionally lax treatment of evidence continued even beyond the grave. When Liebman asked to see all the stored evidence in the case, so that he could subject it to the DNA testing that was not available to investigators in 1983, he was told that it had all disappeared.

Having lived and breathed this case for so many years, Liebman says the most shocking thing about it was its ordinariness. "This wasn't the trial of OJ Simpson. It was an obscure case, the kind that could involve anybody. Maybe those are the cases where miscarriages of justice happen, the routine everyday cases where nobody thinks enough about the victim, let alone the defendant."

The groundbreaking work that the Columbia law school has done comes at an important juncture for the death penalty in America. Connecticut last month became the 5th state in as many years to repeal the ultimate punishment and support for abolition is gathering steam.

In that context, Liebman hopes his exhaustive work will encourage Americans to think more deeply about what is done in their name. All the evidence the Columbia team has gathered on the DeLuna case has been placed on the internet with open public access.

"We've provided as complete a set of information as we can about a pretty average case, to let the public make its own judgment. I believe they will make the judgment that in this kind of case there's just too much risk."

As for the tocayos Carloses, Carlos Hernandez died of natural causes in a Texas prison in May 1999, having been jailed for assaulting a neighbour with a 9in knife.

Carlos DeLuna commented on his own ending in a television interview a couple of years before his execution. "Maybe one day the truth will come out," he said from behind reinforced glass. "I'm hoping it will. If I end up getting executed for this, I don't think it's right."

(source: The Guardian)

***************************

Columbia Law School Investigation Uncovers New Evidence Suggesting Texas Executed Innocent Man

New York, May 15, 2012—A groundbreaking investigation by Professor James Liebman [www.law.columbia.edu] and a team of Columbia Law School students has revealed new evidence demonstrating that the State of Texas likely executed an innocent man in 1989.

The investigation, published today by the Columbia Human Rights Law Review (HRLR) and at the website thewrongcarlos.net [www.thewrongcarlos.net], represents one of the most comprehensive collections of materials and evidence about a criminal case ever released to the public. It describes the case of Carlos DeLuna, a poor Hispanic man in his 20s with childlike intelligence who was convicted on the thinnest of evidence for the 1983 murder of a convenience store clerk. The materials include video and notes from hundreds of interviews with witnesses and key participants, the complete case files from police and prosecutors, and previously unreleased police audiotape of the manhunt that resulted in DeLuna’s arrest.

The HRLR has devoted its entire Spring 2012 issue to this book-length anatomy of a wrongful execution, titled Los Tocayos Carlos.

“No one cared enough about the defendant or the victim to make sure they caught the right guy,” said Liebman, a leading death penalty litigation expert and the Simon H. Rifkind Professor of Law at Columbia Law School. “Everything that could go wrong in a death penalty case did go wrong for DeLuna.”

The article documents how DeLuna was convicted on the basis of a single, nighttime, cross-ethnic eyewitness identification with no corroborating forensic evidence. He claimed from the start that another man named Carlos—Carlos Hernandez—stabbed clerk Wanda Lopez to death with a lock-blade buck knife at a convenience store in Corpus Christi, Texas. DeLuna’s assertion was derided by some as the “some other dude named Carlos” defense, and the lead prosecutor told the jury that Carlos Hernandez was a “phantom” of DeLuna’s imagination. Liebman and his co-authors, however, uncovered evidence showing that not only did Carlos Hernandez exist, but he was known to police and prosecutors at the time of the trial as someone with a long history of crimes similar to the one for which DeLuna was executed. The police audiotape that Liebman and his authors have released—suppressed during DeLuna’s trial—shows that police chased another man who matched Hernandez’s (but not DeLuna’s) description for 30 minutes immediately following the crime.

Hernandez had been arrested for murdering another woman with a lock-blade buck knife, and he stabbed and attempted to rape another woman while DeLuna was confined to death row. Hernandez spent years bragging around Corpus Christi that he, not his tocayo (“twin” or “namesake”), Carlos DeLuna, committed the murder. Indeed, families of both Carloses mistook photos of the men for each other.

"Sadly, DeLuna’s story is not unique,” Liebman said. “The very same factors that sent DeLuna to his death—faulty eyewitness testimony, shoddy legal representation, and prosecutorial misfeasance—continue to put innocent people at risk of execution today.”

The astonishing collection of primary documents and interviews allows readers to come to their own conclusions regarding DeLuna’s guilt or innocence. “My co-authors and I present the story as best we can tell it, and invite readers of all stripes to consider for themselves what happened and how concerned we should be about it,” Liebman said.

The materials presented in the article and at the website include:

· complete files of police, sheriff’s office, district attorney, county court, trial transcripts, and federal court records

· all of the police photos (which, via digital enhancement, revealed key evidence never recognized by the police, including the assailant’s bloody footprints)

·  a police audiotape of the 40-minute manhunt that led to Carlos DeLuna’s arrest

·  full criminal records of the key actors

·  a raft of television news clips and newspaper articles

·  20 videotaped interviews of key participants

·  notes from 100 witness interviews

·  an interactive map tracking key people, places, and events

For more information, please visit thewrongcarlos.net, or contact the Columbia Law School Public Affairs office at publicaffairs@law.columbia.edu to arrange an interview.

# # #

Columbia Law School [www.law.columbia.edu], founded in 1858, stands at the forefront of legal education and of the law in a global society. Columbia Law School combines traditional strengths in corporate law and financial regulation, international and comparative law, property, contracts, constitutional law, and administrative law with pioneering work in intellectual property, digital technology, tax law and policy, national security, sexuality and gender, and environmental law.

(source: Columbia University Law School)

*******************

Wrong man was executed in Texas, probe says

He was the spitting image of the killer, had the same 1st name and was near the scene of the crime at the fateful hour: Carlos DeLuna paid the ultimate price and was executed in place of someone else in Texas in 1989, a report out Tuesday found.

Even "all the relatives of both Carloses mistook them," and DeLuna was sentenced to death and executed based only on eyewitness accounts despite a range of signs he was not a guilty man, said law professor James Liebman.

Liebman and 5 of his students at Columbia School of Law spent almost 5 years poring over details of a case that he says is "emblematic" of legal system failure.

DeLuna, 27, was put to death after "a very incomplete investigation. No question that the investigation is a failure," Liebman said.

The report's authors found "numerous missteps, missed clues and missed opportunities that let authorities prosecute Carlos DeLuna for the crime of murder, despite evidence not only that he did not commit the crime but that another individual, Carlos Hernandez, did," the 780-page investigation found.

The report, entitled "Los Tocayos Carlos: Anatomy of a Wrongful Execution," traces the facts surrounding the February 1983 murder of Wanda Lopez, a single mother who was stabbed in the gas station where she worked in a quiet corner of the Texas coastal city of Corpus Christi.

"Everything went wrong in this case," Liebman said.

That night Lopez called police for help twice to protect her from an individual with a switchblade.

"They could have saved her, they said 'we made this arrest immediately' to overcome the embarrassment," Liebman said.

40 minutes after the crime Carlos DeLuna was arrested not far from the gas station.

He was identified by only 1 eyewitness who saw a Hispanic male running from the gas station. But DeLuna had just shaved and was wearing a white dress shirt -- unlike the killer, who an eyewitness said had a mustache and was wearing a grey flannel shirt.

Even though witnesses accounts were contradictory -- the killer was seen fleeing towards the north, while DeLuna was caught in the east -- DeLuna was arrested.

"I didn't do it, but I know who did," DeLuna said at the time, saying that he saw Carlos Hernandez entering the service station.

DeLuna said he ran from police because he was on parole and had been drinking.

Hernandez, known for using a blade in his attacks, was later jailed for murdering a woman with the same knife. But in the trial, the lead prosecutor told the jury that Hernandez was nothing but a "phantom" of DeLuna's imagination.

DeLuna's budget attorney even said that it was probable that Carlos Hernandez never existed.

However in 1986 a local newspaper published a photograph of Hernandez in an article on the DeLuna case, Liebman said.

Following hasty trial DeLuna was executed by lethal injection in 1989.

Up to the day he died in prison of cirrhosis of the liver, Hernandez repeatedly admitted to murdering Wanda Lopez, Liebman said.

"Unfortunately, the flaws in the system that wrongfully convicted and executed DeLuna -- faulty eyewitness testimony, shoddy legal representation and prosecutorial misconduct -- continue to send innocent men to their death today," read a statement that accompanies the report.

(source: Yahoo News)

************

Killing The Innocent With Indifference----Carlos DeLuna was executed by the state of Texas in 1989. A new study by Columbia University could prove his innocence.

The USA has almost certainly executed innocent men in the so called “modern” era of capital punishment, since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. One of them may have been Carlos DeLuna, who was put to death in Texas in 1989 for the killing of gas station attendant Wanda Lopez in Corpus Christi.

Today, a comprehensive report and website by James Liebman and a team of students in the Columbia University Human Rights Law Review makes a compelling case for DeLuna’s innocence.

To explain how this wrongful conviction and execution could have happened Liebman et al. point to the

“failure of lawyers on the defense as well as the prosecution side to have the curiosity and gumption to look just an inch or two below the surface.”

This is an all-too common occurrence, argue the authors, when there is a general indifference to an “obscure” victim like Wanda Lopez, making such cases “ripe for miscarriage” of justice.

This report, Los Tocayos Carlos, follows on the heels of an investigation by the Chicago Tribune, amplified by the film At the Death House Door, which already made it fairly clear that Texas authorities had the wrong Carlos.

Carlos Hernandez was the other Carlos, the man Carlos DeLuna said had stabbed Wanda Lopez. At trial, prosecutors declared that Hernandez was a “phantom” made up by DeLuna, but this wasn’t true. He was in fact well-known to Corpus Christi law enforcement as a man with a propensity to frightening violence and a love of knives. A career criminal who was almost always out on parole, he continued to assault women after DeLuna was sent to prison.

In November 1983, Hernandez was arrested for attacking his wife with an axe handle. He got 30 days in jail for a misdemeanor, but his parole wasn’t revoked. The judge who issued this light sentence was the father of the lawyer who had inadequately represented Carlos DeLuna.

Carlos Hernandez repeatedly told others that he killed Wanda Lopez and that a tocayo (namesake) was paying for the crime. Hernandez also told people he was responsible for a 1979 murder for which he was indicted but never tried. A former detective admitted that tipsters had told him Carlos Hernandez was the real killer of Wanda Lopez, but that information was apparently never pursued.

The failure to investigate Carlos Hernandez for the killing of Wanda Lopez, or to adequately punish him for other crimes, suggests a cruel indifference to the people of the community he was terrorizing. As the authors put it:

Wanda Lopez’s worthy and unimpeachable life was dishonored not only by the inattention to her plight on the night of February 4, 1983, by everyone in a position to help her, but also by the nonchalance with which everyone in a position to find her killer carried out that responsibility.

The people in this Corpus Christi community paid the price for this nonchalance, and it appears Carlos DeLuna paid the ultimate price.

If you think the death penalty is wrong and the risk of executing the innocent is too high then do something about it by joining our fight to abolish the death penalty in every US state.

(source: Amnesty International USA Blog; Brian Evans)

***************************

Yes, America, We Have Executed an Innocent Man----Carlos DeLuna was put to death in December 1989 for a murder in Corpus Christi. But he didn't commit the crime. Today, his case reminds us of the glaring flaws of capital punishment.

Even for Justice Antonin Scalia, the crassest of the current United States Supreme Court justices, it was a particularly callous piece of writing. In 2006, in a case styled Kansas v. Marsh, the Court's 5 conservatives had just upheld a portion of Kansas' capital punishment law. The statute was interpreted to direct a sentence of death even if a jury found the "aggravating" and "mitigating" sentencing factors in equilibrium -- "equipoise," the Court lyrically called it. A tie, in other words, would mean death, not life.

For the majority, Justice Clarence Thomas had bent over backward to overturn a ruling by the Kansas Supreme Court that had declared the law unconstitutional. The High Court's 4 liberal justices had voted to uphold the Kansas ruling. Justice John Paul Stevens, the Ford appointee, chastised Thomas for reaching out so aggressively to overturn a state court on a matter of state law. And Justice David Souter, the Bush I appointee, wrote about how such "equipoise" necessarily precluded a death sentence.

Mocking the rationale of both, and unsatisfied with the scope of Justice Thomas' majority opinion, Justice Scalia wrote a concurrence he will have to live with the rest of his life. As he sought to destroy Justice Souter's argument about the doubts reasonable people have about the accuracy and reliability of America's death penalty regime, Justice Scalia described a criminal justice system unfamiliar to anyone who has ever covered a murder case, read a book about one, or watched television news. Justice Scalia wrote:

It should be noted at the outset that the dissent does not discuss a single case -- not one -- in which it is clear that a person was executed for a crime he did not commit. If such an event had occurred in recent years, we would not have to hunt for it; the innocent's name would be shouted from the rooftops by the abolition lobby.

And then...

Capital cases are given especially close scrutiny at every level, which is why in most cases many years elapse before the sentence is executed. And of course capital cases receive special attention in the application of executive clemency. Indeed, one of the arguments made by abolitionists is that the process of finally completing all the appeals and reexaminations of capital sentences is so lengthy, and thus so expensive for the State, that the game is not worth the candle.

The proof of the pudding, of course, is that as far as anyone can determine (and many are looking), none of cases included in the .027% error rate for American verdicts involved a capital defendant erroneously executed.

There are 2 obvious and basic explanations for Justice Scalia's strident concurrence. Either he truly believed that capital cases are "given especially close scrutiny at every level," in which case he hadn't been paying attention to his work all those years. Or he did not truly believe that "capital cases receive special attention in the application of executive clemency," in which case his concurrence was just a thoughtless, reflexive reaction to Justice Souter's compelling case. Either way, he was wrong. Terribly wrong.

THE ARTICLE

The DeLuna case was flawed at virtually every level.At 11 p.m Monday, the Columbia University Human Rights Review published and posted its Spring 2012 issue -- devoted entirely to a single piece of work about the life and death of two troubled and troublesome South Texas men. In explaining to their readers why an entire issue would be devoted to just one story, the editors of the Review said straightly that the "gravity of the subject matter of the Article and the possible far-reaching policy ramifications of its publication necessitated this decision."

The article is titled "Los Tocayos Carlos: Anatomy of a Wrongful Execution" and it was written by James S. Liebman, Shawn Crowley, Andrew Markquart, Lauren Rosenberg, Lauren Gallo White, Lauren Rosenberg and Daniel Zharkovsky. Los Tacayos can be translated from Spanish as "namesakes" and the two men at the heart of the story were, indeed, named Carlos DeLuna and Carlos Hernandez.. On December 7, 1989, this intense piece establishes beyond any reasonable doubt, Texas executed the former for a murder the latter had committed.

The Review article is an astonishing blend of narrative journalism, legal research, and gumshoe detective work. And it ought to end all reasonable debate in this country about whether an innocent man or woman has yet been executed in America since the modern capital punishment regime was recognized by the Supreme Court in 1976. The article is also a clear and powerful retort to Justice Scalia in Kansas v. Marsh: Our capital cases don't have nearly the procedural safeguards he wants to pretend they do.

Soon to be published as a book, Los Tacayos Carlos is a seminal piece of online advocacy as well. Not only is the article itself now available on the web in its entirety (at www.thewrongcarlos.net) but so are all of its supporting materials. "The web version of the Article contains approximately 3,469 footnotes," the Review editors tell us, which in turn "provide hyperlinks to view the cited sources," including a great deal of the evidence relevant to the case. Now, everyone in the world who is interested can learn how bad it all can go when human beings try to administer what's supposed to be a fair, just and accurate death penalty.

THE HISTORY

Kansas v. Marsh was decided on June 26, 2006. The very next day, on June 27, 2006, two decorated Chicago Tribune reporters, Steve Mills and Maurice Possley, published the last of a three-part, groundbreaking series about the legal and factual problems with the DeLuna case. The headline that day was: "The Secret That Wasn't" and here was their lede:

It was a secret they all shared. Some kept it out of fear. Some because no one ever asked. Whatever their reasons, it was a secret that might have saved Carlos De Luna from the execution chamber. 23 years after Wanda Lopez was murdered in the gas station where she worked, family members and acquaintances of another man, Carlos Hernandez, have broken their silence to support what De Luna had long asserted: Hernandez, a violent felon, killed Lopez in 1983.

A Tribune investigation has identified five people who say Hernandez told them that he stabbed Lopez and that De Luna, whom he called his "stupid tocayo," or namesake, went to Death Row in his place. They also say he admitted killing another woman, in 1979, a crime for which he was indicted but never tried. Although some aspects of De Luna's actions on the night of Lopez's killing remain suspicious, the Tribune uncovered substantial evidence that undermines his conviction.

I met Possley while we were both covering the McVeigh bombing trial. That was before his groundbreaking work a decade ago exposing the arbitrary and capricious nature of the death penalty in Illinois. Last year, when Illinois ended its experiment with capital punishment, it was in large part because of the Tribune and the work of Mills, Possley and fellow reporter Ken Armstrong. So why had he chosen back in 2005 to focus upon the DeLuna case? What had struck him? Last week, Possley told me via email:

When I reflect back on the series, what I think about most is how this case was a sensational case in a small arena. It didn't play out on a national stage and it happened so quickly -- so little time between arrest, conviction and execution. I remember that what really got me interested in the case was seeing the crime scene photos with all of the blood and then learning that there was no blood on DeLuna. It just didn't seem possible that he committed such a crime and was caught so quickly and had no blood on his clothing.That fact was so startling to me.

I really haven't changed my view of the case from back then. I thought it was a colossal, global failure of every corner of the criminal justice system. The media failed to question the case (not unusual in smaller markets where police and prosecutors are the best sources) as well.

Possley says the new piece "takes a giant step beyond our reporting because it's such a comprehensive and detailed account" of the DeLuna case. And why wouldn't it be? It was Liebman who first came to Possley and Mills, in November 2005, to see if the two veteran journalists couldn't independently investigate what his own team had discovered about the two Carloses. The resultant series became a finalist that year for a Pulitzer Prize in National Reporting. Someone was shouting from the rooftops, Justice Scalia.

Like a Karmic game of leapfrog, the two investigations have enabled one another. For their 2006 series, Possley and Mills got new information that Liebman initially had not uncovered. And now, today, Liebman has uncovered new information that in 2006 was unavailable to Possley and Mills. And what is the point of all? Why spend the inordinate time and energy writing about the guilt or innocence of a man dead now more than 20 years? In the Epilogue, Liebman makes it clear:

With the publication of this book, we make our voices heard. At the same time, we have attempted to present the case so that our readers can consider the evidence for themselves, reach their own conclusions about what happened, and let their own consciences dictate how much tolerance for doubt is allowable when human life is on the line. Whatever else is true, we owe it to the Carlos DeLunas of our nation, as well as the Wanda Lopezes, to ask these questions and to shout out the answers.

THE STORY

Like Possley and Mills in 2006, I don't have the space here to do justice to the facts of the DeLuna case. But I will try. Carlos DeLuna was executed in December 1989 for murdering Wanda Lopez in a February 1983 robbery in Corpus Christi. A jury convicted him in an afternoon of deliberation and sentenced him to death shortly thereafter. No appellate courts came to his rescue. And the 6 years it took from crime to execution was surprisingly -- suspiciously -- fast; nationwide, it's usually twice that long.

Texas convicted and executed DeLuna, all right, despite the fact that there was no blood or DNA evidence linking him to the scene of the crime. The state executed him despite the fact that the only eyewitness to the crime identified DeLuna while the suspect was sitting in the back of a police car parked in a dimly lit lot in front of the crime scene. Texas executed him despite the lack of DeLuna's fingerprints at the crime scene and the lack of the victim's hair and fibers on DeLuna. From a bloody scene, there was nothing.

No one can ever say again with a straight face that America doesn't execute innocent men. No one. Texas convicted and executed DeLuna despite the fact that the police and prosecutors knew or should have known that Lopez's real murderer was a man named Carlos Hernandez, a violent criminal who looked almost exactly like DeLuna. Why? Because Hernandez was known to use the sort of knife used as the murder weapon. Because he matched initial descriptions of the suspect. Because he was known to be violent toward women. Oh, and because he evidently couldn't stop bragging about how he had murdered Lopez and gotten someone else to take the fall for him.

"... [It] is no overstatement to call it 'common knowledge' in 1980s Corpus Christi that Carlos Gonzalez Hernandez killed Wanda Lopez," Liebman and Co. conclude. Yet Texas executed DeLuna despite the fact that key evidence in the case went missing both before and after trial; that DeLuna initially was appointed a lawyer without criminal law experience; and that law enforcement failed to provide the defense with exculpatory evidence. Any one of these factors might warrant a new trial. Taken together they portray appalling injustice.

THE BACKSTORY

Reading through the manuscript last weekend, jarred by what I was seeing, I began to jot down a list of things that went terribly wrong in the DeLuna case -- issues of fact, of evidence, of testimony, of motives, of incompetence, of indifference, of fraud, of morality, of integrity, of constitutionality -- that should have been raised and answered long before DeLuna was convicted, much less executed, back in the 1980s. I stopped when I got to 10. Here's the list.

1. There was no DNA or blood evidence on DeLuna despite bloody murder scene. There were no fingerprints. There was only 1 eyewitness and he was sketchy about what he had seen.

2. Police/prosecutors knew the whereabouts of another, more likely, suspect. But they didn't tell the defense this before or after the trial.

3. When the defendant identified the likely killer shortly before trial, the police and prosecutors did not reasonably follow up even though they knew that the man identified was capable of committing the crime.

4. Based upon early witness reports, the police at first sought another suspect. They did not share this information with the defense even though the 2 men (the 2 Carloses) looked eerily like one another.

5. The police officer collecting witness accounts relayed inaccurate and incomplete descriptions of suspects to the police dispatcher, who radioed them to officers in manhunt.

6. Police investigators botched the crime scene by turning it back to the store manager just 2 hours after the murder to be washed down and reopened immediately.

7. Evidence from the initial investigation was checked out by a prosecutor the day after the trial and was never returned. Any usuable DNA thus was lost.

8. The trial judge appointed a solo civil practitioner without any criminal trial experience much less any capital trial experience. The defense did not call a single "mitigating" witness in the sentencing phase of trial.

9. Police investigators did not measure a bloody footprint they photographed at the scene of the crime or test a cigarette butt they found on the floor of the store where the victim died.

10. A 9-11 dispatcher failed to quickly dispatch police to the scene of the crime, despite the fact that the victim had called for help. Later, the "manhunt tape" made by dispatchers was taped over and not turned over to the defense by the police.

Surely this epic malfeasance and misfeasance cannot be what Justice Scalia had in mind when he wrote in Marsh about capital cases getting "especially close scrutiny at every level." Indeed, as here, the opposite was true. The DeLuna case was flawed at virtually every level. And all it would have taken to do justice would have been for one prosecutor or cop, one judge or witness, to step up and tell the truth. That didn't happen. And when it did, thanks to Liebman, Mills and Possley, it was too late for Carlos DeLuna.

What do I think happened? All of the things that go wrong every day in capital cases in this country, all of the human failings and official, institutional biases and prejudices and self-justifications and self-delusions that turn Justice Scalia's Marsh concurrence into a farce. The bottom line? The criminal justice system decided, combustibly, that Carlos DeLuna was bad enough to be executed without a remotely fair process. The community was fine with the result. The media didn't care. And the rule of law "covered" it all.

THE EXPERTS

The answer to Los Tocayos Carlos, if there can be one, is that the case is so old its failings are now outdated and irrelevant. The district attorney lobbyists will argue that capital cases, in Texas and elsewhere, are handled much more professionally today than they were 30 years ago. And because both of the Carloses are now long dead, there isn't much of a media hook here, either. Posthumous exonerations don't give the cameras the just-out-of-prison "walk shot" television producers love.

But it would be a shame if we were to view the DeLuna case through the prism of legal history. There is nothing ancient about the lessons it teaches. DeLuna may be gone. But the problems his case represents still are here, in virtually every jurisdiction that still imposes capital punishment. So last week I asked some of the most prominent death penalty experts in the country to look at my DeLuna "list" and then identify pending cases that were similarly marked with such obvious reasonable doubts.

I asked Richard Dieter, at the Death Penalty Information Center, and Barry Scheck, co-director of the Innocence Project. I reached out to professors like Eric Freedman, Sean O'Brien and Bennett Gershman, to practitioners like George Kendall, and to earnest other lawyers who handle capital cases from more of a ground-level view. They all agreed that today in America there are plenty of more recent cases where these sorts of issues have arisen or could arise. Here are links to just a few of the cases they cited (again, I stopped at the count of 10)

•D'Ambrosio v. Bagley (Ohio- faulty crime scene analysis, information withheld by law enforcement, other known viable suspects.)

•Elmore v. Ozmint (South Carolina--ineffective counsel, no eyewitnesses, evidence fabricated)

•Keith v. Bobby (Ohio-- no DNA, blood or fingerprint evidence, other known viable suspects) •Noling v. Bradshaw (Ohio--unreliable eyewitness identification, other known viable suspects)

•Arkansas v. Howard (Arkansas -- DNA withheld)

•Skinner v. Switzer (Texas -- DNA withheld following Supreme Court intervention.)

In Georgia, Troy Davis was executed last year despite a dearth of physical evidence and only a single eyewitness linking him to the crime. In Texas, Claude Jones was executed in 2000 because of DNA evidence we now know did not belong to him. In North Carolina, it took officials ten years to release Darryl Hunt after DNA tests exonerated him of murder. Justice Scalia is either kidding himself, or being disingenuous, when he proclaims the justice system goes out of its way to protect these people.

THE LESSON

On the day, sooner than you think, when the United States Supreme Court again outlaws the death penalty, the justices will almost certainly cited the DeLuna case as one of the prime reasons why. It is not the first recent instance where smart, reasonable people have compellingly proven that an innocent man was executed in Texas. And it's certainly not the first time we've read the details of a capital case where the work of government officials -- police, prosecutors, judges -- was so profoundly and consistently shoddy.

But there is something especially compelling about the DeLuna case. It's what drew Possley to it. It's what haunted the lone eyewitness for all these years. A legendary case of injustice deserved -- it needed -- a legendary treatment. And it got one. No one can ever say again with a straight face that America doesn't execute innocent men. No one. Barry Scheck told me Friday: "If Carlos DeLuna were still alive, [the Article] would form the basis of a habeas petition that would have exonerated him."

Anyone who cares about the integrity of our justice system, and the constitutional values it is supposed to reflect, should expect Justice Scalia to read the Review article this summer -- and certainly before he writes another word for the Court about the death penalty. We'll see. I also especially recommend Los Tocayos Carlos to anyone and everyone -- judge, prosecutor, police official, witness, medical expert, etc -- who had anything at all to do with making the DeLuna case the symbol it will now become.

DeLuna was reportedly slow as a child and tested as mildly mentally retarded as a juvenile. Later, he was in and out of trouble with the law until he was found (and was perhaps beaten) by the police on the night of the Lopez murder. There is great doubt even today that he fully understood the magnitude of the trouble he was in, even as he was nearing the end in 1989, which is why he made such a perfect patsy for Carlos Hernandez.

The ultimate villain of this awful story, Hernandez died in prison, in 1999, boasting to the end that he had killed Wanda Lopez and allowed another man to take the fall for it. The cops knew this. The prosecutors knew or should have known it. Witnesses knew it. And yet no one did anything to stop the state executioners from carrying out their job. Why no one listened to Hernandez for all those years, and why no one hears the cries of others today, is a question Justice Scalia and many others have to answer for themselves.

(source: Andrew Cohen is a contributing editor at The Atlantic and legal analyst for 60 Minutes. He is also chief analyst and legal editor for CBS Radio News and has won a Murrow Award as one of the nation's leading legal analysts and commentators; The Atlantic)

CALIFORNIA:

Jurors to weigh death penalty for Jamiel Shaw II's killer

Jurors who found a gang member guilty of killing Los Angeles High School football star Jamiel Shaw II are to return to court Tuesday to determine if Pedro Espinoza should be put to death.

Espinoza, now 23, was accused of gunning down Shaw in March 2008 because he was wearing a red Spider-Man backpack. Jurors deliberated for barely half a day last Wednesday before returning a guilty verdict.

They found to be true allegations that Espinoza committed the crime in association with a gang and that he personally discharged a firearm, circumstances that made the death penalty an option.

Prosecutors had argued that Espinoza shot the 17-year-old in the belief that he was a Bloods gang member because he was a black man wearing a red backpack. Shaw was shot near his Arlington Heights home as he walked back from a friend's house after a day of shopping at the mall.

Espinoza, who had been released from custody just 28 hours earlier, asked Shaw, “Where are you from?” before shooting into his abdomen, then again into his head in an execution-like manner, prosecutors contended.

Driving away from the scene, he boasted to a fellow 18th Street gang member, “I'm a killer,” according to testimony.

Shaw's slaying touched off an outcry over the Los Angeles Police Department's practices regarding arrestees who are illegal immigrants, because Espinoza was in the U.S. illegally.

After the verdict, Shaw's family said they wanted Espinoza to be executed.

“We want the death penalty bad. We want to set a precedent,” said the victim's father, Jamiel Shaw Sr.

(source: Los Angeles Timse)

***************

Lawsuit seeks to keep death penalty off ballot

A victims' rights group is seeking to remove from the November ballot a measure that would abolish the death penalty.

The Criminal Justice Legal Foundation filed a petition with the California Court of Appeal on Monday. The Sacramento-based group argues the initiative violates a state law limiting propositions to single subjects. If passed, the measure would abolish the death penalty and allocate $100 million saved from eliminating death row to law enforcement agencies to help solve murder and rape cases.

The group charges the ballot measure is driving a "wedge" between 2i types of crime victims, those who support the death penalty and those yearning for solutions to unsolved cases.

Backers of the proposition say the measure is solely about abolishing the death penalty.

(source: Associated Press)

USA (FLORIDA):

Hate Crime Could Mean Death Penalty For Zimmerman

George Zimmerman, the volunteer neighborhood watchman from Florida charged in the killing of unarmed black teen Trayvon Martin, could face federal hate crime charges, WFTV reports.

Zimmerman profiled and stalked Martin before allegedly shooting and killing him Feb. 26, state prosecutors have said, so the FBI is looking into charging Zimmerman with a hate crime, the television station reports.

Zimmerman has said he acted in self-defense.

If Zimmerman is convicted of the 2nd-degree murder charge, he could face life in prison, but a hate crime charge could mean he would face the death penalty, WFTV reports.

FBI representatives are interviewing residents of Zimmerman's neighorhood in Sanford, Fla., looking for evidence of a hate crime, according to WFTV.

WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer said, "What the government would have to prove is that Mr. Zimmerman acted out of hatred toward African Americans. That's why he came into contact with him. That's why he shot and killed him."

Zimmerman lawyer Mark O'Mara tells WKMG television that he received a threat Monday. He said police officers were at his office investigationg, WKMG reports.

No further details were available.

(source: digtriad.com)

ARIZONA----impending execution

Appeals court refuses to block Arizona execution

A federal appeals court is refusing to block an Arizona execution scheduled for Wednesday.

Separate 3-judge panels of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco on Tuesday each denied an appeal filed on behalf of Samuel Villegas Lopez.

One of the appeals challenged the state's execution procedures while the other argued that Lopez was denied effective legal representation.

Meanwhile, Lopez's lawyers have asked the Arizona Supreme Court to block his execution so a lower court can consider whether Lopez's rights to a fair clemency hearing have been violated.

Lopez is scheduled to be executed for the 1986 murder of Estefana Holmes of Phoenix.

(source: Associated Press)

********

Judge doubts Samuel Lopez's clemency hearing's fairness, can't block execution

A Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled Monday that death-row inmate Samuel Lopez may not have received a fair state clemency-board hearing, but he added that he did not have the power to stop Wednesday's scheduled execution.

Judge Joseph Kreamer partially agreed with Lopez's attorneys' challenge of actions by the Arizona Board of Executive Clemency, and he set a July 16 hearing on the matter. But the judge added that only the state Supreme Court could halt Lopez's execution.

A July hearing on that case against the clemency board will be moot if Lopez's execution occurs as scheduled. The state Attorney General's Office said it would ask to have the hearing vacated, because there would no longer be a plaintiff with legal standing if Lopez is executed Wednesday.

Lopez also had hearings Monday before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, where it was argued that the state's Corrections Department cannot be trusted to follow its own rules in carrying out the execution. In a second hearing, it was argued that Lopez did not receive effective legal assistance during his 2 murder trials or during his early appeals. Both also sought to delay Wednesday's execution.

The federal court had not issued a decision late Monday.

Lopez, 49, was sentenced to death for the murder of a Phoenix woman in 1986. Estefana Holmes was raped and sodomized in her apartment and stabbed more than 20 times before Lopez slit her throat.

Julie Hall, an attorney for Lopez, argued in state court Monday that her client did not get a fair hearing before the clemency board because its members were not qualified and their appointments did not follow state law. His hearing ended in protest May 7.

Kreamer agreed that Lopez's attorneys had "established a strong likelihood of success" on the claim the state failed to comply with the minimal requirements of the law and that his due-process rights were violated because he was "not afforded a hearing in a substantial sense."

Kreamer set a hearing for July to determine if the clemency board was illegally constituted.

At issue is whether 3 new appointed members -- Brian Livingston, Mel Thomas and new chairman Jesse Hernandez -- had received the 4 weeks of training required by state law before they considered Lopez's case.

Another issue, according to the judge, is whether Hernandez had demonstrated an interest in the state's correctional programs, as required by law, and was qualified to be on the board.

Gov. Jan Brewer's office has denied any violations in the appointment process and said state law does not specify that the four weeks of training must be completed before board members consider cases.

(source: Arizona Repuoblic)

*******************

AZ inmates receive health care some law-abiding citizens can’t

Lynette Barrett's eyes well up with tears when she talks about her husband, Murray, his struggle to survive and their family's struggle to keep up with medical bills.

"9 years ago last December," Barrett said is when she discovered Murray had liver failure. "He needs a new liver," she said.

But her sorrow quickly turns to confusion after learning that life-saving medical procedures for Arizona death-row inmates are paid by the state while families like the Barretts no longer qualify for state assistance.

Unable to work and with no health insurance, the Barretts found themselves under a mountain of debt and with an even larger bill on the horizon.

"He's had 3 hospital stays in the last year and each of them has been over $50,000. Without insurance, we had to have $100,000 up front before they'd even consider a transplant," said Barrett.

To raise money, the Barretts and other families in similar situations have had to become creative. They've held pancake breakfasts, auctions, car washes and accept donations on their blog.

Since 2010, the state indigent healthcare system has purged more than 100,000 people from its rolls. The Barretts are among those who no longer qualify for state money.

State leaders say helping them is a luxury they just can't afford. But a CBS 5 investigation found cases where state dollars have gone to lifesaving operations in one of the unlikeliest places: death row.

Every inmate there is awaiting execution and in a strange quirk of the law, some of those condemned inmates are receiving the kind of state-funded medical care being denied to law-abiding citizens who don't have health insurance.

In 1984, Robert Moorman murdered his adoptive mother and chopped her into pieces. But in November of last year, Moorman received a quintuple heart bypass surgery at the taxpayers' expense. He was executed three months later.

Why does the state pay for healthcare for prison inmates?

"Because there's no choice," said Daniel Pachoda, who is the legal director for the Phoenix office of the ACLU.

He said he can't explain what happened to Moorman, but the requirements of the death penalty may help explain it.

"That is a quirk in the law that people have to be medically and physically competent before they're allowed to be executed," said Pachoda.

But according to Pachoda, it would be a mistake to think that all inmates get the same treatment.

The ACLU recently sued the state, citing dozens of cases where basic medical treatment or antibiotics would have saved the lives of inmates or spared them from serious illness.

Lynette Barrett says the Moorman case does not make any sense to her.

"It's really hard to see somebody they're going to execute in 3 months ... what was the point of the bypass?" she asked.

Department of Corrections officials would not discuss any specific inmate medical questions, but they said medical professionals are the ones who make the decisions about healthcare for inmates. And they insist that all inmates receive the same constitutionally required medical care.

(source: KCTV News)

CONNECTICUT:

Conn. home invasion killer tries not to think about murders

The Connecticut killer who once called himself one of the most hated men in America said in a death row interview that he tries not to think about the murder of a suburban mother and her 2 daughters, suffers no nightmares and has nothing to say to the only survivor of the brutal 2007 attack.

Joshua Komisarjevsky told the Associated Press in his 1st interview since he was convicted that there isn't anything he could say to Dr. William Petit "that will restore the lives lost."

He also declined an opportunity to express remorse for the killings.

"I guess my reaction is not the reaction society expected," Komisarjevsky said.

Wearing a yellow prison jumpsuit, Komisarjevsky kept direct eye contact during the one-hour interview Monday, smiling at times as he spoke by telephone from behind a glass window at Northern Correctional Institution in Somers, Conn. He had the same short hair and facial stubble that he wore during the trial, but the once-slender inmate has since put on 30 or 40 pounds, which he blamed on depression and lack of movement. He said he agreed to speak to a reporter out of curiosity.

By turns jovial and introspective, he made references to an afflicted conscience but said he fills his time in solitary confinement by drawing, watching television and reading and responding to hate mail as well as notes from supporters.

"Some days you're just overwhelmed by the isolation and the difficulties in communicating with loved ones, dealing with your own crisis of conscience," Komisarjevsky said.

Komisarjevsky, 31, was convicted last year in a crime that unsettled notions of suburban safety and featured prominently in Connecticut's death penalty debate.

He and his co-defendant, Steven Hayes, were convicted of killing Jennifer Hawke-Petit and her daughters. Hayes raped and strangled Hawke-Petit, while Komisarjevsky sexually assaulted her 11-year-old daughter, Michaela. Michaela and her 17-year-old sister, Hayley, were tied to their beds and died of smoke inhalation after the house was doused in gas and set on fire.

Last month, Connecticut Gov. Dannel P. Malloy signed a new law that ends the state's death penalty for future crimes, but it does not apply to those already on death row. Many had insisted that the death penalty remain for previous cases so that Komisarjevsky and Hayes would not be spared.

"In order for some to swallow this bitter pill, it was inevitable that we would be left out," Komisarjevsky said.

In the last half-century, Connecticut has executed only one inmate — serial killer Michael Ross, who was put to death in 2005 after voluntarily waiving his appeals.

"I don't think I'll be executed against my will," Komisarjevsky said. "I think if I volunteer the state will execute me."

Asked if would consider volunteering, Komisarjevsky said, "I have my days. I think everybody on death row has their days. Some days you'd consider it. Some days you don't."

Still, he said he feels a responsibility to supporters, saying they would be hurt by his execution. He said his parents and a few friends visit him in prison.

"The reality of my situation is that I'm going to die in prison," he said. "It's simply a matter of what age. It's a very surreal experience to be judged so worthless that society wants you dead."

Asked if he is remorseful, he did not offer a direct answer. He said he has trouble expressing emotion.

"I like everyone else has to get up every day and look in the mirror," Komisarjevsky said.

Komisarjevksy said he has not spoken to Hayes, but has seen him passing by on death row, where a total of 11 inmates are each held in individual cells. During separate trials, Komisarjevksy and Hayes each blamed the other for escalating the crime.

"Frankly, we don't have anything to talk about," Komisarjevsky said. "I'm sort of taking the stance let bygones be bygones. I know what I'm culpable for and he knows what he's culpable for."

For the interview, Komisarjevsky was escorted into a room where his handcuffs were removed through a slot in the door.

"I try really hard not to think about it," Komisarjevsky said of the crime.

Among the ways he occupies his time is by drawing. He said one depicts a biblical scene of Daniel in the Lion's Den that he did for a friend.

Komisarjevsky said he gets 2 hours per day of recreation time, but he has a television in his cell that gets several channels including the Spanish-language network Telemundo.

"No hablo espanol, so that doesn't do me much good," Komisarjevsky said with a laugh.

Komisarjevsky declined to comment directly about the crime, citing the advice of lawyers who are expected to file an appeal.

In an audiotaped confession played for the jury in his trial last year, Komisarjevsky admitted that he spotted Hawke-Petit and 11-year-old Michaela at a supermarket and followed them to their house in Cheshire, a suburb of New Haven. After going home and putting his own daughter to bed, Komisarjevsky and Hayes returned to the Petit house in the middle of the night, while the family was sleeping, to rob it.

William Petit was beaten, tied up and taken to the basement. He managed to escape and hop, roll and crawl across a yard to a neighbor's house for help.

Petit advocated keeping the death penalty in Connecticut and last year successfully lobbied state senators to hold off on repeal legislation while Komisarjevsky was still facing a death penalty trial.

Petit declined to comment through a spokesman.

"July 23, 2007, was our personal holocaust," Petit said after Komisarjevsky was sentenced to death. "A holocaust caused by two who are completely evil and actually do not comprehend what they have done."

(source: Associated Press)

NEW MEXICO:

Jurors deliberating in Astorga's NM death penalty trial

Jurors on Monday began deliberating whether to allow prosecutors to seek the death penalty in the case of a man convicted of murdering a Bernalillo County sheriff's deputy.

The prosecution and defense delivered their closing arguments in the case of Michael Astorga after more than two weeks of testimony. It will be up to jurors to decide whether the prosecution proved the aggravating circumstances required for the state to seek the death penalty.

Astorga's attorney, Gary Mitchell, continued to argue that his client did not kill the deputy.

"This is a new jury," Mitchell said during closing arguments. "This is a new presentation far greater than what any jury has ever heard with more witnesses, more clarity and frankly more information."

Mitchell attacked the state's evidence during his closing arguments. He contends there's no evidence that Astorga's pickup truck was ever pulled over the night Deputy James McGrane was killed in the mountains east of Albuquerque.

Astorga was convicted of the 2006 killing of the deputy during a traffic stop. He faces life in prison or death, even though New Mexico repealed the death penalty in 2009. He is eligible for the death penalty since the crime occurred before the repeal.

District Attorney Kari Brandenburg said jurors should use their own common sense about what had happened, the Albuquerque Journal reported (http://bit.ly/JRBaYZ). Brandenburg argued that Astorga lied on the stand about possessing a gun, and she mocked what she called his "psychic abilities" that led him to flee to Mexico before he was identified as a suspect.

Astorga was convicted in 2010.

By Monday afternoon, jurors had sent several questions to state District Judge Neil Candelaria. They asked if Astorga would get a life sentence if they did not find the required aggravated circumstances. The judge answered yes.

(source: Associated Press)

OHIO:

Death penalty pondered for man who killed 3----3 judges hear arguments before deciding fate

3 Franklin County judges are to decide today whether to impose the death penalty or sentence a man to life in prison for fatally stabbing his former girlfriend and her 2 children.

The judges heard closing arguments yesterday in the case of Caron E. Montgomery, who pleaded guilty last week to murdering Tia Hendricks; their 2-year-old son, Tyron Hendricks; and her 10-year-old daughter, Tahlia Hendricks, on Thanksgiving Day 2010.

Defense attorney Isabella Dixon told the judges that Montgomery should be spared the death sentence because his mother and the system failed him.

But prosecutors argued that the aggravating circumstances that make Montgomery, 37, subject to the death penalty are “overwhelming” and far outweigh any mitigating factors.

“Death is the only appropriate penalty in this case,” Assistant County Prosecutor Jennifer Rausch said.

Common Pleas Judges Guy Reece, Pat Sheeran and Richard S. Sheward heard arguments in the morning and spent the rest of the day deliberating. A unanimous decision by the judges is necessary to impose the death penalty.

The judges ruled last week that Montgomery is eligible for the death penalty because he purposely killed two or more people, including two victims under 13 years old, and killed the 10-year-old to escape detection.

The defense presented mitigating evidence last Tuesday to convince the judges that they should impose a life sentence.

All 3 victims died after their throats were slit, autopsies found. No motive was presented, but Montgomery was convicted of domestic violence against Tia Hendricks in 2009. Members of the victims’ family told TheDispatch that Tia Hendricks had broken up with Montgomery but allowed him to stay in her apartment on Broad Meadows Boulevard on the North Side.

She called 911 from her cellphone on the morning of Nov. 25, 2010, crying and screaming, “Caron!” Because of problems tracing the call, the bodies weren’t found until the next afternoon. Montgomery was found in the apartment with a self-inflicted knife wound in the neck.

In closing arguments, Dixon said that Montgomery suffered traumas throughout his childhood, beginning when he was raped by a group of boys at age 4. She said he had no positive role models; was raised by a crack-addicted, negligent mother; and was dumped on a Children Services system that failed him.

Dixon said he “took responsibility immediately” for his crimes by remaining at the apartment rather than fleeing.

But Assistant County Prosecutor Doug Stead told the judges that Montgomery cut his own neck to make it appear that he was a victim.

“This wasn’t a suicide attempt,” Stead said. “He knows how to slice a neck. This was superficial. So was his acceptance of responsibility.”

(source: Columbus Dispatch)

WASHINGTON:

Pierce County jury deliberates whether to reinstate man’s death sentence

A Pierce County jury is deliberating whether a man who had his death penalty overturned on appeal should again be sentenced to die for raping and killing a Tacoma woman.

A jury in 2001 convicted Allen Eugene Gregory of aggravated 1st-degree murder in the 1996 death of Geneine Harshfield. Prosecutors alleged Gregory, now 39, attacked Harshfield, 43, in her kitchen, tied her hands behind her back, raped her and then slashed her throat and stabbed her. He wasn’t charged in Harshfield’s death until his DNA was drawn after being arrested for allegedly raping another woman 2 years later. The DNA from that case matched evidence found at the scene of Harshfield’s murder.

The same jury that convicted him of killing Harshfield also recommended he be put to death, and Superior Court Judge Rosanne Buckner followed that recommendation.

In 2006, the Washington state Supreme Court ratified Gregory’s murder conviction but overturned his death sentence, citing judicial and prosecutorial error.

Prosecutors decided to try again for the death penalty, and his trial solely on that provision began two months ago. Lawyers in the case delivered their closing arguments Monday.

If the jury decides Gregory should not be put to death, he’ll serve the rest of his life in prison without the possibility of parole.

(source: Bellingham Herald)

CANADA:

The Victoria Stafford file: Should Canada bring back the death penalty?

The tragic and horrific death of eight-year-old Victoria ‘Tori’ Stafford has caused many Canadians to question whether Canada should reinstate the death penalty.

On May 11, a jury of 9 women and 3 men convicted Michael Rafferty of 1st-degree murder, sexual assault causing bodily harm and kidnapping in the death of the Grade 3 student.

Tori vanished outside her school in Woodstock, Ontario in April 2009. Her remains were found 3 months later under piles of rocks.

According to Amnesty International’s 2011 death penalty report, death sentences were pardoned or commuted in 33 countries, compared to just 19 in 2010.

Canada abolished the death penalty for murder in 1976. The last execution in Canada was at Toronto’s Don Jail on December 11, 1962.

In the wake of Rafferty’s trial, several petitions have been set up online urging the death penalty be reinstated for violent crimes against children. Outside the courtroom in London shortly after Rafferty’s verdict was handed down, motorists drove by yelling, “hang him.”

In 2010, Rafferty's ex-girlfriend Terri-Lynne McClintic pleaded guilty to first-degree murder in Tori's death and is currently serving a life sentence. During Rafferty’s trial, McClintic described the gruesome details of Tori’s kidnapping and death and testified that she killed the young girl using a hammer.

On Tuesday, Rafferty was formally sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years. He was also sentenced to 10 years to be served concurrently for sexual assault causing bodily harm and kidnapping.

Global News spoke with Aubrey Harris, co-ordinator of the Canadian Amnesty International Campaign to Abolish the Death Penalty about whether or not Canada should reinstate the death penalty.

What is your definition of capital punishment or the death penalty?

Capital punishment, also called the death penalty, is the deliberate killing of someone (execution) as part of a sentence following a judicial procedure in response to an offence under the law. This can be differentiated from extrajudicial executions, which lack a judicial process (e.g., armed forces are sometimes accused of extrajudicial executions when executing prisoners of war without trial).

Why do you think such highly-publicized cases like the Rafferty trial cause Canadians to question whether the death penalty should be reinstated?

As with any violent description of a crime, it is quite normal for us to be angry and repulsed by the suggestion that a young person could have been treated in such a way. Public opinion polls taken at such times don’t usually ask what sort of justice system do you want to have, but whether it’s OK to execute someone convicted of a violent crime. These are really distinct questions. The distinction becomes clearer when presented with alternative punishments. Support for the death penalty plummets when given the option of life imprisonment, though death penalty proponents are unlikely to offer that when they claim to be seeking public opinion. The difference was also highlighted in the Abacus poll last year that claimed a majority support of the death penalty but also a majority of Canadians opposed to reinstatement.

There is another dimension to this question in Canada also – Canada cannot legally reinstate the death penalty without violating international law and destroying Canada’s trustworthiness for international treaties and agreements. It is also extremely unlikely that it could survive a Constitutional challenge today given that the grounds used in the Burns decision 10 years ago have strengthened even more.

Today more than two thirds of the countries in the world have abandoned the death penalty in use or law. There is an international consensus that the death penalty is now a minority practice in the world with only a handful of countries regularly executing prisoners.

Overall, do you think Canadians would like to see the death penalty reinstated? Why or why not?

The result of a reinstatement of the death penalty, even if it were legally possible, would be detrimental to Canada. Foreign relations would be grossly affected by the destruction of our reputation in trustworthiness, in the giant step backwards in human rights and the cost of implementing a death penalty system would put our domestic finances in peril. The cost of the death penalty has been cited as one of the driving forces behind the gradual abolition of the death penalty in the United States.

Fortunately I don’t think it would get to this point. Not only do the legal prohibitions make it unlikely, but public opinion generally moves against the death penalty once the population becomes more informed on the facts, in particular: it is costly, does not reduce crime and there is no way to guarantee an innocent person will not be executed.

Are there cases where the death penalty would be suitable? For example, in a case where a child is the murder victim or in a case where the jury concludes that, after examining all of the evidence, they believe that without a doubt the accused is guilty of 1st or 2nd degree murder?

The death penalty corrupts justice. Sacrificing human rights to obtain a sense of vengeance is no way to achieve a just society. Even for the worst of crimes, the International Criminal Court, which hears the cases of those charged with crimes such as genocide, does not have the death penalty.

There is also an argument to be made that the most violent cases are also those where the greatest care must be taken over evidence. The pressure to find ‘the killer’ is going to be heaviest on the authorities and in some cases on the jury as well to convict. This is especially the case, for example, in the United States where many positions such as District Attorney or Sherriff are elected.

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases on the grounds that it is a violation of the most fundamental human rights: the right to life and the right to be free from cruel or inhumane treatment or punishment. These rights are enshrined in founding documents of the United Nations and are rights that were agreed to by all nations. Even the largest executing nations in the world acknowledge that there will be a day when they too will abolish the death penalty.

Advocates tend to argue that the death penalty acts as a deterrent for criminals yet some studies show that threat of execution is no more effective as a deterrent to murder than the punishment of life in jail. Why could that be?

Advocates making that claim have been proven wrong time and again. There have been countless studies on whether the death penalty acts as a deterrent. Nearly all come to the conclusion that the death penalty does not deter violent crime. The few that have made the claim that it does deter have all been shown to be seriously flawed. Some studies have even suggested that the death penalty may increase the rate of violent crime.

Part of the reason the death penalty does not reduce violent crime is that violent crime is not typically planned-out. The action is not a rational one and it is hard to expect that someone in the midst of irrational thinking would have the ability to stop and think rationally about consequences until after. Having the death penalty may also increase the risk of violent crime against authorities. Once a person has reason to fear being executed it is quite rational for them to do everything possible to avoid being caught.

There is a contradiction in the system when capital punishment is at play. Put simply, it is contradictory to say killing is wrong and to prove it, we are going to kill someone.

Does a death penalty sentence tend to provide more closure for families of murdered victims than a life in prison sentence?

No – there is no indication that a family actually gets “closure” through an execution. In fact there is a growing number of organizations in the United States and around the world, of survivors of violent crime and the families of victims of violent crime, that oppose the death penalty. Murder Victims Families for Human Rights is one such organization. In some cases also, because of the mandatory appeals processes built into the death penalty system, many families feel re-traumatized during each hearing. In the end family members are subjected to watching a human being be strapped down and killed. Afterwards the public often expects them to feel healed when in fact they have gained nothing.

In examining the question of closure, psychiatrists have come to the conclusion that witnessing an execution is highly traumatic and not healing. Dr. David Spiegel studied the witnesses of several high-profile executions in recent years and concluded “the theory that execution provides ‘closure’ is a ‘naïve, unfounded, pop psychology idea’ perpetuated by politicians and the media.”

I had the privilege of meeting and hearing the testimonies of several members of Murder Victims Families for Human Rights in 2010. One of the key points they made was that for healing to really work, they needed to be able to reach out and understand from the perpetrator why they did the crime. In many cases this would not be possible with a death penalty. Others noted that they felt that having someone executed was no way to honour the life of their loved one.

What are the consequences and benefits of reinstating the death penalty back into our society? Into our legal system?

There really is no benefit to reinstating the death penalty. There will be no reduction in the rate of violent crime, costs on the justice system will skyrocket and Canada's international reputation will be ruined.

We are bound by the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights not to reinstate the death penalty. There is no mechanism to withdraw from the protocol (unlike with the Kyoto Protocol). We would not only be violating the protocol, but also the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

What state is likely to want to sign into any agreement with Canada when we have demonstrated our word is no good on such agreements? A treaty on arctic sovereignty? Forget it. Extraditing people from other countries for crimes they committed here? Not without diplomatic assurances that the death penalty will not be applied – but what value would those diplomatic assurances be with our ruined reputation for agreements? Trade agreements with European Union countries? Still no good.

Pleas with other countries not to execute Canadian citizens? On what grounds if we have decided that our government can have the ability to execute their citizens?

Should the debate regarding reinstating the death penalty be reopened? Should Canadians even care about this debate?

The death penalty cannot be reinstated in Canada. One day people will look back on the question of the death penalty the same way today we look back on slavery and wonder how we ever let it happen anywhere in the world.

There is still room for debate in Canada but the frame of the argument is wrong when we argue about whether to bring it back in Canada. We should be asking is Canada doing enough to help other countries advance their human rights. Canada was once a world leader in the abolition movement. This not only helped to protect citizens in other countries from facing execution, but also helped to protect Canadians.

Today there are at least 6 Canadians facing execution in other countries, many of whom face execution on incredibly weak cases and questionable charges. When we ask Iran not to execute Saeed Malekpour, sentenced to death for writing internet coding to allow photos to be uploaded, or with Saudi Arabia not to execute Mohamed Kohail, sentenced to death after he went to help his little brother get safely away from a crowd of armed youths at school, we argue most convincingly when we demonstrate that Canada opposes capital punishment always and are not just selective about whose justice system we recognize. We must argue from principle not by special request.

(source: Global News)

CHINA:

Wuhan bank bomber given death sentence

A man who shocked China by detonating a bomb in front of a bank in Wuhan, Hubei province, was sentenced to death on Monday, according to the city's intermediate people's court.

Wang Haijian, 25, was convicted of using explosives in a robbery attempt on a China Construction Bank branch in Hongshan district of Wuhan with self-made explosives on Dec 1. 2 people were killed and 15 injured.

The convict said at the 5-hour trial that he began learning to make explosives using the Internet and books in October 2010, and he originally intended to sell them to mine developers and companies.

In March 2011, Wang, a resident of Zaoyang, first met Wang Wei, his co-defendant in the case and moved to Wang Wei's rented room n Hongshan district, where the two made explosives, according to court papers.

2 months later, Wang Haijian asked Wang An'an, another friend of his, to join his explosives business. The three started planning to rob a bank after they failed to sell their explosives, Wang Haijian told the court.

Wang Haijian's left eye was injured during one of the explosives experiments the three conducted when they were planning the robbery, according to the verdict.

The three had divided their work. Wang Haijian was responsible for choosing a target bank as well as installing and detonating the explosives, Wang An'an was responsible for committing the robbery and preparing a motorcycle for escape, and Wang Wei was supposed to hide the money after the robbery, according to the court.

After the bank was chosen, the 3 did some tests and made preparations for the robbery.

But Wang An'an and Wang Wei quit the robbery plan in August, saying they were afraid of punishment, according to the verdict.

Wang Haijian was not deterred by his accomplices' quitting.

He covered the explosives in cement and placed them in front of the bank. After detonating them, he did not carry out the robbery as planned and sped away on a motorcycle on the night of Dec 1, according to the court. He was captured 2 weeks later.

Wang Wei was sentenced to 10 years in prison, and Wang An'an received 6 years.

In addition, the judge did not ask Wang Haijian to compensate victims, because he has no fixed income and got a death penalty. Instead, Wang An'an and Wang Wei should pay compensation of 80,000 yuan ($12,680), including about 50,000 yuan to the victims.

Zhao Li, a criminal lawyer from the Zhen Bang Law Firm in Beijing, said the death penalty for Wang Haijian is fair, given that the crime was intentional.

Locals hailed the verdict.

(source: China Daily)

IRAQ:

Tariq Al Hashemi Trial: Iraq Vice President Trial Starts In Baghdad

Former bodyguards for Iraq's fugitive vice president testified Tuesday that they were ordered to kill security officials and plant roadside bombs as a politically charged terror trial against the Sunni leader got under way.

Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi, who was in Turkey but faced trial in absentia, has denied all charges against him. If convicted, he could face the death penalty.

The case threatens to paralyze Iraq's government by fueling simmering Sunni and Kurdish resentments against Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who critics claim is monopolizing power. Al-Hashemi is an ardent critic of al-Maliki, whose government issued a warrant for the vice president's arrest the day after U.S. troops left Iraq last December.

Al-Hashemi has been accused of playing a role in 150 bombings, assassinations and other attacks from 2005 to 2011, according to the judicial council. The Iraqi government alleges that Sunni death squads were largely composed of his bodyguards and other employees.

The charges against the vice president span the worst years of bloodshed that followed the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq as retaliatory sectarian attacks between Sunni and Shiite militants pushed the country to the brink of civil war. He has been in office since 2006.

Tuesday's testimony focused on more recent years, when violence ebbed but insurgents continued to attack security forces and other targets in a bid to undermine the Iraqi government in the run-up to the U.S. withdrawal in December.

Bodyguard Odai Ghazi Amin, who served in the Iraqi army under Saddam Hussein, said he joined al-Hashemi's staff in 2008 and was ordered by the vice president's son-in-law in 2009 to escort bomb-planting missions on roads across Baghdad.

In 2011, Amin said he was told to assassinate an army general and a lawyer – orders he tried to avoid by asking for a job transfer. But he said he was threatened by the son-in-law, who ran al-Hashemi's office, that he would be killed and his family in danger if he refused the deadly missions.

Last September, Amin testified, he was summoned to meet with the vice president.

"Al-Hashemi told me that he is going to assign me to kill some officers who work against the interests of the state and to carry out operations on security checkpoints," Amin said.

Amin testified that after the meeting, al-Hashemi's son-in-law Ahmed Qahtan, who also faces terror charges, gave him and 2 other bodyguards silenced guns and told them to assassinate army Brig. Gen. Talib Balaasim. The bodyguards tracked down Balaasim in western Baghdad, and Amin testified that he killed the general, in a Sept. 26 drive-by shooting before returning to al-Hashemi's office in the heavily guarded Green Zone.

"About 2 days after the attack, al-Hashemi received us (in his office) and said to us, `God bless your efforts,'" Amin testified. He said the bodyguards shared a $3,000 payment.

Amin's account was later contradicted by testimony from another bodyguard, Yassir Saadi Hassoun. Hassoun said he and his brother opened fire on Balaasim, not Amin.

A 3rd bodyguard, Ahmed al-Jubouri, described a November 2011 shooting that killed national security official Ibrahim Saleh Mahdi and his wife. Al-Jubouri said Mahdi was ordered killed because he had become "a source of annoyance" to al-Hashemi.

Al-Hashemi is in Turkey, where he has said he is receiving medical treatment. His spokesman, Fahad al-Turki, said al-Hashemi was not available to comment on Tuesday's proceedings. Ahmed Qahtan also is in Turkey.

He has hotly denied the charges, and accuses the government of torturing his bodyguards to obtain confessions from them. The Iraqi judiciary last month investigated and dismissed his claims.

The vice president believes he will not get a fair trial in Baghdad's criminal court, and has asked that the case be heard by a special tribunal appointed by parliament.

His allies see the trial as another political power battle in Iraq.

"As far as I'm concerned, the issue of al-Hashemi is more political than a legal one," said Sunni lawmaker Hamid al-Mutlaq of the Iraqiya political bloc that opposes al-Maliki.

Al-Hashemi's trial has also strained relations between Iraq and several of its mainly Sunni neighbors, including the Gulf states and Turkey.

Earlier this month, Interpol issued a so-called "red notice" on al-Hashemi, which puts member countries on alert that he is wanted for arrest in Baghdad. But Turkey, which has provided sanctuary to al-Hashemi and is on tense terms with his opponents in the Iraqi government, is hesitant to pursue the Sunni vice president.

The trial was scheduled to resume on Sunday.

Underscoring the continued violence in Iraq, a suicide bomber drove an explosives-rigged fuel truck into the front gate of an army post in the northern city of Mosul, a former al-Qaida stronghold, wounding 15 people, authorities said.

(source: Huffington Post)

IRAN----execution

A prisoner charged with espionage for Israel and killing an Iranian nuclear scientist, was hanged this morning

A prisoner identified as "Majid Jamali Fashi" was hanged in Tehran this morning.

According to the official site of the Iranian judiciary in Tehran," Majid Jamali Fashi" was convicted of "Moharebeh" and "corruption on earth" for murdering the Iranian nuclear scientist "(Masoud) Ali Mohammadi" and espionage for Mosad (the Israeli intelligence). He was sentenced to death in September 2011.

Iranian state media on Sunday announced that the trials of 10 to 15 "convicts of collaboraion with Mosad (the Israeli intelligence service) took place in Tehran. According to these news "most" of those charged were sentenced to imprisonment. According to the Iranian opposition website Kalemeh the Iranian student Omid Kokabee was among those convicted for espionage on Sunday. Iran Human Rights has now confirmed that Omid Kokabee, the Iranian graduate student at the University of Texas, who was arrested by the Iranian authorities when he was visiting Iran, has been sentenced to 10 years in jail. According to the state run Mehr news agency the verdicts can be appealed within 20 days.

Iran Human Rights spokesperson condemned today’s execution and the heavy jail sentences issued on Sunday. He said: "We have many reports indicating that prisoners are subjected to torture and forced confessions". He added: "Often the prisoners are sentenced based on the confessions they have made under torture".

(source: Iran Human Rights)

*************************

Iran Executes Assassin Of Nuclear Scientist

Iran on Tuesday executed a young man convicted of assassinating an Iranian nuclear scientist in 2010 and spying for Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, state media reported.

"Majid Jamali Fashi, the Mossad spy and the person who assassinated Masoud Ali Mohammadi, our nation's nuclear scientist was hanged on Tuesday morning," the IRNA news agency reported.

Iranian media reported that 24-year-old Fashi was hanged to death at Tehran's infamous Evin prison. He was sentenced to death by an Iranian court in August last year for murdering the nuclear scientist.

During his trial, Fashi was accused of having received training and money from Mossad for killing the nuclear scientist. He was charged with 'moharebeh,' which means 'enmity against God' and faced death penalty if convicted.

In an appearance on Iranian state TV in January after his conviction, Fashi confessed to the killing of Mohammadi, a professor of nuclear physics at Tehran University, and admitted to receiving orders from Mossad to carry out the killing along with 5 others which he did not carry out.

Mohammadi was killed in a bomb explosion near his home in Tehran's Qeytariyeh district on January 12, 2010. He was killed by a remote-controlled bomb hidden in a motorcycle parked near his home.

Iran's Foreign Ministry had then said that "in the initial investigation, signs of the triangle of wickedness by the Zionist regime, America and their hired agents, are visible in the terrorist act." But the United States dismissed the allegation and the State Department described the Iranian claim as "absurd."

However, Iran announced in January, 2011 that it had dismantled a network "comprising of Israeli spies and terrorists" and arrested "the main agents" responsible for the nuclear scientist's killing. It is not clear what happened to the other suspects.

In addition to Mohammadi, several other Iranian scientists have been killed or injured in attacks in recent months. Daryoush Rezaei, a physicist at a Tehran University, was shot dead by unidentified gunmen outside his home in Tehran in July last year.

Prior to that incident, one Iranian nuclear scientist was killed and another injured in separate but identical bomb attacks in Tehran in November, 2010. The scientist killed in one of those attacks was Majid Shahriari, a member of the nuclear engineering department of the Shahid Beheshti University.

The scientist injured in the 2nd attack on the same day was identified as Fereydoon Abbasi, a nuclear physicist who did research at the Defense Ministry. Soon after those attacks, Iran blamed Israeli and other foreign intelligence agents for the incidents, alleging that the attacks were part of efforts by the West to undermine the Islamic Republic's disputed nuclear program.

(source: RTT News)

SAUDI ARABIA:

Saudi beheads Yemeni convicted of murder

Saudi Arabia on Tuesday beheaded a Yemeni national, convicted of killing a fellow Yemeni in the kingdom, the SPA news agency reported quoting the interior ministry.

Ibrahim Zouani was convicted of clubbing to death fellow Yemeni Khalid Saafan, the ministry said, adding that he was executed in the southwestern Saudi city of Abha.

His beheading brings to 25 the total number of executions in the ultra-conservative kingdom so far this year, according to an AFP tally based on official reports.

Under the AFP count, at least 76 people were beheaded in 2011 in Saudi Arabia, while rights group Amnesty International put the number of executions last year at 79.

The death penalty in Saudi Arabia applies to a wide range of offences including rape, apostasy, armed robbery and drug trafficking, as well as murder, as stipulated by Islamic Sharia law.

(source: Agence France-Presse)

PAKISTAN:

Govt urged to stay hanging in Karachi

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) on Monday noted with alarm that, despite an informal moratorium on executions, a man on death row is scheduled to be hanged in a Karachi prison on May 23.

In a statement, the commission said: “The HRCP has called upon the government to stay the hanging and announce a formal moratorium on executions. The HRCP has received with serious concern and dismay reports that Behram Khan, a death row prisoner in Karachi, is set to be hanged on May 23.

The last execution of a death row prisoner in the country had taken place in late 2008. Executions have since been suspended.

The HRCP has welcomed the suspension of executions in the country and has on numerous occasions called upon the government to keep the promise it had made in 2008 to convert almost all death sentences into life imprisonment.

The HRCP wishes to remind the government that the reasons that had caused the stay of executions in 2008 have not changed.

These include the well-documented deficiencies of the law, flaws in administration of justice and investigation methods and chronic corruption and on account of these factors a very high probability of miscarriage of justice prevails.

Capital punishment remains on the statute books for 28 offences, and the courts continue to award death sentences.

Against this backdrop, the report of Behram’s planned execution on May 23 is a regressive step and raises concerns at several levels.

The HRCP calls upon the government to immediately halt this and any other executions that might be under consideration and make the informal suspension of executions formal forthwith.

Such a decision would do away with the need for the president to issue orders staying executions every 6 months or so. We also urge the president to favourably consider mercy petitions and convert capital punishment to life imprisonment.

The HRCP demands that the government takes urgent measures towards abolition of capital punishment in Pakistan, including deletion of the death penalty from the statute books, at least for all but the most serious offences.

The HRCP also urges the government to sign the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aimed at the abolition of the death penalty.

The Commission calls upon parliamentarians, political parties and the civil society to join the campaign for abolition of the death penalty in Pakistan and enhance respect for the right to life in Pakistan.”

(source: Dawn)

MAY 14, 2012:

TEXAS----stay of impending execution

Texas inmate set to die Wednesday gets reprieve

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Monday stopped this week's scheduled execution of a convicted killer whose mental health had become an issue in his appeals.

The state's highest criminal court gave a reprieve to Steven Staley, 49, who was set for lethal injection Wednesday evening in Huntsville for the 1989 shooting death of a Fort Worth restaurant manager during a botched robbery.

"This is great," said Staley's attorney, John Stickels. "I'm very happy."

Prosecutors contended Staley was competent for execution, but Stickels in his appeal to the court said that was accomplished only because a state judge in Fort Worth improperly ordered Staley be given drugs to make him competent so the state of Texas could kill him.

The appeals court spent much of the ruling's three pages recounting Staley's case in the courts and only in a final paragraph specifically addressed the appeal, saying the court had determined the execution should be halted "pending further order by this court."

It gave no reason. Justice Lawrence Meyers dissented from his 8 colleagues but issued no dissenting opinion.

"I don't know what's next," Stickels said. "It just orders the execution stayed and doesn't order anything else. I'm not going to do anything until they tell me."

Staley escaped from a Denver halfway house when 35-year-old restaurant manager Bob Read of Fort Worth was killed in October 1989. Staley and 2 accomplices were arrested after a wild 20-mile car and foot chase ended a series of robberies, assaults and at least 1 other killing as the trio traveled from Colorado, through Kansas and Oklahoma and into Texas.

In a written statement, Staley implicated himself in Read's slaying. His lawyers contended his mental abilities have deteriorated while in prison.

The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled forcible medication is appropriate if it's likely to make the condemned inmate competent, if the side effects wouldn't be worse than the benefits and if it's in the prisoner's best medical interests. The Supreme Court hasn't addressed the issue.

In 1986, the high court said a person may be executed if he's aware of the punishment and the reason for it. Then in 2002, the court barred execution of mentally impaired people.

Stickels said Staley's IQ of 70 — considered the threshold for mental impairment — also could disqualify him from the punishment.

Staley had fled the Denver halfway house while awaiting parole on robbery and auto theft convictions. In 1989 in Fort Worth, he and accomplice Tracey Duke ended a meal by pulling semiautomatic weapons from the purse of Duke's girlfriend, Brenda Rayburn.

They herded customers and employees to the back of the restaurant, then forced Read to open cash registers and the store safe. An assistant manager slipped out and called police. Read, married and a father of three, urged the robbers to take him and leave the hostages alone when the police arrived.

Officers watched Read walk out the door of the restaurant, guns poked in his ribs. The robbers hijacked a car and police moved in as Read was being forced into the back seat. Evidence showed Staley shot Read, then Staley and Duke fired on the officers.

They then led authorities on the 20-mile chase and were caught after the car broke down and they tried to flee on foot.

Duke, 45, is serving 3 life sentences in Texas and has a 30-year sentence in Colorado for murder and armed robbery. Rayburn accepted 30 years in a plea bargain.

(source: Associated Press)

TENNESSEE:

Son could face death penalty for mom's murder

The Memphis man charged with stabbing his mother to death has a new court date.

William Walsh was ordered to be back before a judge June 6.

"It's kind of the beginning of the journey," public defender Gerald Skahan, who was appointed defend Walsh. "We'll start looking into the case and have a mental evaluation done and see what we learn."

Skahan said he's decided to not ask for a bond for his client right now.

"I imagine that he is in a cell by himself- most people on the medical floor are, but you know, they are taking good care of him in the jail and I'm sure he's behaving himself."

Walsh has been in jail since Saturday, April 21, the day his mother Elaine Walsh was found stabbed to death on a sofa in her home.

Walsh and his mother got into an argument about loud noises he was making, according to a police report. While his father, attorney Kevin Walsh, slept in another room, the son attacked his mother with a knife, investigators say.

Skahan said that several of Walsh's supporters were in court Monday, but they didn't comment publicly on the case.

If he's convicted of 1st degree murder, Walsh could be sentenced to life in prison or the death penalty.

(source: WMC TV News)

CALIFORNIA:

California ballot measure on death penalty faces legal challenge

The Sacramento-based Criminal Justice Legal Foundation petitioned the 3rd District Court of Appeals today to remove from the November ballot a proposal to abolish the death penalty in California, arguing it violates the state's "single-subject rule" for initiatives.

The foundation said abolishing the death penalty while also authorizing the distribution of $100 million to local law enforcement agencies to help solve murder and rape cases violates a requirement that ballot measures address only one subject.

"This kind of manipulation, forcing the people to vote on 2 different measures as an all-or-nothing choice, is exactly what the single-subject rule was put in the Constitution to prevent," the foundation's Kent Scheidegger said in a prepared statement.

Supporters of abolishing the death penalty said the litigation is baseless. Former San Quentin Warden Jeanne Woodford said in a prepared statement that the ballot measure is "about one thing and one thing only: ensuring that those who commit the most serious crimes in our state are caught and held accountable. Every aspect of the initiative is connected to that goal."

(source: Sacramento Bee)

**********************

Bump California death penalty measure from November ballot, group says

A law-and-order organization on Monday asked a state appeals court to bump a measure off the November ballot that would repeal California's death penalty, arguing that it violates the so-called "single subject" rule because it proposes multiple reforms.

The ballot language is "deceptive" and conflicts with state rules that limit voter initiatives to a single subject the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation argues in a petition filed with the Sacramento-based 3rd District Court of Appeal.

The foundation brought the lawsuit on behalf of Phyllis Loya, the mother of a Pittsburg police officer fatally shot in 2005 whose killer was sent to death row by a Contra Costa County jury.

The SAFE California Act would abolish the death penalty, clear the state's death row and replace capital punishment with life in prison without the possibility of parole. But the measure also provides for shifting as much as $100 million used for death penalty costs to a fund that would pay for solving murder and rape cases.

The lawsuit argues that the measure contains conflicting proposals that combine unrelated reforms into a single ballot argument. "This kind of manipulation ... is exactly what the single-subject rule was put in the constitution to prevent," said Kent Scheidegger, the foundation's legal director.

Supporters of the ballot measure predicted the appeals court would reject the legal arguments.

"We are confident that the courts will agree that a fully informed electorate should decide on this critical issue," Jeanne Woodford, the former San Quentin warden heading the campaign, said in a statement.

(source: San Jose Mercury News)

OHIO:

Judges consider death penalty for man who admitted to killing girlfriend, 2 children

3 Franklin County Common Pleas judges began deliberating the fate of Caron E. Montgomery this morning after hearing closing arguments from the prosecution and defense about whether he should be sentenced to death or life in prison.

Judge Guy Reece said the panel will deliberate most of the day and may not announce a decision until Tuesday morning.

A unanimous decision is necessary to impose the death penalty for Montgomery, 37, who pleaded guilty to fatally stabbing his former girlfriend, Tia Hendricks; their 2-year-old son, Tyron Hendricks; and her 10-year-old daughter, Tahlia Hendricks, on Thanksgiving Day in 2010.

The judges ruled last week that Montgomery is eligible for the death penalty because he purposely killed 2 or more people, including 2 victims under the age of 13, and killed the 10-year-old to escape detection.

The defense presented mitigating evidence on Tuesday to persuade the judges that they should impose a life sentence.

In her closing argument, defense attorney Isabella Dixon said that Montgomery suffered traumas throughout his childhood, beginning when he was raped at age 4. She said he had no positive role models, was raised by a crack-addicted, negligent mother, and was dumped on a Children Services’ system that failed him.

Assistant Prosecutor Jennifer Rausch told the judges that the aggravating circumstances were “ overwhelming” and far outweighed any mitigating factors.

“Death is the only appropriate penalty in this case,” she said.

(source: Columbus Dispatch)

ARIZONA:

Arizona death-row inmate's lawsuit heads to court

Lawyers for an Arizona death-row inmate will make a last-minute bid to stop his execution.

Attorneys for Samuel Villegas Lopez plan to argue Monday in Maricopa County Superior Court that his execution should be delayed until an issue with the state's clemency board is resolved.

Lopez is scheduled to be executed Wednesday.

His attorneys filed a lawsuit saying 3 newly appointed board members were chosen to ensure no recommendations for clemency in high-profile or controversial cases land on Gov. Jan Brewer's desk.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is also scheduled to hear arguments Monday in a separate filing by Lopez's attorneys regarding the conduct of the Arizona Department of Corrections.

Lopez was convicted of raping, robbing and stabbing a 59-year-old Phoenix woman to death in 1986.

(source: Associated Press)

WASHINGTON:

A death-row inmate's murder conviction was overturned Thursday after the state Supreme Court ruled the prosecution "wrongfully suppressed" evidence, including a picture of a county detective wearing the defendant's jeans.

Prosecutors used the jeans, which were spattered with blood and contained gunshot residue in the pocket, as a key piece of evidence to convict Darold Stenson of murdering his wife Denise and his business partner Frank Hoerner.

Prosecutors say Stenson attempted to make the killings look like a murder-suicide. Investigators later found that Hoerner had not committed suicide, but had been "beaten unconscious" and dragged from Stenson's driveway into the house, where he was shot in the head. Denise Stenson was found shot in bed.

The state claims Stenson wanted to collect his wife's life insurance policy and killed Hoerner because he owed Hoerner money.

Stenson was sentenced to death in 1994 for the 1993 slayings. The state had access to the photographs and an FBI file at the time of trial, but did not provide the evidence to Stenson's attorneys until 2009.

In an 8-1 decision, the court said Stenson should get a new trial because his Brady rights were violated. In Brady v Maryland, the Supreme Court found that prosecutors violate a defendant's constitutional rights by not turning over evidence that could prove a person's innocence.

The court said the 2 pieces of evidence -- gunshot residue found inside the right front pocket of the jeans Stenson was wearing when the officers arrived at his house and Hoerner's blood spattered on the front of those jeans -- were the only forensic evidence linking Hoerner to the shootings and the remainder of evidence was "largely circumstantial."

Photographs showing a detective on the case wearing Stenson's jeans with an ungloved hand and with the right pocket turned out and an FBI file that indicated an agent who testified did not actually perform a gunshot residue test, were not properly disclosed to the defense.

"Had the FBI file and photographs been properly disclosed here, Stenson's counsel would have been able to demonstrate to the jury that a key exhibit in the case Stenson's jeans -- had been seriously mishandled and compromised by law enforcement investigators. It is also likely that exposure of the State's mishandling of the jeans with regard to GSR testing would have led to further inquiry by Stenson's counsel into possible corruption of the blood spatter evidence," according to the ruling written by Justice Pro Tem Gerry Alexander for the majority.

The court found the newly discovered evidence "undermines confidence in the jury verdict" and reversed the convictions and death sentence and ordered a new trial.

Justice James M. Johnson dissented, saying the court failed to consider the "mountain of other evidence linking Stenson to the crime" and that there was never another viable suspect. Stenson's has been on death row for 18 years and this was his 6th appeal to his death sentence. Courts have stayed his execution 3 times.

(source: Courthouse News)

IRAN:

Parents of American 'Spy' Held by Iran Issue Tearful Plea

For the 1st time the parents of an American who could face the death penalty in Iran for alleged espionage have gone before a camera in stirring video to speak about their young son and the suffering they've endured since the arrest of the "typical American boy."

"Everywhere I go I see him. His face is in front of me everywhere," Behnaz Hekmati, mother of arrested Amir Hekmati, says as tears stream down her face in the new video posted on FreeAmir.org. "I miss him so much. I miss him so much… [But] I keep myself strong because I know my boy needs me. I need to help him."

Amir Hekmati, an Arizona-born ex-U.S. Marine, was arrested in August 2011 while his family said he was on his 1st trip ever to Iran to see his grandmother. Iran accused Amir of being a spy, and in December an Iranian television station broadcast a "confession" from the 28-year-old in which he says he was sent into Iran by the CIA to become a double agent hidden inside Iranian intelligence.

A day after the broadcast, Amir's father, Ali, told ABC News in an exclusive interview that the Iranian claims were "lies."

"My son is no spy. He is innocent. He's a good fellow, a good citizen, a good man," the elder Hekmati said then. "These are all unfounded allegations and a bunch of lies."

The next month, an Iranian court found Amir guilty and sentenced him to death. However, Iranian media reported in March that the death sentence had been annulled and Amir would be retried.

In the new video, neither Amir's father nor mother mention Iran or the allegations against their son, but talk about Amir when he was a charming boy and describe the effect his arrest has had on the family.

"I am in very bad shape. I am just deteriorating every day. Every day I get worse and worse," Hekmati's mother says. "I try to be strong because maybe it's only me and his family... we are his voice. He doesn't have a voice."

Hekmati's father says he thinks about his son "all the time" and says he sometimes prays to dream about him, if only to see his face.

"Maybe I will share a dream of him," Ali Hekmati says. "I sure miss him."

(source: ABC News)

***********

Malekpour Family Allowed Visit After 3 Months

The family of Saeed Malekpour, an Iranian-Canadian who was sentenced to death in January 2012, was finally allowed to see him after three months of not being able to visit him. His sister, Maryam Malekpour, told the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran that Saeed’s interrogators have prevented him from seeing his family.

“During these 3 months, authorities never answered any of our requests or questions, and the numerous letters I wrote were left unanswered. Only some reliable sources whose names I cannot reveal said that Saeed’s interrogators do not authorize visits for him. Even when the case judge issued a permit for visitations for Saeed, we were not allowed to see him. We guess that because they took Saeed in front of a television camera 3 times in order for him to make confessions and to show that he was remorseful and each time Saeed refused to give a confession, perhaps they did not allow him to have visitors to punish him,” said Maryam Malekpour.

36-year-old Saeed Malekpour, a web developer and resident of Canada, has been sentenced to death on the charge of “insulting Islamic sanctities,” for alleged “management of pornographic websites.” Malekpour’s family has maintained that he simply developed image-sharing software that was used, without his knowledge, to post pornographic photos.

Maryam Malekpour told the Campaign that authorities have not given her brother clear information about his upcoming execution: ” … [W]e were able to see Saeed 2 weeks ago. Saeed’s morale was good. They had not informed him of the confirmation of his death sentence, so we didn’t tell him anything either, lest the news upsets him. His death sentence remains in the Judiciary’s Sentence Enforcement Unit. Neither he nor his lawyers have been served the confirmation, but we are really fearful that his death sentence may be carried out suddenly.”

“I heard a while back through Saeed’s cellmates that he has developed kidney stones and is in a lot of pain. His cellmates had also asked the prison guards several times to take him to a doctor, but they only transferred him to the prison infirmary. When I heard this I spoke with a specialist and got him his medicine and sent it to him,” added Maryam Malekpour, explaining that since he has begun taking the medicine, his condition has improved.

Security forces arrested Canadian resident Saeed Malekpour, 36, when he returned to Iran in 2008 to visit his ailing father. He appeared on Iranian state TV in 2009 and confessed to charges raised against him. In October 2010 he was sentenced to death on charges of “insulting Islamic sanctities” for alleged “management of pornographic websites.” The Supreme Court overturned the sentence in November 2011 because of deficiencies in investigations and insufficient evidence, and forwarded his case to the Revolutionary Court. Even so, the Supreme Court upheld his death sentence on 30 January 2012.

(source: Iran Human Rights)

*****************

Iranian Rapper Faces Calls For His Execution Over 'Insulting' Song

Iranian rapper Shahin Najafi’s new song, "Naghi," contains the perfect ingredients for controversy.

The lyrics include joking references to Naghi, the 10th imam of the Shi’ites; a penis; Viagra; and the breasts of an Iranian actress.

The image that accompanies the song on YouTube depicts the dome of what appears to be a religious shrine as a female breast, with a rainbow flag -- the symbol of the gay community -- flying over it:

Naghi, I swear on your sense of humor

On this exile that is far from [you]

On the great organ of life

That sits behind us in a threatening mode

Naghi, I invoke you on the length and width of sanctions

On the rising value of the dollar and the feeling of humiliation

Naghi, I swear on the cardboard imam

On the baby who was saying “Ali!” while stuck in his mother’s womb

The song has been condemned by some inside Iran as disrespectful and insulting to Imam Naghi, while others have praised it for breaking religious taboos.

Najafi, who moved to Germany in 2005, told RFE/RL that his aim was not to insult religious sanctities.

“I had done something similar in the past. I have another song titled 'Mahdi' [and] there hasn’t been any such reaction to it," Najafi says. "Also, I thought many would like the song. It’s satirical. When I [create] something, I never think about its consequences.”

The consequences this time include a $100,000 bounty on his head and calls for his execution. The hard-line website Shia-online is offering the reward and says the sum will be paid by an unnamed Arab country in the Persian Gulf.

Call To Violence

The hard-line semi-official Fars news agency, which is affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), claimed earlier this week that senior Ayatollah Safi Golpayegani had issued a fatwa against Najafi and declared him an apostate. The punishment for apostasy in Iran is death.

The ayatollah issued a written statement in response to a question about the song. Without naming names, he said, “If they have insulted the imam, they are apostates.”

Whatever is not in praise and approval of the political and religious system is dismissed and declared as apostasy----Rapper Shahin Najafi

Najafi says that’s a call to violence. He says he has had to take measures to ensure his safety.

“When you issue a death sentence for someone – even under the assumption that that person has insulted [religious sanctities -- that’s [spreading] violence, and it’s unacceptable,” Najafi says.

The song touches on social problems in Iran, mentioning "prayers rugs made in China," "fossilized opposition in the diaspora," and the reported "3 % of Iran's population that reads books." But it also mentions sensitive religious issues, including the return of the Hidden Imam.

In the song, Najafi calls on Naghi to appear and redeem the world instead of Imam Mahdi or the Hidden Imam, who Shi’ites believe will reappear and bring justice to the world.

O Naghi, now that the Hidden Imam is asleep, we call upon you, O Naghi

Appear, for we are ready in our burial shrouds, O Naghi , O Naghi, O Naghi, O Naghi.

It’s not just religious hard-liners who are offended. Some members of the Iranian opposition believe Najafi has crossed a line.

“It is our right for our beliefs and sanctities not to be insulted,” a reformist activist based in Tehran wrote on Facebook.

No Regrets

Religious Iranians consider their imams to be saints. For Najafi, who is an atheist, Naghi is merely a "historical figure.”

Najafi says the definition of what constitutes an insult should be reviewed.

“This is the problem of those who have dogmatic and ideological views on issues," he says. "That is why in Iran’s history, art has not been accepted as it should be. Whatever is not in praise and approval of the political and religious system is dismissed and declared as apostasy.”

Despite the threats, Najafi says has no regrets, however.

“If I regretted what I did for a second," he says, "I would say farewell to music."

(source: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty)

TEXAS:

Texas death row inmate's mental health questioned

The outcome of legal wrangling about condemned killer Steven Staley's mental health is likely to determine if the former laborer is put to death this week in Texas for a slaying almost a quarter-century ago in Fort Worth.

Prosecutors contend he's competent to be executed. His lawyer says Staley is severely mentally ill, suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, and has been observed catatonic or lying on the floor of his jail cell covered in urine.

Staley, 49, faces lethal injection Wednesday evening for the fatal shooting of a Steak and Ale restaurant manager who was taken hostage during a botched robbery in October 1989. The arrest of Staley and two accomplices after a wild 20-mile car and foot chase ended a series of robberies, assaults and at least one other killing as the trio wreaked havoc in Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas.

In a written statement, Staley implicated himself in the slaying of 35-year-old Bob Read. And since he arrived on death row in 1991, his mental competence became an issue as his punishment neared.

Prosecutors say he's legally competent, and state District Court Judge Wayne Salvant has ordered him to be medicated, by force if needed.

"If he was found not to be competent, the trial judge would just withdraw the (execution) date," said Jim Gibson, an assistant district attorney in Tarrant County, where Staley was tried and convicted.

Staley also has been examined by psychologists, who determined the prisoner was competent.

"Everybody agrees he's competent," Gibson said. "... I think the issue is going to be why he's competent."

Staley's lawyer, John Stickels, calls the competency artificial.

"The state has given him enough psychotropic drugs that the judge found he met the definition to be competent to be executed," said Stickels, who is asking the courts to halt the execution. "The whole reason he's been medicated is to make him competent to be executed."

Staley's previous attorney called him "too nuts to be executed" when the courts stopped a scheduled execution in 2005. And Stickles said Staley's severe mental illness has existed for several years and has been exacerbated by the forced drug regimen Stickles argues was illegally ordered by Salvant.

If lower courts refuse to stay the execution, Stickles said he'll take his case to the U.S. Supreme Court, which he said has not addressed the question of involuntary medication for the purposes of execution. When administered, the drugs leave Staley "with extreme sedation and zombie-like effects," Stickles said in an appeal to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

Salvant, in his order, pointed to a 2003 ruling from the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that said forcible medication is appropriate if it's likely to make the condemned inmate competent, if the side effects wouldn't be worse than the benefits and if it's in the prisoner's best medical interests.

In 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court said it is unconstitutional to execute someone who is insane. The justices didn't define insanity, but did say a person may be executed if he's aware of the punishment and the reason for it. Then in 2002, the court barred execution of mentally impaired people.

Stickles said Staley's IQ of 70 — considered the threshold for mental impairment — also could disqualify him from the punishment.

Staley, from death row, declined to an interview request from The Associated Press.

In Texas, the nation's most active death penalty state, Monte Delk was executed in 2002 despite questions about his mental health. Before dying, he spouted obscenities and declared he was the prison warden and on the island of Barbados. In 2007, a 5-4 high court vote stopped Scott Panetti's execution as his lawyers successfully argued Panetti was delusional and incapable of comprehending the reason for his death sentence.

Staley had escaped from a Denver halfway house where he was awaiting parole on robbery and auto theft convictions. In Fort Worth on the evening of Oct. 14, 1989, he and accomplice Tracey Duke ended a meal by pulling semiautomatic weapons from the purse of Duke's girlfriend, Brenda Rayburn.

They herded customers and employees to the back of the restaurant, then forced Read to open cash registers and the store safe. An assistant manager slipped out and called police. Read, married and a father of 3, urged the robbers to take him and leave the hostages alone when the police arrived.

Officers watched Read walk out the door of the restaurant, guns poked in his ribs. The robbers hijacked a car and police moved in as Read was being forced into the back seat. Evidence showed Staley shot Read, then Staley and Duke fired on the officers.

They then lead authorities on the 20-mile chase, and were caught after the car broke down and they tried to flee on foot.

Duke, 45, is serving 3 life sentences in Texas and has a 30-year sentence in Colorado for murder and armed robbery. Rayburn accepted 30 years in a plea bargain.

(source: Associated Press)

ILLINOIS:

Exhibit on anti-death penalty activist opens

An exhibit dedicated to the life of a nationally known Roman Catholic anti-death penalty activist is opening in Chicago.

Sister Helen Prejean wrote the book "Dead Man Walking," which later became a film starring Susan Sarandon and Sean Penn.

The exhibit at DePaul University looks at notable moments in her activism over the decades and includes correspondence with people on death row. Prejean donated her papers to DePaul in 2010.

The exhibit is called "In Deeds and Words: The Prejean Ministry Against the Death Penalty."

The ribbon cutting is Monday.

(source: Associated Press)

NEW MEXICO:

Closing arguments slated in NM death penalty trial

Closing arguments are scheduled in the sentencing phase of a man convicted of murdering a Bernalillo County deputy and who could face the death penalty.

The prosecution and defense are slated Monday to give their last arguments to jurors who could then begin deliberations this week in the sentencing trial of Michael Astorga.

Jurors will be asked to sentence Astorga, who was convicted in the 2006 killing of James McGrane, to life in prison or to death, even though New Mexico repealed the death penalty in 2009.

Astorga is still eligible for the death penalty since the crime occurred before the repeal.

2 others remain on the state's death row.

(source: Associated Press)

KANSAS:

No traction on Kansas death penalty repeal

Former Topekan Phillip Cheatham would be among Kansans taking more than passing interest in attempting to end the death penalty.

Cheatham, who awaits resentencing after receiving the death penalty for gunning down 2 women and shooting a third in 2003, could be spared the ultimate punishment. 9 other men sit on death row in Kansas.

During the 2012 legislative session, which is nearly completed, a House committee conducted a hearing on a death penalty repeal bill. Discussion was termed "informational" to signal the committee had no intention of advancing the bill.

House Speaker Mike O'Neal, R-Hutchinson, said he didn't believe a majority of colleagues in the chamber supported ending capital punishment.

"I'm not sure there is a great deal of interest in trying to revisit that," said House Minority Leader Paul Davis, D-Lawrence.

No substantive development on the issue has transpired since 2010 when the Senate split 20-20 on a bill written to sustain death sentences for people previously sentenced for capital murder and to create a substitute category for murder cases punishable by life in prison without parole.

"I've heard nothing this year," said Senate President Steve Morris, a Hugoton Republican who voted to enact the death penalty and subsequently endorsed abolition.

Gov. Sam Brownback, who takes a hardline pro-life view on abortion, said his support of the death penalty was limited to instances in which the state couldn't protect society from killers.

Shari Silberstein, executive director of Equal Justice USA in New York City, said she understood formidable obstacles to reshaping political attitudes in Kansas before arriving recently at the Statehouse on a mass reorganizing excursion.

Similar opinion existed in Illinois, New Mexico, New Jersey and New York before those states took capital punishment off the table, she said.

Gov. Dannel Malloy signed legislation in April making Connecticut the 17th state, and fifth state in five years, to step away from the death penalty.

“This takes the momentum for repeal up a notch. We have another state saying, ‘we’ve tried this experiment and the death penalty has failed,’” Silberstein said.

She said states recognized the death penalty was prone to false conviction, unfairly applied, ineffective as deterrent, unhelpful to family survivors and impossible to correct once the sentence has been carried out.

Jeremy Schnoeder, a Chicago field worker for the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, said rhetoric accompanying passage of capital punishment statutes had moderated as practical implications emerged.

Dozens of people placed on death row across the United States have been exonerated, Schnoeder said.

"Everything has changed on the death penalty," he said. "It's not the political issue it once was."

Silberstein said members of evangelical communities were increasingly supportive of repeal campaigns because of sentiments about "sanctity of life."

"Some conservatives we talk to say, 'We don't trust government to fix potholes. Are we going to trust them to determine who lives and dies?'" Silberstein said.

Nine inmates have death sentences pending in Kansas, and Cheatham could join them as the 10th on the list if resentenced to death.

Capital punishment returned to Kansas statute books in 1994 when Democratic Gov. Joan Finney allowed a bill to become law without her signature. The state hasn't executed anyone since 1965.

(source: The Topeka Capital-Journal)

USA:

Husband of 9/11 Victim Goes To Gitmo To Spare Pllotters From Death Sentence

The husband of a woman killed on 9/11 went to Guantanamo Bay on a shocking secret mission — to try to save the lives of the al-Qaeda monsters who planned the murder.

Blake Allison — 1 of 10 relatives of victims to win a lottery for tickets to the arraignment of confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed and 4 of his evil accomplices — had told people he was making the trip because “I wanted to see the faces of the people accused of murdering my wife.’’

But while there, the 62-year-old wine-company executive held a clandestine meeting with the terrorists’ lawyers, in which he offered to testify against putting their clients to death.

A vocal critic of capital punishment, Allison wants to convince the US government to spare the lives of KSM and his minions even if a military commission convicts them of a slew of death-penalty charges.

“The public needs to know there are family members out there who do not hold the view that these men should be put to death,” Allison told The Post.

“We can’t kill our way to a peaceful tomorrow.”

Allison’s 48-year-old wife, Anna, was a software consultant on her way to visit a client in Los Angeles when her plane, American Airlines Flight 11, was smashed into World Trade Center Tower 1 on Sept. 11, 2001.

In a lengthy conversation from his home in New Hampshire, Allison explained his controversial view — one he admits is not shared by his late wife’s relatives or by the other family members of victims he met at Guantanamo.

“My opposition to the death penalty does not say I don’t want the people who killed my wife and [the other 911 victims] brought to account for their crimes,” he said.

“But for me, opposition to the death penalty is not situational. Just because I was hurt very badly and personally does not, in my mind, give me the go-ahead to take a life.”

(source: The Yeshiva World)

**************

Death penalty harms society

Charles Lane writes ("Some belong on death row," May 3) that the death penalty should remain available for "the worst of the worst" offenders. That might be what these rare offenders deserve, but we must consider what moral damage administering the death penalty will cause to our country. Do we want to be party to an officially sanctioned murder?

A murderer who has to live out his/her life locked up with nothing to do can no longer kill anybody and will suffer from excrutiating boredom even if he or she does not have a conscience.

It is not up to us to seek revenge. We must certainly insure the safety of all members of society by insuring that these offenders never get the opportunity to harm anyone again, but not at the cost of our own moral well-being.

It is quite probable that these criminals are beyond redemption. That is why they must be securely sequestered for life. This will protect us without doing emotional harm to society.

Hannah Benson-Bernstein

Clifton Park

(source: Letter to the Editor, Albany Times Union)

****************************

Death penalty argument misguided

In response to the May 4 column by Charles Lane: “Why the death penalty abolitionists are misguided”:

Lane takes a cheap shot at the abolition of the death penalty when he uses the case of Anders Breivik for his lead argument. How would the vengeful execution of this criminally insane individual advance the cause of justice?

To call a 21-year prison sentence too lenient and potentially dangerous is to make a presumptuous critique of Norway’s judicial and penal systems. Though their prison sentences are shorter and less harsh, the rate of recidivism in Norway is one-tenth of ours.

Next, to condemn Gov. Dannel P. Malloy for signing into law in April the abolition of the death penalty in Connecticut, Lane invokes (1) a death penalty poll by the Quinnipiac University and (2) the inconsistency of the Connecticut bill where it does not apply retroactively to 11 men already on death row.

The non-retroactivity clause was undoubtedly a political pre-condition for the passage of the bill, which passed by strong majorities, first in the state senate 20-16 and then in the house 86-62.

The poll does report that 62 % of registered voters in Connecticut support the death penalty. But that figure is open to serious questioning: typical of such public opinion studies, the April 25 Quinnipiac poll suffers from statistical shortcomings. Nowhere in the published results could I find information on the polling sample. How many respondents did they have? How did the pollsters select their respondents?

Indeed, when given a clear choice between state executions and a life sentence without parole, most verifiable polls show that a majority of respondents would choose the life sentence.

No matter how appalling and reprehensible it was, the public reiteration of the crime by premeditated state execution serves no purpose beyond that of giving a model of vengeance; it brings back no deceased victim.

By contrast, a life in prison condemns the killer to live the consequences of his crime in a cage forever.

George T. Diller lives in Gainesville.

(source: Letter to the Editor, Gainesville Sun)

ARIZONA----impending execution

Death-row prisoner's lawyers to make final push

Lawyers in Phoenix and San Francisco Monday will make a final push to keep death-row prisoner Samuel Lopez from being executed on Wednesday.

Lopez, 49, was sentenced to death for the murder of a Phoenix woman in 1986. Estefana Holmes was raped and sodomized in her apartment and stabbed more than 20 times before Lopez slit her throat.

But lawyers will argue in Maricopa County Superior Court that Lopez was not allowed a fair hearing for reprieve or commutation of his death sentence because new members on the Arizona Board of Executive Clemency were not qualified and were not legally appointed. His attorney walked out of his hearing in protest on May 7.

And more lawyers will appear before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco to claim that the state's corrections department cannot be trusted to follow its own rules in carrying out the execution. In a 2nd hearing, they will argue that Lopez did not have effective legal assistance during his two murder trials or during his early appeals.

The 1st of the hearings is the most likely to buy time for Lopez. Members of the clemency board have suggested Lopez will get another chance to make his case for a life sentence. But with an execution slated for Wednesday, time is running out.

The 9th Circuit has issued warnings to the Arizona Department of Corrections over its variances in execution protocol, although it has allowed executions to go forward. Attorneys for Lopez will call the judges' attention to further lapses since the last of such hearing.

But courts are hesitant to stop executions, especially after so many years of appeals -- in this case 25 -- have failed to spare a prisoner's life.

Lopez's attorneys will argue that mitigating evidence of his horrific life was not adequately presented in trial or post-conviction hearings.

Lopez grew up in abject poverty in southwest Phoenix. His mother, Concha, was born in Texas, but was thrown out of her parents' house after she became pregnant. She came to Phoenix, where she worked in the fields, and there she met Lopez' father.

Arcadio Lopez, who was born in Tombstone, drove the bus that took the workers to the fields. He took a liking to Concha. He moved into her home against her wishes and stayed long enough to father 8 children.

A drunk, he would beat Concha and the children. They were relieved when he finally moved to California, where he drank himself to death.

The new man who moved into Concha's life forced her children out of the house. Samuel Lopez dropped out of school in the 9th grade and lived in fields and a cemetery. He robbed houses to get by, and he sniffed paint and glue to get high, which caused brain damage. And like his father and brothers, he became a drunk; the court record shows that his behavior became even more erratic when he drank.

Lopez was 25 when he murdered Holmes; she was 59. Nothing in the court record explains why he was in her home. But on Oct. 29, 1986, he gagged her and blindfolded her, raped her, then stabbed her repeatedly in the head and chest. The apartment was bloodied and torn apart, indicating "a terrible and prolonged struggle," according to court records.

In 1987, Lopez was convicted of 1st-degree murder, kidnapping, 2 counts of sexual assault and burglary. Lopez was sentenced to death.

The death sentence was overturned on appeal, but his re-sentencing trial ended the same way.

(source: Arizona Republic)

INDONESIA:

Bali 9 mastermind appeals for clemency

Bali 9 mastermind Andrew Chan, who is on death row for his role in a plot to smuggle eight kilos of heroin into Bali, has appealed for clemency from Indonesia's president.

Officials at Kerobokan prison say Chan has appealed for Indonesian president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono to pardon him from execution so he has a chance to live and reform.

Chan, 28, lost his final court appeal against the death penalty in June 2011.

He is 1 of 2 members of the Bali 9 on death row. Myuran Sukumaran, the other man charged with masterminding the smuggling plot, also faces execution by firing squad.

The rest of the Bali 9 are serving lengthy sentences, including life terms.

Kerobokan's prison chief, Gusti Ngurah Wiratna, says the appeal was based on Chan's age and that last week was the deadline for his clemency request.

He says the appeal was submitted last Thursday.

Shortly after last June's court decision, Prime Minister Julia Gillard said Australia was strongly opposed to capital punishment and that she would try to have Chan's sentence commuted.

Indonesia enforces stiff penalties for drug trafficking, including life imprisonment and death.

(source: Australian Broadcast Corporation)

IRAN:

Imprisoned Iranian pastor alive, in good spirits

Though Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani remains in prison in Iran, a new letter gives reason to believe he is still alive.

Jason DeMars of President Truth Ministries received the letter that Nadarkhani reportedly wrote from prison. But it actually addresses "all those who are worried about [his] current situation."

"He wanted to let everybody know that he's in perfect health in the flesh and in the Spirit, and he looks at the days that he's being persecuted as 'a day of exam and trial' of his faith," DeMars reports. "He's using them as a trial in order to prove his loyalty and sincerity before God, and he's doing everything he can to stay right with what he's learned from God's Word."

The pastor writes that though he wants his ordeal to end, he has surrendered himself to God's will. He also addresses another point of controversy.

"He just wanted to make a statement that he does not agree with the burning of the Quran, as we read about in the news, by Terry Jones," DeMars clarifies. "He didn't agree with that, and he didn't believe it was the right thing to do."

Nadarkhani was given the death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity, although he has stated frequently that he never practiced the Muslim faith to begin with (see earlier story). Now, he is asking "all the beloved ones to pray" for him.

(source: One News Now)

EGYPT:

Mubarak’s tainted legacy hangs over Egyptian vote----Mubarak may be gone, but his legacy lingers. Then vice-president, he was catapulted into office in October 1981 after surviving the gunfire from religious army soldiers who assassinated his predecessor, Anwar Sadat

Military police idly guard the gates of Egypt’s presidential palace in Heliopolis, built as a 400-room luxury hotel in 1910 and vacant since a popular uprising deposed Hosni Mubarak 15 months ago.

Egyptians, who never stormed in to gawk and plunder their fallen leader’s home as Tunisians and Libyans did last year, vote on May 23 and 24 for a new president, the latest stage of an uncertain transition guided bumpily by the military. People who live in the wealthy Cairo district around the palace are delighted to be spared the road closures that snarled traffic for hours every time Mubarak went anywhere. But some, such as 24-year-old Sara Hussein, find it harder to perceive any other changes wrought by the uprising she had so ardently supported. “Like everything, the palace is still not free of the Mubaraks. The palace, and the country, are not for the people,” she says. “His regime is still in power.”

Still, Egypt will soon have a freely elected - and probably civilian - president for the first time in the republic’s 60-year history, assuming the generals who sealed Mubarak’s fate by refusing to shoot at crowds baying for his downfall keep their promise to hand over by July 1. Little else is clear. Attempts to craft a new constitution have stalled. No one knows how power will be divided between the president and parliament, dominated by religious groups. The military, wary of religious groups and jealous of its own power, perks and privileges, may step back from day-to-day affairs but is likely to seek an as-yet undefined political role, seeing itself as the paternal guardian of the state. The generals effectively removed Mubarak to safeguard the system, not to promote revolutionary change. So far reform has not touched that system’s main pillars - the military, the judiciary, the police, security and intelligence agencies. “We have not had regime change in Egypt, only change within the regime, with a lot of street noise outside,” said Robert Springborg, a professor at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, and a specialist on the Egyptian military.

Mubarak may be gone, but his legacy lingers. Then vice-president, he was catapulted into office in October 1981 after surviving the gunfire from religious army soldiers who assassinated his predecessor, Anwar Sadat. He brought calm and kept Egypt at peace for 30 years, crushing an armed rebellion in the 1990s, until political and economic frustrations with his stagnant rule boiled over in the cauldron of Cairo’s Tahrir Square, where wild rejoicing greeted his departure on Feb. 11, 2011. Many compare Mubarak to his predecessors - Sadat, who made peace with Israel and forged an alliance with the United States, and Gamal Abdel Nasser, an Arab nationalist who once inspired those fighting colonial powers in the Arab world and beyond. “Sadat was exceptional in his intelligence, Nasser in his charisma. Mubarak was half-talented at everything and had no exceptional quality,” said Ayman Nour, who ran in a 2005 election against Mubarak and was later jailed for his pains. “Mubarak had the kind of tyranny that is typical of half-democracies,” the 47-year-old lawyer told Reuters. “He was a tyrant under the umbrella of the law.”

That did not stand in the way of Mubarak’s friendship with the West, which valued him for upholding Sadat’s 1979 peace treaty with Israel, deeply unpopular with many Egyptians. He was also a close ally of Saudi Arabia, which was dismayed at Washington’s failure to prevent the fall of a pillar of a US regional political and security order that included Egypt and conservative Arab monarchies from Morocco to the Gulf. “Without Mubarak, it will be harder for the United States to do the things it has done in the past,” said Steven Cook, a Middle East expert at Washington’s Council on Foreign Relations. US-Egyptian relations have become tetchier since Mubarak’s ouster, but military aid and cooperation continue, as does the treaty with Israel, although the peace is colder than ever.

Now on trial for his life, Mubarak, who turned 84 this month, spends his days in the capital’s International Medical Center, sitting in a lounge, walking in the garden, watching television and seeing relatives, according to a hospital source who offered a rare, unauthorised glimpse of his activities. This suggests he is healthier than the image projected at his court appearances, when he showed up lying on a stretcher, wearing dark glasses and taking little part in proceedings. He and ex-Interior Minister Habib al-Adly both deny ordering the killing of protesters. If convicted, they could face the death penalty, but appeals will follow and the military may well protect Mubarak, a former airforce chief, from execution. The judge has promised a verdict on June 2, a date that falls between the first presidential election round and a likely run-off between the 2 top vote-getters on June 16 and 17.

Mubarak’s 2 sons, Gamal, once seen as his heir-apparent, and Alaa are also on trial with him on corruption charges. Many Egyptians see the trial as a test of accountability and want justice for the 800 or so people killed during the revolt, but Mubarak, if not his unloved sons, still has a following. A 62,000-member Facebook page called “We are sorry Mr President” says: “You made your mistakes and you disappointed some. You trusted men around you with no conscience, but you will stay in the heart of every Egyptian who loves you.” Weariness with post-uprising chaos and shattered livelihoods may also feed nostalgia for Mubarak’s staid order. “The economy is in terrible shape. It’s not as if his passing has led to a golden era for Egypt, so lots of Egyptians are already yearning for the good old days,” Springborg said.

(source: Reuters)

CHINA:

Death for Chinese man accused of lethal blast

A man was sentenced to death on Monday after being convicted of causing a blast in central China that killed 2 people and wounded several others, state media reported.

Wang Haijian was given the death penalty at a court in Wuhan city, and his associates Wang Wei and Wang Anan were jailed for 10 and 6 years respectively, the China News Service said.

The 3 were found responsible for an explosion that went off near a bank in Wuhan in December, which authorities at the time said occurred during an attempted robbery, killing 2 passers-by.

It was unclear if the 3 are related, and calls made to the Wuhan Intermediate Court - where they were tried - went unanswered.

Bomb attacks have been increasingly frequent in China in recent years, and are often carried out by individuals angry over perceived injustices, business disputes or other pressures associated with rapid modernisation.

On Thursday, a woman blew herself up to protest the demolition of her house in the southwestern province of Yunnan, killing 2 people and injuring 14, the official Xinhua news agency said.

The woman, who also died on the spot, was at a local government office negotiating compensation for the loss of her home when she detonated explosives attached to her body, it said.

Late last year, a man who set off explosives in 2010 at a tax office in the central province of Hunan - killing 4 people and injuring at least 17 others - was executed.

Liu Zhuiheng, who sold hardware, was reportedly frustrated over the state of his business, which had sustained losses.

According to the rights group Amnesty International, China executes more people every year than the rest of the world combined.

These have in the past typically carried out by a bullet to the back of the head, but in recent years the state has increasingly been using lethal injection.

(source: Asia One)

MAY 13, 2012:

TEXAS:

Death Sentence Reviews Leave Unsettled Issues in Texas

Stanley Schneider was shocked last year when Texas’ highest criminal court sent his death row client an early Christmas gift of sorts, ordering the trial court to re-examine evidence from a psychologist who had decided that John Reyes Matamoros was mentally fit to face execution.

“We were hopeful their sending it back would mean something,” Mr. Schneider said.

But his hope flagged in March when, he said, two Harris County state district judges virtually rubber-stamped Dr. George Denkowski’s findings in the cases of Mr. Matamoros and a fellow death row inmate, Steven Butler. Dr. Denkowski, the psychologist who testified in the cases of 14 current Texas death row inmates that the convicted men were mentally fit for execution, was reprimanded last year after other psychologists and defense lawyers filed a complaint alleging that he had used discredited evaluation methods.

Lawyers for Mr. Matamoros and Mr. Butler, who have filed objections with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, say any findings by Dr. Denkowski should be disregarded. They said that the trial court judges — who are husband and wife — simply adopted Dr. Denkowski’s conclusions instead of examining reams of evidence from other psychologists that they said proved their clients were mentally retarded and ineligible for the death penalty.

“This is a perfect example of the state taking science and trying to prostitute it,” Mr. Schneider said, adding, “The role of the courts is to protect us from junk science.”

Judge Marc Brown, of Harris County District Court, who reviewed the Matamoros case, was in trial and did not respond to a request for comment. His wife, Judge Susan Brown, declined to comment on the Butler case because it is continuing. Calls to Dr. Denkowski were not returned.

But Roe Wilson, Harris County assistant district attorney, contended that the judges had disregarded Dr. Denkowski’s findings.

The judge’s findings in Mr. Butler’s case repeatedly refer to Dr. Denkowski’s findings, but Ms. Wilson said the references were “historical.”

“There was no consideration given and no mention given,” Ms. Wilson said.

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in 2002 that states could not execute people who were mentally retarded. The court allowed states to decide on guidelines for determining whether a person was mentally retarded. Texas courts have adopted a 3-part definition that requires the convicted inmate to have below-average intellectual function, to lack adaptive behavior skills and to have had these problems since an early age.

Dr. Denkowski conducted tests to determine whether defendants who might face the death penalty aligned with those definitions. But other psychologists and defense lawyers complained that he artificially inflated intelligence scores to make defendants eligible for the death penalty. (Dr. Denkowski’s lawyer has said that he vigorously denies having violated any psychology board rules and that he used his best clinical judgment in making forensic evaluations.)

Last year, the Texas Board of Examiners of Psychologists agreed to a settlement with Dr. Denkowski in which it reprimanded him, but he did not admit guilt. He agreed not to conduct intellectual disability evaluations in future criminal cases and to pay a fine of $5,500. In return, the board dismissed the complaints.

Since that reprimand, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has asked trial courts to review at least six cases that included Dr. Denkowski’s work to determine what effect it had had on the case.

Defense lawyers argue that Dr. Denkowski’s conclusions should be completely excluded from those reviews.

“You can talk all day long about how you don’t want junk science used in these cases, but when you’re confronted with it, you have to take active steps to make sure it hasn’t contaminated the case,” said Kathryn Kase, executive director of the Texas Defender Service, which represents death row inmates.

The Butler and Matamoros cases are the first to be returned to the Court of Appeals.

Mr. Butler, who was also sentenced to life in prison for a separate conviction of aggravated sexual assault with a weapon, was sentenced to death in 1988 for the shooting death of Velma Clemons, a clerk at a dry-cleaning business.

Dr. Denkowski evaluated Mr. Butler, and he testified in the case in 2006. School records showed Mr. Butler had been classified as “educable but mentally retarded,” but Dr. Denkowski said nothing in the records indicated that he required special education. He noted that Mr. Butler could tell time and could recite his Social Security number, “highly atypical skills for a mentally retarded person.” He concluded that Butler’s I.Q. was borderline normal.

Similarly, Judge Susan Brown concluded that Mr. Butler’s poor academic performance reflected underachievement and poor choices, not lack of intellectual function. She also wrote that he had enough intellectual ability to plan, commit and then lie about the murder for which he was convicted.

Dick Burr, a defense lawyer, said the judge had ignored findings by experts hired by Mr. Butler’s lawyers, including Dr. Denis Keyes, a special education professor at the College of Charleston, and Dr. Jack Fletcher, a psychology professor at the University of Houston. Both found that Mr. Butler had a low I.Q. and was mentally retarded. Dr. Fletcher — one of the psychologists who complained to the board about Dr. Denkowski’s work — said that Dr. Denkowski’s conclusion that Mr. Butler was mentally fit for execution “was based on outmoded, no-longer-accepted information.”

“Our evidence demonstrated very persuasively that Steven Butler has mental retardation,” Mr. Burr said.

Mr. Matamoros, whose criminal history included auto theft and burglary with intent to sexually assault, was convicted of the 1990 murder of 70-year-old Eddie Goebel, who was found in his bed with 25 stab wounds.

Dr. Denkowski concluded in 2006 that Mr. Matamoros was not mentally retarded. His low I.Q. scores and a psychologist’s finding in 1977 that at 14 Mr. Matamoros had a mild intellectual disability, Dr. Denkowski concluded, were a result of bilingualism and his rearing in a deprived environment.

Judge Marc Brown agreed, quoting from a federal court ruling in the case that in turn relied on Dr. Denkowski’s findings. Like Dr. Denkowski, the judge concluded that Mr. Matamoros’s ability to care for himself as an inmate and to plan and commit crimes also contradicted his claims of mental retardation.

Judge Brown’s findings discounted the evaluations of psychologists hired by Mr. Matamoros’s lawyers who found that he was mentally retarded.

Dr. Thomas Oakland, a psychologist and retired professor at the University of Florida, reviewed Dr. Denkowski’s findings along with Judge Marc Brown’s ruling. Both, he said, showed a “reckless disregard” for established forensic psychology.

“Based upon my review of Dr. Denkowski’s affidavit and testimony, it is my opinion that Mr. Matamoros’s intelligence was and is significantly subaverage,” he wrote in an affidavit.

Ms. Wilson, the assistant district attorney in Harris County, disputed the inmates’ lawyers’ argument that the judges’ findings were largely copied from Dr. Denkowski’s work.

“I don’t think that is an accurate characterization, but that is something the Court of Criminal Appeals will determine,” she said.

Lawyers for Mr. Butler and Mr. Matamoros want the Court of Criminal Appeals to insist that the death row inmates’ claims be re-evaluated without any reliance on Dr. Denkowski’s work.

Mr. Schneider said the decision by the Court of Appeals in the two cases would also send a signal to other judges who are reviewing cases in which Dr. Denkowski had made evaluations. He said he hoped the court would continue to reject forensic methods that had been proven unscientific.

“Their role has to be that of the supergatekeeper of forensic science,” Mr. Schneider said. “They have to say we will not allow a proceeding tainted by junk science to go forward.”

(source: New York Times)

USA (GEORGIA):

Justice Department investigates 2 prosecutors involved in federal death penalty case in Ga.

The Justice Department is investigating 2 former prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney's office in Atlanta in connection with allegations of misconduct in a death penalty case.

U.S. Attorney Sally Quillian Yates told The Daily Report (http://bit.ly/K5JgeV) that she reported Todd Alley and Matthew Jackson to the department's Office of Professional Responsibility last month.

She said it was the second time she has asked the department's disciplinary arm to investigate the two. The move came after U.S. District Senior Judge Clarence Cooper accused the pair of deceiving him during pretrial litigation in the death penalty case of Brian Richardson, who was sentenced to life in prison without parole. She said it was the second time she has asked the department's disciplinary arm to investigate the 2.

Alley, who is now in private practice, declined to comment. Jackson, who is a federal prosecutor in Florida, couldn't be reached for comment.

(source: Associated Press)

CONNECTICUT:

THE ARTFUL STRATEGIST Death penalty decision points to other reality

Every few years in Massachusetts, the boys and girls flex their muscles and launch a referendum grenade at the powers-that-be.

Eliminate the income tax, slash the sales tax — of course, such stuff never actually passes, but it gets enough votes to at least cause the tax-and-spend folks to perspire for a few hours.

In Florida a few years back, the voters pondered a referendum question about banning cruelty to pigs.

And then there was Michigan, of course, which launched a referendum ballot item to prohibit affirmative action in the public college admissions process. That was an interesting one. The legislators dived under their desks. The powers-that-be, the stuffy establishment types, all opposed it. The politically correct activists strummed their folk guitars constantly, in opposition to it. But, of course, it passed — because it was clear from the beginning that most Michigan voters approved of it.

On occasion, referenda can be as frivolous as a pig in distress. But there are those kinds of issues for which voters feel strongly — and can get no relief through the normal process of “representative” government.

Ponder Connecticut, where, for years, public opinion polls have made it unfashionably clear that most of the voters in this Northeastern, sort-of-liberal, progressive state favor the death penalty.

It’s on the books, of course, but the politicians and lawyers and judges and advocate hangers-on have conspired to maintain Death Row as a kind of gloomy motel, where no one ever leaves until they die of old age.

To the establishment types, it was embarrassing even to have it on the books — public opinion be damned. It was embarrassing to go to national meetings and have to sit in the corner with Florida and Texas and other creatures of the night that actually executed people, according to the rule of law — whatever that might be.

And so it was in this current session of the Connecticut General Assembly, that the legislators did away with capital punishment — quite aside from public opinion; quite aside from the fact that there is no evidence to suggest that Connecticut is some kind of cracker Southern state that steamrolls innocent defendants to their death.

Voters in Connecticut have no independent authority to launch a state-wide referendum — on the death penalty, or anything else. At least for the short term, the politicians can get away with defying voter desires, public opinion, and doing away with something that most folks wanted to retain.

Whether one favors the death penalty or not, the process has to leave a bad taste. No good can come from a process that confirms to our “representatives” that they are relatively free to do what they prefer, quite aside from that nonsense about being “the voice of the people.”

Oddly enough, 2 pieces of legislation this session both seemed perfect for what is often lovingly called, “participatory democracy,” that is, referenda. The inconsequential, yet irritating ban on Sunday liquor sales and the death penalty ban both were well-suited to actually ask voters what the heck they wanted. It doesn’t work that way in Connecticut. It can’t work that way in Connecticut.

The death penalty bill will be back in the spotlight the next time some monster kills not 1, not 2, but perhaps a family of 8, with a few rapes thrown in for good measure. The marginal cost to him of the extra carnage? Well, none at all. Life in prison is life in prison, if there is no death penalty to add to the punishment stew.

(source: Laurence D. Cohen is a freelance writer; Hartford Business Journal Online)

ARIZONA:

Arizona prisoners rarely granted clemency----Governor seldom uses sentencing 'safety valve'

By his 14th birthday, Tommy Londo was addicted to crack cocaine. With both parents in prison, he grew up on the streets of Phoenix, homeless and uneducated. He spent his teens in and out of mental hospitals and shelters.

After he was arrested in 2004 for selling a $20 lump of crack to an undercover police officer, prosecutor Eric Rothblum described him as "a clear societal liability." Londo was sentenced to 15 years and 9 months in prison.

7 years later, in 2011, Arizona's Board of Executive Clemency unanimously agreed that Londo had turned his life around. He was working on his GED, was drug-free and had earned a certificate for good behavior in prison.

The board recommended commuting Londo's sentence to 5 years, stating in a letter to Gov. Jan Brewer that Londo was someone who "has made outstanding progress." The board noted, too, that the judge who sentenced Londo had called the prison term required by Arizona's mandatory-sentencing laws "excessively harsh" given the situation.

Brewer denied Londo clemency without comment last June.

Londo has plenty of company. Statistically, if you are convicted of a felony in Arizona, you are more likely to be struck by lightning than granted clemency by the governor. Excluding the cases of inmates nearing the end of a terminal illness, Brewer is on track to grant the fewest clemency cases in more than two decades -- even when a judge and unanimous board recommend a shorter sentence.

Recent board members interviewed by The Arizona Republic believe clemency will be granted even less frequently in the future.

Indeed, Brewer's decision to replace three of the five clemency-board members at once last month has led to legal and political turmoil: Departing board members say they were ousted for voting to grant clemency; and attorneys for an inmate scheduled to be executed Wednesday will be in Maricopa County Superior Court on Monday, seeking a court order to nullify the appointments, arguing that they violated state laws. If the court agrees, it would invalidate dozens of board decisions from the past three weeks and could stall the clemency process.

Clemency is a way to correct an injustice, reduce an unfair sentence or give a second chance to someone who merits it. Sometimes called the criminal-justice system's "safety valve," it can take the form of a commutation, which reduces a sentence, or a pardon, which absolves a felon of the legal consequences of his or her conviction. But as Arizona adopted increasingly inflexible mandatory sentences over the last 30 years, a period that has seen the state's prison population soar eight-fold, governors' use of that safety valve steadily decreased.

Budget cuts have reduced the number of clemency cases the board can hear to 1/4 as many as 3 years ago, creating a nearly 2-year, 900-case backlog.

This withering of clemency brings both personal fallout, in ruined lives and separated families, and a financial cost to taxpayers, who pay to house and feed inmates who could otherwise be working and paying taxes. In Londo's case, it will cost taxpayers at least $200,000, based on Department of Corrections per-inmate prison-cost estimates of $22,166 a year.

"It's very worrisome because we have a system now in which almost nobody has discretion to fix an injustice," says Rachel Barkow, a professor at the New York University School of Law who has written extensively on clemency. "With mandatory sentencing, the judge can't do anything; the jury isn't told what the sentence will be. The only check on the system, the only safety valve, is clemency."

From 1913, when Arizona established a board of pardons and paroles, until 1993, fewer than 60 inmates a year applied for commutation, on average. In 1993, the state adopted so-called "truth in sentencing" laws, which effectively abolished parole. The new code requires offenders to serve at least 85 % of their sentence before becoming eligible for community supervision; for many felonies, 100 percent of the sentence must be served. The laws, along with mandatory minimums that took discretion in sentencing out of the hands of judges, left commutation as the only avenue for most offenders to seek a reduced sentence. By 2005, commutation applications soared to more than 1,200 a year.

The clemency board can recommend commutations, pardons, reprieves to temporarily delay a punishment, and the release of terminally ill inmates. Any inmate facing execution is automatically offered a clemency hearing. The board's recommendations are forwarded to the governor.

Brewer is the 1st governor in at least 34 years who has not issued a single pardon. She has denied each of the clemency board's 13 recommendations. By comparison, Janet Napolitano issued 22 pardons over 6 years, Jane Dee Hull issued 7 over 5.3 years, Fife Symington issued 13 over 6.5 years, and Rose Mofford granted 13 over 3 years.

Neither Brewer nor her 4 predecessors commuted a death sentence. In the 31 executions since 1992, the board has never recommended a commutation.

Citing "the futility of the process," Thomas Kemp, 63, didn't ask for a hearing before his execution on April 25 for a 1992 murder. In a letter written a week before his execution, the unrepentant Kemp said a hearing would merely bring "public humiliation of the prisoner without any chance" of his death penalty being reduced to a life term.

There is an exception to Brewer's aversion to clemency: She has granted 19 requests to release inmates medically judged to have only days or weeks to live and who weren't considered a public-safety threat. Otherwise, in her 3 years and 4 months in office, she has routinely denied unanimous board recommendations for clemency, leaving scores of prisoners serving longer sentences than the board found they deserved.

Brewer declined requests for an interview. Her spokesman, Matthew Benson, issued a statement saying that every case is reviewed and that Brewer "fulfills this solemn responsibility with the seriousness owed, and always mindful of the victims harmed by these crimes."

The effect: Arizona's justice system has no safety valve, says Henry J. Florence, a Phoenix defense attorney for more than 40 years. More than 76,000 felony criminal cases a year are filed across the state. Nearly 96 % are settled by plea bargains, according to state court statistics. Those plea-bargain sentences are driven by the long mandatory minimums in state law, Florence says. And, he notes, when cases do go to trial, the law bars jurors from being told how long a sentence a charge will carry.

Sentences defended

Prosecutors fiercely defend mandatory sentencing. Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery, who says his prosecutorial policy is not much different from those of predecessors Andrew Thomas and Rick Romley, rejects defense-attorney accusations that his office uses the long mandatory sentences to compel tough plea bargains. "It's never the ace card," he says, adding that since a defendant must agree to the length of sentence in any plea bargain, "we're not going to agree it's unduly harsh, or we wouldn't have pushed for it in the first place."

But those being offered the plea bargains -- and sometimes the judges imposing the sentences -- see it differently.

Evaluating whether a sentence merits clemency can be thorny. Consider Christopher Lindquist's case. On Oct. 11, 2009, Lindquist, then 22, drove home drunk from a friend's birthday party. Speeding and weaving, he ignored the sirens and lights of a policeman on a motorcycle until he pulled into his parents' carport. He got out of the car holding a knife with metal spikes along a brass-knuckle-type handle. Officer Eric Thrower, standing behind his motorcycle at the foot of the driveway, drew his gun and ordered Lindquist to drop the knife. Lindquist stepped forward, out of the carport, and following the officer's second command to drop the weapon, threw the knife into some bushes and ran into the house. His parents brought him back outside, where he was arrested.

"Why he had the knife in his hand, I couldn't tell you," said his father, Steven Lindquist. "He couldn't tell me."

He said the prosecutor's only offer was a sentence of 7 1/2 years.

The Lindquists chose to go to trial. Christopher Lindquist was convicted and given the mandatory 10 1/2 years for aggravated assault.

"The jury didn't know he was going to get 10 1/2 years, or I think they would have voted for a lesser charge," says Steven Lindquist. In a written order, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Pendleton Gaines called the sentence "clearly excessive and disproportionately harsh" for "a one-time incident of defendant's intoxication and an assault, consisting of the display of a knife, in which there was no physical injury." Noting Lindquist's consistent remorse, unclear evidence over whether the incident amounted to an assault, a lack of prior criminal history and other factors, Gaines issued an order at sentencing allowing Lindquist to expedite his case to the clemency board within 90 days.

In his petition to the board, Christopher Lindquist wrote that his behavior that night was "completely out of character for me. ... I would like the board and Governor to know how sincerely remorseful I am. I want to apologize to my family, friends, co-workers and especially to Officer Thrower. Not a day has passed that I haven't thought about the events that I caused that night."

He had one prior conviction, for driving under the influence. He promised never to drink again.

In November 2010, the board unanimously recommended that his sentence be reduced to 3 years. The governor denied commutation in March 2011.

"We had a lot of hope," said Steven Lindquist. "To see the governor deny him, and then to see her boasting on TV that she never grants such things, what's the point?"

Immediate clemency rare

Despite defense attorneys and judges' frequent complaints about the harshness of mandatory sentencing, they rarely push for immediate clemency, says Donna Hamm, who with her husband runs Middle Ground Prison Reform, a prisoner-advocacy organization. Even when they consider a sentence grossly disproportionate, few judges regularly issue what are called 603(L) orders. Named for the statute they fall under, such orders allow the defendant to petition the clemency board within 90 days for a commutation. Otherwise, inmates must wait 2 years.

It is rare for judges to issue 603(L) orders, and few of those granted ever reach the governor. Arizona judges have issued only 49 in the last 3 years, and of those 19 made it to Brewer's desk. She has granted only 2 and has denied all 14 that have been submitted since October 2009. By comparison, Hull granted one in three such cases and Napolitano granted 1 in 6.

Among those denials is Shannon Connely, a 42-year-old real-estate agent who had no prior arrests or convictions before a run-in with police on May 7, 2009. He was asleep, at home, when a police officer looking for a missing child pulled up in front of his house. Awakened by squealing tires and barking dogs, and worried because of a recent attempted burglary, Connely said, he grabbed his holstered handgun and ran out the front door. The officer drew his weapon and ordered Connely to drop the gun. Instead, according to witnesses, Connely cursed at the officer, pointed out that his gun was holstered, and ordered him off the property. The officer shouted at him again to drop the gun and lie on the ground. Connely did so; the officer shot him with a Taser and then arrested him.

Offered probation if he pleaded guilty to a felony, Connely opted to go to trial. He was convicted of aggravated assault and given the mandatory 10 1/2-year sentence.

Montgomery defends the sentence as appropriate. "We ask police officers to put their lives on the line every day and to make difficult decisions. When someone threatens them, we sanction that with a severe sentence," he said. "I will say that if this individual had dropped the weapon at the 1st command, it would have been a very different case, if it had been a case at all."

At the August 2010 sentencing, Superior Court Commissioner Steven Lynch noted that Connely had never removed his gun from the holster or pointed it at the officer. He said the sentence "is clearly excessive" and issued a 603(L) order.

At his clemency hearing, Connely acknowledged the seriousness of his mistake, apologized and expressed remorse. Among many other letters, his daughter Danielle, 16, wrote to the board describing how the family lost its home because of what happened. "I have had to move away from my school and friends I have had since 3rd grade," she wrote. She said she needs her dad's help and advice, ending by writing, "I NEED MY FATHER!"

In April 2011, the board unanimously recommended Connely's sentence be commuted to the seven months already served, that he be put under community supervision and complete an anger-management program.

"We were ecstatic," recalls Joy Ardolino, his sister-in-law. "It was a unanimous decision; they saw what the case was and agreed that the sentence was outrageous."

Brewer denied the commutation last October.

"Why have a clemency board if you aren't going to follow their recommendations?" asks Ardolino. "The governor was in the middle of a campaign and it's a police issue, so she's going to say no. I think it's atrocious."

Independent decision

Hamm, the reform advocate and a former state judge, said she understands the frustration that prisoners' families feel. But, she says, "Executive clemency is an act of grace -- to correct a manifest injustice, to recognize a special case in which there has been extraordinary movement towards rehabilitation or some other extraordinary circumstance. ... It seems logical you should have a good chance if you get five votes from the board, but the governor is well within her authority to do her own investigation and make a completely independent decision." Hamm's husband, James, had his murder sentence commuted by Mofford and went on to graduate from Arizona State University's law school.

Perhaps the most-debated commutation rejected by Brewer is the case of William Macumber, who was convicted in 1975 of a 1962 double homicide and sentenced to life in prison. In a unanimous recommendation three years ago, the board said he had served excessive time in prison and had a record of behavior showing he is not a threat to society. Most importantly, the board called his conviction a miscarriage of justice, saying that "the evidence that now exists certainly casts serious doubt on Mr. Macumber's conviction."

Former state Judge Thomas O'Toole told the board that another man confessed to committing the murders to him in 1967, but attorney-client privilege required him to remain silent about the confession until after his client died.

Montgomery's office strenuously opposed Macumber's clemency petition, calling his petition misleading.

Brewer denied commutation in November 2009, sparking critical national-media coverage. In October 2010, Brewer fled her own televised news conference after Macumber's son asked the governor about her decision.

"The parole board says he's innocent, yet she still won't do anything," says P.S. Ruckman Jr., an Illinois political-science professor who publishes a blog on clemency, pardonpower.com. He is highly critical of Brewer and other governors who he says don't appear to take their pardon powers seriously. "Sometimes the law has a disproportionate impact and may be too rigid. That's what the pardon power is for," he says. "Brewer has the power and discretion to have a larger sense of justice and to do something about it. That's her duty."

Governors avoid it

Brewer's reluctance to grant clemency isn't unique. Before the advent of mandatory-sentencing and "truth in sentencing" laws in recent decades, roughly one in four or five clemency applications would be approved, according to a 2010 Duke Law School study. But increasingly, governors around the country avoid it, says NYU Law School professor Barkow.

"It's common among Democrats and Republicans alike," Barkow said, noting that President Barack Obama's clemency rates also are at historic lows.

Officials fear the potential political nightmare of releasing from prison someone who goes on to commit a violent crime, she said. She noted the 2000 commutation in Arkansas by then-Gov. Mike Huckabee of an inmate, subsequently granted parole, who gunned down four police officers in Parkland, Wash., in 2009 before he was shot to death. Though the inmate had been in and out of prison and jail in Washington state and was out on bail, the media focused on the commutation by Huckabee, who had been a candidate for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination.

"Every time something like that happens, every politician takes note," said Barkow, adding that, politically, the potential downside can far outweigh the fact that some commutations are warranted in the interests of fairness and justice.

Since taking office, Brewer has granted 5 commutations, aside from those for inmates at death's door. 4 of these reduced sentences by less than 2 1/2 years. The biggest reduction was for Christopher E. Patten, who was sentenced to 7 years for manslaughter as the driver of a vehicle in a 2005 drive-by shooting in Phoenix. The judge noted that Patten was forced at gunpoint to drive the vehicle, turned himself in to police and testified against the shooters at the risk of his life. He served just under 2 years before the governor granted a commutation in October 2009. Aside from those granted to dying inmates, Brewer hasn't granted any commutations in the last 17 months and has rejected 39 recommended by the board, out of 1,180 applications, according to board records. That does not include the nearly 900 cases in the backlog.

Effects of budget cuts

Budget woes brought on by the recession have reduced the board's ability to handle commutation requests. 2 years ago, as part of broader cuts, Arizona's Legislature made 4 of the 5 board positions part-time instead of full-time, and slashed the board's budget.

Duane Belcher, who was until recently the board's chairman and executive director, says the cuts forced him to reduce the number of commutation hearings to 25 a month from 100. That led to the 2-year backlog and to a plunge in applications to 346 last year, less than 1/2 as many as 2 years ago, Belcher said.

Brewer recently replaced Belcher, who served as chairman for 20 years, and 2 other board members: 2010 Brewer appointee Marilyn Wilkens and 2007 Napolitano appointee Ellen Stenson. The ousted board members expressed shock at being pushed out all at once. Board members' terms are staggered, and typically 1 new member is appointed each year.

Belcher and Stenson attributed their departures to the governor's displeasure with their votes to grant clemency in the Macumber case; Wilkens said the governor's aides grilled her over her vote in another case.

The manner in which Brewer replaced the 3 also has ignited a legal fight. Attorneys for Samuel Lopez, who is scheduled to be executed Wednesday for a brutal 1986 murder, will argue in court Monday that the appointments of three new board members, Bill Livingston, Melvin Thomas and the new chairman, Jesse Hernandez, should be declared null and void. In court filings last week, the attorneys argued that the committee that recommended the appointments violated the state Open Meeting Law and other statutes. They included a statement from Wilkens declaring that her interview by the committee, conducted in executive session, didn't comply with state statutes.

Stenson said Friday that she hadn't spoken with Lopez's attorney but that she, too, wasn't told in advance that she would be interviewed in executive session, and wasn't told she could object to the closed-door venue.

"It doesn't make any sense" to replace three board members at once, said Stenson, adding that it makes it difficult for new members "to learn the procedures before their vote is needed. This makes it hard on the new members and the old members, and it's unfair to the inmates, the families or to anyone."

Lopez's attorneys also are seeking a stay of his execution until the court determines whether the board is legally constituted. A spokesman for the governor said the appointments complied with state law.

If Superior Court Judge Joseph Kreamer were to nullify the appointments, Brewer's office would have to begin the process from scratch, potentially leaving the two remaining board members to handle cases on their own for days or weeks. Then, because state law specified that only the chairman can declare a quorum of two, Brewer either would have to make one of the existing members the chair, or leave the board unable to hear cases until a new round of appointments was complete.

In any event, Belcher, the former chairman, said last week that it's clear to him that the governor wishes to see fewer clemency cases land on her desk.

Commutations and pardons:

Gov. Rose Mofford (April 4, 1988 to March 6, 1991): 13 pardons, 2 commutations.

Gov. Fife Symington III (March 6, 1991 to Sept. 5, 1997): 13 pardons, 16 commutations.

Gov. Jane Dee Hull (Sept. 5, 1997 to Jan 6, 2003): 7 pardons, 28 commutations.

Gov. Janet Napolitano (Jan. 6, 2003 to Jan. 21, 2009): 22 pardons, 34 commutations (including 9 "imminent danger of death" cases).

Gov. Jan Brewer (since Jan. 21, 2009): 0 pardons, 24 commutations (including 19 "imminent danger of death" cases).

Except for "imminent danger of death" cases, Brewer has not granted a commutation since Dec. 15, 2010.

3 types of clemency hearings

Arizona's Board of Executive Clemency conducts three types of clemency hearings: commutations, pardons and reprieves. If a majority of the board approves a clemency request, its recommendation is sent to the governor, who makes the final decision. In Arizona, the governor can't grant clemency without a board recommendation.

A commutation reduces a sentence. Inmates facing imminent execution automatically are granted a commutation hearing. Other inmates can apply for commutation after they have been in prison 2 years and have at least 1 more year to serve. A judge who considers a mandatory sentence too harsh in a particular case can issue a 603(L) order, which allows an inmate to request a commutation hearing within 90 days. Terminally ill inmates also can request a commutation if they can submit medical documentation that they're expected to die in less than 6 months.

A pardon absolves a convicted felon of the legal consequences of the crime and conviction. Pardons most often are granted to people who already have completed their sentence and who are seeking to have their civil rights, such as the right to bear arms, restored.

A reprieve is a delay or temporary suspension of the carrying out of a sentence.

The board also can act on its own authority to grant absolute discharges or parole for people convicted under sentencing laws in effect before Jan. 1, 1994. An absolute discharge can grant release from imprisonment; but it is more often used, on the recommendation of the Community Corrections division, to end parole early for someone who has shown exceptional performance while under supervision.

(source: Arizona Republic)

MAY 12, 2012:

TEXAS----impending execution

Texas Wants To Drug a Prisoner So They Can Kill Him----It’s a macabre spectacle, and it should be stopped.

Can the state force a person to take drugs in order to execute him? That is the grisly question raised by the case of Steven Staley, a convicted murderer who believes polygraph machines are controlling and torturing him. Even though he’s psychotic, Staley is scheduled to be executed next week, based on a judge’s order requiring him to take medication he has refused. If Texas actually goes ahead with this deeply disturbing plan, it will be the first state, as far as I can tell, to drug someone in order to carry out a death sentence. That is a distinction that no one on the planet should want to have.

Here are the facts of Staley’s crime: In September 1989, he escaped from a Denver jail and went on an armed robbery spree, hitting up nine businesses in four states. The last one was the Steak and Ale Restaurant in Tarrant County, Texas. Just before closing, Staley and two friends came in, and Staley herded the employees into a kitchen storeroom and made manager Robert Read open the cash registers and the safe. He then took Read as a hostage, forced him into the back of a car, and shot him dead during a high-speed chase by the police.

And here are the facts of Staley’s mental illness: He has a long history of paranoid schizophrenia and depression. Staley was abused as a child by his mother, who was also mentally ill; when he was 6 or 7 she tried to pound a wooden stake through his chest. His father was an alcoholic. Staley tried to kill himself as a teenager. Doctors who have examined Staley on death row have said that he talks in a robot-like monotone yet has “grandiose and paranoid” delusions, including the beliefs that he invented the first car and marketed a character from Star Trek. He has given himself black eyes and self-inflicted lacerations and has been found spreading feces and covered with urine. Medicated with the anti-psychotic drug Haldol, Staley complained of paralysis and sometimes appeared to be in a catatonic state. He has worn a bald spot on the back of his head from lying on the floor of his cell.

Staley was found competent to stand trial back in 1991. The standard is low: A defendant has to be able to understand the charges against him and consult rationally with his lawyer so he can aid in his own defense. The standard for competency at execution was set by Ford v Wainwright, a 1986 case in which the Supreme Court said that the Eighth Amendment’s bar against cruel and unusual punishment forbids execution of the “insane.” Indeed, at the time no state permitted such an execution. The court quoted British judges in the 17th century worrying about the “miserable spectacle” of “extream inhumanity and cruelty” presented by executing a “mad man.” It served no retributive purpose, Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote, to execute a person “who has no comprehension of why he has been singled out.” He also noted “the natural abhorrence civilized societies feel at killing one who has no capacity to come to grips with his own conscience or deity.”

The problem with Ford is that the justices’ holding didn’t match their rhetoric. A defendant can be executed as long as he shows some rational understanding that he is about to die and why. Many people with serious mental illness can grasp those basic facts, at least on some level. Among the many examples of seriously mentally ill people who have been found competent to be tried and executed is Scott Panetti, a delusional schizophrenic who represented himself in 1995 dressed in a purple cowboy suit. Panetti tried to call Jesus Christ and John Kennedy as witnesses. Then there’s the case of Andre Thomas, which is so horrific that I’m sorry to ask you to read the next 2 sentences. Thomas was tried and sentenced to death, for triple murders in which he cut out the hearts of his victims, 6 weeks after gouging out his right eye. In 2008, on death row, he gouged out his left eye and ate it. (Both Panetti and Thomas’s executions are on appeal in the Texas courts.)

OK, deep breath. In 2006, after Staley stopped his medication, Judge Wayne Salvant, in a moment of mercy, found him incompetent to be executed. The District Attorney for Tarrant County, Joe Shannon, Jr., unmercifully asked Salvant to order Staley to be forcibly medicated. Salvant entered the order, finding that medicating Staley was the only way to ensure his competency to be executed, and that “the State has an essential interest in ensuring that the sentence of this Court is carried out.”

What is behind Judge Salvant’s chilling decision? In two cases in the 1990s, the Supreme Court said that the government can forcibly medicate a mentally ill inmate if he is dangerous to himself or others, the treatment is in his medical interest, and there is no less intrusive alternative. In 2003, the court acknowledged concerns about side effects of the drugs, and emphasized that the treatment had to be medically appropriate. None of these cases involved pending executions, however. When death is the state’s end goal, how can anyone argue that forcible medication is in a prisoner’s medical interest? The Louisiana and South Carolina supreme courts have both rejected that macabre contention in ruling that to drug someone in order to execute him would violate their state constitutions.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit cracked open the door to forcible medication in 2003, in ruling that the state could execute a man who’d regained competency by taking medication on death row. The constitution doesn’t preclude executing someone who is “artificially competent,” the court said. In that case, the prisoner wasn’t refusing to take his meds, so the scenario is different than Staley’s. But this is the legal precedent that Judge Salvant cited when he ruled that forcing Staley to take Haldol would be “medically appropriate”—even though the purpose of drugging him is to make him rational enough to kill him.

I will pause in this grim tale to note, with relief, that the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association hold that it is ethically unacceptable for doctors to prescribe drugs to restore competency for the purpose of execution. This should be an easy call for the Texas courts as well. If it’s awful to imagine psychotic prisoners going without their meds, it’s more awful to force shots on them so the state can kill them. If Texas fails to grasp this, other inmates will follow Steven Staley. Mental illness is common on death row. The only reason that the issues raised in Staley’s case haven’t been decided before, defense lawyers tell me, is that humane prosecutors and judges don’t insist on executing people whose sanity is so uncertain.

There’s a larger question here, beyond the one about forcible medication. It’s about halting the execution of the seriously mentally ill in the same way, and because of similar concerns about a defendant’s impairment, that the states have stopped executing the mentally disabled. Kentucky recently considered such a law and Connecticut has one. If Texas and other states followed suit, we would be spared the miserable spectacle of executing people who commit terrible crimes, but also have terrible deficits. People like Steven Staley and Scott Panetti and Andre Thomas.

(source: Slate.com)

****************

Change on TDCJ Public Information Office:

Public Information Office

The Public Information Office works with news media throughout the world to tell the TDCJ story, and to assist reporters in covering prison events and understanding the objectives of the agency. Information is given to news media as allowed by TDCJ policy and according to current state public information laws.

TDCJ Public Information Office:

Jason Clark, Public Information Officer

jason.clark@tdcj.state.tx.us

To contact the Public Information Office:

Huntsville:

P.O. Box 99

Huntsville, TX 77340

Ph: (936) 437- 6052

Fax: (936) 437-6055

(source: TDCJ)

USA (RHODE ISLAND):

Death Penalty Causes State-Fed Clash Over Accused Murderer In Rhode Island

The U.S. Supreme Court may be faced with another case pitting the federal government against a state. But unlike the health care law or immigration, the 2 sides -- Washington versus Rhode Island -- are fighting over a man in state custody facing capital murder charges that carry the death penalty.

Rhode Island is trying to prevent the accused, 34-year-old Jason Pleau, from being handed over to the federal government to stand trial for the shooting death of a gas station manager in a 2010 botched robbery outside of a bank. The state's governor is refusing to cooperate with the federal government because of his opposition to capital punishment.

Following a defeat in the tug-of-war over Pleau at the 1st Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Monday, Gov. Lincoln Chafee said he will ask the Supreme Court to take the case. Chafee asked on Friday for a delay in the order to give up Pleau pending a Supreme Court petition, according to the Associated Press.

"The State of Rhode Island must seek to protect both the strong states' rights issues at stake and the legitimacy of its longstanding public policy against the death penalty," Chafee, an independent who was formerly a Republican, said in a statement.

Rhode Island's top federal prosecutor, U.S. Attorney Peter Neronha, rejected Chafee's states' rights claim.

"The governor does not have the right to prevent a defendant properly charged by a federal grand jury from appearing in federal court to face federal charges," Neronha said.

Turning Over Pleau

Nearly 3 months after David Main, the gas station manager, was murdered September 2010 during a stop at a Woonsocket, R.I., bank, a federal grand jury indicted Pleau for capital charges that could allow prosecutors to seek the death penalty, a decision that has not been yet been made.

When the indictment came down, Pleau was in state custody, serving an 18-year sentence for parole violations. After a federal judge ordered him to be taken into federal custody to answer the indictment, he appealed to the 1st Circuit. Chafee intervened in the case to keep the defendant in Rhode Island to face life in prison.

The appeals court initially sided with Pleau, but a 5-judge panel, in what is known as an en banc hearing, said the defendant can stand trial in the federal case.

The battle at the 1st Circuit involved a 1970 interstate pact called the Interstate Agreement on Detainers that provides an expedited way for prisoners to be extradited to other states for trial proceedings. The federal government cited the agreement to avoid having to file a formal order for Pleau. Once Chafee rejected the request, the U.S. issued an order known as a habeas writ.

At issue is whether the federal government must abide by the pact it invoked, instead of the mandatory order, and whether a governor has discretion to ignore the order.

Chafee argued transferring of a prisoner "depends upon comity" that "the governor may withhold," according to the court opinion. He based the argument on old court decisions that cited a 1922 Supreme Court case involving Charles Ponzi, the infamous Italian con artist whose name is associated with the investment scam.

With Ponzi in a federal prison and Massachusetts attempting to prosecute him, the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. Attorney General had discretion to hand Ponzi over to Massachusetts authorities.

The appellate judges in Pleau's case, however, rejected the idea that "comity" goes both ways to allow a governor to hold onto a prisoner. The Ponzi case, the judges wrote, "simply had nothing to do with a federal court's order to a state."

"[The Ponzi case] neither held nor said that a state governor may invoke comity principles to disobey a federal court habeas writ," the appeals court wrote.

Regardless of the comity issue, the appeals court said even if the U.S. was bound by the interstate prisoner pact, that does not diminish the authority of a federal order demanding the transfer of a prisoner.

"State interposition to defeat federal authority vanished with the Civil War," the appellate judges said. Should Chafee win, "the state prison would become a refuge against federal charges."

(source: International Business Times)

UTAH:

Ogden visitor facing death penalty in St. George slayings

Perea to serve life in prison for gang-related double homicide in Ogden A man with Ogden ties, shot in retaliation for a double homicide here almost 5 years ago, is now himself charged with a double homicide in St. George.

Paul Ashton was shot multiple times and left for dead on Aug. 6, 2007. The attack came a day after his friend, Riqo Perea, shot up a wedding party in Ogden in a gang dispute, killing two and wounding 2 others.

Ashton was targeted in retaliation for Perea’s violence, police said, kidnapped by a carload of gangmates of Perea’s victims.

Perea narrowly avoided the death penalty and is serving a prison term of life without parole.

Ashton, 33, is facing the death penalty on two counts of aggravated murder in December 2010 slayings in St. George. Numerous pre-trial motions typical of any death penalty case were recently resolved, allowing a preliminary hearing to be scheduled.

The preliminary hearing is set for 6 days beginning Aug. 2, according to court records. Ashton is in jail, held in lieu of $1 million bail.

He is accused in the shooting deaths of Brandie Sue Dawn Jerden, 27, and Jerrica Christensen, 20.

Police have not revealed a motive, according to news reports, but Ashton shared an apartment with Jerden. Christensen was reportedly helping Jerden prepare to move out.

“Yes, that is the same Paul Ashton,” said Capt. Kyle Whitehead, head of the St. George Police Department’s detective division.

His office and prosecutors have researched the 2007 circumstances in Ogden involving the Perea case and the retaliation against Ashton, he said.

Weber County Attorney Dee Smith also said it’s the same Paul Ashton, noting St. George officials contacted his office last year about the 2007 incident involving the fallout from the Perea case.

As late as 2006, Ashton had a Davis County address, according to court records, but was living in St. George when he was shot in 2007 while visiting the Ogden area.

The head of the Ogden-Metro Gang Unit, Lt. Scott Conley, recalls his detectives having to travel to St. George to interview Ashton during the investigation of his shooting.

Conley said Ashton was a friend of Perea’s, not a member of Perea’s gang, Ogden Treces.

“He was not a Trece. He was just an associate,” Conley said. “He was a friend. He hung out with them at the time.”

Smith said his office paid Ashton’s expenses to travel from St. George to Ogden for court hearings after one of Ashton’s assailants was arrested.

Only one suspect was prosecuted in Ashton’s shooting. Adrian Alvarado, believed to be the driver of the car, was charged with attempted murder.

He was initially given a suspended prison term, earning a year in jail. But a recent drug arrest violated the terms of his probation, according to court records.

Last month, Alvarado was sentenced by 2nd District Judge Michael Lyon to a 1-to-15-year prison term for his part in the Ashton shooting.

(source: Standard-Examiner)

OREGON:

Jurors spare Brian Bement from death sentence, vote for life without parole

Washington County jurors spared Brian Bement from the death penalty Friday and voted to impose a sentence of life in prison without parole.

The same jury convicted the Portland-area heroin dealer last month of aggravated murder in the 2010 shooting and robbery of David Greenspan, a Tigard naturopath.

Jurors deliberated for a little more than 4 hours Friday before reaching a decision. Circuit Judge Rick Knapp read the verdict a little before 8 p.m.

Bement's sentencing hearing is set for June 1.

Friday morning, Bement, wearing a dark suit and glasses, stood in the dark wood-paneled courtroom and asked jurors to spare his life.

"Since my earliest memories, I have had major problems," he said. "For reasons unknown, I just can't deal with myself."

He told jurors that sexual abuse as a child led to his drug addiction and crimes. He asked them to let him live so that even if he spends the rest of his days in prison, he might make amends.

"I can only hope to atone for (Greenspan's) death by being there for other inmates in prison," he said. "Maybe, just maybe, I can say or do something that will put someone on the right path."

The prosecution case for the death penalty focused on Bement's lengthy criminal history and lifelong violent behavior, including domestic violence incidents and armed robberies.

The defense case for mitigation relied on testimony that Bement is caring, funny and unlikely to commit violence in the future, and that he has dealt with troubled family relationships and drug addiction from an early age.

Defense attorney Devon Fooks told jurors that Bement's execution would not rectify Greenspan's loss. It would only cause more suffering to Bement's family, including his teenage son, Fooks argued.

"Dr. Greenspan is dead and we cannot change that, but sentencing Mr. Bement to death isn't going to accomplish anything other than multiplying the damage," he said Friday.

Deputy District Attorney Jeff Lesowski asked jurors not to be persuaded by feelings of sympathy for Bement or his family.

"He committed a violent, brutal, premeditated murder," he said. "That calls for the death penalty, and that's what we're asking for."

Jurors remained expressionless as Knapp read their verdict. Bement let out a visible exhale at the first word of a no-death verdict.

Defense attorney Conor Huseby patted his back and put his arm around Bement.

The victim's mother and sister, the lead detective in the case and a defense investigator listened to the verdict quietly. The courtroom was nearly empty after hours at the county courthouse in Hillsboro.

The jury then left the courtroom. Bement received pats on the back and hugs from his attorneys.

As a deputy fastened a chain with wrist constraints around his waist, Bement smiled broadly and saluted Fooks.

"Have a drink on me," he said.

(source: The Oregonian)

MONTANA:

Albertan Ronald Smith on death row in U.S. simply waits to learn his fate----Nearly 30 years after Canadian Ronald Allen Smith murdered two men in Montana, he still waits to learn his fate. The Montana parole board held a clemency hearing earlier this month after Smith applied to have his death sentence commuted to life in prison without parole. The day before the hearing Smith sat down with Calgary Herald reporter Jason van Rassel in the State Prsion in Deer Lodge. They discussed his remorse, his rehabilitation, and how he feels he is atoning for his crimes. Here are some excerpts from that conversation.For a man who has spent nearly 30 years fighting his death sentence, Ronald Allen Smith is surprisingly comfortable with the prospect of being executed.

As a Montana parole board weighs Smith's bid to commute his death sentence to life in prison without parole, the double murderer from Alberta says he's not worried about his own fate.

"Personally, I'm good to go with this thing," he says during an interview this month inside Montana State Prison, a sprawling facility tucked in the foothills just outside Deer Lodge.

"The only people that I'm concerned about if it goes the other way is my family. This is going to have a huge detrimental effect on them, and that bothers me a lot."

With only 2 inmates currently awaiting execution in Montana, the state doesn't have a death row in the physical sense. Smith is confined in 1 of 2 maximum-security units on the prison grounds, a squat concrete box with only small windows to let in light from the outside.

Policy dictates death row inmates are kept in maximum security because they are seen as having "nothing to lose," but Smith has long been considered a model prisoner.

It emerged during Smith's clemency hearing that an official once recommended moving Smith to a lower-security cellblock until it was discovered he was facing the death penalty. Policy notwithstanding, some prison staffers say privately Smith's track record inside doesn't warrant keeping him locked in a cell 23 hours a day.

Nevertheless, policy is strictly observed by everyone as correctional officers handcuff Smith, 54, and lead him from his upper-tier cell to a manager's office for the interview.

Smith remains handcuffed during the visit and an officer stands watch in the doorway behind him.

"How are you doin', Ron?" one asks Smith during the move.

"Same old, same old," Smith answers.

The journey that landed Smith on death row in the United States began on a summer day in 1982 when he and 2 friends, Rod Munro and Andre Fontaine, decided to get out of Red Deer and head south. Under the cover of night, they sneaked across the border into Montana.

The trio of drifters ended up at a bar in East Glacier Park on the Blackfeet Indian reservation, where they met Harvey Mad Man and Thomas Running Rabbit, who were cousins. The men then spent a friendly afternoon shooting pool and drinking beer.

The groups parted ways at the bar but met up again on the highway, where Mad Man, 23, and Running Rabbit, 19, spotted the Canadians hitchhiking and offered them a ride.

The generous gesture was met with treachery from Smith and his companions, who had discussed stealing the car.

Smith says his recollection of the murders is hazy because he was drunk and high on LSD, but in one previous account the plan was set in motion during a bathroom break at the side of a lonely highway near the Marias Pass: Smith pulled a sawed-off rifle he had smuggled across the border and Munro brandished a knife. They marched Mad Man and Running Rabbit into the dense brush, where Smith shot them both in the head.

Smith and Munro initially faced the death penalty, but prosecutors offered them both life in prison if they pleaded guilty.

Munro took the deal, but Smith turned it down and asked for the death penalty.

A judge quickly granted Smith's request, which met with little opposition from the public defender assigned to represent him.

Smith changed his mind in the weeks that followed, and has spent 3 decades trying to get the state to change its mind.

"I was looking at a life sentence. All I could think of is, 'I have no interest in spending another 20 years sitting in prison,'" Smith says.

The irony isn't lost on Smith, who chuckles and allows a brief smile to flash across his face.

"It's a little bit odd considering how long I've been here, but that was the thought process: I had no interest in spending my life sitting around."

And so, a man who asked for a death sentence because he couldn't face the prospect of growing old in prison now seeks to live the remainder of his natural life behind bars.

It's just 1 paradox in a case replete with them.

Consider Smith's family, described by 1 witness as dysfunctional and "fragmented" in the years immediately following the killings. Somehow, from behind the walls of a prison hundreds of kilometres away, Smith has managed to forge positive relationships with his father, sisters, daughter and grandchildren.

Then there are the politics of the case: a Canadian government nominally opposed to capital punishment has offered only grudging support for Smith's clemency bid. Meanwhile, a retired prison guard who worked 32 years for Smith's jailer and would-be executioner testified he supports the clemency application and has reconsidered his support of the death penalty.

Only one thing has remained straightforward amid the legal appeals and political machinations: the unwavering desire of the victims' families, Blackfeet tribe members and prosecutors to see Smith's death sentence finally carried out.

"This man needs to be executed," said William Talks About, an uncle who discovered the decomposed bodies of Mad Man and Running Rabbit after more than 6 weeks of searching by dozens of family members and volunteers.

"30 years is too long for the state and the taxpayers to be taking care of him."

The case is now in the hands of a three-person parole panel, which has retired to weigh the evidence given by more than 30 witnesses who testified during last Wednesday's clemency hearing at the Powell County courthouse in Deer Lodge.

The board has 30 days after the hearing to deliver a non-binding recommendation to Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer, who will ultimately decide if Smith will be executed by lethal injection. The board has said it will announce its recommendation the week of May 21.

Smith will pass the time awaiting news about his fate the same way he has passed almost every day for nearly 30 years: spending 23 hours in his cell, with one hour a day to shower and exercise by himself in a common area.

"It's pretty blah, actually. I work out, I write letters, I watch TV, I read when I can get the books. You fill your day up with pretty much anything you can," he says.

For a man destined to spend the rest of his life behind bars - however long or short that may be - fantasy novels that allow him to escape, if only mentally, are frequent choices.

"I'm into the fantasy world, books that if it's a good storyline, you can involve yourself and pretty much lose yourself," says Smith, naming Robert Jordan as a favourite author.

Over the years, Smith finished high school and is a few credits short of 2-year associate degree. He also trained himself in paralegal work, which Smith describes as a constructive outlet for his energy.

Although Smith has no physical contact with other inmates, they can talk between their cells or send "kites" - tossed written messages that are retrieved by the recipient or someone who agrees to pass it along.

Smith says he helped clear an inmate facing institutional charges and win compensation for another whose property was lost by prison staff.

"It's quite an uplifting feeling to be able to do that," he says.

Above all, Smith looks forward to contact with his family in Alberta, who visit once or twice a year. In between, there are weekly phone calls.

"Short of actually being there to give them a hug, I'm there more so than you might be able to imagine. It's still playing the big brother role, giving them a shoulder to cry on, somebody to talk to, offering advice," he says.

Some argue Smith's tightly controlled environment leaves little room for violence or misconduct, but a psychologist who testified on his behalf said his good behaviour is unusual among inmates facing the death penalty.

"A high number commit suicide or go insane," said Dr. Bowman Smelko.

Over the years, the federal government had lent its voice to Smith's cause, based on Canada's official position to the death penalty since abolishing capital punishment in 1976.

At one time, the former Liberal government was working to have Smith returned to Canada under a bilateral treaty that allows prisoners to finish their sentence in a Canadian institution.

That changed with the election of the Conservatives in 2006, with Prime Minister Stephen Harper saying that supporting clemency would send the "wrong signal" at a time when it was implementing a tough-on-crime agenda in Canada.

In 2009, the Federal Court of Canada ordered the government to continue support for Smith. Its response was a brief letter to Montana officials from Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird asking them to commute Smith's sentence but adding the Canadian government "does not sympathize with violent crime," and the request "should not be construed as reflecting a judgment on Smith's conduct."

Baird's terse missive may have complied with the letter of the ruling, but Smith and his supporters criticized the Conservatives for failing to live up to its spirit.

"It's like a petulant child: 'We're being forced into this, but whatever you want to do, go ahead.' I don't think it benefits me, but I don't think it really hurts me, either. We can present a good enough argument to show I'm not the same person I was 30 years ago. I think that's going to be of more benefit than anything the Canadian government does, did or did not do," Smith says.

The controversy flared anew at Smith's clemency hearing, when a Canadian consular official was added to the list of defence witnesses at the last minute.

The official was apparently supposed to read a new, presumably more supportive letter to the parole board, but did not testify.

Smith's lawyers allege the government once again reneged on its duty to help.

In large measure, Smith's clemency bid rests on demonstrating what Montana law calls an "extended period of exemplary behaviour" and evidence of remorse.

Smith and his lawyers feel they have met that test, and Smith issued a direct apology to the families of Mad Man and Running Rabbit during his clemency hearing.

But the parole board will also consider the circumstances of the crime itself and the impact it had on the victims and their loved ones.

Smith killed Mad Man and Running Rabbit, but a dozen family members told the parole board the crime hastened the deaths of victims' grandmother, their mothers and other relatives.

Running Rabbit had a young daughter and an infant son who grew up without him.

While Smith can enjoy visits with his daughter and grandchildren, all Jessica Crawford and Thomas Running Rabbit IV have left of their father is a grave marker.

"I have a great deal of jealousy toward what (Smith's daughter) has and I don't," Crawford told the parole board.

"I want what she has. I want what he took."

Smith's lawyers also argued he was poorly represented at trial by an inexperienced and indifferent public defender.

Munro was "equally culpable," said Don Vernay, yet the plea agreement he accepted allowed him to finish his sentence in Canada. He is now free on parole while Smith sits on death row. (Fontaine, who co-operated with investigators and didn't have a hand in the killings, has long since finished serving the five-year sentence he received.)

Former prosecutors say Smith received fair trials, each of which ended in the same result: a death sentence.

The punishment fits the crime, and justice for Mad Man and Running Rabbit's relatives - living and dead - dictates the death sentence is carried out, former state attorney Tom Esch told the parole board.

"To bestow mercy now is not justice," he said.

(source: The Calgary Herald)

CALIFORNIA:

End death penalty, says judge

"Moral leadership needed to end state's death penalty" (Insight, April 29):

After nearly 19 years presiding as a state court judge in Santa Clara County, I am certain that the SAFE California initiative to replace the death penalty with life without parole will pass in November.

Yes, there have been failed efforts to end the death penalty.

This time it is different because it's about our safety. Californians are facing a serious public safety gap. A shocking 46 % of murders and 56 % of rapes in California are unsolved. This means that murderers and rapists are on our streets because the money to pay for investigations to apprehend them is not there - it's in death row. Once we pass the SAFE California Act, we can fund investigations.

Public opinion has shifted, too. When offered a choice between the death penalty and permanent imprisonment, all recent polls show majority preference for life in prison without parole. The failed promise of the death penalty is now obvious to all. Death penalty cases in California take an average of 25 years from conviction to execution. A quarter of a century is not justice for the families of murder victims. It is agony, insulting and unacceptable.

California looks different today than it did in 1978. Forecasts of voter turnout for the presidential ballot suggest that SAFE California will win. No one, not even professors from Berkeley, can predict the future. Those who want to try should wake up to the fact that these are the final days for the death penalty in California.

LaDoris H. Cordell is a retired Santa Clara County Superior Court judge.

(source: Letter to the Editor, San Francisco Chronicle)

GLOBAL:

The global fight to end capital punishment--The death penalty is a shameful legacy of colonialism – now British lawyers are fighting to abolish it around the world by representing condemned prisoners in court

"If we needed to hang someone tomorrow," Martin Martinez, Trinidad and Tobago's commissioner of prisons, says, grinning wolfishly, "we would grease up the gallows and buy some new rope." Death by hanging is the penalty for anyone convicted of murder in Trinidad and Tobago, although no one has been executed here since 1999.

From his air-conditioned office, minutes from the cemetery in the capital, Port of Spain, Martinez reels off the four witnesses needed: a doctor, a priest, a court official and himself, the prisons commissioner. "It is traumatising to take a man's life," he explains. "It's an emotional issue, as there is such a high murder rate here. The death penalty sends a message, but it may or may not solve the problem."

Prime minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar, backed by former Fifa vice-president Jack Warner, who is now her minister for works and transport, is campaigning for enforcement of the death penalty to fight the "the tsunami of crime" that has hit Trinidad and Tobago. In Jamaica, which has one of the world's highest murder rates, there is also a growing clamour for the rope to be used.

The debate is close to boiling point in the English-speaking Caribbean, partly because it plays on one of the few remaining links to Britain colonialism. The fate of those on death row is currently decided more than 4,000 miles away, in Westminster, at the judicial committee of the privy council (JCPC). "We talk about independence, meaning a flag and an anthem," Martinez says, "but we need to sever the umbilical cord with the mother country."

The JCPC remains the highest court of appeal for 27 countries, including former Caribbean colonies, and the persuasiveness of a British campaign to abolish capital punishment – argued through successive cases – has prevented many islands from carrying out punishments that remain on their statute books.

The London-based Death Penalty Project (DPP) provides free representation to those facing the death penalty in countries that still use the JCPC as their final appeal court. The judgments made there are influencing the capital punishment debate around the world: increasingly Commonwealth countries accept that executing someone who has been on death row for 5 or more years constitutes cruel and inhuman treatment.

This follows the landmark Jamaican case of Pratt and Morgan, in which the judges ruled that the death sentences of 2 convicted murderers who had spent 14 years on death row should be commuted to life imprisonment. The case is viewed around the Caribbean as the main barrier to implementing the death penalty – by the time that most appeals have been exhausted, the 5-year limit has run out. Keir Starmer, the UK's director of public prosecutions, who used to appear on behalf of condemned prisoners, has described the project as the "most successful litigation organisation in the world".

In March, 2 British QCs were arguing these points before 5 British judges in an oak-panelled room within the new UK supreme court building in Westminster. It could have been a day like any other in the British legal system, except for the large Trinidad and Tobago flag in the corner.

The judges were hearing the case of Marcus Jason Daniel, one of 33 people on death row in Trinidad. Daniel has been convicted of murder and sentenced to hang. The DPP organised psychologists to assess Daniel's mental health and argued that he should have been able to use the defence of diminished responsibility at trial. The JCPC will assess whether Daniel's conviction was safe, and if his death sentence should be sent back to Trinidad's appeal court for review.

Listening to well-spoken barristers reading witness statements littered with colloquialisms and expletives is often surreal but this had an extra edge. Julian Knowles QC referred to "liming", Trinidadian slang for partying. Another exchange had Lord Clarke interjecting: "Smoking 'blacks' is drugs, is it?", to which the counsel Peter Knox QC replied helpfully: "Yes, my lord. A cigarette mixed with cocaine and marijuana."

Privy council judges emphasise their role is to apply the law of the country in question. They deny their stance is explicitly anti-death penalty. However, Lord Dyson, one of the judges hearing Daniel's case, told the Guardian last year that hearing death penalty appeals made him feel "extremely uncomfortable". He acknowledged the role the court has played in preventing executions: "I'm not aware of any case in recent years in which the death penalty sentence has been upheld."

Rajendra Krishna is personally grateful for the intervention of British judges. He spent seven years on death row in Trinidad, having been convicted of murder during a botched burglary in his early 20s. He is wary of the press, as any local media attention could affect his chances of finding work. However, he is happy to speak to British journalists, explaining that he owes his freedom to English people.

"We [the inmates] always had faith in the privy council because the justice in Trinidad and Tobago is very poor," he says. "I have no confidence in no Caribbean court. I believe in the privy council. I would rather the British judges make the decisions." Krishna eventually spent 27 years in prison until the privy council granted his immediate release last year. "No one deserves to hang. Everybody deserves a second chance in life. [Among] the people on death row … not everybody is innocent." But those who are not guilty and can't afford representation, he adds, also "end up in there".

While the privy council has saved lives, the idea of British judges having the final say over former colonial subjects in 2012 – the 50th anniversary of both Jamaican and Trinidadian independence – may seem anachronistic. As Justice Adrian Saunders, a judge at the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), puts it: "Are you independent if your final court of appeal is situated in the former colonial power?"

The CCJ was set up as an alternative to the privy council to serve as the final appeal court for the region. Until now, it has failed to attract widespread support. The court currently only hears appeals from Barbados, Belize and Guyana – even though it is situated in Trinidad. This is about to change. Last month, the Trinidadian prime minister pledged to stop sending criminal appeals to the privy council. This follows a promise from Jamaica's new prime minister, Portia Simpson Miller, in January, to end "judicial surveillance from London", sign up to the CCJ and drop the Queen as head of state.

While many have welcomed the news as an overdue step towards full independence, there are worries that leaving the privy council removes the barrier to hangings. Judges at the CCJ deny they preside over a "hanging court". They point to a death penalty appeal heard in 2006, where the sentence was commuted. The judgment allowed the CCJ to set out its philosophy on capital punishment. Justice Wit, another CCJ judge, said it showed the court was not "insulated". He continued: "Creating a Caribbean jurisprudence; that means a jurisprudence more connected to our kind of problems and our culture but that does not mean we are going to work in a vacuum. I would even say that at some points, the judgment was more progressive than I've seen from the privy council."

The CCJ has been hailed as a model for selection of judges among international courts. The court's impressive e-filing and video-conferencing system allows it to hear cases from around the region. The court can also travel to hear cases, which makes it more accessible than the JCPC, where parties must either pay for travel to London, accommodation and visa costs, or hire British lawyers. Saunders argues: "Access to the privy council is so restricted that almost all of the cases heard are those by or against the state, by or against big corporations, by or against wealthy individuals or pro bono death penalty cases. So the average man and woman has never had the opportunity to appeal right up to the privy council."

It's a persuasive argument for the CCJ, so why has there been a reluctance to sign up? Trinidad and Tobago's attorney general, Anand Ramlogan, told the Guardian in March that the priority is "the fight against crime" while signing up to the CCJ is a decision that "must be decided by the people and not the politicians", implying a time-consuming referendum. But the move to stop sending criminal cases to the privy council, while retaining its jurisdiction in civil appeals, could be read as a canny political move to show the population that the government is doing something about the mounting murder rate – 124 so far this year.

A recent survey by the DPP showed that 91% of Trinidad and Tobago's population support capital punishment. Ramlogan says his role means he is "duty bound – regardless of personal views – to facilitate and advance its implementation". Contrast that to his message in the local press in 2010: "Rest assured the death penalty is coming - if you do the crime you will not just do the time, but we will pop your neck."

Douglas Mendes, a Trinidadian human rights lawyer, is used to death-penalty politicking. "When people are complaining about crime, the first thing that somebody says is 'let's hang somebody' and they distract the population into a debate about hanging." He notes that capital punishment will always garner popular support (recent surveys in the UK have often shown large numbers in favour of bringing back executions). "Every country where it has been abolished, it's because someone took a leadership decision."

Even without abolition, the privy council's jurisprudence is increasingly being adopted on other continents. Kenya, Malawi and Uganda have taken almost 5,000 people off death row as a consequence of a ruling that mandatory death sentences for all murders are unconstitutional.

One irony of the campaign is that having once exported capital punishment to its dominions around the world and hardwired it into their constitutions, the UK is now leading the fight to abolish the gallows. "There's no death penalty in Latin America. It was abolished in Brazil in 1950s," observes Saul Lehrfreund, the DPP's director. "It's a British colonial legacy. About 60 countries retain the death penalty; a significant proportion are former British possessions. We are trying to get abolition on to the Commonwealth agenda; 19 member states are abolitionist."

Opposing the death penalty is now official government policy. The foreign secretary, William Hague, called for abolition when he addressed the Commonwealth People's Forum in Australia last year. The UK has supported a series of UN resolutions supporting a moratorium on the death penalty. Asked in the Lords what representations Britain makes to the United States (where there are 4,000 people on death row), Foreign Office minister Lord Howell described it as "one of our priority countries". The project's work and some of its training programmes have been partially funded by the Foreign Office.

One of the most prominent defenders of capital punishment is Singapore, which left the JCPC in 1994; it has ignored subsequent legal developments. Yong Vui Kong, a 23-year-old Malaysian, is due to die because the state imposes a mandatory death sentence for drug trafficking; he was carrying 47g of heroin. His lawyers, who have been supported by the DPP, have made a clemency application to the president.

The greatest challenge for abolitionists is China where, some estimate, around 4,000 executions are carried out each year. The numbers have been reducing and last year the National People's Congress cut the number of capital offences from 67 to 54. The case of Wu Ying, a 31-year-old multi-millionaire and the s6th richest woman in China, has stirred up public debate about capital punishment. She was condemned to death for "illegal fundraising" but in an unusual act of public clemency the death penalty was rejected in her case.

The Death Penalty Project is hoping to expand its work in China. "Abolition is the long-term goal," says co-director Parvais Jabbar. The project has held workshops in Beijing and Guangzhou for judges who have the discretion to impose the death sentence. "When we started we were quite a long way apart, but by the end of the exercise we were getting closer together."

So will they be greasing up the gallows in Trinidad? Abolitionists should not assume the CCJ will bow to demands for more executions. The privy council may be loosening its global reach, but its philosophy will live on.

Although the global trend is towards abolition of the death penalty, progress is unlikely to be smooth. Belarus, the last country in Europe to execute criminals, shot two young men – Dmitry Konovalov and Vladislav Kovalev – convicted of carrying out a 2011 Metro bombing in Minsk.

Iraq, which has reinstated capital punishment, has put more than 60 people to death since November; on one day alone, 19 January 2012, 34 prisoners were killed. According to Amnesty International, there were at least 360 judicial killings in Iran in 2011 (up from 252 in 2010) and at least 82 in Saudi Arabia (up from 27 the previous year).

Almost 150 countries have now either abolished the death penalty in law or in practice, or introduced a moratorium. In the US, there were 43 executions but support appears to be ebbing.

More than 500,000 people in California have backed an abolition proposal ensuring it will be on November's ballot paper. Connecticut became the 17th state to abolish capital punishment in April.

Amnesty International's secretary general Salil Shetty says: "Even among the small group of countries that executed in 2011, we can see gradual progress. These are small steps but such incremental measures have been shown ultimately to lead to the end of the death penalty."

(source: The Guardian)

INDIA:

Drop MCOCA charge against Abu Salem, orders Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court on Friday allowed the police to drop the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act (MCOCA) charge in an extortion case against gangster Abu Salem, whose extradition order to India has been quashed by the Portuguese supreme court owing to non-observance of extradition terms here.

While allowing the police to file a plea requesting dropping of the MCOCA charge, justice VK Shali said, “The order dated August 28, 2009, passed by the designated lower court is set aside and the state is permitted to withdraw the MCOCA charges.”

The Delhi HC judgement assumes significance as it would help the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in pursuing the Salem’s extradition case before the Constitutional Court in Portugal, where the probe agency have suffered a setback in judicial proceedings. In fact, the police sought the dropping of MCOCA charge after the Court of Appeal in Lisbon terminated the don’s extradition for breach of the terms by India.

Reacting to the HC order, Salem’s counselMS Khan said it would not impact proceedings in the Portuguese Constitutional Court, as the authorisation of the extradition has already been terminated. “This order has now become inconsequential,” added Khan. To secure Salem’s extradition, India had given an executive assurance that he would be awarded neither death penalty nor a jail term exceeding 25 years nor any fresh charges would be invoked against him.

The Portuguese Constitutional Court had on March 12 stayed the order of its Supreme Court on the alleged violations by New Delhi, which allegedly violated extradition terms by slapping new charges, entailing death penalty on conviction, on Salem.

Salem along with his girlfriend Monica Bedi, a Bollywood starlet, was detained in Portugal on September 18, 2002, and handed over to India on November 11, 2005, to face trial in eight cases, including the 1992 Mumbai serial blasts case.

(source: Daily News & Analysis)

PAKISTAN:

Release of 9 Pakistanis at Bagram ---- UK-based NGO seeks govt’s help * JPP activist says Bagram Internment Facility ‘backlogged with prisoners’

A UK-based NGO head on Friday sought help from the government in releasing nine Pakistani nationals detained at the Bagram Airbase.

Reprieve UK Charity head Clive Stafford Smith was addressing a press conference along with the family of one of the detainees. The conference was organised by the Justice Project Pakistan. Smith said the men needed the government’s support for their release.

“I have no hesitation in saying that this is wrong and that the government of Pakistan should do whatever it takes,” he added.

The family of a detainee moved the Lahore High Court regarding the release of the men and also to initiate criminal charges against the Pakistani government for violating Pakistani and international laws.

JPP activist Maryam Haque said the Bagram Internment Facility had become “backlogged with prisoners” who were held for years without charges, trials or legal rights.

Maryam said 14-year-old Hamidullah Khan was picked up on his way from Karachi to Waziristan. His family was desperate for his return, she added.

She said the nine prisoners included in the JPP petition were Awal Noor, Hamidullah Khan, Abdul Haleem, Fazal Karim, Amal Khan, Younas Rehmatullah, Shoaib Ahmed, Amanatullah Khan and Iftikhar Ahmad. She also said all were Pakistani citizens and have been denied access to lawyers, adding that they have also not been informed about evidence against them.

The Justice Project Pakistan is a non-profit law firm, which was established in Lahore in January 2010. The JPP provides support to the most vulnerable prisoners in the criminal justice system, especially those facing death penalty as well as those held in violation of law at undisclosed prisons. The JPP is currently representing the nine prisoners detained at Bagram. The firm will urge Lahore High Court Justice Khalid Mahmood Khan to pass an order for the Pakistani government to take concrete steps towards the repatriation of the detainees. The firm will also urge for a greater transparency about the process of repatriation.

(source: Daily Times)

IRAN----impending executions

4 Iranian men due to be hanged for sodomy

According to Iranian human rights campaigners, over 4,000 lesbians and gay men have been executed since the Ayatollahs seized power in 1979.

Iran court sentence four men from the town of Choram, in the Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad Province, to death by hanging for sodomy.

4 men named ‘Saadat Arefi’, ‘Vahid Akbari’, ‘Javid Akbari’ and ‘Houshmand Akbari’ are due to be executed shortly after their verdict was approved recently by high court judges, according to a report from the Human Rights Activist News Agency (HRANA) in Iran.

The 4 men are said to be from the town of Choram, in the Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad Province of Iran.

According to HRANA and JOOPEA, these 4 men will be hanged for sodomy according Shari’a law.

A gay activist based in Iran said: ‘Although being gay is not a crime based on Iranian criminal law but this is the most clear statement against same sex-acts in past months.’

He added that ‘there wereof our other men hanged in past 5 months.’

London based Iranian Human Rights Lawyer, Mehri Jafari said: ‘I am horrified and saddened to have heard the news about these 4 men. Not only with regards to the execution which is about to take place, but the fact that is beyond our control.

‘There are 2 important issues in this case; the location of the alleged occurrence and the interpretation of the Sharia’ law that a Hodud (strict Sharia punishment) is eminent. Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad is one of the most undeveloped provinces in Iran and it is obvious that a lack of access to lawyers and fair trial can be considered a serious issue in this case. After this announcement it is very likely that the execution will be carried out soon, and the remote location makes it difficult to exert any influence on the process.’

Mehri further pleaded: ‘I hope international organisations act quickly and effectively on this specific case.’

Gorji Marzban chairperson of the Austrian-based Oriental Queer Organization (ORQOA) said: ‘The recent death sentence for the four Iranian men is a shocking reality and demonstrates the discrepancy between Western and Islamic perception of queer life. The rhetoric of announcement makes the link between same-sex sexual activity, or sodomy with corporal punishment very clear. Last month the Iranian authorities hanged a young man and the local news agencies/authorities were intentionally unclear about the reason for the death penalty. In the case of these four men we have a clear text attributing the reason for hanging is sodomy.

‘The judicial denial of same-sex relationships in Iran stems from its relationship to Shari’a law and patriarchy. This is a warning signal not only for the queer population of Iran but also for all types of gender inclusive the heterosexuals who have sexual relations outside marriage.

‘The death penalty has failed to eradicate homosexuality from Iran but it was successful to force queer people into the closets. Sooner or later any Islamic community is obliged to integrate queer people. We believe that Iranians should gain more gender equality and rights and wholly condemn such an archaic sentence to murder which is inherently unislamic!’

Human Rights Watch (HRW) in its 2011 - We are a Buried Generation: Discrimination and Violence Against Sexual Minorities in Iran - stated that because trials on moral charges in Iran are usually held in closed sessions, it is difficult to determine what proportion of those charged and executed for same-sex conduct are gay and in what proportion the alleged offense was consensual.

Because of the lack of transparency, Human Rights Watch said: ‘It cannot be ruled out that Iran is sentencing sexual minorities who engage in consensual same-sex relations to death under the guise that they have committed forcible sodomy or rape.’

The issue of the death penalty for same-sex acts is further compounded by the fact that the Iranian legal code does not differentiate between rape and homosexual acts.

Furthermore, in many cases, it is often unclear whether the accused has actually committed a sexual act or it is a mere accusation based on some dispute. Even in the cases where the same-sex act has happened, often it is not clear whether the individuals involved are actually gay or it is an occasional act of sexual gratification.

Iranian Human Rights activists constantly note the fact that the 2 genders are strictly segregated increases the tendency for same-sex acts among the youth, in a phenomena that is also similarly known in single gender prisons. Indeed this phenomenon happens throughout highly segregated societies in the Middle East and North Africa.

(source: Pink News)

INDONESIA:

Bali 9 inmate's final plea to escape death Michael Bachelard, Jakarta

Bali 9 inmate Andrew Chan has filed his plea for clemency with Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, with lawyers asking the President to grant the drug courier ''a chance to have a new life''.

It's the last chance to save from the firing squad the man found guilty of taking a leading role in the 2005 plot to use young couriers to smuggle 8 kilograms of heroin from Bali to Australia.

Chan's Indonesian lawyer, Mulya Lubis, said that the plea had been handed to the governor of Bali's Kerobokan prison, Gusti Ngurah Wiratna, last week, just before Thursday's deadline.

The plea was based on the ''very progressive'' stance Indonesia had taken in adopting the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights into its constitution and its domestic law, according to one of Chan's Australian lawyers, Julian McMahon.

It also emphasises that, in the 7 years since he was imprisoned, Chan has reformed, becoming a Christian and taking a lead role in educating prisoners at Kerobokan jail.

''Everyone should be universally protected under the UN treaty - and Andrew is entitled to that protection,'' Mr Lubis said.

''He has become a very religious person, he has become very considerate. He should be given a chance to have a new life.''

Chan and fellow inmate Myuran Sukumaran are the only two of the Bali nine still facing the death penalty. Both lost their final legal appeal to the Indonesian Supreme Court a year ago.

Sukumaran's clemency plea will be filed in coming months, and Mr McMahon, who with Mr Lubis represents both men, said more details on Chan's plea would also be filed at that time.

Mr McMahon said Indonesia had not executed anyone since 2008, despite having 114 people on death row, including 43 foreigners.

In the meantime, many in the country had been horrified by the beheading in June last year of an Indonesian maid found guilty of murder in Saudi Arabia. A committee of eminent Indonesians had been formed to fight for the rights of Indonesians on death row in other countries. ''Indonesia is now proactively fighting to save the lives of its own citizens on death row in other countries, and we regard that as an important step for us,'' Mr McMahon said.

''We hope the forceful advocacy by Indonesia for its own citizens improves Andrew's chances, especially because of his determined rehabilitation.''

However, Mr McMahon emphasised that the plea for clemency was not about the death penalty in general, it was about the penalty ''in Andrew's case specifically''.

Mr Lubis said it would be ''fair and just'' if the President granted clemency to Chan. ''The principle of criminal punishment is not an eye for an eye. The philosophy is to re-educate the people, to bring them back to society.''

(source: Sydney Morning Herald)

ZIMBABWE:

Death penalty violates human rights

Section 4.1 of the draft constitution has the encouraging sub-title “The right to life”, but this fundamental human right is almost immediately erased when, in subsection (2), the death penalty is announced.

“A law may permit the death penalty to be imposed only on persons convicted of murder committed in aggravating circumstances . . .” reads the draft.

Before we advocate for the death penalty, we need to take into cognisance the old adage that 2 wrongs do not make a right and in this case, 2 murders do not bring back a life.

We should not pretend that capital punishment is not murder because of the legal technicality behind it. While we do not condone criminals, including murderers, we think the death penalty is morally wrong.

Section 4.5 of the draft constitution has the sub-title “Freedom from torture or inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment” and it clearly states: “No one may be subjected to physical or psychological torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”

The cruel irony is that there is no worse torture than being on death row, living each day knowing that someone has the legal power to take away your life any time. By allowing the death penalty, the constitution would be presupposing the infallibility of the judicial system which is not always the case.

Judges and juries, like any other human beings, are prone to mistakes and globally, there are documented cases where people have been wrongly executed by the State. In this country, we have had people wrongfully accused of murder; Cain Nkala’s case quickly comes to mind.

We are all aware of how the justice system is prone to manipulation by politicians in this country and it might not be surprising to have innocent people hanged for political expediency.

In a country like ours, where the police are known for lack of professional ethics, forced and falsified confessions can easily lead innocent people to the gallows.

It is also a shuddering thought that the State would employ a professional murderer in the name of a hangman. By implication, the executioner is a murderer who deserves to be executed as well.

A convicted murderer deserves severe punishment, but he or she is still a human being who deserves the chance to be corrected and rehabilitated, which is central to the modern-day prison system.

Research has shown that although the death sentence represents a strong condemnation of brutal and violent crimes, it does not necessarily deter people from perpetrating violent crimes.

Those who clamour for the death penalty do not know that they have literally descended to ancient times where an eye for an eye was central to legislation and this, as Mahatma Ghandi once said, will make the whole world blind. It will only serve the purpose of advancing the murderous cycle.

The death penalty is a violation of human rights, especially the right to life that the constitution must safeguard.

(source: Opinion, Newsday)

CHINA----execution

Man executed for stabbing spree in downtown Beijing

A 50-year-old man was executed in Beijing Friday for killing two and injuring 14 others in the capital's downtown area in 2009.

Zhang Jianfei, a native of northeast China's Jilin province, was found guilty in 2010 of endangering public security by stabbing 2 to death and injuring another 14 in the Dashila area on September 17, 2009.

Tourists, security guards and salesmen at roadside shops were among the victims.

Zhang, a former worker at a primary school in Yongji county of Jilin, blamed his actions on him becoming emotionally distraught while looking for a job.

He argued that he was drunk at that time, and but forensic doctors concluded following an investigation that Zhang was only slightly drunk and had the full ability to control himself.

Zhang's death penalty was meted out in November 2010. The verdict has been approved by the Supreme People's Court, as required.

(source: China Daily)

MAY 11, 2012:

TEXAS:

TDCJ Public Information Officer charged for responding to Backgate and Senator Whitmire via email regarding misconduct by the agency, resigns amidst false claims, retaliation.

TDCJ Public Information Officer (PIO) Michelle Lyons resigned this morning after being targeted by TDCJ's Bryan Collier and others for simply reporting the truth. Lyons, who has been employed by TDCJ for the past 11 years, resigned after enduring retaliation and harassment by agency officials for several months. Michelle had been nothing but cordial and professional throughout our years of exchanges as the website sought out answers to questions regarding policy, statistics or contraband issues. Many of our inquiries were also forwarded to state Legislators for their knowledge as well.

Ultimately, this action (forwarding emails to Legislators) is what is believed to have put Michelle on the radar with her TDCJ bosses. She responded to us like she would have any other entity seeking answers. Certain TDCJ administrators didn't appreciate the fact that we were in the loop as we are sometimes critical of TDCJ policies and other issues. Last Friday, Michelle responded to a request for information we filed the week prior for a statement about the ongoing facebook privacy story. She stated that she had been removed from that position, and explained why she had been. She had raised concerns to her bosses about the way time was being kept months ago within the department, and brought it forward. That's were it all began. A few trumped up charges later, one for not helping a subordinate by not supplying a statement for him to use in her name, and one for explaining to us via email why she wasn't able to answer our "official request" and the rest is history. Michelle emailed us this statement this morning;

"When I received the email from Duane on Friday and when I responded to him and everyone who he had originally copied on the message, it set in motion a chain of events. Within a couple of hours, my email account was 'frozen' and I was told I was under investigation. Before I was charged with failing to obey an order, I was told that I should not have responded to Duane because he is considered media. At this point, I would note that some time ago, I was tracking down an answer to a question Duane had asked me and I went to Mr. Collier. He asked why I was responding to Duane since "he's not media." It's interesting to me that he wasn't 'media' several months ago, but now he is? At the time, I said that while Duane may not meet the definition of media in TDCJ's own media policy, that he is a TDCJ employee and member of the public and that I respond to as many inquiries I can from the public in addition to those I receive from the media. That's exactly what I did on Friday. I view it as responding to a message from a colleague about possible federal labor law and privacy violations and including on it my union representative and 2 state lawmakers. Why is that an issue? " Michelle went on to say; "I know that what I've gone through these last 6 months is similar to what so many other TDCJ employees have had to endure during their own tenures with the agency. I just really didn't understand until it happened to me. I'll never know exactly what initiated the discriminatory measures they took against me with my demotion and pay cut, but I can pinpoint that the retaliation began as soon as I questioned the way TDCJ requires employees to track their time and how they appear to be circumventing federal labor laws through some policies (although an agency policy obviously shouldn't trump federal law). Within 2 weeks, Mr. Collier told me "I should have just fired you," and it only escalated from there. "

It's ashamed that any employee with TDCJ must endure these types of retaliation and harassment. But it hits home when it's an employee in the public eye, and with media connections like those of Michelle Lyons. TDCJ has become so comfortable with it's unchecked retaliation and harassment that it doesn't skip a beat in mistreating employees statewide. As the Sunset Commission Hearings with the Legislature approach us soon, i am almost positive these issues will be heard by Legislators. Michelle Lyons was the last line of defense and the open door that provided some sense of transparency for an agency still living and operating in the dark ages. With her gone, the agency will surely suffer a huge blow to their ability to be believable and honest. We wish you the best Michelle.

(source: Duane Stuart, the backgate.org)

WASHINGTON:

Court throws out death sentence of accused double-murderer

The state Supreme Court on Thursday reversed the conviction and death sentence of a man accused of killing his wife and business partner and called for a new trial in his double murder case.

In an 8-1 ruling, the state high court said that Darold Stenson's rights were violated because the state "wrongfully suppressed" photographs that raised questions about mishandling of evidence as well as an FBI file that wasn't provided to the defense until 2009, years after Stenson was convicted.

Stenson was sentenced to death in 1994 for the 1993 slaying of his wife, Denise, and a business partner, Frank Hoerner, at Stenson's Clallam County exotic bird farm.

Sheryl McCloud, an attorney for Stenson, said she was pleased that the court so overwhelmingly sided with their position.

"I was just so gratified that the court was willing to make a decision that might be unpopular but is really necessary given what we discovered almost 20 years after the conviction about the evidence being so unreliable," McCloud said.

The high court noted that other than 2 key pieces of evidence that tied Stenson to the shootings, the remainder of evidence provided at trial was "largely circumstantial." Those 2 pieces of evidence - gunshot residue found inside the front pocket of the jeans Stenson was wearing when officers arrived, and blood spatter on the front of those jeans "consistent with Hoerner's blood protein profile" - were at the heart of Stenson's most recent appeal to the high court.

At issue were photographs showing sheriff's Detective Monty Martin wearing Darold Stenson's jeans with the right pocket turned out and Martin's ungloved hands and an FBI file indicating an agent who testified did not perform a gunshot residue test, which the court said was implied at the trial.

Stenson had claimed that he kneeled next to Hoerner's body, accounting for the blood on the jeans. But an expert witness called by the prosecution had testified that was not possible.

"Had the FBI file and photographs been properly disclosed here, Stenson's counsel would have been able to demonstrate to the jury that a key exhibit in the case - Stenson's jeans - had been seriously mishandled and compromised by law enforcement investigators," wrote the majority for the high court, led by Justice Pro Tem Gerry Alexander.

Clallam County Prosecuting Attorney Deborah Kelly said she was deeply disappointed by the decision.

"It is my firm belief that all involved in the investigation and prosecution of this case acted conscientiously and in good faith towards a just outcome. It is an utter tragedy for the victim's family that they are forced to relive this."

Kelly said she expected a retrial on murder charges but would consult with the family about whether to seek the death penalty again.

Stenson has long claimed he didn't commit the murders. When Stenson called authorities in 1993 to report the deaths, he suggested that his business partner, Frank Hoerner, had killed Denise Stenson and then shot himself in another room. Prosecutors have said Stenson, struggling financially and in dire business straits, shot the 2 in order to collect $400,000 in life insurance.

Stenson has filed multiple appeals to his death sentence, and courts have stayed his execution 3 times, most recently in 2008 when he was less than 2 weeks from a scheduled execution.

In January 2011, a Superior Court judge ruled that the prosecuting attorney did not meet its legal obligation to provide the evidence to the defense but also found it wouldn't have changed the outcome of the trial, something the high court disagreed with in its ruling Thursday.

The high court noted that it had already once affirmed both of Stenson's convictions and the death sentence in 1997, and has since rejected four prior personal restraint positions filed by Stenson.

But the current petition cited due process violations of the so-called Brady rights. Those rights are named after the Supreme Court's Brady v. Maryland case, which says prosecutors violate a defendant's constitutional rights by not turning over evidence that could prove a person's innocence. The high court on Thursday said that those rights were violated.

"We are left with the fact that constitutionally significant mistakes were made in Stenson's trial, resulting in imposition of the ultimate punishment without the full benefit of due process protections," the majority opinion read.

Alexander was joined on the majority in Thursday's ruling by Chief Justice Barbara Madsen, Justices Charles Johnson, Debra Stephens, Tom Chambers, Charles Wiggins, Mary Fairhurst and Justice Pro Tem Teresa Kulik.

Justice Jim Johnson, the lone dissenter, argued that the Supreme Court has "reviewed and affirmed both guilt and sentence over the intervening 18 years" since Stenson was sentenced.

"The interests of finality in justice to provide peace for the families of Stenson's victims argue for the same result," he wrote.

With Stenson's death sentence now overturned, 7 men remain on death row at the state penitentiary. Washington state's last execution was in September 2010, when Cal Coburn Brown died by lethal injection for the 1991 murder of a Seattle-area woman. He was the 1st Washington inmate executed since 2001, after spending nearly 17 years on death row.

Since 1904, 78 men have been put to death in Washington.

(source: Associated Press)

*******************

Reversal of inmate's death sentence shocks victim's widow

Denise Hoerner, the widow of 1993 murder victim Frank Hoerner, said Thursday she was shocked the state Supreme Court has overturned the double-murder conviction of death-row inmate Darold R. Stenson, her husband’s accused killer.

“I couldn’t believe it,” Denise Hoerner, 45, said in a telephone interview.

“I was shocked. I feel like I just relived everything. I’m not having a very good time right now.”

Stenson, 59, owned an exotic-bird farm near Sequim when he was convicted in 1994 for the shooting deaths of his wife, also named Denise, and Hoerner, his business partner.

Clallam County Prosecuting Attorney Deb Kelly said Thursday in a statement that she was “deeply disappointed” by the state Supreme Court’s decision.

“It is an utter tragedy for the victims’ families that they are forced to relive this,” she said.

Kelly said in an interview that she will not seek review from the state Supreme Court because the decision was 8-1 but will consult with appellate attorneys to determine if she will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the ruling.

Kelly has 30 days from the issuance of the ruling to file an appeal.

That means that the earliest Stenson, who had filed numerous appeals before Thursday’s ruling, could return to Clallam County from the Washington State Penitentiary in Walla Walla would be after June 10 for a retrial on 2 aggravated-murder charges.

A county Superior Court status hearing would be held the day after Stenson’s return to Clallam Count and an arraignment held the following week, Kelly said.

Kelly said that if Stenson returns for a retrial, she would refile the murder charges against Stenson but would ask family members of the murder victims whether she should again seek the death penalty.

“I’m going to have to sit with family members to obtain their input and discuss with them what their wishes are,” Kelly added.

If Kelly seeks the death penalty, the presiding Superior Court judge would be required to appoint a special attorney qualified to try death penalty cases to represent Stenson, Kelly said.

Denise Hoerner told the Peninsula Daily News on March 25, 2010 — the 17th anniversary of her husband’s death — that she could not handle a new trial and that Stenson’s execution would allow her to move on with her life.

On Thursday, she said she wants Stenson to be tried again for the murders of her husband and Stenson’s wife.

Stenson “doesn’t scare me,” Denise Hoerner said.

“My husband was a wonderful man,” she added.

“God will make it right.”

In overturning Stenson’s convictions, the court cited the withholding of evidence from the defense by the county Prosecuting Attorney’s Office.

Kelly was an appointed District Court judge in 1994, when Stenson was tried.

The evidence the court cited consisted of FBI lab notes and photographs of then-county Sheriff’s Detective Monty Martin wearing the same bloody jeans worn by Stenson the day Stenson’s wife and Frank Hoerner were murdered.

Kelly said Martin wore the pants at the request of a Prosecuting Attorney’s Office expert witness who never testified at the trial.

Stenson had claimed he kneeled by the victims.

The expert witness “was having [Stenson] move in ways to see if the blood on the pants could be created by the movements that Stenson described,” Kelly said.

(source: KOMO News)

CALIFORNIA:

Death row inmate faces additional death sentence

A man already on death row for killing 2 Marymount College students in a San Pedro supermarket parking lot was sentenced to death again today for killing a fellow jail inmate while awaiting trial in the double slaying.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Ronald Coen imposed the term on 36-year- old Raymond Oscar Butler after denying the defendant's motion for a new trial.

"I've known you now for many months, Mr. Butler, and you're a very intelligent man," Coen said. "You're a killer, but you're a very intelligent man."

Asked by the judge if there was any legal cause why sentencing should not be carried out, Butler replied, "Other than I'm innocent and I shouldn't be sentenced to death, no."

Butler occasionally glanced at the audience during the hearing and smiled.

"I intend on being an active participant in my appeal," Butler said after hearing his punishment.

After Coen told Butler he would have to talk to a jail liaison about his request to have his legal materials forwarded with him to state prison, Butler replied, "Thank you, your honor, I appreciate it."

Jurors recommended Feb. 6 that Coen sentence Butler to death for the March 26, 1995, jailhouse stabbing death of Tyrone Flemming.

Butler was already on death row for the March 25, 1994, shooting deaths of Takuma Ito, a Japanese citizen, and Go Matsuura, a U.S. citizen who grew up primarily in Japan -- a crime that made headlines in both countries.

The California Supreme Court upheld his conviction and death sentence for the slayings of Ito and Matsuura, who were shot in the head in the parking lot of a Ralphs store in San Pedro. But the state's highest court reversed his original conviction and death sentence for Flemming's murder, ruling that a judge had erroneously decided he could not act as his own attorney.

Butler represented himself during his retrial. He also acted as his own attorney while making his plea for a new trial on various grounds, including his lack of privacy while interviewing witnesses in jail.

"I did not have access to my witnesses without having the sheriff saddled to me," Butler said. "It had a chilling effect on me and my witnesses thereby being able to talk to me."

Deputy District Attorney David Barkhurst said the jury's verdicts were proper and that the alternative sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole should not be imposed.

"The people have always felt the appropriate punishment was death," Barkhurst said.

During the penalty phase of his retrial, prosecutors introduced into evidence Butler's convictions for murdering Ito and Matsuura.

Barkhurst told jurors that the evidence they heard during the guilt portion of the trial was "the tip of the iceberg."

Butler has had a series of run-ins with fellow jail inmates, has had a number of weapons -- including jail-made shanks -- recovered from his cell, and has unleashed containers with feces and urine at prison guards who were bringing him library books or cleaning up trash, Barkhurst said.

During the penalty phase, Butler called his mother -- Donna Ray Butler -- to the stand to testify on his behalf.

"You love me, correct?" Butler asked his mother.

"Yes, I do, very much," she responded.

She said, "I stick behind my children. I love them unconditionally," adding that he was "the apple of my eye" when he was born.

"Thank you, mother, I love you," the defendant told his mother as he finished questioning her.

The murders of Ito and Matsuura stunned Japan and prompted expressions of regret from President Bill Clinton and Walter Mondale, who was then the U.S. ambassador to Japan.

Ito and Matsuura, both aspiring filmmakers, were shot once each in the back of the head. Ito's Honda Civic was then stolen.

(source: Daily Breeze)

INDIANA:

Trailer park babysitter who bludgeoned a 9-year-old girl to death before dismembering her is spared death penalty--Michael Plumadore, of Fort Wayne, Indiana, bludgeoned Aliahna Maroney-Lemmon to death

'Put body in his trailer park freezer and later dismembered it with hacksaw' -- Sentenced to life without parole

A man who confessed to bludgeoning a 9-year-old girl to death then dismembering her body three days before Christmas pleaded guilty today after prosecutors said they would ask for the death penalty.

Michael Plumadore, 39, from Indiana, also pleaded guilty to abuse of a corpse and removing a dead body from the scene in Aliahna Maroney-Lemmon's December 22 death at a Fort Wayne trailer park.

He'll be sentenced June 18 to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Plumadore's attorneys and prosecutors had told the judge last week they were ready for his trial to start that day.

But defense attorney Anthony Churchward said today that they agreed to the guilty pleas after prosecutors indicated they would pursue the death penalty if Plumadore was convicted by trial.

Plumadore was looking after Aliahna and her 6-year-old sister because their mother was sick. He was a trusted family friend who had looked after Aliahna's dying grandfather at the trailer park where the family lived.

The grandfather - who died 3 weeks before the girl's death - was a convicted sex offender. The family moved to the trailer park - where 15 sex offenders lived - to take care of him in his final days.

Plumadore told police he repeatedly hit Aliahna in the head with a brick, chopped up her body with a hack saw, stashed her head, hands and feet in the trailer where he lived and dumped the rest of her remains nearby.

She weighed only 41 pounds when she died. The other girls weren't harmed.

Plumadore has previously been convicted of trespassing, assault and forgery in 3 different states and there had been a warrant out for his arrest 11 years before the murder. He was charged with battery of a 1st-responder in 2000 and was given felony probation.

But he failed to report to his probation officer, fulfill his community service hours or complete an anger management course. Plumadore was reported an absconder in June 2000.

Greg Shumaker, one of 15 convicted sex offenders who lives at the park, recalled Aliahna's family moving to the trailer park to help take care of 66-year-old James E 'Shorty' Lemmon.

Mr Shumaker said he introduced Plumadore to Mr Lemmon shortly after Plumadore moved into the trailer park, and Plumadore moved in with Mr Lemmon a few days later.

Mr Shumaker said he knew Mr Lemmon because they were both sex offenders and were in jail together. Plumadore is not a registered sex offender in Indiana.

But Mr Lemmon had assured Ms Souders that there was nothing to worry about, Mr Shumaker said.

Paulette Hair, 45, a former manager at the trailer park who lives at a nearby trailer park, said she also knew Mr Lemmon was a sex offender. 'He stayed out of everybody's way,' she said.

Mr Shumaker said Plumadore briefly moved away, but returned when Ms Souders, 28, asked him to care for her father.

Aliahna's father, Dawayne Maroney of Centerville, Iowa, said he knew Plumadore through Ms Souders and had no reason to distrust him.

'I can't talk about it because I'm still coping with it. It's too hard to talk about,' he said. 'I had no reason to suspect anything.'

(source: Daily Mail)

MISSOURI:

Collings gets death sentence

A judge has formally sentenced a 37-year-old southwest Missouri man to death for raping and killing a friend's 9-year-old stepdaughter.

A jury that convicted Christopher Collings, of Wheaton, in March had recommended the death penalty. Phelps County Circuit Judge Mary Sheffield imposed the sentence Friday.

Collings and David Spears were both charged in the November 2007 rape and killing of Spears' stepdaughter, Rowan Ford, of Stella. Spears is awaiting trial.

Collings said in a videotaped confession that he "freaked out" and strangled the child because she looked at him as she was being raped. His defense lawyer had requested a life sentence.

The judge did not set an execution date for Collings.

(source: Associated Press)

USA (MASSACHUSETTS):

Judge says prosecutors can appeal decision to order second death penalty hearing for serial killer Gary Lee Sampson

A federal judge has authorized prosecutors to appeal his decision to order a 2nd sentencing hearing to consider whether serial killer Gary Lee Sampson should be executed for carjacking and killing two people in 2001.

US District Judge Mark Wolf granted prosecutors’ request for an interlocutory appeal -- an appeal lodged before legal proceedings end -- to the First US Circuit Court of Appeals.

Wolf rejected arguments by Sampson’s lawyers that prosecutors could not appeal until the 2nd hearing was over.

Sampson was sentenced in the 1st hearing to be executed. It was the 1st death penalty to be handed down in federal court in Massachusetts and the 1st in the state in more than half a century.

But Wolf found last year that Sampson’s constitutional rights to an impartial jury had been violated because a juror had lied about “important questions relating to her ability to be impartial.” He then ordered a new hearing. In today’s ruling, Wolf officially vacated Sampson’s death sentence. Proceedings in his court will now be put on hold, pending the appeal.

Wolf said “a 2nd hearing to determine whether Sampson should live or die will be lengthy, expensive, and anguishing for the families of Sampson’s victims.”

“It is, therefore, appropriate,” he wrote, “to give the First Circuit the opportunity to decide whether the decision that a second sentencing hearing is legally required is now appealable.”

If it finds that an appeal is in order, he said, the appeals court could also decide whether to take it up, and then decide whether he correctly interpreted the law in ordering the new sentencing hearing.

Sampson killed 2 men, Jonathan Rizzo and Philip McCloskey, in Massachusetts in July 2001. He pleaded guilty to federal charges, which carried the possibility of the death penalty. A jury found in 2003 that he should be sentenced to death.

Sampson was also convicted in state court in New Hampshire on charges of killing Robert “Eli” Whitney in Penacook, N.H., later the same month.

(source: Boston Globe)

LIBYA:

'I will send people to liquidate them': Saif Gaddafi recorded ordering the deaths of dissidents over the phone

The son of Colonel Gaddafi gave direct orders for opponents of the Libyan regime to be killed, telephone wire taps have revealed.

More than 12,000 tapes of conversations between the toppled dictator's inner circle were made between February and June last year, as Gaddafi's long-standing reign began to collapse.

In one of them, due to be broadcast by Al Jazeera in a series starting tonight, Saif Gaddafi can be heard telling a senior aide he will 'send people to liquidate' rebel fighters in the eastern port city of Tobruk.

Tayeb El Safi warns the dictator's 39-year-old son - whose capture was a pivotal moment in the Libyan uprising - about 'traitors' at the Abdel Nasser airbase, which fell into the hands of rebel forces in mid-February last year.

Saif, who was educated at the London School of Economics, tells El Safi: 'If you also have people there, send them to the base to kill them.'

The recordings could prove important as Libya and the International Criminal Court tussle over which of them should try Saif Gaddafi and the slain dictator's former intelligence chief for war crimes.

Lawyers in the Hague believe the North African nation's legal system is still too unstable to give the two men a proper trial. If found guilty in Libya, they will face the death penalty.

Luis Moreno Ocampo, chief prosecutor of the ICC, called the tapes 'fascinating' and said they were evidence that Saif played a prominent role in the ruthless crackdown on rebels.

He said: 'Saif was the boss, he was giving direct orders to kill, to liquidate them. This is new for me, this type of evidence... It is important to show the direct involvement of these people.'

Mr Ocampo wants Al Jazeera to submit the recordings, obtained by journalist Hoda Hamid, for the consideration of prosecutors in Libya.

(source: Daily Mail)

CHINA----execution:

Chinese man executed for 2009 stabbing spree

A 50-year-old man was executed in Beijing Friday for killing 2 and injuring 14 others in a stabbing spree in the Chinese capital in 2009.

Zhang Jianfei, from northeast Jilin province, was found guilty of endangering public security in Beijing's Dashila area Sep 17, 2009, Xinhua reported.

Tourists, security guards and roadside salesmen were among the victims.

Zhang, a former worker at a primary school in Jilin, blamed his actions on him becoming emotionally distraught while looking for a job.

He said he was drunk at that time, but forensic doctors concluded after a probe that he was only slightly drunk and had the full ability to control himself.

Zhang's death penalty was announced by a court in November 2010.

(source: New Kerala)

CANADA:

Don't kill me, I'm Canadian

Newfoundlanders (and Labradorians) sure get around. Take any given news story from the mainland, the U.S. or more greatly beyond — in the temporal sense — and there’s a 50-50 chance a Newfoundlander will be involved.

Anecdotal wisdom says there are only the famous 6 degrees of separation between someone and anyone — or anything — else on the planet. With Newfoundlanders, it’s reduced to two degrees of separation.

News item: Canadians accused of bribing officials in Moammar Gadhafi’s Libya. Newfoundlanders? Alas, no. Several SNC-Lavalin executives are alleged to have paid millions to corrupt Libyan officials to win construction contracts in that northern Africa country.

The local connection? Gadhafi, when he was alive and going on speechifying tours, was once rumoured to be coming to St. John’s. But that’s not all. More specifically, SNC-Lavalin has several contracts to work on megaprojects in Labrador (and Newfoundland).

The rest of the world can have their six degrees of separation — we’ll make do with 2.

Newfoundlanders do indeed find themselves in odd places and strange predicaments.

Like, for example, on death row.

Apparently, Japan and South Korea could absorb only so many Newfoundlanders before some of the overflow found themselves in the U.S., down and out and without a job teaching English, their only recourse being to rob a bank and fatally shoot a security guard.

Setting aside the pros and cons of capital punishment, adherents on either side of the issue must agree that sitting on death row often inspires its occupants to undergo an inner revival. Suddenly, they become nice people, a conversion their supporters energetically remind everybody of, lest the switch be pulled one night when they’re not looking.

Sometimes, death-row residents — despite living rent-free and with three meals a day, albeit temporarily — discover a renewed fondness for home. This is especially true of Canadians who find themselves on the wrong side of a date with a prison gurney in the Yoonited States.

Finding roots

Convicted killer and death-row inmate Robert Bolden’s lawyers hope to use his Newfoundland birth certificate as a ticket to life, so to speak.

According to The Canadian Press, in 2002 Bolden shot a bank guard in the head during a robbery in St. Louis. He is in a prison near Indianapolis.

It wasn’t until a couple of years ago that Bolden’s lawyers found out he was born in Stephenville. American authorities never conveyed this fact to Bolden’s defence lawyers. Neither it seems, did Bolden.

Presumably, American lawyers don’t indulge in niceties upon first meeting their clients.

“Say son, where are you from? Whaddya mean, you don’t know?”

Where a common person might see trivial technicalities, lawyers see opportunities.

Bolden’s rights were violated, his lawyers say, because at the time of his arrest and during his trial he was denied the services of a Canadian consul, which was his right as a Canadian citizen.

No matter that his mother took him away from Stephenville and to the U.S. when he was about 3 years old. He’s still a Canadian, and a Newfoundlander.

Quick, somebody grab the pink, white and green and head to Indianapolis. Never mind - there goes Ryan Cleary.

In Montana, convicted murderer and death-row veteran Ronald Smith has been seeking clemency, based partly on the argument that he is a Canadian citizen in a foreign jail. Smith murdered 2 young men in Montana in 1982.

Some Canadians have said the federal government should support Smith’s bid for clemency. Other Canadians, and I’m one, say our government should stay out of it.

I’m against the death penalty, but using citizenship as a deciding factor brings disrepute to both countries’ justice systems.

(source: Brian Jones is an editor on desk row at The Telegram)

JAPAN:

25 yrs after Teigin convict's death, exoneration efforts continue

When a death row inmate convicted of a 1948 mass murder died of natural causes 25 years ago, most people believed the "Teigin Incident" had left unanswered questions that would now never be solved.

However, a group of lawyers and experts in pharmacy and psychology are still struggling to unearth the truth behind the most notorious mass-poisoning case in postwar Japan and exonerate Sadamichi Hirasawa, who passed away on May 10, 1987, at a prison hospital in Tokyo at the age of 95.

"We will complete presenting new evidence by the end of next year to reopen the case," said Nobuyoshi Araki, one of the lawyers involved in the petition for a posthumous retrial of Hirasawa, who was a painter.

The 19th petition was filed with the Tokyo High Court by Hirasawa's adopted son, Takehiko, on May 10, 1989, the 2nd anniversary of his death. The 1st had been filed in 1955 and rejected the next year.

One of the focuses in the petition is on the poison used to kill the 12 victims at a Teikoku Ginko (Imperial Bank) branch in Tokyo on Jan. 26, 1948, by a man posing as a health official.

He gave them a drug, saying dysentery had broken out in the neighborhood and urging them to take the "remedy." It turned out to be poison. He then escaped with cash and checks.

While the courts determined the murderer used potassium cyanide, Hiroyoshi Endo, former dean of the pharmacology department at Teikyo University, said, "I can't specify what the poison was, but as a scientist, I can say it was not potassium cyanide."

The victims would have suffered immediate effects from potassium cyanide, but a certain amount of time passed before they died, indicating the poison had a delayed effect, he said.

Endo told a public gathering held on May 10 this year in Tokyo to commemorate the anniversary of Hirasawa's death that such a poison with delayed effects "could not have been used by a painter, who had little chemical knowledge."

"Thus, I strongly believe it was impossible that Mr. Hirasawa was involved in the Teigin Incident," he said.

Endo has already presented these arguments in written expert opinion submitted to the high court.

Meanwhile, psychologists are working to determine if eyewitnesses' testimonies identifying Hirasawa as the murderer and his confessions during questioning are credible by reviewing investigation and court records.

"We have carried out a series of experiments to examine if people could identify the same person after an interval of several months, and confirmed that their memories are rather precarious," Yukio Itsukushima, psychology professor at Nihon University, told the Tokyo gathering.

Itsukushima, who tested people's ability to pick out people after such an interval in lineups such as the one police used for Hirasawa, also said witnesses tended to be influenced by external factors such as what other witnesses said.

Hirasawa, who was arrested in August 1948, eventually confessed to the crime, but he retracted his confession later and pleaded not guilty in court.

The psychologists also said they are examining how Hirasawa was forced to make a confession at a time when investigators relied on confessions by suspects rather than on objective evidence.

Araki, the lawyer, said, "It is said that Mr. Hirasawa had a delusive tendency and was a habitual liar, and we think it is necessary to examine if such a morbid tendency contributed to causing the transition in his statements during investigation."

The lawyers plan to check if his history of diseases, including the neurological disorder Korsakov's Syndrome, affected his personality development.

"There is no evidence anyway to clearly support the allegation that Mr. Hirasawa committed the crime," Araki added.

The ongoing petition for a retrial is chiefly based on a memo hundreds of pages long written by Bunsuke Kai, a Tokyo police investigator who was involved in the case.

The Kai memo indicates that investigators initially believed someone connected to Japan's wartime secret military units, known to have experimented on human bodies to develop chemical and other arms for mass destruction, must have been involved in the Teigin Incident because of the skill displayed in the murder and the poison's special delayed effect.

"A former member of a special unit could have disguised himself as a health official and dealt with a special poison, as the murderer of the Teigin Incident did," Araki said.

Hirasawa's death penalty was finalized in 1955, and he spent 32 years on death row, during which time more than 30 justice ministers refused to sign an execution order.

His adopted son, Takehiko, 53, said at the May 10 gathering, "It has been a long struggle (for exoneration), but I want to continue it to reach our aim."

(source: The Mainichi)

SAUDI ARABIA:

Witchcraft and the Death Penalty in Saudi Arabia

Recently, a Sri Lankan woman was arrested by Saudi authorities for witchcraft. A man accused this woman of casting a spell on a 13 year old girl during a family shopping trip. He complained to the police that the girl ‘started acting in an abnormal way’ after a close contact with the woman in a shopping mall in the port city of Jeddah. According to news reports, the accused woman is currently in police custody in Saudi Arabia. If pressure is not brought on Saudi authorities to spare the life of this ‘innocent’ woman, she may be executed by beheading any moment from now.

In Saudi Arabia, witchcraft is a crime punishable by death. Last year, Saudi authorities beheaded two people, a Sudanese man and a Saudi woman, for practicing witchcraft. It is not clear how the judicial system in the country defines the crime of witchcraft or justifies it as a harmful practice punishable by death. It is difficult to understand how Saudi courts try and convict people for witchcraft offense.

Definitely such procedures fall short of international standards. I am so eager to know on what ground the government of Saudi Arabia continues to allow the execution of persons who allegedly committed the ‘crime’. I understand that Saudi Arabia has no written criminal code, so there is nothing like the ‘letter of the law’ in terms of witchcraft crime. Rulings are based on the judges’ interpretation of sharia law. Judgments are issued based on the faith, beliefs and mentality of judges.

Witchcraft is an imaginary crime that should not be associated with the penal code of any country in this 21st century. There is no evidence at all that some people have supernatural powers and can harm others by magical means. Witchcraft is a belief which people, out of fear and ignorance, associate with harm, evil and misfortune, and the criminal offense of witchcraft is a painful legacy of this primitive and lingering fear and superstition. It beats my imagination that a country like Saudi Arabia still recognizes witchcraft as a crime, and in fact goes to the extent of beheading people for committing the ‘offense’. I am literally stunned by the criminal silence of states and the international community over the terror of witch hunting in places like Saudi Arabia.

There is no justification for witchcraft, sorcery or casting spell as a crime. The term, witchcraft, begs for an evidence-based definition and categorization. The crime of witchcraft does not actually refer to any action that can be concretely proven or demonstrated. Due to lack of proper definition and justiciability, enlightened societies decriminalized witchcraft. Saudi Arabia should follow sooth without delay.

Meanwhile, in this case, the burden of proof lies with the accuser - the man - who should actually be arrested and be made to convince the court, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the abnormal behavior of the girl was as a result of a spell - and in this case the woman’s spell and not something else. In fact it is the man, not the Sri Lankan woman, who has a case to answer.

This case actually presents the Saudi authorities with an opportunity to come out with a landmark judgment and bring an end to the scourge of witch hunting in the country. But will Saudi Arabia seize this opportunity?

Anyone who is acquainted with the legal history of Europe knows that the region went through this process which led the continent to end witch hunting and removed witchcraft from its criminal code.

Saudi Arabia should learn from the ‘dark’ history of Europe and stop wasting its judicial resources by trying and entertaining witchcraft criminal cases. The Saudi authorities should stop wasting innocent lives by beheading persons accused of committing the ‘chimeric crime’ of witchcraft.

Instead, the government should try to enlighten its citizens so that they stop associating witchcraft with any evil act or abnormal behaviour. The government of Saudi Arabia should be told in very clears terms to spare the life of this Sri Lankan woman and end immediately the state sponsored witch hunting going on in the country. The government should put in place the necessary legal and judicial reforms to forestall this embarrassing development in the future. Incidentally many countries in Africa and around the world look up to Saudi Arabia as a model in terms of law, politics, religion and governance. Many Islamic theocracies and republics around the world copy and imitate the legal precedents in Saudi Arabia in terms of interpreting the sharia law. What happens in Saudi Arabia has enormous impact on what goes on in many communities and countries in the world.

Stopping witch hunting in Saudi Arabia is critical to ending this violent campaign in Africa and in other parts of the globe. More so, the government of Saudi Arabia is one of the backers of democratic changes and reforms - also known as the Arab Spring - in North Africa and the Middle East. Saudi Arabia cannot be supporting progressive changes in other countries while sitting on and condoning unjust, oppressive and murderous systems at home. Saudi Arabia cannot be supporting the respect for human rights and the rule of law in other countries while denying its people - and others - the same.

Hence, I am urging the UN, EU and other relevant agencies to speak out against witch hunting in the Saudi Kingdom. The US and other Western nations should, in spite of their strategic, economic, trade and oil interests pressure the Saudi authorities to abandon this interpretation of sharia law being employed by local authorities to justify the arrest, prosecution and execution of persons in the name of witchcraft and sorcery.

(source: Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies)

GLOBAL:

Foreign Nationals facing the death penalty----http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oF8aoOOU_p8 [www.youtube.com]

It includes Bianca Jagger, Clive, Joao Vale de Almeida (head of European Union Delegation to the US), Sandra Babcock, Foreign and Commonwealth office, and others.

(source: Reprieve)

SINGAPORE:

The Mandatory Death Penalty: A Blinkered Policy

Singapore has often been identified as "one of the most prominent defenders of capital punishment." But what many people -- including Singaporeans -- may not yet realize is that Singapore does not just have the death penalty, but also the mandatory death penalty.

The mandatory death penalty is applied to various crimes such as murder and firearms smuggling, but is most often used in relation to drug trafficking, as part of Singapore's tough drug policy and the Misuse of Drugs Act. The mandatory aspect of the punishment removes the discretionary powers of the judiciary when it comes to sentencing, effectively prohibiting them from taking mitigating circumstances into account.

The result is an irreversible punishment that blinkers all involved to the actual issues related to drug crime and abuse, and the variety of motivations that drive people towards them. Offenders are not allowed to explain their backgrounds and circumstances, and judges are not allowed to see the individual for who he or she really is. As a result, we're left with a knee-jerk reaction to a problem that's a lot more complicated than we're willing to admit.

Last week a friend and I travelled to Sabah in East Malaysia on behalf of anti-death penalty group We Believe In Second Chances to meet the family of Yong Vui Kong, our longest-running death penalty case. Yong was arrested in 2007 at the age of 19 and convicted of trafficking 47.27g of heroin in to Singapore. His latest appeal was dismissed last month, and he now waits for a response from the President of the Republic of Singapore to his clemency petition.

What we saw in Yong's home town of Sandakan was much more effective in helping us understand the circumstances that could have driven a boy towards drug smuggling than any academic or legal study would have told us.

A 2010 World Bank report found that although Sabah makes up only 10 % of Malaysia's total population, it has 40 % of the country's poverty. There are problems with both hard and soft infrastructure, from electricity supply to health and education. Datuk Chua Soon Bui, one of Sabah's Members of Parliament, told us that some children graduate from primary school still being unable to read, write or count. Yong himself was illiterate at the time of his arrest.

In places like Sandakan where people are poor, struggling and lacking in opportunities, it is easy to find young people naive, gullible and eager to get out of what is perceived as a dead-end town. The promise of going to cities like Kuala Lumpur and Singapore -- seen as advanced, prosperous paradises -- is enough to tempt some to commit crimes the severity of which they may or may not fully comprehend.

Yong is not the first Sabahan to find himself on the wrong side of the law, and neither will he be the last. Another boy from Sabah was Lee Siaw Foo, who was convicted of trafficking heroin into Singapore. Lee, too, came from a family facing hard times; his mother a bankrupt, his father in need of an operation after a heart attack. As the only child and sole breadwinner, he agreed to deliver packages in Malaysia and Singapore. The packages turned out to be heroin. Yong told his lawyer that in 2009 Lee was dragged kicking and screaming from his cell to the gallows.

Cristina Luke, a polytechnic student also from Sandakan, only narrowly escaped the death penalty for drug trafficking in Hainan due to inconsistencies in the investigation. She is currently serving a life sentence. She had been tricked by her Nigerian boyfriend into carrying a suitcase for him into China. Datuk Chua says that "love scams" such as these are rife in Sabah, where people aren't often on their guard and are eager to find ways to improve their lives.

There is very limited information on the backgrounds of those currently on death row in Singapore. Activists are only able to find these stories out by talking to the families they can locate. We often notice similarities: broken or dysfunctional families, low levels of education, naivete and gullibility, poverty. I use Sabah as an example, but it's by no the means the only source of such vulnerable demographics. These are conditions that can be found all over the world, and where these conditions exist drug syndicates will never run short of willing or unwitting recruits to smuggle their product. The mandatory death penalty shuts its eyes to this fact even as it shuttles drug mules to the execution chamber.

Singapore's government often insists that the mandatory death penalty is necessary to our city state, portraying it as a "trade-off" for security and a drug-free Singapore. But in 2011 the Central Narcotics Bureau admitted an error in statistical computation for the period of 2008 to 2010, and stated that cases of drug abuse are actually on the rise. The mainstream media often carries reports of large drug raids and arrests -- the cases keep on coming with no sign of abatement. If the mandatory death penalty is really such a good trade-off, then why is this still happening?

The mandatory death penalty is far too simplistic a solution for a problem as big as drug trafficking and abuse. Singapore clings on to it as a sort of security blanket, repeating over and over that it's dealing with the bad guys and keeping us safe. But unless we can shake off this penchant for knee-jerk responses, we'll find ourselves continually plagued with the same problem and never understanding why.

(source: Kirsten Han.Co-founder, We Believe In Second Chances; Huffington Post)

CHINA:

Chen Guangcheng's Nephew Might Face Death Penalty

Chen Guangcheng has good reason to fear for the safety of his family, as his nephew has already been charged with a crime that it's not clear ever happened, and could face the death penalty. The Guardian's Jonathan Watts reported on Friday that Chen Kegui, nephew of Chinese activist Chen Guangcheng, has been charged with voluntary manslaughter, which carries a penalty of 10 years to death.

So far, it's unclear whether anybody actually died when Chen Kegui slashed with a knife at intruders who broke into his house after Chen Guangcheng's flight to the U.S. embassy in Beijing. The Guardian's original report of the incident doesn't mention any fatality, nor does an interview Chen Kegui gave, hours after the incident, to Seeing Red in China blogger Yaxue Cao. Per The Guardian's Watts on Friday, Chen Kegui's lawyers "say he acted in self-defense and only wounded the intruders, but his legal team have come under intense pressure from the local authorities to drop what looks set to become one of China's most politicized criminal cases in recent years."

Chen Guangcheng's nephew isn't the only one living in fear. According to The Washington Post's Keith B. Richburg, his entire village of Dongshigu is basically on lockdown, with masked thugs using sticks to beat outsiders who try to come in. "Residents said this reign of terror extends to at least three other close-knit villages in the city of Linyi besides Chen’s, and has intensified since Chen fled to Beijing," writes Richburg. That "crazy retaliation" Chen Guangchen talked about on Thursday appears to be in full effect in his hometown.

(source: The Atlantic Wire)

GEORGIA:

Wife may testify to avoid death penalty in husband's slaying----Schoeck expected to testify against accused triggerman in 2010 Valentine's Day shooting

Stacey Schoeck, who could face the death penalty if convicted of hiring a man to kill her husband in 2010, likely will testify against her alleged co-conspirator next week.

In exchange, Hall County’s district attorney won’t seek the death penalty against her, according to statements made Thursday in Hall County Superior Court.

Schoeck’s former co-worker, Lynitra Ross of Austell, will stand trial for what prosecutors say was her role in the 2010 Valentine’s Day slaying of Richard Schoeck in Belton Bridge Park.

Ross is accused of being the go-between for Stacey Schoeck and accused triggerman Reginald Coleman, also of Austell. Prosecutors say Stacey Schoeck paid Coleman $10,000 to kill her husband at the Lula park on the banks of the Chattahoochee River.

Ross, they say, connected Schoeck, her supervisor at a DeKalb County spine clinic, with Coleman.

Prosecutors plan to seek the death penalty against Coleman.

According to statements made in court Thursday, they likely will seek the same punishment for Schoeck if she refuses to testify in Ross’ trial.

If Schoeck testifies, she will plead guilty to murder and avoid the death penalty.

“We expect her to be testifying truthfully,” District Attorney Lee Darragh told Hall County Superior Court Judge Jason Deal.

Ross’ attorneys likely will emphasize the deal with prosecutors in their cross-examination if Schoeck testifies, asking “what happens if you don’t do this?” Ross’ attorney, Rodney Williams, said.

Attorneys for both the defense and the prosecution refused to comment after the hearing.

Ross will not be handcuffed during her trial, and Deal said Thursday that he will allow her to wear clip-on earrings during court proceedings. Both are efforts at keeping the jury from knowing that she is currently incarcerated and making assumptions of guilt or innocence.

The trial of Ross, the first of three alleged to have conspired to kill Richard Schoeck, is expected to last nearly 2 weeks.

Because of a county furlough day, the trial won’t begin until Tuesday.

State prosecutors plan to present all of their evidence by the end of the first week. Jurors, who were chosen Thursday, have been instructed to make arrangements to miss work until the Memorial Day holiday.

Deal, too, is planning for long days in the courtroom, offering his office refrigerator to attorneys who might want to bring lunch to court.

The Hall County jury, including two alternates, that will decide Ross’ fate comprises 7 women and 7 men.

Originally, defense attorneys sought to move the trial, citing the saturation of pretrial publicity and its impact on Ross’ ability to receive a fair trial.

Deal has allowed the case to continue in Hall.

A few of the potential jurors said during a jury selection process this week that they knew many details about the case.

Deal has also instructed the jury to stay away from local news, to refrain from visiting the scene of the crime and to avoid posting about the case on social media sites like Facebook or Twitter.

(source: The Gainesville Times)

ALABAMA:

Lee Co. man could face death penalty in sheriff's deputy murder

The man convicted in the capital murder of a Lee County Sheriff's deputy learned he will be eligible for the death penalty.

Entered the courtroom Thursday in shackles and chains, Gregory Henderson learned on June 27 Judge Jacob Walker could sentence him to die for the murder of Lee County Sheriff's Deputy James Anderson back in September of 2009.

Henderson's defense had claimed their client was mentally unfit to be sentenced to die, but it appears the experts who evaluated Henderson disagreed.

Defense attorney Jeremy Armstrong says, "Based on some evaluations we had done, we did not think we would be successful in the Atkins request, so we withdrew that and based on that withdrawal obviously Judge Walker can consider the death plenty in the case and override the juries recommendation of life without parole."

Now it's up to Judge Jacob Walker to decide of Henderson will face lethal injection for killing Deputy James Anderson, or if he will uphold the juries recommendation of life in prison.

"I'm very concerned Judge Walker will override the juries but we are going to present any information we can in mitigating circumstances to hope that judge walker upholds the juries recommendation."

(source: WTVM News)

DELAWARE:

Former Calif. death row inmate to speak in Del.

A man who once spent time on California' death row is speaking to opponents of the death penalty in Delaware.

Ernest "Shujaa" Graham was to give a speech Friday night at the Hockessin United Methodist Church.

Groups sponsoring his visit include Delaware Citizens Opposed to the Death Penalty, the Campaign to End the Death Penalty, the ACLU and Pacem in Terris.

Graham and another inmate were charged with killing a prison guard in 1973.

His 1st trial resulted in a mistrial, but he was sentenced to death in 1976 after his 2nd trial.

The California Supreme Court reversed the conviction because prosecutors improperly excluded prospective jurors who were black. Graham eventually was acquitted at his 4th trial in 1981.

(source: Associated Press)

ARIZONA:

Lawyer for man in death penalty case alleges judicial misconduct

An attorney in the Cesar Garcia-Soto death-penalty murder trial has filed a motion asking that Yavapai County Superior Court Judge Celé Hancock be removed from the case because, he claims, she has violated ethical rules.

Garcia-Soto, now 30, was arrested in February 2008 and charged with 1st- and 2nd-degree murder and 2 counts of child abuse in connection with the death of his 3-month-old son.

Deputies also arrested the child's mother, Gladys Yamileth Rodriguez-Paz, who was not home at the time of the 911 call, saying she could have acted to stop the abuse.

The couple's other two young children were placed in the custody of Child Protective Services.

Rodriguez-Paz pleaded guilty to one count of child abuse in 2008 and was sentenced to a year in prison.

Michael Terribile, an attorney for Garcia-Soto, alleges that Hancock communicated with a non-party to the case regarding a pending issue, disclosed confidential reports regarding the defendant's I.Q., and threatened to file a bar complaint against Garcia-Soto's lead attorney, John Napper, all of which are evidence of "bias and prejudice against the defendant," he wrote.

Napper has been arguing that, because this is a death penalty case, he is obligated to undertake "an exhaustive investigation into the history and life of Mr. Garcia-Soto," but the fact that Garcia-Soto is a citizen of Mexico means that would have to take place in Mexico, and "the United States State Department has issued a warning asking all American citizens not to travel to that portion of Mexico (Cuidad Juarez in Chihuahua)."

Napper said he did not want to send anyone to Mexico to do the investigation because he found it "morally and ethically repugnant to risk innocent lives attempting to conduct a mitigation investigation."

He had first asked that Judge Hancock dismiss the death penalty, but when she denied that motion, he then asked that he and his co-counsel, Phoenix attorney Dennis Jones, be allowed to withdraw as counsel for Garcia-Soto.

Hancock denied that motion as well; she said that there was evidence available to Napper and Jones that could be used in mitigation, specifically mental health evaluations; these, she said, "include information on the defendant's upbringing in Mexico."

Terribile argued that her "reference to and reliance on the contents of (those 2 mental evaluations) was highly improper," because they were sealed and, he asserted, were intended to be "available only to the defendant."

Hancock, in an earlier hearing, referred to Napper's complaint that he could not, in good conscience, send investigators to Cuidad Juarez, saying, "I have done a lot of research on this on my own. This is not an isolated issue. It is occurring in Phoenix as well.

"It is my understanding that there are individuals who will travel to these areas to gather mitigation and there are attorneys who don't seem to have a problem (hiring them)," she said, referring to information she gained in a phone call she had placed to the Director of Public Defense Services for Maricopa County.

Terribile called that an "unauthorized" conversation, and cited an ethical rule which he said prohibits a judge from "considering other communications made to the judge outside the presence of the parties."

He also took issue with the fact that, after Napper had said in court that he would not take part in the mitigation phase of the trial if his client was found guilty, calling it a "farce," Hancock said that if he refused to do so, "the court is duty-bound to report such action to the State Bar of Arizona."

Terribile characterized that as a "threat" and said Hancock was "compelling (Napper) to provide ineffective assistance to the defendant."

He concluded that Garcia-Soto could not get "a fair and impartial hearing of trial" if the case stayed before Hancock, and that her actions violated his 5th, 6th, 8th and 14th amendment rights.

Presiding Judge David L. Mackey currently has the case and will rule on the motion as well as hearing a settlement conference, which could lead to a plea agreement.

(source: The Daily Curier)

MONTANA:

Change of Montana governor could impact Canadian's bid to avoid execution

Just a week after Canadian killer Ronald Smith made a high-profile plea at his clemency hearing for Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer to spare him from the death penalty, Postmedia News has learned that Schweitzer will not be the state's governor if and when Smith is scheduled for execution.

Lawyers on both sides of the case — Smith's defence team as well as the state's assistant attorney general, who's leading the push for Smith's execution — now say there's no chance the Alberta-born double-murderer could be put to death until 2013, after Schweitzer's 2nd and final term as governor ends on Dec. 31, 2012.

Montana's constitution imposes a 2-term limit on the state's top political post, the holder of which has the exclusive authority to commute a death sentence.

Schweitzer, first elected governor in 2004, was in office for the 2006 execution of Montana inmate David Dawson, who had not requested clemency.

Schweitzer has remained non-committal in his public statements about whether he would consider commuting Smith's death sentence, though he has repeatedly said he is deeply moved by the torment suffered by the families of Smith's 2 victims — Blackfeet Indian cousins Thomas Running Rabbit and Harvey Mad Man.

The latest surprising twist in the Smith saga could mean a whole new round of legal battles — in a case that has already spent close to 30 years in the courts — over the implications of the coming change in governors for the Canadian's bid to avoid execution.

The lawyers in the case acknowledge that it could even result in the launch of a fresh clemency petition, under Montana's next governor, by the 54-year-old Smith.

The situation arises because of an ongoing U.S. lawsuit — filed jointly in 2008 by Smith's defence lawyers and the Montana branch of the American Civil Liberties Union — over the protocols involved in administering Montana's lethal-injection method of capital punishment.

Smith and the ACLU have argued that flaws or potential flaws in the 3-drug regime for executing prisoners in Montana amount to "cruel and unusual punishment" and violate the condemned individual's constitutional rights.

A trial in the lawsuit has been scheduled for Sept. 4, and both Ronald Waterman — the lawyer representing Smith in the case — and Montana's assistant attorney general, Mark Fowler, told Postmedia News this week that the inevitable appeals following that hearing will push resolution of the matter into 2013.

In 2010, a Montana judge imposed a stay of execution in the Smith case until the lethal-injection lawsuit is concluded.

"Right now, the state of Montana cannot seek an execution date, not only until the lethal-injection decision is made by the trial judge, but also until the appeal of that decision one way or the other is resolved," said Fowler, the state's pointman on the Smith file. "So we're looking well into next year, 2013, before the state could even entertain any possibility it could set an execution date."

Asked it the change of governors on New Year's Day 2013 could trigger a second clemency bid by Smith, Fowler answered: "Is a death-row inmate only entitled to one clemency petition during their time on death row? I don't know the answer to that."

He then wondered aloud if, perhaps, Schweitzer "could postpone or defer to another administration? I don't know if that is a lawful thing to do, either. I don't want to speculate on that."

Waterman, also asked if the change of governors could make the current clemency process under Schweitzer's administration moot, replied: "Your question raises an issue which has never occurred in Montana — could a condemned inmate who had sought and been denied clemency, but whose execution had not occurred, then ask a new sitting governor to consider a renewed clemency petition? I don't know that answer to this question."

Waterman added that "the statute is silent as to whether a person can seek clemency more than once" because of a change in governors. "If the current petition fails and assuming my efforts ultimately fail to totally stop Montana from proceeding forward with a lethal injection protocol, then we may find out the answer to this question in 2013 or 2014."

Smith, originally from Red Deer, Alta., committed the shotgun killings of Running Rabbit and Mad Man just south of the U.S.-Canada border in August 1982.

Smith initially requested the death penalty for his crimes, but has since waged a decades-long court fight to avoid execution.

In 2007, in response to a Postmedia News report on a fresh bid by Canadian diplomats to help Smith win clemency from Schweitzer, Canada's recently elected Conservative government abruptly ended the diplomatic effort and announced a new "case-by-case" policy of not automatically intervening to prevent the execution of Canadians on death row in the U.S. or other democratic countries.

But after an opposition uproar over the policy shift and the launch of a lawsuit by Smith's lawyers, the Federal Court of Canada ruled in 2009 that the Conservative government had acted "unlawfully" and ordered it to re-launch clemency efforts on Smith's behalf.

The government agreed to do so. In December, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird sent letters to Montana's parole board and to Schweitzer seeking clemency for Smith. The letter, however, was slammed by opposition critics for its lukewarm expression of support for Smith's bid to avoid capital punishment, which was abolished in Canada in 1976.

Last week, a three-member panel of Montana's parole board heard statements from Smith, his sister and daughter urging the state to grant clemency because of Smith's rehabilitation efforts in prison.

The families of Running Rabbit and Mad Man made passionate pleas for Smith to be executed for robbing them of two greatly missed loved ones, men who had kindly offered the hitchhiking Smith a ride in their car before they were brutally murdered by the drunk and drugged-up Canadian.

The parole panel is expected to make its recommendation to Schweitzer later this month or in early June. Unless he promptly grants clemency to Smith, the controversy over the Canadian's death sentence is likely to be faced by Montana's next governor, as well.

Among both the Republican and Democratic fields of contenders to succeed Schweitzer are avowed opponents of the death penalty, meaning Smith's bid to win clemency could become a major issue in upcoming state elections.

(source: PostMedia News)

INDIA:

Convert Sarabjit's death penalty to life, Burney tells Zardari

Leading rights activist Ansar Burney on Friday appealed to President Asif Ali Zardari to convert the death sentence of Indian national Sarabjit Singh, facing gallows on charges of involvement in bomb blasts in Pakistan, to life imprisonment on humanitarian grounds.

Noting that Sarabjit had been on death row for nearly 21 years, Burney said in a letter sent to the President that the Indian national's possible hanging should be halted and his death sentence converted to life imprisonment "in the greater interest of humanity, human dignity, justice and human rights".

Burney noted that he had submitted several mercy petitions on Sarabjit's behalf to the President.

He said any move to hang a prisoner who had already spent such a long time in jail would be tantamount to a "murder of justice".

"I would like to mention here that one day in a death cell is equal to one year in a normal jail and that prolonged detention in the worst and inhuman circumstances on death row is, at the very least, cruel treatment and the worst kind of human rights violations...," Burney said in his letter.

Burney's request was made against the backdrop of the Indian Supreme Court's order allowing 82-year-old Pakistani national Khalil Chishti to travel back home after being granted bail.

Chishti was accused of involvement in the murder of a man during a brawl in Ajmer in April 1992. At the time, he was visiting India to meet relatives.

In January last year, Chishti was given life imprisonment after an 18-year trial.

(source: The Times of India)

MAY 10, 2012:

CALIFORNIA:

Client dies in prison, but lawyer still seeks to prove innocence----ATTORNEY ASKS THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT TO DECIDE THE CASE OF DENNIS LAWLEY, WHO WAS CONVICTED AND SENTENCED TO DEATH IN A 1989 MURDER FOR HIRE. THE BID FOR FREEDOM WAS FILED IN 2008 AND HAD LANGUISHED.

A convicted killer who died on death row while his appeal languished before the California Supreme Court should have his case decided posthumously, his attorney told the state high court.

Scott F. Kauffman, who represented Dennis Lawley for 19 years, contends that his client was innocentof a 1989 murder for hire that sent him to San Quentin. Lawley, he said, deserves a ruling on his claims, even if the outcome will have no practical consequence.

"Mr. Lawley's death does not erase the injustice of his conviction and sentence," Kauffman told the court in a written motion. "It would be a disservice to justice and to Mr. Lawley, who has always maintained his innocence, for this court to [dismiss the case] as moot."

Lawley was sentenced to death after he was convicted of hiring 2 men to kill Kenneth Stewart, a recently released prisoner who had been robbing drug dealers. Prosecutors contended that the murder weapon was a gun found in Lawley's cabin in Modesto.

Years after Lawley's conviction, Brian Seabourn, the admitted triggerman, said he was ordered to shoot the victim by the Aryan Brotherhood, a prison gang. Seabourn, serving a life sentence, had long confided in others that he had buried the murder weapon in a Modesto field.

A search of that field in December 2007 turned up a rusty revolver, the type of gun Seabourn had described.

The discovery came too late for an innocence case that Lawley had pending before the California Supreme Court. The court rejected that petition, ruling that Lawley had not proved his innocence, but gave him the opportunity to file a new challenge based on the gun's discovery.

Kauffman filed the new challenge in April 2008, and written arguments were completed in January 2009.

After hearing nothing from the court for 23 months, Lawley filed another motion in December 2010 asking the court to move more quickly.

15 additional months had passed when Lawley, 68, was found dead in his cell March 11, a victim of heart failure triggered by methamphetamine use. His motion asking for a speedy resolution was still pending.

Courts sometimes decide cases after they have become moot, to resolve important legal issues. But in fact-specific cases such as Lawley's, they generally decide that their time would be spent better elsewhere.

Deputy Atty. Gen. David A. Eldridge, representing the prosecution in the case, could not be reached for comment. Kauffman said he wants "the state of California to acknowledge there was a giant miscarriage of justice."

"Mr. Lawley is dead, but his case should not be buried with him," Kauffman told the court.

The court has not responded to his request.

(source: Los Angeles Times)

****************

see: a link to a current poll on the S.A.F.E. California Initiative; http://www.mountain-news.com/opinion/poll_a172c6c6-9a27-11e1-afba-0019bb2963f4.html

(source: Mountain News)

OKLAHOMA:

Anatomy of an American Execution

In 2010, while making an episode of Fault Lines on the death penalty in the US, Josh Rushing interviewed death row inmate Michael Selsor. It was the only interview Selsor ever granted. 2 years later, Rushing returned to watch Selsor die. In this special report, he takes an unflinching look at an American execution.

I came to Oklahoma to witness a killing, a homicide in fact.

At a microphone Debbie Huggins fights tears and with a strong southern drawl says slowly, emphatically: "What we did to him today was much kinder than what he did to my dad."

"Him" refers to Michael Selsor and "what" to the murder of Clayton Chandler, a clerk shot 6 times during a gas station robbery in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Selsor pulled the trigger even after Chandler had complied and volunteered the loot.

"In 1975 I never would have thought that it would take 37 years for justice," Huggins says.

Today's justice was delivered about half an hour before Huggins approached the microphone; it is why I am here. The only interview Michael Selsor ever granted was to Al Jazeera's Josh Rushing.

There are few acts graver than when a government takes the life of one of its own citizens. Executions often get a lot of coverage in the US, when there is something controversial about the case or enough people believe the condemned might be innocent. These scenarios attract media attention and fuel vigils. This was not the case with Michael Selsor. Everyone agreed that he did it, including him. The reporters who cover Selsor's execution will focus on Huggins and her family. Perhaps you cannot blame them. The only interview Selsor ever granted was to me.

Even though executions are conducted on behalf of the citizens of the state, very few are allowed to witness it: families of the condemned and their victims, lawyers, law enforcement, and journalists. This is why I felt a responsibility to witness Selsor's end and then to report it as dispassionately and honestly as I could. The following attempts such an account.

About an hour before Huggins gives her statement, I am led from a makeshift media centre to the notorious H Unit, home of Oklahoma's death row. A pat down ensures our escorts that I carry no possessions other than the clothes on my back. They give me paper and a pen so I can take notes. I am joined by five other reporters. We manoeuvre through a set of gates that open to a large passageway. The walls and floor are made of smooth concrete. The passage feels stark, modern, like a secret missile silo - and incongruous with the century-old prison famous for inmate rodeos and executions.

Eventually we turn through a large yellow door into the death chamber's viewing room. I have been here before, but then the space was empty and part of the tour - now it is ready for business.

A handful of prison officials and guards are waiting for us in the viewing room, a narrow rectangle about four times as long as it is wide. A long series of windows to my right are covered by drawn blinds. 2 rows of 12 brown metal folding chairs - the kind dragged out of a storage closet at a school picnic - are lined up. I am the first reporter in the room and told to go to the end of the second row and take a seat.

As I sidestep down the row I notice for the 1st time another set of windows on the left side of the room. The tinted panes conceal the identity of those on the other side. I suppose the setup is not unlike a wedding with two families to attend to and keep separated. The original victim, Clayton Chandler, is represented by an unknown number of family members behind the dark glass. It is hot in the room - at least 90 degrees and rising as people file in. Movement behind the opaque windows catches the light and my eye; at least 2 people are fanning themselves with white paper. Chandler's family members must already be in place, watching us nervously find our seats.

3 lawyers in dark suits representing Selsor enter next and sit directly in front of me. Selsor's family follows. His son wears a grey t-shirt, shorts and a military-short haircut. Tattoos cover his neck and arms. Selsor's sister, with a shock of blonde hair, looks tired. Her bright blue, short-sleeved shirt contrasts a suntanned face, wizened beyond her years. A box of cheap tissues rests in the son's chair, courtesy of the state. Once Selsor's family is settled, a small contingent of law enforcement file in, including Jeff Jordan, who investigated Chandler's murder as a rookie homicide detective. He is now Tulsa's police chief.

A cacophony of banging echoes throughout the prison. We have been warned not to be alarmed by the noise - it is how inmates say their goodbyes.

Selsor is respected on death row. He is seemingly regarded as a serious and contemplative individual who became an asset of sorts to prison inmates and staff alike - though officials always caveat the sentiment with a reminder that his crime was inexcusably wrong and such actions must bear consequences. As the run guy, a job given to the toughest of the condemned, Selsor made deliveries to other cells and kept fellow inmates in line. When school children visited the prison, Selsor played a regular part in the tour. From behind bars he shared his life lesson about the consequences of one's actions with the children.

The appointed time nears and the banging becomes rhythmic - quick at first, but slowing now to a steady, dirge-like pace.

The director of Oklahoma prisons, Justin Jones, who has twice appeared on Fault Lines, enters. The yellow door shuts behind him. Rather than taking a chair, he is handed a phone, a hotline to the governor's office. Though not far from me, I cannot hear what he is saying. Jones hangs the receiver up, picks up a different phone connected with the execution chamber and tells them to proceed.

It is exactly 6 pm local time. The curtain goes up as guards raise the mini-blinds inside the execution chamber. Selsor's family in front of me gasps at the sight of him. He is strapped to the bed with his arms padlocked down and covered in a sheet up to his chest. Selsor's pinched eyebrows convey a look between fear and guilt.

The son waves to his father for what turns out to be the last time and reaches for the tissues. The son and sister begin to cry. Selsor lifts his head as much as he can and turns toward his small audience: "My son, my sister, I love you 'til I see you again next time. Be good. Eric, [Selsor's lawyer] keep up the struggle." His eyes scan the viewing room: "I'll be waiting at the gates of heaven for you. I hope the rest of you make it there as well."

There have been at least 1,121 executions by lethal injection in the US since 1979.

He turns his head toward the prison official standing over him and says: "I'm ready." Relaxing back to the bed, he turns his head to the side and focuses on his son.

Though we cannot see it, we all know what is happening now. 2 intravenous lines run from Selsor's arms to 2 holes in a wall about three feet behind his head. From a hidden room, three executioners each press a plunger sending lethal doses into his veins: one with pentobarbital, another with vecuronium bromide and a third with potassium chloride. The executioners are each paid $300 in cash, so no paper trail leads to their identity.

With a tilted head still looking at his son, Selsor's gaze begins to fade, his eyelids half closing. A final breath exits his body with a visible puff from his lips. His body stills, eyes half open and locked on his son. It is roughly 6:03 pm.

The next 3 minutes pass painfully slowly. No one moves in the death chamber or viewing room. I hear barely perceptible sounds of crying from the row in front of me. A medical examiner in the chamber approaches the bed, checks for signs of life and pronounces Michael Selsor dead at 6:06 pm.

We solemnly return to the media centre. Huggins holds a press conference and tells us that the execution did not bring closure or the kind of justice it seems she was seeking, but it is easy to see her relief from the death of Selsor. The ultimate boogeyman in her mind was finally gone.

In time a death certificate will be issued from the state of Oklahoma. For cause of death, it will say Selsor died from a homicide. Though it took nearly 4 decades to find its target, it is clear now that the trigger Selsor pulled that fateful day in 1975 ended not only Chandler's life, but his own as well.

(source: Truthout.org)

ARIZONA----impending execution

Arizona death-row inmate sues Brewer

Lawyers for an Arizona death-row inmate set for execution next week have sued Gov. Jan Brewer and the state's clemency board.

In a filing in Maricopa County Superior Court late Wednesday, attorneys for inmate Samuel Villegas Lopez argue that three newly appointed board members were picked to ensure that no recommendations for clemency in high-profile or controversial cases land on the governor's desk.

The attorneys are asking Judge Joseph Kreamer to declare the new board members' appointments null and void and to delay the execution until the matter is resolved.

Arguments in the case are set for Monday, 2 days before Lopez's scheduled execution.

Lopez was convicted of raping, robbing and stabbing a 59-year-old woman to death in her Phoenix apartment on Oct. 29, 1986, after what court records described as a "terrible and prolonged struggle."

(source: Associated Press)

WASHINGTON:

Man on death row 18 years will get new trial----18 years after Darold Stenson was condemned to death for killing his wife and business partner, the Washington Supreme Court has overturned his convictions and ordered a new trial.

Stenson's attorney Sheryl Gordon McCloud said she was "gratified" by the court's 8-1 ruling, announced Thursday morning. The crux of the reversal was based on possibly tainted gunshot residue on the jeans Stenson wore on the night of the slayings in March 1993, McCloud said.

McCloud said that she discussed the ruling with Stenson by phone this morning.

"He was crying," she said.

McCloud said the defense argued that a Clallam County sheriff's investigator handled the jeans after the slayings, possibly getting residue from his own handgun on the pants. When the defense realized this possible evidence tainting, more than a decade after the murders, they had what McCloud describes as an "Oh my God moment."

"We're gratified that the court agrees that you cannot execute a man based on evidence this unreliable," McCloud said.

Clallam County Prosecutor Deborah Kelly said, "I don't think anyone was prepared for this."

Kelly defended the actions of investigators and said she's "deeply disappointed in the decision to force a retrial."

Kelly said it will be a few weeks before Stenson returns to Clallam County. She plans to prosecute him, again for aggravated murder, but is undecided on whether she will seek the death penalty. Kelly said that she will consult the victims' families.

"It's an utter tragedy for the victims' family that this is the outcome," she said.

Stenson, 59, was an exotic-bird dealer living near Sequim when he allegedly shot his wife, Denise Stenson, at their home in what prosecutors called an effort to collect $800,000 in insurance. They claim he also shot and killed Frank Hoerner to make it look like a love-triangle murder-suicide.

Stenson's three children were asleep nearby when the slayings occurred.

Stenson and Hoerner had been embroiled in a dispute over the cost of ostriches, which Stenson handled on his five-acre Dakota Farms. Hoerner's widow testified that Stenson persuaded her and her husband to invest their life savings of $48,000 in ostriches, but the big birds never materialized.

In his dissent, Justice James M. Johnson said the majority opinion failed to take into account the "totality of evidence" against Stenson and "exaggerates the potential prejudice of a late-discovered photo of Stenson's pants."

Denise Hoerner, the slain man's wife, could not be reached Thursday, but she has been in support of Stenson's execution.

"He needs to freaking die," she said during a 2010 interview with the Peninsula Daily News.

(source: Seattle Times)

USA (MASSACHUSETTS)----federal death sentence overturned

Judge overturns killer Gary Sampson’s death penalty

U.S. District Court Chief Judge Mark L. Wolf has formally vacated the death sentence of convicted spree killer Gary Lee Sampson, whose rampage in the summer of 2001 claimed the lives of 3 strangers here and in New Hampshire, including a Kingston college student who picked him up hitchhiking.

The order issued today affirms a decision Wolf made in October. Sampson’s conviction for the murders still stands. The decision is stayed while the U.S. Attorney’s Office appeals.

Sampson’s lawyers argued that a juror had lied on her questionnaire about her history as a victim of domestic violence.

Sampson’s Washington, D.C., public defender, Thomas Windom, declined comment on Wolf’s order. Sampson is 52 and on death row at the federal penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana. Prosecutors could not immediately be reached for comment.

(source: Boston Herald)

**************************************

USA (RHOSE ISLAND):

State, Pleau preparing death penalty appeal to high Court

Gov. Lincoln Chafee and the attorney for Jason Pleau are preparing an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, to keep the suspected Woonsocket bank shooter from facing a possible death penalty prosecution.

Chafee said attorneys for the state would pursue an appeal of this week's 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals split ruling that the state surrender Pleau to face prosecution by the federal government, in the 2010 shooting death of David Main, as Main, a gas station manager deposited receipts at a Woonsocket bank. And, Pleau's attorney, Robert Mann said he is preparing an appeal to the Supreme Court.

"It's an issue where even in the most difficult situations, you're going to stand up for the state's policy and opposition to the death penalty, or you're going to have gray areas," said Chafee. "In our case, in the state, we arguably executed an innocent man, and since then, we have been opposed to the death penalty, and that's been the Rhode Island position."

Chafee was asked about an angry email from one of David Main's sisters, Deborah Smith, asking how he would feel if it was his son, Caleb who had been gunned down.

"You are obstructing justice," Smith wrote to Chafee. "If your son Caleb was shot in the head, in broad daylight while doing his job you would be horrified, as we were!"

"That's fair, I think that's fair to bring that up," Chafee said. He maintains that he has considered the feelings of the Main family in reaching his decision to pursue a Supreme Court appeal.

Pleau's attorney, Robert Mann is preparing to file an appeal to the Court.

"We're working on pleadings right now, and I'm not prepared to discuss them yet," said Mann. "It's fair to say that we're working on them right now." Pleau has indicated that he would accept a life sentence without the possibility of parole in state court, over the risk of facing the death penalty in a federal prosecution. The U.S. Attorney for Rhode Island, Peter Neronha has not indicated whether he would seek the death penalty if Pleau is convicted, but says that any decision to seek the death penalty rests with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.

Mann said that he has spoken with Pleau since the 1st Circuit rendered its 3-2 decision earlier this week.

"Of course," Mann said. "I'm not going to get in to my discussions with Mister Pleau. I communicate with him, but I'm not going to get into my discussions with him."

(source: WPRO News)

OREGON:

Brian Bement's mother tells jury deciding death penalty: 'I can't have him die.'

Jurors could begin deciding whether to impose the death penalty for Brian Bement as soon as Friday afternoon.

The Washington County jury found the Portland-area heroin dealer guilty of aggravated murder in the 2010 shooting and robbery of David Greenspan, a Tigard naturopath.

After 3 weeks of trial, which began April 3, jurors deliberated about a week before issuing a verdict on April 27. The sentencing phase, which has lasted nearly 2 weeks, is expected to conclude Friday.

Thus far, jurors have heard testimony from Greenspan's family, Bement's friends and family, Chicago- and Portland-area law enforcement officials, Bement's past girlfriends, his prior robbery victims and other witnesses.

The state's sentencing-phase case centered around Bement's lengthy criminal history and evidence of violent behavior throughout his life, including incidents of domestic violence and robberies with weapons.

Attorneys for Bement have focused their mitigation case on testimony that Bement is caring and funny but has dealt with troubled family relationships and drug addiction from an early age.

Bement's mother, Cathy Bement, and his girlfriend, Pam Wager, also testified that he told them of sexual abuse by a family friend that occurred when he was a child.

Wager testified Thursday that after Bement's prior prison stint in Illinois, he told her he'd been encouraged in counseling to tell those he trusted about his experiences with sexual abuse. He told her a man had molested and raped him as a child, she said. Much of his drug use, he told her, was because of the abuse.

On Wednesday, Cathy Bement described a difficult experience parenting her son, for whom she first sought counseling when he was 4 or 5 years old in West Chicago, Ill.

By the time he reached junior high, she said, he was skipping school often and she found marijuana seeds in his room. In his sophomore year, he dropped out of school and started getting in trouble with police, she said. Weeks later, he moved out, she said, and for the next several years, his parents were constantly bailing him out of jail.

After serving 3 years in prison, Bement lived with his parents again for about a month, she said, until they kicked him out because he was so hard to live with.

"Anything he did, it was not his fault," she said. "There was a lot of arguing."

In an interview with a defense investigator, Cathy Bement said she didn't believe her son was a good person, but she testified that she no longer feels that way. Her comment came from anger, she said, because of the hurtful things he'd said to her in the past.

"I believe if Brian had not gotten into drugs, he would be somebody – really great man," she said. "I don't think that he meant to hurt anyone personally; I know the drug thing was hurting people, but I mean to hurt – I don't know the man's name ... I believe he was scared."

Growing more emotional, she told jurors, "I can't have him die."

(source: The Oregonian)

OKLAHOMA:

The Execution of Michael Selsor

Oklahoma carries out more executions per capita than any other state in the USA (though things might slow down as the state is currently down to its last dose of pentobarbital, the anesthetic in its lethal injection cocktail).

In September 2010, Al Jazeera reporter John Rushing put together a video piece on the Oklahoma and U.S. death penalties. Now, he has supplemented that with his interview of Michael Selsor, who was first sent to Oklahoma’s death row in 1976, and a blow-by-blow description of Selsor’s execution on May 1, 2012 for the 1975 killing of convenience store clerk Clayton Chandler in Tulsa.

The interview with Selsor (which took place back in 2010 and was the only one he ever gave) is particularly interesting and reveals a man who was remorseful, reflective, somewhat resigned but also prideful. He was sorry for his crime, but never reached out to the victim’s daughter:

“And really if I could say look I’m sorry for what I’ve done, I’m sorry I killed your dad, what the hell would that mean to her?”

Like Merle Haggard in the country classic Mama Tried (“That leaves only me to blame ‘cos Mama tried”), Michale Selsor didn’t fault others for his crime:

“No. It would have to be a different me. I don’t wanna blame my parents for my shortcomings.”

Selsor comes across as a plain-spoken man who accepted his guilt, and his punishment. But he also observed that “…somewhere along the road there should be some kinda redemption.”

Sadly, there isn’t, not with the death penalty. There is only retribution.

Was the 57-year-old man put to death in Oklahoma’s execution chamber last week the same person who committed that terrible crime 36 years ago? From the article describing the execution we learn this:

“When school children visited the prison, Selsor played a regular part in the tour. From behind bars he shared his life lesson about the consequences of one’s actions with the children.”

This would seem to suggest that Oklahoma authorities believed Michael Selsor had become a better man. At his clemency hearing, corrections workers testifed that:

“Selsor was a model inmate who often looked out for younger men and helped them adjust to prison life.”

But whatever self-improvements Michael Selsor made were meaningless under a law that places no value on the human capacity for change.

(source: Amnesty International USA blog)

TEXAS----impending execution

Staley's 4th Execution Date Approaches----A paranoid schizophrenia diagnosis could disqualify him

After the U.S. Supreme Court declined to agree to a last-minute stay of execution for Beunka Adams, the 29-year-old became the 482nd person executed in Texas since reinstatement of the death penalty (see "One Slated, One Stayed," April 27). The state has its 483rd scheduled for next week, when it intends to put to death Steven Staley. But whether Staley will actually be executed is, at press time, unclear; his 3 previous dates with death have been stayed in order to determine whether he is sane enough for execution. Staley was convicted of the 1989 robbery with two accomplices of a Fort Worth Steak & Ale restaurant and the kidnap and murder of the restaurant's general manager, 35-year-old Robert Dorsey Read. Reportedly, Staley suffers from paranoid schizophrenia and has declined to take stabilizing meds because he believes they are poison; at one point a state judge ordered him to be forcibly given the medication, but that was later stopped. If it's determined Staley can comprehend the reason for his execution, the state can go through with the lethal injection scheduled for next Wednesday evening.

(source: Austin Chronicle)

LOUISIANA:

Death-penalty case may be tried this year

The trial of a Houma man facing death for allegedly killing 3 people in a matter of days may go forward this summer, prosecutors said.

Jocobby Lee, 24, was arrested the same day he shot Gail Collins in the head as she watched television in her Dunn Street home in July 2009, police said. Later, Lee was tied to the deaths of cousins Michael D. Hebert, 33, of Houma, and Michael G. Herbert, 25, of Belle Rose, who were killed 2 days earlier, as well as the shooting of Collins' son Sean as he escaped out of a window.

Collins initially survived the shooting but died in February 2011 at age 55. Later, Lee was indicted by Terrebonne grand juries on 1st-degree murder, robbery and weapons charges. He is being held without bond in the Terrebonne Parish jail, and also has pending cases on charges of purse-snatching, drugs and battery on a correctional officer.

Terrebonne First Assistant District Attorney Carlos Lazarus has said the “execution-style” killing of the victims led to his decision to seek the death penalty from day one. In September 2009, shortly after Lee was indicted for the 1st time, Lazarus called Lee “a 1-man crime spree.”

Lee's July trial is scheduled in front of District Judge George Larke.

Lazarus, who is prosecuting the case along with Assistant District Attorney Jason Lyons, said Wednesday his office is prepared to go forward with the case. However, as is standard for most death-penalty cases in Louisiana, defense attorneys have continuously filed motions in the case. If they are denied, they are then appealed to higher courts.

“We're ready. That's the bottom line,” Lazarus said.

Attorneys from the Baton Rouge Capital Conflict Office couldn't be reached for comment Tuesday afternoon.

A trial where prosecutors are seeking the death penalty is separated into two phases. First, the jury hears evidence and decides whether to convict the accused. Following a conviction, the penalty phase commences, and the jury decides whether to impose the death penalty or life in prison.

Lazarus said he expect's Lee's trial to last a few weeks, while the penalty phase will most likely take a few days.

More motions for the case will be heard May 24.

This is the sole remaining death-penalty case pending in Terrebonne and Lafourche parishes. In February, prosecutors decided to amend 23-year-old William Henderson's charge to second-degree murder. Henderson, 25, is charged with smothering 10-month-old Kaleb Nelton, his girlfriend's son, when the baby would not stop crying.

Chief of Trials Mark Rhodes said the family was consulted on the decision to reduce the charges. The change will help bring the case to a faster conclusion and “was in the best interest of justice.”

(source: Houma Today)

CALIFORNIA:

Alameda County's only pending death penalty case begins

A dispute over a gun and a simmering feud between 2 men led to a triple murder, a prosecutor said Wednesday, that now leaves David Mills facing the death penalty in the only such case pending in the Alameda County courts.

Mills, 37, is accused of systematically executing 3 people, trying to kill a 4th and killing a dog and injuring another in a 2005 shooting in East Oakland.

That 4th person, Elizabeth Martinez, 26, survived the shooting and identified Mills immediately after the killings, which helped lead to his arrest the next day.

The shootings, senior deputy district attorney Jim Meehan said, were "horrific."

Photos shown to the jury during opening statements of the trial showed 3 blood-soaked bodies lying dead in a car, a pit bull with a bullet hole in his chest lying dead in the street and another pit bull with blood soaked fur being taken from the scene by animal control officers.

The photos also included images of Martinez looking hysterical with blood streaming down her neck.

Somehow, Meehan said, Martinez survived the shooting and went to a house on St. Elmo Drive in East Oakland for help. There, she spit a bullet out of her mouth and told a mother and daughter that, "Shulk shot them."

Mills, who served prison time after pleading no contest to involuntary manslaughter for a killing in 1997, is nicknamed Shulk.

"Almost the 1st words out of her mouth were, 'Shulk shot them,'" Meehan said. "There has never been a point ... in which Elizabeth Martinez in any way has deviated in her statements that the person who shot (them) was David Mills."

Meehan accused Mills of shooting the group because he did not get along with Martinez's longtime boyfriend, Dale Griffin, 36, who was killed instantly with a bullet to the back of his head.

Meehan admitted that all involved in the shooting were living on the edges of society. Each had drug addictions, and Martinez's sister, Rebecca Martinez, 22, was a drug addict and part-time dealer.

Mills also was a drug dealer and user and knew all the people he killed, including James Martin, 28, who was dating Rebecca Martinez.

Meehan said the killings were calculated and conducted by Mills in a calm, systematic fashion as he walked behind the car, fired a bullet into Griffin's head and then "firing as he walked in a clockwise fashion around the car." A total of 10 shots were fired.

Mills' defense attorney, William DuBois, agreed that the crime scene was horrific but said his client was not the shooter.

DuBois said he will prove that Mills was in a hotel room getting high and drunk at the time of the shooting and that the killings were ordered by Rebecca Martinez's former boyfriend, who was upset that she began dating another man when he got sent to jail.

Although the killings occurred in front of Mills' father's home, and cellphone records show Rebecca Martinez had made and received a call from Mills' cellphone minutes before the killing, DuBois said his client was not guilty.

DuBois said his client is accused of the crime because of a shoddy police investigation into the killings.

"Elizabeth Martinez's account of what happened is entirely inaccurate," DuBois said. "When you have all the evidence, the defense suggests you are going to have a hard time (reaching a conviction)."

(source: Oakland Tribune)

*****************

Sister Helen Prejean implores PUC students to ‘End the machinery of death’

Sister Helen Prejean, author of “Dead Man Walking,” called for the end of the death penalty and a shift in focus from retributive to redemptive justice at a recent appearance at Pacific Union College in Angwin.

Prejean’s talk came as an initiative to end the death penalty in California qualified to appear on the ballot in the November election.

“The Supreme Court says that the death penalty should only be reserved for the worst of the worst murder cases — but how in the Sam Hill do we know which is the worst of the worst?” said the Louisiana-born nun who was portrayed by Susan Sarandon in a 1995 film based on her book. “Every murder is the worst of the worst … we don’t even know how to apply the standards.”

A nun in the Congregation of St. Joseph, Prejean called attention to what she sees as an extreme paradox — the religious justification for executing criminals and the merciful figure of Jesus Christ found in the Bible. “We have gotten ourselves to a point in this country where we try to make violence redemptive,” she said. “Nothing could be further from the gospel of Jesus.”

She related how she at first tried to focus on the moral arguments for ending the death penalty, only to discover that for many, the practical arguments were just as compelling. “You spend $4 billion to execute 13 people. You pay

$180 million a year to keep this death machinery in place, and on average you execute someone every 20 years,” she said.

For her, those numbers raised the question of how states that practice the death penalty could be putting that money to better use. “Can we end the machinery of death and put those resources into at-risk kids? Into health care for people? Into affordable housing? Into education?” she asked. “Look at California. In 28 years, you’ve built 27 prisons and one university, and you’re cutting the education budget.”

Prejean concluded her presentation to a standing ovation from the campus audience. Following the program, she signed copies of “Dead Man Walking,” as well as her follow-up book “Death of the Innocents,” which details cases of wrongful convictions that led to executions.

At a luncheon following the morning programs, PUC president Heather J. Knight hosted Prejean, as well as college administrators, faculty, and student leaders of the PUC chapter of Amnesty International. Prejean encouraged the student activists to prepare for a hard fight on the November vote. If the measure passes, the 720 California inmates currently on death row would have their sentences changed to life without the possibility of parole.

Prejean said she sees capital punishment as just one part of a struggle against economic and social inequality in the United States. “Look who’s on death row across the United States. 98 % or higher are poor people,” she said. “The street saying is, ‘Capital punishment means them without the capital gets the punishment.’”

She said California has the most inmates on death row, far surpassing even the swath of the Deep South that she calls the “Execution Belt states.” “It’s up to the discretion of the prosecutor whether to pursue the death penalty,” she said. “It’s pure political symbolism … get a death sentence and you’ll look tough on crime. It couldn’t be more superficial.”

Despite her claim that the U.S. has become a “punishing society,” Prejean is optimistic that with education, the American public will eventually come around to her side. “I’ve discovered that most people aren’t wedded to the death penalty — they just never think about it,” she said

She called on college students and other activists around the state to help with spread her message in advance of the November election. “They get awake on it. They get that knowledge and get really active in their state,” she said. “It’s gonna take massive education, because if [the death penalty] is upheld, it’s going to be much more difficult.”

(source: Napa Valley Register)

SOUTH CAROLINA:

Fewer death penalty cases

The tendency of South Carolina prosecutors to go after sentences of life without parole instead of the death penalty probably does not result from squeamishness about executing criminals. But the result is the same: Fewer people on death row than at any time in nearly 2 decades.

Regardless of the motivation behind pursuing fewer death penalty cases, that result is welcome for a variety of reasons. For one, it alleviates concerns about the basic unfairness and uncertainty of the nation’s system of capital punishment.

With the advent of more widespread DNA testing, we have learned that many innocent people end up on death row – and one is too many. In addition, African Americans are disproportionately represented on death row.

But the chief motivating factor in the reduction in death penalty cases in South Carolina most likely is the high cost of putting people to death. Some might assume that it is cheaper to strap those convicted of capital crimes to a gurney and inject them with deadly chemicals than to house them in a cell for life, but that doesn’t account for the enormous cost of trying capital cases and then going through multiple appeals.

Kenneth Lynch of West Columbia was convicted this year for killing a 7-year-old girl and her grandmother, whose bodies have not been found. If the judge had sentenced the 52-year-old Lynch to death, he would have been the 52nd inmate on South Carolina’s death row, boosting the lowest number in nearly 20 years.

But that didn’t happen. Instead, Circuit Judge Eugene Griffith sentenced Lynch to life without parole. That means prosecutors haven’t sent anyone to death row in the past 14 months.

This change might also reflect a changing attitude toward the death penalty. Americans may be increasingly satisfied with assurances that those who commit heinous crimes will spend their lives behind bars with no chance of ever being released.

Prosecutors also have found the so-called “life means life” sentence useful as a bargaining tool. It is easier to persuade defendants to plead guilty and serve a life sentence by threatening to pursue a death sentence if they don’t.

Again, though, the decline in death sentences is welcome whatever the reason.

Illinois and Connecticut banned the death penalty within past 2 years, joining 14 other states and the District of Columbia. Other states, while not banning the death penalty outright, have virtually quit pursuing it.

South Carolina is not likely to ban the death penalty anytime soon. But its growing reliance on life sentences as the ultimate punishment may have much the same effect.

The motives may not be entirely humane, but the results are.

(source: Editorial, Herald Online)

TENNESSEE:

Death penalty off the table for second suspect in Kingsport murder case

The death penalty and life without parole are no longer possibilities for the second of 2 Kingsport double-murder and robbery suspects still awaiting trial.

Sullivan County District Attorney Barry Staubus said Wednesday that the state’s decision to cease pursuit of these possible sentences for Jawaune Massey, 36, was linked to the earlier decision to do the same in the case of Leslie Ware Jr., 33. The death penalty was initially dropped in Ware’s case to settle the defense counsel’s demand for a mistrial due to discovery issues that arose amid Ware’s trial in January. A mistrial that was later prompted by Ware’s alleged attempt to have drugs smuggled into the jail through attorney Steve Finney meant Staubus could have sought the death penalty once again, but he said he chose not to in order to expedite prosecution.

On Wednesday, Staubus cited what happened in the Ware case and a desire to likewise expedite the Massey case among his reasons for ceasing to pursue the death penalty or life without parole, as well as the fact that the men are facing the same charges.

Ware and Massey are each charged with 2 counts of premeditated 1st-degree murder and felony murder and 1 count each of especially aggravated robbery and criminal conspiracy to commit aggravated robbery. They also face charges of criminal conspiracy to possess more than 26 grams of cocaine with intent to sell or deliver, possession of over 26 grams of cocaine for resale, and maintaining a dwelling where controlled substances are used or sold.

The murder and robbery charges stem from the Nov. 18, 2006, robbery and execution-style shooting deaths of Jeffrin Nolan and Terrance Alexander inside the former Solé candle shop on Myrtle Street in Kingsport, owned by Nolan. The drug charges stem from their alleged participation in a drug operation headed up by Jawaune Massey’s half-brother, Osheene Massey, who has already pleaded guilty to a litany of charges.

Massey appeared with attorneys Douglas Payne and William Ricker Wednesday afternoon in Sullivan County Circuit Court.

Citing that the death penalty is off the table, Ricker asked Judge Jerry Beck to lower Massey’s bond from $1 million to $100,000. Beck denied the motion, noting that the warrant for Massey’s arrest was issued May 24, 2006, and it took police until Sept. 24, 2009, to locate him in Baltimore and bring him into custody.

Payne asked the judge to grant a change of venue, citing pretrial publicity. He cited the media coverage in the Times-News from 2005 to the present alongside a readership of 46,000 plus, and noted some readers had posted “inflammatory” comments in response to articles posted online. He also noted that Massey’s name was mentioned in the questionnaire that had been submitted to 450 prospective jurors in Sullivan County in the Ware case.

Staubus noted that very few prospective jurors called for possible service on the Ware trial were dismissed for having prior knowledge of the case, and he expressed the opinion they should try to find a jury in Sullivan County before going to the expense of securing one in another county. Beck agreed with Staubus and denied Payne’s motion.

Beck granted Payne’s request to submit a questionnaire to prospective jurors before Massey goes to trial, but advised he intends to delete some of the questions from the 25-page document, which he described as “overly broad.”

Payne also requested a transcript of Ware’s trial. Beck agreed to order a transcript only of the witness testimony — not opening statements.

Staubus told the judge he believed they had only heard testimony from 3 or 4 witnesses before the proceedings were halted.

(source: Times News)

USA (RHODE ISLAND):

Chafee appeals federal decision on state inmate

A tug-of-war over an inmate in Rhode Island custody in a possible death penalty case escalated Wednesday as Gov. Lincoln Chafee said he will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court a federal court ruling allowing the inmate to stand trial in federal court

Chafee said the court's close vote shows a split in the interpretation of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act, which allows governors to refuse to surrender inmates. The U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals voted 3-2 on Monday that Jason Pleau, 34, may stand trial in federal court where he faces a possible death penalty prosecution over a fatal robbery.

Rhode Island does not have the death penalty.

The governor invoked the concept of states' rights in the fight over Pleau, who is accused of fatally shooting a gas station manager outside a Woonsocket bank in 2010.

"Given the close vote of the full court, which demonstrates a genuine split in the interpretation of the law, the state of Rhode Island must seek to protect both the strong states' rights issues at stake and the legitimacy of its longstanding public policy against the death penalty," Chafee said in a statement.

The Appeals Court in Boston sided with federal prosecutors, saying the state prison would serve as "a refuge against federal charges" if Pleau were allowed to remain in the custody of Rhode Island authorities.

The custody battle over Pleau dates to June 2011, when Chafee, an independent, refused a request to surrender him to federal authorities. Chafee said prosecutors want to try Pleau federally to make the death penalty a possible punishment.

The Appeals Court ruling said that if Pleau and Chafee prevail, Pleau could be permanently immune from federal prosecution and the use of the detainer system would be badly compromised.

Federal prosecutors have not said whether Pleau would face the death penalty if convicted of killing 49-year-old David Main. Rhode Island-based U.S. Attorney Peter F. Neronha said in a statement after the Appeals Court ruling that his office is ready to move forward with the case.

A spokesman for Neronha would not comment on Chafee's announcement.

Robert Mann, one of Pleau's lawyers, said he is grateful for the governor's decision to appeal.

Main's sister, Deborah Smith, told Chafee in an email Tuesday that his fight to keep Pleau in state custody is "obstructing justice." She told the governor it is time to stop wasting taxpayers' money.

Chafee said he regrets that the case continues to cause pain for Main's family.

"I extend once again my most sincere condolences to them for their terrible loss, which resulted from such a senseless crime," he said

(source: Associated Press)

FLORIDA:

Death row inmate's fate now up to Judge Berger----James Daniel Turner in court seeking retrial

A death row inmate convicted in a brutal stabbing death in a motel room in 2005 now must do what probably is familiar to him: wait.

James Daniel Turner was in court Wednesday for the 2nd day of an evidentiary hearing in which his attorneys asked for a new trial. They said Turner’s former attorneys didn’t make the jury aware of significant mental health illnesses he had when Renee Boling Howard, 37, a mother of 5, was stabbed to death at a Comfort Inn.

The hearing concluded before noon, and now Circuit Judge Wendy Berger will think over the matter before making a decision.

No date has been set for a decision.

On Tuesday, an expert witness for the defense said Turner suffers from bipolar and borderline personality disorders and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and that the jury was not made aware of those diagnoses.

On Wednesday, an expert witness for the state said he does not believe Turner suffers from bipolar or borderline personality disorders.

Dr. Jeffrey Danziger, a Maitland-based psychiatrist and medical doctor, said the symptoms that led to those diagnoses were induced by Turner’s dependence on powdered methamphetamine, cocaine and alcohol and did not appear in the 7 years he was in prison.

Danziger said Turner “does not suffer from bipolar disorder because he hasn’t had a manic episode that I am aware of.”

He said accounts of manic activities such as Turner’s spending of a $25,000 settlement in 1 week and unstable romantic relationships, including 3 failed marriages, could be attributed to the effects of the substances.

Rather, “he has some situational unhappiness, and that’s to be expected” because he is in prison and sentenced to death, Danziger said.

He said Turner had not exhibited borderline behavior while in prison, such as cutting himself, banging his head against a wall or attempting suicide.

And the ADHD?

“Maybe,” Danziger said. But even if he does suffer from that disorder, “it has little to do with (the murder) in 2005.”

Danziger agreed with several previous diagnoses that found that Turner has frontal lobe damage.

He said those findings were “not surprising for someone who has a history of heavy substance abuse and maybe suffered some knocks to the head,” including head trauma in substance-induced car accidents.

A jury in 2007 found Turner, then of Silverstreet, S.C., guilty of stabbing Howard on Sept. 30, 2005, at the St. Augustine motel off State Road 207 and Interstate 95 after escaping from a South Carolina prison and stealing a police car.

Prosecutors said he stabbed Howard several times before turning to see her crawling toward the door and stabbing her again.

2 of Howard’s children, a 10-month-old and a 2-year-old, were in the room, as was her 10-month-old grandchild. They weren’t injured, but Howard’s friend Stacia Raybon was attacked twice before locking herself in the bathroom.

If Berger grants a new trial, it would be the third for Turner.

Berger declared a mistrial during Turner’s first trial in July 2007 when a juror had a seizure during consideration of the fifth and final charge against the defendant.

Jurors found him guilty Nov. 29, 2007, during his retrial and later recommended the death penalty.

Dr. Miguel Mandoki, a Jacksonville psychiatrist, said during the first trial that he believed Turner was insane when Howard was killed in St. Augustine.

In addition to the death sentence, Berger sentenced Turner to life in prison for home invasion robbery with a deadly weapon, five years for the grand theft of Howard’s Ford F-150 pickup truck and 15 years for aggravated assault on a police officer.

St. Johns County Deputy Graham Harris had testified that he chased Turner south on State Road 207 at speeds between 90 and 100 mph. He said Turner put the pickup truck in reverse and rammed his patrol car before jumping off the Deep Creek bridge.

(source: St. Augustine Record)

PENNSYLVANIA:

District Attorney seeking death penalty for accused Chester killer

The Delaware County District Attorney’s office will pursue the death penalty for accused killer Jamir Williams, who is facing charges in 2 separate shooting deaths in the city of Chester last year.

Assistant District Attorney Eileen Courtney filed notice that her office would be seeking capital punishment during an abbreviated formal arraignment this week before Judge Patricia Jenkins.

Williams, 26, of the 3000 block of West Second Street in Chester, is charged with 1st- and 3rd-degree murder for the Oct. 30, 2010, shooting death of Emerson Price, 22.

Price and another man were walking on the 1000 block of Madison Street in the early morning hours when gunshots rang out. Both men were hit multiple times and Price died a short time later at Crozer-Chester Medical Center.

Williams is also facing murder and related charges for the shooting death of 21-year-old Rahim Hicks on July 24, 2010. Hicks was killed while standing in the doorway of the J&S Seafood on the 800 block of Kerlin Street, after he and Williams had a confrontation, authorities said.

Williams did not have an attorney present for his arraignment.

Courtney indicated she had received word from defense attorney Mike Malloy, who represented Williams at a preliminary hearing, that he had not been retained for the case.

Williams said he was unaware Malloy would not be representing him and asked for time to gather funds for his defense.

Jenkins rescheduled the arraignment for May 22.

(source: Delaware County Daily Times)

OHIO----impending execution

Man who killed 2 in Cuyahoga County Courthouse seeks mercy from parole board

A condemned Ohio inmate who killed his estranged wife and brother-in-law in the Cuyahoga County Courthouse in 1992 is asking the state parole board for mercy.

Abdul Awkal is scheduled to die June 6, 1 of 11 executions scheduled over the next 2 years.

Awkal was sentenced to die for killing his estranged wife, Latife Awkal, 22, and brother-in-law Mahmoud Abdul-Aziz, 24, in the Lakeside Courthouse basement while disputing custody of their daughter, Zaynab, then 17 months old. A deputy shot him as he tried to leave the courthouse with the girl. She was eventually raised by her mother's family.

The Ohio Parole Board will hear arguments for and against clemency Thursday. They will then make a recommendation in about a week to Gov. John Kasich, who has the final say.

At Awkal's trial, his lawyers argued unsuccessfully that he was depressed and under pressure from the wife's family. The Ohio Supreme Court refused to accept his appeal in 1996, but a U.S. Court of Appeals panel ordered a new trial for him in 2009, ruling that an expert witness should not have been called in the penalty phase of the trial. A year later, Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Bill Mason won an appeal of that ruling, placing Awkal back on death row.

(source: Plain Dealer)

ETHIOPIA:

Journalist Could Face Death Penalty At Friday Verdict

A verdict in the trial of Ethiopian journalist Eskinder Nega and other activists accused of inciting terrorism is expected on Friday, 11 May, report PEN American Center and other IFEX members, whom Nega has worked with. If convicted, Nega could face the death penalty.

Nega was arrested in September 2011 for an article questioning the arrests of journalists and the actor Debebe Eshetu under the country's sweeping anti-terror legislation, under which he himself is now being tried. The laws criminalise any reporting deemed to "encourage" or "provide moral support" to groups and causes which the government considers to be "terrorist".

Nega was accused of affiliation with the banned political party Ginbot 7, and of allegedly receiving weapons and explosives from Eritrea so he could carry out terrorist acts in Ethiopia.

He's among 5 journalists - including two Swedish reporters - jailed under the anti-terrorism laws that the Ethiopian government, concerned by the Arab Spring protests last year, has increasingly used to quash independent reporting, according to PEN American Center and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ). About 150 Ethiopian journalists live in exile - more than from any other country in the world, CPJ says.

Nega and his wife Serkalim Fasil, also a journalist, have remained in the capital, Addis Ababa. In 2005, they were jailed together in Kaliti Prison for treason because of their coverage of a disputed parliamentary election. The couple's son, now 7, was born in jail.

After protests began sweeping across the Arab world, Fasil told "The New York Times" that police started threatening her husband. She said the police warned that if he continued to cover protests and opposition politics in Ethiopia, he would be violating the law and could face the death penalty. "With that kind of threat, you can't function as a journalist," she said.

But Nega - who had previously been imprisoned at least six times under Prime Minister Meles Zenawi for his work as a journalist - has continued to write. His defiant stance in defence of human rights in Ethiopia earned him a prestigious press freedom award from PEN American Center. PEN said it was both recognition of his past work and an attempt to pressure the Ethiopian government into halting its prosecution of journalists.

32 IFEX members have also spoken out against Ethiopia's jailing of journalists and other critics on terrorism charges, and called for their immediate release.

And the International Press Institute (IPI) asked 20 of its World Press Freedom Heroes - renowned courageous journalists worldwide - to condemn his imprisonment.

The authorities now appear to be tightening their hold on local media. Just last week, Temesgen Desalegn, another local editor, was fined 2,000 Birr (US$114) for his newspaper's "biased reporting" of that trial, reports IPI.

IFEX members argue that Western governments are unlikely to press Zenawi on human rights abuses in Ethiopia, a strategic partner for the West in combating terrorism and instability in the Horn of Africa.

"But can you really be crowned a "champion of development" if you lock up all your critics?," asks Tom Rhodes, CPJ Africa correspondent. "Ethiopians and the international community will never be able to truly determine whether the prime minister is an 'advocate of the development state' if only yes-men and blind supporters are allowed to speak of his achievements."

(source: All Africa News)

IRAN:

Iranian Pastor Nadarkhani Calls Possible Execution “Trial Of Faith”

Iranian Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani still in prison awaiting a possible death sentence for refusing to abandon his faith in Christ and return to Islam.

Iranian Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani, who faces the death penalty for abandoning Islam and converting to Christianity, says he faces "a trial of faith" in a new letter attributed to him.

The letter, dated May 7, 2012, was released by Christian advocacy group Present Truth Ministries and obtained by BosNewsLife late Wednesday, May 9.

Nadarkhani, 35, said he wanted to "inform all of my beloved brothers and sisters that I am in perfect health in the flesh and spirit," despite difficulties in prison.

This is "the day of exam and trial of my faith," added the pastor of the Church of Iran, one of the nation's largest evangelical house church movements.

"Though my trial...has been so long, and as in the flesh I wish these days to end, yet I have surrendered myself to God's will," Nadarkhani wrote from Lakan Prison near the northern city of Rasht, where he has been held since 2009.

"HARD DAYS"

"These days...are hard" but "to prove [my] loyalty and sincerity to God, I am trying to do the best in my power to stay right with what I have learned from God's commandments," he said.

Though Nadarkhani said he appreciates news media covering his case and "various churches and famous politicians" asking for his release, he expressed concerns over unspecified "insulting activities" by activists towards Iranian authorities.

"I'd like to announce my disagreement with the insulting activities which cause stress and trouble, which unfortunately are done with the justification [or] excuse of defending human rights and freedom, for the results are so clear and obvious for me," the pastor explained.

"I try to be humble and obedient to those who are in power [showing] obedience to those in authority which God has granted to the officials of my country."

He added: "I am neither a political person nor do I know about political complicity...But I know that while there are many things in common between different cultures, there are also differences between these cultures around the world."

CRITICISM CONCERNS

That, he said, "can result in criticism [and] response to this criticism [from Iran] will be harsh and as a result lengthen our problems."

It was not clear whether some aspects of the letter attributed to him had been written under duress, but they appeared to be aimed at Western protests against his imprisonment.

The pastor stressed that he continues to "pray for [Iranians] to rule the country according to the will of God and be successful in doing this." This way, he explained "I have obeyed God's word."

Nadarkhani suggested he tried to support those in a similar situation as him, apparently referring to fellow jailed Christians. "They never had any complaint [but] just let the power of God be manifested in their lives," he noted in comments resembling letters of jailed Apostle Paul in the Bible.

Yet, "sometimes we read that they have used [the] right to defend themselves, for they had this right... I am not an exception as well and have used all possibilities and so forth and am waiting for the final result," the pastor wrote.

LONG YEARS

Nadarkhani has been behind bars since 2009 when he was captured in his home city of Rasht to register his house church, which is part of the Church of Iran movement.

He was later sentenced to death, though a court in Gilan province asked a final opinion from Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Khameini, a move critics saw as an attempt to make someone else responsible for executing the married father of 2 children.

Iranian officials indicated in December however that they could release the pastor if he agreed to make a statement saying Islam's Prophet Mohammed was "a messenger sent by God" Christians with close knowledge about the situation told BosNewsLife earlier.

Pastor Nadarkhani reportedly refused to do so saying that statement would "amount to abandoning" his faith in Jesus Christ.

"So I ask all the beloved ones to pray for me as the holy Word has said," he stressed in the latest letter, referring to the Bible, regarded by Christians as God's Word.

FREEDOM DREAM?

"At the end I hope my freedom will be prepared as soon as possible [and that] the authorities of my country will act with [a] free will according to their law and commandments which [they] are answerable to."

The church leader ended his letter with a wish for readers that "God's Grace and Mercy be upon you now and forever."

Youcef Nadarkhani has become a symbol of what Christians and rights activists view as widespread suffering of devoted Christian converts, including many former Muslims, who face prosecution in the strict Islamic country.

Iranian officials have denied the accusations. Gholam-Ali Rezvani, deputy governor general of the northern province of Gilan, where the pastor's case was being reheard, denied to government linked Fars News Agency (FNA) that Nadarkhani faces execution for "apostasy", or abandoning Islam.

"The issue of crime and of capital punishment of this individual is not a question of faith or religion," he claimed, despite confirmation from several written court verdicts seen by BosNewsLife.

The European Union and United States have demanded Nadarkhani's release from prison.

(source: BoxNewsLife)

INDIA:

Govt may relax 'death penalty' clause under Narcotics Act

The government proposes to drop the mandatory death penalty provision for drug offences through an amendment of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. "In view of the observations of the Standing Committee on Finance made in its report on the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Amendment) Bill, 2011, it is proposed to amend Section 31A of the NDPS Act and replace the words 'shall be punishable with death' with the words 'may be punishable with death'," finance minister Pranab Mukherjee on Tuesday told Rajya Sabha in a written reply.

The NDPS Act, 1985 has provision for a graded system of punishment, with the quantum of punishment varying with the quantity of drug or substance involved in a case, he said.

The Bombay high court had in June 2011 held that the Section relating to mandatory death penalty was violative of Article 21 of the Constitution (right to life).

However, the court's verdict was given for the accused convicted twice for the offense.

The court had observed that second conviction in NDPS case need not be death penalty and it was the sole discretion of the judge of the special court to decide about the capital punishment.

The Rajya Sabha was told there was a surge in the number of people prosecuted under the NDPS Act in the last three years and decline in the cases of conviction.

As many as 20,364 people were prosecuted in 2011 for their involvement in offenses under the Act as against 19,720 in 2010 and 19,377 in 2009, Mukherjee said.

Whereas, 7,857 and 9,819 people were convicted in 2011 and 2010 respectively. In 2009, a total of 11,418 were convicted for the offenses, he added.

According to a recent report by an international narcotics control body, India is witnessing an increase in abuse of prescription drugs and over-the-counter pharmaceutical preparations which contain psychotropic substances.

"In India, 681 hectares of cannabis plants were eradicated in 2010, and 95 hectares were eradicated in the first half of 2011," it said.

The country also reported having seized a total of 173 tonnes of cannabis herb and 4.3 tonnes of cannabis resin in 2010. In the first half of 2011, 2.66 tonnes were reported to have been seized in the country, the report added.

According to the report by United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), India is both the largest producer and consumer of heroin with a value of $1.4 billion or over Rs. 6,000 crore (as per 2009 data).

(source: Hindustan Timse)

MAY 9, 2012:

TEXAS:

Dallas County district attorney a hero to the wrongfully convicted----Craig Watkins both seeks the death penalty in Dallas County and uses DNA evidence to exonerate those wrongfully convicted. His family's history helps drive him.

On the way to witness his 1st execution in the town known as the "Execution Capital of the World," the Dallas County district attorney stopped at the prison cemetery to find his great-grandfather's grave.

Captain Joe Byrd Cemetery in Huntsville is the final resting place of inmates whose families could not afford burial anywhere else. Tall pines guard the grassy expanse nicknamed "Peckerwood Hill," where many gravestones bear prison identification numbers, not names.

Dist. Atty. Craig Watkins scanned row upon row of gray crosses and headstones, making quick progress in his usual cowboy boots until he found the boxy stone belonging to Richard Johnson, dated Aug. 10, 1932.

Watkins knelt beside the grave in his suit.

Engraved next to Johnson's prisoner number — 101 — was a telltale X. His great-grandfather had been executed.

His dual missions that day in February — paying respects, witnessing the execution — embodied how Watkins, Texas' first African American district attorney, grapples with his role in meting out justice.

Although morally opposed to capital punishment — he calls it "an archaic form of justice" — Watkins has sought the death penalty in 9 cases, obtaining it in 8. He requested to see this execution, ordered before he took office, to fully experience the criminal justice system.

Even as he enforces the law, Watkins cites evidence of a flawed system. He has emerged as a leader in a growing national movement to exonerate wrongly convicted prisoners, most of them black men.

"As an African American, you always have a doubt about the criminal justice system," he said.

A few days after Watkins, then 38, was elected to his 1st term in 2006, a Dallas police officer stopped him in his black $100,000 Mercedes G500 SUV.

"Whose car is this?" the officer asked.

Watkins, who at 6-foot-4 is imposing even when seated, explained that he was the new district attorney.

"He had this surprised look on his face," Watkins said.

*

Watkins says people often assume he grew up poor in the slums of south Dallas. He actually grew up in the middle-class Oak Cliff neighborhood, the son of teachers.

But he did have relatives who ran afoul of the law. When he visited the Huntsville prison as the district attorney, he was startled to recognize a visitor's room. He had sat there as a child, waiting to see an incarcerated uncle.

Watkins did not set out to right wrongs when he entered historically black Prairie View A&M University as an engineering major. A political science class and politically active relatives — an uncle was a four-term president of the local NAACP chapter — inspired him to go into public service.

He earned his degree in political science, went to Texas Wesleyan University School of Law and thought working as a prosecutor would lay the foundation for a political career.

When the Dallas district attorney's office rejected him three times — he's not sure why — Watkins worked for the public defender and city attorney instead.

In 2002, still a fledgling lawyer with a wife and young children, Watkins decided to run against Dist. Atty. Bill Hill. He lost, but garnered 48% of the vote.

4 years later, Hill announced he would not seek reelection. Instead, Watkins this time faced off against a prosecutor with more than 20 years' experience. His great-grandfather's story remained secret, as critics focused on his age and charged that he was too much of a novice to handle a staff of 250 lawyers and an annual budget of $36 million.

A backlash against then-President George W. Bushswept Republicans from power in the Dallas area and helped Watkins eke out a victory with 51% of the vote.

His first week in office, Watkins made two decisions that would change the course of his career.

Dallas is one of few cities that stores forensic evidence dating back to 1969, when the crime lab was created followingPresident Kennedy's assassination. But storing evidence costs money, and county leaders asked him to start destroying old evidence.

He refused.

That same week, Watkins heard that a prisoner convicted under a previous district attorney was being exonerated based on DNA evidence. Watkins attended the hearing, and a reporter happened to be there.

"I apologized to the guy, the reporter wrote a story and it just caught fire — a D.A. will admit that they're wrong!" Watkins recalled.

Suddenly, activists were calling him about other problematic cases. A member of his staff suggested starting a unit to investigate suspect convictions.

Watkins hesitated. He thought about his nascent political career. He had planned so carefully.

"I was under so much scrutiny, not just this office but the outside — the media — thinking, 'He's not qualified.' "

But if he didn't do it, who would?

He persuaded county leaders to spend about $450,000 to create the country's first conviction integrity unit: two prosecutors, an investigator and a paralegal.

By the time the unit started work in 2007, 400 prisoners convicted in Dallas County had appealed under a 2001 state law to have their DNA tested against evidence.

Start there, Watkins said.

The unit began reviewing cases and sharing files with the New York-based Innocence Project, the Innocence Project of Texas in Lubbock and defense attorneys. Based on DNA tests, it appeared there were potential problems with about half the cases, but it would take time to fully investigate.

By the time Watkins was up for reelection in 2010, his unit had helped exonerate about a dozen prisoners. Though critics complained he was thin-skinned, that he squabbled unnecessarily with county leaders, the exonerations proved popular and he was reelected by the same slim margin.

Just a year earlier at a family reunion, Watkins had noticed a binder full of information about his great-grandfather. Growing up he'd heard vague comments about the execution but did not know details — how Johnson had walked to the electric chair singing "Swing Low, Sweet Chariot." He read how Johnson had been convicted of murdering a white Fort Worth man by an all-white jury that deliberated for less than 40 minutes.

But Watkins didn't reveal his family's secret until February, a few days before witnessing the execution in Huntsville. He brought it up after attending an exoneration hearing for Richard Miles, a black man who spent 14 years behind bars for a murder and attempted murder he didn't commit.

"People don't know," Watkins said, "that my great-grandfather was executed by this state. And so that's an issue we need to explore, as it relates to our justice system. Are we doing the right thing?"

A flurry of questions followed: Did Watkins think his great-grandfather was wrongfully convicted? (He'd read the trial transcript and had doubts about his guilt.) Did he now oppose the death penalty? (He still had reservations but would apply it.)

"What's really different about Craig Watkins is it is rare for a public official to have a public dialogue and admit he's not sure of aspects of the system," said Kathryn Kase, executive director of the Austin-based Texas Defender Service.

So far, Watkins' office has helped exonerate 25 inmates, including 2 men last week, all prosecuted under predecessors. Both had received life sentences for a 1983 rape and shooting. 7 other men exonerated under Watkins were serving life terms as well. Still, in cases prosecuted by his office, the conviction rate is 99.4%.

Barry Scheck, co-founder of the Innocence Project, said prosecutors have long feared that exposing wrongful convictions will undermine public confidence in their work. "Craig has proven that exactly the opposite happens," Scheck said. "If you become known as the district attorney's office that has a conviction integrity unit, if you bring a case before a jury, they will trust you more."

Now district attorneys from Manhattan to Santa Clara have followed Watkins' example and started similar units. The district attorney in Houston, a Republican former police officer, also launched one.

Watkins' approach still alarms some prosecutors. John Bradley, a Republican district attorney in Williamson County, outside Austin, thinks such units are unnecessary because prosecutors already dedicate staff to appeals and DNA analysis, and he has told Watkins so via email.

"We have conviction integrity every time we receive and screen a case," Bradley said. "We need to be investing all we can in how we do our job now so we will be less likely to have them reviewed in the future."

This spring, Watkins was at the Dallas crime lab watching from the back as the head of the conviction integrity unit explained its mission to members of the D.A.'s first citizens academy, which teaches residents how the office works.

Prosecutor Russell Wilson flipped to a photograph of Charles Allen Chatman, convicted of aggravated rape in 1981 and sentenced to 99 years in prison. Chatman refused parole because it would have meant admitting guilt. With help from Watkins' office, he was granted new DNA testing.

"The test results excluded him and he was exonerated," Wilson said, "And he's here tonight."

The audience of about 40 gasped and erupted in applause as a burly man in a blue dress shirt rose from their midst, shaved head gleaming, and approached the microphone. Chatman, 51, had been imprisoned for 26 years.

A hush fell over the room. Chatman looked to the back of the room, to the now familiar tall figure in suit and cowboy boots.

"I took care of myself in jail," Chatman said. "I never thought I'd say another man was my hero. But this man right here is my hero."

(source: Los Angeles Times)

CALIFORNIA:

Foster could face death penalty in Trinity Hanna murder

The Kern County District Attorney's Office has filed 2 allegations of special circumstances that could make Eric Foster eligible for the death penalty if he is convicted of the murder of Trinity Monique Hanna.

One of the allegations charges that the 3-year-old girl was molested before her death.

Those allegations were filed in Bakersfield the same day that Trinity's mother, Angela Monique Hanna, was arrested on second degree murder charges in connection with the case.

Foster, 26, is already charged with 1st degree murder, torture and willful cruelty to a child.?The special circumstance allegations charge the murder was committed during torture and the murder occurred during the commission of child molestation.

The molestation allegation is based on the autopsy results, said Deputy District Attorney Andrea Kohler.

“We filed that special circumstance allegation based on the coroner's report and looking at the injuries,” Kohler said Tuesday afternoon.

Kohler said not decision has been made on whether or not prosecutors will seek the death penalty or not.

Foster's preliminary hearing has been delayed for 6 weeks.

It is now set for June 21.

He is being held without bail and has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Trinity was pronounced dead on the night of Jan. 25 after her mother drove her to Bakersfield seeking medical treatment. Foster was arrested the next morning.

Angela Hanna was not charged until today.

(source: Taft Midway Driller)

***************************

A Cast Of Converts Rallies Around Death Penalty Repeal

14 years ago, Ronnie Sandoval was a self-proclaimed “Orange County conservative,” a criminal justice student who dreamed of becoming a prosecutor and an ardent supporter of California’s death penalty.

She believed those facing death sentences were guilty of horrific crimes and had to pay for what they had done. A state-administered fatal drug dose seemed like a fair price.

But Sandoval’s faith in the justice system was shattered when her teenage son, Arthur Carmona, was wrongfully convicted in multiple armed robberies and sentenced to 12 years in prison. It took two years of insisting he was innocent before a court overturned the conviction.

Her experience advocating for an innocent son behind bars ultimately shook Sandoval’s support of the death penalty. Today, she is among a dedicated group of converts who once championed capital punishment but are now pushing to get rid of California’s death penalty.

Last month, a measure was approved for the November ballot that would change the maximum penalty imposed from death to life without parole. This year marks the first time voters will get to decide the issue since 1978, when California overwhelmingly approved The Briggs Initiative—expanding the kinds of cases in which defendants could be executed under the reinstated death penalty program.

The proposition faces an uphill battle in a state where, according to a 2011 Field Poll, two-thirds of voters favor keeping the death penalty for serious crimes. But Californians’ overwhelming support for keeping capital punishment as an option doesn’t mean they think it’s always the best option.

The same poll shows that given the choice between life imprisonment without parole and the death penalty for 1st-degree murder, 48 p% of Californians prefer life imprisonment, over 40 percent in support of the death penalty.

In an effort to persuade pro-death penalty voters to change their minds and end executions in California, the campaign has enlisted a number of former capital punishment supporters. The campaign’s website prominently features the stories of Sandoval and others—some from within the law enforcement community—who have turned to oppose California’s death penalty program.

This strategy is essential in the campaign’s effort to overcome the daunting task of convincing the state’s voters to end capital punishment.

Historically, a ballot initiative needs to start out with strong majority support to find success on Election Day, because support dwindles as an opposition campaign gears up, according to Dan Schnur, director of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at the University of Southern California.

Despite the odds, Schnur said the new voices in the campaign could multiply.

“The campaign’s test is going to rest on its ability to convince people that have supported the death penalty to oppose it,” he said. “The most credible messengers for that type of approach are former supporters.”

In 1977, when California’s death row population was one-third its current size, Donald Heller was a young attorney who’d earned the nickname “Mad Dog” for his tough-on-crime approach as a federal prosecutor. After putting Manson Family follower Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme away for life for her assassination attempt on former President Gerald Ford, Heller was hired by state Sen. John Briggs, a Republican from Fullerton, to craft a stricter death penalty law.

The bill he wrote doubled the number of first-degree murder “special circumstances” that could result in execution, adding hate crimes and “especially heinous” murders to the list and removing the state’s requirement to prove that a murder was intentional. Today, California’s death penalty program is the largest and most expensive in the nation—and among Heller’s deepest regrets.

“As death row filled over the years, I realized I had made a major mistake drafting it the way I did,” Heller said. “The practical application turned out to be a fiscal nightmare.”

Since then, the number of condemned inmates in San Quentin has swelled to 720. California taxpayers have spent an estimated $4 billion to fund a system that has carried out only 13 executions, according to an analysis conducted by a Loyola Law School professor and federal judge. The study has taken on a central role in the debate over whether to abolish capital punishment.

Heller, 68, speaks out against California’s death penalty and backs the initiative dubbed The Savings, Accountability, and Full Enforcement for California Act. He said his shift to oppose the law he authored was gradual, as its dysfunction became more evident with time.

If there was a tipping point, Heller said, it was the case of Thomas Thompson, a man who was convicted of rape-murder and executed in 1998. After Thompson’s lawyers asked him to review case materials, Heller concluded that Thompson’s conviction was based largely on the testimony of a jailhouse snitch, which he considered highly unreliable. At Thompson’s clemency hearing, Heller testified that prosecutors had committed misconduct when they used contradictory arguments to convict Thompson and his accomplice in separate trials.

“That was very frightening to me,” Heller said, “as a lawyer who believed in an ethical system of prosecution.”

Joining Heller in support of ending the death penalty is Ron Briggs, the son and former aide of the senator who proposed the current statute. While in his early 20s, Briggs was tasked with gathering and processing hundreds of thousands of signatures to get the initiative on the ballot. He was a capital punishment supporter at the time and, like his father, hoped a broadened death penalty would bring California swift justice and savings.

“I thought the state could line them up and execute them, but that didn’t occur,” Briggs said. “Instead, we’ve got a system that consumes lawyers’ hours and a merry-go-round of appeals for murderers.”

This lengthy appeals process, Briggs says, prolongs suffering for the families and friends of victims. Briggs began to question the process during a retrial of rape-murderer James Karis, Jr. in 2007. Karis had attacked and shot 2 El Dorado County women in 1981—killing 1 and leaving the 2nd for dead. The second victim survived to testify against her attacker. Briggs befriended the survivor and said he was heartbroken when she had to testify again 26 years after the ordeal.

“In the most grotesque public display, she not only had to tell her daughters what happened,” Briggs said, “but she had to relive it, and had to look at the goddam guy in the eyes.”

A staunch conservative member of the rural El Dorado County Board of Supervisors, Briggs says fiscal considerations are among his reasons for shifting position and are likely to resonate with voters in November.

“As a conservative, as a Tea Partier, a Republican or a Democrat, close your eyes for a moment and think about it,” he said. “There’s a state program that costs $184 million a year and nothing gets done.”

Among the initiative’s other supporters is former Los Angeles County District Attorney Gil Garcetti, who spent a career pursuing the death penalty for convicted killers. While DA in the 1990s, Garcetti said he sought death in 22 % of the cases where defendants were eligible.

Garcetti said he never believed capital punishment to be a deterrent to crime and argued its punitive power has diminished over the years, as more inmates die of natural causes on death row.

One factor in his new perspective, Garcetti said, is the number of cases around the country where convicted murders on death row were found innocent. Since 1973, 138 people have been released from death rows nationwide after evidence showed they were innocent, according the American Civil Liberties Union.

“With 720 people on California’s death row, there’s likelihood that at least 1 of them is factually innocent,” Garcetti said.

Garcetti began advocating against the death penalty when he read recent reports outlining the cost of the program in California.

“It’s culminated with the incredible budget crisis,” Garcetti said. “I see teachers being laid off, yet we’re spending hundreds of millions every year to implement the death penalty.”

The taxpayer costs of maintaining the death penalty in California is a major talking point for the SAFE California campaign, as it aims to shift this year’s debate away from traditional arguments about the morality of execution and focus instead on the cost-effectiveness of the state’s death penalty program.

The 2011 study by Loyola Law School Professor Paula Mitchell and U.S. 9th Circuit Judge Arthur Alarcon is crucial to the campaign’s cost claims. The least expensive death penalty trial costs $1.1 million more than the most expensive life without parole trial, the study found. And costs are higher at every step of the process in capital cases, from lengthy appeals to incarceration—resulting in a total cost of $183 million more each year to administer the death penalty than life without parole, according to the study.

The SAFE California Act calls for the money saved by eliminating the death penalty to be used in unsolved rape and murder investigations—$30 million per year for 3 years.

California’s death penalty supporters say the Loyola report relies too heavily on other studies by groups that oppose capital punishment.

“It’s basically opponents of the death penalty coming out with studies and relying on each other as if earlier reports were definitive,” said Kent Scheidegger, legal director for the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation. “But they weren’t. They were advocacy pieces.”

Scheidegger also criticizes the campaign’s use of figures like Heller, Briggs and Garcetti, saying that few capital punishment supporters have changed their views.

“I have worked with a lot of capital case litigators over the years all over the country,” he said. “Not a single one of my acquaintances has ever become an opponent of the death penalty.”

While Scheidegger agreed the system is broken, he said it’s not beyond fixing.

“I agree that incarcerating people on death row for 20 years is a big expense, but they shouldn’t be there 20 years,” Scheidegger said.

Recent reform attempts have failed to make it past the California State Legislature. Last month, the Senate Public Safety Committee killed 2 bills proposed by state Sen. Joel Anderson (R-San Diego) that were designed to streamline the death penalty appeals process.

Scheidegger says the counter-campaign to SAFE California will ask Californians not only to vote to keep the death penalty, but demand that the Legislature fix it.

For Ronnie Sandoval, advocating against the death penalty is a way to make sure the same lapses in the system that caused her son’s ordeal don’t result in the loss of innocent lives. The teenager had been locked away for 2 years based solely on eyewitness testimony. Sandoval says she dropped out of school to focus on freeing her son, and—with the help of pro bono lawyers and private investigators—uncovered evidence favorable to Carmona.

3 hours before a court hearing to determine whether Carmona would be granted a retrial, the state offered to vacate Carmona’s armed robbery conviction and set him free if he signed a stipulation that his conviction was not the result of misconduct.

“I didn’t trust the system, so I forced my son to sign the stipulation,” Sandoval said.

Upon his release, Carmona, then 18, became an advocate for wrongfully convicted criminals with organizations like The Innocence Project.

And then—just after his 26th birthday—Carmona was killed in a hit-and-run. The driver fled the scene, was arrested several months later and pleaded guilty to vehicular manslaughter. Again, Sandoval found herself in a courtroom pleading for justice, this time, asking a judge for more time behind bars for her son’s killer. The man was sentenced to 6 years and paroled in 2011, 3 years after his arrest.

Jaded by the justice system and eager to carry on her son’s activism, Sandoval, now an out-of-work paralegal, never did return to school to get her criminal justice degree.

“None of it really struck home until he was murdered,” Sandoval recalled, gripping a wad of Kleenex.

“He had always told me: ‘Mom, you know if someone would have died, they could have put me on death row, and you knew I was innocent.’ Well, I know one thing—that I want nothing to do with executing someone that’s innocent.”

(source: neontommy.com)

OKLAHOMA:

Armes urges lawmakers to solve death row execution mess

State Rep. Don Armes called on lawmakers to find a way to allow the Oklahoma Department of Corrections to continue to execute Death Row inmates in light of a shortage in the drug used for executions, according to a media release.

“There are 64 criminals on death row, including child killers, but only 1 dose of the drug we use for executions,” said Armes, R-Faxon. “With an effective moratorium on getting new drugs because of FDA-approval issues and liberal anti-death penalty groups, we must look at what we can do to continue to execute death row inmates. The people of Oklahoma would be extremely disappointed in their Republican-led Legislature and executive branch, if we let the death penalty effectively fall away.”

Armes said only the worst of the worst make it to death row.

“Once a criminal makes it to death row, they are beyond rehabilitation and their execution deters other would-be killers and brings justice to the victims and families of the victims. One current death row inmate was convicted after he chased a little 5-year-old girl through the woods to kill her. These particular inmates do not warrant our sympathy,” he said.

Armes said there are legal alternatives to lethal injection.

“We may have ran out of the drug currently required under law, but I think we still have options though we have to take action to make them feasible. We need to get this done as quickly as possible to ensure we do not delay executions unnecessarily,” Armes said. Oklahomans believe in the execution of brutal and cold-blooded killers. They expect us to carry out their will.”

(source: Muskogee Phoenix)

FLORIDA:

Man on death row seeks new trial in murder of Crescent Beach mother of 5----Turner, convicted of killing Crescent Beach woman, claims ineffective counsel

Turner, convicted of killing Crescent Beach woman, claims ineffective counsel

A man convicted in the 2005 killing of a Crescent Beach mother of 5 at a Comfort Inn is to be in court again today to ask for the judge to overturn his conviction and death sentence and give him a new trial.

A jury found James Daniel Turner of Silverstreet, S.C., guilty of stabbing Renee Boling Howard, 37, 15 times on Sept. 30, 2005, at the St. Augustine motel off State Road 207 and Interstate 95 after escaping from a South Carolina prison and stealing a police car.

Prosecutors said he stabbed Howard several times before turning to see her crawling toward the door and stabbing her again.

Turner was in court Tuesday claiming ineffective counsel during the capital penalty phase because he said his attorneys didn’t get him properly mentally evaluated or present experts during the penalty phase of his trial, according to his motion.

Today is the 2nd of a 2-day evidentiary hearing held before St. Johns Circuit Judge Wendy Berger.

On Tuesday, the defense’s expert witness said Turner had grave mental illnesses which were not presented to the jury.

Miami Beach-based clinical psychologist Hyman Eisenstein said he had extensively tested Turner and found Turner suffered from Attention Deficit with Hyperactivity disorder and Bipolar Disorder, suffered from anxiety and depression and for years had self-medicated with drugs and alcohol.

He said he also has periodic psychotic episodes.

However, he said Turner scored low on a test predicting future violence and said prison life had reduced some of the stressors that led to Turner’s biggest problems.

“Mr. Turner would be a good candidate for life in prison ... with a low risk of violence,” Eisenstein said.

Eisenstein said everyone he spoke to in Turner’s family had stories about Turner’s poor judgment and impulsivity and that he had brain damage to his frontal lobe.

“I think the findings describe Mr. James Turner, who he is,” Eisenstein said.

Attorneys Carol Rodriguez and Raheela Ahmed are representing Turner, court records show.

Relatives also testified that Turner had an unstable upbringing, living at times with a mother who had him at 17 and physically abused him. Other times, he lived with his aunt and developed a close bond with an uncle who died of cirrhosis of the liver. He also lost his grandfather, a significant figure in his life.

Eisenstein said that childhood instability created grave problems for Turner later in life, including drug and alcohol dependence.

About the trials

If Berger grants a new trial, it would be the 3rd for Turner.

Berger declared a mistrial during Turner’s 1st trial in July 2007 when a juror had a seizure during consideration of the fifth and final charge against the defendant.

Jurors found him guilty Nov. 29, 2007, during his re-trial and later recommended the death penalty.

Dr. Miguel Mandoki, a Jacksonville psychiatrist, said during the 1st trial that he believed Turner was insane when Howard was killed in St. Augustine.

Berger will hear more testimony beginning at 9 a.m. today.

About the crimes

Turner was completing a prison term at a Newberry, S.C., jail on Sept. 28, 2005, when he hotwired a police car and drove to St. Augustine, where he ran out of gas. Then, he went looking for a car and money to continue his getaway, prosecutors said at the time.

Turner was a trustee and had three or four months left on his sentence for a probation violation, according to testimony at his trial.

Howard and a friend, Stacia Raybon, had been staying at the Comfort Inn with 2 10-month-old babies and a 2-year-old toddler. One of the babies and the 2-year-old were Howard’s. The other baby was Howard’s granddaughter.

They were preparing to check out of the motel when Turner burst into their room and began stabbing Howard, according to testimony.

Raybon was attacked twice before she locked herself in the bathroom.

After the attacks, he stole Howard’s car and led police on a high-speed chase.

Jurors found him guilty of attempted 1st-degree murder, grand theft of a motor vehicle, home invasion robbery with a deadly weapon and aggravated assault on a police officer.

State Attorney Angela Corey, who is now prosecuting the Trayvon Martin case, prosecuted Turner at trial as an assistant state attorney.

In addition to the death sentence, Berger sentenced Turner to life in prison for home invasion robbery with a deadly weapon, five years for the grand theft of Howard’s Ford F-150 pickup truck and 15 years for aggravated assault on a police officer.

St. Johns County Deputy Graham Harris had testified that he chased Turner south on State Road 207 at speeds between 90 and 100 mph. He said Turner put the pickup truck in reverse and rammed his patrol car before jumping off the Deep Creek bridge.

(source: St. Augustine Record)

**************

Man guilty of killing Nova Southeastern University professor Joseph Morrissey in 2010----Jurors will later decide whether to send Randy Tundidor Sr. to death row

A South Florida man is facing the death penalty after a jury convicted him of killing a Nova Southeastern University professor.

Jurors in Fort Lauderdale deliberated a little more than 5 hours before returning guilty verdicts Wednesday against Randy Tundidor Sr., 45, in the murder of professor Joseph Morrissey in April 2010.

Tundidor was also convicted of attempted murder, armed burglary, armed robbery, kidnapping and arson.

Morrissey, who was Tundidor's landlord, was stabbed to death after a burglary at his Plantation home. He and his wife were kidnapped at gunpoint, taken to an ATM and forced to withdraw cash.

Tundidor then took them back to their home, tied them up and set the place on fire. Morrissey's wife and son managed to escape.

Morrissey worked at Nova Southeastern University's main campus in Davie but taught courses at the College of Pharmacy in Palm Beach Gardens via video.

Tundidor's two sons and Morrissey's widow testified against him. One of Tundidor's sons pleaded guilty to taking part in the crime in exchange for a maximum life sentence.

Jurors will decide later whether to send Tundidor to Florida's death row.

(source: WPBF News)

ARIZONA:

Arizona court hears 'Serial Shooter' death-penalty appeal

The Arizona Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday in the appeal of convicted "Serial Shooter" Dale Hausner, who was sentenced to death 6 times in March 2009.

It was a mandatory argument for a mandatory appeal: All death sentences are automatically appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court. Rarely are they overturned. From that point on, though appeals can delay executions by 20 years or more, they are voluntary.

Hausner, 38, was the mastermind of a 14-month shooting spree in 2005 and 2006 that killed 8 men and women, wounded 18, and killed at least 9 horses and dogs.

Since the day before he was sentenced, Hausner has said that he wants to die. As recently as last December, he wrote a letter to the state Supreme Court justices asking them not to let his appeals attorney, Thomas Dennis, file any more motions on his behalf, threatening to file a complaint with the state Bar.

Dennis was in court Tuesday, and he had raised 17 distinct issues for the justices to consider. They were interested in 3: whether the jury had erred in finding certain aggravating factors in the murders; whether prospective jurors had been improperly excluded; and whether police and prosecutors had stepped out of bounds when they wiretapped Hausner's phone, car and apartment.

When he was arrested in August 2006, Hausner was living with one of his accomplices, Samuel Dieteman, who confessed to 2 of the murders and then turned state's evidence against Hausner. Dieteman also implicated Hausner's older brother Jeff, whom police and prosecutors could not tie conclusively to any of the murders but who was convicted of 2 stabbings committed during the Serial Shooter spree. Dieteman got life in prison.

Dale Hausner was initially charged with 87 felonies. He was convicted of 80, including 6 of the 8 murders.

Before sentencing, Hausner elected to speak to the jury, telling members: "We're done. This is the last you'll ever see me or hear me before you send me to death row."

Although he never confessed to any of the crimes, he told the jury that he wanted to die, that as far as he was concerned he had already died in 1994, when his 2 sons were killed in a freak car accident.

"I'm willing to accept the punishment," he said. "And I firmly believe, to help the victims heal, that it should be the death penalty."

During the mandatory appeal, the justices do not reassess guilt or innocence. The defendant does not appear before them. Rather, they read transcripts and briefs and hold a hearing so that they can question the attorneys on both sides as to whether there had been any errors of law during the trial.

Hausner's appointed attorney, Dennis, raised issues about whether the murders had been carried out in a "cold" manner, considering the state's theory that Hausner was killing for thrills. He questioned if two prospective jurors had been kept off the panel because they expressed opinions against the death penalty. And he particularly wanted to ask about a police task force's decision to do an emergency wiretap instead of going through a longer process of obtaining a warrant.

At the time, police had watched Hausner and Dieteman stalking victims and were afraid that they would not be able to intercede in time to stop another killing. Then-Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and a presiding criminal judge approved the emergency wiretaps.

What police overheard was damning: Dieteman and Hausner bragging about the killings and even laughing at the suffering they had inflicted on some victims. After several days of pretrial hearings, Superior Court Judge Roland Steinle allowed the wiretaps to be used as evidence.

The Supreme Court justices will issue their opinion on the death sentences in 60 to 90 days. If his convictions and sentences are upheld, Hausner has so far indicated that he will not appeal them further. If he asks the state to carry out the death sentence, a court likely will order him to undergo examination to make sure he is competent to make that decision.

If Hausner's convictions and sentences are upheld and he wants to appeal further, the next stop would be the U.S. Supreme Court. If the convictions and sentences are upheld there as well, the case would return to Superior Court.

There, in a process known as "post-conviction relief," Hausner could raise issues about whether his attorney had effectively defended him, or whether the jury or prosecution or police investigators had committed any improprieties. From that point on, the case could bounce back and forth between state and federal courts until all options were exhausted or the defendant obtained relief.

So far, Hausner has indicated that that will not happen.

If he asks the state to carry out the death sentence, a court likely will order him to undergo examination to make sure he is sane enough to make that decision.

(source: Arizona Republic)

*************

State Supreme Court denies review in inmate's case

The Arizona Supreme Court has denied a petition to review the case of a death row inmate set for execution next week.

Lawyers for Samuel Villegas Lopez had asked the state's high court to review a lower court's order dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief on March 30.

The state Supreme Court issued its ruling Wednesday without comment. There's no immediate response from Lopez's attorneys.

The 49-year-old Lopez is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection May 16 at the state prison in Florence in what would be the fourth execution in Arizona this year.

Lopez was convicted of raping, robbing and stabbing a 59-year-old woman to death in her Phoenix apartment on Oct. 29, 1986, after what court records described as a "terrible and prolonged struggle."

(source: Associated Press)

OHIO:

Murderer ask judges to spare his life

An Ohio man who fatally stabbed his ex-girlfriend and their 2 children, one of them a 2-year-old son, pleaded with judges to spare him the death penalty.

Caron E. Montgomery, 37, apologized Tuesday in a Franklin County Common Pleas courtroom for the Thanksgiving Day 2010 killings in a Columbus apartment, The Columbus Dispatch reported.

The 3 victims -- his ex-girlfriend, Tia Hendricks, 31; their daughter, Tahlia Hendricks, 10; and son, Tyron Hendricks, 2 -- all died after their throats were slashed.

"I'm sorry for what I did," Montgomery said. "I took my family. It's a selfish act. I hurt a lot of people. ... I hope you all have mercy on my soul."

Judges Guy Reece, Pat Sheeran and Richard S. Sheward ruled Tuesday morning Montgomery is eligible for the death penalty. A unanimous decision by the three judges would be required for the death penalty to be imposed.

Montgomery gave the judges no explanation for the killings.

His 2 oldest sons, ages 17 and 18, a brother, a cousin and the cousin's wife testified Montgomery was a good person despite the killings.

"I still have family and my boys, and they want you all to spare my life," Montgomery said. "I hope you all spare my life so I can at least be some type of dad from prison for them."

Relatives of Tia Hendricks said she had broken up with Montgomery but was allowing him to stay at her home.

(source: United Press International)

SOUTH CAROLINA:

‘You will not walk free’: Convicted killer gets life----Lynch spared the death penalty despite prosecutor Myers’ pleas

Disregarding impassioned pleas from prosecutor Donnie Myers to give convicted killer Kenneth Lynch the death penalty, Circuit Judge Eugene Griffith on Tuesday sentenced Lynch to life in prison without parole for killing Portia Washington and her 7-year-old granddaughter.

Their bodies were never found after they disappeared in 2006 from their blood-soaked West Columbia apartment, where Lynch, now 52, was living with Washington.

“In the coming weeks, months and years,” Griffith told Lynch, “you will come to realize what the rest of your days on this Earth will be like, and that your actions are the cause of your fate. You may decide to reveal what you have not yet revealed (where the bodies are).

“However, you will not walk free amongst us again, and someday you will die in prison. May God have mercy on your soul.”

It was a rare defeat for Myers, who on Monday had begged the judge to give Lynch — whom he called a “parasitic leech” and “a ticking time bomb” — the ultimate punishment for killing Washington and 2nd-grader Angelica Livingston.

Over the 35-odd years he has been 11th Circuit prosecutor, Myers has successfully persuaded juries to give dozens of killers the death penalty.

But in this case, Lynch’s 2 defense lawyers, Ben Stitely and Bill McGuire, gambled and chose, along with the defendant, to try the case without a jury. That put the decision to find Lynch guilty or innocent — as well as the punishment — squarely in the hands of the judge.

“It’s incredible to think that 1 man — the judge — has to make that call,” Stitely said later Tuesday. ”We of course were disappointed with his guilty verdict, but we respect the judge’s decision. But were very happy he made the call for a life sentence.”

The judge’s decision was also right on a philosophical level, Stitely said. “As Gandhi said, if everyone believed in ‘an eye for an eye,’ soon all the world would go blind.”

Stitely said Lynch was “obviously relieved” at the judge’s decision. A defense appeal of both the guilty verdict and the sentence is likely, Stitely said.

In his final argument to the judge Monday, Stitely said that apart from a few minor scrapes, Lynch had lived a crime-free life and had posed no problems to anyone the past 6 years he has been in jail. Thus, Lynch is not the “worst of the worst” kind of killer for whom the ultimate punishment should be given, Stitely said.

Lynch chose not to testify during the trial.

Griffith began deliberating on the punishment late Monday afternoon and reached his decision around 11 a.m. Tuesday.

A subdued Myers said: “It was a rough case. Like he said, a jury might have reached different decision. We’ll live with it.”

“A couple of years ago,” Myers said, “we sent word to the defendant we wouldn’t seek the death penalty if he would tell us where the bodies are. His response wasn’t too nice. His response was something like, ‘You don’t have the evidence to convict me and some cuss words.’”

That’s the reason he pushed for death, Myers said. “I’m not giving him a bag of air to breathe. I’m not giving him a break. All we can do is put up our case.”

Stitely confirmed that Myers had made the offer but added, “We’ve maintained he’s not guilty. He’s never told us anything to change our minds of that.”

“This case is unusual in that it is the only non-jury capital case in which I am aware that the judge has assumed the role of fact-finder in both the guilt and sentencing phases of the trial,” said Griffith, 47.

“It is possible that another judge, or a jury, would view the same evidence and find a different verdict, or impose a different sentence,” said Griffith, who is in his 1st term as judge. This was his first death penalty trial.

In interviews afterward, members of Washington’s and Livingston’s family said they accepted the sentence. Many had attended the entire trial, which began April 18 and was one of the longest murder trials ever held in Lexington County.

“We want him to live with what he did. We want him to be reminded of it every day,” said Vernell Bellamy, Washington’s aunt.

Sam Brown, Washington’s son, said, “We really would like to know where they are.”

Washington, 53 when she disappeared, had been living with Lynch but had told friends he had turned her once-happy apartment, where she was raising Livingston, “into a hellhole.” She told friends and family she was taking steps to leave him when she and the girl disappeared in June 2006.

Livingston’s blood was found in the apartment mixed with Lynch’s blood. Lynch was apprehended by the U.S. Border Patrol north of Seattle, Wash., as he tried to cross into Canada a week after Washington and Livingston vanished. The car he had stolen from Washington to make his getaway was found abandoned in Seattle, witnesses testified.

(source: The State)

VIRGINIA:

Group Protests VA's Use of Sparse Anesthetic For Executions

A group that opposes the death penalty is criticizing Virginia's use of an anesthesia drug for executions.

Reprieve says in a news release that the Food and Drug Administration lists the drug, pancuronium bromide, as being in short supply for hospitals.

The group says Virginia has a stockpile of 60 vials. That amount could be used to relax the muscles of 50 to 60 patients during hospital surgeries.

Virginia Department of Corrections spokesman Larry Traylor told media outlets that the agency doesn't discuss its execution protocols.

In Virginia, condemned inmates are allowed to choose between injection and electrocution. If they decline to choose, they get the injection.

(source: Associated Press)

NEVADA:

Nevada Department of Corrections lacks plan for executions due to prison closure, drug shortage

The last execution in Nevada was of convicted murderer Daryl Mack on April 26, 2006. A court convicted him in 2002 of the 1988 rape and strangulation of Betty Jane May. Other Northern Nevadans on death row include:

Tamir Hamilton: Washoe County; sentenced March 27, 2008; Hamilton raped and murdered Holly Quick, a Sparks student found dead in her bed in 2006. Several injuries indicated that she was tortured.

Robert McConnell: Washoe County; Aug. 28, 2003; McConnell pleaded guilty to fatally shooting Brian Pierce on Aug. 7, 2002. Pierce was engaged to McConnell's former girlfriend.

Siaosi Vanisi: Washoe County; Nov. 22, 1999; Vanisi killed a University of Nevada, Reno police officer in 1998. Sgt. George Sullivan had been struck at least 20 times with a hatchet.

Shawn Harte: Washoe County; May 7, 1999; Harte fatally shot John Castro Jr., a Reno cab driver, in 1997.

David Middleton: Washoe County; Sept. 18, 1997; Middleton, a former Miami police officer, killed Sun Valley teacher Katherine Powell and Circus Circus Reno employee Thelma Amparo Davila.

Carlos Gutierrez: Washoe County; Aug. 10, 1995; Gutierrez pleaded guilty to beating to death his 3 1/2-year-old stepdaughter, Mailin Stafford, in Reno in 1994.

Michael Sonner: Pershing County; Oct. 28, 1994; Sonner, a North Carolina jail escapee, killed Carlos Borland, a Nevada Highway Patrol trooper, during a stop on Interstate 80 east of Lovelock in 1993.

David Bollinger: Washoe County; Sept. 28, 1994; Bollinger kidnapped James Vertres, 79, and his wife, Rose, 74, from their Sparks trailer park in April 1992, murdered them and set their bodies on fire at a Colorado rest stop.

Avram Nika: Washoe County; July 10, 1992; Nika killed Edward Smith of Fallon after Smith stopped to help Nika, whose car had broken down on I-80 east of Sparks. Nika beat Smith and shot him in the head.

Roger Libby: Humboldt County; June 25, 1990; Libby murdered Charles Beatty and James Robertson, whose bodies were found in the desert near Winnemucca.

William Leonard: Carson City; Aug. 25, 1989; Leonard stabbed fellow inmate Joseph Wright 21 times with a prison-made knife in 1987. It was his 3rd murder conviction.

John Bejarano: Washoe County; May 11, 1988; Bejarano murdered Reno cab driver Roland Wright in March 1987 during a robbery.

Ricky Sechrest: Washoe County; Oct. 28, 1983; Sechrest bludgeoned to death 10-year-old Maggie Schindler and 9-year-old Carly Villa, who disappeared in May 1983 and later were found in shallow graves.

Nevada death row statistics

82: Number currently on death row

12: Number of executions since 1976

16.9: Average number of years spent on death row

31: Longest number of years spent on death row

1: Number of innocent people freed from death row

1: Number of clemencies granted

[source: Death Penalty Information Center]

4 months after shutting down Nevada State Prison in Carson City, site of the state’s only death chamber, officials have no solid plan for carrying out executions and no access to a lethal injection drug.

As Nevada’s death row inmates continue to appeal their convictions and sentences, the Nevada Department of Corrections has continued to lose its ability to hold an execution.

Corrections officials shut down the Nevada State Prison in Carson City, site of the state’s only death chamber, early this year, and they have no solid plan in place for transporting and holding an inmate who is about to be executed, the Reno Gazette-Journal found.

In addition, 1 of the drugs used during a lethal injection has not been available for more than a year, and the state’s execution protocol has not been updated to address the drug shortage, the Gazette-Journal found.

The department plans to submit a bill draft request to the Legislature next year asking for $385,000 to build a new execution chamber at the Ely State Prison, said Steve Suwe, a department spokesman.

The Nevada Attorney General’s office sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder early in 2011 seeking help to deal with the lethal injection drug shortage, spokeswoman Jennifer Lopez said. But no resolution has been found.

“Should any executions be scheduled, we will do the best to help the Department of Corrections have the drugs necessary to carry out a lawful execution order,” Lopez said.

Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, said the lack of a solid plan could be problematic, especially if an inmate were to suddenly stop the appeals process and ask to be killed. Eleven of the 12 inmates executed in Nevada since 1976 “volunteered” to be executed.

“When it comes time, they just can’t say, ‘Trust us,’” Dieter said of corrections officials. “They have to have a very specific protocol. Either a state or federal court would want them to produce that information. They’ll want to make sure this isn’t done in a slipshod way.”

(source: Reno Gazette-Journal)

ILLINOIS:

Jury Foreman in McKinney Case: "Justice Was Perverted"

It is a saga of murder and injustice that spans three decades, and even now a surprising new chapter is being written.

Anthony McKinney, a black teenager, was convicted of the 1978 shotgun slaying of white security guard Donald Lundahl in South Suburban Harvey. Prosecutors sought the death penalty, but McKinney had no history of violence and the judge sentenced him to life without parole.

A quarter century later, my journalism students re-investigated the case, unearthing evidence that pointed to McKinney's innocence: a confession coerced by a brutal cop, witnesses who admitted they had lied at the trial, viable alternative suspects and an alibi nailed down by the TV log of a Muhammad Ali championship fight. Based on this evidence, lawyers at the Center on Wrongful Convictions filed an innocence petition in 2008 seeking a new trial for McKinney and the Chicago Sun-Times ran a front-page story that exposed the injustice.

But Cook County State's Attorney Anita Alvarez turned the tables in 2009 by subpoenaing the students' grades, notes and memos about the case. McKinney's plight was lost in the media uproar that followed.

One man, however, remained intently focused on the evidence. Meet Donald Gemmell, Ph.D., a retired physicist at Argonne National Laboratory -- and the foreman of the jury that decided McKinney's fate.

Gemmell, now 77-years-old, has been haunted by the verdict for most of his adult life. Last month, he called me to confess: The jury that he led had made a tragic mistake. "We convicted an innocent man," he said in a voice filled with pain.

Gemmell's doubts about McKinney's guilt first surfaced during the trial, he said. He was skeptical about the credibility of the lead detective in the case and the testimony of a supposed eyewitness. And, he wondered why the state was unable to produce the murder weapon since police had apprehended McKinney near the scene. But mostly he was confused by the state's time-line of events. "It was hard to figure out where the witnesses were in relation to the shooting," he said.

Nevertheless, after he was elected foreman. the initial vote was 8-4 to convict, and two days later. the verdict was unanimous: Guilty. "We figured McKinney probably did it because he confessed," Gemmell explained. "Why would an innocent person admit to murder? And we saw pictures of that poor man's brains splattered all over his car. It was troubling that [McKinney] didn't seem remorseful about that."

Gemmell said he "didn't sleep for weeks" following the verdict and began methodically reviewing the evidence in his head, as a scientist would. Logic gradually replaced the emotion of the trial. As time passed, his doubts became "more nagging." He followed the recent controversies about the case on the Internet and was not surprised to read about the new evidence of McKinney's innocence. He also became "not as naive" about the problem of false confessions. Finally, consumed by remorse and having moved from the Chicago area, he called to repudiate the verdict.

Reflecting on the case, an interracial crime, Gemmell chides 2 white jurors for showing "racial bias." A female juror, he says, made overtly racist comments about McKinney. He says their votes for conviction were predictable -- and not based on the evidence.

He similarly recounts a black juror's pronouncement that "Hell is gonna freeze over before I'll cast a vote against my black brother." When he switched his vote to guilty at the end of deliberations, Gemmell asked for an explanation. "'I have a job on the overnight train to Seattle and if I'm not on board... it'll cost me two days' pay!'" he told Gemmell.

"So [the black juror] caught his train to Seattle without losing any pay. And Anthony McKinney went to prison for life."

Gemmell has "come to the conclusion that Mr. McKinney has indeed been wrongfully imprisoned and that the case against him was flawed." How flawed? "[T]he course of justice was perverted...," he believes.

"It's really a shame that a blameless young fellow who liked to go out with his friends was found guilty of murder," he continues. "I feel terrible that I didn't question it more."

Legal experts downplay the significance of juror recantations, considering them to be buyer's remorse. Famously, a juror in the Troy Davis case led the charge to spare his life when new evidence of innocence emerged, but that didn't stop the authorities from putting him to death last year.

Still, Gemmell hopes his voice will be heard in the decision whether to grant McKinney a new trial. That decision will be made by criminal courts Judge Diane Cannon following the impending hearing on the innocence petition.

"I'm willing to come to Chicago, if necessary," Gemmell says. "I want him to go free someday soon."

Anthony McKinney was 18 years old at the time of his arrest. He will turn 50 next Monday.

(source: David Protess.President, Chicago Innocence Project; Huffington Post)

USA (MICHIGAN):

Federal prosecutors weigh death penalty in Flint 'Howard Boys' gang prosecution

If convicted, the federal case against the alleged “Howard Boys” gang could present a rare question to possible future jurors: Should these Genesee County residents be put to death?

That’s a question the federal government is weighing now, as it decides whether to pursue the death penalty in the federal case against the group of men prosecutors claim ran a drug and gun-dealing operation from their south-side public-housing complex.

A federal indictment against the men alleges that the group used violence and murder to help protect their operation.

Cooley Law School Professor Kathy Swedlow, who specializes in federal death penalty prosecutions, said the cases against the men will have to be reviewed before prosecutors decide to move ahead with seeking the death penalty.

A new review process for these types of cases was recently enacted in a 2011 memo from Attorney General Eric Holder.

“Department policy requires that all potential federal capital cases be submitted for review by the department and a decision by the Attorney General regarding whether to seek the death penalty,” the memorandum states.

The memorandum also lays out a number of factors that are considered when deciding to move ahead with the death penalty. Included in those factors is the strength of evidence, the role of the defendant in the alleged offense, the defendant’s willingness to plead guilty to a life or near-life sentence and other factors that would determine a jury’s likelihood of imposing a death sentence.

Gina Balaya, public information officer from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Michigan, said it is not yet known if prosecutors will pursue capital punishment in the Howard Boys case.

“The case is death-penalty eligible,” said Balaya. “But, a decision has not yet been made whether to seek the death penalty or not.”

Balaya declined to comment on the status of the review process.

“Normally, the process that is involved in requesting the death penalty is something that is not public record,” Balaya said.

Federal law allows for capital punishment for dozens of charges, regardless of whether the state the crime was committed in uses the death penalty itself. Included in those charges is murder involved in a racketeering offense.

8 of the 12 men indicted in federal court in the Howard Boys case are charged with variations of murder in aid of racketeering. 4 of the men, none of whom have been arraigned, are charged with murder in aid of racketeering. The other 4, 2 of which have been arraigned, are charged with attempted murder in aid of racketeering.

Swedlow said attempted murder falls into a gray area when it comes to prosecuting it as a capital crime.

If prosecutors do decide to move forward with a capital punishment case, Swedlow said it would dramatically change how the case moves forward.

“A death penalty case is very, very different to handle,” Swedlow said.

Finding an attorney for the defendant is more difficult, since the pool of attorneys qualified to handle a capital punishment trial is limited.

“This is very specialized work,” said Swedlow.

It can also change how many defendants actually face a trial, particularly in cases with a large amount of defendants.

“The possibility of death opens different avenues of possible plea negotiations,” Swedlow said.

However, Holder’s 2011 memorandum prevents attorneys from seeking the death penalty solely to try and obtain a more-favorable plea deal.

The trial process also differs from a non-death penalty trial.

Capital punishment cases are bifurcated, or broken down into 2 separate parts, with 1 portion focusing on guilt or innocence and the other focusing on punishment.

Defendants convicted in a death penalty case also have different appellate options open to them.

And, it’s these changes, Swedlow said, that makes death penalty cases much more expensive than traditional cases.

“These capital prosecutions are incredibly expensive,” Swedlow said.

According to a September 2010 report on the cost and quality of defense representation in federal death penalty cases, the median cost of death-eligible non-authorized cases from 1998-2004 was $44,809, compared to $353,185 for death-eligible authorized cases.

However, federal cases in which the death penalty is actually sought is rare.

According to the same report, only 19 federal cases in Michigan have had the death penalty authorized from 1989-2009, more than 25 % of all such authorized cases nationwide.

The last Michigan man to be convicted and sentenced to death in a federal crime, Swedlow said, was Marvin Gabrion in 2002.

Gabrion was convicted of drowning Rachael Timmerman in a lake on federal land in 1997 to prevent her from pursuing a rape case against him.

However, a federal appeals court overturned the death sentence in 2011 because of apparent uneven treatment of pro-death penalty and anti-death penalty jurors.

The last man tried in Michigan’s Eastern District in a capital punishment case was for Timothy O’Reilly in 2010.

A jury found O’Reilly guilty of murdering an armored-truck courier in Dearborn in 2001, but jurors sentenced him to life in prison without parole.

As a state, Michigan abolished the death penalty in 1847.

Anthony Chebatoris is the only person executed in Michigan since its inception as a state. He was convicted of killing a man during a botched bank robbery in Midland in 1938. It was a federal execution.

(source: Michigan Live)

******************

Lawyer on the defense at Guantanamo

Attorney Cheryl Bormann is no stranger to defending unpopular clients. She spent several years with the Cook County Public Defender’s Office supervising lawyers handling death penalty trials. Then she joined a state office that provided assistance to attorneys in death penalty cases across Illinois.

Now Bormann is defending Walid bin Attash, 1 of 5 top al-Qaida operatives on trial in Guantanamo Bay for allegedly conspiring in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The 5 men, who have come to be known collectively as the Gitmo 5, were arraigned there on Saturday.

It was then that Bormann gained national notice, and a measure of criticism, for appearing in court in traditional Muslim clothing that left only her face showing and for asking one woman on the government team to consider dressing more modestly so her client could focus on the proceedings.

Bormann would not discuss reports of threats against her.

For her, the issue is a simple one of respecting the religious and cultural beliefs of a client. She said that since she was appointed to bin Attash’s case last year, she has always dressed conservatively out of deference to a client who believes he will violate a religious tenet if he looks at a woman who is immodestly dressed.

“My client has never seen my hair, has never seen my arms, has never seen my legs,” Bormann said in an interview. “All of the defense counsel, all of the guards, and everybody who works in Guantanamo Bay camp has seen me dressed like this. … I never thought in my wildest dreams that this would become an issue.”

Bormann’s actions at Guantanamo Bay are especially interesting because the crimes bin Attash and his co-defendants are accused of have stoked hatred of their religion among some Americans. Expecting others to show the same respect she displayed seems bold to some. But for the 52-year-old attorney from Chicago, buying the abayas in preparation for meetings with her client and then donning them in court over a suit was the right thing to do.

“There is nothing provocative about what I did. This is a religious issue and a cultural issue for (some of these defendants),” Bormann said in the interview. “I want him to be able to fully concentrate on the proceedings at hand without any kind of interference or loss of focus.”

Joseph Margulies, an attorney at the MacArthur Justice Center at Northwestern University law school who has represented prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, said some women attorneys dress conservatively out of respect for their clients, donning a shawl and a long skirt, for instance. Others, he said, do not, in part because some of the men being held at Guantanamo Bay do not find typical Western dress offensive.

“For some of these guys, it really doesn’t matter. But it would facilitate a relationship that’s fragile to begin with,” said Margulies, who has argued detentions at the U.S. Supreme Court and is currently the lawyer for Abu Zubaydah, whose interrogation prompted the Bush administration to draft the so-called torture memos.

Amina Saeed, the president of the Muslim Bar Association of Chicago, said she could appreciate Bormann’s decision if it were part of an effort to respect the wishes of a client or to connect with him, calling it “thinking out of the box” and reflecting a large measure of understanding and religious tolerance.

Saeed said she would never expect an attorney to do that in response to a demand from any client, however.

“He should respect her for who she is and the services she provides. It has absolutely nothing to do with what she wears on her head and on her body,” Saeed said. “I would never expect anyone to conform themselves like that in public to my beliefs.”

Bormann, citing national security rules that make what bin Attash says classified, would not say if he had requested she dress modestly. But she said her co-counsel, Capt. Mike Schwartz, a military attorney from the U.S. Air Force, had suggested she wear the abaya in court.

Bormann’s career has been spent representing clients who do not engender sympathy. Those who know her say that she believes fervently in protecting everyone’s civil liberties no matter what they are accused of doing.

She graduated from Loyola University and its law school, then went to work in 1989 at the public defender’s office. She was there for a decade before she left to start her own practice. But she returned in 2003 as a supervisor, directing attorneys in death penalty and other cases and trying capital cases herself. She directed the state appellate defender’s office’s Capital Trial Assistance Unit in 2008. She is a staunch opponent of capital punishment and spent much of her career fighting it. She cheered its end in Illinois, even though its abolition ended up costing Bormann her job.

She now is a civilian defense counsel in the Office of Chief Defense Counsel at the Department of Defense.

“She’s a 1st-rate lawyer, highly committed to her clients. She’s a fierce advocate,” said Jeffrey Urdangen, the director of the Center for Criminal Defense at Northwestern University law school. “She’s not afraid to take on a tough case with a difficult client or a difficult situation.”

Michael Pelletier, the state appellate defender, said he hired Bormann for her administrative experience and her trial skills. He said that she was adept at getting along with both prosecutors and judges, keeping her passion in check so that she would not burn any legal bridges.

“She had a good reputation for being a zealous advocate, but a reasonable advocate. She was assertive and aggressive in representing her clients,” said Pelletier.

Attorney Allan Sincox, who worked with Bormann, said she always had ideas for lawyers going to trial and itched to try cases herself.

“She knew what she was doing and could easily understand the issues around a trial and help with planning a trial,” Sincox said.

Bormann has taught at Loyola’s law school and at Chicago-Kent law school. She lectures frequently on issues in criminal law. She also had been active in the Constitutional Rights Foundation of Chicago, teaching public school students.

She said the dust-up over her request has been blown out of proportion. She plans to dress in the same fashion when she returns to court June 12.

“I will be wearing abaya every time I meet with my client and every time I appear in court if my client or others of the accused are present in the room.”

(source: Morris Daily Herald)

SINGAPORE:

Singapore authorities urged to save Malaysian man from execution

A young Malaysian man under threat of imminent execution in Singapore for drug trafficking should be granted clemency, Amnesty International and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) have said.

Yong Vui Kong, who was 19 when he was first arrested for possessing 47g of heroin in 2007, has no other options left.

On 4 April, the Supreme Court rejected his 3rd and final appeal, which was made on the basis he was subjected to unequal treatment before the law.

“Countries around the world have abolished the mandatory death penalty because it does not allow courts to consider the circumstances of the defendant and the crime - Yong Vui Kong must be spared this cruel and degrading punishment,” said Lance Lattig, Amnesty International's Singapore researcher.

In an open letter, Amnesty International and ADPAN urged the Minister for Law and Foreign Affairs and other Cabinet members to intervene and recommend clemency for Yong Vui Kong, to establish a moratorium on the death penalty and suspend executions.

Clemency granted by the President, following advice from the Cabinet, is Yong’s last hope.

Yong’s lawyer cited the Singapore attorney general's decision not to prosecute the alleged mastermind of the drug operation, dropping 26 charges against the Singaporean who was Yong’s boss.

"The Boss of the drugs syndicate has had the charges against him dropped, while Yong Vui Kong, poor and only 19 at the time of his arrest, will be put to death. No enlightened legal system could justify this result," said Mr. M. Ravi, counsel for Yong Vui Kong and ADPAN member.

Yong was sentenced to death in 2008 under Singapore’s Misuse of Drugs Act, which requires the death penalty for anyone caught with more than 15g of heroin.

The case has sparked concern around the world. In Malaysia, Foreign Minister Anifah Aman and legislators requested the Singaporean authorities to grant clemency in 2010.

The President of Singapore can only grant a presidential pardon upon the advice of the Cabinet.

Clemency for a death sentence has only been granted 6 times since independence in 1965.

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases and without reservation.

ADPAN is an independent regional network comprising lawyers, NGOs and civil society groups from 24 countries including Singapore. It campaigns for an end to the death penalty across the Asia-Pacific region.

(source: Amnesty International USA)

BELARUS:

Lukashenka: countries which have abolished the death penalty, “climbed the shit”

The retention of the death penalty capital punishment in Belarus will continue. On the 8 may, Alyaksandr Lukashenka said, answering questions after the reading of the message to the Belarusian nation and the National Assembly, correspondent BakuToday .

“Parliament has no competence to declare a moratorium on the death penalty, but the President never goes”, Lukashenka said, referring to “the view.” He also noted that the decision to pardon takes it, but sees no reason to review their views.

The head of Belarus brought an example of cruel murder, noting that justice should apply capital punishment, and he endorsed the decision. “Or are these 2 the villain”, Lukashenka continued, pripomniv attack in Minsk metro, the investigation of which were shot Vladislav Kovalyov and Dmitry Konovalov.

“If not I blame!” exclaimed Alexander Lukashenko, saying the reaction to the imposition of the death penalty “Vitsebsk terrorists”. The head of Belarus also noted that in making the decision, he was subjected to severe pressure from the international community, whereas in countries which have the death penalty, hears voices for return of this punishment.

“If you have GAD and villain and go on a wild crime you should be held accountable,” Lukashenka said. He cited the words of foreign politicians in calling for a return to the death penalty: “that’s climbed the shit -”.

The decision to abolish the death penalty in Belarus must be accepted by the people, Lukashenka noted, but before that you should “walk”. The head of Belarus approved a reform of the judicial system and said: “We actively move to models that have already been tested in the world-the Assize Court, administrative courts”.

As reported BakuToday, November 30, 2011, the Supreme Court of Belarus sentenced Vladislav Kovalev and Dmitry Konovalova to death by shooting for the blasts in Vitsebsk and Minsk, as well as a number of other crimes. The loud episode of criminal proceedings has become an attack in Minsk underground, by April 11, 2011, that killed 15 people and about 200 (other sources say up to 400) were injured, including citizens of Russia. In mid-March of convictions Kovalyov and Konovalov were shot-event caused international outrage and opposition. The UN Human Rights Committee has considered petition Kovalev, but the official Minsk has ignored the appeal of the international organization, citing the execution pending “Kovalev” UN experts.

Remember, 17 April Belarusian oppositionist Zmitser Bandarenka said that political prisoners tried to make ridiculous confessions, for example, was accused in the bombing of April 11, 2011, in the Minsk metro. Bondarenko explained that suspects in the terrorist attack at the Metro station “Kastrychnitskaya” by Dmitry and Vladislav Kovalev Konovalova led for night interrogations. On a number of grounds Bondarenko concluded that in addition to the 2 persons involved in the case of the terrorist attack in “American woman” (KGB) could be the third extra in remaining anonymous.

(source: Baku Today)

IRAN:

The Salman Rushdie of music? Iran calls for killing of ‘apostate’ rap artist

The death sentence was issued against rap artist Shahin Najafi after he released a controversial song called “Naqi.”

Ayatollah Safi Golpayegani, a Shi’ite cleric based in the holy Iranian city of Qom, has issued a death sentence against rap artist Shahin Najafi for apostasy, the Persian-language Al Arabiya website reported on Wednesday.

The sentence was issued after Najafi released a controversial song called “Naqi.”

The song sparked a furor among protesters who believe it to be offensive to Imam Naqi, the tenth Imam in Shi’ite Islam.

News website Asr Iran, which is closely tied to the regime in Tehran, launched an online campaign calling for the hanging of Najafi. The website stated that the aim of the campaign was to have Najafi condemned for apostasy, a crime that carries the death penalty in Iran.

The campaign organizers have called on all Shi’ites and Muslims in general to find and kill Najafi and “send him to hell,” according to the website.

Najafi, 31, was an underground artist during his time in Iran, and was banned by the authorities from performing in the country. He moved to Germany in recent years where he joined a group called “Tapesh 2012” which performs politically-motivated songs in Persian.

In 1989 a novel by British author Salman Rushdie created a similar response from Iran, when a fatwa (religious edict) was issued by Iran’s highest authority, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, calling for his killing for what was considered a disrespectful depiction of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

More recently, Christian pastor Youcef Nadarkhani has been charged with apostasy by Iranian authorities and sentenced to death for leaving Islam and converting to Christianity, creating uproar across the Christian community worldwide.

(source: Al Arabiya)

MALAYSIA:

Nayati’s kidnappers face death penalty

The kidnappers arrested in Malaysia for the abduction of 12-year-old Nayati Moodliar could be executed, the country’s government has confirmed.

Police this morning confirmed that 5 people had been arrested - 4 men and a woman. Reports said a 6th, the alleged mastermind, had fled the country.

Interpol’s help was now being sought to track him down as well as another suspect.

Bakri Zinin, federal criminal investigation chief, said the suspects were arrested in separate raids from Sunday until early Wednesday in Kuala Lumpur and nearby areas..

The New Straits Times said the arrested suspects were aged between 30 and 50.

“Sources said part of the 300 000 ringgit (R768 745) ransom paid to secure the boy’s release last Thursday was also recovered.

“Nayati’s parents, Shamelin Moodliar and Janice Smith, both originally from Cape Town, communicated with the kidnappers via Facebook to negotiate the ransom down from one million ringgit.

“Police also seized laptops and cellphones said to be used to demand for ransom.”

The Malaysian Insider reported today: “The mastermind behind the sensational abduction of 12-year-old Nayati Shamelin Moodliar fled the country immediately after the Dutch boy was released last week.”

Federal CID chief Datuk Seri Bakri Zinin said police were seeking Interpol’s help to trace the man.

He confirmed today that 5 people - 4 men and a woman - had been arrested in connection with the abduction.

The arrests followed several days of surveillance by a task force headed by city Criminal Investigation Department chief Datuk Ku Chin Wah, and police picked up the suspects’ trail not long after Nayati was dropped off at the Rawang rest and recreation area on the North-South Expressway last Thursday morning.

“The suspects had allegedly gone separate ways after collecting the ransom,” the Malaysian Insider said.

The kidnappers had apparently been assigned different duties during the abduction.

“One was tasked with kidnapping him, another hiding and taking care of him, one to negotiate with the parents and another to collect the ransom,” a source of the New Straits Times said.

Kuala Lumpur police chief Mohmad Salleh spelt out the possible punishment the four faced, if found guilty, saying at a press conference, according to the Malaysian Insider: “Police are still investigating the case under the Kidnapping Act, and if found guilty, the suspects will receive the death sentence.”

(source: The Star)

****************

SA boy's kidnappers face death penalty

Malaysia’s government confirmed the kidnappers arrested in Malaysia for the abduction of 12-year-old Nayati Moodliar could be executed, the Cape Argus reported on Wednesday.

“Police are still investigating the case under the Kidnapping Act, and if found guilty, the suspects will receive the death sentence,” Kuala Lumpur police chief Mohmad Salleh said at a press conference.

Police confirmed that 5 people, 4 men and a woman, were arrested on Wednesday morning. The alleged mastermind reportedly fled the country.

The arrested suspects were aged between 30 and 50.

Nayati was kidnapped on the morning of 27 April while walking to the Mont Kiara International School.

Witnesses said they saw him being bundled into a black car by 2 men.

Reports of his abduction went viral within hours through social networking websites.

Nayati's father, South African-born Sham Moodliar, appealed to the kidnappers to release the boy.

The kidnappers made contact with Nayati's parents via a social networking website within 24 hours of his abduction, demanding a ransom of nearly R2.6m.

This was later negotiated down to about R770 000.

Nayati was freed along a highway the next morning, "hungry and tired", but unharmed.

(source: news24.com)

MAY 8, 2012:

VIRGINIA:

Anesthetic in short supply stockpiled for Va. executions, critics say

Critics say the Virginia Department of Corrections has a stockpile of an anesthesia drug for use in executions that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration lists as in short supply.

According to Reprieve, an anti-death penalty group, the department has 60 vials of pancuronium bromide used to induce paralysis as the 2nd of 3 drugs employed in lethal injections.

However, documents obtained by 2 Northern Virginia lawyers under the Freedom of Information Act show that as of last November the department had as many as 95 vials of the drug – with 15 vials apparently used in 1 execution.

Reprieve says 60 vials could be used to treat roughly 50 to 60 patients to relax muscles during surgeries.

The FDA maintains a list of drug shortages in an effort to prevent them and to restore their availability. Warnings about a shortage of pancuronium bromide date back to 2010.

The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, which also has the drug on its shortage list, says another manufacturer stopped producing it 2 years ago. Hospira is now the only manufacturer and has it on back order due to manufacturing delays.

“We don’t discuss our execution protocols," said Larry Traylor, a corrections spokesman. "The Virginia Department of Corrections is tasked by the General Assembly to carry out court ordered executions and has the means to do so.”

Officials with Hospira Inc., which manufactures the drug, could not be reached for immediate comment.

Virginia, which has about 12 people on death row, has conducted 79 lethal injections since it became an option to the electric chair in 1995. The 3-drug procedure is similar to that used in other states and has withstood court challenges.

(source: Richmond Times-Dispatch)

ARIZONA:

Defense lawyer leaves Samuel Lopez's clemency hearing----She takes issue with Brewer appointees

A defense attorney walked out of a clemency hearing for a death-row prisoner Monday, claiming that Gov. Jan Brewer violated state statutes in appointing 3 new members to the Arizona Board of Executive Clemency.

Samuel Lopez is scheduled for execution May 16. But his attorney, Assistant Federal Public Defender Kelley Henry, told the clemency board that she could not go ahead with the hearing until it was determined whether the board was authorized to hear the case. To do so, she said, would essentially waive her client's right to a fair hearing.

Among Henry's allegations are that the new members have not completed training required by state statute, that their interviews violated open meeting laws by taking place behind closed doors, and that one new member is a lobbyist for a police association that advocates the death penalty.

Henry intended to file a writ of mandamus in Maricopa County Superior Court by this morning, asking for a stay of execution until the questions can be cleared up.

If the court were to rule that the board members were improperly appointed, it could call into question 56 decisions the board has made since the new members began considering clemency, parole and parole revocation cases April 23. Brewer spokesman Matthew Benson said the appointments were in full accordance with the law.

Lopez, 49, was sentenced to death for the brutal 1986 murder of a Phoenix woman. According to court records, on Oct. 29, 1986, Lopez gagged and blindfolded Estefana Holmes, 59, raped and sodomized her, stabbed her more than 20 times in the chest and head, then slit her throat. The disarray in her apartment showed "evidence of a terrible and prolonged struggle," the record said. He was convicted and sentenced to death the next year.

Henry, his current appeals attorney, had intended to present expert testimony that Lopez suffered brain damage from huffing glue, and to argue that he had been denied effective assistance of counsel in his trial because his lawyer did not present mitigating evidence that might have persuaded a judge not to sentence him to death. Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are a recurring question before the U.S. Supreme Court, with several recent rulings on the subject, particularly regarding claims that are not raised during the prisoner's first appeals.

Instead, Henry confronted the board with 16 apparent violations of state statute stemming from the appointments last month of clemency board members Brian Livingston, Mel Thomas and the new chairman, Jesse Hernandez.

Henry said the commission that appointed the new members appeared to have violated state laws by not notifying the public or the candidates in advance that the interviews would be held in executive session; by not telling the appointees they could choose to be interviewed in open session; by not holding a public vote on going into executive session; by not considering enough candidates for each position; and by not sending the governor three candidates for each position as specified by statute.

Though state statutes require the board to send the governor three candidates for each position, records show the commission interviewed just 8 candidates in total. According to Benson, the commission sent Brewer at most 5 candidates for the 3 positions, which he termed standard practice. Benson declined to speak to the conflict-of-interest allegations raised by Henry, but said the governor was entitled to staff the board "with people with whom she's comfortable."

Henry also argued that Brewer violated state laws by appointing the 3 and having them sign loyalty oaths before they were confirmed by the Arizona Senate.

Copies of the oaths show they were signed April 9 and 10, more than a week before the their appointments were confirmed.

"We believe, at this point, that this renders the appointment of the three new members null and void," said Henry. "That means you don't have the authority to take any action at this time." While the statutes allow the chairman to declare a quorum with just two members, she told Hernandez that because his appointment wasn't legal: "Our position is that you don't have the authority to declare a quorum."

Henry also said the new board members had not received the 4 weeks of training specified in state law.

While the statute does not specify whether the training must be completed before board members vote, she said that given the life-or-death decision facing the board, such training is essential.

By a 3 to 2 vote, with the new members in the majority, the board retired to "executive session" Monday to discuss the matter with an attorney from the Arizona Attorney General's Office, then returned to continue the hearing.

Henry claimed that to present her case for reprieve would invalidate any further claims to receive a fair hearing. She left and the hearing was adjourned.

The board members were uncertain what would happen next. Veteran board member Jack LaSota, a former Arizona Attorney General, at first opined that Lopez had effectively waived his right to a clemency hearing.

"This is tantamount to, they don't want a hearing," he said.

Hernandez vacillated in his response.

"They were offered a process, they declined it," he said at first.

Interviewed after the hearing, Hernandez claimed he did not know details of how he was appointed to the board.

And he said the new members already had undergone 80 hours of the required training in the first two weeks of their tenure.

He suggested he would consult with the Governor's Office, then denied he took direction from the governor.

The outgoing board members have already said that they were not reappointed because of Brewer's displeasure with some of their decisions.

In the end, Hernandez said he expected Lopez to get his clemency hearing after all.

LaSota took it further. "I don't think (Lopez will) be executed on the 16th," LaSota said.

A U.S. District Court judge in Phoenix, meanwhile, on Monday denied a request by Lopez's legal team to stay his execution because of recurring lapses in the Arizona Department of Correction's execution protocol.

The Federal Public Defender's Office has already filed noticed that it will appeal the ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

(source: The Arizona Republic)

*****************

Death row inmate's case up for review

Arizona’s largely new clemency board on Monday delayed considering the case of a death row inmate set for execution next week after the man’s defense attorney said three new board members didn’t have the legal authority to make such a decision.

Samuel Villegas Lopez’s attorney had asked the 5-member board to delay her client’s execution and a decision about whether he deserves mercy over questions about the legality of the 3 new members’ appointment by Gov. Jan Brewer.

Attorney Kelley Henry told the board members that the new members didn’t get the four weeks of training required under Arizona law and there were other problems surrounding their appointment.

“We just have to start the training process. We don’t have to complete it,” new board Chairman Jesse Hernandez told The Associated Press. “We are in the process of training. We are within the law.”

Hernandez said Henry wanted to stop the hearing, and when she couldn’t, she and her legal team walked out.

“I ended the meeting,” Hernandez said. “We wanted to give Mr. Lopez a fair hearing. But (his lawyers) decided to exit the process. I presume it was a legal maneuver on their part to buy Mr. Lopez time.

“We did not make a ruling. What happens now is we are waiting for their response, to see if they want to come back for another hearing or go to court,” Hernandez added.

Dale Baich, a federal public defender in Phoenix, said “the question about the board’s legal authority to act needs to be addressed before it can give full attention and consideration to the clemency request by Mr. Lopez. The governor should direct the attorney general to move to vacate the execution date so that the legal questions can be sorted out.”

The clemency board often is a death row inmate’s last chance to argue against being executed.

Lopez is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection May 16 at the state prison in Florence in what would be the fourth execution in Arizona this year.

Lopez was convicted of raping, robbing and stabbing a 59-year-old woman to death in her Phoenix apartment on Oct. 29, 1986, after what court records described as a “terrible and prolonged struggle.”

Brewer overhauled the board last month, replacing two voting members and longtime Chairman Duane Belcher with three new people in what some defense attorneys and anti-death-penalty advocates said was a political move.

In a filing with the board last week, Henry cited an Arizona law that says each new board member must undergo a four-week course before beginning their new duties.

“This board should not sit in judgment on Sammy Lopez’s very life without proper training and preparation,” according to the filing.

When the board does meet to consider whether to recommend mercy for Lopez, Henry plans to ask its members to recommend that Lopez’s death sentence be overturned. She argues Lopez had a difficult childhood during which he “grew up in constant terror,” hunger and poverty, and began inhaling paint and glue at a young age.

Henry also argues Lopez’s attorneys never informed the trial judge of those details, which she says are mitigating factors. She says if the judge had known about them, Lopez never would have gotten the death penalty.

If the board votes to recommend that Lopez’s execution be reduced to a life sentence or delayed, Brewer would need to give her approval in order for that to happen.

In a separate filing in federal court last week, Lopez’s attorneys ask that his execution be put on hold because the Arizona Department of Corrections has continuously violated and changed its own written protocol for executing death row inmates.

Attorneys argue a new execution protocol released in January loosened requirements for those who inject inmates with lethal drugs and gives far too much discretion to corrections Director Charles Ryan to make last-minute changes.

Similar arguments on behalf of two other Arizona inmates failed to stop executions in February and March, but they did cause a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco to issue a strong warning to the department.

The judges wrote on Feb. 28 that Arizona forced the court “to engage in serious constitutional questions and complicated factual issues in the waning hours before executions.”

“This approach cannot continue,” the panel wrote. “We are mindful of the admonition requiring us to refrain from micromanaging each individual execution, but the admonition has a breaking point.”

(source: TriValleyCentral.com)

USA (RHODE ISLAND):

Rhode Island must turn over suspect in death-penalty spat

Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee must surrender a state prisoner to federal authorities to potentially face the death penalty on charges of killing of a gas station manager, a federal appeals court ruled on Monday.

The Boston-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit ruled in a 3-2 decision that Chafee could not keep shooting suspect Jason Pleau in state custody to shield him from capital punishment. Ruling otherwise would undermine the federal government's ability to prosecute federal crimes, the court ruled.

"Instead of a place of confinement, the state prison would become a refuge against federal charges," Judge Michael Boudin wrote for the majority.

Pleau was serving an 18-year sentence in state prison for parole violations when he was indicted on federal charges for the 2010 murder and robbery of David Main outside a bank. The federal government asked for custody of Pleau under a federal law that governs the transfer of prisoners between states and the U.S. government. But Chafee refused, asserting Rhode Island's policy of opposing the death penalty.

In 2011, a three-judge panel of the 1st Circuit had upheld Pleau and Chafee's right to resist the federal request. But a majority of the full 1st Circuit reached the opposite conclusion on Monday, finding the federal government's right to prosecute federal crimes trumped the state's interest in opposing capital punishment.

"State interposition to defeat federal authority vanished with the Civil War," Boudin wrote.

Two judges dissented, defending the governor's right to refuse the request.

Robert Mann, a lawyer for Pleau, was not immediately available for comment.

U.S. Attorney Peter Neronha said in a statement his office was prepared to move forward with the prosecution, which could carry the death penalty.

(source: Reuters)

NEVADA:

Top Nevada court reviews death penalty sentence of convicted killer

A convicted killer does not have to show by a preponderance of the evidence that he does not deserve a death sentence, a defense lawyer says.

John R. Petty of the Washoe County public defender's office told the Nevada Supreme Court that it should nullify the death penalty given murderer James Biela because a wrong instruction was given to the jury during the penalty phase of the trial in Reno.

But Terry McCarthy of the Washoe County district attorney's office said each juror makes his or her own decision. And the death penalty should be upheld.

But Justice Kristina Pickering said there could be confusion in the jury instruction.

On Jan. 20, 2008, 19-year-old Brianna Dennison disappeared while sleeping on the couch of the home of a friend in Reno. Her body was found Feb. 15 in a field. She had been raped and strangled with a pair of thong panties.

Petty, the chief appeal deputy in the public defender's office, said the jury was wrongly instructed that the mitigating circumstances must outweigh the aggravating circumstances to eliminate the possibility of the death penalty.

But Justice Michael Douglas noted the defense at the trial never objected to the jury instruction. Nor did the defense attorney argue against it in his closing argument.

But Petty said the court should either grant a new penalty hearing or reduce the death sentence to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Deputy District Attorney McCarthy told the court there was no requirement at trial that the death penalty be imposed. He said it was a moral judgment by the juror.

In his brief to the court, McCarthy quoted the instruction as saying, "If you find unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt that at least one aggravating circumstance exists and each of you determines beyond a reasonable doubt that any mitigating circumstance do not outweigh the aggravating, the defendant is eligible for a death sentence."

The court took the arguments under submission.

Biela is 1 of 82 men on death row in the state prison in Ely.

There has not been an execution by lethal injection in Nevada since Daryl Mack was put to death on April 26, 2006.

(source: Las Vegas Sun)

FLORIDA:

Greg Gardner: Evolution from cub reporter to execution witness ends watching killer Gore with 'fear in his eyes' ---- 30-plus years later, reporter witnesses death of serial killer he wrote about decades before; Greg Gardner, Jensen Beach, is a freelance journalist who has worked at newspapers and a TV station in each of the Treasure Coast counties

As a cub reporter responsible for bringing a serial killer onto law enforcement's radar, I never dreamed it would take more than 30 years to witness the final chapter of the story with the April 12 execution of David Alan Gore.

Gore, admitted murderer of six women in Vero Beach, went quietly to death in front of 34 witnesses in the death chamber at Florida State Prison — unlike his victims who suffered terror at the hands of him and his cousin, Fred Waterfield.

It was 1981 when I wrote a story about an Indian River County sheriff's auxiliary deputy who stopped a woman under suspicious circumstances. Her girlfriend's father worked for the Vero Beach Press Journal and we ran the story without Gore's name only to find out the next day that he had resigned, ending a brief internal investigation.

2 weeks later with lifesaving luck, a sheriff's deputy leaving a doctor's office heard a woman scream and rushed to her car to find Gore in the back seat with vodka, handcuffs, a loaded .357 magnum and a police scanner.

We ran numerous stories before the trial, including the search for three missing women, who lawmen were certain Gore had murdered. The glares from Gore at the trial were creepy, but nothing compared to staring evil face-to-face two years later without the protection of court bailiffs.

Gore was found guilty and given the maximum five years in prison. Two years later, he was introduced to me in a Port St. Lucie nightclub. It was pretty scary until he and another man finally left with two young women. To this day, we will never know if the women were dropped off safely or never seen again.

When Gore was arrested in 1983 for the murder of 17-year-old Lynn Elliott, she was the third woman murdered after his early parole from prison.

"It doesn't bring closure, but it ends a chapter," said Joe Byer, whose 14-year-old niece was Barbara Ann Byer. "It can't bring anyone back. With 6 victims, he hurt a lot of people. Gore got to say goodbye to his family but the victims never did."

While her father witnessed the execution, his brother waited outside with the eight pro-death penalty advocates just yards away from 40 anti-death penalty protesters.

Among the pro-death penalty protesters were the twin daughters of Fred Waterfield, Gore's cousin and co-conspirator serving several life terms in Okeechobee. They were overheard saying, "He (Gore) was a heinous man," adding they don't believe their father is guilty.

If you can pass a background check, any Florida resident can witness an execution, although family members of the condemned inmate are never allowed in the witness room — a 12- by 20-foot box crammed with chairs in four rows, facing a large picture window.

Unfortunately, the sound system to hear the dying man's last words is chronically dysfunctional, said a reporter who has witnessed 53 executions. As reporters, the 10 trained, professional observers had to agree afterward on Gore's final statement. If we couldn't understand all of what was being said, how could the witnesses?

Robert Stone, 19th Judicial Circuit state attorney for 14 years and prosecutor in the case, sat on the front row, seats away from the Elliotts.

"I don't know why they have witnesses," Stone said. "All I could see was his nostrils. The Elliotts could not see his face. They agonized for 29 years. They should be able to look him in the eye. He should have been sitting up. Let them see each other."

At a kind of debriefing, after the execution, Stone said he spoke to every one of the witnesses he knew.

"They all felt some satisfaction and relief," he said. "Now they can begin to forget about it as much as is possible."

In his last words spoken on this Earth, Gore said, "I do not fear death. Thank you."

From the end media seat on a riser 2 feet above the witnesses, I saw the fear in his eyes before he took his last deep breath and closed them for the last time.

(source: TC Palm)

CALIFORNIA:

State Supreme Court Upholds Death Sentence for Riverside Man Who Killed Neighbor

The state Supreme Court yesterday unanimously affirmed the death sentence for a Riverside County man convicted of raping and killing his elderly next-door neighbor, then setting her house afire.

William Alfred Jones, a convicted sex offender who was 39 years old when he killed Ruth Eddings, 81, in 1996, failed to demonstrate prejudicial error at his 1996 trial before then-Riverside Superior Court Judge Robert Spitzer, Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye said.

Sheriff’s deputies who investigated the crimes focused on Jones from the beginning of their investigation. Interrogated at home the morning and afternoon of the crime—which occurred during early morning hours—and later at the police station, he admitted responsibility for the sexual assault, the death, and the fire.

Prosecutors charged Jones with first degree murder—with special circumstances of rape, sodomy, and burglary—as well as arson. They argued that Jones entered the Eddings residence with intent to assault the victim sexually, raped and sodomized her, then strangled her and tried to burn down her mobilehome in order to destroy the evidence.

The defense contended that Jones went over to the house to check in on Eddings, who had not taken in her newspaper, but was heavily intoxicated at the time and accidentally fell on her. Any sexual contact, the defense argued, was not intended at the time of entry and occurred postmortem.

Jones admitted starting the fire, saying he panicked because he didn’t want to go back to prison, from which he had recently been paroled.

Jurors found Jones guilty of murder with special circumstances and of arson, and returned a death penalty verdict.

On appeal, the defense argued that Spitzer erred in allowing a forensic pathologist who had conducted the autopsy to opine that the sexual assault occurred while Eddings was still alive. Not being a psychologist or other specialist in necrophilia, or a criminologist, the pathologist was not qualified to render an opinion on the issue, defense counsel claimed.

The standard of review regarding the court’s determination to allow a witness to testify as an expert, the chief justice noted, is manifest abuse of discretion. A pathologist’s opinion regarding how a fatal injury did or did not occur is generally regarded as within his or her area of expertise, she added.

“The question of whether a victim was raped and sodomized prior to or after dying is a relevant circumstance of death for which a qualified forensic pathologist might offer an opinion in an appropriate case,” Cantil-Sakauye wrote. She also noted that a defense expert, who testified that the sexual assault occurred postmortem, also lacked the credentials the defense argued were required.

The chief justice also rejected defense arguments concerning the admission of evidence of prior criminal assaults by Jones and the related jury instructions.

At the guilt phase, Spitzer allowed a woman, identified as Toni P., to testify that when she was 16 years old and living with her aunt, who was Jones’ sister, Jones came over and had forced oral sex with her after her aunt and uncle had left for work. He told her that she would “regret it” if she told anyone.

Jones was subsequently convicted in that case, and was paroled 18 months before he killed Eddings.

The judge admitted the evidence as bearing on Jones’ state of mind and intent in going to Eddings’ home on the occasion of the killing. Spitzer also allowed prosecutors to impeach Jones’ direct testimony with evidence that he had stabbed a teacher in high school with a knife, and sexually assaulted the mother of his then-girlfriend three years after the incident with the teacher.

Evidence of several attacks on women he dated were admitted in the penalty phase.

Cantil-Sakauye said the evidence regarding Toni P. was admissible to show a predisposition to commit a sexual assault against Eddings, and that the evidence was sufficiently probative to outweigh any prejudice.

The chief justice acknowledged that the jury instructions regarding the other-crimes evidence “were not entirely consistent” with the judge’s rulings limiting the purposes for which the evidence could be considered. But there was no cause for reversal, she said, because the standard instruction that was given, CALJIC No. 2.50, correctly stated the law; the evidence was clearly admissible; the evidence of intent was strong; and the arguments of counsel made clear what the purpose of admitting the evidence was.

The case is People v. Jones. 12 S.O.S. 2163.

(source: Metropolitan News Company)

************

Joshua Graham Packer Faces Death Penalty For Stabbing Couple & Unborn Baby To Death

A sexual assault count has been added to charges against a man facing trial in the stabbing deaths of a couple and their unborn child in their Southern California beach house.

A grand jury last week indicted 22-year-old Joshua Graham Packer on a charge of using a knife to force a pregnant Davina Husted to perform a sex act with him before she was stabbed to death.

Packer is facing a death penalty trial on accusations that he killed Brock and Davina Husted and their unborn child inside their Faria Beach home on May 20, 2009.

Packer appeared in court Monday on the latest indictment, but arraignment was postponed until May 16.

The prosecutor and defense lawyer wouldn't comment.

(source: Huffington Post)

UTAH:

Judge deciding if alleged Utah cop killer qualifies for death penalty ---- Court » Psychologists disagree on whether the accused is mentally retarded.

With doctors split on the mental capacity of the man charged with killing a Millard County sheriff’s deputy, it will be up to a judge to decide whether to remove the possibility of death in the capital murder case.

In court this week, two psychologists testified Roberto Miramontes Román’s IQ falls below 70 — generally considered the threshold for determining mental retardation under the law — and that the alleged killer also has adaptive functioning deficits indicative of mild mental retardation.

2 other psychologists, however, disagreed. It is now up to 4th District Judge Donald Eyre to rule on whether prosecutors could seek the death penalty if Román is convicted of the 2010 murder of Deputy Josie Greathouse Fox. Following a 2-day hearing that concluded Tuesday, attorneys will submit briefs on the issue after which Eyre will make his ruling.

Stephen Greenspan, a psychologist who did not evaluate Román but reviewed the reports of three other doctors, called Román "the odd man out" in his family, and said he has always needed others’ care to survive.

"They are all competent adults," Greenspan said. "Mr. Román on the other hand clearly was not competent at that level."

Doctors said Román, who was born in a home in Mexico, could have been impacted by perinatal anoxia, a shortage of oxygen during birth. That would be a "major risk factor" for mental retardation, Greenspan said.

Doctors also said Román’s drug and alcohol use, which started at an early age, could have damaged his brain.

"The damage that you do to your brain [with drugs and alcohol] when you’re an adult is severe, but it’s nothing compared to what you do to your brain in adolescence," said Dr. Ricardo Weinsten, who also found Román to be mentally retarded.

Doctors said Román struggled with impulse control and decision making. When he was younger, he would walk in front of trucks "and thought he had superhuman abilities" to make them stop, Greenspan said.

But prosecutors and two other psychologists doubted the diagnosis. Assistant Attorney General Patrick Nolan questioned how Román could have then sold drugs and engaged in other criminal activities for which he has been convicted.

According to charging documents, Román, 39, shot and killed the 37-year-old Fox during a traffic stop on Jan. 5, 2010. Fox had stopped the car because Román had allegedly been involved in a drug deal just minutes before.

When Fox walked up to the car and asked for license and registration, Román pointed the barrel of an AK-47 out the driver-side window and fired, according to preliminary hearing testimony.

Another man, Rubén Chávez-Reyes, is serving time in prison for helping Román evade police following the shooting.

A trial for Román is scheduled for August.

(source: Salt Lake Tribune)

CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC:

Briton facing the death penalty for 'mass murder': Hunter held in Africa after FINDING 13 bodies

A British man was last night facing the death penalty after being charged with mass murder following the discovery of 13 bodies in an African jungle.

David Simpson, 24, a manager for a big game company, was arrested 6 weeks ago in the Central African Republic after he reported the gruesome find to police.

He found himself being thrown in prison accused of the killings, which are widely believed to have been carried out by supporters of notorious warlord Joseph Kony.

Mr Simpson, whose company offers wealthy clients the opportunity to shoot lions, leopards and buffalo, is being detained in a cramped and filthy jail cell with 80 other inmates in what he has described as a ‘nightmare’.

The Yorkshire-born son of a farmer told the Daily Mail he has been charged with a crime that still carries the death penalty in the war-torn impoverished country.

Speaking yesterday on a mobile phone smuggled into prison, he said: ‘For 6 weeks they held me without a shred of evidence.

'And now I have been forced to sign a piece of paper which states that I have been charged with murdering 13 people.

‘It is just ridiculous. Everyone knows I had nothing to do with it. They know it was Kony.

‘It’s all about money. They think because I am white, I must be wealthy.

'When they first arrested me, my bail was set at one million euros, which is just ludicrous.

‘I do not know what is going to happen. It’s like a nightmare. I’m sleeping on the floor with no blankets or mattress. I just want this to be over.’

Ugandan rebel chief Kony, the leader of the Lord’s Resistance Army, is wanted by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity including the abduction of thousands of children he has forced to be soldiers or sex slaves.

His troops have committed hundreds of atrocities in the Central African Republic, where he is understood to be in hiding.

He made international headlines after a video of his terrible crimes was viewed more than 90million times and highlighted by celebrities including Angelina Jolie.

Mr Simpson moved to Africa 2 years ago for an exciting new life away from his family’s pheasant farm in Gillamoor, North Yorkshire.

As manager for the game hunting company he is also the firm’s pilot, flying guests and picking up supplies.

He was helping colleagues clear a road through dense bush in the south of his firm’s vast hunting reserve on March 23 when they found the mutilated bodies of workers near a gold mine.

The men had been tied together in groups of 4 and murdered by having boiling water poured over them. They had been cut with machetes and beaten with sticks.

He said: ‘It was a terrible thing to see. They were murdered in such a methodical and brutal way, tied together in groups, face down and in circles with their heads together.

‘Kony has killed and maimed lots of villagers here. I have found the bodies of women and children he had kidnapped and then murdered.

‘I led investigators to the massacre site and they took a few photos on their mobile phones, which was about the sum total of their investigation.’

Police in the capital, Bangui, detained Mr Simpson and his Swedish boss Erik Mararv after 6 hours of interrogation when they voluntarily went to report the massacre in the remote south-east of the country. Mr Mararv is also in custody.

His company Cawa offers clients the chance to hunt wild game at a cost of thousands of pounds, with the cost of shooting a lion around £20,000.

Mr Simpson’s brother Paul, 22, who lives with their parents, Peter, 57, and Vicky, 55, on their farm, said: ‘I just hope the police come to their senses and release him.’

The Foreign Office said it was providing consular assistance.

(source: Daily Mail)

PHILIPPINES:

Senate ratifies treaties with China, UK

The Senate has given its concurrence to ratify three treaties, two of which involve mutual legal assistance on criminal matters.

With an identical vote of 18-0, the Senate has approved the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs) with China and the United Kingdom.

The 3rd treaty, a consular agreement between the Philippines and China, was also passed with a 19-0 vote.

Senate committee on foreign relations chair Loren Legarda said that the MLAT with China was proposed by China in 2000 and was ratified by the Philippines in 2001.

The MLAT with the UK, on the other hand, was proposed by the Philippines in 2007 and was ratified by the UK in 2009.

Legarda said that the MLATs would establish a legal framework, which mandates contracting parties to assist in the investigation, prosecution and suppression of criminal offenses and proceedings related to criminal matters.

“Assistance by other States is generally limited to service of documents and can be provided only on the basis of reciprocity, and on an ad hoc basis, thus MLATs are important because they make assistance compulsory and obligatory,” Legarda explained.

“Given the increasing frequency of transnational crimes, our fight against money laundering and corruption, as well as the transboundary nature of terrorism, an MLAT has become a necessary and vital tool for the Philippines to secure evidence, witnesses and proceeds of crimes which are beyond our physical and legal jurisdiction,” she added.

In the case of the consular agreement with China, Legarda said, this would ensure immediate and appropriate protection to Filipinos in China who are being detained, arrested or deprived of freedom.

According to Legarda, there are around 271 Filipinos in detention or serving sentences in China for various offenses including drug smuggling, larceny, fraud, overstaying, robbery, theft, illegal business operations, pornography, counterfeiting, rape, forging of documents and identification, gambling and manslaughter.

Around 73 of them have been meted the death penalty, with a 2-year reprieve.

“When a foreign national is detained or arrested by law enforcement authorities in a country outside of his own, it is critical that he be made aware of the charges against him. It is crucial that he is informed of his rights and his legal options,” Legarda stressed.

(source: Philippine Star)

IRAN----executions

10 prisoners were executed in Iran

10 prisoners were executed in Iran reported Iranian state media today.

9 prisoners executed in Tehran today:

According to the state run Iranian news agency Fars, 9 prisoners were hanged in Tehran’s Evin prison today.

7 of the prisoners were convicted of planning to send a container with 500 kilograms of "Shisheh" to a Southeast Asian country, said the report. The prisoners were identified as Reza Golshani, Abolfazl Norouzi, Majid Heydarkhani, Majid Doosti, Majid Mandehi, Ali Alaeiand Babak Paravarzar, according to the report.

The 2 other prisoners who were hanged in Tehran today were 2 brothers by the names Bahman and Behzad Nabavi. They were convicted of synthesizing and keeping 212 kilos and 610 grams of Shisheh, said the report.

One prisoner was hanged in the prison of Tabriz (North-eastern Iran):

According to the state run Iranian news agency Fars, a man convicted of sexually abusing several minor girls was hanged in the prison of Tabriz (North-eastern Iran). The man was not identified by name. The news of his execution was published by the state run Iranian media today. However, according to Iran Human Rights’ sources the execution took place on Wednesday May 3.

*************************

A letter by death row prisoners Zanyar and Loghman Moradi

Zanyar and Loghman Moradi, 2 Kurdish citizens held in Rajai Shahr prison, who are at imminent risk of execution, have written a letter about Farzad Kamangar and the other political prisoners executed by Iranian authorities in Evin prison on May 9, 2010. The letter was sent by Iranian activists to Iran Human Rights for publication.

We live in a land where you cannot separate and detach yourself from past stories, events, and adventures. And, we cannot pass by [the month of May] without paying homage to the memories of Farzad, Farhad, Ali and Shirin.

It has been two years since the event that none of us want to hear about— the day when the Iranian people everywhere were as sad as Kurdistan and the Kurdish people. It was the day when another page in Iran’s tragic history was written in the land of Kurdistan. The Kurdish history has seen so many bitter days throughout the years.

When we listen to [the stories] of our elders it makes it difficult to experience peaceful and joyful days, [because we cannot] ignore and abandon the many events, pains, and sufferings that have become an integral part of Kurdistan: the military campaigns, the ideological conflicts, the sacking of this city and the massacre of people in another city. Sometimes bullets were fired to assassinate and other times to silence the voices of dissent. In the course of a greedy and obstinate war, bombardments and missiles were launched by both sides— and tragedies like massacres, chemical attacks, and revenge caused the Kuridsh land to be bereaved of [lively] moments. And, conspiracies and sentiments of bitterness aimed to rob us of our friendships and unity in Iran. The arrests, reactions, massacres, hate, endless executions, and fate of our missing loved ones made friendship, peace, sweet songs, pleasant roads, and all the beauty of our land more foreign and unattainable. The elders are tired, worn out, and brokenhearted.

We live in a land where you cannot separate and detach yourself from past stories, events, and adventures. And, we cannot pass by Ordibehesht [the second month in the Iranian calendar; equivalent to the zodiac sign Taurus] without paying homage to the memories of Farzad, Farhad, Ali and Shirin. Before we experienced the bitter, dark days of imprisonment and torture, and execution had not yet cast its heavy shadow over us, these names told a nostalgic and painful story. We had been following the news related to them. We accompanied them in their experience, [which helped us] understand a little about prison and its atmosphere. The news [of their execution] was a repetition of what was happening for years.

There was a moment of worry when concern was raised. There was also a moment of hope that took root— a hope that was not supposed to take root in the midst of all the unfortunate events. During those days [before the executions and our imprisonment], we lived with the smiles and tears of them and their families. We tried to put ourselves in their shoes so we would be able to accompany them on the quest to achieve their wishes and demands. [We tried to] understand what they were saying and forget the pain that they covered up under layers of patience and hope. However, we never thought to be in the same position as them.

[Now that we are on] death row, we constantly reflect on memories of them. [I, Zanyar, remember] the day when my mother was crying as Farzad’s mother was sobbing and Farhad’s children were mourning. We could not fathom how a mother felt wile awaiting his son/daughter, and we could not understand what it meant for her to find her child in pain. We did not realize that the pure tears of a mother could find their way through the dark halls of the prison and offer a ray of hope to the children. We had heard about that father who would bend under pressure so that his children could have the chance to resist and hold their heads up high. But, we never knew that one year of imprisonment for a son would bring sadness to a father and age him.

[Farzad Kamangar], a young teacher working in impoverished villages, had one hope: to raise a generation who will be able to work to develop Kurdistan and reclaim the rights of which the Kurdish people have been deprived of. [He wished to] sacrifice many things for the prosperity and glory of Kurdistan and to attain what our elites wished for. He was a teacher who loved people for their humanity. He was struggling for the Kurdish and Iranian people, for human beings, for humanity. Alas, he was to be executed.

We faced similar circumstances when we were arrested. Months of solitary confinement and security detentions prevented us from hearing any news [on the executions] until we finally heard the news nine months following that horrible day. It was an excuse [for us] to sob and cry. When we heard the news, we did not need to try to imagine it based on what others were saying. We understood their ordeal through experiencing solitary confinement, black and insufferable torture, deprivation from seeing our families, looming death sentences, unfair trials, bitter and dark stories of a prisoner, and various other stories told by those who were inmates with Farzad, Farhad, and Ali. [We heard about their] nostalgia, their land, their patience and serenity, their endurance of tortures without giving as much as a frown, the low moments as well as sweet moments during visits, their love for Kurds and Kurdistan, their memories of nature, and their joyous days in Qandil and other mountains that reflect their steadiness and resistance. We heard mostly about Farzad [Kamangar], who was always smiling and laughing.

The prison transfers and the summons were both indications of a looming event, and perhaps even….finally, the most bitter event took place. Everyone else was anxious but they were steady. They spent the last night together. There are stories about that last night before their executions. We heard about the night we have not yet experienced.

We do not know to what extent our nearly three years of detention has been similar to their nearly 4 years.

How long will this continue for?! Kurdistan has seen so many of these dark and sour events. The strength of the rulers is proven through the execution of the sons and daughters of this land. For how much longer will [they] kill and murder?! Blood cannot wash blood. Violence is not quenched through violence. Violence leads to violence, and bloodshed will bring about more bloodshed. Until when will the sounds of bullets and mourning on dead bodies silence and drown joyous cheers? How much more violence will overpower peace and happiness? Which generation will be the last to hear the ominous news of executions? Will the day come when the sad stories of violence and the incitement of violence are not heard?

May our blessed memories live long every day and during every moment— especially on May 9, the day they walked and chanted to the gallows so we may remember that each step we take should be toward life and joy (even when sour experiences and death prevail).

(source for both: Iran Human Rights)

ZIMBABWE:

Amnesty petitions Zimbabwe leaders over death penalty

An international human rights group has written to Zimbabwe’s 3 main political party leaders urging them to scrap the death penalty from the new constitution.

Amnesty International says in a letter to Zanu PF leader Robert Mugabe and the 2 leaders of the MDC Morgan Tsvangirai and Welshman Ncube that the death penalty’s deterrent effect is negligible.

"The death penalty was one of the most hated forms of punishment during Zimbabwe's liberation struggle which was applied by the white minority government against freedom fighters,” Amnesty said in the letter signed by its Zimbabwe chapter’s executive director, Cousin Zilala.

Zilala said the death penalty was the “ultimate violation of the right to life”.

"One of the reasons countries retain the death penalty is the misplaced view that it acts as a deterrent to serious crimes, but studies show otherwise,” he added.

Zimbabwe’s new constitution which is being steered by the 3 parties is currently at drafting stage. A draft released last week shows the death penalty will be retained, but only for aggravated murder.

But Amnesty International is urging a complete abolition.

Zimbabwe has 61 people who are currently on death row. Since 1980, 78 prisoners have been executed by hanging, but there have been no new executions since 2003, partly blamed on the lack of a hangman.

The last hangman retired after executing murderous armed robbers Edmore Masendeke and Stephen Chidhumo.

Meanwhile, pressure is mounting on a parliamentary committee to meet the May target to approve a draft to be sent to a referendum.

Paul Mangwana, who represents Zanu PF on the committee, said the drafting process for the new constitution had been complicated by splits among the 3 ruling coalition parties.

"It is no easy feat to represent all parties but we are optimistic that it will be done,” he said.

But his optimism is not shared by a growing number of critics of the process.

National Constitutional Assembly chairman Lovemore Madhuku said: “We are wasting time and money with this COPAC. You can give them 100 years but nothing will come out."

Zanu PF’s Tsholotsho North MP Jonathan Moyo said without intervention by the leaders of the three parties to move the process forward, the constitution would be stalled.

"They have been at it for 36 months, and gobbled $45million but all they have to show for it is an incomplete 1st draft. Surely, one would have to be an incurable optimist to think the principals will remain patient and keep extending the deadline," he said.

(source: New Zimbabwe)

INDIA:

Mandatory death penalty provision may be dropped from NDPS Act

The government may drop the mandatory death penalty provision for repeat drug offenders through an amendment of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.

Finance minister Pranab Mukherjee on Tuesday said in response to a parliamentary question that he was considering bringing an amendment based on the recommendations made by the parliamentary standing committee on finance.

"In view of the observations of the standing committee made in its report on the NDPS (Amendment) Bill, 2011, it is proposed to amend Section 31A of the NDPS Act and replace the words 'shall be punishable with death' with the words 'may be punishable with death'," Mukherjee told Rajya Sabha.

The NDPS Act, 1985 has provision for a graded system of punishment, with the quantum of punishment varying with the quantity of drug or substance involved in a case, he said. The provision for capital punishment is in case of repeat offence only.

This provision was earlier questioned by the Bombay high court which had in June last year held that the section relating to mandatory death penalty was violative of Article 21 of the Constitution (right to life). The observation was made in a case where the accused was convicted twice for the offence.

The court had observed that second conviction in NDPS case need not be death penalty and it was the sole discretion of the judge of the special court to decide about capital punishment.

Though there was a surge in the number of people prosecuted under the NDPS Act in the last three years, there was a decline in the cases of conviction.

As many as 20,000 people were prosecuted in 2011 for their involvement in offences under the NDPS Act as against 19,700 in 2010 and 19,300 in 2009, Mukherjee said.

(source: Times of India)

*********

Government may relax 'death penalty' clause under Narcotics Act

The government proposes to drop the mandatory death penalty provision for drug offences through an amendment of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.

"In view of the observations of the Standing Committee on Finance made in its report on the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Amendment) Bill, 2011, it is proposed to amend Section 31A of the NDPS Act and replace the words 'shall be punishable with death' with the words 'may be punishable with death'," Finance minister Pranab Mukherjee today told Rajya Sabha in a written reply.

The NDPS Act, 1985 has provision for a graded system of punishment, with the quantum of punishment varying with the quantity of drug or substance involved in a case, he said.

The Bombay high court had in June last year held that the Section relating to mandatory death penalty was violative of Article 21 of the Constitution (right to life).

However, the court's verdict was given for the accused convicted twice for the offense.

The court had observed that second conviction in NDPS case need not be death penalty and it was the sole discretion of the judge of the special court to decide about the capital punishment.

The Rajya Sabha was told there was a surge in the number of people prosecuted under the NDPS Act in the last three years and decline in the cases of conviction.

As many as 20,364 people were prosecuted in 2011 for their involvement in offenses under the Act as against 19,720 in 2010 and 19,377 in 2009, Mukherjee said.

Whereas, 7,857 and 9,819 people were convicted in 2011 and 2010 respectively. In 2009, a total of 11,418 were convicted for the offenses, he added.

(source: The Times of India)

*******************

Govt likely to amend 'death penalty' clause in Narcotic Act

The government is likely to amend the death penalty clause in the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act following observations of a Parliament Standing Committee.

"In view of the observations of the Standing Committee on Finance made in its report on the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Amendment) Bill, 2011, it is proposed to amend Section 31A of the NDPS Act and replace the words "shall be punishable with death" with the words "may be punishable with death," Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee [ Images ] said in a written reply to the Rajya Sabha.

The NDPS Act, 1985 has provision for a graded system of punishment, with the quantum of punishment varying with the quantity of drug/substance involved in a case, he said.

As many as 59,461 persons were prosecuted and 29,094 persons convicted under the NDPS Act between 2009 and 2011, he said adding 13,711 persons were also acquitted during the period.

(source: Press Trust of India)

INDIANA----foreign national found on death row

Man on death row for murdering guard in United States born in Newfoundland

A lawyer representing a Canadian on death row in Indiana wants Ottawa to advocate to save her client's life, but isn't sure what kind of support, if any, the case will get.

Jennifer Merrigan said she carefully watched the political drama unfold at last week's clemency hearing of another Canadian death row inmate, Ronald Smith in Montana.

Smith's lawyers accused the Canadian government of reneging on an offer to speak at his hearing and called their tepid support in his case "treachery."

"That's been pretty disappointing," said Merrigan, an attorney with the Death Penalty Litigation Clinic in Kansas City. She has been talking with Canadian officials about providing help for her client, Robert Bolden.

"To be honest, we really haven't been able to ascertain what (support) that would be."

Smith had been considered the only Canadian currently on death row in the United States until Bolden's new team of defence lawyers made a discovery 2 years ago. He was born north of the border in Newfoundland.

His lawyers have since found a copy of his birth certificate and determined that not only does he have Canadian citizenship, he may not officially be American.

The revelation only recently made its way to the Canadian public, including officials with Amnesty International.

Court documents show Bolden was born in Stephenville, N.L., in 1963. It's believed his mother was a prostitute and his father, a military serviceman, was stationed at the nearby U.S. air force base.

Merrigan said Bolden's father, who was black, was not involved in his life. His mother, who was white, struggled on her own to raise the biracial child in the small, mainly white community. When Bolden was three years old, he and his mother moved to the U.S., but it appears they never applied for American citizenship. Forged documents were used to enrol Bolden in school.

Eventually, his mother abandoned him with another family and Bolden grew up having no contact with his Canadian relatives.

3 decades later, Bolden was a father of four children and suffering from a serious drug addiction. He was separated from his wife and needed $2,000 to avoid being evicted from his home. So he hatched a plan to rob a bank in St. Louis.

Documents show he recruited two other men, and on Oct. 7, 2002, they drove to a Bank of America branch. One of the co-accused testified at trial that Bolden planned to disarm the bank guard outside then use the guard as a hostage.

But when Bolden brandished a handgun and confronted the guard in the parking lot, the guard tried to grab his gun and the pair struggled. The jury heard that Bolden shot Nathan Ley in the jaw and, after the guard fell to the ground, shot him in the head.

The jury convicted Bolden of murder during the commission of a robbery and sentenced him to the death. Now 48, he is on federal death row at Terre Haute prison, southwest of Indianapolis.

Merrigan said Bolden's case was appealed all the way through the court system before she was appointed to handle another appeal. That's when she found out he was Canadian and that officials in Canada had never been informed about his case.

She said she spoke with consular officer Sharon Simpson in Detroit in July 2010, eight years after Bolden's arrest. Simpson wrote in an affidavit that she was able to verify Bolden's birth certificate.

"I think she was surprised by that," Merrigan said. "This is a case in which Canada was not even notified that one of its own citizens was facing capital prosecution in another country. Canada was never notified that its citizen was sent to death row."

She said Simpson and another consular official have since met with Bolden at the prison. And they have written letters to prison officials to inquire about his health. Bolden was born with diabetes but has been refused a special diet behind bars and prison staff have often changed his insulin levels without consulting a doctor, said Merrigan.

She said Bolden's kidneys are deteriorating and he may need to go on dialysis.

"If Canada is not interested in the rights of its citizens abroad on death row, we think that they are still interested in their citizens not receiving adequate medical care," Merrigan said.

She said records show the U.S. government has always known Bolden was Canadian and its failure to notify Canada violated Bolden's rights under the Vienna Convention. The claim is made in the latest appeal documents.

The appeal also cites the racial make-up of the jury and questions the impartiality of the trial prosecutor, who knew the victim's family.

Merrigan said the appeal could take several years and it's a shame Canada hadn't been involved in Bolden's case from the beginning. A Liberal Canadian government would likely have been more helpful, she said.

The Canadian government had a history of automatically seeking clemency for Canadians facing the death penalty abroad. But Stephen Harper's Conservative government decided it would no longer intervene in cases in democratic countries.

A court ruling later forced the government to abandon the policy. But critics say the government remains lukewarm on offering support in some cases.

"Had the United States government fulfilled its duty and contacted Canada when Robert was first arrested," Merrigan said, "we think there would have been a significantly different level of involvement by Canada."

(source: Winnipeg Free Press)

ALABAMA:

Jurors recommend death for Marquese Smith

A Morgan County jury took less than an hour to recommend the death penalty for 32 year old Marqueze Smith.

Smith was found guilty of Capital Murder last week in the 2003 shooting death of Jeremy Black. In dramatic testimony Thursday, one of Smith's former co-defendants told a chilling story about Smith laughing about shooting Black after stealing items out of the victim's car.

The jury's opinion is not binding. The ultimate decision is now on Judge Sherrie Paler, who will sentence Smith in August.

(source: WAAY News)

NEVADA:

Sentence in Denison killing appealed to high court

Lawyers trying to get James Biela off Nevada's death row said Monday his sentence was emotionally motivated by an avalanche of news coverage and a public campaign for justice for the 19-year-old woman he was convicted of raping and strangling.

The appellant lawyers told the Nevada Supreme Court during oral arguments that Biela deserves a new trial in the 2008 killing of Brianna Denison and the sexual assaults of two other college coeds around the campus of the University of Nevada, Reno.

John Petty, the chief appellate deputy public defender who wrote the appeal brief, said even if Biela is guilty of the crimes, he didn't deserve the death penalty. He said the jury's excessive penalty was motivated by passion generated by news coverage, a huge volume of secret witness reports, a public campaign in Brianna's name and the work of the Bring Bri Justice Foundation.

"This homicide became a media case resulting in becoming a death penalty case," Petty said.

Prosecutors said in court documents that no errors were made during Biela's 2010 trial, and his convictions and death sentence should be affirmed.

Appellate Deputy District Attorney Terry McCarthy said nothing in the record supports the argument that the verdict was "a product of passion or prejudice." He said there was a thorough jury selection process "and at the end all parties were satisfied that the jurors would not be influenced by the publicity."

The justices took the appeal under submission and did not indicate how long it would take for them to rule, the Reno Gazette-Journal reported. The string of crimes around the campus north of the downtown casino district began in October 2007 and culminated in Denison's death in early 2008.

Denison, a sophomore at Santa Barbara City College in California, was home visiting friends when she was kidnapped in January 2008 while sleeping on a friend's couch at a residence across the street from the UNR campus.

As a manhunt intensified, blue ribbons in honor of her appeared on fences, posters and lapels throughout the Reno area. Her body, clothed only in socks, was found in a vacant field in Reno about a month later with a pair of thong underwear.

In November 2008, police arrested Biela, 30, thanks to a tip from his former girlfriend who reported that he had an obsession with thong panties. 2 other women identified him as the man who sexually assaulted them in the months before Denison's disappearance.

Judge Robert Perry said at the sentencing that the string of attacks had the entire city on edge. Perry initially set the execution for Aug. 16, 2010.

McCarthy said the judge and jury followed all of the rules and that Biela's execution should go forward.

"Perhaps it was because of the evidence that Biela was a serial rapist who then graduated into murder," McCarthey said. "It seems most likely that our community avoided a serial killer only because we were able to catch the killer before his next graduation ceremony."

Cheryl Bond, a deputy public defender also representing Biela, told the justices that his convictions were tainted because the judge tried the 3 cases together. By bundling them, the jurors confused some of the evidence, making a guilty verdict easier, she said.

McCarthy disagreed. He told the justices there was "sufficient connectedness" to place the cases before one jury at the same time. It was a crime spree that occurred within a 400-yard radius, he said.

Many of the witnesses were the same and there was an overlap of evidence, he said.

Bond said the crimes were committed under different circumstances, the assailant used different methods of attack, his treatment of the victims was different, and the type of sexual attack also differed.

"They were not connected together in a scheme," she said. "The cases should have been severed."

The evidence was strong in one case, she said, while a witness statement was used in another. But when all three were bundled together, the jury likely confused the evidence and concluded "we have a bad person here. He must be guilty," she said.

(source: Associated Press)

USA (RHODE ISLAND)----federal death penalty case

S. Attorney: Pleau custody case not about death penalty

The U.S. Attorney’s officehad a major victory in the legal tug-of-war over the custody of accused murder suspect Jason Pleau. The first U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the state must surrender Pleau to the Federal Government to face prosecution.

Governor Chafee has been trying to keep Pleau in state custody because he is a strong advocate against the death penalty and says Pleau may face the death penalty if prosecuted by the Federal Government.

U.S. Attorney Peter Neronha said this case is not about the death penalty. “There should not be a situation where a governor or anyone else in state government can prevent the federal government from pursuing a federal case. The death penalty, in my view has been something of a red herring in the discussion,” Neronha told the WPRO Morning News with Tara Granahan and Andrew Gobeil.

Chafee’s office as maintained that there are also “considerable states’ rights issues involved.” Neronha rejected the notion. “I don’t think this is about state’s rights, in fact I think it is about the Federal government’s rights,” said Neronha. “When a grand jury indicts an individual on federal charges the federal government has the right to try that person in court.”

Neronha said he is “committed to pursuing this case.” He noted that if Governor Chafee prevailed that it could prevent the federal government from prosecuting any case with death resulting. “If the governor’s position is taken to a larger conclusion that would effectively prevent the United States government, me, the U.S. Attorney’s Office from bringing any case where a death resulted and that simply can’t be the result,” said Neronha.

This is the 1st time a governor has refused to surrender a state inmate to the federal government. Neronha said Chafee will ultimately do what he believes is the right thing to do but noted that he believes, “our position is the right position.”

Pleau is charged with gunning down gas station manager David Main outside a bank in Woonsocket while Main was trying to make a deposit.

(source: WPRO)

*******************

Rhode Island must turn over suspect in death-penalty spat

Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee must surrender a state prisoner to federal authorities to potentially face the death penalty on charges of killing of a gas station manager, a federal appeals court ruled on Monday.

The Boston-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit ruled in a 3-2 decision that Chafee could not keep shooting suspect Jason Pleau in state custody to shield him from capital punishment. Ruling otherwise would undermine the federal government's ability to prosecute federal crimes, the court ruled.

"Instead of a place of confinement, the state prison would become a refuge against federal charges," Judge Michael Boudin wrote for the majority.

Pleau was serving an 18-year sentence in state prison for parole violations when he was indicted on federal charges for the 2010 murder and robbery of David Main outside a bank. The federal government asked for custody of Pleau under a federal law that governs the transfer of prisoners between states and the U.S. government. But Chafee refused, asserting Rhode Island's policy of opposing the death penalty.

In 2011, a 3-judge panel of the 1st Circuit had upheld Pleau and Chafee's right to resist the federal request. But a majority of the full 1st Circuit reached the opposite conclusion on Monday, finding the federal government's right to prosecute federal crimes trumped the state's interest in opposing capital punishment.

"State interposition to defeat federal authority vanished with the Civil War," Boudin wrote.

2 judges dissented, defending the governor's right to refuse the request.

Robert Mann, a lawyer for Pleau, was not immediately available for comment.

U.S. Attorney Peter Neronha said in a statement his office was prepared to move forward with the prosecution, which could carry the death penalty.

(source: Reuters)

*********************

US seeks more time for death penalty decision on Iowa woman

Prosecutors want more time to determine whether to continue seeking the death penalty against a woman convicted in the 1993 slayings of 5 Iowans.

The Department of Justice has asked for 30 extra days to determine whether to withdraw its request for the death penalty against Angela Johnson or to ask jurors to return the sentence during a new trial to determine her punishment.

U.S. District Judge Mark Bennett in March threw out Johnson’s death sentences, ruling her lawyers failed to present evidence about her mental state that could’ve convinced jurors to let her live.

The decision does not affect her conviction. If prosecutors drop the death penalty request, Bennett says he’ll change Johnson’s sentence to life in prison.

Johnson had been one of two women on federal death row.

(source: Associated Press)

ARIZONA:

Arizona death row inmate's case up for review

Arizona's largely new clemency board on Monday delayed considering the case of a death row inmate set for execution next week after the man's defense attorney said three new board members didn't have the legal authority to make such a decision.

Samuel Villegas Lopez's attorney had asked the 5-member board to delay her client's execution and a decision about whether he deserves mercy over questions about the legality of the 3 new members' appointment by Gov. Jan Brewer.

Attorney Kelley Henry told the board members that the new members didn't get the four weeks of training required under Arizona law and there were other problems surrounding their appointment.

"We just have to start the training process. We don't have to complete it,'' new board Chairman Jesse Hernandez told The Associated Press. "We are in the process of training. We are within the law.''

Hernandez said Henry wanted to stop the hearing, and when she couldn't, she and her legal team walked out.

"I ended the meeting,'' Hernandez said. "We wanted to give Mr. Lopez a fair hearing. But (his lawyers) decided to exit the process. I presume it was a legal maneuver on their part to buy Mr. Lopez time.

"We did not make a ruling. What happens now is we are waiting for their response, to see if they want to come back for another hearing or go to court,'' Hernandez added.

In a 1-sentence emailed response, Henry said "we are reviewing our legal options'' but she didn't elaborate.

Dale Baich, a federal public defender in Phoenix, said "the question about the board's legal authority to act needs to be addressed before it can give full attention and consideration to the clemency request by Mr. Lopez. The governor should direct the attorney general to move to vacate the execution date so that the legal questions can be sorted out.''

The clemency board often is a death row inmate's last chance to argue against being executed.

Lopez is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection May 16 at the state prison in Florence in what would be the fourth execution in Arizona this year.

Lopez was convicted of raping, robbing and stabbing a 59-year-old woman to death in her Phoenix apartment on Oct. 29, 1986, after what court records described as a "terrible and prolonged struggle.''

Brewer overhauled the board last month, replacing two voting members and longtime Chairman Duane Belcher with three new people in what some defense attorneys and anti-death-penalty advocates said was a political move.

In a filing with the board last week, Henry cited an Arizona law that says each new board member must undergo a four-week course before beginning their new duties.

"This board should not sit in judgment on Sammy Lopez's very life without proper training and preparation,'' according to the filing.

When the board does meet to consider whether to recommend mercy for Lopez, Henry plans to ask its members to recommend that Lopez's death sentence be overturned. She argues Lopez had a difficult childhood during which he "grew up in constant terror,'' hunger and poverty, and began inhaling paint and glue at a young age.

Henry also argues Lopez's attorneys never informed the trial judge of those details, which she says are mitigating factors. She says if the judge had known about them, Lopez never would have gotten the death penalty.

If the board votes to recommend that Lopez's execution be reduced to a life sentence or delayed, Brewer would need to give her approval in order for that to happen.

In a separate filing in federal court last week, Lopez's attorneys ask that his execution be put on hold because the Arizona Department of Corrections has continuously violated and changed its own written protocol for executing death row inmates.

Attorneys argue a new execution protocol released in January loosened requirements for those who inject inmates with lethal drugs and gives far too much discretion to corrections Director Charles Ryan to make last-minute changes.

Similar arguments on behalf of two other Arizona inmates failed to stop executions in February and March, but they did cause a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco to issue a strong warning to the department.

The judges wrote on Feb. 28 that Arizona forced the court "to engage in serious constitutional questions and complicated factual issues in the waning hours before executions.''

"This approach cannot continue,'' the panel wrote. ``We are mindful of the admonition requiring us to refrain from micromanaging each individual execution, but the admonition has a breaking point.''

(source: KTAR)

MYANMAR:

Phyo Wai Aung Receives Death Sentence

Phyo Wai Aung, an engineer who was arrested for his alleged involvement in a spate of bombings at the Thingyan water festival in Rangoon in April 2010, was sentenced to death by a special closed court on Tuesday.

He was arrested on April 23, 2010, after being accused of involvement in the Buddhist New Year explosions that killed 10 people and injured over a hundred at the crowded X2O Pavilion in the former capital.

Various sentences handed down include the death penalty for murder, life sentences under the Criminal Act, three years detention with labor under the Immigration Act, 10 years with labor under the Demolitions Act, and 3 years with labor under the Unlawful Association Act.

“These are the highest sentences ever,” said Kyaw Hoe, his lawyer. “We are disappointed as the court sentenced him because of evidence submitted by the authorities which they received through torture. We will submit an appeal to Divisional Court”, Family members were not allowed to enter the court and had to wait outside instead, close relatives told The Irrawaddy.

“We hoped that we would not get this kind of sentence,” said his wife, Htay Htay. “We are so disappointed with the judicial system for these unlawful and illegal proceedings. However, we will submit appeals.”

According to his family, Phyo Wai Aung needs immediate medical attention as he is suffering from osteoarthritis on his back which prevents him from sitting or walking. He is also suspected of having liver sclerosis and his family worry that he may be moved to another prison without notice.

“The prison authorities allowed some doctors from outside to give a check-up few weeks ago,” said Htay Htay. “But the ultrasound machine in the prison hospital is not working properly so the doctors can’t diagnose the exact problem.

“He is only given painkillers and now has to move from the prison hospital to the psychiatric ward as he received a death sentence. We’ve submitted appeals to give him medical care with physicians or specialists but have not yet received a reply.”

Meanwhile, by pointing out human rights abuses in the case of Phyo Wai Aung, the Hong Kong-based Asian Human Rights Commission said in their May 6 report that the recent political transformation in Burma has not been accompanied by wider institutional reform.

The report said that Phyo Wai Aung has been tortured and illegally detained and was forced to confess about the bomb blast with these illegally obtained confessions submitted to the court.

Moreover, the closed trial at a special court inside Insein Prison used fabricated evidence and denied him the right to a defense, claims the AHRC.

(source: The Irrawaddy)

KUWAIT:

Death penalty for Muslims in Kuwait who curse God, Quran or Prophet----Kuwait’s parliament on Thursday passed a bill stipulating the death penalty for Muslims who curse or mock God, the Muslim holy book, all prophets and the wives of Islam’s Prophet Mohammed.

Kuwait’s parliament on Thursday passed a bill stipulating the death penalty for Muslims who curse or mock God, the Muslim holy book, all prophets and the wives of Islam’s Prophet Mohammed.

The same punishment is applied to those who “describe themselves as new prophets or messengers from God,” the Kuwaiti state news agency KUNA reported.

“But if the accused is a non-Muslim, the punishment would be lowered to jail for no more than 10 years,” the report added, according to the bill.

40 MPs, including cabinet ministers, voted for the bill in the 2nd and final round of voting, against 6 opponents who included all five Shi’ite MPs present and liberal MP Mohammad al-Sager.

The bill introduces 2 new articles to the Gulf state’s penal code specifically to stiffen penalties for such offences.

Defendants who repent in court will be spared capital punishment but will get a jail sentence for 5 years and a fine of $36,000 or one of them, while repentance by those who repeat the crime is not acceptable, the bill says.

“We do not want to execute people with opinions or thought because Islam respects these people... But we need this legislation because incidents of cursing God have increased. We need to deter them,” opposition MP Ali al-Deqbasi said during the debate.

The bill becomes effective after the government accepts it, the emir signs it and it is published in the official gazette within one month.

Minister of Justice and Islamic Affairs Jamal Shehab told reporters after the vote that the government will accept and implement the law.

Shiite MPs also demanded that the bill impose the death penalty on anyone who curses their sect’s 12 revered Imams, but the Sunni-dominated parliament rejected their request.

Shiite MP Abdulhameed Dashti said the bill breaches the Kuwaiti constitution and the principles of Islam.

“Why are we trying to show Islam as a religion of death and blood when it is actually the opposite of that,” Dashti said.

(source: Ahlul Bayt News Agency)

IRAN:

Iranian pastor's attorney arrested

An attorney who represented an Iranian Christian pastor under the death penalty has been ordered to prison for "a very broad crime." Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani has been in prison 938 days under the death penalty for his role in the house church movement in Iran. Jordan Sekulow of the American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ) tells OneNewsNow that the pastor's attorney, Mohamad Ali Dadkhah, has previously served time in jail for representing clients in human rights cases.

"... Even though they might not share the faith of a minority religious group or the political position of someone who's in the opposition, they're willing to represent them in court," he reports, "because they believe in at one day attaining the rule of law and the respect for the rule of law that we're used to here in the United States, where anyone can have representation in court and that you're innocent until proven guilty -"

Dadkhah, who recently represented 12 Christians in a separate case, now faces 3 charges himself.

"He was accused of crimes against national security, a very broad crime there -- spreading propaganda against the regime and then having illegal books in his home," Sekulow details.

Dadkhah now faces 9 years in prison, but that has been delayed, as he is appealing the verdict. If the attorney goes to prison, it will be difficult for Pastor Nadarkhani to find other representation.

(source: onenewsnow.com)

INDIA:

Karnataka Cabinet rejectes serial rapist, killer's mercy plea

The Karnataka Cabinet on Monday rejected serial killer Umesh Reddy's mercy plea. Reddy was convicted and sentenced to death by a Fast Track Court in 2006 for the rape and murder of Jayshree Maradi Subbaiah.

Reddy's death sentence was upheld in 2007 by a Bangalore High Court division bench for the 1998 case of rape and murder of Jayshree, a widow. The Supreme Court had on February 1, 2011 upheld his death penalty.

Reddy is a former police constable from Hiriyur taluk, in Chitradurga of Karnataka. He had raped Jayshree on February 28, 1998 in Peenya police limits.

Umesh Reddy has committed crimes in Mysore, Pune, Mumbai, Ahmedabad, Baroda, Hubli and Bangalore.

Reddy who has committed crimes in Mysore, Pune, Mumbai, Ahmedabad, Baroda, Hubli and Bangalore, has 20 cases against him. His mother had petitioned President Pratibha Patil for clemency under Article 72 of the Constitution.

(source: IBN Live)

****************************************************************