News and Updates (as of 12/22/96)

APRIL 16, 2024:

TEXAS----new execution date

After Losing Key Appeal, Execution Date Set For Brownsville Death Row Inmate

For a fourth time, Brownsville death row inmate Ruben Gutierrez has been scheduled to die. MyRGV.com reports a judge has set July 16th as Gutierrez’s new execution date for his role in the 1998 murder of Escolastica Harrison.

The 85-year-old Harrison had been robbed and stabbed to death in her Brownsville trailer home. The latest death date for the 46-year-old Gutierrez comes about 2 months after he lost a key appeal. The Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied his request for DNA testing of crime scene evidence his attorneys insisted would show Gutierrez was not in the home when Harrison was killed.

Gutierrez was initially to be given a lethal injection in October 2019.

The execution was stayed due to a technical issue related to the death warrant. Two other execution dates, in June 2020 and October 2021, were stayed over religious freedom arguments as Texas grappled with whether to allow a spiritual advisor to be with an inmate in the death chamber.

(source: KURV vewws)

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

State district judge recommends overturning Melissa Lucio’s death sentence----In a rare joint statement, the district attorney and the defense agreed that prosecutors withheld evidence that could point to a Rio Grande Valley woman’s innocence in the death of her toddler.

A district judge who previously presided over a woman’s capital murder case recommended last week that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overturn Melissa Lucio's 2008 conviction after a district attorney’s office admitted that prosecutors withheld evidence from her defense.

Decades after a jury sentenced Lucio to death for the murder of her 2-year-old daughter, the Cameron County district attorney and Lucio’s legal team cosigned court filings that found key evidence, which included interviews with Lucio’s other children, was suppressed by prosecutors at the time of the case.

For more than 15 years Lucio has lived in the Patrick O'Daniel Unit, where women on death row are housed, since she was charged in the death of her daughter, Mariah Alvarez, who died in the hospital after she was found unresponsive in the bedroom where she had been sleeping. Bruises, scratches and what seemed to be a bite mark on her body led police investigators to believe Mariah was killed. Her death was later determined to be caused by blunt-force head injury.

The prosecutors’ case centered around an ambiguous “confession,” in which police obtained after hours of interrogation, that Lucio had abused her daughter. Lucio has since recanted that admission.

5 of Lucio’s children who were interviewed immediately after the young girl’s death told a Child Protective Services investigator that their mother was not abusive toward them or Mariah, according to court filings. One of her children told the investigator that they witnessed Mariah fall down the flight of stairs in their Harlingen apartment and corroborated Lucio’s account of her daughter’s injuries and declining health in the days after the incident.

But prosecutors did not share those interviews in full with the defense during the trial, which Lucio’s lawyers and the Cameron County district attorney now say was a violation of her constitutional due process rights. The 2 parties said in a statement earlier this month that the withholding of evidence entitles Lucio to relief from her death sentence.

Two years ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers pushed Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz to halt Lucio’s execution during a legislative hearing. Saenz, who was not in office when Lucio was convicted, initially stated he would not intervene, but eventually said he would withdraw a request for an execution date if the criminal appeals court did not act.

“I'm so glad that we did what we did two years ago to step up and — let's not mince words — to stop the state from murdering Melissa Lucio,” Rep. Jeff Leach, a Plano Republican who has advocated for Lucio, told The Texas Tribune.

More than 1/2 of the Texas House asked the state’s parole board to stop the execution in 2022 due to the substantive doubts surrounding her case.

Weeks after the 2022 hearing, the Court of Criminal Appeals halted the execution 2 days before it was scheduled. The court sent Lucio's case back to the Cameron County court to consider several questions.

The following year, Saenz and Vanessa Potkin, Lucio’s lawyer, together submitted findings of fact and conclusions of law to the trial court, providing proof prosecutors withheld evidence from the defense.

On Friday, State District Judge Arturo Nelson signed the court filings, recommending the Court of Criminal Appeals overturn Lucio’s conviction and death sentence.

Nelson had previously presided over Lucio’s case. During the 2008 trial, Nelson refused to allow a social worker and psychologist to testify for Lucio’s innocence defense at trial. Her advocates argued that the absence of this crucial testimony could explain why Lucio might falsely confess as a longtime victim of sexual abuse and domestic violence.

Leach said the criminal justice system failed Lucio, from the initial interrogation to the prosecution. He added there is still work that needs to be done to make this right as long as Lucio is on death row.

Jordan Steiker, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin, said it's “exceptionally rare” for the prosecution and defense to agree on findings of fact that prosecutorial misconduct occurred during a trial.

Lucio’s case, which Steiker described as a combination of bad forensic evidence and the withholding of exculpatory evidence, is one of those rare examples of a district attorney’s office acknowledging an error in court.

When the defense doesn’t have access to the same evidence as prosecutors, there isn’t a level playing field, Steiker said. This is known as a “Brady violation.”

It’s not clear when the Court of Criminal Appeals will consider the state district judge’s recommendation. Lucio does not have a scheduled execution date, but remains incarcerated. Texas has executed one person in 2024.

“We hope and pray the Court of Criminal Appeals will agree with the District Attorney, the defense, and Judge Nelson and our mother can come home to her family,” several of Lucio’s children said in the statement on Monday. “It’s been 17 years that we have been without her. We love her and miss her and can’t wait to hug her.”

(source: The Texas Tribune)

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

Melissa Lucio death penalty case headed back to Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

Ajudge on Friday signed off on an agreed order between the Cameron County District Attorney’s Office and appellate attorneys for Melissa Lucio that she did not have access to evidence that would have corroborated her story that her 2-year-old daughter died from a fall, not child abuse.

Arturo Nelson, the county’s senior judge who sits on the bench in the 138th state District Court, ordered that the court’s clerk will prepare a transcript and and transmit the order, “including the Judgment, Sentence, Indictment, docket sheets, and other exhibits and evidentiary matter filed in the trial records of this cause, to the Court of Criminal Appeals,” or CCA.

He was appointed to the case by Missy Medary, presiding judge of the Fifth Administrative Judicial Region, on April 10, court records show.

Lucio, 55, is the 1st Mexican-American woman to be condemned to death in Texas.

She was convicted in July 2008 of the murder of her daughter, Mariah Alvarez, and was sentenced to death.

She has long maintained her innocence, saying her daughter fell down a staircase at their Harlingen apartment, and that she falsely confessed after about five hours of interrogation at the Harlingen Police Department.

She narrowly avoided an April 27, 2022 execution by just 2 days when on April 25, 2022, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that four claims in a writ of habeas corpus filed on April 18, 2022 met the requirements to stay her execution.

One of those claims that is at issue in the agreed order is that prosecutors at the time suppressed favorable, material evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, which stipulates that prosecutors must turn over exculpatory evidence to defense attorneys.

That evidence included that one of her children actually saw Mariah fall down the stairs, and that her children told Child Protective Services and police that she was not physically abusive to Mariah or the other children. The evidence also included a CPS report where Lucio’s children told an investigator that their mother was worried about Mariah following the fall and was caring for her before the child died.

At the time of her trial, Lucio’s attorneys only had summaries of these reports that left out the exculpatory evidence, according to the order.

In a rare move, Lucio’s appellate attorney, Vanessa Potkin, of the Innocence Project, and Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz released a joint statement in early April to MyRGV.com regarding the agreed order.

“Following CCA’s remand and in response to the Court’s directive, the Cameron County District Attorney’s Office undertook further review of Melissa’s case,” the statement reads.

The agreed statement says the joint filing acknowledges that evidence was withheld.

“This joint filing acknowledges that Melissa’s legal team did not have access to information favorable to her defense at the time of trial, thereby entitling her to habeas corpus relief from her conviction and sentence,” the statement reads. “The Agreed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are under review by the trial court.

On Monday, Lucio’s son, Bobby Alvarez, and his son and daughter-in-law, John and Michelle Lucio, released a joint statement on behalf of the family.

It goes on to say that important evidence was never presented to the jury.

“We hope and pray the Court of Criminal Appeals will agree with the District Attorney, the defense, and Judge Nelson and our mother can come home to her family,” the statement read. “It’s been 17 years that we have been without her. We love and miss her and can’t wait to hug her.”

Potkin, Richard Ellis and Sandra Babcock, Lucio’s appellate team, also released a statement about Nelson’s findings.

“Judge Nelson, who presided over Melissa’s trial, found that critical information was withheld from the defense at the time of trial,” the statement read.

It goes on further to reference Lucio’s stay of execution and the Cameron County District Attorney’s Office further review after remand.

“After that review, the DA’s office concluded that the undisputed facts show that favorable evidence was withheld from Melissa’s defense team at the time of trial,” the statement read. “Judge Nelson found that critical information was withheld from the defense at the time of trial and that Lucio ‘met her burden of proof, by a preponderance of evidence, that she would not have been convicted in light of the suppressed evidence.’

“The case now moves to the CCA, which has the ultimate power to decide whether the conviction should be set aside.”

Lucio is incarcerated at the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Patrick L. O’ Daniel facility in Gatesville, Texas.

(source: myrgv.com)

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

Congratulations are in order to Melissa Lucio and her attorneys. News broke Monday that on Friday, the judge in Cameron County, TX signed the order as proposed jointly by Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz and Melissa's legal team. THIS IS NOT OVER. The order still must be upheld by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Death Penalty Action and the Free Melissa Lucio Campaign are not calling for further action at this time.

Statement of the Family of Melissa Lucio

“We are grateful to our mother’s legal team for their hard work to bring the truth to light and to D.A. Saenz for taking another look at our mother’s case and recognizing that she did not receive a fair trial and her conviction should be overturned. Important evidence that our sister Mariah’s death was an accident, not a murder, was never presented to the jury. We hope and pray the Court of Criminal Appeals will agree with the District Attorney, the defense, and Judge Nelson and our mother can come home to her family. It’s been 17 years that we have been without her. We love her and miss her and can’t wait to hug her.”

-- Bobby Alvarez, Melissa Lucio’s son

-- John and Michelle Lucio, Melissa’s Son and Daughter-in-Law

Statement of Melissa Lucio’s Attorneys

“On April 12, 2024, the Honorable Judge Arturo Nelson entered findings of fact and conclusions of law recommending that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) overturn Melissa Lucio’s conviction and death sentence. Judge Nelson, who presided over Melissa’s trial, found that critical information was withheld from the defense at the time of trial. On April 25, 2022, the CCA issued a stay of execution for Melissa and ordered the 138th Judicial District Court of Cameron Country to consider new evidence of her innocence in the death of her daughter, Mariah Alvarez, along with other claims challenging the fairness and reliability of her conviction. Following the remand and in response to the CCA’s directive, the Cameron County District Attorney’s Office undertook further review of Melissa’s case. After that review, the DA’s office concluded that the undisputed facts show that favorable evidence was withheld from Melissa’s defense team at the time of trial. Judge Nelson found that critical information was withheld from the defense at the time of trial and that Lucio ‘met her burden of proof, by a preponderance of the evidence, that she would not have been convicted in light of the suppressed evidence.’ The case now moves to the CCA, which has the ultimate power to decide whether the conviction should be set aside.”

-- Vanessa Potkin, Director of Special Litigation at the Innocence Project; Richard Ellis, attorney at law; Tivon Schardl, Chief of the Capital Habeas Unit for the Federal Public Defender in the Western District of Texas; and Professor Sandra Babcock, Director of the Cornell Center on the Death Penalty Worldwide, Melissa Lucio’s Attorneys

(source: Death Penalty Action)

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

Death row inmate claiming gender discrimination on jury rejected by Supreme Court----The death row inmate claims prosecutors unfairly excluded women from his jury because they tended to be less in favor of the death penalty than white men.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to take up a case brought by a death row inmate who claims Texas prosecutors unfairly kept female jurors off his capital murder jury because of their views on the death penalty, prompting a dissent from Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

In a 7-page dissent in which she was joined by Joe Biden appointee Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sotomayor wrote that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals failed to conduct an “important side-by-side comparison of struck female jurors against male jurors permitted to serve” in Dillion Gage Compton’s trial for the 2016 killing of correctional officer Mari Ann Johnson.

The Barack Obama appointee said the state gave only 1 reason for striking all but 4 women jurors from the 12-person jury: prospective women jurors’ general hesitations about imposing the death penalty.

"A prosecutor may claim that he is striking a woman based on her hesitation to impose the death penalty. When the prosecutor fails to strike a man who has expressed even greater hesitancy, however, it indicates that the woman was struck based on unconstitutional stereotypes about women rather than objective facts," Sotomayor wrote.

The Texas appellate court examined the women’s views on capital punishment “as a group instead of individually," Sotomayor wrote.

“That legal error hid the best indication of discriminatory purpose. Under a side-by-side comparison, it is clear that at least one woman struck by the state had more favorable views on the death penalty than at least one man the state did not strike,” Sotomayor wrote.

In 2023, the Texas appellate court upheld Compton’s conviction and death sentence for strangling and killing Johnson during a lockdown at the French Robertson Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, where Compton was already serving a 25-year sentence for aggravated sexual assault of a child.

The lower court rejected Compton’s claims that prosecutors unfairly used peremptory strikes against women and minorities during jury selection to ensure a majority white male jury. Compton claimed the prosecution’s use of peremptory strikes based on race, ethnicity and gender violated his Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection.

Prosecutors used 13 of their 15 peremptory strikes on women.

The Texas court ruled that the state provided a gender-neutral reason for the strikes, finding that each person struck from the jury “expressed more concern, hesitation or opposition to imposing the death penalty than those venirepersons the state chose not to strike.”

In a petition seeking Supreme Court review of the case, attorneys for Compton argued that the state accepted white male jurors whose views on the death penalty were less supportive than the women kept off the jury – at least 4 of whom Compton said had favorable views on the death penalty.

Sotomayor pointed out that 1 woman juror who voiced strong support for the death penalty — saying capital punishment was “absolutely justified” and “just and necessary” — was struck from the jury while a male prospective juror was not struck despite saying he thought Texas used the death penalty too often.

“The state defended its views-on-the-death-penalty rationale for each struck woman but never compared their views with those of the men it did not strike. Thus, it did not respond to Compton’s comparative argument that the State had retained men with similar views on the death penalty to the struck women,” Sotomayor wrote.

Attorneys for the Texas Special Prosecution Unit argued in a brief to the high court that the appellate court “meaningfully compare[d] the struck women with the men.”

The justice said she would have tossed out the Texas court’s ruling and sent the case back for another analysis.

“This case illustrates the hazards of analysis by aggregate,” Sotomayor wrote. “The [Texas Court of Criminal Appeals] may have been right that most of the struck women expressed less favorable views on the death penalty than most of the men permitted to serve. When the state, however, extends a reason true of many female potential jurors to another female potential juror not based on what she says, but based on the fact that she is a woman, it crosses the line into invidious discrimination.”

Compton, a Black man, also claimed the state unfairly struck the only 2 qualified Black prospective jurors as well as a Hispanic man. The jury was made up of 10 white jurors, 1 Hispanic juror and 1 juror whose race is unknown.

Jennae Swiergula, a Texas Defender Service attorney representing Compton, did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday, nor did 2 members of the Texas Special Prosecution Unit.

(source: Courthouse News)

ALABAMA:

• HB 27 by Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, would allow capital defendants to seek resentencing if their death sentence resulted from judicial override of a jury's sentencing recommendation. The House Judiciary Committee will consider HB 27 on Wednesday, April 17, at 1:30 p.m. Alabama Arise supports HB 27.

(source: Project Hope)

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

Man who raped, murdered Georgia 5-year-old gets death penalty, judge says

WARNING: The following report contains details that some may find graphic or disturbing.

A man found guilty of raping and murdering a Georgia 5-year-old girl has received the death penalty.

On Monday morning, an Alabama judge sentenced 40 year-old Jeremy Williams to death for 4 counts of capital murder, WTVM reports.

Williams was accused of killing Kamarie Holland in Dec. 2021. Police said Hollard’s mother, Kristy Siple, trafficked her daughter to Williams in exchange for money. Prosecutors said Williams forced the 5-year-old to perform sexual acts on him before he strangled her.

In March, Williams pleaded guilty to 4 counts of capital murder, obstruction of a corpse, knowingly recording the acts, rape, and sodomy. Siple pleaded guilty to human sex trafficking and will be sentenced at a later date. While he pleaded guilty, Alabama law requires a 12-person jury to determine if a suspect in a death penalty case is guilty or innocent. Over the course of 3 days, the jury heard graphic testimony from forensic pathologist and another sexual assault victim, WTVM reports.

On Friday, the jurors deliberated for 90 minutes before returning a guilty verdict on all counts. The judge said Monday that Williams’ execution date will be decided at a future date.

(source: WSB TV news)

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

Man sentenced to death for rape, murder of 5-year-old Georgia girl in 2021

The man convicted of killing a 5-year-old girl from Columbus named Kamarie Holland and hiding her body in a vacant home in east Alabama in December 2021 has received the death penalty, according to Columbus Ledger-Examiner.

Jeremy Tremaine Williams, 40, was sentenced to death for capital murder of a child less than 14 years old, kidnapping, rape and sodomy. The date of execution will be determined at a later time.

He was also sentenced to life for knowingly recording the acts of rape and sodomy, and he received 10 years for obstruction of a corpse.

Williams was involved in a sexual relationship with the little girl's mother, according to AL.com. When he tired of her, he asked for Kamarie. The girl's mother, Kristy Marie Siple, asked for $2,500 and Williams countered with $1,300. However, he never paid Siple the money.

Williams recorded the abuse of the child, including forcing her to perform oral sex and smoke methamphetamine with him. Williams reportedly had sex with the girl before and after her death.

Williams confessed to killing Holland as well as his 1-month-old daughter in Alaska in 2005 during a 5-hour interview with the Russell County Sheriff's Office.

He pled guilty to capital murder charges on March 13, 2024. A jury returned a guilty verdict on all counts on Friday.

Kristy Stipe also pled guilty for selling her child to Williams, according to WRBL.com.

In a separate sexual assault case involving a 6-year-old child, Williams was sentenced to life in prison without parole and 20 years in prison on two other charges. He will also have to pay $90,000 to the state.

(source: foxatlanta.com)

LOUISIANA:

Wilbert Rideau, former Louisiana Death-Sentenced Prisoner, is Honored for Extraordinary Journalism During 44 Years at Angola Prison

RACE LOUISIANA On April 12, 2024, Long Island University celebrated the 2023 George Polk Awards in Journalism, honoring investigative journalists and recognizing 16 former winners, including formerly death-sentenced prisoner Wilbert Rideau. Mr. Rideau spent 44 years incarcerated in Louisiana’s Angola State Penitentiary where he created The Lifer, one of the first Black prison periodicals. Sentenced to death in 1961 at age nineteen, Mr. Rideau spent 12 years on death row before the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Furman v. Georgia (1972), which struck down Louisiana’s capital punishment scheme. Mr. Rideau was resentenced to life in prison and moved to general population. Once there, Mr. Rideau tried and failed to get a job at The Angolite, an all-white prison magazine, and instead created The Lifer. Mr. Rideau also wrote as a freelance journalist for local newspapers and magazines. In 1976, “reformist” official C. Paul Phelps took over as Angola Prison’s new warden and named Mr. Rideau as The Angolite’s new editor. “[Mr.] Phelps felt there was a role for freedom of expression and journalism in prison,” said Mr. Rideau. “Censorship, and keeping everything a secret, was counterproductive to changings things.”

As the editor of The Angolite, Mr. Rideau produced a rich body of writing from behind prison walls and proved a vibrant uncensored magazine was a positive force in the prison setting. Mr. Rideau was given unrestricted access to phone lines, cameras, and tape recorders, and was given the opportunity to leave prison with unarmed escorts to interview individuals around the state and visit newspaper conventions. The Angolite gained national recognition for its reporting, particularly after publishing “Prison: The Sexual Jungle,” which described the sexual violence experienced by prisoners at the hands of other prisoners in Angola. In this piece, Mr. Rideau wrote that “the act of rape in the ultramasculine world of prison constitutes the ultimate humiliation visited upon the male.” In a recent interview, Mr. Rideau told The New Yorker that his goal was partly “to humanize everybody in prison, whether it’s ourselves or the guards. Because that is part of the bigger problem: people in the streets did not see us as normal, breathing human beings, like themselves.”

Sentenced to death just 8 weeks after the crime in question, Mr. Rideau would ultimately have 3 trials — all with juries consisting of 12 white men — all of which ended in death sentences. At his 1st trial, the jury returned a death verdict in an hour, but the Supreme Court overturned his sentence, calling the proceedings a “kangaroo court.” In 1964, another all-white male jury returned a guilty verdict after 15 minutes of deliberation, once again sentencing Mr. Rideau to death. 6 years later, a federal court threw out this death sentence, but another jury of 12 white men found Mr. Rideau guilty after just 8 minutes of deliberation. “3 juries with all white men, in a state where half the people are women, and 1/3 of the population was Black. That was justice back then.”

With the support and legal advocacy of Linda LaBranche, the woman who eventually became his wife, Mr. Rideau received a new trial after a federal court ruled the original indictment was flawed. In 2005, at his fourth and final trial, a jury consisting of 1 white man, 1 Black man, and 10 white women, determined Mr. Rideau’s case did not constitute murder. The jury found Mr. Rideau guilty of manslaughter and sentenced him to 21 years in prison. Having been incarcerated since the 60s, Mr. Rideau was immediately released. Reflecting on his release and incarceration, Mr. Rideau reiterated to The New Yorker the importance of his relationship with former warden Phelps. “Of all the people in my life, except my mother, I cannot imagine anyone who had a greater impact on the course of my life and the person I became than him,” Mr. Rideau said. In closing, he also emphasized the importance of prison authorities in creating change. “Sell them on this idea, man! I mean, you can write this story about me and the award, but give credit to this thing that happened, that has never happened since. Sell it to these wardens who are going to be reading this. If it doesn’t benefit you, maybe it’ll benefit somebody else. Maybe one of these wardens will say, ‘Maybe I ought to try this.’”

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

OHIO:

Ohio House bill proposes alternate method for executions in the state----HB-392 would allow inmates to choose between lethal injection and nitrogen hypoxia. In January, Alabama was the first state to use nitrogen gas for an execution.

Ohio legislators held the 1st hearing last week for a bill that would change Ohio's options for the death penalty.

Ohio has not executed anyone since 2018. In 2020, Governor Mike DeWine declared lethal injection "no longer an option." There are currently 118 inmates on death row, according to the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction's website.

House Bill 392, sponsored by State Representatives Brian Stewart (R-Ashville) and Phil Plummer (R-Dayton) would give inmates on death row a choice between lethal injection and nitrogen hypoxia. If lethal drugs are not available, nitrogen gas would be required to be used.

"This would provide a legal means for us to continue to carry out these sentences that unanimous juries have imposed in Ohio," Stewart said.

In January, Alabama was the first state to carry out an execution using nitrogen hypoxia.

"I think from a lot of people's standpoint, it was an experimental method that went horribly wrong," State Representative Michele Grim (D-Toledo) said. "It left the inmate convulsing for at least two minutes and he was straining against his restraints."

Grim is part of the Government Oversight Committee and has spoken out against the bill.

"Veterinarians don't use this method to euthanize our pets when they need to be euthanized," Grim said. "There's a lot of distress they've seen in that method. So if veterinarians are not using this method to humanely euthanize pets, why would we be using that on human beings?"

"The negative feedback came from death penalty abolitionists who have negative feedback to every execution that's been carried out," Stewart said.

The bill had its first hearing last week.

"We've had sponsor testimony that we thought went very well," Stewart said. "This bill has the support of Attorney General Dave Yost. It has support of the Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association."

Stewart said he believes capital punishment should be rare, but available as an option.

"There is another bill in the Ohio Legislature which would abolish the death penalty," Stewart said. "I would encourage people who are against the death penalty to go work on that bill."

House Bill 259 is a bipartisan bill, sponsored by Jean Schmidt (R-Loveland) and Adam Miller (D-Columbus) to abolish the death penalty. The bill is currently in the Finance Committee and has had two hearings so far.

The next step for HB-392 is — if the committee chair Bob Peterson (R-Washington Court House) gives the bill the go-ahead — proponent and opponent testimony to start.

(source: WTOL news)

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

Hamilton County Prosecutor Joseph T. Deters announces death penalty indictment against Tianna Robinson for the murder of Nahla Miller

Today, Hamilton County Prosecutor Joseph T. Deters announced the death penalty indictment against Tianna Robinson (DOB 1/17/96) for the murder of her 4-year-old daughter, Nahla Miller. Robinson is now charged with 1 count of Aggravated Murder with death penalty specification, 2 counts of Murder, 1 count of Felonious Assault, and 1 count of Endangering Children.

Robinson was previously indicted for 1 count of Attempt Murder (F1), 2 counts of Felonious Assault (F2), and 1 count of Child Endangering (F2), relating to an incident in her Springfield Township home that occurred on April 13, 2021. Robinson beat and strangled her daughter, Nahla, until her heart stopped. Nahla was transported to Children’s Hospital where she remained until she was removed from life support on April 21, 2021. Investigators believe Nahla had been abused for months.

The Coroner’s Office has ruled Nahla’s death a homicide. The cause of death was determined to be strangulation and blunt force trauma, resulting in significant internal injuries.

Hamilton County Prosecutor Joseph T. Deters commented, “I have never understood how anyone could hurt a little kid so badly, especially the child’s own mother. Violence like this goes against every instinct we are born with as humans and as parents. These cases are exactly why I worked so hard in 1997 to help pass legislation making the purposeful murder of a child under the age of 13 a death penalty eligible offense.

This year has been especially difficult – with what seems like case after case of horrific acts perpetrated against children. But rest assured we will not stop until justice has been served for Nahla Miller and her family.”

(source: hcpros.org)

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

Financing of Ashland County’s death-penalty case still unknown

Who will pay for Ashland County’s pending capital case?

There are only 2 options — Howard Walters or Ashland County. But the answer to that question remains a mystery and court records indicate it could be May before it’s answered.

Walters, 59, is accused of the 2023 slaying of his son-in-law, Kurtis Harstine, 41. He faces a number of charges related to Harstine’s death, including aggravated murder.

The case is being tried as a capital case, meaning Walters faces the death penalty. It also means Walters, under state law, is afforded rights such as having an extra attorney and experts.

‘New ground’

But capital cases are also expensive. The last one cost the county $115,734.30 because the defendant, Shawn Grate, was determined to be indigent.

Walters, on paper, is not indigent, Ashland County Prosecutor Chris Tunnell has said. But the question came up when Walters’ wife filed for divorce in November, which froze the couple’s assets and bank accounts.

“Frankly, this is sorta new ground for everybody. It’s rare that you have someone in this status,” Tunnell has said of Walters.

That divorce wrapped up last month, court records show, which should bring the answer to the question at the forefront of this story into focus.

The wife, her divorce attorney argued, is a “stay-at-home grandmother” who hasn’t worked for six years and who has relied on the couple’s rental property income and her former husband’s job.

She started college but never finished “because she worked to help (Walters) through college.”

The separation agreement states Walters earned approximately $100,000 per year for the last 3 years “from his employment and consulting work, but he is no longer employed due to being incarcerated for his pending criminal charges.”

Walters worked as a professor of adult education at Ashland University from 2003-2021, according to his LinkedIn account.

Most recently, he worked for North Central State College as an academic administrator from June 2021 to May 2023 and his account lists him as a freelance “research and evaluation scholar” currently.

Court records show an LLC with 8 rental properties with a total assessed value of just under $710,000.

According to the separation agreement, the wife will receive the marital residence, all 8 rental properties, the LLC bank account and an equal share of Walters’ retirement assets.

A pre-trial hearing for the capital case was scheduled for Tuesday — but Walters’ attorney, Jim Mayer III, asked for a continuance.

The reason? Mayer said it will take time to disperse funds according to the separation agreement for an equal division of retirement assets.

“That process is underway but funds will not be dispersed until the end of April, beginning of May 2024. As a result, (Walters) is unable to accurately attest via affidavit to the account balance until it has been divided and taxes and penalties assessed,” reads Mayer’s motion.

Mayer asked the court to schedule the pre-trial hearing for the 1st or 2nd week of May.

The court has yet to reschedule the hearing, according to court records.

Ready, if necessary

Meanwhile, the Ashland County Court of Common Pleas has planned for the money should it ever be needed for the case. The budget reflects $125,000 earmarked for “capital case fees.”

The hourly rate for a public defender in a capital case is $140 and applies to all stages, including trial, appeal and post conviction proceedings.

According to reporting from Court News Ohio, the Ohio Public Defender Commission used to cover 100% of the costs for these cases.

“Now, counties pay a portion of the costs through their legal defense funds,” reads the article from July 2023.

(source: ashlandsource.com)

ARKANSAS:

Murder trial set for Fayetteville man after plea deal falls through, officials confirm----According to court documents, the state is pursuing the death penalty in this case.

A man charged with killing a woman in Fayetteville and disposing of her body has pled not guilty to capital murder— his trial date has been set for August 26, 2024.

Kacey Jennings, 30, is accused of capital murder, abuse of a corpse, tampering with evidence, and theft after the Fayetteville Police Department (FPD) investigated the disappearance of Allison Maria Castro and concluded that Jennings had killed and disposed of her body.

Washington County Prosecutor Matt Durrett confirms that in a hearing on April 15, his office was expecting a guilty plea, but the trial is moving forward after Jennings changed his mind.

Durrett also said that Castro's family was in the courtroom, having traveled from Hawaii for the hearing.

According to the FPD, on Sept. 19, 2022, officers responded to a home where they reportedly found Jennings overdosing on drugs.

While investigating, officers reportedly heard concerns from family members about the welfare of Jenning's ex-girlfriend, Castro.

The FPD said that after not hearing from Castro, officers reported her missing the same day and started looking into "exactly what occurred."

Evidence led officers to believe that Jennings killed Castro and disposed of her body, and a week later, Jennings was arrested for 1st-degree murder and disposing of a body.

Since his initial arrest, Jennings' charges have been amended to capital murder, disposing of a body, tampering with evidence, and theft.

According to court documents, the state is pursuing the death penalty in this case.

If you have any information concerning this investigation, you're asked to contact the FPD at (479) 587-3555.

(source: 5newsonline.com)

NIGERIA:

Falana rejects capital punishment, calls for focus on root causes

Human rights lawyer Femi Falana has weighed in on the debate surrounding capital punishment, calling it an ineffective solution that ignores the root of societal problems.

Falana, a prominent figure in Nigerian law, rejected the notion that capital punishment acts as a deterrent, arguing it fails to address the underlying issues that lead to crime.

The activist spoke on Monday during a virtual programme to mark the 10th anniversary of the Chibok schoolgirls’ abduction organised by Women Radio 91.7fm.

On April 14, 2014, Boko Haram terrorists attacked the Government Girls Secondary School, Chibok in Borno state and abducted about 276 students.

Commenting on adopting capital punishment for kidnappers as recommended by the First Lady, Oluremi Tinubu, Falana said the suggestion is “diversionary”

“We do not subscribe to any form of capital punishment because it has never addressed the root cause of the problems it is meant to address,” he stated.

The statement comes amidst discussions on how to tackle rising crime rates in Nigeria. Some have advocated for harsher penalties, including the death penalty, particularly for crimes like kidnapping.

Falana, however, offered a different perspective. He suggests that focusing on corruption, a major issue in Nigeria, might be a more productive approach. “While I think it is a diversionary suggestion,” he said, referring to calls for capital punishment for kidnappers, “other Nigerians would prefer that we recommend capital punishment for the criminality that leads to corruption.”

Falana further highlighted the hypocrisy of advocating for harsher punishments for some crimes while ignoring others.

“Those who are making suggestions that kidnappers be shot at would also not want to extend that to those who loot the treasury, sometimes to the tune of over N100 billion,” he pointed out, referencing the vast sums embezzled through corruption.

(source: ripplesnigeria.com)

SINGAPORE:

Essay on MHA’s survey findings highlights need for rigorous debate on necessity of Singapore’s death penalty policy----Simone Galimberti highlights Professor Mai Sato’s critique of Singapore’s reliance on the death penalty, particularly questioning the validity of MHA-conducted surveys that allegedly show public support. He advocates for more thorough and unbiased research to inform policy, urging the MHA to openly address the shortcomings identified in Prof. Sato’s analysis.

There is one key way to press against the death penalty in Singapore, and this is about rationally and scientifically bringing forward evidence that supports alternative forms of punishment.

It is about critically analysing and dismantling the rationale that has been used by the People’s Power Party (PAP), the party in power in the city State, for decades, to justify capital punishment.

This is exactly what Professor Mai Sato, an expert on the death capital and an academician at Monash University, did with an essay published on Academia SG, an independent, academician-led platform for bold discussions on sensitive issues related to Singapore’s affairs.

At Monash, Prof Sato leads the Eleos Justice, a research centre whose mission is “to restrict and abolish the death penalty in the Asian region”.

The essay, Singapore’s death penalty for drug trafficking: What the research says and doesn’t, is a comprehensive analysis of the two major ways the Singapore’s government justifies the death penalty: strong citizens’ support for it and its deterrent effect.

The essay does something that is long due: it analyzes all the major reports and researches that have beenå commissioned by Singaporean Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA).

In doing so, the paper at the same time rebuts some of the key positions that Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam had made in a public conversation with youths on the death penalty last October.

The fact that Mr Shanmugam felt the need to engage with representatives of the youths on the issue was itself unusual, a sort of milestone.

It was an indicator that the PAP was forecasting that something in public opinion could slowly and gradually shift in relation to people’s perceptions towards the death punishment.

Therefore, the issue had to be tackled head-on openly and transparently, something that should be commended even if Mr Shanmugam, as expected, used the platform to reiterate the official party policies.

What Prof Sato does was academically rigorous because she highlighted incongruences and weaknesses in the ways these official studies where conducted.

While she is unable to disprove the fact that a good majority of citizens of Singapore accept capital punishment as the best way to tackle illicit drugs, Prof Sato ably proves that the Government’s rationale is not unassailable.

I would invite the readers to go through the essay as it is relatively readable even for a lay person especially thanks to some summaries included and her closing remarks.

The essay also aims to be seen as unbiased and based on facts and analysis, and I might believe that even Mr Shanmugam would credit Prof Sato for that.

One of the major points made is to demonstrate, in a quite convincible manner, that Singaporeans are not clamouring for the death penalty.

For example, the surveys conducted by the Ministry, she explained, are unable to prove how important is the death penalty for the public, and she elaborates that there has never been a major discussion on the issue beyond the usual talking points presented by the government.

I can guarantee the readers that the time spent going through the report is well spent because Prof Sato manages to capture the flaws of the official policies that are at the foundation of the rationale pushed by the PAP to justify capital punishment.

The end of the essay could not be more powerful.

“Whom and what purpose the death penalty serves in Singapore remains unanswered”.

And, once again, it is not just an activist who admirably and emotionally put her case or an opinion writer stating this but someone who should be considered as the most renowned academician on the death penalty in Asia.

Let’s forget that the country Prof Sato is originally from, Japan, is like Singapore, a retentionist.

Not only as academician but also as civil society organizer, she has developed, along the years, not only tons of expertise but also a lot of complex nuances on how to deal with the issue there.

While the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has not directly responded to the essay by Prof Sato, it did issue a statement in response to a petition submitted to the Minister for Home Affairs and Law, K. Shanmugam, calling for a moratorium on the death penalty.

Just a couple of days after Prof Sato’s publication, MHA asserted that its stringent approach to drug trafficking has saved more lives.

The statement highlighted that individuals who engage in drug trafficking do so for profit, fully aware of the consequences. It emphasized that those caught trafficking drugs beyond the capital threshold and sentenced to death were afforded full and due process in court, where they could present their defences.

MHA further noted that capital punishment has been extensively discussed in Singapore, including in Parliament, where it has been upheld. Additionally, MHA mentioned studies indicating strong domestic support for the death penalty, including for drug trafficking—a point contested by Prof Sato.

As clearly explained in Prof Sato’s essay, Singapore needs a real conversation on the issue.

Hopefully, Mr Shanmugam’s public engagement on the issue was not just a one-off event, and, albeit reluctantly, the PAP will feel the need not to bury its head under the sand but instead proactively engage the public, especially the new generations.

The party knows that youths might develop different views on the death penalty, and one of the two pillars that justify the death penalty support in Singapore, the strong public opinion for it, might crack and crumble.

It would be very welcome if Mr Shanmugam would issue a directive for more comprehensive and stronger studies that would address the flaws identified by Prof Sato.

Can the Law School at the National University of Singapore become a centre of expertise on capital punishment?

I do understand that this question looks like a provocation, but if the death penalty is so important for the government of Singapore and if the Ministry of Home Affairs wants to back its policy through evidence, then what you need is more impartial research on the issue.

Prof Sato’s essay might have opened a new era in the fight against capital punishment in Singapore.

It is not that the day the city-state will get rid of it will become closer because of it, but at least, from now onwards, the PAP and the government will be forced to play a much better role in explaining why the death penalty is so indispensable for Singapore.

It is going to be a battle of evidence vs evidence.

All those activists on the ground who so boldly and audaciously are fighting capital punishment despite a hostile environment should continue their work, and hopefully, their propositions and work on the ground won’t be dismissed or downplayed so easily as it often happens now.

An editor’s note at the beginning of Prof Sato’s essay reminds us what the death penalty should be about.

“Like all policy tools, capital punishment is only a means to an end and not an end itself”.

Will Mr Shanmugam, his party and his officials at the Ministry agree on this statement?

Will they foster a genuine debate about the pros and cons of the death penalty?

Will they be able to garner the courage to admit that their positions and justifications might not be so rainproof?

Finally, will the parties in the opposition also rise to the occasion and contribute to a genuine, unbiased conversation on the death penalty?

(source: Opinion; Simone Galimberti writes on democracy, social inclusion, youth development, regional integration, SDGs and human rights in the context of Asia Pacific----gutzy.asia)

IRAQ:

Iraqi court sentences 6 drug dealers to death

An Iraqi court on Sunday issued death sentences to 6 drug dealers, including 3 foreigners.

"The Central Criminal Court issued a verdict to execute 6 drug dealers who were convicted of trafficking narcotic substances," a statement by the media office of the Supreme Judicial Council said, without specifying the nationalities of the t3 foreigners.

The statement said that 4 of the convicts, including a foreigner, worked within an international network to promote marijuana and were found in possession of 2.8 kg.

The other 2 convicted foreigners were found in possession of 10 kg of opium and various narcotic substances, the statement added.

The chaos and conflicts that have engulfed Iraq since the U.S. invasion in 2003 impeded successive Iraqi governments from effectively addressing the threat of drugs.

In May 2023, Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia' al-Sudani underlined the importance of waging "a war on drugs," saying that drug dealing remains one of the main ways of financing terrorism, and the circulation of drugs flourishes in the shadow of terrorism.

(source: english.news.cn)

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

Iraq postpones vote on bill including death penalty for same-sex acts

Iraqi lawmakers have postponed voting on a bill that includes the death penalty or life in prison for same-sex relations – a measure that diplomats from Western countries said could have serious consequences for Iraq’s political and economic ties if it goes through.

Parliament was in session today, with the bill – an amendment to an anti-prostitution law – 2nd on its agenda.

It imposes life imprisonment or the death penalty for anyone engaging in same-sex relations or anyone who swaps their wife with someone else’s for sexual purposes.

It also bans promotion of homosexuality and violations are punishable by at least 7 years in prison.

2 lawmakers in the session say the vote was postponed over time constraints and that some disagreements remained over proposed amendments.

Currently, mainly Muslim Iraq does not explicitly criminalize gay sex, but loosely defined morality clauses in its penal code have been used to target LGBT people.

Parliament was in session to vote on the bill just hours before Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani was scheduled to meet US President Joe Biden in Washington on a trip focused on pushing for more US investment.

More than 60 countries criminalize gay sex, while same-sex sexual acts are legal in more than 130 countries, according to Our World in Data.

When Uganda in May 2023 enacted a law that includes the death penalty for certain same-sex acts, the World Bank halted new lending to the East African nation and the US announced visa and travel restrictions against Ugandan officials.

(source: timesofisrael.com)

IRAN----executions

Marjan Hajizadeh, 19, hanged in the Central Prison of Zanjan, Iran

A 19-year-old woman named Marjan Hajizadeh was executed on Thursday, April 11, 2024, in the Central Prison of Zanjan, Iran.

Marjan Hajizadeh and her husband, Esmail Hassaniani, 29, had been sentenced to death on drug related charges. They were arrested and imprisoned 3 years ago.

Marjan Hajizadeh was only 16 years and 4 months old at the time of arrest and detention.

Marjan and Esmail were arrested on a motorway in Zanjan. Marjan didn’t know her husband was carrying drugs, and she was innocent.

The execution of this young couple has not yet been announced by the official authorities at the time of publishing this news.

Marjan Hajizadeh is the 233rd woman to be executed in Iran since 2007, according to the data gathered by the NCRI Women’s Committee. She is the 4th woman executed in Iran in 2024.

Record holder of executions of women

The Iranian regime is the world’s top record holder of executions of women.

No government in the world has executed so many women. The list does not account for the tens of thousands of women executed in Iran on political grounds.

The NCRI Women’s Committee previously mentioned that many of the women executed by the mullahs’ regime are themselves victims of domestic violence against women and have acted in self-defense.

An average of 15 women were executed every year under the former government in Iran.

However, 26 women were executed under Raisi government in 2023, which is 11 more than the previous average.

The NCRI Women’s Committee calls on the United Nations, the European Union, and other relevant international organizations to take urgent action to save the lives of those on death row and stop the use of death penalty in Iran.

(source: women.ncr-iran.org)

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

Zanjan Central Prison, execution of a young couple In Iran

Esmaeil Hosniani and Marjan Hajizadeh arrested 3 years ago in a joint case on charges of drug trafficking. And sentenced to death in zanjan centeral prison.

According to the Iranian Human Rights Society Website of Iran, on Monday, 15 of April 2024. A young couple executed in Zanjan Central Prison on charges related to drugs. The female prisoner who executed had only 19 years old. The death sentence for this couple carried out on Thursday, 11th of April 2024, in Zanjan Central Prison.

Esmaeil Hosniani and Marjan Hajizadeh arrested 3 years ago in a joint case on charges of drug trafficking and sentenced to death. It said that Marjan Hajizadeh is the child of a poor family and unaware that her husband involved in drug trafficking during their arrest.

Marjan Hajizadeh was 16 years and 3 months old at the time of her arrest. Consequently, Marjan is the 1st juvenile offender executed in recent years on drug-related charges.

Execution is a tool of repression and intimidation of the society

The leaders of the government use execution as the most important tool for suppressing and intimidating society. They try to prevent the resurgence of uprisings by increasing the number of executions. Government leaders strongly suppress any gathering related to condemning executions. And even prevent the gathering of the families of the condemned prisoners.

Revelation of executions, the scene of confrontation between the people and the government

The concealment of the government’s leaders in relation to executions can be understood by not officially announcing them. They want to convey to the people that they can execute anyone they want without mentioning their names. This has turned the discovery or announcement of the names of the executed into a scene of confrontation between the people and the oppressive government. The revelation of these executions has so far led to the recognition and registration of the oppressive regime as a violator of human rights in international forums.

(source: en.iranhrs.org)

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

5 Executed for Drug Offenses in Mashhad

In a recent development, 5 individuals convicted of drug-related offenses faced execution in Vakilabad Prison, Mashhad, on April 15, 2024, according to Haal Vsh.

The identities of the executed individuals were withheld from the report. However, it was noted that 4 of them hailed from Mashhad, while one was identified as an Afghan national.

No official sources or domestic media outlets within the country have provided coverage of these executions at the time of writing. In 2023, 66% of HRANA’s reports on executions lacked official announcements by judicial authorities and went unreported by media inside Iran, highlighting a troubling lack of transparency in due process.

The reports from the Department of Statistics and Publication of Human Rights Activists for the year 2023 reveal a concerning prevalence of executions for drug offenses in Iran, constituting 56.4% of the total executions.

(source: en.hrana.org)

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

Urgent Action Needed: Iranian Regime Executes Seven, Including Young Woman Arrested at 16

On Thursday, April 11, Ali Khamenei’s henchmen, in a heinous crime, executed a 19-year-old woman who was barely over 16 at the time of her arrest, along with her husband. This young couple, named Marjan Hajizadeh and Esmail Hassaniani, were hanged in Zanjan Central Prison after 3 years of imprisonment, coinciding with the Eid al-Fitr celebrations.

On Sunday, April 14, a prisoner named Arsalan Hashemi in Hamedan Central Prison, on Saturday, April 13, a prisoner named Abuzar Salem in Isfahan Central Prison, on April 7, Alireza Marzban in Shiraz Central Prison, on April 5, Hassan Ali Mirza Nia in Khorramabad Central Prison, and on March 25, Abbas Aghaei in Tabriz Central Prison were executed by Khamenei’s henchmen.

On the other hand, on Sunday, April 14, five prisoners in Qezelhessar Prison in Karaj were transferred to solitary confinement for the execution of their death sentences.

On Saturday night, April 13, Mehrdad Abdollahzadeh, a 20-year-old from Sardasht who was making a living through the exhausting job of Kolbari in the Beitush border heights, fell from the mountain and died instantly due to the shooting of the criminal officials of the mullahs’ regime.

The Iranian Resistance once again calls on the United Nations, relevant organizations, the European Union, and member countries to strongly condemn these criminal executions and to take immediate action to save the lives of prisoners sentenced to death. It also re-emphasizes the necessity of an international investigation delegation to visit Iranian prisons.

(source: Secretariat of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) )

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

Asghar Tabarzin Executed in Tabriz in March

A man named Asghar Tabarzin was executed for murder charges in Tabriz Central Prison in March.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a man was executed in Tabriz Central Prison on 17 March. His identity has been established as 34-year-old Asghar Tabarzin from Hashtroud. He was sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder by the Criminal Court.

An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Asghar Tabarzin was arrested for murder 3 years ago. He worked for a company where he gets into a fight with the site manager that ended with the murder.”

Despite a month passing, his execution has not been reported by domestic media or officials in Iran.

Those charged with the umbrella term of “intentional murder” are sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) regardless of intent or circumstances due to a lack of grading in law. Once a defendant has been convicted, the victim’s family are required to choose between death as retribution, diya (blood money) or forgiveness.

In 2023, at least 282 people including two juvenile offenders and 15 women, were executed for murder charges, the second highest number of qisas executions since 2010. Only 20% of the recorded qisas executions were announced by official sources. In 2023, Iran Human Rights also recorded 857 cases of families choosing diya or forgiveness instead of qisas executions.

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

Alireza Marzban Secretly Executed in Shiraz----He wasn’t able to come up with the diya demanded by the plaintiffs in time.

Alireza Marzban, a man on death row for a murder he was alleged to have committed during a group fight, was secretly executed in Shiraz Central Prison after he failed to come up with the set diya (blood money).

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a man was executed in Shiraz Central Prison (Adel Abad) on 7 April. His identity has been established as 27-year-old Alireza Marzban from Shiraz. He was sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder by the Criminal Court.

An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Alireza Marzban was arrested for charges of murder during a group fight. He maintained his innocence throughout the interrogation phase and trial. He said he’d participated in the fight but didn’t kill anyone and is completely innocent. Alireza was executed without a last family visit. He’d been transferred for execution once before but had managed to obtained an extension. But he wasn’t able to come up with the diya demanded by the plaintiffs in time.”

At the time of writing, his execution has not been reported by domestic media or officials in Iran.

In 2023, at least 282 people including 2 juvenile offenders and 15 women, were executed for murder charges, the second highest number of qisas executions since 2010. Only 20% of the recorded qisas executions were announced by official sources. In 2023, Iran Human Rights also recorded 857 cases of families choosing diya or forgiveness instead of qisas executions.

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

Afghan Abuzar Salem Executed in Isfahan

Abuzar Salem, an Afghan national on death row for murder, was executed in Isfahan Central Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, an Afghan man was executed in Isfahan Central Prison (Dastgerd) on 13 April. His identity has been established Abuzar Salem, a 30-year-old man from Pol Khomri in Afghanistan.

Abuzar was arrested for murder around 3 years ago and sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder.

It is important to note that Afghan nationals constitute the largest group of non-Iranian executions and death row cases in Iranian prisons. The number of their executions have been steadily rising since the Taliban takeover in 2021. At least 5 Afghan nationals were executed in 2021 which more than tripled in 2022, with 16 Afghan nationals including a juvenile offender and a woman executed. In 2023, at least 25 Afghans were executed, a 56% rise compared to the previous year. Abuzar Salem is the 6th Afghan national executed in 2024.

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

Probable Child Offender and Child Bride Marjan Hajizadeh and Esmail Hassaniani Executed for Drug Charges

Marjan Hajizadeh and Esmail Hassaniani, a couple sentenced to death for drug-related charges in a joint case, were executed in Zanjan Central Prison. Marjan is reported to have been 16 at the time of arrest which IHRNGO is working to confirm. If verified, she will be the 1st child offender executed for drug charges since 2014. She was also a child bride forced into the marriage.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a husband and wife were were executed in Zanjan Central Prison on 11 April. Their identities have been established 29-year-old Esmail Hassaniani and 19-year-old Marjan Hajizadeh who were sentenced to death for drug-related charges in a joint case.

An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Esmail Hassaniani and Marjan Hajizadeh were arrested for drug charges around three years ago and sentenced to death. Marjan was only 16 years and 4 months old when she was arrested and had been forced to marry Esmail.”

At the time of writing, Iran Human Rights is working to verify her age through document evidence.

“Marjan’s father was a labourer and they were extremely poor. Marjan and Esmail were arrested on a motorway in Zanjan. Marjan didn’t know her husband was carrying drugs and was innocent. But they executed both of them,” the source added.

Articles 88 and 89 of the 2013 Islamic Penal Code removed the death penalty for ta’zir* crimes committed by offenders under the age of 18. As drug-related offences are considered ta’zir crimes, it is unlawful to carry out drug execution of child offenders per the Islamic Republic’s own laws. If Marjan’s age is confirmed, she will be the first child offender to be executed for drug offences since 2014. She is also the 4th woman executed in 2024.

At the time of writing, their executions have not been reported by domestic media or officials in Iran.

Iran is one of the few countries in the world that still carries out the death penalty for juvenile offenders. According to Iran Human Rights' reports, at least 70 juvenile offenders were executed between 2010 and 2023 in Iran.

The Convention on the Rights of the Child, which the Islamic Republic is a signatory to, explicitly states that “Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age.”

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which the Islamic Republic of Iran is also a signatory to, prohibits the issuance and implementation of the death penalty for crimes committed by an individual below 18 years of age.

Drug-related executions have continuously risen every year since 2021. According to IHRNGO’s 2023 Annual Report on the Death Penalty, at least 471 people were executed for drug-related charges, an 84% increase compared to 2022 (256) and about 18 times the average of drug-related executions in 2018-2020.

On 10 April 2024, 80+ Iranian and international organisations and groups called for joint action to stop drug-related executions, urging UNODC to make “any cooperation with the Islamic Republic contingent on a complete halt on drug-related executions.

* Ta'zir: punishment for offences at the discretion of the judge.

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

Nasir Jabari at Risk of Execution in Rasht----He will be executed in the next 2 days if he cannot obtain an extension from the plaintiffs in the case.

Nasir Jabari, a man sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder, was transferred to solitary confinement in preparation for his execution in Rasht Central Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a death row prisoner was transferred to solitary confinement in Rasht Central Prison on 15 April. His identity has been established as 40-year-old Nasir Jabari from Sari who was sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder.

An informed source told IHRNGO: “Nasir Jabari was arrested for the murder of his friend during a financial dispute around 3 years ago. He will be executed in the next 2 days if he cannot obtain an extension from the plaintiffs in the case.”

In 2023, at least 282 people including 2 juvenile offenders and 15 women, were executed for murder charges, the 2nd highest number of qisas executions since 2010. Only 20% of the recorded qisas executions were announced by official sources. In 2023, Iran Human Rights also recorded 857 cases of families choosing diya or forgiveness instead of qisas executions.

(source for all: iranhr.net)

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

Iran Executes 8 for Drug Offenses as Death Penalties Rise

The Islamic Republic has executed 8 more prisoners over the past few days amid a significant spike in death penalties.

On April 14, 2024, Hamedan Prison executed Arsalan Hashemi, a man convicted of drug offenses, according to human rights group HRANA.

Hashemi had been sentenced to death in 2021.

There have been no reports on the execution by Iranian authorities or domestic media outlets.

5 people convicted of drug-related offenses were also executed at Vakilabad Prison in Mashhad on April 15, according to Haalvsh human rights news agency.

On April 11, Zanjan Prison in Iran executed Esmaeil Hosniani, 29, and his wife, Marjan Hajizadeh, 19, according to the Iran Human Rights Organization.

The couple was sentenced to death three years ago for drug-related offenses.

In recent weeks, the sharp rise in executions in the country sparked passionate calls from Iranian civil society to abolish the death penalty, with the hashtag #NoToExecution becoming increasingly popular among social media users.

According to the Iran Human Rights Organization's report, the Islamic Republic executed approximately 834 individuals last year.

(source: iranwire.com)

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

Disturbing Executions in Iran Demand Global Condemnation

Iran’s regime has carried out a horrifying wave of executions in recent days, including the brutal killing of a young woman who was just 16 years old at the time of her arrest. These heinous acts demand immediate global condemnation and action to halt the unjust executions.

Executions of Minors and Innocents

On April 11th, the regime’s henchmen executed 19-year-old Marjan Hajizadeh and her husband Esmail Hassaniani in Zanjan Central Prison. Marjan was only 16 when initially arrested, making her execution a grave violation of international laws prohibiting the death penalty for minors. Their executions cruelly coincided with Eid al-Fitr celebrations.

In a separate tragic incident on April 13th, 20-year-old Mehrdad Abdollahzadeh from Sardasht was killed by regime officials while working as a kolbari (cross-border porter) near the Beitush border heights. He fell to his death after being shot at by the criminal authorities.

Recent Wave of Executions

Over the past 2 weeks, the Iranian regime has executed at least 6 other prisoners across various prisons:

April 14: Arsalan Hashemi in Hamedan Central Prison

April 13: Abuzar Salem in Isfahan Central Prison

April 7: Alireza Marzban in Shiraz Central Prison

April 5: Hassan Ali Mirza Nia in Khorramabad Central Prison

March 25: Abbas Aghaei in Tabriz Central Prison

Additionally, 5 prisoners in Qezelhessar Prison in Karaj were recently transferred to solitary confinement, likely facing imminent execution.

Global Action Needed

The Iranian Resistance strongly condemns these brutal executions and calls on the United Nations, relevant human rights organizations, the European Union, and member countries to take immediate action. Concrete steps must be taken to save the lives of prisoners on death row and establish an international investigation into the dire human rights situation in Iranian prisons.

The world cannot stand idly by as the Iranian regime perpetrates such egregious violations of human rights and human dignity. Global pressure and accountability measures are urgently needed to halt these disturbing atrocities.

(source: irannewsupdate.com)

APRIL 15, 2024:

FLORIDA:

Prosecutors to seek death penalty case of Palm Bay man accused of killing 3, wounding 2

The state attorney’s office is moving forward with seeking the death penalty for a 26-year-old Palm Bay man who police said fatally shot his mother, sister and grandfather and wounded 2 others, including his 15-year-old nephew, in January.

The notice to pursue the death penalty for the killings, which prosecutors stated were “committed in a cold, calculated and premeditated manner without any pretense of moral or legal justification," was filed last week. The Brevard County judge presiding over the case had already ordered Ta’Shawn Taylor to have a mental evaluation, court records show.

Taylor, who family members said had a history of mental health issues, was indicted by a grand jury in February on 3 counts of 1st-degree premeditated murder in the Jan. 20 shooting deaths of Lisa Suglam, 31, Angella Suglam, 60, and Stephen Suglam, 79, in the family's Palm Bay home.

Palm Bay Police on Sunday at Woodlake Village, at the scene where three people were shot dead and two wounded in an apartment complex. He was also charged with two counts of attempted murder in the shootings of Kamauri Curry, 15, and Gary Taylor, 59, and was scheduled to go before a Brevard County Court judge Wednesday for a first appearance on the formal charge. He has been assigned a public defender. The case, depending on the findings of the evaluation, could take years before going to trial.

Kamauri, who police said was wounded by his uncle, continues to recover and is expected to undergo extensive physical therapy during the course of his recovery, family members and friends reported.

The deadly shooting happened about 9:30 p.m. Jan. 20 at Woodlake Village Apartments on Palm Bay Road. Police said Taylor, armed with a laser-scoped handgun, walked into a bedroom where his mother, Angella Suglam, was lying on the bed with 2 grandchildren, including Kamauri. Taylor fired several rounds, killing his mother and then critically injuring Kamauri, who was shot in the head, police reported.

Police said Taylor then shot his grandfather, Stephen Suglam, and Lisa Suglam, Taylor's sister, to death.

Taylor remains held at the Brevard County Jail on a no bond status. His next court hearing will be before Brevard Circuit Court Judge Tesha Scolaro Ballou on May 3 at the Titusville Courthouse.

(source: floridatoday.com)

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

Penalty phase beginning in trial of man who killed Nassau County deputy

The penalty phase in the trial of the man who pleaded guilty to shooting and killing a Nassau County sheriff's deputy during a traffic stop in 2021 is set to begin Monday morning.

Patrick McDowell pleaded guilty in 2023 to murdering Nassau County Deputy Josh Moyers during a 2021 traffic stop.

McDowell is charged with 1st-degree murder, 8 counts of aggravated battery on an officer and 1 count of using a deadly weapon on a police K-9.

McDowell shot 29-year-old Moyers during a traffic stop just before midnight on Sept. 23, 2021. Moyers died from his injuries at a local hospital three days later.

McDowell fled the scene of the shooting, prompting a 5-day manhunt during which McDowell exchanged gunfire with officers, injuring a Jacksonville Sheriff's Office K-9 attempting to apprehend him.

Ultimately, McDowell was captured on Sept. 28, 2021, after he was found hiding in a concession area of a school's athletic field.

McDowell faces the death penalty for Moyer's killing.

First Coast News will be in the courtroom throughout McDowell's sentencing. ********************

Facing the death penalty: McDowell penalty phase begins

Opening statements in the penalty phase of Patrick McDowell’s case begin Monday morning at the Nassau County Courthouse in Yulee.

McDowell shot and killed Deputy Joshua Moyers during a traffic stop in Callahan in 2021.

He pleaded guilty to the charges, and now, a jury will hear arguments about how McDowell should pay for his crime.

The jury can recommend the death penalty or life in prison.

The penalty phase is expected to take about a week.

(source: WOKV news)

MISSISSIPPI:

Mississippi man charged with 4 counts of Capital Murder

Quadruple Homicide:

Tunica County Sheriff’s Office has issued an arrest warrant for 20-year-old Anthony Carter Jr. a.k.a. “A.J.” of Tunica, MS.

Anthony Carter Jr. has been charged with the shooting death of Steven Burts, 23 of Dundee; Tednequa Moore, 25 of Robinsonville; Moore’s unborn child; and the death of Deshun Isabell, 24 of Tunica, who died with injuries sustained from the car crash that occurred on Friday, November 10, 2023, on Casino Center Boulevard located in Robinsonville, MS.

Anthony Carter Jr. (A.J.) has been charged with:

• 4 counts of Capital Murder

• 4 counts of Conspiracy to Commit a Crime

• 1 count of Drive by Shooting

• 1 count Shooting into a Motor Vehicle

Anthony Carter Jr. is also being charged with the October 26, 2023, Drive by Shooting and Attempted Murder on Steven Burts that occurred in the White Oak Community.

Additionally, Anthony Carter Jr. is being charged in the November 1, 2023, Drive by Shooting and Attempted Murder of Deshun Isabell that occurred in the White Oak Community.

Anthony Carter Jr. is being held at the Tunica County Jail for the Attempted Murder of Thako Jackson and Denzel Jackson that occurred April 4, 2023.

Carter is also being held for his recent arrest on Possession of Controlled Substance, Possession of Firearms, and Contributing to the Delinquency of Minor(s) following a search warrant that was served on April 1, 2024. During this search warrant served on Carter’s vehicle, a number of firearms were recovered.

Deonte Taylor remains in custody at the Tunica County Jail for charges related to the Quadruple Homicide that occurred November 10, 2023, in Robinsonville. Taylor is charged with:

• 3 counts of Capital Murder

• 4 counts of Shooting into a Motor Vehicle

• 4 counts of Conspiracy to Commit a Crime

Capital Murder [Miss. Code Section 97-3-19(1) & (2) (j)] is punishable by life in prison or the death penalty.

There will be additional charges forthcoming, and more arrests made for the investigation related to the November 10, 2023, quadruple homicide. This investigation is active and ongoing. If you have any information regarding this incident, please contact TCSO at 662-363-1411. If you wish to remain anonymous, contact CrimeStoppers at 662-910-0400. Any information leading to an arrest can pay up to $1,000.00.

Tunica County Sheriff’s Office would like to thank the following agencies for their assistance in this investigation: Mississippi Bureau of Investigation, ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives), Mississippi Highway Patrol Crime Scene Unit, and the Mississippi Highway Patrol Reconstruction Team.

(source: visksburgnews.com)

MISSOURI:

The Cruelty of Punishment Without Purpose

Last Tuesday, Brian Dorsey was put to death by the state of Missouri. His execution served no legitimate penological purpose.

Dorsey had been sentenced to death for a crime he committed in 2006. From the moment he was arrested and charged, he accepted responsibility.

Had he received adequate legal representation there’s a good chance he would not have gotten the death penalty. But that was not the case.

During his time in prison, Dorsey compiled an enviable record. He never violated a prison rule and never caused trouble.

Correction officials gave him privileges and responsibilities reserved for only a few of those under a death sentence. And, in the run-up to his execution, 72 of them, the people who worked most closely with him, asked Missouri’s Republican governor, Mike Parson, to spare Dorsey’s life.

They offered compelling evidence that Dorsey was a changed person and had been successfully rehabilitated. Their testimony on his behalf was genuinely unprecedented and received nationwide attention.

What received less notice was a petition that Dorsey’s lawyers filed with United States Supreme Court that asked them to consider whether the Eighth Amendment prohibits the execution of a death sentence against a person who has demonstrated that he has been rehabilitated. The Court refused to issue a stay of execution and take up the question his petition had posed.

Still the question remains: why execute someone like Brian Dorsey?

Someone might answer that question by referring to the seriousness of the crime that landed Dorsey among Missouri’s death sentence population. He was convicted of killing Sarah and Ben Bonnie with a shotgun and, during the penalty phase, the state contended that Dorsey had raped Sarah Bonnie.

For those who support the death penalty and believe it should be used to punish the “worst of the worst,” the brutal facts of what Dorsey did would be sufficient to justify his execution. They tether their retributivist commitments to that moment in time when a crime is committed. Nothing else seems to matter.

For those who support the death penalty and believe it should be used to deter murder, the Dorsey case might seem easy. But, at the time Dorsey committed his crime, he was not the kind of rational utility maximizer that deterrence theorists imagine.

As his cert. petition explained, “Dorsey, who had a lifelong history of suffering from major depression, and had been on a crack cocaine binge and not slept in about 72 hours. As he was crashing from his binge, he experienced drug induced psychosis. As he drank more beer and vodka, he became suicidal and also experienced hallucinations and paranoid delusions.”

And even if Dorsey fit the profile of someone who could be deterred by the threat of a death sentence, by the time the state of Missouri got around to executing him he was no longer that person.

His petition for a stay of execution and a review of his constitutional claim noted that Dorsey was a member of “a unique class of person sentenced to death who have achieved remarkable redemption and rehabilitation while under sentence of death. He has spent more than 17 years on death row without a single rules infraction. No death-sentenced person has ever had a better prison record.”

“Dorsey lives in the prison’s honor dorm,” the petition continued, “and he has been entrusted as the prison barber to handle potentially dangerous tools and cut the hair of fellow inmates, prison staff, and even wardens….”

The letter from the correctional staff members at Missouri’s Potosi Correctional Center, where Dorsey was incarcerated, said that while they were supporters of capital punishment, they nevertheless believed that “the death penalty is not the appropriate punishment for Brian Dorsey.” Their letter offered testimony that the man that they had come to know was “a good guy, someone who stayed out of trouble, never gotten himself into any situations, and been respectful of us and his fellow inmates.”

It said that “if all of the inmates were like Brian, they would never be a problem in the institution,” and concluded that while Dorsey had been convicted of murder “that is not the Brian Dorsey that we know.”

A few of the correctional officers also wrote individual letters to the governor. One noted “when you spend time around Brian like I have, you can just tell he has changed.” Another said, “I know that he is very sorry for his crime. Brian demonstrates spirit of remorse and regret…. Brian’s remorse is genuine and always present.”

A 3rd correctional officer stated “I have known many offenders who should be executed. Mr. Dorsey simply is not one of them. He stands out from other inmates. It would be a loss for the state if he were executed.”

Dorsey’s cert. petition argued that in his case and those of others who are rehabilitated after being sentenced, carrying out the death penalty would serve no purpose. It noted, quoting Justice Byron White’s concurring opinion in Furman v. Georgia, that an execution “can be barred by the Constitution…when it ‘ceases realistically to further the purposes’ of capital punishment.”

The petition called on the Court to recognize that when “the penological goal of rehabilitation has been satisfied…, the capital punishment goals of retribution and deterrence are not met by an execution.” Again citing Furman, Dorsey told the Court that “[a] penalty with such negligible returns to the state would be patently excessive and cruel and unusual punishment violative of the eighth amendment.”

Generally speaking, a punishment might be considered cruel if it imposes very severe suffering. It might also be considered cruel if it violates human dignity or contemporary standards of decency.

Dorsey’s contention directs our attention to another meaning of cruelty. A punishment is cruel if it imposes more pain than is necessary to achieve a legitimate penological purpose.

Put simply, the Eighth Amendment does not condone or tolerate punishment without purpose.

Dorsey’s cert. petition reminded the Court that executing someone who has been rehabilitated would amount to “the pointless and needless extinction of life.” It reviewed cases in which the Court has recognized “situations where executing a person would not support the goals of retribution and deterrence,” including its “categorical exemptions of classes of people who cannot be executed because the goal supporting capital punishment would not be furthered.”

It boldly and correctly claimed that the small number of people who are rehabilitated while on death row should be subject to such a categorical exemption. It argued that it makes no sense and serves no purpose to execute someone who is “for all moral purposes…not the same person who committed the crime.”

Dorsey sought to persuade the Court that he had lived what amounted to a “second lifetime” on death row and that he was “a very different person than the one who was originally sentenced to death.” And he called on the Court to consider whether the execution of such a person would amount to punishment without a purpose.

Unfortunately for Dorsey and for the rest of us, the Supreme Court refused his request to consider what it means to end the life of someone who had his life changed, and been successfully rehabilitated, after committing a horrible crime. We can only hope that one day the Court will change its mind and say definitively that executing such a person violates the Eighth Amendment.

(source: Opinion; Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College----verdict.justia.com)

CALIFORNIA:

San Diego child killer transferred out of San Quentin's death row----David Westerfield's move comes as the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation continues phasing out segregated death row units at San Quentin in part to comply with Proposition 66.

David Westerfield, the man sentenced to death in the 2002 kidnapping and killing of 7-year-old Sabre Springs resident Danielle van Dam, was transferred out of San Quentin to another state prison last month, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation confirmed to NBC 7 on Friday.

Westerfield, 72, was moved to High Desert State Prison, located in the northeastern area of California near Susanville, on March 12 as part of the Condemned Inmate Transfer Program, according to CDCR spokesperson Terri Hardy. He is expected to serve the rest of his sentence there.

Hardy clarified that transfers under this program do not alter an inmate's condemned sentence.

Westerfield's move comes as the CDCR continues phasing out segregated death row units at San Quentin in part to comply with voter-approved Proposition 66, which requires death-sentenced inmates to work to pay restitution to their victims.

The program, which was approved on Jan. 31, plans to move those with death sentences to general population prisons across California by this summer. The inmates will be rehoused in institutions with an electrified secured perimeter, according to the CDCR's website.

Van Dam's disappearance in February 2002 prompted a massive county-wide search conducted by volunteers. Nearly a month later, her badly decomposed body was found in the underbrush off Dehesa Road in El Cajon.

6 months later, a jury convicted Westerfield, who lived across the street from the van Dam family, of kidnapping and 1st-degree murder. He was also found guilty of possession of child pornography.

In February 2019, the Supreme Court of California upheld a death penalty sentence for Westerfield.

The latest numbers from April 12 show that 641 people in CDCR have condemned sentences. Since Feb. 26, San Quentin has seen 189 transfers, while Central California Women's Facility in Chowchilla has seen 20, according to the state agency's data.

(source: nbcsandiego.com)

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

Misconduct allegations in OC murder prosecution center stage in San Diego courtroom----'The refusal to investigate obvious wrongdoing undermines any reasonable faith that all favorable evidence will be disclosed in this case,' says a defense attorney

In a San Diego courtroom, the Orange County district attorney’s office and a defense lawyer are set to clash this month over sweeping allegations that top prosecutors have for more than a decade hid evidence of law enforcement misconduct.

Orange County Assistant Public Defender Scott Sanders will be asking a San Diego County Superior Court judge to order a special hearing on whether a former high-level Orange County prosecutor — now a judge — withheld evidence in a murder case and covered up the county’s illegal use of jailhouse informants.

Orange County Senior Deputy District Attorney Seton Hunt opposes Sanders’ request for a hearing, saying the allegations are part of a personal vendetta by the defense attorney against the former prosecutor and have no bearing on the real issue, which is the retrial of Paul Gentile Smith. Smith is accused of killing his boyhood friend and marijuana dealer in Sunset Beach.

Smith’s conviction was thrown out after revelations that ex-prosecutor Ebrahim Baytieh failed to turn over evidence that might have been beneficial to the defense. Sanders now wants the charges dismissed entirely based on the argument that the actions of Baytieh and others constitute “outrageous government conduct.”

Sanders and Hunt are scheduled to argue before Judge Daniel Goldstein on April 19 on whether the special hearing should be held. The Smith case was transferred to San Diego because Baytieh is a sitting judge in Orange County.

In his latest motion, Sanders accused Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer of failing to fully investigate accusations against Baytieh and failing to inform defense attorneys under the Brady notification system about law enforcement officers engaged in the illegal use of jailhouse informants.

Because of Spitzer’s alleged inaction, Sanders contends, Smith cannot get a fair trial.

“The refusal to investigate obvious wrongdoing undermines any reasonable faith that all favorable evidence will be disclosed in this case,” Sanders wrote in his motion.

Spitzer responded that he commissioned an independent probe on Baytieh’s conduct and terminated him as a result.

“It defies logic that I’m trying to protect Brahim when I fired him,” Spitzer said. “I’m happy to litigate any issues Mr. Sanders wants to raise in court.”

Spitzer added that he now must personally approve the use of jailhouse informants by his prosecutors, and no request has been made under his administration.

Spitzer took office in 2019 pledging to reform the agency after revelations that prosecutors and Orange County sheriff’s deputies were violating jail inmates’ civil rights by using a secret network of in-custody informants. Sanders launched a crusade to unmask the network, leading to a federal investigation that confirmed the illegal use of the informants.

Sanders now contends Spitzer is not following through with his promise of reform and is instead behaving like former District Attorney Tony Rackauckas in trying to protect Baytieh to save the murder case.

Sanders wrote that the D.A.’s office is now engaged in an office-wide effort to do “damage control” in the Smith prosecution.

Baytieh was fired from his top job in the district attorney’s office in February 2022 for not turning over the evidence. Baytieh’s supporters contend he was actually fired for whistleblowing on racially charged statements made by Spitzer in an unrelated double-murder case.

Sanders alleges Baytieh failed to disclose evidence that multiple informants were used in getting incriminating statements from Smith instead of the single informant disclosed to the defense. He added that more than a dozen other pieces of evidence that might have been helpful to Smith’s defense also were withheld.

Sanders has claimed that Baytieh, in his top position at the D.A.’s office, denied the existence of the informant network for years to keep anyone from finding out about his own misuse of the snitches.

He also alleged Baytieh did not include in the required Brady notifications the deputies who aided him in the illegal use of informants. Those deputies went on to participate in nearly 100 other cases in which defense attorneys were unaware of their alleged exploits and unable to use that information to question their credibility, Sanders said. Almost all of those cases ended in convictions.

After his firing, Baytieh was elected to the Orange County bench with substantial backing from other judges.

If granted the special hearing, Sanders could subpoena Baytieh to testify.

In the past, Sanders has used the evidentiary hearing process to unmask the surreptitious use of jailhouse informants, leading to one of the largest criminal justice scandals in the nation. By the time the dust settled, Sanders had gotten the district attorney’s office removed from the case against mass killer Scott Dekraai, who fatally shot eight people at a beauty salon in Seal Beach.

Because of the misconduct, Dekraai was given multiple life terms in prison instead of the death sentence.

Sanders now represents Smith, who was convicted in 2010 of stabbing Robert Haugen 18 times and torching his body in Sunset Beach. That conviction was dismissed because sheriff’s deputies indicated they would refuse to testify about allegations they had illegally used the informants.

In previous motions, Sanders said three informants were used by the prosecution and sheriff’s officials to engage Smith in a day room at the Orange County jail. Only one of the informants was disclosed to the defense, with no hint that it was an organized operation with two other informants.

In a recorded interview, one of the informants laid out the illegal plan to get Smith to incriminate himself. Although Sheriff Don Barnes has said the CD recording was properly booked into evidence by deputies, Baytieh did not turn it over to the defense.

Baytieh did not return a telephone message seeking comment Friday. A spokesman for the court has said judges are not allowed to speak to reporters on cases.

(source: The Orange County Register)

USA:

Lawyers for Boston Marathon bomber to argue for new trial

Lawyers for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev are due in court on Tuesday to seek a new trial for their client, who was sentenced to death in June for the 2013 bomb attack that killed three people and injured more than 260.

U.S. District Judge George O'Toole agreed last month to hear defense attorneys' arguments about a federal sentencing law that applied additional prison time for crimes committed while in possession of a firearm. The Supreme Court found it overly broad 2 days after Tsarnaev was sentenced to death by lethal injection.

Defense lawyers are also asking that rules put in place ahead of the trial providing them with privacy to communicate with their client be left intact as they prepare for appeal.

The defense in August asked that Tsarnaev be re-tried outside Boston, saying the intense publicity surrounding the attack and the trial unfairly influenced the 12 jurors who found their client guilty and sentenced him to death.

Tsarnaev, 22, is being held at the "Supermax" high security prison in Florence, Colorado, while his attorneys appeal his death sentence. He is not expected to be present in court, according to a spokeswoman for federal prosecutors.

He was last seen in public on June 24, when he said he was "sorry for the lives I have taken." His older brother, Tamerlan, who participated in the April 15, 2013 attack, died following a gun battle with police 3 days after the bombing.

In addition to killing 3 people with homemade pressure-cooker bombs that the brothers learned to make from an al Qaeda publication, the two shot dead a university police officer as they tried to flee the city.

Martin Richard, 8, Chinese exchange student Lingzi Lu, 26, and restaurant manager Krystle Campbell, 29, died in the bombing. Three days later the Tsarnaevs shot dead Massachusetts Institute of Technology police officer Sean Collier, 26.

The legal wrangling over Tsarnaev's fate could play out for years, if not decades. Just 3 of the 74 people sentenced to death in the United States for federal crimes since 1998 have been executed.

(source: Reuters)

JAPAN:

Court rejects inmates’ suit on same-day notice for death penalty

The Osaka District Court on April 15 dismissed a lawsuit claiming that notifying a death-row inmate hours before carrying out an execution is unconstitutional.

In the lawsuit, two death-row inmates said they should not be obligated to accept the judicial practice of the same-day notification of executions and sought compensation for mental suffering from the government.

The district court denied both requests.

Currently, a person on death row is sent to the gallows 1 to 2 hours after a notice is given.

The plaintiffs said the system denies those on death row sufficient time to meet family members or file a legal complaint.

They said the same-day notice of executions therefore violates Article 31 of the Constitution, which says, “No person shall be deprived of life or liberty, nor shall any other criminal penalty be imposed, except according to procedure established by law.”

The plaintiffs’ lawyers said such notices used to be given a few days before the execution, and presented a tape recording from 1955 as evidence.

The tape contained conversations between a death-row inmate and his sister after he received a notice 2 days before the execution.

The plaintiffs’ lawyers also said prior notice is the norm for countries that retain the death penalty. They cited a United Nations human rights organization’s statement that said failure to notify the date of execution at an appropriate time to a death-row inmate is mistreatment.

The lawyers also said the same-day execution notice violates human dignity guaranteed by Article 13 of the Constitution because the condemned prisoners are given no time to prepare for death.

The government cited the absence of laws or regulations governing notices and said the Constitution does not guarantee death-row convicts the right to seek prior notice.

It said the same-day execution notice was adopted because a person on death row committed suicide after a notice was given a day before the execution.

The government said the current practice is a reasonable way to smoothly carry out the death penalty and avoid the risk of prisoners killing themselves.

It had asked the court to dismiss the plaintiffs’ requests.

2 other lawsuits related to the capital punishment system are still pending at the Osaka District Court.

One centers around the cruelty of hanging, while the other questions the appropriateness of execution while a retrial is being sought.

(source: asahishimbun.com)

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

Death-row inmates' lawsuit targeting same-day notifications of executions dismissed

The Osaka District Court on Monday dismissed a lawsuit by death row inmates that claimed same-day notifications of executions violate the Constitution — the first ruling of its kind.

The plaintiffs filed the lawsuit against the government in hopes of sparking a wider discussion on the rights of death row prisoners. They also sought ¥22 million in compensation and plan to appeal to a higher court.

Presiding Judge Noriko Yokota said the social standing of the 2 plaintiffs — being death row inmates — doesn't allow them to avoid execution when they are notified.

Yokota also said the plaintiffs “are in a position to accept the execution according to the current legislation on death penalty.” She rejected their claim for compensation, saying it would practically nullify their death sentences.

The ruling did not state whether same-day notifications are constitutional or not.

The plaintiffs argued that notifying death row inmates an hour or 2 before their execution leaves them with no time to file a complaint and violates the right to due process guaranteed in Article 13 of the Constitution.

They said they are “living in hell” because they spend every day not knowing when they will be executed.

Yuko Shiota, an official at the Center for Prisoners’ Rights, said that in the past, death row inmates were given a few days prior notice of the execution. However, this was changed to same-day notifications because some inmates took their own lives after being told of the schedule, she said.

A key problem with the current policy, Shiota said, is cases in which individuals are wrongly sentenced to death and are in the process of seeking a retrial — which can be a lengthy process.

“If the person is notified several days in advance, the lawyer can go to see the inmate ... and they can file an appeal on grounds for human rights,” she said. “They would also have time to say goodbye to their family and friends.”

In one high-profile example, Iwao Hakamata had been on death row for more than 30 years over a 1966 murder case until the Tokyo High Court sent the case back to the district court for a retrial last year, raising the possibility that he will be exonerated. Hakamata was freed and the trial is currently underway at the Shizuoka District Court.

In Japan, there were 109 death row inmates as of the end of March. The most recent death row inmate to be executed, in July 2022, was Tomohiro Kato, who was convicted over a mass killing in Tokyo’s Akihabara district in 2008.

As of December 2022, Japan is one of 55 countries that has capital punishment, according to Amnesty International.

(source: japantimes.co.jp)

VIETNAM:

Rights groups slam Vietnamese tycoon's death sentence----Human Rights Watch calls Truong My Lan’s punishment 'cruel and unusual'

Human rights groups have come out in defense of a Vietnamese real estate tycoon who was sentenced to death by a court in Ho Chi Minh City for her role in a US$12.5 billion corruption scandal that outraged the public and resulted in the prosecution of 84 people.

Truong My Lan, chairwoman of Van Thinh Phat Holdings Group, was the only defendant sentenced to death and the only one who maintained her innocence, and instead blamed her subordinates.

Phil Robertson, deputy director of Human Rights Watch's Asia division, noted that Vietnam did not usually publicize death sentences but was likely the second largest user of the penalty in Asia after China, with hundreds executed every year.

“This woman has now been found guilty of massive fraud,” he said. “But the bottom line is that even if she goes to prison for the rest of her life, she shouldn't face the death penalty.

“That's cruel and unusual punishment that is outrageous and unacceptable, and Vietnam should commute that sentence to life in prison, or whatever the prosecutors deem appropriate, but certainly not sentenced to death,” he said.

Death sentences, carried out by lethal injection, for financial crimes are rare in Vietnam and typically reserved for crimes like murder and terrorism.

Amnesty International also says Vietnam’s use of the death penalty ranks among the highest in the world.

The 1-party communist state launched its Blazing Furnace campaign more than four years ago to counter mounting anger over a series of banking and financial scandals.

Lan was sentenced to an additional 40 years behind bars after the court found she had amassed a fortune equivalent to 3 percent of Vietnam’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

However, some analysts have said the Blazing Furnace crackdown was also being used by Communist Party Secretary General Nguyen Phu Trong to purge his political enemies.

Vietnamese president Vo Van Thuong was forced to resign last month amid an embarrassing scandal and efforts by the communist leadership to open the country’s doors to foreign trade and diplomacy.

A papal tour is expected later this year, a first since 1975.

Carl Thayer, emeritus professor at Australia's University of New South Wales, said Vietnam’s largest-ever embezzlement case also raised questions about accountability among senior members of the Communist Party and the State Bank of Vietnam.

“Vietnam paints the billionaire’s death sentence as a victory for clean governance. It’s not,” Thayer said, adding, “Only small fry appear to have been charged with receiving bribes in the current court proceedings.… Perhaps it’s a case of let sleeping dogs lie.”

The court also found that Lan, 68, had used proxies to take illegal control of the Saigon Joint Stock Commercial Bank which was then used to provide loans for her real estate acquisitions.

“There is no reason for Lan to be executed,” said one analyst who declined to give his name because he lives in Vietnam.

“There is no place for the death penalty but more so for crimes that do not involve violence. Lan’s crimes are serious but don’t warrant her execution.”

Robertson said despite Vietnam's pledges, there had been no reforms or backing away from the death penalty and the international community needed to do more by pressuring Vietnam into abandoning capital punishment.

“What is shocking in this case is this person is one of the most high-profile real estate business persons in the country,” he said. “She was hobnobbing with the elites. She was someone who was a daily fixture in the news.”

“This is a person who owns some of the most important, luxurious developments in Vietnam. And now she's facing the death penalty.”

“What it shows is that Vietnam, unfortunately, applies this ultimate sanction not just for violent crimes, but for crimes across the board.”

(source: ucanews.com)

APRIL 14, 2024:

TEXAS:

Jury selection for Crockett man facing death penalty for aunt’s death set for May

Jury selection has been set for May in the case of a Crockett man facing the death penalty for allegedly murdering his aunt.

David Denson, 29, of Crockett is accused of killing his aunt, Faye Lynn Paul, in February of 2020.

Friday, Denson’s lawyers and the prosecution discussed upcoming dates with Judge Mark Calhoon.

The 1st call for jurors will happen on April 30 and the interview process for jurors will begin on May 16.

Denson was the last one seen with Paul before her disappearance.

Authorities have not recovered Paul’s body, but investigators have said that evidence not only indicated her death but that it was a result of homicide.

(source: KTRE news)

FLORIDA:

Opening statements to begin Monday in sentencing trial for man who killed Nassau County deputy

The sentencing trial for the man who killed a Nassau County deputy will move forward on Monday after the jury was seated on Friday.

Opening statements will begin on April 15 for Patrick McDowell’s sentencing trial. McDowell pleaded guilty to shooting Moyers during a traffic stop in September 2021.

Friday was the sixth day of jury selection. The court screened roughly 1,200 Nassau County residents.

They were questioned in groups of 50 to find out if they could fairly listen to and consider all testimony. A portion of the screening involved asking the potential jurors what they’d seen and heard from local news coverage.

Prosecutors only need eight jurors to agree to send McDowell to Florida’s death row.

His mental health and documented Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder are expected to be front and center during this sentencing trial.

(source: news4jax.com)

LOUISIANA:

How to Publish a Magazine in a Maximum-Security Prison----For decades, Wilbert Rideau investigated America’s prison system—from the inside.

In 1961, Wilbert Rideau, a 19-year-old with an 8th-grade education, robbed a bank in Lake Charles, the small Louisiana town where he lived. During a botched getaway, he killed a teller named Julia Ferguson. Rideau spent 12 years on death row at the Louisiana State Penitentiary, or Angola, a former plantation that occupies as much land as Manhattan. Then in 1972, the Supreme Court struck down Louisiana’s death-penalty law; Rideau soon joined the prison’s general population. After trying and failing to get a job at The Angolite, an all-white prison magazine, Rideau created The Lifer, which may have been the first African American prison periodical.

The Lifer was shut down after only 2 issues. Rideau, however, started to freelance for regional newspapers, and even wrote a story for Penthouse about Angola’s Vietnam veterans. In 1976, when a reformist official named C. Paul Phelps became Angola’s warden, he named Rideau the new editor of The Angolite. “Phelps felt there was a role for freedom of expression and journalism in prison,” Rideau told me. “Censorship, and keeping everything a secret, was counterproductive to changing things.” The magazine had its own unrestricted phone lines, cameras, and tape recorders; Rideau often reported outside the prison with unarmed escorts, and, on 2 occasions, attended a convention of newspaper editors in Washington, D.C. He said at the convention that, even in an institution rife with violence and conflict, The Angolite “had proven valuable at easing tensions”—not only because it countered rumors with reporting but also because it helped “keeper and kept understand each other.”

Under Rideau’s leadership, The Angolite was nominated for seven National Magazine Awards. One of his stories, “Prison: The Sexual Jungle,” about men who raped and subjugated other men in Angola, won the George Polk Award. “The act of rape in the ultramasculine world of prison constitutes the ultimate humiliation visited upon the male,” Rideau wrote. In the seventies, American prisons still tended to aim for rehabilitation rather than punishment, and the story led directly to policy reforms. But, at a time when Louisiana’s governor commuted many serious sentences, Rideau was repeatedly denied release, seemingly because of his high profile. Only in 2005, after his murder conviction was overturned and he was convicted of the lesser charge of manslaughter, did he win his release. Now eighty-two, Rideau has spent the past 19 years with Linda LaBranche, who fought for his release and then married him, and several cats. He still works as a criminal-defense consultant.

On April 12th, the George Polk Awards, which honor a CBS journalist who was murdered during the Greek Civil War, named Rideau one of its career laureates. In advance of the occasion, I called him from the often stormy recreation yard at Sullivan Correctional Facility, in New York’s Catskill Mountains often exposed to the snow and rain. I found his story relatable: in my 20s, with a 9th-grade education, I was convicted of murder and given a sentence of 28 years to life; I started to report stories after taking a creative-writing workshop in prison. Rideau and I spoke in the course of several weeks, during half-hour calls for which a prison contractor, Securus, charges $1.25. I asked him about his Southern childhood, the power of reading and writing, and his provocative case for professional relationships between prison officials and prisoners. Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

What was the 1st book you read on death row?

“Fairoaks,” by Frank Yerby—a plantation novel. I was totally shocked that something like this existed, because, you have to understand, the world I came from didn’t teach slavery to the students.

The 1st time you learned about slavery was reading Frank Yerby on death row?

On death row!

In your memoir, you wrote that reading allowed you “to emerge from my cocoon of self-centeredness and appreciate the humanness of others—to see that they, too, have dreams, aspirations, frustrations, and pain. It enabled me finally to appreciate the enormity of what I had done, the depth of the damage I had caused others.”

It’s why I’m such a pro-book person. It’s exposure to other perspectives, to other lives, to other beings, to other worlds.

You grew up in Lake Charles, Louisiana.

It was the Deep South—a totalitarian regime that was all about white men. As far as criminal justice goes, let me hip you to something. You’re a prisoner, and you’ve been through the system. But I come from a world before Gideon v. Wainwright. You didn’t have a right to an attorney. You didn’t have a right to anything except to complain, to pray, and maybe to die. At a certain point, because of Emmett Till and sensational stuff that was disturbing the country, they decided that lynching Black folks was bad for their public image. So they transferred what they were doing from the tree and the rope to the courtroom. In 1961, I was a product of that world. I was frustrated. I was angry.

At 19, you probably couldn’t wrap your head around all this.

I was really, really ignorant. I didn’t even know who the hell the governor was. And the crime, even in my own opinion, was really stupid. I tried to rob a bank, it got out of hand, and I panicked. I was scared. One of the tellers ended up dead. I killed her. I’m responsible for that.

Eight weeks later, I was tried by a jury of all white men, and in an hour they came back with a verdict of death. The United States Supreme Court threw out the death sentence, called it a kangaroo-court proceeding. In 1964, 12 white men again found me guilty and gave me the death penalty, in 15 minutes. In 1970, a federal court threw that conviction out, too. And again, 12 white men found me guilty, this time in 8 minutes. 3 juries with all white men, in a state where 1/2 the people are women, and a third of the population was Black. That was justice back then. That’s why they called it “lynch law.”

I mean, we’re all so ignorant when we come to prison.

And a lot of us grow up like a weed in the crack in the sidewalk someplace—untended, unguided. Just on its own. That’s asking for trouble. I mean, the fact that some of us turn out to be a beautiful flower, that’s a miracle.

After the Supreme Court decision in 1972, when you got off death row and moved into the Louisiana State Penitentiary’s general population, you had to get a weapon, right?

Everybody did. The guys who were creative, we hung together to kind of protect ourselves. I try to explain to people that, in a lot of ways, sentencing me to death saved my life. Putting me on death row [initially] protected me from the violence in the prison.

You started pursuing writing ventures. You couldn’t get a job with The Angolite, so you started The Lifer. What did that look like?

We put together the paper at night. I was a commissary clerk. I’d hook up the electric typewriter, and other guys in different offices would type up articles. I had this contact; he was a gangster, and he would let us use the copy machines. They wanted a little money, and we took care of that. They’d print it out, and we’d take the sheets to an empty place, usually the education department. We’d have different lifers pulling them together, stapling them, and binding them into magazines. After that, we had people who took them over to the different prison camps. Angola is 18 thousand acres big. Guys live miles away from each other. It’s like any other world, with its own economy, with thousands of inmates. And, despite the divisions between one another, people worked together and did business. It was organized. The hardest thing was to stay in business. A couple of paragraphs in a little news report pointed out a shortage in toilet paper. That caused them quite a bit of embarrassment, because they had ladies bringing toilet paper to the prison.

How did ladies read The Lifer?

We had supporters outside, and I made it a point to get the magazine to churches. For the second issue, we were selling issues and even obtained legal counsel, the A.C.L.U. of New Orleans. That’s what got me put out of business. But it’s also what made me a leader.

So then you started freelancing. And, at one point, they put you in the hole for writing about the rodeo?

That’s when I ended up on the front page of the Black newspapers.

You’re building a name for yourself. They gotta contain this Rideau guy.

Well, they did. They had to do something. The question is: what?

[Recorded message: “Thank you for using Securus. Goodbye.” I call Rideau back.]

By the end of 1975, the warden offers you The Angolite, but you don’t want to take it because that will cause a beef. You’re trying to be shrewd?

No, I was trying to make the right decisions. Once you become a leader, you kind of get locked into leadership. Thing is, they hadn’t cleaned up the prison yet. Everybody had weapons. Some guys even had guns. The world of prison was divided by race: Black and white. And everybody is playing for keeps, man. You can’t just make crazy decisions. I was seen as the Black leader of the Black paper. And then you got the whites that look at The Angolite as theirs. I didn’t want a war; I wanted to create a peaceful transition. I knew The Angolite editor, Bill Brown, was eligible for parole, and he had this woman he wanted to marry. And I told him, “Hey, man, if we don’t coöperate on this, you ain’t gonna make parole.” We made it work.

So you give up your weekly column, which is making you money.

I’d write one column a week for 20 dollars. The local white papers paid a couple hundred.

What’s The Angolite paying?

2 cents an hour. The same as the guys in the fields.

It’s like a plantation down there. But it seems to promote relationships—even though it’s this eerie paternalistic and racist thing, right?

If you went to a party at the governor’s mansion, people in a tuxedo waiting on you—they’re serving life for murder. When the governor left, they were freed. This is the way it was in Louisiana. Things started changing when we had people who wanted to reform prison, and started saying that they’re taking advantage of those poor prisoners. I’m telling you, most of the prisoners who were beneficiaries of the system, they didn’t want to lose that.

Shit, I wouldn’t want to lose it, either. Here in New York, we don’t talk to administrators at all. They walk right by your cell. There’s never a conversation.

I spent 44 years in Angola, which was supposed to be the worst system in the country, but I can’t even imagine that. The problem you are running into is a system-wide culture that promotes, “Do not talk to these assholes, do not fraternize with them, don’t be friendly with them. They’re here to be punished.” Even in all its brutality, in the past—and that’s all I can speak to—it was more humane than a lot of what they do today.

__Just recently, when a new acting commissioner of the prison system, Daniel Martuscello III, came in, I started writing to him. In one of my correspondences, I mentioned that I have these writing mentees I’m working with, and I asked him for a classroom to have a workshop. And, apparently, he called the superintendent down here and she gave me a workshop. I was just gonna ask your take on that. How do I pursue this without pissing off the leadership in my prison?

It doesn’t matter whether they’re a warden, a lowly security guard, or your fellow-prisoners. Basically, they all want the same thing: to be judged in their own right. That’s the way you approach relationships with anybody. That’s the way it was with Phelps.

When you started at The Angolite, it had to be a step up from The Lifer magazine.

The Angolite was a step up. It was printed at a press that was operated by prisoners. And, once we started winning awards, they were all proud of it, you know? Forget who wrote it, or who took the photograph! [Rideau laughs.] Everybody had a piece of the action. It was a great thing.

There’s a real solitary aspect to being a freelancer. I report in the yard, go back to my cell, transcribe notes, figure out the story. What you describe has more human interaction, a collegial atmosphere. How’d you spot stories?

I mean, you talk with these guys, you live with them, you hear their stories. Hell, I’m in a laboratory with them.

So the year is 1979, and you’re working on an exposé about prison rape. Tell me about James Dunn.

Stinky Dunn! He deliberately let himself go dirty and filthy to keep potential rapists off of him. A lot of young guys did that. That’s why his nickname was Stinky Dunn. Thing is, these were all very real people, very real stories.

Yeah, I felt for Dunn. What was the prison population’s reaction when “The Sexual Jungle” came out?

What you really want to get at is why I even did the piece to begin with. Back then, there was mass censorship in the nation on prison matters. I mean, when I got off death row, nothing prepared me. I read hundreds of books, criminal justice and everything, but they never talked about sexual violence and enslavement of prisoners by other prisoners. I wanted to explain this whole world. Back then, the federal court had instructed Louisiana to end the violence. Angola was the bloodiest prison in the country. They thought gay men caused the sexual violence, so they started removing all of them from the general population to solve the problem.

But, clearly, that’s not the case.

It was the heterosexuals doing it. Somebody needed to explain this. You’ve got guys walking around going to the movies with their “old lady”—or slaves—on their arm. Nobody thought it was a big deal. That’s what happens in those small subcultures. Your sense of right and wrong becomes distant from reality. I figured I could get them to talk about it.

I had to start by talking to the officials, who acknowledged what was going on. Imagine them telling that to the New York Times! A lot of people talked to us because they felt we understood. Part of my whole objective was to humanize everybody in prison, whether it’s ourselves or the guards. Because that is part of the bigger problem: people in the streets did not see us as normal, breathing human beings, like themselves.

So you do interviews and take pictures. Folks are in the yard, braiding each other’s hair. It’s a whole culture. When “The Sexual Jungle” comes out, what’s the reception?

Well, the people who were featured in the magazine had no problem with it. But a lot of guys—not the majority—did have a problem. Those who got visitors were concerned that their family and friends and girlfriends might read it. They didn’t want them thinking that they were engaged in homosexual relationships with slaves. All I could do was explain it to them. “Look, they’re gonna see you as they’re gonna see you. If you tell your people, ‘Hey, I don’t do that,’ then they’re going to accept that.” Some of them were quite hostile.

What does that look like?

I had some show up at the office. We can’t escape the ramifications of what we do in prison. We all lived together, we ate together, we slept together. I think it was 60 people to a dorm, and only one guard. So, at night, if anyone wanted to take you out, they’d take you out. Everything rested upon your own reputation, and how the rest of the prison world saw you.

“The Sexual Jungle” became required reading.

In the training academy, all over the state. They practiced zero tolerance and changed a whole bunch of things after that. I know it’s going to sound like bragging, but a lot of big issues in criminal-justice debates—if you go back 40 years, to The Angolite, you’ll see we were dealing with it then. The latest big issue has been solitary confinement. The 1st time anybody did a big feature on solitary confinement, it was The Angolite! What happened is, we got a note from one of the guys in C.C.R.O., the solitary unit. He said, “Man, you writing about everything in prison but y’all don’t write about us. Y’all act like we dead up in here.” It struck a nerve. He was right. I put in an official request to the warden, asking how many people in Louisiana had been in cells twenty years or more. I got a response back with five names. One was a woman.

What’s the name of this solitary piece?

It was “The Plant.” I didn’t write this. I had a staff by then, and I assigned it to one of our staff writers, Lane Nelson, who came off death row as well. Just about all my people were lifers. When Phelps said I could pick my people, I told him I didn’t want anybody who hadn’t been in prison long enough to understand prison.

Can you describe the process of assigning stories?

If I assigned you the story, I already had a basic idea for it in mind. I’m sure all editors do the same thing. You bring the guy in and you talk about it. Maybe a week later, he’ll come back and say he’s having a little problem on something, and you flesh it out. That’s the way great pieces are done. It’s not by yourself.

In “Edge of Madness,” you write about this guy, Alvin Anderson.

By that time, in 1986, The Angolite had become an institution. I mean, if I could travel to interview Harry Connick—the district attorney of New Orleans—and go all over the state, it’s an institution, you know? I got phones on my desk, I can call anybody, anywhere in the country. I talk shop with other reporters and editors from other newspapers. And, by that time, I’ve learned what The Angolite can do.

I wasn’t looking at Alvin Anderson as a story. My friend, the director of mental health—she was the wife of a state senator and pulling for me to get out. She knew I was down in the dumps after the governor had turned me down for clemency. She came up to the prison and took me to the hospital wing. She’s talking to Alvin [a long-term patient in the chronic-care wing], and it dawned on me: I’ll be damned. This guy’s blind! I was just shocked. I got pissed off. And I told him, “That sonofabitch governor might keep me in, but I’m gonna make him let you out!”

Anderson got out?

Yes, he did.

Let me ask you this, Wilbert. How did you learn structure? There are character-driven story arcs, there’s explanatory structure—you know, scene, digression, scene, digression. The long-form magazine writer needs to have those narrative skills.

That’s easy. I sat in a cell for twelve years, reading. There was no school for me to go to.

Yeah, I reverse-engineered magazine articles in Attica. I might interview a guy in the yard or the cellblock, then later, in my cell, type up my notes, add a bit of atmospheric stuff. [Automated recording: “You have 1 minute left.”] Right now, as I’m talking to you, it’s snowing and a guy is shuffling around, still trying to pick up cigarette butts on the wet ground.

We always had offices to work in.

Right.

And I had a telephone on my desk.

Well, now you’re just rubbing it in.

[Automated recording: “Thank you for using Securus. Goodbye.” I call him back.]

So, in 2005, they acquit you of murder, and you’re found guilty of manslaughter.

This was the fourth trial, which was the result of a woman—a Shakespeare scholar at Northwestern University named Linda LaBranche—seeing me on Ted Koppel one night in 1986. She went to a corrections convention and introduced herself to Phelps, who was then the Louisiana director of corrections, and asked him about me. He invited her to come down and meet me. And she did.

Linda was the first person to ever go and read through all the trial transcripts. She found the key to getting the third conviction overturned. Every time I won an award, journalists would say I’d cut a woman’s throat. I’d always ask them, “Why don’t you investigate the case?” My lawyers got the autopsy photos, and it was explained that this was from a tracheotomy done in the emergency room.

When I finally got to that last trial, there was only 1 white man and 1 Black man on my jury, and the rest were white women. They looked at all the evidence—especially new evidence—and their conclusion was that it was not murder. It was manslaughter, which carried 21 years in prison.

So they have to process you out of the Lake Charles jail. After serving forty-four years, you walk out [with Linda and your lawyers]. And this is on Martin Luther King, Jr.,’s birthday, right?

Yes. We walk out into the night, and, you know, it was applause, people blowing their horns. Primarily the Black community. Over at Ball’s Auditorium, they were having a concert, and I was told they stopped in the middle of the thing, told everybody I was free, and everyone applauded. Then, in Baton Rouge, they asked the governor about it on TV. Her name was Kathleen Blanco. And she looked thoughtful and said, “Well, I guess justice has spoken.”

I often think about what would’ve become of me if I hadn’t gone to prison. Did I have to take a life to find my way in life?

I hate to look at it this way, but the fact is, if I had not gone to prison, I would have been dead a long, long time ago. I didn’t care what happened to me. I didn’t have the kind of knowledge and education I have today, where we can discuss this. Back then, I was angry. I just had emotions and feelings. They drive you. You’re too stupid to know anything else.

That’s why I latched on to that T. S. Eliot quote in the opening of your memoir: “Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we made of things.”

I wish I had said it. It’s brilliant. It captures my life.

It’s so fascinating. It’s white men who convict you, but then it’s white men like Eliot and Phelps whom you look up to, and who help you.

Back up, back up. Don’t give too much credit to white men. There’s some white men who I really respect and admire. Men who should be Presidents, you know? But the people who really saved me were women. For the most part, they were white women. When I was a teen-ager working in a fabric shop, my boss was a white woman. I had dropped out of school, and she kept after me to try to teach me everything she could. All the way through the first pro-bono lawyer I ever had, Ginger Berrigan.

It’s almost like you and Linda, now your wife, are living happily ever after. Was she still teaching English and Shakespeare when you got out?

No, she stopped everything when she coördinated my defense.

How has it been for you guys?

We’ve been good. I mean, we worked for this. We earned it. We travel a lot. England a couple of times, Italy several times. Now she wants to go on a cruise. She’s the best thing that ever happened to me.

You dedicated your book, which came out in 2010, “to the late C. Paul Phelps, my mentor and friend.” You don’t see too many prison memoirs dedicated to a prison official.

Well, I can’t be nobody else but me. Of all the people in my life, except my mother, I cannot imagine anyone who had a greater impact on the course of my life and the person I became than him. It’s really ironic. It’s perverse when you think about it. This is the guy whose job was to keep me in prison. I’d love to be able to have the credit: “I was brilliant. I was a genius.” But I couldn’t create that window in time and that opportunity. Only prison authorities can do that. Sell them on this idea, man! I mean, you can write this story about me and the award, but give credit to this thing that happened, that has never happened since. Sell it to these wardens who are going to be reading this. If it doesn’t benefit you, maybe it’ll benefit somebody else. Maybe one of these wardens will say, “Maybe I ought to try this.”

(source: The New Yorker)

OHIO:

Death penalty affirmed for Ohio man convicted of stabbing housemates to death

The Supreme Court of Ohio has affirmed the death penalty for a man who was convicted of stabbing his two Parma Heights housemates to death and concealing their bodies for weeks in trash bags hidden in the home.

The Supreme Court rejected the 24 legal arguments raised by Thomas E. Knuff Jr., including his claim that he only killed 1 of the 2 victims, and that killing was in self-defense. Knuff was convicted of the May 2017 murders of John Mann and Regina Capobianco.

Writing for the Court majority, Justice Joseph T. Deters stated that Knuff claimed he was innocent and the only remorse he expressed was that the victims were unable to receive proper burials.

“To the contrary, the evidence (other than Knuff’s self-serving account) strongly supports the jury's rejection of Knuff’s self-defense claim and its finding that he killed both Mann and Capobianco,” Justice Deters wrote.

Knuff received the death sentence based on 2 counts of aggravated murder. Each count carried a death penalty specification for acting in the course of conduct “for the purposeful killing of 2 or more persons.” He also received death specifications for committing the felonies of aggravated burglary and kidnapping.

Chief Justice Sharon L. Kennedy and Justices Patrick F. Fischer, R. Patrick DeWine and Melody Stewart joined Justice Deters in the majority opinion.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Michael P. Donnelly agreed that the death penalty should be imposed based on Knuff’s murder convictions. However, he disagreed with the use of the felony murder specifications, stating that the Supreme Court is relying on past decisions that stretch the limits of the definitions of burglary and kidnapping. Those definitions allow “a burglary charge with almost any murder within four walls and kidnapping with almost any death that was not instantaneous,” he stated.

Justice Jennifer Brunner joined Justice Donnelly’s concurrence.

Knuff, who was serving a 15 1/2-year prison term on a previous conviction, was scheduled to be released from prison in early April 2017. While in prison, he developed a romantic relationship with Alicia Stoner, an employee at the prison. Their relationship ended before his release, but she offered to pick him up when he got out. He declined, saying he arranged a ride with “John and his old lady.”

“John” was John Mann, a friend of Knuff’s who was living in Parma Heights. John’s “old lady” was Regina Capobianco. Knuff and Capobianco had a prior relationship.

Upon his release, Knuff moved into a Strongsville hotel room paid for by Stoner. On May 10, 2017, Marc Fisher, Knuff’s parole officer, learned Knuff was living at the hotel. But when Fisher discovered that the hotel manager had not seen Knuff for 5 days, Fisher confronted Knuff.

Knuff told Fisher he was living with Mann. That same day, Fisher spoke with Mann. Mann said he lived alone and had agreed to any unannounced home visits or warrantless searches. Fisher permitted Knuff to stay with Mann pending a home visit. He also sanctioned Knuff for lying about living at the hotel.

Mann was not living alone. Capobianco had been living with Mann for about a year. When Knuff moved in, Capobianco was engaging in prostitution, sometimes at Mann’s home. Because living with someone who is committing crimes could result in additional parole violation sanctions for Knuff, a conflict arose between Knuff and Capobianco.

On May 11, the day after being granted permission to live with Mann, Knuff asked Stoner for $80 to get Capobianco out of the house. Stoner sent the money around 8 p.m. and then tried to call and text Knuff repeatedly that night and through the following afternoon of May 12. But he did not respond. Knuff then called Stoner and told her she needed to get him, but he did not explain why. She picked him up at a bar.

Stoner saw that one of Knuff’s fingers was bandaged. He told her that drug dealers had visited Mann’s house because Capobianco owed them money. He said the dealers beat up Mann and took Mann’s car. Then a conversation between Mann and Capobianco escalated into a fight, and she stabbed Mann, Knuff said. Knuff claimed he injured his finger when Capobianco tried to stab him. He said he remembered stabbing Capobianco and then “blacking out.” Stoner urged Knuff to call an ambulance for his friends, but he responded, “No, they’re dead.”

Knuff told others different stories about how his hand got injured. On May 13, Knuff told his son, Tommy, there were two dead people at the house who had supposedly attacked Mann. When asked if he was responsible for those deaths, Knuff said he was.

Two days later, Tommy drove his father to a store to buy super-strength glue for his finger and large plastic garbage bags. A few days later, Knuff took his son’s vehicle without permission and broke into two Parma Heights businesses, where he took a cash register from one and cash from another.

The next day, an Ohio State Highway Patrol officer responded to a call and found Knuff walking back and forth along a highway, saying, “Just kill me, I don’t want to live anymore.”

Knuff told the officer he crashed his son’s vehicle and abandoned it. When the officer saw Knuff’s severely injured finger, he called for emergency medical transport. Because Knuff threatened self-harm, he was sent to a hospital for a psychiatric evaluation and to care for his injured finger. At the hospital, he told a nurse yet another version of how he injured his hand. This time, he said that a prostitute attacked and killed his roommate with a knife, and he cut his finger when the prostitute attacked him. He said he killed the prostitute in self-defense.

Meanwhile, Capobianco’s sister became worried after not hearing from her. She called Parma Heights police and told them that Capobianco had communicated with Knuff, a recently released prisoner. Capobianco was described as 4 feet, 11 inches tall and weighing about 125 pounds. Knuff and Mann were described as 5 feet, 11 inches tall.

Police searched Mann’s home after hearing complaints from the neighbors. Officers detected a strong odor and a large presence of flies but found no one inside the home.

Knuff was eventually arrested in late May 2017, and in mid-June, police returned to the home. One officer who read Capobianco’s height realized they might have missed finding her in the heavily cluttered home. A search of the bedrooms uncovered several garbage bags piled around a bed. Police found the decomposing bodies of Mann and Capobianco. Autopsies revealed that Mann had been stabbed 15 times and Capobianco stabbed 6 times.

Also, around that time, Stoner gave Parma Heights police a letter from Knuff to a friend, Robert Dlugo. Knuff offered to pay Dlugo to burn down Mann’s house. In the letter, he told Dlugo he had trash bags with clothes and paper in the back bedroom and that when those were discovered, his life would be over.

During several interviews with police, Knuff consistently claimed Capobianco stabbed Mann, and Knuff killed her in self-defense. Knuff said he was trying to get Capobianco to move out because he feared he would be returned to prison for violating his parole. Knuff also told the officers he cleaned up the crime scene out of fear that he might go to prison if found living in a home where two people were murdered.

Knuff was indicted on 21 counts, including 4 aggravated murder charges. He was also charged with aggravated robbery, aggravated burglary, kidnapping, and several other crimes. The jury found him guilty of all charges except the aggravated robbery of Mann and the 4 felony murder specifications based on aggravated robbery.

The jury recommended death sentences for both murders. In keeping with this recommendation, the trial judge sentenced Knuff to death on each count. The trial judge also sentenced Knuff to 37 years in prison for all the other crimes. Because the death penalty was imposed on Knuff, he was permitted to appeal directly to the Supreme Court, which considered Knuff’s 24 legal arguments against his convictions and sentences.

Among his objections, Knuff claims the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office did not produce sufficient evidence to convict him of the murders and that the weight of the evidence did not support his convictions.

Justice Deters explained that a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence fails if “after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Knuff argued the prosecutor failed to prove the underlying offenses of aggravated burglary and kidnapping that were used to impose a felony murder death specification. Under R.C. 2911.11(A)(1), burglary includes trespassing into an occupied structure with the intent to commit a crime. Knuff argued that since he had permission to live in Mann’s home, he could not have committed burglary.

The majority opinion stated while one might initially have the owner’s consent to be on the premises, that person can become a trespasser when consent is withdrawn. Citing prior Court decisions, the opinion stated a jury can “infer from the facts that a victim terminated the accused’s privilege to remain after commencement of an assault.” The Court found the evidence was sufficient to convict Knuff of aggravated burglary.

Regarding kidnapping, Knuff argued that prosecutors failed to prove he restrained Mann and Capobianco. The Court noted that Knuff admitted he held Capobianco down while stabbing her. As to Mann, the prosecutor maintained that to “stab somebody 15 times, you have to restrain their liberty.”

A challenge to the weight of the evidence requires the reviewing court to find that “the jury clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed, and a new trial ordered.”

Rejecting Mann’s manifest weight challenge, the Court pointed to the autopsies as substantial support for the jury’s rejection of Knuff’s story that he killed Capobianco in self-defense after she killed Mann. The autopsies establish that Mann had downward stab wounds in his neck and score marks on the top of his skull along with other head wounds. The injuries support a claim that Mann and his killer were similar in stature. Capobianco was a foot shorter than Mann, but Knuff and Mann were relatively the same height. The jury could reasonably infer from this that Knuff — not Capobianco — stabbed Mann, the opinion stated. The autopsy also shows that Capobianco had two stab wounds to her back, which, the Court stated, tends to disprove Knuff’s claim that he acted in self-defense.

In addition to the autopsy evidence, the opinion noted that Knuff’s actions after the killing strongly suggested he was conscious of his guilt. He cut the bloodstained carpet into numerous pieces and put them in a garbage bag. Bloodstained mops were found in the kitchen. He admitted he tried to clean bloodstains off the wall, and he dragged the bodies into the bedroom and covered them. For the stated purpose of cutting up the bodies, he bought hacksaws. He also wrote to Dlugo, urging him to burn down the house.

In view of this evidence, “[t]his is not the rare case in which the jury lost its way and returned a verdict against the manifest weight of the evidence,” the Court stated.

After an independent review of the aggravating circumstances and the mitigating factors, the Court affirmed the death sentences and all the convictions.

In his concurrence, Justice Donnelly wrote that the state could pursue a death penalty specification for felony murder based on burglary or kidnapping when appropriate, but the “timing and circumstances” in Knuff’s case did not support it. Justice Donnelly noted that for one to commit burglary where the person resides, “then we have stretched the concept of burglary to its outermost limit, or maybe beyond.”

The concurrence stated it was inappropriate to use burglary as a basis for the death penalty for Knuff. The state only “technically satisfied” the legal definition of kidnapping, which prohibits moving a person or restraining a person’s liberty. Knuff did not restrain the victims apart from fatally attacking them, the concurrence concluded.

The concurrence otherwise agreed with the majority that the death penalty was appropriate for Knuff’s murder of Mann and Capobianco.

(source: The Highland County Press)

WYOMING:

History: Tom Horn’s Trial and Hanging

In this last history column about Tom Horn, we will go into his sentencing, and the book he wrote while he was being held in the Laramie County Jail. Horn had his defenders as well as those who felt he was guilty.

In this column we will look at both sides of his trial.

Cheyenne Daily Leader, November 12, 1902 –Death Sentence Imposed Upon Convicted Murderer This Afternoon

“It is ordered, adjudged and decreed that you, Tom Horn, be taken from hence to the jail of Laramie county; there confined until the 3th day of January, 1903, on which day between 9 o’clock in the forenoon and 3 o’clock in the afternoon, you will be taken by the sheriff of Laramie county to a place prepared by him, and there hanged by the neck until you are dead.”

This afternoon at 2 o’clock Judge Scott overruled the motion for a new trial in the Tom Horn case and imposed the death penalty upon the prisoner. When the fatal words were being said which pronounced his doom Tom Horn, the stoic, the man convicted by 12 men of assassinating in cold blood 14-year-old Willie Nickell, at Iron Mountain, on, July 18 1901.

Horn stood without a muscle of his face moving, absolutely impassive without the least outward indication of emotion, unless it be that the pallor of his cheeks caused by his long months of confinement grew slightly deeper.

Tom Horn must Hang. So said the twelve good and true men of Laramie county, and so has said the Distinct judge who tried the case. There is but hope left, but one loop hole through which the condemned murderer, rapidly approaching his doom, can crawl, and that is the state supreme court. At the conclusion of the sentence today the attorneys for Horn gave notice of an appeal to the state supreme court.

However, the appeal was not successful and Tom Horn’s life ended at the gallows on Nov. 20, 1903.

Wyoming Tribune (Cheyenne), November 20, 1903 – Tom Horn Is Dead! He Died As Might Be Expected, With Courage, Coolness and No Sign of Faltering.

The drop fell at exactly four minutes after eleven o’clock The visitors were admitted to the jail room at about a quarter to eleven o’clock, the newspaper men being admitted to the upper corridor and the other visitors to the lower corridor. After a wait of about five minims Horn appeared in the door of his cell. A moment later Deputy Proctor said “All right.” and Horn started out, turning as though to see if he had left anything behind.

As he stepped out of the corridor, Deputy Proctor said to him. “Tom. the Irwin boys are here and want to sing to you.” “All right, I’ll be glad to hear them.” The two brothers, who were standing almost immediately beneath Horn, then sang the old song with which Horn was perfectly familiar. “Keep Your Hand Upon the Throttle and Your Eye Upon the Rail.” Horn listened intently, his hand resting upon the corridor rail.

He was dressed in a red and white striped negligee shirt, open at the neck a corduroy vest, dark trousers and low slippers. At the close at the singing the two boys mounted to the upper corridor and bade their old friend good-bye. Horn and Charlie Irwin spoke a few words in regard to the delivery of letters which Horn had spent the morning in writing.

Made No Confession. Irwin then said to Horn. “The only thing I want to ask you is, did you make a confession to the preacher?” “No,” was the answer. Both men then said, good-bye. Irwin adding, “It’s coming to all of us.”

While in prison, Horn wrote the story of his life, “Life of Tom Horn, Government Scout and Interpreter, Written by Himself, Together with His Letters and Statements by his Friends.” Published by The Louthan Book Company, Denver, in 1904. Reprints can still be purchased today.

Cheyenne Daily Leader, April 6, 1904 – Cheyennese generally have been of the opinion that the final chapter of the Tom Horn case had been written, discussed and relegated to the past but such Is not the case. Within a few days the Louthan Publishing company of Denver will issue Horn’s story of his own life, together with letters by his friends and chapters by John C. Coble and Gwendolene Myrtle Kimmell. The advance sheets’ of this book have been issued and abound with hot passages, exciting scenes, charges, accusations etc. The letters that Horn wrote just before going to the scaffold and his letter to C. .T. Ohnhaus are included.

An unpublished letter is one written by Horn to Coble, asking him to go to Denver and see Frank Muloch, who Horn says, was paid to come with two other men to Cheyenne to his trial and swear to a lie, and Horn says he wants Coble to find out who gave them the money to swear his life away. Gwendolene Kimmell, the schoolteacher who was friendly to Horn and who figured so sensationally in his trial, has a chapter covering “Horn as I Know Him,” and charging directly that Victor Miller killed Willie Nickell, the crime for which Horn died, and that the Miller boy told her he killed the Nickell boy.

Her chapter is, in the main, an expansion of her affidavit, but it has some warm statements and direct charges and a fierce castigation of Governor Chatterton who refused to pardon Horn.

The publication of the book has been given to the Louthan company by John C. Coble, the Wyoming cattleman and Horn’s life-long friend Coble wrote the preface, published Horn’s letters to him and adds a “closing word.” In his preface Coble, after severely attacking the newspapers, which, he says, seized like greedy newsmongers on every scrap of sensationalism to point a lurid picture of Horn as a fiend, continues: “I wish to repeat, Tom Horn was seldom profane. “This assertion can be sustained by those who really knew him, a fact which alone serves to disprove that the so-called ‘famous confession,’ the language of which smacks so very much more of those who edited the notes that were taken on the spot.”

In closing he says: “In your hands is the book. For it is asked a dealing without prejudice; for its writer is asked that which during his closing years was denied him.” Horn’s direct contribution to the book, aside from his numerous letters, consists of full account of his life up to the time of his Wyoming difficulty, The account of the trial, of his stay in jail and his letters cover this portion.

This story is of his earlier days, his scouting service with the United States army in Arizona, his bringing Geronimo to General Miles and the subsequent surrender of the Apache chief. He tells also of several of his daring exploits, his fights with Indians, his part in the war with Spain, and Charles Horn, a brother, tells of his funeral.

Al Sieber, a scout friend, tells of Horn during the Indian wars. J.C. Coble’s “closing word” contains some matter very abusive of prominent Wyoming citizens. He says: “And it has not been the press alone, but there have been men in positions of trust, pulled up with their little brief authority, who have besmirched their trust and stooped to odious means for selfish ends. If it be true that kings play at chess with nations for pawns, then it is as true that Wyoming politicians play the game of justice with human souls for pawns, and, I may add, with cowardice as referee.”

“I am convinced and I reassert it to be true that Tom Horn was guiltless of the crime tor which he died, nor am I alone in this behalf. He suffered the death, but thereis a great and final referee in all matters of justice.

Miss Kimmell’s chapter describes Horn’s drunken condition at the time of the confession to LeFors, saying he had been drinking for four days and was practically in a stupor when his confession was taken. Speaking of Horn’s reputation, she says: “His main weapon was his reputation as a killer. He himself carefully fostered his reputation, for, as he said: “That is my stock in trade.” Dropping in on a family for the night, he would relate bloody tales of his deeds, killing Indians, and his daring and for days after his departure not a calf would be stolen in the neighborhood.”

Speaking of who really killed Willie Nickell, she says; “After the 2nd session of the coroner’s, inquest I heard three conversations between Jim and Victor Miller, in each of which conversations statements by both incriminating Victor Miller as the murderer of Willie Nickell were made. Twice afterward Jim Miller acknowledged to me that Victor had confessed to him the killing of the Nickell boy, and on October 10, 1901, Victor Millerhimself confessed to me that he was the murderer. I agreed to say nothing about Victor’s criminality, provided they would make no attempt to sidetrack the crime on Horn or any other innocent person.” One of the hitherto unpublished letters of Horn is that to Coble, relative to securing testimony in Denver. Horn said: “I think it you would go to Denver and see Billy Loomis that he could get an affidavit from F. Frank and W. Muloch showing that Muloch was hired to swear to anything that was put into his mouth and that Stoll and I hired him to do so.”

Writing to Charles J. Ohnhaus, the stenographer who took the notes on Horn’s confession, Horn said “You and I and Snow and La Fors and Stoll all know that you changed your stenographic notes at the instigation of some one, from what was actually said to what you wanted me to say.

“There are too many men mixed up in this business that know the truth, and it will sooner or later come out.” Horn’s last letter to Coble tells all he knows of the killing of the Nickell boy, in which Horn says that Bllly McDonald and Miller asked him to go in on the job, saying they were going to “kill all the Nickel outfit,” and that he refused to have anything to do with it. Later he refused to talk to them, knowing that they would tell him of the murder. He closes by saying; “This is the truth, as I am going to die in 10 minutes.”

The book is called a “vindication” of Tom Horn and the manuscript is to be used in this form by Coble for that purpose. The pictures include those of Horn and some of his immediate relatives, but nothing of a gruesome nature. It is not expected that the “vindication” will create much of a sensation In Wyoming.

Like the old-time outlaws, including the Dalton Gang members, who were displayed and photographed after they were killed, newspaper and curiosity seekers were anxious to view Tom Horn’s remains.

Was Horn guilty or innocent of the Nickells murder? After 121 years, we will probably never know.

(source: sheridanmedia.com)

CALIFORNIA:

Man facing death penalty saved by sitcom footage that proved his innocence----The gobsmacking story has since become the subject of a Netflix documentary.

An innocent man accused of murder was saved from facing the death penalty after unused sitcom footage was unearthed, proving his innocence.

In May 2003, 16-year-old Martha Puebla was shot dead on her doorstep at her home in Los Angeles.

Weeks before, Puebla had testified against a man named Mario Catalan - a gang member - and shortly after her death, Mario's brother, Juan Catalan, was arrested and charged with Puebla's murder.

At the time, police believed Catalan was responsible for carrying out a hit on the teen, which had been arranged by her ex-boyfriend Jose Ledesma and Mario.

"Witnesses described the suspect who fled the scene as a medium build male Hispanic, 19-25 years of age, 5’8" to 5’10". He had very short hair and a mustache and appeared to be a gang member," according to an LAPD police report from the time.

Despite providing an alibi and insisting he'd been at a baseball game with his 6-year-old daughter at the time of the murder, Juan's legal team couldn't find any actual proof he'd been at the game.

He was subsequently arrested and charged before he spent 5 months remanded in custody while awaiting his trial.

If convicted, Catalan could've potentially faced the death penalty, but new evidence was found which corroborated his alibi.

Somewhat incredibly, an episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm (season 4’s 'The Car Pool Lane' where Larry David hires a prostitute who then gets his father high on pot) was filmed in the stadium that night.

And unaired footage filmed for the episode showed Catalan at the game, which, of course, corroborated his alibi.

The DA was forced to drop the murder charges and award him a settlement of $320,000.

The incredible case was covered in Netflix’s 2017 true-crime documentary The Long Shot.

Filmmaker Jacob LaMendola said it took five years to get the documentary made, but added: “I knew that it was worth taking the time to tell it correctly.”

During an interview with the Indiewire in 2017, LaMendola said it took him a ‘long time’ to earn Catalan’s trust to feature in the documentary.

And that was just half the battle - he then had to get Larry David on board.

He revealed: "The very first thing he said when he got on the phone was, ‘There’s no way that I would ever be a part of this’.

"I think I just went into shock… We had gone so far, we had every piece, and I just didn’t want it to end."

When LaMendola started to explain how much effort he had invested into getting the film off the ground, David asked: "So wait, you just want to interview me?” to which LaMendola said yes, and David replied: "'OK, I’ll do it'."

(source: unilad.com)

SOUTH AFRICA:

Reintroducing death penalty will be ‘misplaced, dangerous’

Recent calls to bring back the death penalty are misplaced and dangerous. There is no credible evidence that it reduces crime, but there are countless examples of its selective use, and its leading to the deaths of innocent people.

Pro-death penalty sentiments reflect a lack of understanding about why we have abnormally high levels of violent crime, which is a product of a near-broken criminal justice system and our failure to address our violent legacy and improve the quality of life significantly.

We have become a criminalised state in which personal enrichment, not service, dominates governance, and politicians may participate in criminal syndicates themselves, with impunity.

In abolishing the death penalty, South Africa joined the growing ranks of democracies that had made the transition. The right to life and dignity are core constitutional principles, and must remain so, despite the government itself routinely flouting them.

Repressive countries with the worst human rights records implement most death sentences. It is known that its selective application often results from political misuse of power, and prejudices linked to race and even sexual orientation. In apartheid South Africa, black men would hang for raping white women, but white men raped black women with impunity. Even in established democracies, the poor are more likely to be executed, if only because they generally lack quality legal services.

From the handling of crime scenes to court proceedings, human error leads to innocent people being found guilty, as was the case with James Hanratty, hanged in the UK for a 1961 murder and rape he did not commit.

While DNA evidence has saved people, it has also led to false guilty verdicts for serious crimes. In the early 2000s, independent DNA analysis showed serious errors in the Houston (Texas) police forensic laboratory testing, which led to reforms, including far better oversight (which South Africa lacks)

Were South Africa to reintroduce the death penalty, there is little doubt that it would be poor people – not criminal politicians – who would face the gallows, as they are the visible face of crime, deployed by the invisible multiracial syndicates using them as hitmen and hijackers; they are seldom charged and, if they are, can afford the best lawyers.

Violent crime has a long history in South Africa, and it was allowed to fester in deprived areas. Cape Flat gangs date from forced removals from District Six, and complicity between police, prisons and drug dealers. In the 1980s, violence intensified as guns flooded into black areas as part of the government’s strategy against liberation movements. The damage done was greater than the many thousands of deaths, as children who witnessed the carnage grew up traumatised for life. Not nearly enough has been done to address the psychological damage done to the victims whose socialisation has facilitated their recruitment as killers in gangs and syndicates.

The apartheid state was an organised crime syndicate, and the democratic government introduced its own beneficiaries, allowing it to flourish with impunity and fuel general crime, as drug dependants steal to feed their addiction. For most historically disadvantaged people, little has changed in terms of quality of life in 30 years, including in crucial areas such as education (some are worse than apartheid) and general community development, including support for families and youth (the state of apartheid-era hostels is a prime example).

Poverty does not necessarily lead to crime, but it facilitates recruitment by syndicates. However, it is the appalling failure of our criminal justice system that fuels violent crime, starting with the police whose ranks are ridden with gross corruption and in which promotion is based on nepotism and not competence. Bribery buys recruitment. Good police suffer at the hands of corrupt management, which may endanger their lives.

Policing, starting with crime intelligence, is used for political ends – including to cover up for murderous politicians – not to address crime.

Guns disappear from police hands, and no one is held accountable. The private security industry is awash with guns and unregistered or non-compliant companies – some of them linked to politicians and taxi bosses – and badly regulated. There are serious problems in the prosecution services, including corruption and failure to exercise proper oversight of investigations. Police members kill and torture with impunity, as the Independent Police Investigative Directorate fails its mandate. With credible reports that some staff endanger the lives of police members by colluding with criminals, it should immediately be placed under judicial oversight.

Surely, it is obvious that dealing with violent crime starts with fixing our near broken criminal justice system? This must be the priority of our new government, for if it does not happen, there is little hope for a safer and more peaceful South Africa.

(source: Opinion; * Mary De Haas is a violence monitor in KZN, an honorary Research Fellow at the University of KZN’s School of Law and a member of the Navi Pillay Research Group on justice and human rights----iol.co.za)

GHANA:

Let’s introduce death penalty as punishment for corrupt officials, says presidential candidate----The presidential candidate of Begin Ghana Party wants a referendum organised for the introduction of the death penalty for corrupt officials

The presidential candidate of the Begin Ghana Party (BGP), Edward Ohene Kye, is proposing the use of the death sentence as a punishment for individuals who engage in certain corrupt practices in Ghana.

Kye believes such measures could deter others from engaging in corrupt practices thereby eradicating the canker in the country.

The presidential candidate of Begin Ghana Party wants a referendum organised to vote in favour of the death penalty for corrupt officials.

Speaking to Caleb Ahinakwah on TownHall Talk on Asaase 99.5 Friday ( 12 April) Kye said “We are proposing a sort of referendum to peg the death penalty to corruption so that we will eradicate it.”

Kye added, “… Instead of doing the right thing, our elders are amassing wealth for themselves, we cannot continue this way, we need to save our motherland.”

(source: asaaseradio.com)

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

Sobering reason why judges break their pens after sentencing someone to death----Indian judges took up the tradition hundreds of years ago

There's an important reason why some judges break the nib of their pens when sentencing someone to death.

Adopted by numerous judges across the world, the practice of breaking pens after giving out a death sentence is more symbolic than anything else, as it isn't a legally enforced requirement in any country.

It's purely up to the individual, by breaking the pen has become a tradition in certain countries, for example, India has been carrying this tradition out ever since the early 16th century.

Back then, it was the breaking of the quill, but as time has gone on, it has become the breaking of the nib on the pen.

It's done to symbolise the weight and seriousness of the decision that they have just made, but there are certain things that it highlights.

Firstly, the act of breaking the pen highlights finality or solemnity - essentially the irreversible nature of imposing a death sentence on someone that no money can get you out of.

It serves up a moment of reflection for those involved, and really lets the impact sink in for all parties, including friends and loved ones, shortly after passing the sentence.

It is also widely believed that breaking the nib of a pen actually emphasises the fact that a pen being used to sign a death sentence should not be used for anything else, again showing just how serious it is.

Indian lawyer Subhash Ahlawat explained: "The tradition of breaking the nib after passing a death sentence can be traced back to the Mughal era in India.

"It was during this period that the Mughal Emperor would break the quill used to sign off on death sentences."

He said that this tradition was eventually adopted by British judges in colonial India, later continuing after India gained independence.

Ahlawat also stated that it represents the 'judge's heavy heart' as they have no choice but to give such a serious sentence, as they have the emotional burden of deciding someone's fate.

Of course, several western countries have banned the death penalty in recent years, including the UK.

Poorvi Sirothia, another Indian lawyer, wrote about the topic in a piece for indianlegalsolution.com, saying: "After the authority passes capital punishment, he has no authority to audit or renounce his request.

"So once the sentence has been granted and the adjudicator's mark inked, the nib is additionally broken, emblematic of the way that the appointed authority can't drop or revamp the judgement in the event that he/she has a difference in heart of psyche." Basically, it's the most extreme version of no take backs.

(source: ladbible.com)

APRIL 13, 2024:

TEXAS:

A man convicted of a 1991 El Paso murder is still on death row. The judge says he’ll decide on an execution date in the coming weeks.

Will an El Paso man who has been on death row for more than 30 years soon fulfill his sentence?

That was the question today at the center of a hearing in the County Courthouse downtown.

In court today

Ford was not in the 34th District Court today, but his attorney Richard Burr was.

Burr argued that Judge Bill Moody should dismiss the District Attorney's motion to place Ford's execution on the calendar.

The DA's office asked Judge Moody to allow the state to schedule Ford's lethal injection for November 14, 2024.

The victim's family speaks

The father of Ford's victim, Armando Murillo Senior, delivered a passionate and emotional plea to the judge to schedule the execution so he and his adult daughters can, in his words, "get closure and be allowed to truly heal."

Ford was 18 when he was arrested, accused of a home invasion and murder at a home in East El Paso.

Myra Murillo was shot and left paralyzed. Her daughters were wounded, and her son, Armando Junior, was killed.

Ford maintained that he was not the shooter, and that he was instead the lookout for his accomplices. He also argues that he did not know anyone was going to be killed during the home invasion.

Ford's attorney today argued that the conviction was based on eyewitness testimony, which can be unreliable.

Murillo Senior told me that he believes his daughters, who survived the shooting and identified Ford as the one who pulled the trigger.

"This is too long. My case, my two daughters, even my ex, saw Tony Ford. They were this close together, not even two feet apart. And when he shot, he didn't shoot at long-distance. He put the gun right up on her head. You see, it's a tough situation. It's tough for my daughters. It's tough for my ex, too."

Murillo said he and his daughters and ex-wife have been filing letters with the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.

Ford's accomplice

The Murillo family is urging the parole board to deny early release to Ford's accomplice, Vanjarmar Belton.

Belton was sentenced to prison until 2066 on aggravated assault and has been eligible for parole since 2006, according to the TDCJ. Belton will go before the review board in September.

Judge Moody said he will make a decision on the state's request to schedule Ford's execution no more than 6 weeks from today.

(source: KVIA news)

***********

Convicted murderer charged in 2 new Texas killings offers to return to prison in plea

A convicted murderer who was released early from a Texas prison in 1993 and now faces 2 new murder charges offered Thursday to enter a plea and return to prison for 50 years in exchange for avoiding going to trial and facing a possible death sentence — an offer that victims’ families urged prosecutors to reject.

Raul Meza Jr., 63, served about a decade in prison for killing an 8-year-old girl before he was released. He was charged last year with two other killings that happened in 2019 and 2023, and investigators have said they are looking into as many as a 10 other unsolved cases that they think might be connected to Meza.

During a pretrial hearing Thursday, Travis County prosecutors said they had just received the plea offer from Meza’s attorney and hadn’t had time yet to evaluate it. Meza’s lawyer, Russ Hunt, said the number of years in prison was the only term offered, and that there had been no discussion yet whether a deal would require Meza to plead guilty or no contest to the murder charges.

After the hearing, victims’ family members speaking to reporters urged prosecutors to reject the offer.

Meza’s original 1982 conviction and 30-year prison sentence were the result of a plea deal. He was released early after receiving credit for good time.

“It just brought me back to what my parents had to go through when we were children,” said Tracy Page, whose sister Kendra Page was strangled and sexually assaulted by Meza in 1982. “It’s like he’s dictating what he wants. … To me, in my heart, I want (him) to go to the death penalty.”

Hunt said the offer of 50 years on each murder charge, to be served concurrently, would effectively mean he’d be in prison for life. By law, Meza would be eligible for parole in 30 years, at age 93.

“Mr. Meza would like to avoid a trial and all the trouble and emotional turmoil it brings to everyone involved in the case, including the families of the victims,” Hunt said.

Meza’s early release from prison in 1993 caused an uproar throughout Texas and he was met by protesters at nearly every turn. Picketers drove him out of six cities, sometimes with threats of violence.

“In my heart, I know that I will not willfully bring harm to anyone," Meza said during an August 1993 news conference after he had been driven out of communities.

Austin police said Meza called them last May and confessed to killing his 80-year-old roommate, Jesse Fraga, days earlier, and implicated himself in the 2019 sexual assault and killing of Gloria Lofton. Meza was carrying a backpack containing zip ties, a flashlight, duct tape and a .22 caliber pistol with extra rounds when he was arrested, police said.

Meza has been charged with capital murder in Lofton’s killing, which could result in him being sentenced to death or life without the possibility of parole if he’s convicted. He was indicted on a murder charge in Fraga’s death, which could result in a life term.

(source: Associated Press)

NEW YORK:

Inside infamous US 'Sing Sing' prison where 614 inmates fried to death on 'Old Sparky'----Since 1825 - when the prison's first inmates were forced to horrifically build their own confinement - 'Sing Sing' has seen over 600 lags fried to death by the electric chair, dubbed 'Old Sparky'

The phrase "being sent up the river" refers originally to getting sentenced to a spell at the infamous "Sing-Sing" slammer.

Located on the banks of the Hudson River, about 30 miles north of New York City, the prison is one of the oldest in the US to still be operative. Up until the state’s death penalty was abolished in 1972 614 men and women have been put to death via Sing Sing’s electric chair, a piece of deadly equipment bearing the alarmingly affectionate nickname "Old Sparky".

Sing Sing was constructed in 1825 after the State of New York purchased an 130-acre site on the Hudson River. Its first residents were 100 incarcerated men who were transported from New York’s Auburn Prison to the new site, at the time named Mount Pleasant.

However when the lags arrived there were no cells to hold them, meaning the hapless blokes were forced to build their own prison walls. Under the supervision of law enforcement officials, marble was excavated from a nearby quarry and the prisoners got to work on their home-to-be.

Each of the 800 cells were reportedly 7ft deep, 3 feet 3 inches wide and 6 feet 7 inches high.

Early inmates at Sing Sing were forced to spend their incarceration in total silence (dubbed ‘the Auburn method’), which was enforced by guards brandishing whips. During the day, labour groups made up of ‘lockstepped’ lags would spend hours in the baking heat working on the site.

Although the prison is still very much in use today, the 1825 cell block is defunct with plans to turn it into a museum.

Over the first hundred years of the prison, several inmates on death row managed to forge daring escapes from Sing Sing’s ‘Death House’, leading to a new one being built in 1920.

High-profile executions at the hand of Sing Sing’s ‘Old Sparky’ electric chair include Julius and Ethel Rosenberg in 1953 for being involved in espionage for the Soviet Union on nuclear weapon research. In 1954 Gerhard Puff was executed for the murder of an FBI agent, while the last person executed in the state was the murderer Eddie Lee Mays.

Following the abolition of the death penalty in 1972, ‘Old Sparky’ was moved to Green Haven Correctional Facility in working condition, but never used again. Finally put out to pasture, the electric chair was transferred to a museum in Albany, where it was displayed as an artefact.

In the current era, Sing Sing appears to be a far-removed place from the site which saw over 600 people fried to death over its history. In November 2023, a USA Today visit to the penitentiary included meeting with a peer-support group made up of inmates who called themselves "Voices from Within".

The group is reportedly attempting to change the culture in prisons by shedding light on the mistakes they’ve made and “keeping young people from heading down the same path”.

"I don't want life to end the day we are sentenced," said one Sing Sing inmate. "That's not the end of us as humans and as men. We have so much we can share with everyone, if we are given that chance."

(source: dailystar.co.uk)

ALABAMA:

VERDICT: Jury finds Jeremy Williams guilty in capital murder case, facing death penalty

After nearly an hour and a half of deliberations, the jury decided on a verdict.

On April 12, Jeremy Williams was found guilty in all four counts in the capital murder case of Kamarie Holland.

After 3 gut-wrenching days of tearful and explicit testimony, the jury deliberated for an hour and a half and found Jeremy Williams guilty.

Kamarie Holland’s father, Corey, was present in the courtroom as the jury read their verdict. A look of relief was on his face as the jury read the verdict.

RECAP:

Day 1 of trial featured opening statements from both the State and the Defense, as well as testimony from five law enforcement authorities on what they witnessed and experienced on December 13, 2021. The following information contains graphic, vulgar and violent accounts by attorneys and witnesses. Viewer discretion is advised. The full details are below.

Day 1: Trial begins for murder suspect in Kamarie Holland case

Day 2 of trial, the State had 3 more witnesses testify against Jeremy Williams. This day, the forensic pathologist that conducted the autopsy on Kamarie Holland gave gruesome descriptions on what he saw on December 14, 2021 as he examined Holland.

Day 2: 3 additional witness testify against Jeremy Williams in capital murder case

Day three of trial, the State had one final witness - a sexual assault victim of Jeremy Williams - testify against him. She was just 5-years-old at the time of the assaults. The victim made it through her tearful testimony with her service dog by her side. She stayed in the courtroom during closing arguments.

Day 3: Sexual assault victim testifies against Jeremy Williams; State and Defense present closing arguments

Sentencing will take place on Monday, April 15 at 9 a.m.

(source: WTVM news)

OHIO:

Lawmakers discuss reviving death penalty

Lawmakers in Columbus are discussing whether to revive the death penalty in Ohio by gassing prison inmates with nitrogen as a means of execution.

House Bill 392, which would use nitrogen hypoxia to carry out the death penalty, is sponsored by state representatives Brian Stewart, R-Asheville, and Phil Plummer, R-Dayton.

State Rep. Gary Click, R-Vickery, is a co-sponsor of the bill. State Rep. D.J. Swearingen, R-Huron, has not taken a position but is a member of the Ohio House Government Oversight Committee, which is considering the bill.

Ohio’s last execution was on July 18, 2018, when Robert Van Hook was executed for murdering a Cincinnati man he met in a bar.

When he met with journalists from Ogden News newspapers in January, including from The Courier, Gov. Mike DeWine said he doubts any executions will be carried out during the last three years of his term.

The governor explained that under Ohio law, lethal injection is the only approved method of capital punishment. Drug companies have warned the state not to use any of their products for executions, DeWine said.

Stewart and his allies are trying to get around that situation with a new method of execution, nitrogen hypoxia, which would kill inmates by depriving them of oxygen. On Jan. 25, Alabama used nitrogen to execute convicted murderer Kenneth Eugene Smith. It was the first execution in the U.S. to use the method.

“Nitrogen hypoxia is an alternative method for carrying out capital punishments that has been made available by legislatures in other states,” Stewart said. “In federal court pleadings, even defense counsels have conceded that an offender executed by nitrogen hypoxia would ‘be quickly, painlessly, and humanely rendered unconscious, followed rapidly by death.’”

Ohio currently has 118 inmates on death row awaiting execution.

The 118 include Curtis L. Clinton, 52, convicted of the aggravated murder in 2012 of Heather Jackson, 23, Sandusky, and her two children, ages 1 and 3. He was sentenced to death in 2013.

In addition to his trio of murders, Clinton choked and raped a 17-year-old girl a week before the killings. He had previously served 13 years in prison for the strangling death of 18-year-old Misty Keckler in 1997.

Ogden Newspapers asked Click why he signed on to co-sponsor the bill.

“Justice is delayed when the justice system is handicapped by extraneous and unnecessary obstacles. Victims and their families often suffer extended grief and the lack of closure when heinous crimes meriting capital punishment face delay after delay. Survivors should not be suspended in a perpetual state of grief absent closure due to bureaucratic obstruction,” Click said.

“If the state desires to eliminate capital punishment, there is a mechanism to do so. Artificial workarounds are unfair to Ohio's citizens. So long as it remains the law, the law should be enforced effectively and efficiently,” he said.

The Ohio House Government Oversight Committee held a hearing on the bill on Tuesday.

Swearingen is a member of the committee, so he’ll be asked to vote on the measure if it comes up for a vote.

“I’m still reviewing the bill at this time,” Swearingen said Wednesday.

Swearingen said he doesn’t know when the committee might vote on the bill.

“I haven't been given a timeline on that,” he said.

House Bill 392’s backers include Ohio’s attorney general, Dave Yost.

“No criminal penalty — capital or otherwise — should carry an empty promise of justice,” Yost said earlier this month. “Ohioans on both sides of the death-penalty debate can agree that our current system of capital punishment is unworkable, and something needs to change.”

Quick and painless?

A letter opposing the proposal has been sent to Swearingen and other committee members. The letter is signed by dozens of Ohio rabbis and other Ohio Jews.

L'chaim! Jews Against the Death Penalty, the group that organized the opposition campaign, argues that the proposed method of execution revives memories of the Holocaust.

"The signers of this letter don't necessarily oppose the death penalty, however we cannot stand by while Ohio considers implementing a manner of execution that awakens the Nazi legacy of the Holocaust every time it is mentioned,” Bonowitz said.

First-hand accounts of the nation's only nitrogen execution also appear to challenge the notion that such executions cause no pain or suffering.

According to journalists and witnesses of Alabama death row inmate Smith's execution in January, the inmate "shook in thrashing spasms and seizure-like movements for several minutes at the start of the execution."

"The force of his movements caused the gurney to visibly move at least once," the Associated Press reported.

Those accounts led another Alabama death row inmate to file a lawsuit seeking to block the state from using the nitrogen execution method on him. Alabama's attorney general, Steve Marshall, maintains that Smith's execution was "textbook."

(source: thecourier.com)

CALIFORNIA:

Civil rights groups fight ‘racially discriminatory’ death penalty in Calif. Supreme Court----The lawsuit says California’s death penalty violates the state constitution’s equal protection guarantees because courts and prosecutors apply it in a racially biased way

California criminal justice reform organizations are challenging the state’s use of the death penalty, saying it disproportionately affects Black and brown people and is unconstitutional.

The ACLU, the Office of the State Public Defender and other legal groups on Tuesday filed a petition with the Supreme Court of California on behalf of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, Witness to Innocence and a handful of civil rights organizations.

The lawsuit says California’s death penalty violates the state constitution’s equal protection guarantees because courts and prosecutors apply it in a racially-biased way, according to a news release from the groups.

Lisa Romo of the Office of the State Public Defender said her organization is filing the suit now due to an “accumulation of data” and new studies showing the death penalty is applied disproportionately to victims of color and is used more frequently in cases involving white victims.

“We’re in a position where, because of the dysfunction of the death penalty, there’s just no way to get this in front of the California Supreme Court in an individual case,” Romo said.

Her group and the others involved in the lawsuit hope to convince the justices that California’s death penalty “ends up in these extreme racial disparities and the court should therefore declare the statutes that we have on the books right now to be unconstitutional.”

This would mean convictions resulting in death sentences under the state’s current capital punishment scheme could be vacated, Romo said. The court could also choose not to allow future death sentences “under this particular statutory system,” she said.

Voters or lawmakers could then change California’s capital punishment system to bring it in line with the court’s ruling, Romo said.

California capital punishment

Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2019 signed an executive order placing a moratorium on state executions, saying the death penalty is “ineffective, irreversible and immoral.” Even before Newsom’s order, California had not executed any condemned inmates since 2006, due to legal challenges over the state’s mode of execution.

About 34% of California’s more than 600 condemned inmates are Black, about 32% are white and about 26% are Mexican or Hispanic, according to March 8 data from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Only about 5% of all Californians are Black, according to 2022 U.S. Census Bureau data.

California is 1 of 27 states that still have a death penalty, according to 2023 data from the Death Penalty Information Center. Twenty-three states do not use capital punishment.

Californians in 2016 voted down a ballot measure that would have ended the state’s death penalty, with 53% against repealing it and nearly 47% in favor.

In spite of the execution moratorium, courts have continued to sentence California prisoners to death. From 2019 to 2024, CDCR added 16 condemned inmates. When Newsom leaves office, executions could resume unless a future governor pauses them again.

The legal challenge comes as the state begins to dismantle its death rows for men at San Quentin State Prison and for women at the Central California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla.

A different 2016 state ballot measure, Proposition 66, allows condemned inmates to be housed at any state prison and requires them to work and pay restitution money to victims, among other provisions.

By summer 2024, CDCR plans to rehouse all male death row inmates in general population housing at other prisons, as San Quentin does not have the required electrified fence.

This plan also fits with Newsom’s proposal to refashion San Quentin from a death row hub into a model rehabilitation center by 2025.

Women on death row at Chowchilla have been transferred to general population housing.

(source: Sacramento Bee)

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

California bishop praises district attorney for seeking to change death sentences

Bishop Oscar Cantú of San Jose recently praised a California district attorney for seeking to convert the death sentences of more than a dozen prisoners to life in prison without possibility of parole.

Jeff Rosen, the district attorney for Santa Clara County, announced last week that he had made a filing in state superior court to resentence 15 condemned men, saying he has “lost faith in capital punishment as a fair and effective crime deterrent.”

The prosecutor added that he views capital punishment as an “antiquated, racially biased, error-prone system that deters nothing and costs us millions of public dollars and our integrity as a community that cherishes justice.”

Rosen pointed to the California law that took effect at the beginning of 2019 and allows district attorneys to resentence a person if they determine the sentence no longer serves justice.

“Judges and juries of the people should decide where an inmate dies. God should decide when,” Rosen said, while acknowledging the “horrible” crimes committed by the inmates.

In an April 4 statement, Cantú, whose diocese includes Santa Clara County, praised Rosen’s “prophetic and principled decision.”

“Catholic social teaching urges us to recognize the dignity of every human being, especially the most vulnerable,” Cantú said.

“In alignment with these teachings, the Church advocates for a consistent ethic of life, encompassing the unborn, the poor, the migrant, the sick, and those in the criminal justice system.”

“DA Rosen’s decision aligns with these values, challenging us to seek alternatives to the death penalty that respect human life and dignity, promote rehabilitation, and foster a safer and more compassionate society,” the bishop said. “It is a call to move away from punitive justice towards restorative justice that heals and rebuilds lives.”

California technically has more prisoners on death row than any other state, but the state’s death penalty has been under moratorium since 2019 and has not been applied since 2006.

The change reflects a development of Catholic doctrine in recent years. St. John Paul II, calling the death penalty “cruel and unnecessary,” encouraged Christians to be “unconditionally pro-life” and said that “the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil.

The Vatican’s top doctrinal office’s new declaration on the theme of human dignity, released Monday, reiterated that the death penalty “violates the inalienable dignity of every person, regardless of the circumstances.”

(source: catholicworldreport.com)

USA:

Rise in US executions masks deep divide between states on use of death penalty----Some of the 27 states that have the death penalty have not executed anyone in years but others still do – and the divide is rooted in history

The execution of Brian Dorsey in Missouri on Tuesday, despite an extraordinary campaign asking for his sentence to be commuted, brought into focus the issue of the death penalty in the US – one of the few countries in the western world that still uses corporal punishment.

Dorsey, 52, was executed for the 2006 murders of his cousin and her husband, after the number of people executed in the US rose to 24 in 2023, from 18 in 2022.

The numbers do little, however, to illustrate how unevenly the death penalty is applied in the country: and the growing opposition to capital punishment among Americans.

“It is an act of state violence that we’re using as a punishment,” said Elyse Max, co-director of Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty.

“We learn in kindergarten that if you get hit, you don’t hit back. You tell someone. And it’s kind of that basic philosophy of you cannot solve violence with more violence.”

20 people were executed in 5 states in 2023: Missouri, Oklahoma, Florida, Texas and Alabama. 7 states sentenced people to death: Alabama, Arizona, California, Florida, Louisiana, North Carolina and Texas.

But states are deeply divided over whether they execute people convicted of crimes. The death penalty has been abolished in 23 states, and in the District of Colombia and Puerto Rico. Some of the 27 states that still have the death penalty have not executed anyone for years.

Others, like Texas and Florida, where the rightwing governor, Ron DeSantis, signed a law last year which made it easier for juries to recommend a death sentence, have been responsible for a disproportionate amount of executions in recent years.

Max said the divide has a base in history.

“Missouri is considered the state outside of the south that had the most racial terror lynchings. We can even look and drill down into specific counties in Missouri that are high use death penalty counties, those are counties that had the most racial terror lynchings,” she said.

“And so you see this culture of fear, this culture of hate that’s embedded in certain parts and areas. And that’s how you end up with these types of sentencing.

“Kansas [which neighbors Missouri] was not a slave state: they haven’t executed in 10 years. Missouri was a slave state, and I think some of that is still lingering in our criminal justice system, certainly in our policing and in other systems that were spawned from that time period.”

It is an act of state violence that we’re using as a punishment

Even within the 27 states that still have capital punishment, “the death penalty is really local in its application”, said Robin Maher, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a non-profit organization which researches the death penalty but does not take a position on capital punishment itself.

“Where the death penalty is being used is just in a small number of jurisdictions, where it has been culturally used for a good many years, and where we have elected officials who are making those decisions, not the American public,” Maher said.

There is evidence that Americans’ opinions on the death penalty are changing. A Gallup poll in late 2023 found that 53% of Americans favor the death penalty for a person convicted of murder compared to more than 70% in the 1990s. (In the 2023 Gallup poll 44% were opposed to the death penalty for murder, and 2% had no opinion.)

Prosecutors – who have the ability to push for the death penalty – are elected to their positions, so in some counties may see a benefit in saying they will pursue execution in certain cases.

The same can happen higher up the chain. State governors have the ability to commute death sentences or award clemency, but in Missouri, Mike Parson, the state’s governor, has shown a particular zeal for the death penalty: the state has executed 10 people during his tenure.

Dorsey’s current lawyers have said he was poorly represented in his original case, owing to the public defender system which was in place at Missouri at the time. That system paid Dorsey’s attorneys a flat fee for his representation, which advocates said meant less time was spent on his case.

Dorsey shot his cousin Sarah Bonnie, and her husband to death in 2006 – lawyers later argued that he lacked the intent necessary to be guilty of first-degree murder, which is punishable by death, as he was under a drug-induced psychosis at the time. Parson declined to commute Dorsey’s sentence, despite a petition for clemency from more than 70 correctional officers.

“It should be really very disturbing that we nonetheless executed this, despite understanding fully that he did not get adequate or competent, legal representation at trial,” Maher said.

Despite some improvements in recent years, the amount of money state counties provide for public defense lawyers has been historically underfunded, Maher said.

“We’ve had flat fees, we have had some counties put out contracts for the lowest bid and award all of their defense work to the lowest bidder, [which means] you will almost be guaranteed to get terrible representation with that sort of contract.”

There is also huge racial disparity among those sentenced to death. Since 1976, 34% of the people executed in the US have been Black, despite Black people making up 13.4% of the US population, according to DPIC figures.

As of January 2023, there were 2331 people on death row in the US, according to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. About 41.9% of those were White, and 41.2% were Black.

Committing a crime against a white person is far more likely to draw a death sentence compared to crimes where the victim is a person of color. In 2023, 79% of the people executed had been found guilty of crimes involving white victims.

Between 1976 and 2022, DPIC reported, there have been 2104 victims in cases which led to the death penalty. About 82% of the victims in those cases were white, 9% were Black, and 7.5% were Latino (2% were identified as other races, according to DPIC).

“So many of these decisions are made by prosecutors who may consciously or unconsciously bring their own biases,” Maher said.

“It’s pervasive, it’s through the entire system. We also know that, you know, because of the way the juries are selected in death penalty cases, many people of color are excluded from juries. And we know that that has an effect on how juries deliberate and how they view defendants of color.”

Over the past decades, states that do practice the death penalty have encountered increasing difficulty in acquiring drugs used in the lethal injection process, amid a boycott by pharmaceutical companies. It has led to experimentation with novel execution methods, with three states authorizing the use of nitrogen gas to execute people.

Alabama was the first to use nitrogen gas, when the state killed Kenneth Smith in January. Despite Alabama claiming the method was “perhaps the most humane method of execution ever devised”, the Montgomery Advertiser reported that after the nitrogen was administered “Smith writhed and convulsed on the gurney. He took deep breaths, his body shaking violently with his eyes rolling in the back of his head.”

Since Smith was executed, 3 of the largest manufacturers of medical-grade nitrogen gas in the US have barred their products from being used in executions.

The death penalty has not been used in the UK since 1964, while France last used it in 1977, and formally abolished it in 1981. It has been abolished within the European Union, and in all European countries apart from Russia – which has a moratorium in place and has not killed anyone since 1999 – and Belarus.

The decline in support for the death penalty, has given hope to advocates who believe the US should follow the more than 140 countries that have abolished the practice.

“I think if the current trends are any indication, and the historical data are any indication, the use of the death penalty will continue to decline,” Maher said.

“The public understands that the death penalty is enormously expensive, that it doesn’t provide any deterrent value, and that it doesn’t keep them any safer.”

(source: The Guardian)

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

John Oliver’s “Last Week Tonight” Criticizes Execution Secrecy Laws and “Sketchy” Procurement of Pentobarbital by Federal Government

SECRECY LETHAL INJECTION U.S. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

During the April 7, 2024, episode of “Last Week Tonight,” host John Oliver focused on “grim developments” in the death penalty since his last segment covering lethal injection in 2019. Since then, 91 people have been executed, including 13 federal prisoners during former President Donald Trump’s administration. “Our federal and state governments have continued to pursue questionably legal and definitely horrifying ways, that, again, I would argue they shouldn’t be doing at all,” Mr. Oliver asserted. He explained that the increased difficulty in obtaining drugs required for lethal injection has pushed lawmakers to enact secrecy statutes that protect the identities of businesses and individuals involved in drug development and procurement. “At every level, those who carry out executions crave secrecy,” said Mr. Oliver. Because of these practices, several states have tried to “source drugs from some pretty sketchy suppliers,” which Mr. Oliver claims “is a problem because when drugs are tainted or not formulated at the proper dosage, executions become a protracted nightmare of suffering, which is both horrifying, and also, unconstitutional.”

While President Trump’s administration offered “sanitized accounts” of all 13 federal executions, Mr. Oliver says that autopsies of two executed individuals revealed that the prisoners’ lungs were “twice as heavy as they should be, indicating ‘pulmonary edema,’ where fluid rushes into the lungs and airways,” causing a drowning or suffocating sensation without adequate anesthetization.

In light of these problematic findings, Mr. Oliver questioned where the Trump administration obtained the pentobarbital it used. Through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests submitted by journalists on Mr. Oliver’s team, Last Week Tonight revealed that it believes that Absolute Standards, a Hamden, Connecticut based company, provided the federal government with the pentobarbital used in the federal executions. The problem, Mr. Oliver alleges, is that while Absolute Standards has been registered with the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) since August 2018 to produce pentobarbital, the drugs are not authorized for human consumption. According to Mr. Oliver, “under the law, companies that make drugs need to be registered with the FDA, and the Trump administration claimed, before the executions, that its supplier was ‘properly registered.’” An additional FOIA request submitted to the Food and Drug Administration revealed that the organization was “unable to locate any records responsive” to the request, and Absolute Standards “has not been inspected by the FDA.” In 2020, Reuters also reported that Absolute Standards may have been the source of executions drugs, but the company’s director, Stephen Arpie, did not confirm and said the company does not always know what is done with their product.

“All this secrecy is also meant to protect us — the people in whose name [executions are] done — from confronting the horror of what the death penalty truly is,” Mr. Oliver said. “Because whether it’s nitrogen gas, or an IV injection of drugs, or a firing squad, or an electric chair, or being pressed with weights, it’s all brutal.” Mr. Oliver called on President Biden to commute the death sentences of all 42 individuals on federal death row to sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole. “But beyond commuting sentences, [President] Biden’s administration could do much more. It could investigate the legality of the federal government’s drug purchases from Absolute Standards…” added Mr. Oliver, who also said state legislatures should eliminate secrecy laws and promote transparency. In closing, Mr. Oliver states that “if the government is going to give itself the power to execute its own citizens — which, for the final time, I strongly believe that it should not — then I want to see where the drugs come from, who’s making them, and relentless scrutiny of every part of this process. Because all this is being done in our name, and far too often, in secret. And we should get a voice to express how we feel about that.”

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

COUNCIL OF EUROPE:

Exchange of views of the Committee of Ministers with civil society on the Abolition of the death penalty

The Ministers’ Deputies held a thematic discussion on the Abolition of the death penalty on April 10, 2024, with the participation of representatives from civil society.

The Presidency of Liechtenstein underlined its long-standing commitment on the abolition, and shared a video message of Ms Renate Wohlwend, former parliamentarian from Liechtenstein and former Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe General Rapporteur on the abolition of the death penalty:

The Committee of Ministers then listened to the testimony of Mr Firmin Yangambi, former death-row prisoner in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in the context of the recent lifting of the moratorium on executions in this country. Mr Yangambi is currently a lawyer at the International Criminal Court and President of the NGO “Paix sur terre”.

Then, Mr Matthew Goldberg, President of the World Coalition against the Death penalty, and Ms Aminata Niakaté, President of Ensemble contre la peine de mort (ECPM) had the opportunity to take the floor.

The discussions with Permanent Representatives touched upon the promotion of the Abolition of the death penalty, and in particular the Council of Europe’s contribution to universal abolition.

After this exchange of views, the Ministers’ Deputies adopted a new decision on the abolition of the death penalty.

(source: coe.int)

TAIWAN:

Taiwan at crossroads on death penalty

Taiwan values hard work and is an exciting, young democracy. This month, it has an opportunity to keep moving forward in its progressive political journey.

Taiwan ranks higher on The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index than any other country in Asia and is second in Asia on Freedom House’s list of free countries. Its rankings on both indices are higher than those of my country, the US, which is often seen as a model.

I have been inspired by my friends in the Taiwanese human rights community who take full advantage of the open civic space to champion national human rights causes, and provide needed solidarity and support to activists struggling in less open societies in the region.

Taiwan is becoming internationally known for making sensible public policy. My friends and family were deeply worried for my safety when they saw news of the earthquake last week. It registered at 7.2 on the Richter scale, which would have left a greater trail of destruction and a higher death toll in many other countries. However, Taiwan’s policies, implemented since the devastating 921 Earthquake, made it well-prepared.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Taiwan showed the world what sound public health policy could look like. My own country saw more than 1 million deaths, with a 5.7 % mortality rate compared with Taiwan’s 0.186 percent. Decisions in the US were clouded by a highly chaotic and politically charged debate about basic public health measures that no one questioned in Taiwan.

This month, Taiwan has a significant opportunity regarding sensible public policy and international human rights norms. The Constitutional Court is evaluating the constitutionality of the death penalty. Only 27 % of the world’s countries have retained this punishment for ordinary crimes. Most of these have authoritarian regimes, with the US being a major outlier.

In my 15 years working for Amnesty International in the US, I have witnessed how the death penalty is a blight on any country that aligns itself with human rights. Its staying power primarily comes from politicians’ ability to manipulate the public’s fears, rather than from any proven impact on deterring violent crime or delivering justice without deadly errors and bias. After a few decades of discovering an incredible number of innocence cases, the clamor to execute prisoners has become less loud.

High-profile murder cases in Taiwan predictably result in cries for the death penalty, amplified by a media that provokes drama. With 0.8 murders in 100,000 compared with 7 in 100,000 in the US, I would argue that Taiwan does not have a serious violent crime problem, despite the tragedy it is to the loved ones of the victims.

Regardless of how you view violent crime in Taiwan, the US has proven that capital punishment does not lower murder rates and is a distraction from tangible services that could better help devastated victims’ families. The international community has increasingly been turning its back on the death penalty given its contradiction of the right to life, to be free from cruel and inhumane punishment and to be treated equally under the law.

Taiwan is at a crossroads. It has chosen to let the judicial system evaluate the death penalty. Now, it can rationally and objectively look at the system without inflammatory cries for vengeance or factually inaccurate claims about its utility.

The court has a momentous opportunity to evaluate whether a democracy with a Constitution that enshrines human rights can accommodate a practice that no longer aligns with international human rights norms. Should it decide that the death penalty is incompatible with the values of a liberal democracy, perhaps my country would take notice of yet another example of Taiwan leading in sound public policy. (source: Laura Moye is a human rights activist and teacher living in Taichung----Taipei Times)

VIETNAM:

Real estate tycoon's death sentence is a turning point in Vietnam's anti-corruption campaign

The unusually harsh death sentence given to a real estate tycoon in Vietnam was a pivotal moment in the decadelong “Blazing Furnace” anti-corruption campaign as the Vietnamese business community wrestled with an uncertain future Friday.

Real estate tycoon Truong My Lan, who was sentenced to death Thursday by a court in Ho Chi Minh city for orchestrating the country’s largest ever financial fraud case, was one of Vietnam's most important businesspeople for years. She has been convicted for fraud amounting to $12.5 billion — nearly 3% of the country’s 2022 GDP — and for illegally controlling a major bank and allowing loans that resulted in losses of $27 billion, state media outlets reported.

Vietnam typically gives death penalties crimes like terrorism or murder and, according to Amnesty International, has among the highest rates of capital punishment worldwide. But a death sentence for a financial crime is rare in the country.

Thursday's sentencing marked a “big turning point” in the ongoing anti-corruption drive in Vietnam, said Nguyen Khac Giang, an analyst at Singapore’s ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.

“It signals that the party's commitment to a crackdown on corruption has … expanded," he said.

The Communist Party's so-called Blazing Furnace campaign began in 2013, but it wasn’t until 2018 that authorities began scanning the private sector. Since then, several owners of Vietnam's fast-growing businesses have been arrested. The trial for Trinh Van Quyet — the former chair of the real estate company FLC, which also owns Vietnam's 3rd-largest airline, Bamboo Airways — will likely be heard next. He was arrested in 2022. Giang said Lan’s trial was “an example” for upcoming cases.

The anti-corruption campaign is a hallmark of Communist Party General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong, Vietnam’s top politician. The 79-year-old ideologue views corruption as a grave threat facing the party and has vowed that the campaign will be a “blazing furnace” where no one is untouchable.

It's making foreign investors jittery while dampening Vietnam’s economic outlook at a time when the country has been positioning itself as the ideal home for businesses looking to shift their supply chains away from China. Vietnam already lost two presidents in a little over a year and the country’s bureaucracy has ground to a halt with terrified officials choosing to do nothing lest they be in the crosshairs.

Lan's death sentence sent “shockwaves” across the Vietnamese business community, creating a “sense of uncertainty” about the future, said Giang.

The real estate sector in particular is floundering. An estimated 1,300 property firms withdrew from the market in 2023 and high-rises lie empty in major cities like Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh. Add to this poor global demand and reduced public investment slowing Vietnam’s economic growth down to 5.05% last year, compared to 8.02% in 2022, according to government data.

Meanwhile, despite the long campaign against graft, public opinion about corruption in Vietnam remains mixed, according to an annual survey built on interviews with nearly 20,000 people known as the Vietnam Provincial Governance and Public Administration Performance Index. It found that, while fewer people were asked for bribes, the number of people who felt the government was serious about fighting corruption had actually dipped in 2023 from the previous year.

Giang said that these were now “uncharted waters” for Vietnam, making it impossible to predict what lay next.

"We haven’t really seen anything like this before,” he said.

(source: Huron Daily Tribune)

INDIA/SAUDI ARABIA:

Kerala man on death row in Saudi Arabia, ?35 crore raised for release. Who is he?

Hundreds of people in Kerala have collected ?35.45 crore through a crowd-funding campaign to secure the release of Kozhikode native Abdul Rahim, convicted in Saudi Arabia for causing the death of a 15- year-old disabled boy, reported news agency ANI. Kerala CM Pinarayi Vijayan has hailed the initiative to help free Rahim.

"When the propagandists of hatred spread lies against the state, the Malayalees are raising their defence through stories of humanity and philanthropy. For the release of Abdul Rahim, a native of Kozhikode who was sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia, Malayalees all over the world have joined hands and collected 34 crore rupees," said Kerala CM on social media.

Why Abdul Rahim is facing death penalty in Saudi Arabia

As per news agency ANI, Abdul Rahim was employed as a house driver of a Saudi citizen and as the caretaker of a 15- year-old disabled boy. As per Rahim's version, while travelling with the boy one day, he stopped the vehicle at a red light. When the boy asked Rahim to violate the red signal, he accidentally hit and dislodged the tube of a life-support device attached to the boy's body. As a result, the boy fell unconscious and died.

Rahim was sentenced to death in 2018 under Saudi law for murder. The victim boy's family was adamant about the death penalty. But they eventually agreed to pardon him if he paid 'blood money' of 15 million Saudi riyals.

How people have arranged money for Rahim's release

A legal action committee was formed to organise the crowdfunding to save Abdur Rahim. The committee set up an app called 'SAVEABDULRAHIM' to collect the amount. More than ?30 crore were collected through the app. The fundraising target was achieved by adding the amount received offline.

A social media campaign was also launched to aid the release of Rahim.

The committee has said that it will contact the Indian Embassy in Riyadh to help secure Rahim's release before the April 15 deadline.

(source: hindustantimes.com)

IRAN:

The life of political prisoner Mahmoud Mehrabi is in danger

Mahmoud Mehrabi, a resident of Mobarakeh, Isfahan, who has been imprisoned in Dastgerd Central Prison in Isfahan since February 1, 2023, and whose physical condition is inappropriate, was assaulted and injured by inmates of the dangerous crimes ward on Wednesday, April 10, 2024.

According to reports received by Iran Human Rights Monitor (Iran HRM), the situation of Mr. Mehrabi is extremely alarming due to his transfer to the violent crimes ward and the death threats he has received from the Intelligence Department and the judiciary in Isfahan province.

Before this, the 2nd investigation branch of the Public and Revolutionary Prosecutor’s Office of Mobarakeh in Isfahan province has issued an indictment against Mr. Mahmoud Mehrabi with 187 charges, including, “corruption on earth through widespread publication of lies on Instagram, propaganda against the state, inciting the military and law enforcement forces to refuse to carry out their duties, inciting people to war and killing, and insulting Khomeini.

The charge of corruption on earth has been issued against Mahmoud Mehrabi without sufficient reasons. The IRGC Intelligence has embarked on wide-scale efforts to fabricate a case against Mahmoud Mehrabi. Some 50 private plaintiffs from among the city’s government officials have been included in the file!!Although Mahmoud Mehrabi is just a protester in cyberspace, the intelligence services are planning to file a serious case against this political prisoner.

During his detention, Mr. Mehrabi suffered from inguinal hernia as a result of torture, harassment, and mistreatment in the Information Detention Center of the Revolutionary Guards. He has also been deprived of access to legal representation.

(source: iran-hrm.com)

APRIL 12, 2024:

TEXAS:

Rare Agreement Between District Attorney and Defense Counsel Acknowledge Prosecutorial Misconduct and Need for New Trial for Melissa Lucio

PROSECUTORIAL ACCOUNTABILITY WOMEN TEXAS

On April 5, 2024, Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz and Innocence Project attorney Vanessa Potkin released a joint statement regarding Melissa Lucio’s case, which has been pending additional review for almost two years. On January 11, 2023, the parties submitted an Agreed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stating that the defense was not given access to favorable information in the prosecution’s possession at trial, an error that they agree should entitle Ms. Lucio to a new trial. “Under Texas procedure the trial court must make a recommendation to the CCA which is the only court that can vacate a conviction,” explained the statement. “We are hopeful that Melissa’s case will be resolved.”

Ms. Lucio’s son John and his wife Michelle also issued a statement. “We are grateful to District Attorney Saenz for recognizing that evidence that our baby sister Mariah’s death was an accident, not a murder, was never presented to the jury. We are also thankful to Melissa’s legal team. We hope and pray that our mother can soon come home to her family.”

Ms. Lucio was sentenced to death in 2008 after prosecutors alleged that she beat her 2-year-old daughter to death. Ms. Lucio’s lawyers recently presented expert opinion that her daughter Mariah was not murdered at all, but likely died from head trauma following an accidental fall two days prior to her death. Ms. Lucio, who was physically, emotionally, and sexually abused from a young age, has been diagnosed with PTSD, “battered woman syndrome” (intimate partner violence), and depression. She also has intellectual impairments, all of which, forensic and domestic abuse experts agree, made her more vulnerable to coercive interrogation techniques. After 5 hours of aggressive questioning by police on the night of Mariah’s death, Ms. Lucio acquiesced to police pressure, saying, “I guess I did it.”

Ms. Lucio’s case has garnered widespread attention and support. In February 2022, the Inter-American Court on Human Rights (IACHR) issued precautionary measures asking the state to refrain from execution until her case is reviewed and to ensure detention conditions align with international human rights standards. In March 2022, 81 members of the Texas House of Representatives, led by Republican Representative Jeff Leach, signed a letter calling on Governor Greg Abbott and the pardons board to grant her clemency. Before the Texas Board of Pardons and Parole could vote on the matter, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (TCCA) granted Ms. Lucio a stay of execution just days prior to her April 27, 2022 execution date. The TCCA highlighted four issues for the trial court to review: whether prosecutors obtained her conviction using false testimony, whether the jury’s exposure to previously unavailable scientific evidence would have resulted in her acquittal, whether she is actually innocent, and whether prosecutors suppressed favorable evidence that was material to the outcome of her trial. The fourth question, answered in the affirmative, was the subject of the January 2023 joint filing.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

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

Death row inmate and mother-of-14 could be saved after 'new evidence' emerges----Melissa Lucio was convicted in 2008, but statements from her children were never presented

Prosecutors working on the case of death row inmate Melissa Lucio have said evidence which was suppressed at her murder trial could have prevented her conviction.

Lucio, a mom-of-14, was convicted in 2008 for the death of her 2-year-old daughter, Mariah, in Texas in 2007.

Prosecutors long maintained Mariah had been a victim of abuse and noted that her body had been covered in bruises, but Lucio's defense argued Mariah had died following an accidental fall down a steep staircase.

Lucio was originally set to die by lethal injection in April 2022, but 2 days before her scheduled execution, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals delayed the injection so state District Judge Gabriela Garcia could review Lucio's claims that new evidence would exonerate her.

Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz initially said he disagreed with her claims, but this month he acknowledged her legal team 'did not have access to information favorable to her defense at the time of trial'.

The suppressed evidence includes witness statements and a report by Child Protective Services which would have corroborated Lucio's defense, Associated Press reports.

The CPS report indicated one of Lucio’s children had told a CPS worker he was present when Mariah 'fell down some stairs', and that their mother had not been abusive to them or Mariah.

Lucio's attorneys were also reportedly not provided with statements made by two of her other children, who had told police that Mariah had been injured in a fall.

The children also said Lucio had grown worried about Mariah's declining health before her death.

Together with Lucio’s attorneys, the office of Saenz has produced a 33-page agreement laying out the facts and conclusions in the case, which stated: “She would not have been convicted in light of the suppressed evidence."

It is unclear why the evidence was suppressed, but the agreement has recommended that Lucio's conviction and death sentence be overturned; a decision which now lies with Texas judge Garcia.

Garcia received the findings on 20 December, 2022, but she is yet to issue a ruling and forward her decision to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

The court of appeals will then be responsible for making the final decision.

Lucio’s son, John Lucio, and his wife, Michelle, stood by Lucio as they shared their appreciation for the agreement.

“We are grateful to District Attorney Saenz for recognizing that evidence that our baby sister Mariah’s death was an accident, not a murder, was never presented to the jury," they said in a statement.

"We are also thankful to Melissa’s legal team. We hope and pray that our mother can soon come home to her family."

(source: unilad.com)

PENNSYVANIA:

DA files for death penalty against man accused of kidnapping 2 co-workers, torturing and killing them

It is now official. The death penalty will be sought if the accused shooter in the January double homicide in Williamsport is found guilty of 1st-degree murder.

That step was taken when Lycoming County First Assistant District Attorney Martin L. Wade filed in county court the aggravating circumstances required in capital cases.

(source: pennlive.com)

ALABAMA----death row inmate drops appeals

Alabama man convicted of killing 5 people asks to be executed: ‘It’s the right thing to do’----Derrick Dearman, convicted killer of 5 on Alabama death row, dropped his appeals and asked the state to be executed.

Derrick Dearman says he wants to live.

The 35-year-old inmate on Alabama’s death row has spent almost 6 years fighting his sentence after being convicted of killing five people, including a woman who was pregnant. But now, he says he’s asked the state to execute him. It’s time, he says, for “justice to be delivered,” and “it’s the right thing to do.”

“I don’t want to die,” Dearman told CNN in a phone interview Friday from a prison in Atmore, Alabama. “But I feel it in my heart that this is the only option that would help the victims’ families get the closure they need to move forward.”

“I made peace with my decision.”

In the early morning hours on August 20, 2016, Dearman broke into a home in small-town Citronelle, Alabama, according to a sentencing order filed in the case. He made his way through the house, attacking 5 of the occupants one by one, using an ax, a .45 pistol and a shotgun.

Shannon Melissa Randall, Robert Lee Brown, Justin Kaleb Reed, Joseph Adam Turner and Chelsea Marie Reed, who was 5 months pregnant, were left dead. Dearman fled the scene, taking his sometime girlfriend and the infant son of 2 victims with him.

Dearman, who was born in Greene County, Mississippi, later turned himself in to authorities there.

He pleaded guilty to capital murder charges on August 31, 2018; a jury recommended the death penalty. Dearman’s parents both testified his “long-term drug abuse was the central problem in their son’s life,” according to his sentencing order.

Dearborn said he tried to appeal the sentence – but only for the sake of his family, who he said wanted him to fight for his life. “They have a right as my family, to try to be presented with opportunity to seek relief from the sentence that I was cast, because no father wants their son to die,” he told CNN.

“What they’ve seen was a drug addict, what they’ve seen was a man who literally wasn’t in his own mind, he was in a mental fetal position,” Dearman said. His first appeal was filed in October 2018, and he told his family he’d allow a few years of appeal attempts. In February, the Alabama Supreme Court denied a motion to appeal his sentence, upholding his convictions.

And now, about 5.5 years after his sentence, Dearman says the fight is over.

“It’s just time to do what I know is right and what I know I gotta do,” he said. “My family’s right was secured; now it’s time for the victims and their families to get what’s right to them and what they deserve and that’s for justice to be delivered.”

On April 4, Dearman said, he fired his attorneys with the Equal Justice Initiative who were representing him during the appeals process. Dearman told CNN he wrote letters to Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey and the state’s attorney general, asking them to carry out his death sentence.

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall’s office received the letter, spokesperson Amanda Priest told CNN. CNN also contacted Angela Setzer, Dearman’s former attorney with the Equal Justice Initiative, for comment but did not receive a response.

It’s unknown whether or when Dearborn’s request might be fulfilled.

A ‘heinous’ attack awakened most victims

Dearman had been at the home on August 17 – 3 days before the murders – helping scrap a metal trailer but his behavior started to make at least 1 person at the home in Citronelle, about 30 miles north of the Gulf Coast city of Mobile, “uncomfortable,” according to the sentencing order.

Shannon Randall, who had a 3-month-old son, ultimately said she didn’t want Dearman staying “in the same home as her infant” but he could still work there.

He left and returned to a home he shared with his girlfriend in George County, Mississippi, about 15-minutes over the state line. Court records show he injected methamphetamine that evening and became abusive toward his girlfriend.

The next day, she fled.

Dearman returned to the home in Citronelle, hoping to speak to his girlfriend, and was told to leave. He came back three more times that evening, prompting Randall’s husband, Joseph Adam Turner, to call authorities.

Police patrolled outside the home but left around 3 a.m. when there was a shift change, the sentencing document notes.

Sometime in the early morning hours, Dearman returned a final time on foot. He later told investigators that he had used methamphetamine at some point before he entered the house.

He broke into the home, woke up his sleeping girlfriend and talked with her outside. Dearman, increasingly frustrated, refused to leave and “demanded she stay and talk to him,” the sentencing order says.

He left the home and returned later with an ax, which he’d pulled from a nearby tree.

Dearman made his way through the home, swinging the weapon on multiple sleeping occupants who were staying there. He used it on Turner and Randall, who had been sleeping in bed with their son. Dearman then managed to pry a .45 pistol from one of the victims and shot him. He also used a shotgun in the attack, the sentencing order says.

Court records note “after the initial attack was completed, the Defendant meticulously shot each victim to ensure death.”

He then left and ordered his girlfriend to go with him, taking the infant with them, the sentencing order says.

The order called the attack “especially heinous” and “atrocious,” noting each victim was conscious for a period of time after being brutally attacked.

Later that day, Dearman told his father what happened, and his father persuaded him to turn himself in to authorities.

The reality of the crimes Dearman committed began to settle in once he was behind bars and able to sleep, eat and get the drugs out of his system, he told CNN on Friday. From that point forward, he said he started “talking to God” and knew his life was the price he had to pay.

Dearman stressed his decision is “not for my own gain” and said he’s grappled with the idea of reaching out to the families of the victims but says he didn’t want to cause more pain. CNN attempted to reach the families of each of the victims.

“From my point of view, there’s nothing that I could ever say or do that will make this right. I feel like I personally have a debt for the crimes that I committed,” Dearman told CNN. “That’s the only way that I could ever show that I’m truly remorseful, that I truly do have a conscience.”

‘Who wants to look at death and say, “Come here”?’

Alabama has faced scrutiny over its executions of death row inmates after multiple failed lethal injections prompted an internal review of the state’s capital punishment system in 2022.

Gov. Ivey asked the state Department of Corrections to conduct a “top-to-bottom review of the state’s execution process” after problems with multiple lethal injections came into the national spotlight, CNN previously reported. The state resumed executions last spring after the review was completed.

Dearman acknowledged some people might question whether he’s fully competent to make the decision to be executed, saying: “Yes, I’m confident I’m in my right mind. If I wasn’t, I wouldn’t be trying to think about the victims’ families and their feelings, my family and their feelings. I wouldn’t be trying to think about how people might view the death penalty.”

The Rev. Dr. Jeff Hood, Dearman’s spiritual adviser, told CNN he was skeptical when Dearman first informed him of his decision and said he had “conflicting emotions” about getting involved in his case.

“Derrick has consistently expressed this is a spiritual decision for him and not a political decision or an activist decision,” Hood said. “In our conversations, that’s been an interesting dynamic. This is incredibly spiritual for him.”

The convicted killer said he’s against the death penalty “in nine out of 10 cases” and believes it’s widely misused – but he says it’s warranted in his case.

“Does it scare me? Of course,” Dearman told CNN. “I mean, who wants to look at death and say, ‘Come here’?”

“But I feel it in my heart that this is the only option that would help the victims’ families get the closure they need to move forward.”

(source: CNN)

OHIO:

Man to face 2nd death penalty trial in woman’s 2019 death----In his 1st trial, the jury only convicted him on a kidnapping charge.

A man will face the death penalty once again after his previous death penalty case ended in a hung jury. In March, Jabar Ishmail was facing murder, aggravated murder and kidnapping in connection with the 2019 death of Kailin Jones.

The jury only convicted Ishmail on the kidnapping charge, which he will be sentenced for on June 6.

On Thursday, the state said they are ready to proceed with another capital punishment trial.

“We did attempt to engage in additional plea discussions, but that has been rejected by the defendant [Ishmail], so at this time, the state is prepared to proceed on another capital trial,” the state prosecutor announced in court.

Clyde Bennett, Ishmail’s defense attorney in his previous trial, said prosecutors claimed his client had tortured and terrorized Jones by stabbing her more than 50 times in 5 hours.

The new capital trial is not expected to begin until 2025.

Jones’s mother, Kinjana Williams, hopes to be there as she lives with stage 5 kidney disease.

“Our family is trying to move on with our lives,” Williams explained. “We should not have to come back to this city where she was brutally murdered.”

Williams said she is upset about what happened during the 1st trial and prays for a better outcome for the next one.

“I hope justice is done next time around,” Williams stated.

Bennett said he will not be representing Ishmail after he is sentenced for the kidnapping charge on June 6.

The defense lawyer said that his contract for services expires once all matters involving the 1st trial are concluded.

Ishmail is expected to remain behind bars until then.

(source: WXIX news)

TENNESSEE:

Looking back: Blount County man one of several East Tennesseans on death row----State prosecutors have until Oct. 11 to determine if they'll pursue the death penalty against another man charged with killing a deputy.

Tennessee prosecutors have a deadline of Oct. 11 to announce if they'll pursue the death penalty against an Alcoa man accused of shooting and killing a Blount County deputy.

Kenneth Wayne DeHart Jr. was indicted on 21 charges earlier this month, including a premeditated first-degree murder charge and an attempted first-degree murder charge.

Prosecutors haven't announced whether they'll pursue the death penalty at this point.

The death penalty is rarely used, and Tennessee records show there's currently one man on death row from Blount County.

According to Tennessee's death penalty laws, prosecutors can pursue the death penalty in murder cases with certain extenuating circumstances, including a killing committed against a law enforcement officer.

Only 1 Blount County man on death row

Gary Sutton, convicted of 1st-degree murder in 1996, is the only person from Blount County who's currently on death row.

Sutton, and his uncle James Dellinger, were convicted in the murders of Tommy Griffin and Connie Branham in the early 1990s.

Both Griffin and Branham were siblings, whose bodies were found about a week apart in February 1992.

Police said Griffin's body was found in Walland and Branham's body was found in a burnt-out car in Sevier County. Griffin's mobile home in Sevier County also burned around the time of his killing.

Both Sutton and Dellinger were sentenced to death in connection after being convicted of Griffin's murder.

Dellinger died last year from cancer after spending more than two decades on death row.

He lost an appeal in 2014 in Blount County. In that hearing, his attorneys said he wanted to submit new evidence that would overturn an earlier decision that said his IQ was over 70.

Tennessee law says anyone with an IQ lower than 70 can't be sentenced to death, but a judge refused to re-open the issue.

Sutton was set to be executed in 2022, but that was canceled because of concerns about Tennessee's execution methods.

Some of Sutton's family members have maintained his innocence in this case and are petitioning Governor Bill Lee for a pardon in his case.

Other East Tennesseans on death row

Other East Tennesseans on death row include people from Knox and Cocke counties.

Lemaricus Davidson was sentenced to death for the 2007 killings of Chris Newsom and Channon Christian.

Terry King was sentenced to death for the 1983 killing of Diana Kay Smith.

Christa Pike, the only woman on death row in Tennessee, was sentenced to death for the 1995 murder of Colleen Slemmer.

Dennis Suttles was convicted in 1996 of killing Patricia Gail Rhodes, in the parking lot of a South Knoxville Taco Bell.

Jonathan Stephenson was convicted of hiring a hitman to kill his wife, Lisa, who was shot in the head with a high-powered rifle in Cocke County in 1989.

Oscar Smith was convicted in 1989 in the triple slayings of his estranged wife, Judy Lynn Smith, and her two sons, Chad and Jason Burnett, from a previous marriage in Nashville. He was just hours away from having his death sentence carried out two years ago before Gov. Bill Lee abruptly intervened.

The Status of Executions

In April 2022, Gov. Bill Lee halted all executions in Tennessee after launching an independent review of the state's lethal injection preparation process following an unspecified "oversight" discovered just before Oscar Smith's scheduled execution. The review finished in December 2022, and the Associated Press reported the Tennessee Department of Correction then fired its top attorney and inspector general for "incorrectly testifying" under oath that they were testing the lethal injection chemicals for bacterial contamination.

The independent report found Tennessee had never fully tested drugs for its executions since rewriting the state's lethal injection protocol in 2018, according to the Associated Press.

Executions have not resumed in Tennessee since the investigation, however, Lee noted he did not wish to stop the administration of the death penalty altogether.

Tennessee has a secondary method of carrying out executions -- the electric chair -- and several death row inmates were put to death by that method between 2018 and 2020. However, the electric chair can't be used as a primary means of execution and can only be used if inmates waive the right to lethal injection.

With the status of lethal injections left in limbo, the state would have to change the law in order to resume executions through a different method, such as a firing squad. A few attempts to do so in the state legislature in 2023 stalled.

(source: WBIR news)

USA:

The death penalty says more about us than the condemned----I should know. I’ve been a death row pastor for 45 years.

I have worked with the condemned in the South since 1975. The death penalty is a barbaric practice no matter how you package it. Although Alabama officials hailed the use of nitrogen gas as the wave of the future with their recent execution of Kenneth Smith, witnesses gave a different account of the proceedings.

Despite efforts to modernize execution methods, the underlying brutality of the death penalty remains unchanged.

When a state kills a human being with a drug that some state veterinary associations have outlawed for the euthanasia of animals, that is really all you need to know about the process. Such is the case in Alabama with the use of nitrogen gas and in Tennessee with vecuronium bromide. These drugs are avoided for killing animals, but permitted for the state in killing protocols of human beings.

These ethical inconsistencies inherent in the selection of execution drugs, along with gross injustices throughout the system, underscore the moral bankruptcy of what I have come to refer to as the “killing machine.”

The United States’ first execution of a prisoner by lethal injection happened on Dec. 7, 1982, in Huntsville, Texas. The prisoner’s name was Charlie Brooks. I remember because I was there.

As a death row minister, I had flown out to Texas to meet with then-Gov. Bill Clements prior to the execution; I then joined a protest organized by my colleagues outside the penitentiary where the state killing would take place at midnight.

The proponents of this new “medical model” envisioned lethal injection as providing a painless, cosmetically pleasing viewing for witnesses and prison personnel. In reality, though, it was what a Florida state senator later described thusly: “It makes it easier to execute them because they are not jerking and writhing like they do in the electric chair.”

Ah, yes, an inoffensive viewing makes for a better press report.

Before the vigil was scheduled to begin, I stopped in at a local café, where I overheard two white men sitting at a table nearby discussing the upcoming execution: “He’s gittin’ off easy. This needle business is just gittin’ off easy.”

“Yup,” his companion responded. “They oughta fry” Brooks, he said, using a racial slur.

At the nearby penitentiary, my colleagues and I kept a candlelight vigil but we were not alone. The crowd, really more of a mob of several hundred, assembled and began yelling and screaming for the killing of Brooks. To this Southerner, who knows his history, this group was reminiscent of the mobs that had historically made Texas, especially eastern Texas, a leader in lynching. This section of the state also led in sentencing people to death row.

The mob carried on for several hours and then suddenly became quiet. I looked up from my candle and saw Brooks’ family slowly, painfully climbing those steps of the penitentiary for a last goodbye with a son and brother.

Although the trial court had found Brooks guilty of murder, the prosecutor subsequently requested that his death sentence be commuted over doubt as to who pulled the trigger and said he had “pangs of conscience” over the disparity between the sentences given to Brooks and his partner, who was serving 40 years with the possibility of parole. “It may well be, as horrible as it is to contemplate, that the State of Texas executed the wrong man,” the prosecutor later said.

However, it was not enough to stop the killing machine. And on the day of his execution, witnesses have said Brooks indicated he was in tremendous suffering in the seven minutes after the injection began. An injection did not go as smoothly as expected, and was reported to have had “a problem with the line,” leading to the solution being more diluted for the next execution. As Charles Colson wrote for The Washington Post at the time, “That execution wasn’t painless.”

On Feb. 28 of this year, 2 executions were scheduled in the United States, of Ivan Cantu in Texas and Thomas Creech in Idaho. Cantu maintained his innocence and it was later found that two key witnesses lied in their testimony, leading some jurors on the case to express concerns over the sentence, including the jury foreman, who wrote an opinion column titled “I helped put Ivan Cantu on death row. Now I feel like I was fooled.” None of it mattered. Yet again, Texas made sure Cantu, despite significant doubt as to his guilt, died a horrific death with the “medical model.”

An NPR investigation of over 200 autopsies of the lethally injected has revealed 84% experienced pulmonary edema or drowning. Additionally, doctors “raised serious concerns that many inmates are not being properly anesthetized and are therefore feeling the suffocating and drowning sensation brought on by pulmonary edema,” NPR said.

The 2nd lethal injection execution attempt on Feb. 28 — that of Creech in Idaho — was halted after eight failed attempts to find a vein while he was strapped to the gurney. Defense lawyers stated, “The badly botched execution proves the state cannot carry out an execution that is humane and constitutional.”

Consistent instances of botched executions expose the inherent flaws and inhumanity of the death penalty system, undermining its legitimacy and moral standing.

On April 4, Michael Smith was executed by lethal injection in Oklahoma. He was convicted of murdering two people while on PCP, and under the shattering effect of that drug, gave a confession to police. He was intellectually disabled and said he had no recollection of the killing. What is accomplished by executing a man from such a context?

Brian Dorsey was convicted of murder and was executed in Missouri this week, on Tuesday (April 9). He was known for being a model prisoner. He was even the barber for the warden, and some 60 correctional officers asked for his clemency.

I worked with two men in Tennessee, Ed Zagorski and Nick Sutton, who had the qualities of Dorsey. Zagorski spent 35 years in prison without a disciplinary write-up. In 50 years of prison ministry in the South, I had never seen that for an individual on death row. Sutton hit the trifecta: Post trial, jurors stated that if they had known all of the facts they would have given him life. And correctional officers asked for clemency because he had saved their lives; he had graduated from a conflict resolution course and was a certified mediator.

Neither Zagorski nor Sutton received clemency. They were electrocuted by the state of Tennessee in an inherently political process that has nothing to do with justice. You see, by denying clemency a governor proves he is tough on crime. That is why this is a criminal legal system. What is happening is criminal. It is legal. And it is a system. It is all about politics and killing, not justice.

During my 45 years ministering to the condemned, I discerned that those on death row fall into three distinct categories: those truly guilty of murder; individuals who were unequivocally innocent; and others sentenced to death after the true perpetrator negotiated a plea deal with prosecutors, implicating their co-defendant.

Structural inequalities within the legal system perpetuate a cycle of injustice, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities and undermining the principles of fairness and equality. In other words, often it’s not committing the worst crime that lands an individual on death row, but having the worst lawyer — most cannot afford quality legal counsel.

Across the South, everyone I have met on death row has been poor. In addition, extreme racial discrimination is uncontroverted in more than 20 studies conducted across the country. What we have is a criminal legal system that delivers poor victims of racial discrimination right to the executioner’s door.

These condemned to die have been women, men, the mentally ill, the truly insane; almost all suffered from horrific childhood experiences. Many of them have suffered from trauma and brain damage. Yet I have found each to be responsive to caring, concern and empathy. Most have become my friends.

Although our criminal legal system wishes to designate them to the scrap heap, I have experienced these people to be thoughtful, engaging, funny and responsible human beings confined to cages. And despite their circumstances, those on death row retain their humanity and deserve to be treated with dignity and compassion.

When we lose the perspective that each individual is a child of God, we can do terrible things to one another. Yes, many on death row have committed murder, but none of us should be defined by the worst thing we have done, nor our humanity forfeited because of it.

(source: Opinion; Joe Ingle is a death row pastor, United Church of Christ minister and the founder of the Southern Center for Human Rights. He is the author of a forthcoming memoir, “Too Close to the Flame: With the Condemned Inside the Southern Killing Machine.”----Religion News Service)

SOUTH AFRICA:

Populist death penalty calls do not pass constitutional muster

“We must abolish this Constitution!” has become the election carol and election decorations of this year’s poll.

It has become almost routine to hear calls from populist politicians, including those in the ruling party, as well as other influential figures in society, advocating to change the South African Constitution. They often label this proposed shift as the “second transition”, consequentially portraying the Constitution as inadequate for driving social change and economic transformation.

In the 2024 election campaign, the call has yet again been made to reintroduce capital punishment through constitutional amendment. Capital punishment was abolished in the 1995 constitutional court (CC) decision following S v Makwanyane and Another.

It is my view that such an amendment would be impossible as parliament does not have unlimited authority to change the Constitution. Thus, calls for such constitutional amendment are mere rhetoric that scapegoats the Constitution for the government’s failure to fulfil its constitutional obligations and progressively improve the lives of all who live in the country. The calls project the death penalty as the panacea to the unacceptably high crime rate. In this article, I aim to challenge the fallacious notion of introducing the death penalty through a constitutional amendment.

The significance of the Constitution cannot be overstated. It is the supreme law of the land, as explicitly stated in section 2, and embodies the collective aspirations of the nation which are founded on the values of “human dignity, the achievement of equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms”.

The Constitution defines the role and obligations of the state, delineates the powers and responsibilities of each branch, and provides mechanisms for accountability and oversight primarily for the government to ensure that it operates within its defined powers and duties. Our Constitution exists in a dynamic socio-political context and is adaptable to address and accommodate inevitable societal and political changes that are both desirable and necessary. It was purposely drafted in broad and general terms to ensure its longevity and relevance over time.

To that end, the CC in S v Zuma and Others in 1995 approved the view that the Constitution is a living document but the Constitution does not mean whatever we wish it to mean. Thus, there is a clear distinction between amending the Constitution and replacing it, what is termed constitutional abrogation in legal circles.

While it may be argued that both processes involve altering the supreme law of the land, they have vastly different implications and consequences. The former involves undertaking a rigorous process of adding, altering, correcting, enhancing, or even abolishing one or more existing constitutional provisions to address identified shortcomings or evolving societal needs, while maintaining the integral structure of the Constitution. Conversely, the latter entails substituting the existing Constitution with an entirely new document.

Section 74 of the Constitution provides for the amendment of any of its provisions. These procedures are considerably more stringent than other legislative-making procedures. The rigorous procedure is deliberately imposed to shield the Constitution from the volatility of routine political dynamics and the potential for misuse by transient and populist majorities.

Strict procedures were established to ensure that all attempts to amend the Constitution are approached with great care, to prevent hastily executed amendments that could potentially introduce regressive amendments that would ultimately undermine its basic features.

The amendment procedure in section 74 is initiated by introducing a bill in the National Assembly and/or the National Council of Provinces.

Notably, on the plain reading of the text of the Constitution, any of its provisions may be amended, the only hurdle to conquer is to follow the prescribed procedure to satisfy the required majority stipulated in section 74. Section 167(4)(d) then confers upon the CC, as the custodian and guardian of the Constitution, the exclusive jurisdiction “to decide on the constitutionality of any constitutional amendment”.

The delegation of power to the CC to review the validity of constitutional amendments aims to ensure that the court can establish and ensure that following an amendment there will be a reasonable degree of continuity and stability within the legal and political system.

This implies that the power of the CC to determine the constitutionality of constitutional amendments extends beyond merely examining procedural aspects, it also encompasses scrutinising the substantive validity of amendments enacted.

This signifies that there might be a substantive limitation on parliament’s amending powers and introduces the basic structure doctrine phenomenon. This doctrine posits that the Constitution has certain implied and intrinsic characteristics that parliament cannot depart from — any proposed constitutional amendment deviating from this constitutional sub-structure is invalid despite procedural compliance with section 74.

The basic structure doctrine was approved by the supreme court of India in the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru v State Of Kerala and Anr in 1973, in response to the contentious relationship between the judiciary and parliament of India.

The court held that while the authority to amend the constitution rested with India’s parliament, like in South Africa’s case, this power cannot be exercised to temper the basic features of the constitution in a manner that would fundamentally change its essence or identity.

Hence, the Indian constitution has certain unwritten features that cannot be amended because such an amendment would strip the constitution of its identity and purpose. This legal doctrine reinforces the importance of maintaining constitutional continuity and serves as a bulwark against wholesale replacement or retrogressive constitutional changes.

Although the basic structure is yet to be fully established in the South African jurisprudence, as is the case in other jurisdictions, the CC has nevertheless recognised it. In Executive Council of the Western Cape Legislature v President of the Republic of South Africa the CC, in obiter, briefly contemplated whether the basic structure doctrine could apply in South Africa similar to India.

The CC adopted the stance that parliament cannot enact amendments that would fundamentally alter the features of our constitutional order, for instance, it is inconceivable that parliament through a procedural compliant manner can abolish itself. This reaffirms the imposition of a substantive constraint on parliament’s authority to amend the Constitution.

Merely asserting that parliament has complied with the prescribed procedures will not suffice to justify the removal of specific constitutional provisions, the CC, as empowered by section 167(4)(d), will also scrutinise the constitutional validity of such amendments. Similarly, in Premier of Kwazulu-Natal and Others v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others, the CC noted the basic structure doctrine, supporting the decision in Kesavananda Bharati, but decided not to make a ruling on the doctrine as the case before it did not involve amendments that could potentially undermine or abrogate the Constitution.

The CC held that the general rule is that constitutional amendments enacted by adhering to the special amendment procedures are “constitutionally unassailable”. Except for amendments that “radically and fundamentally restructure and reorganise the fundamental premises of the Constitution”, such changes “might not qualify as an ‘amendment’ at all”.

In the Certification of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, the CC identified the basic structure and premise of the South African Constitution, which is immutable and may not be altered or interfered with, whether by a dominant political party or a coalition of parties wielding their collective majority in parliament.

These fundamental features include:

the supremacy of the Constitution protected by an independent judiciary;

the rule of law;

the establishment of a democratic State founded on openness, accountability and equality; and

the separation of powers between the legislature, executive and judiciary.

This structure provided by the CC is built on the foundation of human dignity, equality and freedom. It is clear that this basic structure doctrine, while not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, is implicit in its design and interpretation and is a crucial safeguard against partisan interest and the enactment of retrogressive amendments that would undermine the essence of our constitutional order. This is not a radical departure from our jurisprudence as the CC has reiterated that constitutional provisions must be read textually, purposively and contextually.

Now turning to the decision of Makwanyane where the CC abolished the death penalty. It was held that this form of sanction is not an effective punishment for murderers, nor does it serve as a deterrent from committing such heinous crimes. Instead, the greatest deterrent to crime “is the likelihood that offenders will be apprehended, convicted and punished”, which the court noted to be lacking in the criminal justice system at the time judgment was made, and I argue that this deficiency persists even today and has exacerbated over time.

This decision was based on the rights to life and dignity which are of supreme importance in our Constitution. In addition, as the high court noted in Qozeleni v Minister of Law, our Constitution was enacted to address the “mischief” of the apartheid legal order and it must be interpreted against that background. Thus, reintroducing the death penalty through a constitutional amendment would be invalid because it would violate the right to life and dignity which have been upheld as “the most important of all human rights, and the source of all other personal rights”.

Given the fundamental and inviolable nature of these rights and the fact that they are intricately woven into the structure of our Constitution, amending them in pursuit of reinstating capital punishment would result in fundamentally altering or otherwise obliterating the basic structure of our Constitution, and would not be viewed favourably by the CC when it assesses the constitutional validity of such amendments, irrespective of whether the prescribed amendment procedures were adhered to.

The CC would assess the constitutional invalidity of these amendments in line with the basic structure doctrine, as they threaten the integrity and foundational values of the Constitution if passed. Such a proposed constitutional amendment would obliterate our Constitution which is a dignity-based Constitution in stark contrast to the apartheid laws.

Thus, there is little doubt that the CC would view such an amendment as unconstitutional. These kinds of amendments are regressive and driven by political expediency for short-term gains, rather than a genuine commitment to justice and the protection of human rights.

The process of amending the Constitution should be undertaken with the objective of preserving its basic elements structure intact. Put differently, although our Constitution permits for any of its provisions to be amended, the “old” Constitution must nevertheless be preserved even after amendments have been made to, not dismantle or nullify its foundational structure or framework.

These calls to overhaul or replace the Constitution seem to stem from the misconception that the document itself is inherently flawed, and no mention of the failures in its implementation or enforcement as the course of the state of affairs.

(source: Opinion; Sello Ivan Phahle is a legal adviser and analyst----Mail & Guardian)

SERBIA:

The murder of a 2-year-old girl may bring back the death penalty in Serbia----The child was first hit, then strangled, and his body was hidden. The Serbian head of state would bring back the death penalty, but this could also stop the country's EU integration.

The possibility of bringing back the death penalty in Serbia came to the fore in connection with the cruel murder of a two-year-old girl. President Aleksandar Vucsic came up with the proposal, and it is expected that its adoption would gain great support among the population, as the case of Danka Ilic caused a huge indignation.

"Despite the fact that we are talking about very serious crimes, which have deeply shaken the entire Serbian society, we are talking about individual perpetrators and cases".

This is what Erik Palusek said when asked by the Hungarian Nation. The Chief Referee of the International Director's Office of the National Public Service University (NKE) emphasized: this is an act that every normal person deeply condemns.

THE CHILD DISAPPEARED ON MARCH 26 IN A SUBURB OF BOR IN EASTERN SERBIA. HE WAS WITH HIS MOTHER AND BROTHER WHEN THE MOTHER BRIEFLY LEFT HIM UNATTENDED TO GIVE WATER TO THE OTHER CHILD. THE PARENTS IMMEDIATELY NOTIFIED THE POLICE, WHO BEGAN AN INVESTIGATION AND A THOROUGH SEARCH OF THE AREA.

For the 1st time in Serbia, the Amber Alert system has also been put into operation, the essence of which is to immediately involve the entire population, the media, railway stations, highway operators, mobile service providers and all other relevant sectors in the search.

The research took place for 10 days.

They combed through the surrounding forests, caves, ruined buildings, and mine lakes. Tracking dogs, helicopters and drones with thermal cameras were also deployed. At the same time, parents, acquaintances, neighbors and other local people were interrogated. They checked the GPS signals of the phones and the surveillance cameras in the settlement. Some clues led to Vienna, but later the Austrian authorities announced that Danka Ilic was not in Austria.

ON THE 10TH DAY OF THE SEARCH, PRESIDENT ALEKSANDAR VUCIC ANNOUNCED IN THE PRESENCE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GOVERNMENT THAT DANKA ILIC HAD DIED, AND THAT TWO LOCAL MEN IN THEIR FIFTIES WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS DEATH, AND THEY ADMITTED THEIR ACTIONS.

The Minister of the Interior's information also shed light on the details of the case: the 2 men worked at the local water works and were out in the field in the company car when the child was hit. But then, instead of trying to help him, they put him in the trunk of their car and then dumped him in an illegal dump. And the subsequent statement of the criminal police chief revealed further serious details. He said that after the body of the child who had been run over was put in the car, the little one still regained consciousness.

However, one of the men held her down with one hand and strangled the little girl with the other.

The search for the body has been ongoing ever since. The body of Danka Ilics was not found at the illegal landfill first marked by the men. Later, a number of additional locations were searched, without success, as the two fifty-year-old suspects constantly give contradictory information.

ACCORDING TO THE POLICE CAPTAIN, THEY WANT TO ACHIEVE THIS SO THAT THE AUTHORITIES DO NOT FIND THE BODY AND DO NOT SEE ITS CONDITION.

The 2 arrested men from Bor were taken to the higher prosecutor's office in Zajecsari for questioning, where they were remanded in custody for 30 days. They are accused of murder. According to the prosecution's announcement, DD admitted to committing the crime, while J. Sz. defended herself by remaining silent. The father and brother of one of the suspects were also arrested, who allegedly helped transport the body to an as yet unknown location. DD's brother subsequently died at the police station in Bor.

On Saturday, the Serbian head of state said that the death penalty could be reintroduced in the country in the most serious cases.

Foreign Minister Ivica Dacsics, the president of the Socialist Party of Serbia, reacted to this and believed that such monsters should be judged, that ordinary people could certainly suffocate them with their bare hands.

HOWEVER, IN ORDER TO SENTENCE THEM TO DEATH, A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT IS NECESSARY, WHICH IS A LENGTHY PROCESS.

The death penalty was included in the Serbian penal code between 1804 and 2002, but the last death sentence was carried out on February 14, 1992. The last death sentence was handed down in 2001.

Life imprisonment was introduced in Serbia in 2019, and it is currently the most severe punishment that can be imposed, constitutional lawyer Tamás Korhecz told the Serbian Pannon Television.

As he explained, this punishment can be imposed primarily in connection with classified cases of homicide, or if it is carried out with particular cruelty, against minors or several people, or if there are aggravating circumstances. However, the constitutional lawyer emphasized: all of this is only a possibility, an alternative that can be chosen, because the court always considers the aggravating or mitigating circumstances.

REGARDING THE HEAD OF STATE'S PROPOSAL RAISED IN CONNECTION WITH THE DANKA ILICS CASE, KORHECZ SAID THAT BOTH VUCSIC AND HIS CABINET EXPERTS KNOW THAT THERE ARE CONSTITUTIONAL OBSTACLES TO THE REINTRODUCTION OF THE DEATH PENALTY AT THIS MOMENT.

Section 24 of the current constitution clearly prohibits the introduction of such a criminal sanction in Serbia. In this regard, considering the sequence of steps, the constitutional amendment must precede the adoption of such a law amendment, and the constitutional amendment is an extremely complex task, he explained. He added: "The constitutional amendment would not clearly make it possible to introduce the death penalty either, since membership in the Council of Europe requires that there be no death penalty, which means that Serbia would not be a member of the Council of Europe, which would also stop European integration."

Knowing this, it is very difficult to imagine Serbia going down this path - Tamás Korhecz stated in the interview.

Last year, there were two violent tragic incidents right after each other, and this year the brutal and violent death of two-year-old Danka Ilics, Erik Palusek reminded. According to the chief referent of the International Office of the Director-General of the Nz NKE, in one case it is lone perpetrators, and in the third case it is a couple, who later had a few additional accomplices.

THEREFORE, THIS CANNOT BE INTERPRETED AS THE FACT THAT VIOLENCE HAS SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT IS LEGITIMATE TO ASK WHY AND HOW THESE CASES COULD HAVE HAPPENED IN SERBIAN SOCIETY, THE EXPERT ADDED.

He pointed out: in terms of society or the social background, in Serbia it is unfortunately still felt that weapons and the use of weapons have a cult, and it is a fact that there are still a lot of illegally and to a lesser extent legal weapons in the country. If the screening of those applying for a gun license is not thorough enough, or if they are not careful enough, it can unfortunately easily lead to a tragedy, so these screening methods and the laws on gun ownership should definitely be reviewed and, above all, the collection of illegally held weapons should be made more efficient, he said.

According to Palusek, in the case of lone shooters, it is important to examine the effects of their environment on them.

It is possible that they themselves are victims of violence - which can be physical or verbal-psychological - and the resulting frustration triggers their unacceptable actions (this is common in the case of school shooters), but of course there can be many other reasons behind it.

HE EMPHASIZED THAT A DRIVER HITTING A 2-YEAR-OLD GIRL DOES NOT NECESSARILY CONSTITUTE INTENTIONAL HOMICIDE, AS IT IS POSSIBLE THAT HE WAS DRIVING FASTER THAN THE LEGAL LIMIT, WAS CARELESS, WAS UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL, ETC.

It is clear that any of the listed cases are unacceptable and extremely tragic in themselves, however, what happened afterwards, namely that the passenger of the trampling driver strangled the little girl who had regained consciousness and her body was hidden in an illegal dump, is completely inexplicable, almost incomprehensible and an act that every normal person deeply condemns.

The expert underlined: here again the question of the individual psychological state and value system of the perpetrators arises, and then the responsibility of the environment in which they were socialized.

Perhaps it can be felt somewhat everywhere that in recent years, our societies increasingly emphasize and place the importance of the individual in the center, and instead of real connections, we live part of our social life online, and in addition, there is a lot of violence on the world wide web and in the media. content. All of this can result in others' lives being considered less valuable by some, which needs to be done urgently, Erik Palusek said. The chief referee explained: last year, in connection with the school shooting and the subsequent tragedy in Mladenovac, the opposition rightly raised the responsibility of the Serbian government, accusing the ruling power of not having done anything before to urge the collection of illegally held weapons, just as they did not even think that introduce precautions in schools that could have prevented the carnage.

Of course, there are no precautions that can be taken to 100 percent rule out the occurrence of such a case, since it is impossible to search every student's bag every day upon entering the school.

The opposition also knows this, but the situation was skilfully exploited, and I repeat, the accusations made against the government were not unfounded. The tragic death of little Danka had nothing to do with gun ownership, so it would be difficult to organize a series of demonstrations with the same rhetoric, and we also saw that the police worked day and night to investigate the mysterious case and are still working to find the body - he said and underlined: therefore, despite the fact that everyone was infinitely outraged and saddened by this terrible incident, society's anger is directed towards the perpetrators rather than the authorities.

(source: civilek.info)

VIETNAM:

Vietnamese court sentences tycoon to death in multibillion-dollar fraud case

A Vietnamese court sentenced a business executive to death Thursday in a multibillion-dollar fraud case as the country’s ruling Communist Party seeks to crack down on corruption.

A court in Ho Chi Minh City sentenced Truong My Lan, a 68-year-old real estate tycoon, to death on mass-scale embezzlement charges, state media reported. She received additional 20-year sentences for bribery and violating lending regulations and was ordered to pay nearly $27 million in compensatory damages.

Lan, chairwoman of the real estate firm Van Thinh Phat Holdings Group, was convicted of fraudulently siphoning $12 billion from Saigon Joint Stock Commercial Bank into shell companies. She had seized control of 91.5 percent of SCB’s shares, allegedly using co-conspirators as proxies to circumvent strict laws against such extensive power over financial institutions, state media outlets reported.

The total takings, according to the charges on which she was convicted, were equivalent to more than 3 % of the country’s GDP as of 2022.

The sentence is perhaps the highest-profile display of the Communist Party’s efforts to root out corruption and draw investment from international companies as firms reduce their presence in China. Lan’s husband, Eric Chu, a businessman from Hong Kong, was sentenced to nine years in prison for his alleged involvement in the fraud, according to state media.

While the majority of death sentences in Vietnam are for drug-related offenses, the one-party Communist state is also known to impose capital punishment for white-collar crimes, according to Amnesty International. The human rights organization said in a 2023 report that more than 102 people were sentenced to death there in 2022, though the number of executions was unclear due to “secrecy surrounding figures and limited access to information.”

Vietnam uses the death penalty as punishment for 22 crimes including murder, and rape and fraud, according to the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty, which tracks the use of capital punishment globally. Embezzlement of as little as 500 million Vietnamese dong — $20,000 — of government funds qualifies for such punishment, according to the group.

(source: Washington Post)

APRIL 11, 2024:

TEXAS:

Death penalty sought against Alamo man accused of fatal McAllen Motel 6 stabbing

Prosecutors have announced that they will seek the death penalty against a 27-year-old Alamo man accused of a fatal stabbing at a McAllen Motel 6 more than a year ago that left two men dead should he be convicted.

They notified Carlos Antonio Cardenas and his attorney, O. Rene Flores, on March 25, court records show.

Cardenas is accused of killing 42-year-old San Juan resident Luis Eduardo Garza and 45-year-old Virginia resident Keith Henry Cole on March 18, 2023.

The notice said prosecutors are seeking the death penalty on a count of capital murder of multiple persons. Cardenas is also charged with attempted murder.

The stabbing happened at around 6:30 a.m. that day at the hotel on 700 W. Expressway 83 where responding police found two bodies before encountering Cardenas, who was covered in blood and holding a knife.

An officer said in an affidavit that he was soaked in blood “from his face to his shoes” outside the hotel front office where he was poking the window with a black foldable knife trying to get inside.

The officer pointed a gun at Cardenas and told him to drop the knife before arresting him.

As he was placed in handcuffs, Cardenas spoke incoherently, according to the affidavit, which said he refused to identify himself and claimed an unknown “they” would hear it.

Police found Garza on the ground in the southeast parking lot and Cole was found on a second floor hallway near a stairwell to the pool.

Both men had multiple stab wounds.

Investigators also said the stabbings were caught on surveillance video, which showed Cardenas and an unidentified man walk out of hotel room 220 at around 4:35 a.m. The other man drove away in a white car and left Cardenas at the hotel.

As Cardenas walked back to the hotel room, he saw Cole walking with a backpack on the second floor hallway. They were seen talking before Cole tried to walk away, which is when Cardenas attacked him, according to the affidavit.

The Motel 6 in McAllen that was the scene of a March 18, 2023 double homicide is seen on Wednesday, March 22, 2023, in McAllen. (Delcia Lopez | dlopez@themonitor.com) That document said Cardenas then gave the backpack to someone in a black car parked at the east side parking lot that had arrived at 4:35 a.m., according to the affidavit, which said that’s when Cardenas saw Garza by another vehicle, which is when he attacked the man.

At some point, Garza slipped and fell and Cardenas stabbed him several times before grabbing his bag and giving it to the driver of the black vehicle, according to the affidavit.

Investigators say Cardenas then went to the hotel’s front office and began speaking with the front desk attendant through a locked glass partition.

“Something happened, somebody got killed,” Cardenas told the attendant, the affidavit stated.

He also claimed someone was trying to kill him.

Authorities say in the affidavit that Cardenas told the attendant that if police were called that “they are going to kill you and they are going to kill all os us.”

He then began kicking the front desk glass door to get in, which is when the attendant called 9-1-1 and escaped through another exit.

Another man who was in the lobby also began trying to walk away when investigators said in the affidavit that he followed him, grabbed him and threatened him.

That man told investigators that Cardenas wanted him to take the knife, but he refused and was let go.

After his arrest, Cardenas saw the man who had fled and yelled out, “I saved you. I saved you.”

That affidavit said that police suspect Cardenas was under the influence of some unknown drug and it also noted a glass pipe was found in his pocket.

Cardenas, who was scheduled for a court hearing Wednesday, remains held in the Hidalgo County Adult Detention Center on a total of $906,000 in bonds.

A motion has also been filed to examine whether he is competent to stand trial, but the competency report is sealed.

(source: myrgv.com)

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

State to seek death penalty in deadly McAllen Motel 6 stabbing

Prosecutors have announced they will seek the death penalty against the man charged in a deadly stabbing at a Motel 6 in McAllen.

Carlos Antonio Cardenas Jr. is facing charges of capital murder of multiple persons and criminal attempted murder. Cardenas was arrested in connection to a stabbing on March 18, 2023 that left 2 men dead.

On March 25, the State notified the court it would seek the death penalty in the case.

On the morning of March 18, officers responded to the Motel 6 at 700 W. Expressway 83, in McAllen, in reference to a man who was bleeding. The officer found 45-year-old Keith Henry Cole of Virginia, lying face down in the hallway, a probable cause affidavit stated.

The officer moved to another entrance and saw 42-year-old Luis Eduardo Garza of San Juan lying face down in the parking lot. The officer then saw Cardenas covered in blood “from his face to his shoes,” poking the front office window with a knife, attempting to get in, the document stated.

The document stated surveillance footage showed Cardenas stab Cole in the hallway. After Cole fell to the ground, Cardenas left for a few seconds, then returned and stabbed him several more times.

The affidavit stated that Garza tried to flee from Cardenas in the parking lot, but slipped. This is when Cardenas allegedly began to stab Garza several times, before grabbing a bag and handing a bag to the driver of a black vehicle.

While being pat down by officers, police found a clear glass pipe with burnt residue on both sides, the document stated.

A previous ValleyCentral report included the full details from the police documents.

Cardenas was booked into the Hidalgo County Jail on March 20. He remains jailed on a $906,000 bond. Cardenas waived his arraignment on June 5, where he entered a plea of not guilty.

Records show that Cardenas’ defense team requested for a 2nd evaluation for competency to stand trial.

Cardenas has a status hearing scheduled for May 29.

(source: valleycentral.com)

OHIO:

Lawmakers discuss reviving death penalty in Ohio

Lawmakers in Columbus are discussing whether to revive the death penalty in Ohio by gassing prison inmates with nitrogen as a means of execution.

House Bill 392, which would use nitrogen hypoxia to carry out the death penalty, is sponsored by state representatives Brian Stewart, R-Asheville, and Phil Plummer, R-Dayton.

Ohio’s last execution was on July 18, 2018, when Robert Van Hook was executed for murdering a Cincinnati man he met in a bar.

When he met with journalists from Ogden News newspapers in January, including from the Sandusky Register, Gov. Mike DeWine said he doubts any executions will be carried out during the last three years of his term.

Ohio currently has 118 inmates on death row awaiting execution.

The 118 include Curtis L. Clinton, 52, convicted of the aggravated murder in 2012 of Heather Jackson, 23, Sandusky, and her two children, ages 1 and 3. He was sentenced to death in 2013.

The Register asked Click why he signed on to co-sponsor the bill.

The Ohio House Government Oversight Committee held a hearing on the bill on Tuesday.

Swearingen is a member of the committee, so he’ll be asked to vote on the measure if it comes up for a vote.

“I’m still reviewing the bill at this time,” Swearingen said Wednesday.

Swearingen said he doesn’t know when the committee might vote on the bill.

“I haven't been given a timeline on that,” he said.

House Bill 392’s backers include Ohio’s attorney general, Dave Yost.

“No criminal penalty – capital or otherwise – should carry an empty promise of justice,” Yost said earlier this month. “Ohioans on both sides of the death-penalty debate can agree that our current system of capital punishment is unworkable, and something needs to change.”

Quick and painless?

A letter opposing the proposal has been sent to Swearingen and other committee members. The letter is signed by dozens of Ohio rabbis and other Ohio Jews.

L'chaim! Jews Against the Death Penalty, the group that organized the opposition campaign, argues that the proposed method of execution revives memories of the Holocaust.

First-hand accounts of the nation's only nitrogen execution also appear to challenge the notion that such executions cause no pain or suffering.

"The force of his movements caused the gurney to visibly move at least once," the Associated Press reported.

(source: The Advertiser-Tribune)

TENNESSEE:

Tennessee Senate passes bill to allow death penalty in child rape cases----Part of the goal of the legislation, supporters say, is to push a case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Republicans in the Tennessee Senate on Tuesday approved a measure allowing the death penalty for defendants convicted of raping a child — in an effort to challenge a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

Senate Bill 1834 would allow capital punishment for adults convicted of raping a child, with certain aggravating factors. Companion legislation in the House will be taken up after the legislature passes a budget.

Senators approved the bill in a vote of 24 to 5 on Tuesday. Sen. Todd Gardenhire, R-Chattanooga, was the lone Republican to vote against the bill. Sens. Mark Pody, R-Lebanon and Kerry Roberts, R-Springfield – though both in the Senate chamber – did not vote.

“We’re not violating the constitution: we’re challenging a ruling,” said Sen. Janice Bowling, R-Tullahoma.

Only 7 other states have passed similar laws permitting capital punishment for rape of a child under 12, which each chip away at Kennedy v. Louisiana. In that 2008 case, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional a Louisiana law that allowed the death penalty in child rape cases that do not involve the victim’s death, finding that it amounts to “cruel and unusual punishment.”

Tennessee is 1 of 27 states that allows capital punishment, and currently does not allow capital punishment for non-homicide crimes. No one has been executed in Tennessee for any crime other than 1st-degree murder since the 1950s.

Roberts, who serves as chair of the Senate Government Operations Committee, offered an amendment aimed at strengthening the state’s standing to challenge the Supreme Court ruling. Fellow Republicans voted it down.

“I'm absolutely not against the death penalty for the rape of a child. But if we think for one minute that the bill in front of us can overturn Kennedy, the greater danger is that the bill in front of us will reaffirm Kennedy,” Roberts said.

Roberts said the bill as written is “blatantly unconstitutional,” and, as such, questioned whether Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti would defend it in the courts in the effort to bring the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

On the other side, Democrats argued the effort could lead to less reporting of sexual offenses and fewer perpetrators being brought to justice because of heightened difficulties reporting and prosecuting capital cases.

“The greatest tragedy in the world of sexual abuse cases is how many of them don’t come to light. How many people suffer in silence for years and decades without justice from institutions for families,” said Sen. Jeff Yarbro, D-Nashville. “I believe that what we’re doing here is potentially pushing further into the shadows.”

(source: The Tennessean)

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

What's the future of the death penalty in Tennessee?

This week, state senators passed a bill that would allow those convicted of child rape to be sentenced to death, in addition to those convicted of first-degree murder, potentially adding to death row.

But Tennessee hasn't executed any death row inmate since early 2020.

Governor Lee has put those on hold after a report found the state Department of Correction (TDOC) "failed to comply" with their own rule book on how to execute death row inmates — giving the TDOC time to write a new rule book protocol.

Since the stoppage, TDOC's lawyers have sent updates to a federal judge every three months, the latest one saying "TDOC is currently working on draft revisions to Tennessee's execution procedures for lethal injection. The process of revising the protocol is a priority, is active and ongoing. The Commissioner of TDOC is currently not prepared to provide a date when a new lethal injection protocol will be finalized."

But as drug manufacturers crack down on states using their products for lethal injection, NewsChannel 5 Legal Analyst Nick Leonardo points to another possibility.

"They're having a hard time getting those chemicals because some of the manufacturers have stopped making the chemicals needed for lethal injection," Leonardo said. "It's making it increasingly difficult to get them."

With the new rulebook still being worked on, it's unclear now when executions in Tennessee may pick back up.

(source: WTVF news)

MISSOURI:

Cori Bush calls for death penalty to be abolished after Missouri executes Brian Dorsey

Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) called for the death penalty to be abolished Tuesday after Missouri executed Brian Dorsey, a man who killed his cousin and her husband nearly 2 decades ago.

“There is no place in a humane society for state violence. Governor Mike Parson could have saved Brian Dorsey’s life by granting clemency, but he chose to uphold his legacy as the ‘Deadly Governor’ by denying Mr. Dorsey mercy,” Bush said in a statement.

Dorsey, 52, was pronounced dead at 6:11 p.m. Monday after a single-dose injection at the state prison in Bonne Terre. The execution came hours after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected his final appeals, The Associated Press reported.

He was convicted of killing Sarah and Ben Bonnie in December 2006 at their home and leaving their 4-year-old daughter home alone. After shooting the couple with a shotgun, Dorsey sexually assaulted Sarah Bonnie’s body and stole several items in an attempt to pay off a drug debt.

The execution stirred debate about Missouri’s single-drug protocol, which includes no provision for the use of anesthetics. The state settled with his attorneys and took steps to limit his pain but did not say what changes were made, or if an anesthetic was provided to Dorsey, the AP reported.

Bush and Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) sent a letter to Parson last week urging him to halt the execution. The congresswoman said her heart is with Sarah and Ben Bonnie’s families as well as Dorsey’s loved ones.

Bush said Dorsey was executed Tuesday “despite serious concerns about his state of mind when he committed the offense and the legal representation he was provided.”

A group of about 85 protesters gathered outside the prison in support of Dorsey ahead of his execution. His lawyers urged the Supreme Court to step in and said he has shown good faith in prison.

Dorsey’s lawyers said his public defenders were hurried through the case. He pleaded guilty in the case even though he had no agreement to spare him from the death penalty, the AP reported.

“Mr. Dorsey’s case demonstrates the systemic rot of our criminal legal system, which not only fails to prevent violence but actually enables violence itself,” Bush’s statement said. “We are so much more than our worst mistakes, and not a single one of us deserves to die because of them.”

“We must refuse to allow another life to be taken by our government. We must abolish the death penalty,” Bush said.

(source: newsnationnow.com)

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

After Missouri Executes Brian Dorsey, Cori Bush Says Abolish Death Penalty----His case, the congresswoman said, "demonstrates the systemic rot of our criminal legal system, which not only fails to prevent violence but actually enables violence itself."

Democratic U.S. Congresswoman Cori Bush renewed her demand for an end to the death penalty nationwide after her home state of Missouri executed 52-year-old Brian Dorsey on Tuesday evening.

"There is no place in a humane society for state violence. Gov. Mike Parson could have saved Brian Dorsey's life by granting clemency, but he chose to uphold his legacy as the 'Deadly Governor' by denying Mr. Dorsey mercy," Bush said in a statement.

Bush and Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) had written to Parson last week urging the Republican to spare Dorsey's life.

Others who recently tried to prevent Dorsey's execution included family members, 5 of the jurors who sentenced him to death, over 70 current and former correctional officers, and former Missouri Supreme Court Judge Michael Wolff, who previously upheld his sentence.

The right-wing U.S. Supreme Court also declined to intervene. Dorsey was injected with a single dose of pentobarbital at the state prison in Bonne Terre and pronounced dead at 6:11 pm local time, according to the Missouri Department of Corrections.

"Dorsey took a few deep breaths as the drug was injected, then several shallow, quick breaths," The Associated Pressreported Tuesday. "At one point he raised his head from the pillow and blinked hard. After several seconds, all movement stopped."

Based on advice from private counsel hired by the Missouri State Public Defender to defend him, Dorsey pleaded guilty to first-degree murder for killing his cousin, Sarah Bonnie, and her husband, Benjamin Bonnie, at their home on December 23, 2006.

"Had counsel investigated and completed an expert evaluation of their client, they would have learned that Mr. Dorsey was not guilty of first-degree murder, as he was neurologically incapable of deliberation," a lawyer for Dorsey wrote in a recent legal filing.

Bush—who is among dozens of congressional Democrats who have advocated against capital punishment—expressed alarm that Dorsey was killed "despite serious concerns about his state of mind when he committed the offense and the legal representation he was provided."

His case, she said, "demonstrates the systemic rot of our criminal legal system, which not only fails to prevent violence but actually enables violence itself."

"We are so much more than our worst mistakes, and not a single one of us deserves to die because of them," the congresswoman added. "We must refuse to allow another life to be taken by our government. We must abolish the death penalty."

(source: Jessica Corbett is a senior editor and staff writer for Common Dreams)

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

The 57 people Missouri has executed since 2000

Since 2000, Missouri has executed 57 people. Their names, and the names of their victims and brief details about the crimes, are listed here.

Executed March 22, 2000: James Henry Hampton

Executed June 28, 2000: Bert Leroy Hunter

Executed Aug. 30, 2000: Gary Lee Roll

Executed Sept. 13, 2000: George Bernard Harris

Executed Nov. 15, 2000: James Wilson Chambers

Executed Feb. 7, 2001: Stanley Dewaine Lingar

Executed March 28, 2001: Tomas Grant Ervin

Executed April 25, 2001: Mose Young Jr.

Executed May 23, 2001: Samuel D. Smith

Executed July 11, 2001: Jerome Mallett

Executed Oct. 3, 2001: Michael S. Roberts

Executed Oct. 24, 2001: Stephen K. Johns

Executed Jan. 9, 2002: James R. Johnson

Executed Feb. 6, 2002: Michael I. Owsley

Executed March 6, 2002: Jeffrey Lane Tokar

Executed April 10, 2002: Paul W. Kreutzer

Executed Aug. 14, 2002: Daniel Anthony Basile

Executed Nov. 20, 2002: William Robert Jones Jr.

Executed Feb. 5, 2003: Kenneth Kenley

Executed Oct. 29, 2003: John Clayton Smith

Executed March 16, 2005: Stanley L. Hall

Executed April 27, 2005: Donald Jones

Executed May 17, 2005: Vernon Brown

Executed Aug. 31, 2005: Timothy L. Johnston

Executed Oct. 26, 2005: Marlin Gray

Executed May 20, 2009: Dennis James Skillicorn

Executed Feb. 9, 2011: Martin C. Link

Executed Nov. 20, 2013: Joseph Paul Franklin

Executed Dec. 11, 2013: Allen L. Nicklasson

Executed Jan. 29, 2014: Herbert L. Smulls

Executed Feb. 26, 2014: Michael Anthony Taylor

Executed March 26, 2014: Jeffrey R. Ferguson

Executed April 23, 2014: William L. Rousan

Executed June 18, 2014: John E. Winfield

Executed July 16, 2014: John C. Middleton

Executed Aug. 6, 2014: Michael Worthington

Executed Sept. 10, 2014: Earl Ringo Jr.

Executed Nov. 19, 2014: Leon Vincent Taylor

Executed Dec. 10, 2014: Paul Goodwin

Executed Feb. 11, 2015: Walter Timothy Storey

Executed March 18, 2015: Cecil L. Clayton

Executed April 15, 2015: Andre Cole

Executed June 9, 2015: Richard Strong

Executed July 14, 2015: David Zink

Executed Sept. 1, 2015: Roderick Nunley

Executed May 11, 2016: Earl Forrest

Executed Jan. 31, 2017: Mark Christeson

Executed Oct. 1, 2019: Russell Bucklew

Executed May 19, 2020: Walter Barton

Executed Oct. 5, 2021: Ernest Lee Johnson

Executed May 3, 2022: Carman Deck

Executed Nov. 29, 2022: Kevin Johnson

Johnson's execution was the 1st time that someone on death row in Missouri had a spiritual adviser beside them in the chamber during a modern execution, advocates say

Executed Jan. 3, 2023: Amber McLaughlin

Scott McLaughlin was convicted of murdering Beverly Guenther in Earth City. The inmate was living in prison in recent months as a woman named Amber McLaughlin, but filed appeals and signed a written statement at the execution with a previous name, Scott McLaughlin.

Executed Feb. 7, 2023: Leonard S. Taylor

Executed June 6, 2023: Michael A. Tisius

Executed Aug. 1, 2023: Johnny A. Johnson

Executed April 9, 2024: Brian Dorsey

(source: St. Louis Post-Dispatch)

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

DID PARSON HAVE AUTHORITY TO DISSOLVE A DEATH PENALTY BOARD? MISSOURI SUPREME COURT WILL DECIDE

The Missouri Supreme Court is weighing whether Gov. Mike Parson had the legal authority to dissolve a board of inquiry looking into whether Marcellus Williams might be innocent of murder. He was sentenced to death for the 1998 murder of former St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Felicia Gayle.

Former Gov. Eric Greitens appointed the board in 2017 to investigate Williams’ claim of innocence, but on June 29 of last year, Parson dissolved the board, even though it hadn’t finished its inquiry. He also removed a stay of execution Greitens had issued. At the time, Parson said, “This Board was established nearly 6 years ago, and it’s time to move forward. We could stall and delay for another 6 years, deferring justice, leaving a victim’s family in limbo, and solving nothing. This administration won’t do that.”

Assistant Attorney General Michael Spillane told the high court on Wednesday that state law is on the governor’s side.

“There’s nothing in the statute that says the governor can’t dissolve a board of inquiry,” Spillane said. “There’s nothing in the statute that says that he has to reinstate the board and take away his ending of a stay of execution. There’s simply nothing there.”

The Midwest Innocence Project sued Parson over the move, but Cole County Circuit Judge Cotton Walker denied a motion by the governor to dismiss that lawsuit. Attorney Jonathan Potts, representing Walker, argued that you cannot insert words into an existing state law.

“There is no dictionary in the world that defines the word ‘appoint’ to mean ‘dissolve,’” he said. “The General Assembly writes the laws, the governor executes those laws as written, and the courts step in to interpret those laws and to invalidate any actions that exceed those words.”

Potts also cited another statute that suggests legislative approval would be needed to dissolve a board of inquiry.

The Missouri Supreme Court will issue a ruling later.

Meanwhile, Prosecutor Wesley Bell has filed a motion in St. Louis County Circuit Court to vacate Williams’ conviction.

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

SHERIFF’S DEPUTY DISCUSSES BRIAN DORSEY’S EXECUTION

The state of Missouri has carried out the execution of Brian Dorsey.

The 52-year-old was convicted of the 2006 killings of his cousin Sarah Bonnie, and her husband, Ben, in their central Missouri home. After Dorsey murdered the 2, he raped Sarah’s corpse and poured, what appeared to be, bleach all over her torso and waist.

According to Chief Deputy, Major Darryl Maylee with the Calloway County Sheriff’s Office, Dorsey went to their home seeking to pay for a drug debt.

“After the other people left, it was just Dorsey and then his cousin, cousin’s husband and then their small child, there, and they were both murdered,” he said.

Maylee argues that Dorsey, at the time of the murder, was not in a “drug induced state.”

“He still thought, had enough thought about him to try and destroy forensic evidence at the scene prior to him leaving.”

He said that Dorsey pled guilty of his own free will and did not want to go to a jury trial, but one was held to decide his fate.

“You know, a trial was put on for the punishment phase,” said Maylee. “A jury of 12 of his peers decided that the death penalty fit, and that’s what was imposed.”

Requests for mercy were denied by Governor Mike Parson, the Missouri Supreme Court, and the U.S. Supreme Court. Tuesday’s execution is the 137th person that Missouri has put to death, and the 1st this year.

(source for both: missourinet.com)

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

Dispatch From a Missouri Execution: A Microcosm of the US Death Penalty Fight----The state-sponsored execution of Brian Dorsey on April 9 marked the fifth death row killing in the US this year.

The state-sponsored execution of 52-year-old Brian Dorsey on Tuesday evening in Bonne Terre, Missouri, marked the 5th such execution to take place in the U.S. this year, as right-wing activists across the nation push hard to expand the use of the death penalty.

2 more executions are already scheduled to take place in Missouri this year, despite a multipronged anti-death-penalty campaign, including prisoner support; focused bipartisan legislative initiatives starting with repeal; exoneration and clemency campaigns; and pressuring officials to reopen problematic cases tried by known racially biased prosecutors.

The wider national conflict between those who wish to abolish the death penalty and those who support it was apparent Tuesday evening outside the Eastern Reception, Diagnostic and Correctional Center (ERDCC).

On one side, 78 people — including public defenders, death penalty abolition advocates and two busloads of clergy and parishioners from the St. Louis Catholic archdiocese — held a prayerful vigil. Getting there entailed the same hour-long trek they’d made four times for the same purpose in 2023. On the other side were 17 people looking forward to the last breath of Dorsey, some wearing “Wish You Were Here” tee-shirts meant to evoke the memory of Dorsey’s cousin Sarah Bonnie, and her husband, Benjamin Bonnie, who he’d killed in 2006 while in a drug-induced psychosis, orphaning their 4-year-old daughter. As the moment of execution approached, they counted down from 10, cheering at zero. One man shouted, “Burn in hell, Brian Dorsey. Burn in hell.”

The same forces that are attacking abortion, trans health care and racial justice are also pushing for more executions.

Under wind-whipped skies only the occasional rain drop fell on those gathered in a cordoned-off protest zone to bear witness to the execution. Across the road, horses, their manes streaming as they galloped, thundered in a corral. A lawn sprouting dandelions gone to seed separated the protest area from the entrance to the prison in southeastern Missouri, a region dense with carceral institutions.

Absent were the 72 correctional officers from nearby Potosi Correctional Center who’d written to Gov. Mike Parson on Dorsey’s behalf urging clemency, telling the governor he was a changed man. But Parson, unmoved by their plea, called capital punishment an “appropriate” sentence and rejected on Monday Dorsey’s final petition asking for life in prison. Around noon on Tuesday, Dorsey’s fate was sealed when the U.S. Supreme Court, with no dissenting votes, declined to intervene. The state of Missouri ended his life by an injection of pentobarbital at 6:11 p.m., as scheduled, making Dorsey the tenth person to be put to death under Parson’s watch since he took office in 2018.

“Brian Dorsey is kind, gentle, hardworking and humble. He has spent every day of the past 18 years trying to make up for the single act of violence,” said a member of Dorsey’s legal team, attorney Kirk Henderson, in a statement. “Executing Brian Dorsey is a pointless cruelty, an exercise of the State’s power that serves no legitimate penological purpose. … We will miss his smile and bear hugs.”

The governor’s intransigence shouldn’t’t take away from noting that prison staff had really put themselves on the line by showing “a little bit too much empathy,” Michelle Smith, co-director since 2020 of Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty (MADP), told Truthout.

“They wouldn’t necessarily get fired,” she explained, “but in their work environment, it’s frowned upon to like a person who’s incarcerated to the point where you’re publicly coming out and saying, ‘This person is a decent person.’ In Missouri, when we center humanizing people, things can change.”

She points to the fact that some years ago, the Missouri Department of Corrections had to relocate the executions from Potosi, where death row prisoners are housed among the general population, to ERDCC, because guards who spent their working lives among the men slated for execution stopped volunteering for the execution teams.

“Of course, the system had to do what it had to do to distance itself. So they bring them here, because these officers don’t know the person; they just got here two days ago,” Smith said.

The annual salary for corrections officers in the Missouri Department of Corrections starts at $28,872, and there aren’t many official perks accompanying the job. But there is one: a barber is made available for wardens, chaplains and staff haircuts, and for the last 11 years, Dorsey was theirs.

“It’s an intimate situation,” Smith noted. “In talking, you get to know a person — who they are, what they’re like. It was his role, a very coveted prison job, that prompted them to speak up for him.”

Smith, who is African American, says MADP is advocating for a renewed scrutiny, in particular of death sentences for Black men, who are overrepresented in Missouri’s carceral system.

“When racism really comes into play in these issues, honestly, is about who is put on death row. Our previous prosecutor in St. Louis County, Robert McCullough, prosecuted Black people exponentially more for death penalty cases,” she said.

Governor Parson will term out this year, and a new governor will be elected.

“We’re hopeful that in the future we will have a governor that at the very least does not sign the orders. We’re hoping the next governor is more merciful,” Smith said. “In the last several years, they have been killing everybody. The killings have a ripple effect of pain, like a stone thrown in a pool of water.”

Brian Dorsey contemplated and acknowledged this fact in his final written statement in which he extended consolation and conciliation, even to those who condemned him.

To all of the family and loved ones I share with Sarah and to all of the surviving family and loved ones of Ben, I am totally, deeply, overwhelmingly sorry. Words cannot hold the just weight of my guilt and shame. I still love you. I never wanted to hurt anyone. I am sorry I hurt them and you.

To my family, friends, and all of those that tried to prevent this, I love you! I am grateful for you. I have peace in my heart in large part because of you and I thank you. To all those on ALL sides of this sentence, I carry no ill will or anger, only acceptance and understanding.

MAPD’s position is that thanks to multiple coalitions with a diverse set of advocates working together on these issues, the possibilities for abolishing the death penalty in Missouri are growing. To get there, they remain dedicated to bipartisanship. They communicate with policymakers and the public about the costs associated with maintaining capital punishment, the frequency of mistaken executions, ways to address disturbing and entrenched issues of racial inequity, the needless prolonged emotional pain to those directly impacted, and the cruelty of the killing processes themselves, all the while emphasizing that state-sanctioned executions don’t even deter crime.

(source: Frances Madeson, truthout.org)

CALIFORNIA:

DA Rosen Asks Court to Remove Death Penalty from 15 Murder Convictions

Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen is seeking to change the sentences of more than a dozen prison inmates from death into life behind bars with no chance of parole.

The move affecting 15 men comes 4 years after Rosen stopped seeking the death penalty, a decision made in the wake of the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis. California has a moratorium on the death penalty.

The long-serving district attorney said that he had lost faith in capital punishment as a fair and effective crime deterrent. The system, Rosen said, was “a fruitless and unfair effort that left victims and perpetrators in legal limbo for decades.”

“The question is not whether these 15 human beings deserve the death penalty,” Rosen said in a statement. “It’s whether the 2 million people of Santa Clara County deserve the indignity and ineffectiveness of the death penalty. It’s an antiquated, racially biased, error-prone system that deters nothing and costs us millions of public dollars and our integrity as a community that cherishes justice.”

The unprecedented resentencing effort, which began with a filing in Superior Court, is seeking to change the sentences from death to life in prison without parole.

A California law allows district attorneys to request a new sentence of a person if they determine the sentences no longer serve justice. The district attorney said that all of the crimes committed by those sent to Death Row were horrible –and these violent and dangerous criminals should and will spend the rest of their lives in prison.

“Judges and juries of the people should decide where an inmate dies – God should decide when,” he said.

Death penalty opponents praised the move.

Bryan Stevenson, a public interest lawyer who has dedicated his career to helping the poor and incarcerated, released a statement that said:: "I'm extremely encouraged by District Attorney Jeff Rosen's decision to reverse death sentences imposed in Santa Clara County. Leadership often requires that we do things because it's the right thing to do even when it may not be popular. I applaud the courage and the commitment to equality and justice that motivated this decision. We can create a safer, healthier and more just society without the death penalty and the history of racial bias and bigotry it carries."

Stevenson is a law professor at New York University School of Law, and the founder and executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative.

Oscar Cantú, Roman Catholic Bishop of San Jose, said: “The Catholic Church stands with all victims of crimes, especially victims of heinous and violent crimes. As the bishop of San Jose, I also stand with and commend Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen for his prophetic and principled decision to reset the death penalty sentences in our county to life in prison. This decision is a significant step forward in respecting the sanctity of all human life, which is a core tenet of Catholic social teaching. It is a call to move away from punitive justice towards restorative justice that heals and rebuilds lives.”

The Death Row inmates who would be affected by Rosen’s request:

Fermin Ledesma, 72; sentenced March 14, 1980

David Raley, 62; sentenced May 17, 1988

William Dennis, 73; sentenced Sept. 6, 1988

James O’Malley, 65; sentenced Nov. 21, 1991

Richard Farley, 75; sentenced Jan. 17, 1992

Gregory Smith, 62; sentenced Aug. 14, 1992

Erik Chatman, 59; sentenced April 9, 1993

Mark Crew, 69; sentenced July 22, 1993

Daniel Silveria, 54; sentenced June 13, 1997

John Travis, 54; sentenced June 13, 1997

Bobby Lopez, 59; sentenced Nov. 14, 1997

James Trujeque, 71; sentenced Nov. 21, 1997

Rodrigo Paniagua Jr., 47; sentenced Dec. 16, 2010

Melvin Forte, 73; sentenced May 6, 2011

Christopher Spencer, 54, sentenced Nov. 7, 1996, declined resentencing.

(source: San Jose Inside)

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

California bishop praises district attorney’s decision to reset death penalties

An unprecedented decision by California’s Santa Clara County district attorney to reset the death penalty sentences in the county to life in prison sentences has been touted by the local bishop as “an important step toward respecting the sanctity of all human life.”

“As Bishop of San José, I also support and congratulate Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen for his prophetic and exemplary decision to reset the death penalty sentences in our county to life in prison,” said Bishop Oscar Cantú of San José, California. “This decision is an important step toward respecting the sanctity of all human life, which is a fundamental principle of Catholic social teaching.”

On April 5, Rosen announced that he converted the sentences of the county’s 15 death row inmates from the death penalty to life in prison with no chance of parole. The 15 inmates are all men.

Rosen cited an “antiquated, racially biased, error-prone” system as the reason he sought to change the sentences. The decision comes about four years after he stopped sentencing people to death; a decision he made after the murder of George Floyd.

“The question is not whether these 15 human beings deserve the death penalty,” Rosen said in a statement. “It’s whether the two million people of Santa Clara County deserve the indignity and ineffectiveness of the death penalty. It’s an antiquated, racially biased, error-prone system that deters nothing and costs us millions of public dollars and our integrity as a community that cherishes justice.”

Capital punishment is legal in California, but has stopped ever since Gov. Gavin Newsoom took over in 2019. The state hasn’t executed someone since 2006. However, the state’s 665 people on death row are the most of any state by a longshot. Texas is 2nd with 313 death row inmates.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center, of California’s 665 death row inmates 232 are Black, 220 are white, 177 are Hispanic, 27 are Asian, and 9 are Native American. The Black inmates represent about 35 % of that total, even though they make up only about 7 % of California’s population. Of the 665 death row inmates, 644 are men, and 21 are women.

California law allows district attorneys to re-sentence a person if they determine the sentences no longer serve justice, which is how Rosen was able to make this move. He is the first district attorney in California to do so, and based on Crux’s research, the first in the nation, as well.

Rosen acknowledged that the crimes of death row inmates are “horrible,” but said judges and juries of the people should decide where an inmate dies,” and “God should decide when.”

In an April 9 statement on Rosen’s decision, Cantú highlighted the catechism of the Church, which states “the death penalty is inadmissible, because it violates the inviolability and dignity of the person.” He also noted that the Church, while it supports victims and their loved ones, also recognizes the “possibility of conversion and redemption for every soul.”

Cantú said Rosen’s decision aligns with Catholic social teachings’ recognition of the dignity of every human life, and the coherent ethic of life the Church holds across issues related to the unborn, the poor, migrants, the sick, and those in the criminal justice system. He noted that the decision is also a call for society as a whole to move away from the death penalty, and place a focus on restorative justice.

“Prosecutor Rosen’s decision aligns with these values, challenging us to seek alternatives to the death penalty that respect life and human dignity, promote rehabilitation, and foster a safe, more compassionate society,” Cantú said. “It is a call to move away from punitive justice towards restorative justice that heals and rebuilds lives.”

Cantú called on Catholics to support the decision and advocate for other actions that support life.

“Let us support this decision as a community that values every human life. Let us continue to work together toward a more perfect union, building a system of justice that reflects our commitment to life, mercy, and redemption,” Cantú said. “Let us pray for the strength to defend the dignity of all people and for the wisdom to find paths that lead to true justice and peace.”

(source: cruxnow.com)

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

Lawsuit Filed at the California Supreme Court Alleges Racist Application of the Death Penalty Violates the State Constitution

RACE CALIFORNIA

On April 9, 2024, the California Office of the State Public Defender, along with several civil rights groups, filed an extraordinary writ petition at the California Supreme Court arguing that the state’s capital punishment system violates the state’s Constitution because of its racially biased implementation. In 2021, the California Committee on Revision of the Penal Code confirmed that racial bias is entrenched in the state’s death penalty system. “The California Constitution does not permit a 2-tiered system of justice where the most severe sentence the state has on its books imposed overwhelmingly on Black and Brown people,” said Lisa Romo, a Senior Deputy State Public Defender. “We urge the Court to address this long-standing injustice and ensure that Black and Brown people are no longer sentenced disproportionately to death.”

In the filings, attorneys for the plaintiffs noted that both Attorney General Rob Bonta and Governor Gavin Newsom have “agree[d] that persistent and pervasive racial disparities infect California’s death penalty system.” AG Bonta opposes capital punishment and has previously acknowledged there is “a disparate impact on defendants of color, especially when the victim is white.” Gov. Newsom has also publicly disclosed his opposition to the death penalty, stating in an amicus brief previously filed with the court that the “overwhelming majority of studies that have analyzed America’s death penalty have found that racial disparities are pervasive, and that the race of the defendant and the race of the victim impact whether the death penalty will be imposed.” In March 2019, just 2 months after taking office, Gov. Newsom signed an executive order placing a moratorium on the death penalty in California, explaining that “death sentences are unevenly and unfairly applied to people of color.” Despite the acknowledgement from both AG Bonta and Gov. Newsom regarding these serious racial disparities, the lawsuit alleges that California prosecutors have continued to seek the death penalty and obtain sentences against a disproportionate number of people of color.

The California Committee on the Revision of the Penal Code reported in 2021 that Black defendants are up to 8.7 times more likely than all other defendants to be sentenced to death, while Latino defendants are up to 6.2 more likely to be sentenced to death. Regardless of a defendant’s race, individuals charged with allegedly killing at least 1 white victim are up to 8.8 times more likely to be convicted than if the victim is not white. Analyzing 1,900 homicide cases occurring between 1978 and 2002 in California unveiled notable discrepancies in sentencing outcomes based on race. Black defendants were found to face a 4.6 to 8.7-fold higher likelihood of receiving the death penalty compared to similarly situated defendants in other cases. Similarly, Latino defendants were shown to be 3.2 to 6.2 times as likely to be sentenced to death as their counterparts from other racial demographics. “In practice… racial considerations determine who is subject to the ultimate punishment in California,” said Catherine Grosso, the study’s lead author and Michigan State University law professor. Several studies focused on individual California counties reach similar conclusions, including studies from Riverside County and San Francisco County.

The lawsuit argues that these studies show that California’s death penalty is broken and unfixable. “The body of evidence presented in this petition demonstrates what experienced death penalty practitioners in California and around the country have long known: decision-makers at every stage of capital prosecution from charging to sentencing have treated Black and Brown lives as less valuable than white lives,” said Claudia Van Wyk, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Capital Punishment Project. “This case gives the California Supreme Court an opportunity to implement the State’s core constitutional values and right this wrong.”

In 1972, the California Supreme Court struck down the state’s capital punishment scheme, declaring it unconstitutional, but a voter referendum quickly reinstated it. In the same year, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Furman v. Georgia that Georgia’s capital punishment law was unconstitutional because of its broad discretion, temporarily pausing California’s executions. Just five years later, the California Legislature passed a new death penalty statute, despite then-Governor Jerry Brown’s veto. This statute survived voter referendums in 2012 and 2016, by 4% and 6%, respectively, despite declining public support for capital punishment. California’s last execution was in 2006, but following the execution, a federal judge found problems with the lethal injection protocol and training and ordered a pause on future executions until all issues were fixed.

The petition to the Supreme Court of California was filed by the Legal Defense Fund (LDF), the American Civil Liberties Union Capital Punishment Project (ACLU CPP), the ACLU of Northern California (ACLU NorCal), WilmerHale, and the Office of the State Public Defender (OSPD). This challenge was brought on behalf of petitioners OSPD, Witness to Innocence, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, and Eva Paterson, co-founder of the Equal Justice Society.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

USA:

Elon Musk’s X accused of promoting post calling to reinstate gay death penalty

Elon Musk’s X/Twitter has been accused of promoting a post which calls to reinstate the death penalty for gay people.

A post by premium X user John White has been advertised to the platform’s users, whom of was left asking “what the f**k is wrong with this app”.

On 1 April, White, whose bio states he has “love for God’s word”, posted about abolished and inhumane laws that saw gay people sentenced to death.

“England and the 13 colonies had civil death penalty on the table for gay sex among males, the most aggressive perpetrators and teachers of such rebellion. After 1789, homosexual acts were illegal in all 50 states until 1962…”

The Buggery Act 1533, introduced under Henry the VIII, saw gay sex outlawed and punishable by death. The decriminalisation of such activity came years later in 1967 in England and Wales.

White’s post linked to another in which he quoted a Bible verse call for the execution of gay people and deemed it “just”.

He wrote: “’If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.’ (Lev 20:13)”

“God’s law is just,” he added.

Unsuspecting X users have had the misfortune of having White’s post promoted on their feed, with one calling it out and writing: “Literally getting an ad calling for the execution of gay people. What the f**k is wrong with this app.”

Another commented under his post: “From one Christian to another: you have a shockingly poor understanding of American history and its founders. In fact, it’s offensive and disrespectful that you speak on secular matters at all.”

White responded: “The Bible speaks to all of life. There is no divide of sacred and secular. Only obedience and disobedience.”

PinkNews has contacted X for comment. White could not be reached.

X premium is a paid subscription service which focuses on features such as a verification badge and monetisation eligibility. Data released in August 2023 found that the number of followers subscribing to the service, formerly called Twitter Blue, is surprisingly low, with only around 453,000 users (about 0.3 per cent of total users) having done so.

Musk – a self-proclaimed free-speech advocate – previously told advertisers who were hesitant to spend their money on the platform that they can go f**k themselves.

The billionaire has been no stranger to contention over his rebranding decisions since he brought Twitter in October 2022. Since his takeover Musk has reinstated previously banned figures on the platform, rolled back protections for trans people, and labelled the word “cis” a heterosexual slur.

(source: thepinknews.com)

DR CONGO:

Death penalty for an army sergeant-major after the murder of a pregnant woman in Goma

The verdict was handed down on Saturday, April 6th, at the end of a summary trial at the military garrison tribunal of Goma, in the North Kivu province, in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). A soldier from the army, Sergeant Major Serugo Buhera, was sentenced to death for shooting and killing a pregnant woman.

This military member of the command staff at the Katindo military camp in Goma was found guilty of "rape, murder, and the dissipation of war ammunition." The sergeant-major had riddled a pregnant woman with bullets on the night of April 3 to 4, 2024. In his defense before the court, the accused claimed he had mistaken the victim for a "monstrous creature."

The events took place while this soldier was assigned to guard the barrier post near the Tongilo primary school at the entrance of the Katindo military camp, in the city of Goma. According to his statements before the military tribunal, before shooting the pregnant woman with ten bullets, he claimed to have seen a silhouette he mistook for a monster approaching him. These statements were deemed "fallacious" by various witnesses. According to the prosecution, the soldier had forcefully taken the pregnant woman before raping her. A dispute between him and the victim ensued. He then shot her ten times in the chest, reports Radio Okapi.

Therefore, the judge found him guilty of the acts of rape, murder, and dissipation of war ammunition, and pronounced the heaviest penalty: the death sentence. After the verdict was announced, the convicted filed an appeal.

(source: digitalcongo.net)

TAIWAN:

Ending death penalty in Taiwan

The Constitutional Court announced that it is to hear a case on the constitutionality of the death penalty and has scheduled oral arguments on April 23, attracting widespread attention.

However, instead of delving into the core debate of whether the death penalty contravenes the Constitution, legislators across party lines and the media have been preoccupied by arguing whether the grand justices should or should not make a ruling.

Curiously, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators seem to think that it should be handled by the legislature. Is that really the case?

In 2000, Taiwan underwent its 1st transfer of political power to another party, and under the DPP administration, there was a shift in policy toward gradually abolishing the death penalty.

The Ministry of Justice also proposed a white paper on gradually abolishing the death penalty, and there was a 4-year moratorium on executions from 2006 to 2009.

In 2008, the KMT regained power. The following year the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights were adopted under domestic law.

According to Article 6 of the ICCPR, Taiwan should move toward abolishing the death penalty, meaning there was bipartisan commitment at the time.

However, in 2010, the administration of then-president Ma Ying-jeou resumed executions, going against the spirit of the covenant.

From 2010 to 2016, the KMT executed 33 people and the DPP has executed 2 since 2016.

The judiciary, based on separation of powers, plays a crucial role in safeguarding the fundamental rights of individuals.

However, marginalized groups, including minorities, the vulnerable and those with less visibility, face challenges in effectively lobbying and expressing their concerns through the democratic process. The judiciary is designed to compensate for this issue of insufficient democratic representation.

One advantage of the judiciary lies in its expertise in gathering facts and analyzing legal matters, enabling it to render impartial judgements independent of political conflicts.

Therefore, when people ask why grand justices can override public support for retaining the death penalty, it raises a fundamental question about who can make important decisions.

The historical context reveals the failure of policymakers and legislators to effectively address the complexities surrounding the death penalty. For more than 20 years, this issue has been neglected and postponed, but now the grand justices are finally addressing it.

In upholding democracy and the separation of powers, regardless of anyone’s views on the death penalty, it is crucial to provide the grand justices with a rational space to address the issue. Taiwanese should refrain from misinforming and misleading public discourse. The institution of amici curiae (friends of the court) in the Constitutional Court aims to provide the grand justices with a broader range of perspectives and arguments for their consideration. If this is deemed insufficient, individuals or groups could also post public comments or organize events to discuss the issues.

Previously, the Constitutional Court’s grand justices declined to hear constitutional interpretation cases brought by death-row prisoners, but the landscape is shifting. In addition to the domestication of international human rights covenants, the Constitutional Court’s progressive rulings on issues such as same-sex marriage and adultery suggest a growing awareness of human rights protection among the grand justices.

Regarding the death penalty, the ultimate decision on this matter would depend on the current Constitutional Court’s will.

To define the societal values Taiwanese aspire to, it is essential for the grand justices to make decisions that align closely with those of progressive democratic societies that prioritize the protection of human rights, free from political influence. This necessitates collaboration between the judicial, executive and legislative branches, along with civil society, to develop concrete and achievable plans for Taiwan’s advancement.

(source: Editorial; Lin Hsin-yi is executive director of the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty----taipeitimes.com)

PAKISTAN:

Family hopeful for release of Pakistani Christian on death row for 22 years

In a significant move, the Supreme Court of Pakistan has directed the country’s top Islamic body to advise on whether content that has left a Catholic on death row for 22 years was in fact blasphemous, Morning Star News reported.

Attorney Rana Abdul Hameed said the top court on March 12 sought the opinions of the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) and two Christian religious bodies on whether a letter by a 70-year-old former government employee, Anwar Kenneth, falls within the definition blasphemy under Section 295-C of Pakistan’s controversial of statutes. The section calls for a mandatory death sentence for insulting Islam’s prophet, Muhammad.

The three-judge bench comprising justices gave the direction after a long-awaited hearing of Kenneth’s appeal against the Lahore High Court’s 2014 decision to uphold his death sentence by the trial court, Hameed told Christian Daily International-Morning Star News.

Kenneth, a former senior officer in the Punjab Fisheries Department, was convicted for sending a letter to Muslim religious scholars, Muslim heads of state, foreign diplomats in Pakistan, the United Nations secretary-general, and Christian theologians in 2001 in which he rejected Muhammad’s prophethood, Hameed said.

Not blasphemy, lawyer argues

The lawyer argued that the rejection of Muhammad’s prophethood by non-Muslims could not be considered blasphemy.

He added that the court had directed the Council of Islamic Ideology, the Pakistan Church Council, and the United Church Council of Islamabad to submit their opinions at the next hearing expected on April 10.

Hope remains

His family members say he’s a well-educated man with a deep interest in his Christian faith.

“My brother was a Bible scholar and often engaged in scholastic discussions with his Muslim friends and religious leaders,” said Kenneth’s 83-year-old elder sister, Reshma Bibi. “He also communicated his religious ideas and values through his letter-writing, but he was never disrespectful towards any holy personality. It was one of these letters that was used to silence him.”

She expressed her deep desire to see her brother walk free in her lifetime.

“It’s been years I haven’t been able to see my brother in prison due to my weak health,” Bibi said as tears welled in her eyes. “I miss him every day of my life, and I just hope that God will give me a chance to spend time with him before I die.”

Pakistan ranked seventh on Open Doors’ 2024 World Watch List of the most difficult places to be a Christian, as it was the previous year.

(source: thebaptistpaper.org)

VIETNAM:

Vietnam tycoon Truong My Lan sentenced to death in $12.5bn fraud case----The largest case of fraud in Vietnam’s history has been uncovered as part of a major state anticorruption drive.

A court in Vietnam has sentenced a property tycoon to death over her role in a $12.5bn financial fraud case, the country’s largest on record.

Truong My Lan, chair of major developer Van Thinh Phat, was found guilty of embezzlement, bribery and violations of banking rules at the end of a trial in Ho Chi Minh City on Thursday, according to state media. Her lawyers now have 15 days to appeal the verdict.

The 67-year-old illegally controlled the Saigon Joint Stock Commercial Bank (SCB) between 2012 and 2022 to siphon the funds through thousands of ghost companies and by paying bribes to government officials.

The value of her alleged asset appropriation was equivalent to about 3 % of Vietnam’s gross domestic product (GDP) in 2022, and prosecutors said they seized more than 1,000 properties belonging to her.

Lan had denied charges levelled against her, instead blaming subordinates. In her final remarks to the court last week, she said she had thoughts of suicide.

“In my desperation, I thought of death,” she said, according to state media. “I am so angry that I was stupid enough to get involved in this very fierce business environment – the banking sector – which I have little knowledge of.”

The court attributed its harsh sentence to the seriousness of the case, saying Lan was at the helm of an orchestrated and sophisticated criminal enterprise that had serious consequences with no possibility of the money being recovered, reported VnExpress state media.

Her actions “not only violate the property management rights of individuals and organizations but also push SCB into a state of special control; eroding people’s trust in the leadership of the Party and State”, VnExpress quoted the judgement as saying.

‘Blazing Furnace’

Lan’s arrest in October 2022 was among the most high-profile in an ongoing anticorruption drive that started in 2016 and has picked up pace since 2022.

The so-called Blazing Furnace campaign has touched the highest echelons of Vietnamese politics, with two presidents and two prime ministers having resigned in recent years and hundreds of officials disciplined or jailed.

Lan’s husband, Hong Kong investor Eric Chu Nap-Kee, was one of the 86 on trial after being accused of setting up fake loan applications to withdraw money from the Saigon bank, in which she owned a 90 percent stake. Lan’s niece Truong Hue Van, who was the CEO of Van Thinh Phat, was another top figure on trial.

The Thanh Nien newspaper reported that 84 defendants in the case received sentences ranging from probation for 3 years to life imprisonment.

Michael Tatarski, host of Vietnam Weekly podcast based in Ho Chi Minh City, said Lan and her family have been highly obscure despite their vast wealth, with very little information or pictures of them publicly available.

“Some of it is emerging now, but little is known about how she came to acquire this massive wealth. They are very secretive despite being an incredibly powerful family,” he told Al Jazeera.

Tatarski said this is one of the largest financial crimes in world history, let alone in Vietnam. This has meant that unprecedented details of corruption cases are being published and scrutinised by state media.

“I think it’s clear there is some real desire to combat corruption here,” he said.

“There are probably some valid arguments that some of this has a political tinge to it, but there is also clearly enormous amounts of corruption and fraud that does need to be cleaned up.”

(source: aljazeera.com)

IRAN:

UN Body Urged To Halt Cooperation With Iran As Drug Executions Soar

82 Iranian and international human rights groups are urging the UN agency on drugs and crime to suspend its cooperation with the regime in Iran, until it halts drug-related executions.

Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, one of the organizers of the call who heads Iran Human Rights, says the UN Office on Drug and Crime has remained silent about the sharp hike in drug-related executions in the country – while it cooperates with Tehran on combating drug trafficking.

“In addition to legitimizing the state’s use of the death penalty, this cooperation also leads to more executions through financial aid and equipment. A UN entity must not be complicit in drug executions in Iran,” Amiry-Moghaddam said.

“This joint action is to raise awareness and sensitise the international community and public about drug-related executions in Iran and increase the political cost of these executions for the authorities. The execution of more than 1 person per day under the pretext of drug offences should become intolerable for the people and the international community.”

Amnesty International’s latest report this month says at least 481 executions – more than half of the total 853 executions recorded in 2023 – were carried out for drug-related offenses.

“The number of executions in 2023 is the highest recorded since 2015 and marks a 48% increase from 2022 and a 172% increase from 2021. Iran’s killing spree is continuing into 2024, with at least 95 recorded executions by 20 March,” the Amnesty report read.

“Aimed at instilling fear and preventing more protests, the Islamic Republic executed at least 471 people for drug-charged in 2023, without any political cost and consequences,” Amiry-Moghaddam highlighted.

Execution numbers recorded by human rights groups are often the minimum figures and organizations like Amnesty International have often said that it believes the real number is higher.

“We are concerned that hundreds more will be executed in the coming months if we do not increase the political cost of these executions for the Islamic Republic. We call on all human rights organizations and activists to take part in a special global campaign to stop drug-related executions in Iran,” the statement read.

The signatories noted that the international community's muted response and limited media coverage for drug-related executions have led to these daily executions to take place with minimal public scrutiny. "On the other hand, the United Nations Office on Drug and Crime (UNODC) which cooperates with Iran in combating drug trafficking, has not only remained silent about the sharp hike in drug executions, but signed a new agreement with the Islamic Republic in May 2023."

Iran's top Sunni cleric Mowlavi Abdolhamid said in October that a lot of people are hanged In Iran for petty crimes involving only a few dollars. Abdolhamid told his congregation in Zahedan, capital of southeastern Sistan-Baluchestan Province, that lack of jobs in his province and some other impoverished areas is the prime reason people are driven to smuggling fuel, minor drug-related offences, or drug trafficking. "Many of these individuals end up in prison or are even executed for committing crimes that involve profiting as little as 5 million rials ($10)."

While on the surface, Iran has some of the world’s harshest drug laws – many of the regime’s own members are known to run parts of the drug business inside the country, including officials and high-ranking members of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, managers from Tehran’s Municipality and members of parliament.

(source: iranintl.com)

APRIL 10, 2024:

TEXAS:

Prosecutors say evidence was suppressed in case of Texas death row inmate Melissa Lucio

Melissa Lucio, a Texas woman whose execution was delayed in 2022 amid growing doubts she fatally beat her 2-year-old daughter, had evidence suppressed at her murder trial, according to prosecutors in the case, which has become a cause célèbre among people including Kim Kardashian.

As part of an agreement on findings in Lucio’s case, prosecutors and her attorneys say the suppressed evidence, including witness statements and a report by Child Protective Services, would have corroborated Lucio’s defense that her daughter Mariah died of a head injury sustained in an accidental fall down a steep staircase two days before her death.

“She would not have been convicted in light of the suppressed evidence,” according to the 33-page agreement between the office of Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz and Lucio’s attorneys. The document lays out what both sides say are agreed findings of fact and conclusions of law in the case.

The agreement, which recommends that Lucio’s conviction and death sentence be overturned, is being called unusual and extraordinary by one death penalty expert. But it has remained in limbo for 16 months before a Texas judge, who has yet to say whether she will give it her approval and forward it to the state’s highest criminal court, which would make a final decision.

Lucio, 55, had been set for lethal injection in April 2022 for the 2007 death of her daughter in Harlingen, a city of about 71,000 in Texas’ southern tip. But the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals stayed her lethal injection 2 days before her scheduled execution so state District Judge Gabriela Garcia could review Lucio’s claims that new evidence would exonerate her.

Prosecutors had long maintained Mariah was the victim of abuse and noted her body was covered in bruises. In a sometimes contentious hearing with Texas lawmakers 2 weeks before the scheduled execution, Saenz had said he disagreed with claims from Lucio’s attorneys that there was new evidence that would exonerate her.

But in a joint statement with Lucio’s attorneys that was issued Friday, Saenz acknowledged her legal team “did not have access to information favorable to her defense at the time of trial.” Saenz was not the district attorney at the time of Lucio’s trial in 2008.

The statement did not provide more information on why the favorable evidence wasn’t given to Lucio’s lawyers. Saenz’s office and Lucio’s attorney, Vanessa Potkin, declined to comment beyond their joint statement.

“We are grateful to District Attorney Saenz for recognizing that evidence that our baby sister Mariah’s death was an accident, not a murder, was never presented to the jury. We are also thankful to Melissa’s legal team. We hope and pray that our mother can soon come home to her family,” Lucio’s son, John Lucio and his wife, Michelle, said in a statement.

The suppressed Child Protective Services report indicated that one of Lucio’s children told a CPS worker he was present when Mariah “fell down some stairs.”

The report also revealed all of Lucio’s children told the CPS worker their mother was not abusive to them or Mariah.

The agreed findings also say Lucio’s trial attorneys were not provided statements from two of her other children, who had corroborated to Harlingen police their mother’s claims that Mariah had been injured in a fall and that Lucio had grown increasingly worried about Mariah’s deteriorating health before her death.

Prosecutors provided the suppressed evidence to 2 experts, including a forensic pathologist, who “concluded that the likely cause of Mariah’s death was an accidental fall resulting in head trauma,” according to the agreed findings.

Saenz and Lucio’s attorneys submitted their agreed findings to Garcia on Dec. 20, 2022. But she has yet to issue a ruling and forward her decision to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which makes the final decision.

Garcia did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.

Robin Maher, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, said the time Garcia is taking to issue a ruling suggests the judge is “giving this case the serious, thoughtful consideration it deserves.”

Maher, whose nonprofit group takes no position on capital punishment but has criticized the way states carry out executions, called the agreement between Saenz and Lucio’s attorneys “quite extraordinary” and “one of those rare instances where both sides have acknowledged an injustice and agree about the remedy.”

Lucio’s case has garnered support from Kardashian and a bipartisan group of lawmakers, including GOP state Rep. Jeff Leach.

“I have long maintained that the system failed Melissa Lucio — and her daughter, Mariah — at every turn and that she should be given a new chance for justice … and a new chance for life,” Leach said in a post Sunday on the social platform X.

(source: Associated Press)

OHIO:

Lawmakers urge nitrogen gas as Ohio execution option

As long as Ohio has the death penalty on its books, it must make it possible to carry out the ultimate punishment, a pair of lawmakers urged Tuesday.

“This legislation does nothing to change the manner or frequency in which capital punishments are imposed by Ohio juries,” Rep. Brian Stewart (R., Ashville) told the House Government Oversight Committee.

“It will not make it easier to impose the death penalty,” he said. “It will not make it harder to impose the death penalty. However, so long as capital punishment remains the law, existing, duly enacted capital sentences should be carried out to give victims the justice and finality that they deserve.”

Mr. Stewart and Rep. Phil Plummer (R., Dayton) are sponsoring House Bill 392 with the backing of Attorney General Dave Yost and the Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association.

Under current law, lethal injection is the sole state-sanctioned method of execution. It typically involves a combination of approved drugs, although the drugs involved and how they are used have shifted over time.

The bill would add nitrogen hypoxia as an option in addition to lethal injection. It would give condemned inmates a choice between the two, but the former would become the default method if the state cannot acquire the drugs it prefers to use for lethal injection.

That has proven to be a chronic problem in Ohio and some other states, contributing to the fact that no execution has been carried out here since 2018. This bill was introduced soon after Alabama became the first state to use nitrogen gas to complete an execution in January.

Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Oklahoma have specifically added nitrogen gas as an option.

“If we’re going to use gas, which frankly veterinarians will not use on our animals, why would we use that on human beings?” asked Rep. Michele Grim (D., Toledo), a committee member. “... It was a terribly botched execution. Why would we do this in the state of Ohio when there’s been one case, which was devastating?”

Mr. Stewart took issue multiple times on Tuesday to the description of the Alabama execution as “botched.”

Bills with bipartisan support have been introduced in both the House and Senate to do away with capital punishment altogether in Ohio and replace it with life in prison without parole.

While he routinely postpones execution dates, Gov. Mike DeWine has said the ball is in the General Assembly’s court to either adopt an alternative execution method or to abolish the death penalty. He has declined to point lawmakers in either direction.

In addition to adding an alternative method, the bill would restore confidentiality provisions that lawmakers previously granted to drug manufacturers and suppliers in hopes of encouraging them to supply lethal injection drugs. It would now extend those protections to nitrogen hypoxia materials, making it a fourth-degree misdemeanor, carrying up to 30 days in jail, to violate confidentiality.

Rep. Mike Skindell (D., Lakewood), a committee member, questioned this provision, particularly its inclusion of the qualifications of participants in the execution process under the confidentiality umbrella.

“How do we as the public assess whether the right people are doing this?” he asked. “...You don’t want the janitor being the one administering the gas.”

There are currently 119 people on Ohio’s death row with a combined 121 death sentences.

(source: Toledo Blade)

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

Ohio Jews Object to Gas Executions Bill

Dozens of Ohio Rabbis and community leaders sent a letter Tuesday morning to members of the Ohio House of Representatives Government Oversight Committee, which was scheduled to hear sponsor testimony on HB 392 at a hearing at 1pm Tuesday in room 313 at the Ohio Statehouse. The Jewish leaders are objecting to the use of gas to suffocate prisoners to death as a new form of execution.

"We stand united in opposition to the introduction of the gas suffocation as a form of execution in Ohio. We do not suggest comparisons to the atrocities of Nazi Germany under which millions of our relatives were murdered, many by suffocation in sealed chambers. Still, we cannot imagine it possible that Jewish communities anywhere could stand by while prisoners are executed in our names, using any variation of that mechanism."

The full text of the letter and list of signers to-date is here and also below. Additional signers will be added until this legislation is withdrawn or defeated.

"Proponents of this bill suggest that replacing oxygen with nitrogen is a peaceful way to kill a prisoner, but what witnesses to the only such execution to have taken place describe is minutes of torturous terror," said Abraham Bonowitz, co-founder of the group, L'chaim! Jews Against the Death Penalty, which is organizing the growing community of Jewish leaders opposed to HB 392. "The signers of this letter don't necessarily oppose the death penalty, however we cannot stand by while Ohio considers implementing a manner of execution that awakens the Nazi legacy of the Holocaust every time it is mentioned."

HB 392 was introduced just days after the first experimental use of nitrogen asphyxiation to execute Kenneth Smith in Alabama on January 25, 2024. In February, Louisiana joined Alabama, Mississippi and Oklahoma as states whose laws allow the use of nitrogen gas for suffocation executions. Arizona maintains an actual gas chamber for executions using cyanide gas, however that is a choice of execution method limited to prisoners sentenced to death in that state prior to 1992. Nitrogen asphyxiation legislation in Kansas and Nebraska has failed to move forward following committee hearings in those states in the past several months.

"For our organization and for many of us personally, this is the wrong conversation," said Bonowitz, a member of Columbus's Congregation Tefereth Israel. "In 2014 the Ohio Supreme Court Joint Task Force on the Administration of Ohio's Death Penalty issued its report with 56 recommended changes to bring more fairness and accuracy to our system, most of which have never been discussed in this building. That's why today's hearing is the wrong conversation. If they won't even talk about fixing it, they should end it."

L'chaim! Jews Against the Death Penalty is a project of Death Penalty Action, the leading single issue anti-death penalty organization in the United States. Death Penalty Action is a partner in the #NoDeathPenaltyOH coalition which is working to pass legislation to repeal Ohio's death penalty. Bonowitz is also co-founder and executive director of Death Penalty Action. Ohio Jewish Leaders & Community Members Say NO to Nitrogen Asphyxiation/Gas Chamber in State Executions

To: Ohio Legislators on the House Government Oversight Committee

• Rich Brown (HD-5)

• John Cross (HD-83)

• Michele Grim (HD-43)

• James Hoops (HD-81)

• Latyna Humphrey (HD-2)

• Dani Isaacsohn (HD-24)

• Scott Oelslager (HD-43)

• Bob Peterson (HD-91)

• Justin Pizzulli (HD-90)

• Bill Seitz (HD-30)

• Michael Skindell (HD-13)

• DJ Swearingen (HD-89)

• Jim Thomas (HD-49)

Jewish tradition presents somewhat contradictory statements regarding the death penalty. While the Torah permits the death penalty, the Talmud, in Tractate Sanhedrin, imposes severe limits on capital punishment even where the crime is murder. Contemporary US law does not meet the standards for fairness and accuracy as articulated in Jewish law. Today we are writing not about the death penalty as a whole, but about proposed forms of execution.

Certainly there are members of Jewish communities who support the death penalty in concept or in practice. However, we stand united in opposition to the introduction of the gas suffocation as a form of execution in Ohio. We do not suggest comparisons to the atrocities of Nazi Germany under which millions of our relatives were murdered, many by suffocation in sealed chambers. Still, we cannot imagine it possible that Jewish communities anywhere could stand by while prisoners are executed in our names, using any variation of that mechanism.

Therefore, the undersigned Rabbis, Cantors and other leaders and members of the Jewish community call on you to reject the conduct of executions by suffocation using a mask or in any sort of gas chamber in Ohio..

SIGNERS AS OF 10am on Tuesday, April 9, 2024

• Ethan Ackelsberg, Columbus

• Rabbi Courtney Berman, Congregation Ohev Beth Sholom, Youngstown

• Rabbi Emeritus Harold Berman, Congregation Tifereth Israel, Columbus

• Abraham J. Bonowitz, Co-Founder, L’chaim! Jews Against the Death Penalty, Columbus

• Rabbi Lisa Delson, Temple Shomer Emunim, Sylvania

• Rabbi Jeffrey Elson, Pickerington

• Rabbi Noah Ferro, Northern Hills Synagogue, Cincinnati

• Rabbi Chase Foster, Solon

• Rabbi Lenette Goldman, Temple Beth Shalom, Columbus

• Dr. Jonathan Groner, Congregation Tefereth Israel, Columbus

• Karen Jones, Columbus

• Rabbi Matthew Kraus, Cincinnati

• Jeanine Huttner, Temple Shomer Emunim, Sylvania

• Rabbi Lewis Kamrass, Isaac M. Wise Temple, Cincinnati

• Rabbi Richard Kellner, Worthington

• Rabbi Enid Lader, Lakewood

• Stacy Leeman, Columbus

• Justin Levy, RAC-OH, Rockdale Temple, Cincinnati

• Nancy Lurie, Community Volunteer, Columbus

• Deborah Lyons, Oxford, OH

• Joel Marcovitch, Columbus

• Rabbi Sharon Mars, Temple Israel, Columbus

• Rabbi Melinda Mersack, Solon

• Rabbi Jay Moses, Columbus

• Rabbi Elle Muhlbaum, Anshe Chesed Fairmount Temple, Cleveland Heights

• Rabbi Robert Nosachuk, Anshe Chesed Fairmount Temple, Shaker Heights

• Rabbi Shoshana Nyer, Director of Lifelong Learning, Suburban Temple - Kol Ami, Beachwood

• Lis Regula, Ph. D. Columbus

• Cantor Jen Roher, Columbus

• Rabbi Hillel Skolnik, Congregation Tifereth Israel, Columbus

• Rabbi Tina Sobo, Temple Israel, Dayton

• Rabbi Miriam Terlinchamp, Cincinnnati

• Rabbi Daniel Utley, Camp Wise - Manel JCC of Cleveland, Beachwood

• Rabbi Josh Warshawsky, Columbus

• Rabbi Dr. Tali Zelkowicz, Bexley

• Rabbi Misha Zinkow, Bexley

(source: Death Penalty Action)

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

Jewish leaders in Ohio sign letter opposing bill seeking use of gas in executions

As Ohio House Bill 392 makes its way through the legislature, Jewish leaders have signed a letter opposing "the use of gas to suffocate prisoners to death as a new form of execution."

The letter points out that Jewish tradition has complicated and contradictory teachings on the death penalty; while the Torah permits capital punishment, the Talmud imposes severe limits on the practice.

However, the letter was not penned with the intention of protesting the death penalty in Ohio, but rather the method for which officials — including Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost — have expressed support: nitrogen hypoxia.

"We do not suggest comparisons to the atrocities of Nazi Germany under which millions of our relatives were murdered, many by suffocation in sealed chambers," reads the letter opposing the bill. "Still, we cannot imagine it possible that Jewish communities anywhere could stand by while prisoners are executed in our names, using any variation of that mechanism."

The letter addresses all legislators on the House Government Oversight Committee, including Bill Seitz and Dani Isaacsohn, who represent districts in the Greater Cincinnati area.

HB-392, sponsored by Republican state Reps. Brian Stewart and Phil Plummer, would give condemned inmates a choice between lethal injection and nitrogen gas, but would require nitrogen gas be used if lethal injection drugs are not available.

Ohio hasn’t executed anyone since 2018. In 2020, Republican Gov. Mike DeWine declared lethal injection “no longer an option,” citing a federal judge’s ruling that the protocol could cause inmates “severe pain and needless suffering.”

Still, nitrogen hypoxia may not provide less suffering; the method, used for the 1st time in Alabama in January, was implemented through a face mask and resulted in a 22-minute-long execution during which the inmate appeared to shake and writhe on the gurney.

As of Tuesday morning, over 35 members of the Jewish community in Ohio, including Rabbis and Cantors, had signed the letter ahead of a 1 p.m. hearing during which testimony on HB 392 would be heard by the House's government oversight committee. Of those who signed the letter, six were from the Greater Cincinnati region.

(source: WCPO news)

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

Death Row Inmate Keith Lamar Phones Into Symposium and Concert

Keith LaMar, death row inmate, phoned in from his cell in Ohio to participate in an on-campus symposium and perform in a live concert at the Drake. LaMar has gained national acclaim as he fights against the death sentence for crimes he says he didn’t commit. Keith LaMar has been incarcerated for over 3 decades, and now sits on Ohio’s death row for crimes he says he hasn’t committed, garnering national attention.

During a prison riot in 1993, authorities said that LaMar became an enforcer and used the chaos of a cellblock takeover by other prisoners to kill inmates. There was no official state investigation, no forensic evidence, yet LaMar was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of five inmates by an all-white jury.

Determined not to be silenced or discouraged from fighting for his innocence, he has since written a book titled “Condemned,” and recorded the first-ever album by a death row inmate — “Freedom First,” a jazz record that was released in February 2022.

This past weekend, Amherst held a symposium with LaMar, who phoned in from his cell in Ohio, and a panel of six activists. The panel included Professor Jennifer Lackey of Northwestern University and Founding Director of Northwestern’s Prison Education Program (NPEP), the first program at a top 10 university to award Bachelors of Arts to incarcerated students, as well as NPEP graduates James Soto, Darryl Johnson, Javier Reyes, and Maria Garza, and the Director of the Justice for Keith LaMar Foundation Amy Gordiejew. The panel was moderated by Assistant Professor of Philosophy Lauren Leydon-Hardy, who was also a tutor for NPEP in previous years. Following the panel, there was a concert playing his album at The Drake downtown.

The formerly incarcerated panelists commented on the biggest challenges they faced in the system. Soto — imprisoned on a wrongful conviction for 42 years before being exonerated in 2023 — emphasized that there “is no human contact in a supermax [prison] … Putting a human being inside of a cell all day long will actually drive a person insane.”

LaMar added that it can sometimes seem impossible to “remain hopeful when there is no hope.”

“The system is designed to make you think your chances [of leaving prison] are so slim that you do not even try,” he said.

Garza and Reyes, now cofounders of Challenge to Change, a nonprofit focusing on helping with reentry to society, said that the 3 biggest obstacles after being released are employment, housing, and education.

“Your debt is never paid off. You have settled your debt with your time, but there is always interest,” said Reyes, referring to the many legal restrictions that follow inmates even after they are released.

Challenge to Change offers space for people to stay for up to a year for free to save their money and complete necessary programming and education.

With the mention of education, Lackey joined the conversation, discussing her work with the NPEP, which sends educators into prisoners to teach and help the incarcerated members who are accepted to the program receive a bachelor’s degree She spoke on the delicacy required to balance her role as an educator, activist, and advocate. If her educational work upsets prison authorities, she often faces “the threat of being banned from facilities,” so she is careful to forcefully push for change while not overstepping.

But despite opposition, the program has persevered, and members of the panel described how obtaining a bachelor’s degree unlocked doors in their lives. Soto emphasized that his “professor saved [him] in a way that nobody else did.”

The system “tries to bury everyone, but we are seeds. Everyone will grow,” Reyes added.

LaMar expressed how meaningful his supporters have been, whether it has been his legal team, the musicians he has collaborated with, or the volunteers who have worked to spread his message of innocence.

“Community is everything,” LaMar added. “[As a community], you are not just two people, you now have the universe behind you.”

The panelists were all on the same page about how imperative it is to celebrate small wins.

Reyes explained that “even with the losses, a small win is a big win. When you celebrate, it becomes contagious.”

Gordiejew also expressed that “victory is like soul food. It serves as an example that the impossible can still happen.”

One such victory in LaMar’s case is a recent ruling granting him one more chance to file for appeal, on the grounds of witness tampering and other violations. Soto added that — to him —“life without the possibility of parole is another form of the death penalty — death by incarceration.”

On death row, LaMar has turned to music. The album he created features contemporary jazz played by a group of international musicians along with LaMar’s spoken word poetry pieces.

On a granular level, the panel unpacked the legal processes of jury selection and the court system. Soto commented on the difficult uphill battle of trying to get rehabilitation and to convince the general public and legislators that this is the best solution.

Jury participation is key. The panelists stated that being one of 12 jury members means that your voice can make a difference.

Rachel Howell ’26 commented on the power of hearing from formerly incarcerated members. “There is an intrinsic value in hearing straight from the voices of those who have lived the experience,” she said. “[It was] incredibly eye opening to hear about the first-hand experiences of individuals who have been through the criminal justice system and have come out to tell their stories and help others.”

The event concluded with a reminder from Professor Lackey to “dream big.” LaMar describes how the carceral system is “like being thrown into the ocean without knowing how to swim. The hardest thing is to find faith in yourself.”

But, the biggest takeaway is to “always bet on yourself,” he said. “You have to participate in your life, otherwise it’s not your life. You have the right to speak and to be.”

(source: amherststudent.com)

TENNESSEE:

Tennessee Senate advances bill to allow death penalty for child rape

Tennessee’s GOP-controlled Senate advanced legislation on Tuesday allowing the death penalty in child rape convictions as critics raised concerns that the U.S. Supreme Court has banned capital punishment in such cases. Republicans approved the bill on a 24-5 vote. It must still clear the similarly conservatively dominant House chamber before it can go to Gov. Bill Lee’s desk for his signature. If enacted, the Tennessee bill would authorize the state to pursue capital punishment when an adult is convicted of aggravated rape of a child. Those convicted could be sentenced to death, imprisonment for life without possibility of parole, or imprisonment for life. Florida’s Gov. Ron DeSantis enacted a similar bill nearly a year ago. Supporters in both states argue that the goal is to get the currently conservative-controlled U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider a 2008 ruling that found it unconstitutional to use capital punishment in child sexual battery cases.

Republican Sen. Ken Yager argued during Tuesday’s debate that his bill was not unconstitutional because it only gave district attorneys the option of pursuing the death penalty for those convicted of child rape.

“We are protecting the children using a constitutional approach,” Yager said. “I would not stand here and argue for this bill if I didn’t believe that with my whole heart.”

Yager’s argument differs from the supporters inside the Tennessee Legislature, where Republican House Majority Leader William Lamberth has conceded that even though Tennessee previously allowed convicted child rapists to face the death penalty, the Supreme Court ultimately nullified that law with its 2008 decision.

Other lawmakers compared their goal to the decades long effort that it took overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 case that legalized abortion nationwide but was eventually overruled in 2022.

“Maybe the atmosphere is different on the Supreme Court,” said Republican Sen. Janice Bowling. “We’re simply challenging a ruling.”

Democrats countered that the bill would instill more fear into child rape victims about whether to speak out knowing that doing so could potentially result in an execution. Others warned that predators could be incentivized to kill their victims in order to avoid a harsher punishment.

Execution law in the U.S. dictates that crimes must involve a victim’s death or treason against the government to be eligible for the death penalty. The Supreme Court ruled nearly 40 years ago that execution is too harsh a punishment for sexual assault, and justices made a similar decision in 2008 in a case involving the rape of a child.

Currently, all executions in Tennessee are on hold as state officials review changes to its lethal injection process. Gov. Lee issued the pause after a blistering 2022 report detailed multiple flaws in how Tennessee inmates were put to death.

No timeline has been provided on when those changes will be completed. And while the state Supreme Court is free to issue death warrants for death row inmates, it has so far not done so.

(source: Associated Press)

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

Should child rapists receive the death penalty? Child advocates have concerns----Tennessee lawmakers are considering a move that would allow convicted child rapists eligible for the death penalty.

Tennessee lawmakers are considering a move that would allow convicted child rapists to be eligible for the death penalty. For House Majority Leader William Lamberth, R-Portland, the reasoning is simple: heinous crimes deserve the maximum punishment.

"If someone rapes one of our children, they are forfeiting their own life," Lamberth said during committee debate back in January. "Life in prison, for these evil people, is simply too good. They should not be able to live out their days with the rest of us."

"Chilling Effect"

But Stephen Woerner of the Children's Advocacy Center of Tennessee thinks there could certainly be unintended consequences if it passes.

"We’ve got reservations," said Woerner, who serves as Executive Director. "You’re asking a child to make a report on someone that they both know and also often love, even though they want the crime to stop, with an understanding they may put this person to death. It’s my cousin, it’s my uncle, it’s my step-dad."

In addition to the chilling effect on reporting abuse, Woerner is worried that the lengthy process of death penalty cases could lead to repeated re-traumatization of the victims.

"Great, we’ve got a conviction, this child is going to have to relive this trauma of their court case and all of the drama going around it, for 20-40 years," he said.

Wrongful Convictions

Then, of course, there are the times when prosecutors, judges and juries get it wrong. William Arnold Jr. was sentenced to 25 years in prison, after being accused of raping a child he was mentoring through a non-profit organization. Even after his conviction and sentencing, he always claimed he was innocent. Eventually, a court agreed with him.

"In 2020, my case was unanimously vacated and the charges were dismissed, and I came home in April of 2020," said Arnold.

But Arnold shutters to think, if the bill was law years ago, he could have been up for the death penalty.

"I can only imagine the damage it would do," said Arnold in an interview with NewsChannel 5. "It’s not good legislation."

Who is William Arnold?

In 2013, William Arnold was sentenced to 25 years in prison after a Davidson County jury found him guilty of sexually assaulting a 10-year-old boy he'd been mentoring through the Boys and Girls Club and Big Brothers, Big Sisters program.

2 years prior, the mother of Arnold's accuser told NewsChannel 5 Investigates that after she'd filed a $3.5 million dollar lawsuit against Arnold and Big Brother Big Sisters that Arnold had repeatedly had sexual relations with her son.

Arnold insisted he'd been wrongfully convicted. He said he'd been fighting to expose what he called a twisted case of "mistaken identity".

In 2018, Arnold spoke to NewsChannel 5 Investigates through a series of phone calls stating he never sexually assaulted or inappropriately touched the boy.

He told NewsChannel 5 that the sexual relationship had actually been between the young boy and another man also named William.

Arnold spent 7 years in prison before the Court of Appeals overturned his conviction because he'd been wrongfully convicted.

In February 2020, in a 70-page ruling, the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals threw out Arnold's conviction and sentence. The ruling stated that the attorney's in the trial had been "ineffective" and that the prosecutor was "exceedingly improper".

The Davidson County District Attorney's Conviction Review Team then told a judge it would not retry the case because they "no longer had confidence in Arnold's conviction and his guilt."

Court Battle

It's worth noting, as Supreme Court precedent currently stands, it's unconstitutional to execute someone for an offense other than homicide. But Republican lawmakers think with a new Supreme Court conservative majority, that ruling could be overturned. Two years ago, Florida passed a similar death penalty law involving child rape and may end up being the test case.

Neutral on the issue Ultimately, the Children's Advocacy Center of Tennessee decided to not fight for or against the bill.

"We are neutral on the bill," said Woerner. "We’re not taking a stance either for or against it."

He says when they spoke to their caseworkers, their opinions were split on the issue.

"There was enough consideration around, both the positives of truly a just consequence for lifelong trauma versus what happens when you have to give that kid therapy for the 30-40 years that may take," Woerner explained.

What's next?

The full Senate passed the measure Tuesday, 28-5. Sen. Todd Gardenhire, R-Chattanooga, was the lone Republican to vote against it. The House has placed the bill "behind the budget" which means they will take up the proposal after the final state budget has been passed.

(source: WTVF news)

MISSOURI----execution

Missouri death row inmate executed despite widespread calls for clemency----Brian Dorsey, convicted of murdering his cousin and her husband, put to death amid efforts by many to have his sentence commuted

Brian Dorsey, who was convicted of murdering his cousin and her husband in 2006, was executed in Missouri’s Bonne Terre state prison Tuesday despite an extraordinary effort by corrections officials and his appeals judge to have his capital sentence commuted.

Prison officials confirmed that Dorsey had been put to death by lethal injection. They said he had been pronounced dead at 6.11pm.

Legal avenues for Dorsey’s life to be spared had been closed down Tuesday, first when Missouri governor Mike Parson denied a last-minute appeal to stay Dorsey’s execution and then when the US supreme court declined to intervene.

Dorsey’s clemency petition had been supported by 72 current and former Missouri correctional officers, a former judge of the Missouri supreme court, five of the jurors who sentenced him to death, Republican state legislators, mental health experts, faith leaders, and members of his family, some of whom were related to the victims.

Dorsey, in a final statement handed out prior to the execution, expressed deep sorrow for the killings.

“Words cannot hold the just weight of my guilt and shame,” the written statement said, in part.

He also had his final meal served to him.

The correctional officers submitted a letter asking Parson to commute Dorsey’s death sentence. “Generally, we believe in the use of capital punishment,” they wrote. “But we are in agreement that the death penalty is not the appropriate punishment for Brian Dorsey.”

One officer wrote: “Some inmates never change, no matter how many years they are in. But that’s not Brian ... The Brian I have known for years could not hurt anyone. The Brian I know does not deserve to be executed.”

But Parson was not moved to commute Dorsey’s sentence.

“The pain Dorsey brought to others can never be rectified, but carrying out Dorsey’s sentence according to Missouri law and the Court’s order will deliver justice and provide closure,” he said in a press release after denying the appeal.

Separately, the US supreme court denied Dorsey’s requests to consider whether he was denied the effective assistance of counsel by his attorneys’ flat-fee compensation – or whether executing someone who is fully rehabilitated is cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the eighth amendment of the US constitution.

More than 150 people call on Missouri governor to forgive Brian Dorsey’s death penalty.

Ahead of the execution, Dorsey attorney Kirk Henderson described his client as “kind, gentle, hardworking, and humble” – someone who had “spent every day of the past 18 years trying to make up for the single act of violence he committed, serving the prison community as the staff barber and never getting in even the slightest trouble”.

“If anyone deserves mercy, it is Brian,” he said, adding that executing Dorsey was “a pointless cruelty, an exercise of the state’s power that serves no legitimate penological purpose”.

Separately, Dorsey’s cousin Jenni Gerhauser, who was also a cousin of victim Sarah Bonnie, said that she was “devastated and disheartened” by the failure of legal appeals. Gerhauser said that it was “easy to see that we as a society have not only failed Brian – we are failing ourselves”. “The death penalty isn’t punishment for the convicted. This evening, Brian will be set free. His punishment will end, and for all of us only guilty of loving him, ours will begin. That is not the life sentence we sought,” she added.

Shortly before the execution, a small number of protesters gathered in an area near the prison.

Dorsey shot Bonnie to death alongside her husband Benjamin Bonnie, 28, in their home 2 days before Christmas 2006. Attorneys for Dorsey have argued that he murdered the Bonnies during a drug-induced psychosis and therefore lacked the intent necessary to be guilty of 1st-degree murder, which is punishable by death.

Supporters of Dorsey had hoped he would be given a sentence of life imprisonment rather than be put to death.

Dorsey is the 1st person put to death in Missouri this year after 4 executions in 2023. Another man, David Hosier, is scheduled for execution 11 June for the killing of a Jefferson City woman in 2009. Nationwide, four men have been executed so far in 2024 – one each in Alabama, Texas, Georgia and Oklahoma.

(source: The Guardian)

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

Missouri executes Brian Dorsey for 2006 double murder after mercy bid backed by 72 correctional officers----Cousin of executed inmate says his death was 'absolutely unnecessary'

The state of Missouri on Tuesday executed Brian Dorsey for the 2006 murders of his cousin, Sarah Bonnie, and her husband, Benjamin Bonnie, after an effort to have his life spared failed in recent days.

Dorsey’s time of death was recorded as 6:11 p.m, the Missouri Department of Corrections said in a news release. The method of execution was lethal injection, Karen Pojmann, a spokesperson for the department, said at a news conference, adding it “went smoothly, no problems.”

The execution of Dorsey, 52, occurred hours after the US Supreme Court declined to intervene and about a day after Missouri’s Republican governor denied clemency, rejecting the inmate’s petition – backed by more than 70 correctional officers and others – for a commutation of his sentence to life in prison.

Dorsey and his attorneys cited his remorse, his rehabilitation while behind bars and his representation at trial by attorneys who allegedly had a “financial conflict of interest” as reasons he should not be put to death. But those arguments were insufficient to convince Gov. Mike Parson, who said in a statement carrying out Dorsey’s sentence “would deliver justice and provide closure.”

In a final written statement before his execution, Dorsey thanked supporters who advocated on his behalf and apologized to the loved ones of his victims.

“To all of the family and loved ones I share with Sarah and to all of the surviving family and loved ones of Ben, I am totally, deeply, overwhelmingly sorry. Words cannot hold the just weight of my guilt and shame,” Dorsey said, according to the statement provided to CNN by his attorneys. “I still love you. I never wanted to hurt anyone. I am sorry I hurt them and you.”

“To my family, friends, and all of those that tried to prevent this, I love you! I am grateful for you,” he said. “I have peace in my heart in large part because of you and I thank you. To all those on ALL sides of this sentence, I carry no ill will or anger, only acceptance and understanding.”

While Dorsey’s petition also cited support from some relatives who his attorneys said were also related to the victims, other members of the victims’ families supported the execution, telling CNN in a statement Dorsey committed the “ultimate betrayal” when he killed Sarah Bonnie, his cousin, and her husband Benjamin and left their daughter Jade, then 4 years old, in the home with her parents’ bodies locked in their bedroom.

“Not only did Jade lose her parents but we also lost a daughter and son, sister and brother, aunt and uncle, and a great aunt and great uncle to so many,” the statement from Sarah Bonnie’s family read, in part.

“They were loved so deeply by anyone that knew them,” it said. “All of these years of pain and suffering we finally see the light at the end of the tunnel. Brian will get the justice that Sarah and Ben have deserved for so long.”

In his statement Monday, the governor said the “pain Dorsey brought to others can never be rectified,” and Dorsey’s execution would proceed according to state law and as ordered by the Missouri Supreme Court.

“Brian Dorsey punished his loving family for helping him in a time of need,” Parson said. “His cousins invited him into their home where he was surrounded by family and friends, then gave him a place to stay. Dorsey repaid them with cruelty, inhumane violence, and murder.”

Victim’s family sees ‘light at the end of the tunnel’

The murders occurred the night of December 23, 2006. Hours earlier, Dorsey called Sarah asking for help, according to a history of the case included with a ruling by the Missouri Supreme Court last month. 2 drug dealers were in his apartment, Dorsey said, and he needed money to pay them.

The couple went to Dorsey’s apartment and the drug dealers left. They then took Dorsey back to their home, the ruling notes, and Dorsey spent the evening drinking and playing pool with their family and friends.

Later that night, the ruling said, Dorsey entered their room and fatally shot them with a shotgun at close range. Court records said Dorsey raped Sarah’s body. Dorsey’s attorneys argued this remains an allegation; he was never charged with and never pleaded guilty to rape or sexual assault.

Dorsey was charged with two counts of first-degree murder and pleaded guilty in March 2008. He was sentenced to death for each murder, court records show, and his conviction and death sentence were upheld on appeal.

The killings were deeply traumatic for Sarah Bonnie’s family, according to their statement, noting the bodies were discovered by her parents. In the years after, the family did what they could to keep the memories of Sarah and Ben alive, taking their daughter to the cemetery each year to release balloons.

“We think of all the things that she has missed out on during her life without her parents. First day of school, school parties, school dances, 1st date, sweet 16, 1st boyfriend and high school graduation,” their statement said. “All of this was taken from her by a family member that proclaimed to love her.”

Jenni Gerhauser, a cousin to both the inmate and Sarah Bonnie, however, had held out hope Dorsey would be spared. His death is “hard to come to terms with,” and the execution was “absolutely unnecessary,” she told CNN’s Laura Coates on Tuesday night.

“Brian was convicted of a terrible crime. We have never denied that. But Brian is not the worst of the worst, and a single, terrible night in his life didn’t justify killing him,” Gerhauser said. “When the … correctional officers sent that letter (supporting him) to the governor, I felt so validated, because … I cannot reconcile this crime with the one convicted for it.”

Inmate’s remorse and trial defense warranted mercy, petition argued

Dorsey was deeply remorseful for the murders, his attorneys said. His clemency petition claimed the killings occurred while Dorsey was suffering a “drug-induced psychosis and alcohol-induced blackout” after years of substance abuse aimed at self-medicating chronic depression.

As evidence of his atonement, Dorsey and his attorneys pointed to his spotless disciplinary record and his work as a staff barber; for 11 years, Dorsey cut the hair of staff at the Potosi Correctional Center, including chaplains, wardens and corrections officers – some of whom wrote to the governor backing his quest for clemency.

“If you ask me, if it were not for drugs, none of this would have happened,” wrote one whose name, like others, was redacted in the petition for privacy. “The Mr. Dorsey I know must have been out of his mind at the time of these murders.”

Additionally, Dorsey’s lawyers contend his sentence was unjust due to the arrangement by which his trial attorneys were paid. Both were given flat fees of $12,000, which would amount to just a few dollars an hour for the work required in a capital case.

Dorsey’s attorneys allege this created a “financial conflict of interest,” which disincentivized work on his case, leading the trial lawyers to have him plead guilty without a guarantee of a life sentence or adequately investigating. If they had done the latter, his current lawyers claim, they might have learned Dorsey was incapable of the deliberation required for a 1st-degree murder charge.

Dorsey’s trial attorneys previously testified the flat-fee payment did not affect their handling of the case. One declined to comment when reached by CNN last week, while the other did not respond.

(source: CNN)

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

Missouri case shows that even people sentenced to death can be rehabilitated

Brian Dorsey is awaiting execution in Missouri for killing Sarah and Ben Bonnie in 2006. The Bonnies were Dorsey’s cousins who offered to help him at a time when Dorsey had a serious drug problem.

As The New York Times reports, “The Bonnies invited Mr. Dorsey to spend the night at their home near New Bloomfield, Mo., in the central part of the state. After the couple went to bed that night, the authorities said, Mr. Dorsey took a shotgun and fatally shot each of them. Prosecutors also said that Mr. Dorsey sexually assaulted Ms. Bonnie.”

Dorsey pled guilty to the murders but has no memory of the sexual assault. Missouri plans to execute him tonight.

But in a truly unprecedented show of support, 72 current and former corrections officers, including those who personally know Dorsey, asked Missouri’s Republican Gov. Mike Parson to commute his sentence to life in prison without parole. But to no avail.

Parson refused to spare Dorsey’s life. A news report in The Independent noted he is a former sheriff who “hasn’t blocked an execution since taking office in 2018.”

The correctional officers who supported Dorsey were joined by a former Missouri Supreme Court judge, 5 of the jurors who served at Dorsey’s penalty phase trial, several Republican members of the Missouri legislature, and members of the victims’ family.

These people all contended that, as the corrections officers put it in their letter to the governor, Dorsey “doesn’t deserve to be executed.”

The Dorsey case is a reminder that people under a death sentence can be, and sometimes are, rehabilitated, reformed and redeemed. In such cases, the usual arguments for capital punishment run up against the stark reality of a human life transformed after being sentenced to death.

In such cases, execution serves no purpose. As Supreme Court Justice Byron White argued more than 50 years ago, the Constitution prohibits executing someone when doing so would be “the pointless and needless extinction of life with only marginal contributions to any discernible social or public purposes.”

The Republican legislators who urged Parson to grant clemency drove that point home.“[G]iven who Mr. Dorsey is today and that he is not a risk if allowed to live out the rest of his life in prison, while giving back to society and providing a service to the state as the staff barber, we strongly believe that a commutation to life without the possibility of parole is now the just result.”

At times, the Supreme Court and others have questioned whether it makes sense to think of the death penalty as a rehabilitative punishment. In 1980 the court said “(T)he penalty of death differs from all other forms of criminal punishment, not in degree but in kind. … It is unique in its rejection of rehabilitation of the convict as a basic purpose of criminal justice.”

Harvard law professor Mark Tushnet agrees that rehabilitation is “irrelevant … in the death penalty debate.”

But Dorsey is not the only example of how lives can change after a death sentence. In fact, law professor Meghan Ryan argues that “Rehabilitation was one of the primary reasons that capital punishment was imposed in early America.”

Ryan notes that “death was imposed in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries to encourage an offender to repent and rehabilitate himself. … Repentance was key because it was thought to be a significant factor in determining the individual’s ‘eternal fate after death.’ … And little provoked repentance like the scheduled death of capital punishment. The citizenry considered this practice as having a ‘unique’ ability to ‘facilitate repentance.’”

Ryan offers several modern examples of rehabilitation on death row. One of them was the case of Paul Crump who was sentenced to death for the brutal murder of a security officer at a Chicago meat packing plant in 1953.

While he was on death row, Crump “transformed himself — from an ‘animalistic and belligerent’ creature to a compassionate man who developed a deep friendship with the warden who kept him imprisoned. The warden attributed the transformation to… ‘reduc[ing] the emphasis on punishment, listening to prisoner complaints, providing education and group counseling, and sharing words of love.’ Treating Crump as a human being in this way allowed Crump to discover his conscience and his humanity and positively contribute to prison life.”

“While on death row Crump began reading and writing, and he authored a novel entitled Burn, Killer, Burn… Some,” Ryan observes, “viewed this as even further evidence that Crump had been rehabilitated. … In other words, Crump had transformed his character.”

In 1962, Illinois Gov. Otto Kerner commuted Crump’s sentence to 199 years in prison without the possibility of parole. Fourteen years later, Gov. Dan Walker removed the parole prohibition and Crump was paroled in 1993.

Perhaps the most famous example of rehabilitation on death row was the Texas case of Karla Faye Tucker. In 1983, Tucker and her boyfriend broke into the home of their acquaintance, Jerry Dean, and brutally murdered him and the woman who was spending the night with him with a pickaxe.

She was sentenced to death in 1984.

As Ryan says, “While in jail awaiting trial, Tucker freed herself from drugs, which had been a lifelong companion, and also accepted responsibility for her crimes and became a born-again Christian. Tucker regularly attended Bible classes and concentrated on improving her education. In one commentator’s words, ‘a remarkable change … had taken place.’”

However, unlike Crump, Faye’s death row transformation was not enough to convince Texas Gov. George W. Bush to commute her sentence. Tucker was put to death in 1998. In a striking recognition of the possibility of change among people sentenced to death, the state of California recently dismantled its death row and committed to offering inmates “opportunities such as employment, rehabilitation programs, and avenues for restitution to victims.” Participation in that program, in itself, will not lead to commutation of those sentences.

In Dorsey’s case, the Republican legislators who supported clemency argued that “Brian Dorsey… is uniquely deserving of mercy and should not be executed.” They point to his “impeccable record over 17 years of incarceration, and the overwhelming support for clemency from over 70 correctional officers and the former warden of the prison….”

They concluded that “Mr. Dorsey is a rehabilitated man.”

The correctional officers agreed. They told Gov. Parson of Dorsey’s remarkable transformation of death row.

“Every one of us,” they wrote, “believe that Brian is a good guy, someone who has stayed out of trouble, never gotten himself into any situations, and been respectful of us and of his fellow inmates.” They note that Dorsey “is a barber at Potosi Correctional and cut hair for many of us…. Being a barber is considered a high-level job for an inmate, and he could not have gotten a job as a barber if he had any disciplinary problems.”

Dorsey, they said, is “housed in No. 5 unit, an ‘honor dorm.’ To be housed there, inmates have to be well behaved. Brian never presented any problems, either inside the institution or outside during recreational time. If all the inmates were like Brian, there would never be a problem in the institution.”

While they reiterated their support for capital punishment, the correctional officers told Gov. Parson, “(W)e are in agreement that the death penalty is not the appropriate punishment for Brian Dorsey… We know that he was convicted of murder, but that is not the Brian Dorsey that we know.”

“Not the Brian Dorsey we know” is a reminder that the person we punish years after the crime has been committed may be substantially different in their character and beliefs than they were when they committed their crime. This is as true in capital cases as it is in less serious offenses.

Thirty years ago a Washington Post opinion piece observed that “Because capital punishment eliminates forever the chance that offenders will redeem themselves, it is society’s concession to despair and failure.”

In the end, Brian Dorsey’s execution seems to prove that point.

But, from the time he was sentenced, Brian Dorsey’s story was a powerful antidote to despair. It calls on all of us not to give up hope, even for those who commit horrible crimes.

(source: Opinion; Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor Jurisprudence & Political Science at Amherst College----thehill.com)

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

The EU expressed regret over the death penalty carried out in the US state of Missouri

The European Union today expressed "deep regret" over the execution of Brian Dorsey in Missouri and called on this American state to join the other 37 federal states in the United States that have so far abolished the death penalty by law or in practice.

Dorsey's execution was the first execution carried out in Missouri this year, which means that the state is renewing this inhumane and degrading practice, the European External Action Service (EEAS) said in a statement.

The statement emphasizes that the EU continues to call for the universal abolition of the death penalty and asks the countries that still practice it to introduce a moratorium and to begin the process of abolishing executions following the world trend.

– As a matter of principle, the EU strongly opposes the death penalty at all times and in all circumstances. It constitutes a violation of the right to life, does not prevent crime and makes miscarriages of justice irreversible, the EU states, pointing out that in the United States so far a total of 197 people have been acquitted as innocent, after being initially sentenced to death.

The 52-year-old Dorsey was executed last night by lethal injection. He was convicted of murdering his cousin and her husband in 2006. Dorsey's attorneys sought a commutation of the sentence, arguing that he had changed during his nearly 20 years in prison and that he did not have adequate legal protection during the trial.

(source: slobodenpecat.mk)

OKLAHOMA:

Judges, Heretics, and Capital Punishment

As you may have seen, the Attorney General of Oklahoma filed a motion asking that the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals slow down the pace of executions in that state. Attorney General Gentner Drummond argued that killing someone on the schedule set by the court—every 60 days—imposed a psychological and professional burden on an overtaxed prison staff that was “too onerous and not sustainable.” He asked that executions take place every 90 days instead.

Judge Gary Lumpkin wasn’t having it. At a hearing on the motion, he said he wasn’t impressed with the “sympathy stuff” and pointed to the slippery slope that had formed in his head. “Who’s to say next month you won’t come in and say I need 120 days? This stuff needs to stop, and people need to suck it up, realize they have a hard job to do, and get it done in a timely, proficient, professional way.” A recording of Lumpkin’s remarks is available here.

It could be that Judge Lumpkin is simply morally obtuse, and that he is either indifferent or oblivious to the toll inflicted on executioners, as several commentators have suggested. If that is true, then there’s really nothing more to be said. Sometimes people say stupid things, and powerful people seem to put their foot in it even more than the rest of us. At a certain point, however, that fact is no longer shocking and its reaffirmation is no longer newsworthy.

But I think something far more interesting is going on. I think the judge’s hostility to Drummond is less a reaction to his motion than an attempt to protect the integrity of his tribe. I think Judge Lumpkin suspects the attorney general is a heretic and is punishing the attorney general for his deviance. The whole imbroglio is an example of what social psychologists describe as the “black sheep effect.”

The logic of the black sheep effect is straightforward. People are tribal; they form and join groups. Some of these groups become essential to their identity, and people derive vital psychological comfort from knowing that their group exists, that it is secure, and that they and their fellow group members are meaningfully different from outsiders. Because these groups can serve such an indispensable psychological role, many people are apt to defend them with particular ferocity. This leads them to police the metaphorical bounds of the group as if their life depended on it (think “culture wars”), but also to be hyper-vigilant about the threat that imposters are masquerading as members and thus weakening the group from within. Think of the attacks on RINOs—Republicans in Name Only—who are shamed and purged from the group for not being ideologically pure. On the left, cancel culture works much the same way and serves the same exclusionary purpose.

You can find a summary of the literature on the black sheep effect here, at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6850106/

***

To see how the black sheep effect might be playing out in the tiff between Judge Lumpkin and Attorney General Drummond, we need a little context. To begin with, Oklahoma is a staunchly conservative state that retains and still actively uses capital punishment. Since the restoration of the death penalty in 1976, only Texas has executed more people, and no state has executed more people per capita, than Oklahoma. In 2016, a state-wide referendum that amended the state constitution to guarantee the state’s power “to impose capital punishment and set methods of execution” passed 66% to 34%. Among other tasks, the attorney general represents the State in court and defends its death sentences from post-conviction attacks. When it comes to capital punishment, the attorney general is perhaps the most visible face of ingroup membership.

In Oklahoma, execution dates are set by the Court of Criminal Appeals, where Lumpkin sits. In July 2022, the court scheduled execution dates for 25 people, with an execution scheduled for nearly every month from August 2022 to December 2024, an unprecedented schedule, especially given Oklahoma’s well-documented history of botched executions. Drummond took office January 9, 2023. Shortly afterwards, he asked the court to delay the pace of executions, spacing them every 60 days instead of every four weeks. The court agreed.

Then, in April 2023, Drummond filed a motion in the Court of Criminal Appeals to vacate the conviction of Richard Glossip, whose case has attracted national attention based on the cumulative evidence of official misconduct. At the request of Oklahoma legislators, a private law firm conducted an exhaustive reexaminationof the case and concluded there were “grave doubt[s] [about] the integrity of Glossip’s murder conviction and death sentence.” Based on this review, Drummond said he had reached “the difficult conclusion” that Glossip deserved a new trial. Noting a prosecutor’s obligation to seek justice, Drummond said that the many problems with the case “establish that Glossip’s trial was unfair and unreliable. Consequently, the State is not comfortable advocating that the result of the trial would have been the same but for these errors.” Notably, in taking this position, Drummond reversed the position taken by prior attorneys general.

The Court of Criminal Appeals unanimously denied Drummond’s motion.

Drummond then took the unprecedented step of supporting Glossip’s petition before the Oklahoma Board of Pardons and Paroles. Again, it is important to note exactly what Drummond said at that proceeding:

I would confirm that I believe Mr. Glossip is, in fact, guilty of at least accessory after the fact. More likely than not, he’s guilty of murder. But I don’t believe that the evidence presents he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and that is my concern. I believe that when we view the cumulative nature of the facts, I have reached the difficult decision that the state cannot proceed in confidence with the conviction that would result in the death penalty.

During the hearing, a district attorney who was present sent crude and derogatory texts about Drummond to colleagues that attacked Drummond’s willingness to speak on behalf of a death row inmate. The Board denied parole by an evenly split vote, 2-2, with one member of the Board recusing.

Finally, Drummond filed a brief supporting Glossip in the United States Supreme Court. The opening line of Drummond’s papers again reveals his purpose. (I am omitting the case citations):

This Court has long held that the prosecutor’s role transcends that of an adversary: he is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty … whose interest … in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done.

On January 22, 2024, the Supreme Court agreed to hear Glossip’s appeal, at least an implicit rebuke of the Court of Criminal Appeals.

8 days later, Drummond filed the current motion seeking to hold executions every 90 days instead of 60.

***

This history places Judge Lumpkin’s hostility to Drummond’s motion in a different light. Many media outlets have noted that Judge Lumpkin said he wasn’t impressed with the “sympathy stuff” and that the attorney general and the Department of Corrections have to “suck it up.” But to my knowledge, none has noticed the passage that seems to matter most. After recounting occasions more than 2 decades ago when the State of Oklahoma executed people far more rapidly than every 60 days, Judge Lumpkin took a direct jab at Drummond:

That Department of Corrections, that AG’s office, those people did their duty. And I’m sorry but I come from the Marine Corps and when we have tough duties, we just say ‘man up.’ … And if those professionals, those people, those leaders from 2001 to 2003 could carry out their duties, in such a professional way without a hitch, then why cannot the leadership that is in place today perform their duties?

The emphasis is in Judge Lumpkin’s original tone.

The implication seems unmistakable. A real attorney general, an attorney general who was a faithful member of the tribe, would never bring such a frivolous motion. That this AG should clutter the court’s docket with this whining just goes to show he really isn’t one of us. Judge Lumpkin’s very public rebuke of Drummond was an attempt to signal to the faithful that Oklahoma has a heretic in high places.

And that is the great tragedy of the whole affair. There is nothing in Drummond’s record that suggests any hesitation about the death penalty, except when it interferes with his superior legal obligation to seek justice and his superior moral obligation to protect prison staff from needless trauma. But Drummond, like his predecessors, clearly has no compunctions about the death penalty. On the contrary, throughout Drummond’s tenure, Oklahoma has continued to have one of the most active execution chambers in the country. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, Oklahoma is one of only five states to have carried out an execution in 2023, and one of only four that has carried out an execution in 2024.

It could be that Judge Lumpkin is a cretin. But it could also be that he is something far worse: an ideologue who is trying to purge Attorney General Drummond for the sin of being more devoted to the Constitution and to basic notions of decency than to killing people. As between a cretin and an ideologue, the latter is far more threatening to the intellectual fabric of the law and the moral fabric of the country.

(source: Joseph Margulies is a Professor of Government at Cornell University----verdict.justia.com)

NEVADA:

Accused triple-murderer makes court appearance, death penalty hangs in the balance

A man accused of murder and facing the death penalty appeared in court Tuesday morning.

Spencer McDonald is charged with the murders of his grandmother, Dina Vail, Vail's boyfriend, Andrew Graden, and maintenance worker Chris Brassard.

Prosecutors say McDonald attacked Brassard while he was performing a welfare check on Vail, who hadn't been seen in a couple of days.

(source: KSNV news)

CALIFORNIA:

Renowned Civil Rights and Legal Organizations File Petition Challenging California Death Penalty, Highlight Evidence Demonstrating Racial Discrimination2

Today, a consortium of nationally renowned civil rights organizations, legal organizations, and a law firm filed an extraordinary writ petition in the Supreme Court of California challenging the state’s death penalty statute as racially discriminatory and unconstitutional under the Equal Protection guarantees of the California Constitution. This is the first time a petition of this nature has been filed with the court.

The original petition to the Supreme Court of California was filed by the Legal Defense Fund (LDF), the American Civil Liberties Union Capital Punishment Project (ACLU CPP), the ACLU of Northern California (ACLU NorCal), WilmerHale, and the Office of the State Public Defender (OSPD). This challenge was brought on behalf of petitioners OSPD, Witness to Innocence, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, and Eva Paterson, co-founder of the Equal Justice Society.

The evidence of racial bias in California’s implementation of the death penalty is pervasive and well-documented. Numerous empirical studies by leading social science experts reveal troubling disparities: Black people are about five times more likely to be sentenced to death when compared to similarly situated non-Black defendants, while Latino people are at least three times more likely to be sentenced to death.

“The California Constitution does not permit a two-tiered system of justice where the most severe sentence the state has on its books is imposed overwhelmingly on Black and Brown people,” said Lisa Romo, Senior Deputy State Public Defender at OSPD. “We urge the Court to address this long-standing injustice and ensure that Black and Brown people are no longer sentenced disproportionately to death.”

“Equal protection under the laws is a fundamental guarantee of the California Constitution,” said Seth Waxman, partner and Co-Chair of WilmerHale’s Appellate and Supreme Court Litigation Practice, “but for decades administration of the death penalty in California has failed to meet that guarantee.”

Added Jessica Lewis, a partner in WilmerHale’s San Francisco office: “That failure is why this petition is so critical. The empirical evidence described in the petition demonstrates that the death penalty in California has long been administered in a racially discriminatory manner, in violation of the equal protection guarantees of the California Constitution.”

California’s capital punishment scheme is not only racially discriminatory, but this form of punishment, as well as other tools of racial violence, have historically been weaponized to harm people of color.

“The persistence of racial disparities in the administration of capital punishment in California is linked to a legacy of racial violence and oppression long perpetrated against Black people and other people of color,” said LDF Assistant Counsel Patricia Okonta. “Capital punishment has roots in slavery, lynchings, and white vigilantism. Maintaining these violent remnants of racial subordination is unconscionable and has no place in modern society.”

Both Governor Gavin Newsom and California Attorney General Rob Bonta have acknowledged the persistent and pervasive racial disparities in the administration of the death penalty in California. In a 2021 amicus brief submitted in People v. McDaniel, Governor Newsom acknowledged that the “overwhelming majority of studies that have analyzed America’s death penalty have found that racial disparities are pervasive, and that the race of the defendant and the race of the victim impact whether the death penalty will be imposed.” In March of 2019 Governor Newsom signed an Executive Order instituting a moratorium on the death penalty in California stating that, “death sentences are unevenly and unfairly applied to people of color. . .”

“California’s racially biased death penalty continues to destroy Black and Brown communities,” said Ella Baker Center for Human Rights Prison Advocacy Coordinator Morgan Zamora. “Even after Governor Newsom’s 2019 moratorium on executions, seventeen people — 80% of whom are Black or Latiné — have been sentenced to death. Black and Brown Californians deserve for our state to live up to its values and take the necessary steps to finally end the death penalty.”

In 2021, Attorney General Bonta also notably stated that capital punishment has “long had a disparate impact on defendants of color, especially when the victim is white,” and added that “[California is] moving towards ending the death penalty.” Despite these disparities and Governor Newsom’s moratorium, California prosecutors continue to seek the death penalty and obtain sentences disproportionately against people of color.

“The Attorney General is of course correct that California’s capital punishment scheme harms Black and brown people disproportionately,” said Deputy Director of the Criminal Justice Program at ACLU NorCal Avi Frey. “The question is what the Attorney General intends to do about this unconstitutional reality. As the State’s chief law enforcement officer, and an avowed defender of equal justice under the law, we would hope and expect that the Attorney General would take affirmative steps to dismantle this racially motivated and disparate system.”

“The body of evidence presented in this petition demonstrates what experienced death penalty practitioners in California and around the country have long known: decision-makers at every stage of capital prosecution from charging to sentencing have treated Black and Brown lives as less valuable than white lives,” said Claudia Van Wyk, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Capital Punishment Project. “This case gives the California Supreme Court an opportunity to implement the State’s core constitutional values and right this wrong.”

(source: aclu.org)

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

Civil rights groups fight ‘racially discriminatory’ death penalty in California Supreme Court

California criminal justice reform organizations are challenging the state’s use of the death penalty, saying it disproportionately affects Black and brown people and is unconstitutional.

“We’re in a position where, because of the dysfunction of the death penalty, there’s just no way to get this in front of the California Supreme Court in an individual case,” Romo said.

Voters or lawmakers could then change California’s capital punishment system to bring it in line with the court’s ruling, Romo said.

California capital punishment

California is one of 27 states that still have a death penalty, according to 2023 data from the Death Penalty Information Center. Twenty-three states do not use capital punishment.

Californians in 2016 voted down a ballot measure that would have ended the state’s death penalty, with 53% against repealing it and nearly 47% in favor.

The legal challenge comes as the state begins to dismantle its death rows for men at San Quentin State Prison and for women at the Central California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla.

By summer 2024, CDCR plans to rehouse all male death row inmates in general population housing at other prisons, as San Quentin does not have the required electrified fence.

This plan also fits with Newsom’s proposal to refashion San Quentin from a death row hub into a model rehabilitation center by 2025.

Women on death row at Chowchilla have been transferred to general population housing.

(source: The Sacramento Bee)

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

California’s death penalty is irreparably racist, lawsuit contends

California’s death penalty law was declared unconstitutional by the state Supreme Court in 1972 but was quickly reinstated by the voters. The statute survived initiatives in 2012 and 2016 that sought to repeal it. And despite Gov. Gavin Newsom’s moratorium on executions in 2019, the death penalty is still the law of the state, which has 640 condemned inmates, the most in the nation.

But the state’s public defender and civil rights groups say capital punishment, as practiced in California, is incurably racist — Blacks and Latinos are far more likely than whites to be sentenced to death, and murder defendants disproportionately face capital charges if their alleged victim was white. And they are asking the state Supreme Court to remove the death penalty from the law books.

“The parties agree that persistent and pervasive racial disparities infect California’s death penalty system,” attorneys from the public defender’s office, the American Civil Liberties Union, the NAACP and other advocates said in a lawsuit Tuesday filed directly with the state’s high court.

The “parties” include the nominal state defendant in the suit, Attorney General Rob Bonta, who opposes the death penalty and says, as quoted in the filing, that it has “a disparate impact on defendants of color, especially when the victim is white.” The suit then quotes Newsom, who has said studies show that “the race of the defendant and the race of the victim” may determine whether a defendant will be sentenced to death.

Newsom, in an unprecedented filing for a California governor, asked the state Supreme Court in 2021 to overturn the death sentence for a double murder in Los Angeles because California’s standard jury instructions do not require jurors to agree on reasons for imposing capital punishment.

The court rejected Newsom’s argument and unanimously upheld the death sentence in that case, but one justice, Goodwin Liu, said in a separate opinion that the state’s death penalty law was constitutionally questionable and should be reconsidered in a future case.

The state’s high court first overturned California’s death penalty law in 1972, ruling that it violated the state Constitution’s prohibition of “cruel or unusual punishment” — a ruling that spared the life of cult leader Charles Manson, among others. Death penalty supporters quickly qualified an initiative to restore capital punishment that was approved that fall by 67% of the voters.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court, also in 1972, declared Georgia’s broad death penalty law unconstitutional because it gave jurors too much leeway in deciding which crimes should be punished by death, a ruling that also put California’s law on hold.

After the court upheld a narrower law that applied to specific categories of murders, California’s Legislature passed a new death penalty law in 1977, overriding Gov. Jerry Brown’s veto, and the voters broadened the law in a 1978 initiative. While polls have shown declining support for capital punishment in the state, initiatives seeking to repeal the death penalty were defeated by 4% in 2012 and 6% in 2016.

After the state’s most recent execution in 2006, a federal judge found problems in lethal injection procedures and staff training, and ordered a halt until the flaws were corrected. Nothing has changed since then, and Newsom ordered San Quentin’s Death Row dismantled when he imposed his moratorium after taking office in 2019. Its inmates are being transferred to other maximum-security prisons.

The governor has not sought clemency for any condemned prisoners, however, and his successor could seek to resume executions unless the law is repealed, by either the voters or the courts. So far, though, the declared candidates for governor in 2026 oppose the death penalty and have said they’d keep the moratorium in place.

Constitutional challenges to state laws generally face long odds. But if the state Supreme Court decided to grant review of Tuesday’s lawsuit and then agreed with its argument, such a ruling might be harder to overturn than its predecessor in 1972.

When the court ruled 6-1 that the death penalty law violated the California Constitution, its advocates drafted an initiative that rewrote the constitutional language to declare that capital punishment was neither cruel nor unusual. That might not be so simple, however, if the court found that the application of the death penalty in California has been permeated by racism.

That claim was argued extensively, citing numerous studies, in Tuesday’s 92-page filing.

California’s Committee on the Revision of the Penal Code, a majority of whose members were appointed by Newsom, reported in 2021 that Black defendants are up to 8.7 times more likely and Latino defendants are up to 6.2 times more likely to be sentenced to death than all other defendants. Defendants of all races are up to 8.8 times more likely to be condemned when at least one of the victims is white, the committee said.

A study of 1,900 homicide cases from 1978 through 2002 in California found that Black defendants were from 4.6 to 8.7 times as likely to be sentenced to death as similarly situated defendants in other cases. Latino defendants, the study found, were 3.2 to 6.2 times as likely to face death sentences as other defendants.

“In practice … racial considerations determine who is subject to the ultimate punishment in California,” said the study’s lead author, Catherine Grosso, a Michigan State University law professor. The report was approved for publication by the Journal of Empirical Studies last month after extensive review, the lawsuit said.

Studies in a handful of California counties reached similar conclusions. In Riverside County, between 2006 and 2016, the lawsuit said, researchers found that Black defendants were 14 times as likely, and Latinos nearly 11 times as likely, as white defendants to be sentenced to death.

And in San Francisco, where district attorneys have not sought the death penalty since 1995, a study examined homicide cases between 1986 and 1993 and found that defendants whose victims were white or Asian were about 4 times as likely to be charged with “special circumstances” murders — punishable by death or life in prison without parole — than those whose victims were of other races.

What the numbers show, the lawsuit contends, is that the state’s death penalty system is broken and can’t be fixed.

“California’s prosecutors have a vast amount of discretion to decide who should face the death penalty,” the lead attorney, Jessica Oats of the state public defender’s office, wrote in Tuesday’s filing. “California has no uniform criteria to guide prosecutors in deciding when to seek death.”

But as of 2015, the suit said, 85% of the elected district attorneys in California’s counties, and 70% of the 3,800 prosecutors in their offices, were white. And because prospective jurors in capital cases can be disqualified if they oppose the death penalty and would be unwilling to vote for it, the suit said, capital juries are disproportionately white.

While death penalty challenges normally must be made in appeals of individual death sentences, Oats said those appeals can last up to 20 years, and urged the court to take up the issue directly.

And the 2021 report by the Committee on the Revision of the Penal Code, cited in the suit, said California’s death penalty system was “beyond repair.”

(source: Bob Egelko, San Francisco Chronicle)

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

Santa Clara, California County District Attorney Requests Resentencing for County’s Entire Death Row

RACE CALIFORNIA

On April 5, 2024, Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen filed petitions asking the county superior court to resentence 15 death-sentenced men from his county to sentences of life in prison without the possibility for parole. These petitions were filed four years after DA Rosen announced his office would no longer seek the death penalty, a decision partly in response to nationwide calls for criminal legal reform following the murder of George Floyd. At the time, DA Rosen said that Mr. Floyd’s death had “changed our country and our community… It has changed my office. It has changed me.” DA Rosen also noted that his views about the death penalty were affected by visits to the Legacy Museum in Montgomery, Alabama, which traces the history of slavery through mass incarceration of people of color. “I went there supporting the death penalty,” he told the Los Angeles Times. “I left not so sure anymore.”

In filings submitted to the Santa Clara Superior Court, DA Rosen cited the “diminishing likelihood” of any executions because of Governor Gavin Newsom’s execution moratorium as well as the “irreversible” nature of capital punishment and inability to guarantee due process to all defendants. “The state is dismantling death row, and it is time we recognize this reality and dismantle these sentences as well,” stated DA Rosen in one of the resentencing motions. Acknowledging that the defendants are not the only people impacted by his decision, DA Rosen noted in all petitions that “the enduring and indescribable pain” felt by crime victims’ families and friends “cannot be discounted or ignored.”

As a prosecutor, DA Rosen previously supported capital punishment and sought the death penalty at trial on several occasions but stopped doing so because of what he said was a lack of fairness in the criminal legal system. “I used to think that in a perfect world, in a perfectly fair society, there could be some crimes so horrible and awful that the appropriate response would be death,” he said. “But I’ve come to know what we all know — we don’t live in a perfect world where everything is fair. I just began to feel like we don’t have the moral authority to execute someone.” If the court grants the motions, DA Rosen said his office will have greater resources to focus on local crime and offer closure to victims’ families who have waited for decades to see finality in their family-member’s case.

Death penalty critics have commended DA Rosen’s efforts, with Professor Elisabeth Semel, director of the Death Penalty Clinic at UC Berkeley, calling his actions “highly significant.” Approximately 35% of people on California’s death row are Black, despite Black people accounting for just about 5% of all Californian residents. About 26% of death row inmates are Hispanic or Mexican, and nearly 70% of California’s death row population are people of color. Research shows that not only is the race of the defendant important in sentencing, but also that the race of the victim and attitudes of the prosecutor affect decisions to seek a death sentence. People accused of killing a white person are more likely to be tried capitally than those being tried for the murder of a person of color. “There is nothing, nothing that these cases have more in common than racial discrimination, whether we are talking about privileging white victims, meaning seeking the death penalty in white crime, or disadvantaging Black clients,” Professor Semel said. Bishop Oscar Cantú of the Diocese of San Jose is also “very pleased” with DA Rosen’s decision. “How we treat the worst of us says something about us as well,” said Bishop Cantú. “Those on death row are poor, almost all of them. Most of them are people of color. How justice is administered is dubious and troubling. We don’t need capital punishment; we’re better off without it as a society.

During his 13 years as District Attorney of Santa Clara County, Mr. Rosen secured just one death sentence. In 2011, a county judge sentenced Melvin Forte to death based on a 2010 jury recommendation for death. Rodrigo Paniagua Jr. was sentenced to death by a jury days before the jury in Mr. Forte’s case recommended death. Since 2011, DA Rosen’s office sought the death penalty four times, with only two of those cases resulting in capital trials. He is confident that the resentencing motions will be legally considered, as California law allows district attorneys to recommend sentencing changes if the defendant is not an “unreasonable risk of danger” to society. DA Rosen’s office believes that all defendants will fall under this rule, as resentencing would not entail release from prison. “We took the first step four years ago…This is the second and final step,” DA Rosen said.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

USA:

This Supreme Court Case on Homelessness May Limit Prisoner Rights and Expand Executions----In Grants Pass v. Johnson, a town in Oregon asks the court to reconsider what constitutes “cruel and unusual punishments”.

When the Supreme Court hears the case of Grants Pass v. Johnson later this month, the justices will consider how far cities can go in policing homeless people. But just as the court swept away a half-century of precedent by overturning Roe v. Wade, the justices could use this case about homelessness to upend how we interpret 4 key words in the Bill of Rights — “cruel and unusual punishments.” Their decision could have ramifications across a wide swath of the criminal justice system, including prison conditions and the death penalty.

The case is about whether the city of Grants Pass, Oregon, violates the Constitution’s Eighth Amendment when it arrests, fines and even jails people without homes for sleeping outside. A lower federal court recently ruled that punishing people for doing something they cannot help is cruel and unusual punishment.

“As long as there is no option of sleeping indoors, the government cannot criminalize indigent, homeless people for sleeping outdoors, on public property, on the false premise they had a choice in the matter,” the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals wrote.

Grants Pass appealed the ruling up to the Supreme Court, which will hear oral arguments on April 22, positing that the courts have no business telling cities what behavior they can regulate. The Eighth Amendment, they say, applies to punishments levied after a crime, not laws that establish what is a crime in the first place, and besides, fines and jail time are hardly cruel or unusual.

At the heart of this debate are two very different ways of reading the Eighth Amendment.First, there’s originalism. In recent sweeping decisions on abortion and guns, conservative justices have focused on what the Constitution’s language meant to the men who wrote it in the 1780s.But other judges and scholars argue for a “living” Constitution, whose meaning should change as the world changes.

The Eighth Amendment barred “cruel and unusual punishments” at a time when the phrase referred to drawing and quartering or public dissection. More than a century and a half later, in 1958, the Supreme Court took the case of Albert Trop, who had been convicted of deserting the military while serving in Morocco during World War II — and was punished with the loss of his citizenship. The court ruled that the punishment was “cruel and unusual” and declared that the amendment “must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.”

Since then, the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment has become the bedrock upon which a generation of civil rights protections for prisoners and criminal defendants are built — few of which would have been recognizable to George Washington and Alexander Hamilton.

Using the evolving standards argument, federal courts have ruled on access to health care in prison, protection from excessive force and limits on the use of solitary confinement. They have prohibited the death penalty and mandatory life-without-parole sentences for people who are younger than 18 when they commit crimes, as well as executions of people with intellectual disabilities. The language has also served as the basis for decades of decisions requiring that juries consider people’s individual, often trauma-filled lives before deciding whether to send them to death row.

In the Grants Pass case, the Supreme Court could sweep away decades of decisions that limit how far states can go in punishing people who are politically unpopular in ways that past justices have said are unacceptable. In 2008, for example, the Supreme Court barred executions of people who sexually assault children, citing evolving standards. Now Florida has enacted just such a law, while Tennessee and Missouri are considering them — inviting the court to reverse course. Gov. Ron DeSantis’ office said at the time that he was “prepared to take this law all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to overrule judicial precedents which have unjustly shielded child rapists from the death penalty and denied victims and their loved ones the opportunity to pursue ultimate justice against these most heinous criminals.”

More than 100 scholars and organizations have filed “friend of the court” briefs ahead of oral arguments in Grants Pass v. Johnson. Many argue the court should let these rulings stand and continue to look to contemporary standards when deciding what is cruel and unusual. In one brief on the other side, Republican attorneys general from 20 states urged the justices to throw out the evolving standards interpretation entirely. (Many of them also made similar arguments in a separate case, supporting Alabama’s request to execute a man with an intellectual disability.) Among their reasons are that it “has no discernible end point” and that it requires “judges to act as sociologists.”

The attorneys general argue that the evolving standards approach has paved the way for courts to get involved in too many subjects, including prisoners’ abilities to pursue gender-affirming surgery or people’s right to vote after they leave prison.What would originalists like to see instead? At the extreme, an originalist could say the court should go back to debating the punishments of the 1700s, like whipping posts and guillotines.John Stinneford, a law professor at the University of Florida who studies the original meaning of the Eighth Amendment, said that originalism need not be so limited, because in the 1700s the word “unusual” referred to punishments that were out of line with “long standing practice.”

That interpretation, he said, could still allow for courts to rule against things like solitary confinement, which has gone in and out of use over history.

“If you're trying to figure out whether a given punishment is cruel and unusual, you have to ask how it compares to prior practice concerning punishment,” said Stinneford, who also wrote a brief in support of the town of Grants Pass. “If it's much harsher than we've traditionally done, then it can be called cruel and unusual.”

The court could choose a very narrow path in Grants Pass, ruling only on the city’s public camping ban and avoiding the broader issues here. It could still be an important ruling, given how many places across the United States are struggling with how to manage rising populations of unhoused people. Cities from San Francisco to Phoenix and beyond have raised controversy by clearing encampments and relying on law enforcement to manage homelessness, even as rents soar and shelter beds are limited.But if the court issues a more sweeping ruling and abandons the evolving standards yardstick in Grants Pass, “that would eviscerate much protection for incarcerated people,” said Sharon Dolovich, a UCLA law professor who studies prison law and policy.

“The central protection for the worst forms of prison conditions — the grossly inadequate medical care, the grossly inadequate mental health care, the excessive force, failure to protect from sexual or physical violence from other prisoners, all kinds of the worst pathologies of prison — are all governed by the Eighth Amendment,” she said.Legal scholars say that the Supreme Court had been slowly moving away from talk of evolving standards in recent years, even before former President Donald Trump’s appointees began shifting the court to the right.

“The court is much more bold and wants to make a statement about originalism,” said Meghan J. Ryan, a Southern Methodist University law professor who published an article last year called “The Death of the Evolving Standards of Decency.” She pointed out that many originalists see the Eighth Amendment as the last vestige of the “living constitutionalism” they’ve been fighting for decades.The court will likely issue an opinion in the Grants Pass case this summer.

Even if the justices choose to rule narrowly on the issue of policing and homelessness, conservative lawyers are sure to look for more ways to end the era of “evolving standards of decency.”

“It now seems to be on the right-wing wishlist,” said Carol Steiker, a Harvard Law School professor who studies capital punishment, pointing to the impassioned opinion issued by Justice Antonin Scalia in 2015, the year before his death. In the case of Glossip v. Gross, the court upheld Oklahoma’s lethal injection protocol, and Scalia blasted the evolving standards approach as having “caused more mischief to our jurisprudence, to our federal system, and to our society than any other that comes to mind.”

(source: Maurice Chammah is a staff writer whose book, “Let the Lord Sort Them: The Rise and Fall of the Death Penalty”, won the 2019 J. Anthony Lukas Work-In-Progress Book Award. A former Fulbright and H.F. Guggenheim fellow, he has reported on a range of criminal justice subjects, including jail conditions, sheriffs, wrongful convictions, and art by incarcerated people.

Shannon Heffernan is a staff writer for The Marshall Project covering prison conditions, experiences of the incarcerated, their families and corrections officers, the federal Bureau of Prisons and the death penalty----themarshallproject.org)

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

BOOK REVIEW: 'The Death of Innocents: An Eyewitness Account of Wrongful Executions'

As in her book “Dead Man Walking,” “The Death of Innocents” is Sister Helen Prejean’s account of accompanying two condemned death row inmates to execution — but with one difference. Prejean believes that the two men described in “The Death of Innocents” — Dobie Gillis Williams and Joseph Roger O’Dell — were innocent.

Prejean takes us back to Virginia’s death row on July 23, 1997, for O’Dell’s execution. O’Dell, who has just married Lori Urs, his advocate, is now meeting with Prejean, his other advocate who doubles as O’Dell’s spiritual adviser. O’Dell, whose case was championed by Pope John Paul II, Mother Teresa, and the government and people of Italy, is about to be executed for the 1985 rape and murder of Helen Schartner, crimes he claimed he did not commit.

Prejean told O’Dell, “Joe, you helped change a big Catholic book, the Catholic Catechism. I personally think that when the pope heard of the suffering you went through — maybe it helped him to see the torture in the death penalty and that it can never be justified.”

Prejean’s narrative prompted me to do an independent review of the O’Dell and Williams cases.

Witnesses testified O’Dell left the tavern about the same time Helen Schartner left. The next day, Schartner’s car was found in the tavern’s parking lot. Her body was found in a muddy field across the highway from the tavern. Schartner had been killed by manual strangulation, with a force sufficient to break bones in her neck and leave finger imprints. She also suffered head wounds consistent with blows from a handgun’s barrel. Her wounds had bled excessively.

A day later, after reading a newspaper account of Schartner’s murder, which described how she had last been seen at the County Line Lounge, O’Dell’s girlfriend remembered that O’Dell customarily went to this place on Tuesday nights — the same night as the murder. She went to her garage and found a paper bag containing O’Dell’s bloody and muddy clothing. She called the police.

O’Dell told police the blood on his clothes came from a nosebleed he suffered while trying to stop a fight outside of another bar. He also claimed to have an alibi at the time of the murder.

At trial, prosecutors said police were unable to verify O’Dell’s alibi or that there was any barroom fight involving O’Dell. Prejean believes that if police had tried harder, they could have verified O’Dell’s claims.

Prejean supports Urs’ belief that the laboratory findings in which the blood found on O’Dell’s clothes was consistent with Schartner’s blood did not prove anything. “All that is really saying is that you can’t exclude the possibility that it might be the victim’s blood, but equally true, it might not be the victim’s blood, which is not saying much at all.”

Equally true? Actually, the state’s forensic laboratory determined that the bloodstains were consistent with that of the victim in terms of blood type and inconsistent with that of O’Dell. Electrophoretic tests established that the blood on O’Dell’s clothing had the same enzyme markers as Schartner’s — a characteristic shared by only three out of 1,000 people. This finding is omitted in Prejean’s book. O’Dell’s blood did not have the same markers. Likewise, dried blood and hairs found in O’Dell’s car were consistent with Schartner’s but not O’Dell’s.

Prejean explains that serial killer David Mark Pruett, along with other confessions, had admitted to killing Schartner. However, his admission did not match his established modus operandi of stabbing his victims. Prejean does not mention the fact that the state claimed that Pruett could not have committed the crime because his blood type was AB, while semen taken from the victim contained type A blood. O’Dell had type A blood.

Prejean does not share with readers the fact that prior to his arrest for Schartner’s murder, O’Dell was imprisoned in Florida for robbery, assault and the abduction of a Zippy Mart clerk. She testified that O’Dell choked her, put a gun to her head, and beat her with it (a handgun with a barrel that could cause wounds consistent with the wounds Schartner suffered had been seen in O’Dell’s car shortly before Schartner was murdered) and threatened to rape her. There are similarities between what happened to this woman and what happened to Schartner.

O’Dell’s Florida victim would later say she was lucky to be alive, adding, “If death penalty opponents are looking for a poster boy for their cause, they sure picked the wrong guy.”

O’Dell claimed that “When I was first arrested, I begged to have a polygraph to prove I was telling the truth and this was denied me.” But in Prejean’s narrative, there is no mention of O’Dell, his attorneys, or Prejean trying to make this happen while O’Dell was on death row. Why not?

Prejean didn’t convince me that either O’Dell or Dobie Williams, the Louisiana man who was executed and whose case is also discussed in “Death of Innocents,” were innocent.

I suspect that Prejean’s opposition to capital punishment is so strong that she is too quick to overlook guilt indicators.

When Russian president Vladimir Putin didn’t call for restoring capital punishment after the 1999 bombings of an apartment building by international terrorists that killed 300 Russians, Prejean depicted Putin as an example of “evolving standards of decency.” I wonder if Prejean now wishes she had selected someone else for such honorable mention.

Prejean claimed her death row experience expanded her soul “to recognize the Great Spirit in everything — land, trees, rivers, animals.” She said she cringes when she hears about cruelty to animals. But actions speak louder than words. That is why, in my essay, “Pope Francis must firmly address systemic cruelty to animals” (Finger Lakes Times, August 13, 2022), I was critical of Prejean’s unwillingness to speak out about cruelty to animals abused in bull fighting and at patron saints’ cerebrations in some predominantly Catholic faith nations — even when these atrocities occur on church property.

In fairness to Prejean, it also bothers me that Virginia officials destroyed some physical evidence that could have been retested using modern DNA technology. And, Prejean convinced me that the testimony of an inmate, who claimed O’Dell confessed to him that he killed Schartner, was not credible.

I would encourage people, if they read “The Death of Innocents,” to do their own online reviews of the cases of O’Dell and Williams. The fact that “The Death of Innocents” challenged me to research these cases speaks for Prejean’s ability to prompt readers to want to learn more about the people and subjects she writes about.

Prejean points out some dysfunctional aspects of our criminal justice system that require closer scrutiny. I especially appreciated Prejean’s discussion about the contrast between two prison wardens — one in Louisiana, the other in Virginia — in their attitudes and policies regarding death row inmates and their families. And, while Prejean didn’t convince me that O’Dell and Williams were innocent, some of the issues she raised left me reluctant to rule out any remote possibility entirely that one or both of these men were convicted wrongfully. This is one of the reasons why I wish that they had been sentenced to life imprisonment without possibility of parole instead of execution.

(source: Canandaigua resident Joel Freedman contributes book reviews and essays to the Finger Lakes Times frequently----fltimes.com)

NIGERIA:

Another Look At Capital Punishment

There are far too many prisoners in Nigeria’s correctional facilities. Thousands of them are awaiting trial inmates, while others are either serving their jail terms or have received death sentences. The approximate number of death row convicts in custodial facilities around the nation as of July 2022 was 3,145. Of the figure, 3,084 were men and 61 women, according to the Nigerian Correctional Service. This has over time put the process of decongesting the correctional facilities all but impossible.

As governors decline to sign the death warrants for the condemned, the number of the individuals on death row is growing, sparking reservations among human rights advocates and attorneys about what might happen to the prisoners. A few of them have proposed converting the death penalty to life in prison. Others contend that the death sentence ought to be abolished under the constitution if the governors are unwilling to sign the warrants. Femi Falana, SAN, maintains that keeping a prisoner on death row for a considerable amount of time is torture.

Despite repeated calls by the Federal Government for state governors to exercise their constitutional responsibility of signing death warrants of criminals condemned to death by courts of competent jurisdictions, no death row inmate has been executed in the last 10 years. Governors are delaying the wheel of justice and contributing to congestion in correctional centres by refusing to sign the death warrants. States should share in the burden of decongesting custodial facilities in the country.

Crimes that are punishable by death include homicide, kidnapping, and murder. The governors must still sign the warrants after the judges issue these orders for the execution to proceed. Over time, the governors, who are liable for confirming execution orders, have been dodging their role, which has made the already cramped jails even more cluttered. They justify their refusal to append the warrants by citing political correctness and feelings.

One of the most contentious and frequently discussed subjects in the world is the death penalty. Numerous organisations observe that it is cruel and barbarous. Its opponents frequently compare it to murder, pointing out that it has no effect on homicide rates and that the ends do not always substantiate the methods, particularly when people are wrongfully condemned.

Since Nigeria is yet to consider abolishing or suspending the death penalty, the onus is on the governors to take the correct course of action. The number of nations that have done so is expanding. According to the Death Penalty Information Centre, almost 70 % of nations worldwide have either outlawed or discontinued the death penalty. Kazakhstan and Papua New Guinea are among the most recent nations to ban it.

By the end of 2021, 108 countries had abolished the death penalty for all crimes under the law; 144 countries had done the same in practice; 28 countries had done so in effect by not carrying out an execution in the previous 10 years; and 55 countries still applied the death penalty for common crimes. This information comes from data provided by Amnesty International.

However, proponents of capital punishment often view it as a necessary evil to protect society from individuals who commit the most heinous crimes. Despite the declarations from former Governors Seriake Dickson of Bayelsa State and Simon Lalong of Plateau State that they would not hesitate to approve the death penalty for convicted kidnappers, there is no concrete evidence of them following through on this promise. The only elected governor in recent Nigerian history known to have signed a death warrant was former Governor of Edo State, Adams Oshiomhole, which sparked criticism from various groups.

During his tenure as President of Nigeria, Goodluck Jonathan made a controversial statement urging state governors to sign death warrants for criminals condemned to death. Speaking at a Fathers’ Day Sunday service in 2013, Jonathan reminded the governors that their role as leaders involved both pleasant and unpleasant tasks. Jonathan’s call serves as a reminder of the dual responsibilities that come with leadership and the need for critical reflection on the consequences of such decisions.

Governors play a crucial role in the criminal justice system when it comes to deciding the fate of individuals on death row. They are faced with the weighty decision of either approving the death warrants of those who have exhausted their appeals process, converting their death sentence to life imprisonment, or offering them clemency. Failure to act on any of these options should result in the removal of Section 33, which permits the death penalty, from the constitution.

State governors must set aside personal emotions and make decisions based on the principles of justice, fairness, and compassion. Approving death warrants should only be done after careful consideration of all facts and evidence in a case, ensuring that justice is served. However, if governors find that there are mitigating circumstances or doubts about guilt, they have the option of converting the death sentence to life imprisonment or offer clemency. This allows for the possibility of exoneration or further legal proceedings to rectify any injustices.

Clearly, then, the death penalty in Nigeria should be re-evaluated. The lack of execution and the potential for injustices highlight the need for a more humane and effective form of capital punishment. Life imprisonment could provide a better alternative, ensuring that criminals are still held accountable for their actions while avoiding the risks and controversies associated with the death penalty.

(soruce: Editorial, thetidenewsonline.com)

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

Foursquare Church GO, Aboyeji, advocates capital punishment for corrupt officials

(see: https://guardian.ng/news/foursquare-church-go-aboyeji-advocates-capital-punishment-for-corrupt-officials/)

IRAN---execution

Execution of Inmate Alireza Marzban in Adelabad Prison, Shiraz

Adelabad Prison officials in Shiraz executed Alireza Marzban, a 27-year-old resident of Shiraz, on April 7, 2024, as reported by the Iran Human Rights Organization.

Marzban had been convicted of murder stemming from a group altercation 3 years prior. The execution took place without a final family visit.

No official sources or domestic media outlets within the country have provided coverage of this execution at the time of writing. In 2023, 66% of HRANA’s reports on executions lacked official announcements by judicial authorities and went unreported by media inside Iran, highlighting a troubling lack of transparency in due process.

According to HRANA’s data, Adelabad Prison ranks 5th among Iranian prisons in the number of executions, having carried out 49.

(source: en-hrana.org)

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

82 Rights Groups: UNODC Must Stop Complicity in Drug Executions in Iran

Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO) and 81 Iranian and international organisations and groups have called for joint action to stop drug-related executions, urging UNODC to make “any cooperation with the Islamic Republic contingent on a complete halt on drug-related executions. They have announced the start of a mass international campaign in this regard.

The statement reads: “We are concerned that hundreds more will be executed in the coming months if we do not increase the political cost of these executions for the Islamic Republic. We call on all human rights organisations and activists to take part in a special global campaign to stop drug-related executions in Iran.”

Commenting on the need for the joint action, Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, the Iran Human Rights Director and one of the organisers of the call said: “Aimed at instilling fear and preventing more protests, the Islamic Republic executed at least 471 people for drug-charged in 2023, without any political cost and consequences.” He continued: “This joint action is to raise awareness and sensitise the international community and public about drug-related executions in Iran and increase the political cost of these executions for the authorities. The execution of more than one person per day under the pretext of drug offences should become intolerable for the people and the international community.”

Call for joint action to stop drug-related executions in Iran

The death penalty or state murder is the Islamic Republic’s most important tool for instilling societal fear to maintain power. Executions in Iran increased dramatically following the “Woman, Life, Freedom” uprising, with at least 834 people executed in 2023.

In 2023, more than half of all recorded executions in Iran were for drug-related charges. At least 471 people were executed without any backlash or political cost for the Islamic Republic. The majority of those executed are from deprived and marginalised communities. The number of executions carried out in the ethnic regions, particularly the Kurd and Baluch, is disproportionally high compared to their population. In 2023, 1/3 of those executed for drug-related charges were Baluch people.

Drug defendants are sentenced to death by Revolutionary Courts based on torture-tainted confessions, without due process and fair trial rights and often without access to a lawyer.

Drug-related executions have not received appropriate international reaction and their daily implementation is met with media silence. This has led to the authorities carrying out 18 times more drug executions in 2023 compared to 2020 with the lowest political cost.

On the other hand, the United Nations Office on Drug and Crime (UNODC) which cooperates with Iran in combating drug trafficking, has not only remained silent about the sharp hike in drug executions, but signed a new agreement with the Islamic Republic in May 2023. In addition to legitimising the state’s use of the death penalty, this cooperation also leads to more executions through financial aid and equipment.

We are concerned that hundreds more will be executed in the coming months if we do not increase the political cost of these executions for the Islamic Republic. We call on all human rights organisations and activists to take part in a special global campaign to stop drug-related executions in Iran.

The aim of the campaign is to echo the voice of the most voiceless victims of the Islamic Republic’s execution and intimidation machine. We also urge the UNODC to make any cooperation with the Islamic Republic contingent on a complete halt on drug-related executions.

Signatories:

Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO)

International Committee Against Execution (ICAE)

Global Campaign to Stop Executions In Iran

World Coalition Against the Death Penalty

Defenders of Human Rights Center (Shirin Ebadi)

Ensemble contre la peine de mort (ECPM)

Harm Reduction International

Kurdistan Human Rights Association - Geneva

Haalvsh

The Baloch Activists Campaign

Kurdistan Human Rights Network (KHRN)

6Rang (Iranian Lesbian and Transgender Network)

Kurdpa Human Rights Organization

Ahwaz Human Rights Organisation (AHRO)

Justice for Iran

Iran Human Rights Documentation Center

Association for the Human Rights of the Azerbaijani People in Iran (AHRAZ)

Center for Human Rights in Iran

United for Iran (U4I)

Hengaw Organization for Human Rights

HANA Human Rights Organization

Balochistan Human Rights Group

Rasanak

All Human Rights for All in Iran

United to End Executions in Iran

The Sunny Center Foundation (USA)

Hands Off Cain

Abolition Death Penalty of Iraq Organization

Rescue Alternatives Liberia

ACAT Belgique

The Christian Union for Progress and Human Rights, DRC

Grupo de Apoyo Mutuo, Guatemala

Death Penalty Focus (USA)

Key and Vulnerable Population Tanzania (KVP Forum)

Capital Punishment Justice Project, Australia

Eleos Justice, Monash University, Australia

ACAT Germany (Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture)

German Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (GCADP)

Federal Association of Vietnamese Refugees in the Federal Republic of Germany

Transitional Justice Working Group (TJWG), South Korea

Humanity Diaspo, France

Italian Federation for Human Rights (FIDU)

SALAM DHR (Bahrain)

ACAT France

Campaign to Free Political Prisoners in Iran (CFPPI)

Association des Chercheurs Iraniens (ACI)

ArcDH Human Rights of Azerbaijanis of Iran

Kanoon-e Khavaran

NIKA, Network of Iranians for Liberty and Democracy

Free Them Now

Frauen für Freiheit e.v

Solidarität mit der Iranischen Revolution - Frankfurt/Mainz

Iranian Voices in Frankfurt

Bramsh - Voice of Balochistan Women

International Iranian Physicians and Healthcare Providers Association (IIPHA)

Aktion für Menschenrechte e.V.

Simorgh; Centre socio-culturel des Iraniens de Québec

Free Human Association

Iranian Healthcare Association for Democracy and Human Rights

Nemiran Center

Women’s Independence and Sustainable Equality (WISE)

Stop Child Executions (SCE)

Hanai Rojhelat

Alborz, Paris - collectif en soutien au soulèvement "Femme, Vie, Liberté", France

Transnational Community Federation e.V

HÁWAR.help Organization

Norsk Iransk Råd

SolidIran Association

Minnesota 4Iran

Ensemble pour l’Iran

Centre Zagros pour les Droits de l’Homme

Kurdistan Human Rights Reporters Center

Iransk Solidaritetsforum

Woman-Life-Freedom, Melbourne

Feminista Bonn

Justice Supporters Association

International Women in Power

Alliance Path for Iran (API)

Volunteer Doctors of Kurdistan

Rev Group Iran

Frau Leben Freiheit Darmstadt

Rojhalat Women Organisation

(source: iranhr.net)

APRIL 9, 2024:

OHIO:

Ohio’s Attorney General’s Report Describes Death Penalty as ?“Enormously Expensive” and ?“Broken” in 2023 Capital Crimes Report

COSTS TIME ON DEATH ROW OHIO

“At a time when faith in society’s institutions is at an all-time low, the failure of the capital-punishment system could be Exhibit A,” concludes the annual Capital Crimes Report issued by by Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost. The Report highlights numerous problems with its “broken” capital punishment system, including the “enormously expensive” cost.

The Ohio Legislative Service Commission has estimated that the cost of capital cases range from $1 to $3 million per case based on a collection of quantitative and qualitative studies in other states. “If these estimates apply to Ohio, then the extra cost of imposing the death penalty 121 times on the 119 people currently on death row might range from $121 million to $363 million,” notes the Report. “[I]t’s a stunning amount of money to spend on a program that doesn’t achieve its purpose.”

Of the 341 death sentences imposed on 336 prisoners from the state’s enactment of the death penalty in 1981 through the end of 2023, only 1 of every 6 sentences, or 56 executions, have been carried out. The Report notes that “87 death sentences have been removed by judicial action resulting in resentencing or release.” 21 prisoners have had their sentences commuted. Forty prisoners have died of natural causes or suicide, which the Report notes are more likely causes of death than execution. 9 prisoners with intellectual disabilities were removed from death row after the Supreme Court held that executing people with intellectual disabilities was unconstitutional in Atkins v. Virginia (2002). Under Ohio’s 2021 law barring the death penalty for individuals with severe mental illness – only one of two states with such legislation – 6 people have been removed from death row and another 35 petitions are currently pending review.

As of December 31, 2023, 119 people with 121 death sentences remain on Ohio’s death row, 9 fewer people than 2022. As of April 1, 2024, prisoners spent an average of 7805 days or 21 years on Ohio’s death row – a number that has consistently increased with each year. Prisoners are an average of 55.5 years old today and were an average of 34 years old at their time of sentencing (figures used the most current resentencing). Due to difficulty obtaining lethal injection drugs, the state has not carried out executions since 2018, at which time the average time spent on death row was 6,280 days or 17.19 years. Currently, there is a bill in the state legislature proposing the authorization of nitrogen gas in executions, described by AG Yost as a way to “kickstart” executions. The report identifies 8 cases in which an execution date could be filed.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

MISSOURI----impending execution

Missouri Governor Denies Clemency for Death Row Inmate Who Got Support From Guards----Dozens of correctional workers urged Gov. Mike Parson to commute the death sentence of Brian Dorsey, who pleaded guilty in the murders of Ben and Sarah Bonnie.

Mike Parson, the governor of Missouri, said on Monday that he would not commute the death sentence of Brian Dorsey, who pleaded guilty to murdering Ben and Sarah Bonnie in 2006 and is scheduled to be executed on Tuesday unless the courts intervene.

“The pain Dorsey brought to others can never be rectified, but carrying out Dorsey’s sentence according to Missouri law and the court’s order will deliver justice and provide closure,” said Mr. Parson, a Republican who previously served as a sheriff.

Mr. Dorsey’s clemency request was unusual because more than 70 current and former prison workers who got to know Mr. Dorsey behind bars asked the governor to commute his sentence. They described Mr. Dorsey, 52, as a compliant and respectful inmate who had earned officers’ respect, eventually becoming a barber for employees at the prison.

“The very concept of ‘corrections’ implies that we want incarcerated people to change their ways,” Timothy Lancaster, a former officer at the prison where Mr. Dorsey was held, wrote in a recent column in The Kansas City Star. “Executing Dorsey would dishonor the hard work he has done to fulfill that objective.”

Mr. Dorsey is scheduled to be executed on Tuesday. He has asked state and federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, to intervene before the scheduled execution.

“Brian’s unprecedented support, and his irrefutable evidence of redemption, are precisely the circumstances for which clemency is designed,” Megan Crane, a lawyer for Mr. Dorsey, said in a statement. “Allowing Brian to be executed despite this truth is devastating.”

Some members of Mr. Dorsey’s family, including some who were related to Ms. Bonnie as well, supported the clemency request. Other members of Ms. Bonnie’s family issued a statement in January saying they hoped the governor would allow the execution to proceed.

“All of these years of pain and suffering we finally see the light at the end of the tunnel,” those relatives said in the statement, which was reported by local news outlets. “Brian will get the justice that Sarah and Ben have deserved for so long.”

Missouri has carried out 97 executions since 1976, ranking behind only Texas, Oklahoma, Virginia and Florida. Mr. Parson has not blocked an execution since he took office in 2018, though he has granted pardons or commuted sentences for hundreds of people convicted of less serious crimes.

Missouri officials say that Mr. Dorsey was having trouble with drug dealers in December 2006 and had sought help from his cousin and her husband. The Bonnies invited Mr. Dorsey to spend the night at their home near New Bloomfield, Mo., in the central part of the state. After the couple went to bed that night, the authorities said, Mr. Dorsey took a shotgun and fatally shot each of them. Prosecutors also said that Mr. Dorsey sexually assaulted Ms. Bonnie, though he never was charged with that offense. The sexual assault accusation was presented at Mr. Dorsey’s sentencing; Mr. Dorsey’s lawyers say he had no memory of a sexual assault.

Mr. Dorsey, whose current lawyers assert that he was in a drug-induced psychosis at the time of the killings, pleaded guilty to two counts of first-degree murder. He was later sentenced to death.

Death notices and news articles published at the time of the killings said Mr. Bonnie, 28, was an auto mechanic who liked to fish, hunt and camp. Ms. Bonnie, 25, was an emergency medical technician who had worked in local government, belonged to a Methodist church and rode motorcycles. The couple had a 4-year-old daughter who was in the home but was not physically harmed.

In his clemency application to the governor, Mr. Dorsey argued that he had received bad advice from court-appointed lawyers who received a flat fee to take his case and did little to explore potential mitigating factors or plea deals. Mr. Dorsey pleaded guilty without any agreement with prosecutors regarding sentencing. One of the lawyers who represented Mr. Dorsey at that stage of his case declined to comment, and the other did not respond to a message seeking comment.

(source: New York Times)

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

Governor denies 70 prison staffers’ pleas to halt Brian Dorsey execution

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson (R) has denied the last-minute attempt to stay the execution of Brian Dorsey, a 52-year-old man convicted in the December 2006 double-murder of his cousin and her husband.

Dorsey’s legal team and his supporters had argued that it would be wrong to execute Dorsey because he has been rehabilitated.

“Gov. Parson has chosen to ignore the wealth of information before him showing that Brian Dorsey is uniquely deserving of mercy,” wrote Dorsey’s attorney Megan Crane.

The facts

Dorsey — who is being held at Potosi Correctional Center in Washington County, Mo. — is scheduled to be executed at 6 p.m. local time Tuesday.

His execution warrant was issued Dec. 13, 2023, for shooting and killing the two family members with a shotgun.

He has “unprecedented” written support of more than 70 prison staff members, including the former warden, who say he should not be executed, his attorneys wrote. He has had a pristine disciplinary record during his 17 years on death row, they added.

Family members argued both for and against Dorsey’s clemency. A statement from Sarah Bonnie’s side of the family given to local television station KOMU argued Dorsey should receive no reprieve because the couple’s daughter never knew her parents. Meanwhile, video provided by Dorsey’s attorneys show cousins of his saying they want his life spared.

The crime

2 days before Christmas 2006, Dorsey’s cousin Sarah Bonnie and her husband, Ben Bonnie, took in Dorsey because a pair of drug dealers were threatening him to collect on his drug debt, according to a news release from Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey.

Dorsey was in a “psychotic state” from not sleeping for 72 hours while on a crack bender, according to his attorneys. That night, prosecutors said, Dorsey shot the couple with their own shotgun in their bed. They left behind a 4-year-old daughter.

Prosecutors said Dorsey took a cellphone, jewelry, 2 firearms and a copy of “Bambi II” belonging to the daughter of the victims. He took the items to repay his drug debt, according to court records filed by prosecutors.

When he learned police were looking for him, he turned himself in and cooperated, his attorneys wrote.

Concerns with the case

Dorsey’s current attorneys argued that their client received ineffective counsel at his trial.

The trial attorneys conducted no investigation, his current attorneys wrote, adding that the trial attorneys “obtained nothing for Mr. Dorsey in exchange for his guilty plea.”

They say the original attorneys did not disclose that Dorsey was in a drug-induced psychosis. The current attorneys argue that part of the reason may be financial: The trial attorneys received a flat fee of $12,000 — a practice Mary Fox, director of the Missouri State Public Defender System, said discourages thorough work.

Fox wrote a letter to the courts arguing that the flat fee is an issue in this case because it has since been recognized as a violation of American Bar Association guidelines and Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct.

“Missouri State Public Defender acknowledges the prevalence of unconstitutional and ineffective assistance of counsel in death penalty flat fee cases,” she wrote.

3years before the crime, the American Bar Association wrote that “counsel in death penalty cases should be fully compensated at a rate that is commensurate with the provision of high quality legal representation and reflects the extraordinary responsibilities inherent in death penalty representation.”

The bigger picture

Dorsey was diagnosed with major depression disorder when he was young, his attorneys wrote, and medication did not help him. He later began self-mediating with crack cocaine when he was a teenager, according to his attorneys.

An open question in this case is whether the Eighth Amendment protects from execution people who have been rehabilitated, his attorneys argued in their latest attempt to stay the execution.

“Because of Mr. Dorsey’s unsurpassed record on Missouri’s death row, this case presents the best vehicle for the Court to take up this question,” his attorneys wrote.

Dorsey has been called a model inmate, one who lives in the honor dorm and works as the prison’s barber. He gives haircuts to the prison guards, Dorsey’s attorneys wrote.

Retired warden Troy Steele, who headed the Potosi Correctional Center, wrote of Dorsey that “his behavior is reported as exceptional, having received no reports for any type of misconduct.” He wrote that Dorsey has achieved the “highest levels of respect and confidence” from staff in the prison.

A group of more than 70 corrections staff members at the prison wrote a letter to Parson, Missouri’s governor, in which they said they are usually in favor of the death penalty but “are in agreement that the death penalty is not the appropriate punishment for Brian Dorsey,” according to a court filing. They said they know he was convicted of murder, but that’s not the Brian “they know.”

“Brian has spent every day of his time in prison trying to make amends for his crime, and dozens of correctional officers have attested to his remorse, transformation, and commitment to service,” said Crane, his attorney. “Brian’s unprecedented support, and his irrefutable evidence of redemption, are precisely the circumstances for which clemency is designed. Allowing Brian to be executed despite this truth is devastating.” (source: Ben Brasch is a general assignment reporter for The Washington Post)

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

Missouri Prepares for Execution of Brian Dorsey

Brian Dorsey is scheduled to be executed by the State of Missouri on April 9th at 6:00 pm at ERDCC Prison in Bonne Terre, MO, for the deaths of his cousin, Sarah Bonnie and her husband, Ben, in 2006. This case highlights the troubling flaws in the death penalty system:

“Over the span of two decades incarcerated at Potosi Correctional Center (PCC), Brian has never received an infraction. He is not a danger to society and should be allowed to live out the rest of his life incarcerated at PCC. The death penalty does not contribute to public safety and only continues to heap cycles of violence and trauma on a family who have been waiting for decades for closure for the loss of their loved ones.” Elyse Max, Co-Director, Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty

“Missouri’s culture of death spreads beyond the execution chamber to our communities and institutions. The taking of life should never be a function of the state. We must be careful what example we are setting when the state takes lives in the name of justice.” Nimrod Chapel, Jr., President, Missouri NAACP

• Jefferson City - Noon, Governor’s Office, 2nd Floor Missouri State Capitol, The Missouri Catholic Conference. Contact wichmerc@mocatholic.org. *Family members of Brian will be present and make a statement*

• St. Louis- 3:00 PM, St. Louis City Cir Court, Market and Tucker, Will carpool to Bonne Terre, MO following.

• KCMO - 5:00 pm, 39th, and Troost.

• Columbia - 5:00 - 6:15 pm, Boone County Courthouse. MADP + MO-FOR Contact Jeff Stack at 573-449-4585

• Bonne Terre - 5:30 pm, Eastern Reception, Diagnostic and Correctional Center (ERDCC), Execution Vigil and Remembrance of Victims of Violent Crime, MADP, contact info@madpmo.org or call 816-931-4177

As the people of Missouri unite in solidarity to uplift calls for #ClemencyForBrian we find ourselves at a pivotal moment. It is imperative that we acknowledge the failures in our legal system, reflect on the profound human toll of the death penalty, and advocate for alternative avenues to achieve justice. You can read more about reasons for clemency for Brian at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GVl8GhST4AxiKWpIJ5yAgF3lLrVNM-P-/view?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=ab673e9a-1a8e-4248-a85f-638884476b7a

###

(source: Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty (MADP) is the only state-wide organization educating lawmakers and the public on the costs and consequences of the death penalty in Missouri)

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

Missouri bishops plead for death row inmate on eve of execution

The Catholic bishops of Missouri are urging the faithful to contact Republican Gov. Mike Parson to stay the execution of convicted murderer Brian Dorsey, who is controversially scheduled to die Tuesday, April 9, in the state’s 1t execution of 2024.

Dorsey, 52, was arrested in 2006 and later convicted of shooting and killing his cousin Sarah Bonnie and her husband Ben. Dorsey’s lawyers argued that he was in a drug-induced psychosis, as he was suffering from chronic depression and addicted to crack cocaine at the time of the killings.

The Missouri Catholic Conference, which advocates for public policy on behalf of the state’s five bishops, said that in addition to the fact that Dorsey “endured substantial mental and physical childhood trauma,” he also has claimed ineffective assistance of counsel, as his attorneys at the time — who were being paid a small flat fee to defend him — entered him into a plea deal without contesting the possibility of capital punishment.

Dorsey’s death sentence has garnered scrutiny. During more than 17 years spent on death row, Dorsey complied zero infractions and served as a barber for other prisoners and for wardens, staff, and chaplains — trusted using potentially deadly instruments. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, a group of 72 current and former Missouri correctional officers submitted and signed a letter vouching for his character and asking Parson to grant Dorsey clemency and commute his death sentence.

Additionally, Dorsey’s attorneys have argued that the Missouri Department of Corrections’ execution protocols, which include the practice of “cut down,” or cutting into the person to set an IV line, will prevent Dorsey “from having any meaningful spiritual discussion or participation in his last religious rites with his spiritual adviser,” the Kansas City Star reported.

Despite his apparent rehabilitation, the Missouri Supreme Court scheduled Dorsey’s execution last December. Dorsey has appealed his case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In addition to submitting a clemency request to Parson, the Missouri Catholic Conference will be hosting a “respectful protest” outside the governor’s office at the Missouri State Capitol in Jefferson City from noon to 1 p.m. on the afternoon of Tuesday, April 9.

The conference urged the public to attend the protest and to contact the governor to express their support for clemency. Parson has not granted clemency to anyone on death row since he took office in 2018, the Kansas City Star reported.

“The Catholic Church is strongly opposed to the death penalty because it disregards the sanctity and dignity of human life,” the conference noted.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, reflecting an update promulgated by Pope Francis in 2018, describes the death penalty as “inadmissible” and an “attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person” (No. 2267). The change reflects a development of Catholic doctrine in recent years. St. John Paul II, calling the death penalty “cruel and unnecessary,” encouraged Christians to be “unconditionally pro-life” and said that “the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil.”

Missouri is among the most prolific of all U.S. states when it comes to the death penalty, having carried out four executions in 2023 alone and being 1 of only 5 states to carry out executions last year.

(source: Jonah McKeown is a staff writer and podcast producer for Catholic News Agency)

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

In Unusual Case – Correctional Officers, Jurors and Even Republican Legislators Call for Commutation of Dorsey’s Death Sentence

A Missouri court on Friday denied Brian Dorsey a stay of execution, in an unusual case where over 70 corrections officers and the former warden of the prison asked for clemency, citing “Dorsey’s impeccable record over seventeen years of incarceration” and the belief that “Dorsey is a rehabilitated man.”

In February, Republican Representatives wrote the governor in support of clemency as well.

On Sunday Dorsey filed a petition for writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court raising a question that lies at the heart of our criminal justice system: “When a death-sentenced person has demonstrated that he has been rehabilitated, does the Eighth Amendment prohibit his execution because the penological goals of the death penalty would not be met by executing that person?”

As the petition explains, “This is the rare case where a person facing an imminent execution unquestionably is fully rehabilitated.”

They noted, “Brian Dorsey committed the offense during a drug-induced psychosis. During Mr. Dorsey’s many years on death row, removed from the circumstances that led to his psychosis, he has been rehabilitated. Notably, he earned the extraordinary trust of prison staff: he served as the prison’s barber – cutting the hair of inmates, correctional officers, and even wardens – and lived in the prison’s honor dorm. He never broke a prison rule and maintained a clean prison record for more than 17 years. And he has received the unprecedented support of more than 70 correctional officers in seeking clemency.”

In the petition, Dorsey asks the Supreme Court to consider whether his execution under these circumstances, which would serve no legitimate penological purpose, violates the Eighth Amendment.

A group of 72 current and former Missouri correctional officers submitted a letter asking Governor Parson to commute Mr. Dorsey’s death sentence.

“Generally, we believe in the use of capital punishment,” they write. “But we are in agreement that the death penalty is not the appropriate punishment for Brian Dorsey.”

Each of these officers knew Dorsey personally from their time working at the Potosi Correction Center.

They explained, “[E]very one of us believe that Brian is a good guy, someone who has stayed out of trouble, never gotten himself into any situations, and been respectful of us and of his fellow inmates.”

Several correctional officers also submitted individual letters supporting clemency for Dorsey.

? One observed during his court hearings and recalls “[seeing] him struggle with the pain he caused his parents and his family.”

Another writes, “Mr. Dorsey has accepted what he did and taken accountability for his crime. It is my impression that he has spent his time since then trying to do his best by being a role model to other inmates and providing a valuable service to staff.”

Former Missouri Supreme Court judge, and former Chief Justice, Michael Wolff has written to Governor Parson to urge clemency for Mr. Dorsey. He explains that the court’s decision upholding Mr. Dorsey’s death sentence is one of the “rare cases where those of us who sit in judgment of a man convicted of capital murder got it wrong.” Judge Wolff points to the flat fee arrangement with Mr. Dorsey’s attorneys as a defect that “undoubtedly influenced everything.”

Similarly, 5 of the jurors who served at Mr. Dorsey’s penalty phase also agree that the legal system got it wrong in his case, and his death sentence should be commuted. (Clemency Petition p.13) In one of the juror’s words pleading to Governor Parson, “By the grace of God, I hope you will find your way to give him a life sentence instead of death.”

In addition, several Republican members of the Missouri legislature joined in asking Governor Parson to commute Mr. Dorsey’s death sentence. “[G]iven who Mr. Dorsey is today and that he is not a risk if allowed to live out the rest of his life in prison, while giving back to society and providing a service to the state as the staff barber, we strongly believe that a commutation to life without the possibility of parole is now the just result.”

(soursce: davisvanguard.org)

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

Missouri to reduce risk of suffering if man requires surgical procedure at execution

The Missouri Department of Corrections is taking measures to reduce Brian Dorsey's risk of suffering during his execution scheduled for Tuesday, according to a settlement reached between the state and Dorsey’s attorneys.

The settlement filed Saturday ends a federal lawsuit that said Dorsey could face tremendous pain if required to undergo what’s known as a cutdown procedure to find a suitable vein for injection of the lethal dose of pentobarbital. Dorsey, 52, is awaiting execution for killing his cousin and her husband in 2006.

Dorsey is described as obese, has diabetes and is a former intravenous drug user — all factors that could make it more difficult to find a vein for injection, his lawyers have said. A cutdown procedure involves an incision that could be several inches wide, then the use of forceps to pull apart tissue to get to a vein.

Missouri’s execution protocol includes no provision for anesthetics. Attorneys for Dorsey had argued that without a local anesthetic, Dorsey could be in so much pain that it would impede his right to religious freedom in his final moments by preventing him from having meaningful interaction with his spiritual adviser, including the administration of last rites.

The settlement doesn’t spell out the specific changes agreed to by the state, or if anesthetics would be used if a cutdown procedure is necessary. A spokeswoman for the corrections department declined comment on Monday. A message was left with the Missouri Attorney General’s Office.

Arin Brenner, an attorney for Dorsey, said the settlement isn’t public and declined to discuss specific details.

“We received sufficient assurances that adequate pain relief will be provided,” Brenner said in an email on Monday.

Dorsey, formerly of Jefferson City, was convicted of killing Sarah and Ben Bonnie on Dec. 23, 2006, at their home near New Bloomfield. Prosecutors said that earlier that day, Dorsey called Sarah Bonnie seeking to borrow money to pay two drug dealers who were at his apartment.

Dorsey went to the Bonnies’ home that night. After they went to bed, Dorsey took a shotgun from the garage and killed both of them before sexually assaulting Sarah Bonnie’s body, prosecutors said.

Sarah Bonnie’s parents found the bodies the next day. The couple’s 4-year-old daughter was unhurt.

Attorneys for Dorsey said he suffered from drug-induced psychosis at the time of the killings. In prison, he’s gotten clean, they said, and a clemency petition before Republican Gov. Mike Parson focuses on Dorsey’s virtually spotless record of good behavior.

Among those urging Parson to commute Dorsey’s sentence to life in prison are 72 current and former state correctional officers. “The Brian I have known for years could not hurt anyone,” one officer wrote. “The Brian I know does not deserve to be executed.”

Dorsey’s rehabilitation also is at the heart of a petition filed Sunday with the U.S. Supreme Court.

Another appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court centers on the $12,000 flat fee paid to Dorsey’s court-appointed trial attorneys. It argues that with the flat fee, the lawyers had a financial incentive to resolve the case quickly. They encouraged Dorsey to plead guilty, but with no demand that prosecutors agree to life in prison instead of the death penalty.

In a letter to Parson as part of the clemency petition, former Missouri Supreme Court Justice Michael Wolff wrote that he was on the court when it turned aside an appeal of his death sentence in 2009. Now, he says, that decision was wrong.

“Missouri Public Defenders now do not use the flat fee for defense in recognition of the professional standard that such an arrangement gives the attorney an inherent financial conflict of interest,” Wolff wrote.

(source: Associated Press)

IDAHO:

Jury set in death penalty trial of Chad Daybell, opening statements begin Wednesday

A jury has been set in the trial of Chad Daybell, who was charged with the deaths of his wife and his girlfriend's 2 youngest children.

Opening statements are scheduled to start in Idaho on Wednesday at 8:30 a.m., with the trial expected to last up to 10 weeks.

The process allowed for each side to strike 16 potential jurors from the pool without further explanation. The remaining 12 jurors and 6 alternates will comprise the jury throughout the trial.

Once the trial is finished, the jurors will determine whether or not Daybell is guilty of killing Tammy Daybell, 7-year-old Joshua "JJ" Vallow, and JJ's older sister, Tylee Ryan. If they find him guilty, they will then have to determine whether or not he will face the death penalty.

The children’s mother, Lori Vallow Daybell -- who married Chad Daybell shortly after the deaths -- was found guilty last year and sentenced to life in prison without parole. She has been extradited to Arizona, where she now faces additional charges of conspiracy to commit murder in the death of her previous husband, Charles Vallow, and the attempted murder of her niece's ex-husband Brandon Boudreaux.

After JJ and Tylee's grandmother became worried for their safety because she didn't see them for quite some time, authorities began investigating.

After months of evasive behavior and lying to authorities, Lori Vallow Daybell was arrested and charged with child abandonment. Investigators found JJ and Tylee's remains buried in Chad's backyard in 2020.

The couple claimed they could tell if people had been possessed by dark spirits that could turn them into “zombies,” former friend Melanie Gibb testified in court. They believed the only way to get rid of a zombie was to destroy the possessed person’s body by killing them.

(source: KBOI news)

CALIFORNIA:

California Prosecutor’s Trip to EJI’s Legacy Sites Compels Him to Overturn 14 Death Sentences

Santa Clara County Dist. Atty. Jeff Rosen, who sought the death penalty in several previous cases, is now working to take 14 people off of California’s death row. He believes that racial bias played a role in each of the cases, citing “an inherent racism in our justice system.” His visit to EJI’s Legacy Sites, he said in an interview published in the Los Angeles Times, is what transformed his view of capital punishment.

EJI’s Legacy Museum, in Montgomery, Alabama, traces 400 years of history from enslavement, to racial terrorism, to codified segregation, to mass incarceration. Nearby, the National Memorial for Peace and Justice honors thousands of people who were killed in racial terror lynchings across the U.S. between 1877 and 1950. The third Legacy Site, Freedom Monument Sculpture Park, uses art and narrative to explore the lives of enslaved people. The park opened earlier this month.

“I went there supporting the death penalty,” Mr. Rosen said of his visit to the sites. “I left not so sure anymore.”

Mr. Rosen said the sites made him question whether there is such a thing as a moral execution, adding that the museum and memorial made clear to him the inextricable connection between racial terror lynchings and modern-day executions.

“I think that if more people went there, they would think a little differently about our country, and hopefully act a little differently also,” he said. “I think that in my lifetime, we will look back and say it was not right to execute people.”

“How can a museum have such an impact?” LA Times columnist Anita Chabria wondered after interviewing Mr. Rosen. She ended up visiting the Legacy Sites herself, later writing that “the museum lays out with astonishing clarity a history that is painful, but necessary to acknowledge.”

The 14 men Mr. Rosen is seeking new sentences for are among 645 people condemned to die in California. Roughly 1/3 of the state’s death row is Black, though Black people make up just 6.5% of California’s population.

While California Governor Gavin Newsom ordered for the state’s death row to be dismantled in 2019, capital punishment still exists in law in the state.

Across the country, support for the death penalty has reached a historic low. A 2023 poll revealed that most Americans believed the death penalty was applied unfairly and nearly two thirds of states have either paused executions or abolished the death penalty altogether.

Alabama, which sentences more people to death per capita than any other state and recently put a man to death using an untested, experimental method, remains an outlier.

(source: Equal Justice Initiative)

USA:

John Oliver on lethal injections: ‘A protracted nightmare of suffering’----The Last Week Tonight host looks into new ‘grim’ developments on the death penalty in the US, and identifies a secret supplier of lethal injections

For the 3rd time in Last Week Tonight’s 11 seasons, dating back to the 2nd-ever episode, John Oliver looked at the death penalty in the US on Sunday evening. The host continued his long-running stance that it’s morally wrong, there is no humane way to do it and “any discussion of one is akin to coming up with the best way to fuck your mom, which is to say, there’s simply no right way to do that”.

But there have been some “grim developments” since the last time Oliver talked about lethal injections in 2019. Since then, the US has executed 91 people, including 13 at the federal level, all under President Trump.

“Our federal and state governments have continued to pursue questionably legal and definitely horrifying ways that, again, I would argue they shouldn’t be doing at all,” he explained. Despite shield laws protecting the identity of lethal drug suppliers in several states, many still have an issue procuring lethal injections because it’s bad for business, leading to sketchy suppliers and an unconstitutional “protracted nightmare of suffering”.

Many states have switched to a single shot of pentobarbital, as did the Trump administration, which can cause suffering akin to suffocation or drowning. “At every level, those who carry out executions crave secrecy,” including the federal government.

But Oliver’s team claimed to have tracked down the Trump administration’s supplier: a company called Absolute Standards, based in Connecticut. Their business is making chemicals for calibrated machines, not drugs for humans, though Oliver suspected they were concocting execution drugs as a side hustle. “I know I’ve spent a lot of time over the last 10 years reassuring everyone that this show does comedy and not journalism,” he said, “but I think we can all agree that the most important thing we do here is stir shit up, and it’s in that spirit that I want to explain how I got to this point.”

Reuters also suspects Absolute Standards, and Last Week Tonight filed a Freedom of Information Act request (FOIA) on the company in 2020; according to Oliver, a government representative accidentally told them, on 2 separate occasions, that the documents were taking so long to arrive because they were “related to the death penalty” which is “what’s known in the government world as a big, old whoopsie”.

“Honestly, 5 out of 5 on the post-call survey there,” he added. “This employee certainly helped me solve my problem.”

A confidential source also confirmed to the show that Absolute Standards are the federal government’s supplier of pentobarbital. “At this point, they might as well just update their real slogan of ‘we have the solutions’ to ‘we have the solutions that were secretly used in a bunch of government executions!’” Oliver joked.

“Maybe Absolute Solutions is proud to have made the drugs that enabled our government to effectively drown at least 13 people while they were strapped to a table,” he continued. “I don’t know. We’ve reached out to them repeatedly for comment on this story and they have ignored us, which is an odd thing to do when someone’s accusing you of making execution drugs.”

But it’s not clear whether they should be able to because under the law, companies that make drugs need to be registered with the Food and Drug Administration. Absolute Standards is not, and the FDA has no records on them (Last Week Tonight did another F OIA request on this, Oliver noted).

“The truth is, even if we shut down the use of pentobarbital, it won’t stop executions in this country,” he said. “Because elected leaders seem hell-bent on getting it done,” with some looking to circumvent lethal drug procurement issues by suffocating prisoners with nitrogen gas, as some Oklahoma legislators considered with a presentation by a criminal justice professor using Youtube videos of teenagers passing out from inhaling helium. Despite the fact that most veterinarians no longer allow for pets to be put down with nitrogen gas, Oklahoma and several other states have now authorized use of the method for executions. In January, Alabama became the first state to execute a prisoner with nitrogen gas, in an execution one witness described to CNN as “definitely the most violent execution I’ve ever witnessed.”

“All of which makes it pretty galling,” said Oliver, that Alabama attorney general Steve Marshall bragged about the execution as “textbook”.

“I would call it textbook bullshit,” Oliver contended. “Alabama, do you ever get tired of being trailblazers in all of the worst ways?”

“All this secrecy is also meant to protect us, the people in whose name it is done, from confronting the horror of what the death penalty truly is,” Oliver added. “Because whether it’s nitrogen gas, or an IV injection of drugs, or a firing squad, or an electric chair, or being pressed with weights, it’s all brutal.”

“It’s never going to be ok, and we are kidding ourselves if we think taking someone’s life is actually going to lower the number of killers in the world,” he concluded. “It literally, definitionally, creates more.”

With 2,331 people currently on death row, Oliver’s prescription was simple: “just stop doing it.” And for Joe Biden, to commute death-row sentences, as well as other regulation efforts of lethal drugs. “If the government is going to give itself the power to execute its citizens,” he argued, “then I want to see where the drugs come from, who’s making them, and relentless scrutiny on every part of the process”.

(source: The Guardian)

GLOBAL:

Good People Oppose the Death Penalty

Reviewing, in July 1970, Sir Walter Moberly’s book “The Ethics of Punishment” (London: Faber & Faber 1968), Sir Donald Neil MacCormick, the late Scottish legal philosopher, politician, professor—and former member of the European Parliament—wrote: Moberly’s book “is a masterpiece of lucid and careful argument, illuminated throughout by a remarkable depth of insight and humanity; and by a refined Christianity which I can admire without sharing.”

While undeniably Moberly approached “The Ethics of Punishment” from a Christian perspective, there’s much insight Jewish people—and people from all faiths, and even atheists—can learn from Moberly’s deeply researched, thought-provoking work. This is especially so as it concerns capital punishment, which all good people must oppose.

Indeed, as a Jewish death penalty-abolitionist-writer, I’ve often relied upon Moberly’s observations about the immorality undergirding capital punishment. For example, in 2018, writing for the Omaha World-Herald in “Gov. Ricketts’ rationale for death penalty doesn’t hold up,” I relied on the anecdotal account—detailed in Moberly’s book—of a prison chaplain in England, Rev. W. Roberts; Roberts gave his account before the Royal Commission of 1866 “when executions were still public,” relating, specifically, that he “interrogated 167 persons under sentence of death as to whether they had ever witnessed a hanging. All but three had done so, yet had themselves been undeterred.”

The same year, in an essay called “British waffling on death penalty will have global repercussions,” this time for the Alabama Political Reporter, I relied again on Moberly and his declaration that state killings have a “demoralizing and brutalizing tendency[,] familiarizing the public with horrors,” and “caus[ing] human life to be held cheap.” Sir Moberly’s tome decries these dastardly acts—all of them—as being a “deliberate infliction of torture [that] to [the British people] [is] unthinkable wickedness, degrading all who have any part in it, whether as agents, spectators or hearers after the event.”

Then, in 2019, in a column titled “Abolishing the death penalty requires morality,” I again turned to Moberly’s wisdom and compelling prose; I did so by quoting his pithy aphorism that “[t]he executioner pays the murderer the compliment of imitation,” and, his even more keen conclusion: “Much demand for retribution certainly has a shady origin. It springs from the crude animal impulse of the individual or group to retaliate, when hurt, by hurting the hurter. In itself such resentment is neither wise nor good and, in its extreme forms, it is generally condemned as vindictive.”

Yet once more, in 2024, with assistance from George Boyd Snell, the former 8th Bishop of Toronto, I want to again inject Sir Moberly’s clearheaded thinking about capital punishment into the public sphere—and why such punishment cannot be morally justified.

Speaking at an open forum on the death penalty held in Toronto, Canada, on February 5, 1954, the late archdeacon Snell, remarking on the untruth that the death penalty acts as deterrent, referred to yet another of Moberly’s writings on “Capital Punishment” from the Christian News-Letter for July 1953 (Oxley & Son, 4 High St., Windsor, England).

Bishop Snell said: “We come then to consider the problem of the retention of capital punishment from the standpoint of its value to society. Here our chief concern is undoubtedly with the deterrent power of the death penalty.” Continuing his discourse, Snell then quoted one of Moberly’s maxims—a maxim Moberly later included in his “Ethics of Punishment” virtually verbatim: “An increase in the efficiency of the police force does more to prevent murder than the busiest hangman.” In close proximity to this passage in the “Ethics of Punishment,” where Moberly makes this argument, he notes also that “every outbreak of violent crime seems to evoke a confused clamour for flogging or hanging.” And, he remarks that capital punishment has “morbid accompaniments, such as the impulse which leads boys to run to see a pig being killed.”

Piggy-backing on Moberly, Snell goes on to say “we must ask ourselves another question—whether [the death penalty] does not do more harm in brutalizing human nature and lowering the whole moral tone of the community than the deterring power of capital punishment does to make life secure.”

At the tail-end of last year, together with Cantor Michael J. Zoosman in a piece called “Jews must speak out against Alabama’s planned nitrogen gas executions,” I answered Snells’ question as it concerns how Jewish people should view state-sanctioned killing. “Because of what has happened to us in our history—the hatred, the hurt, the humiliation, the denial of our humanity—and because of the commonality of this experience with condemned prisoners, I believe strongly that Jewish people have an obligation to be death penalty abolitionists.” (See also “Houses made on death row” and “Growing Away from God by Executing Michael Smith” for additional information and support for my position.)

70 years ago, Bishop Snell, a proponent of Moberly’s timeless erudition like me, was equally convinced that the death penalty’s retention “does not seem to be of value to society.” Snell said, too, that because “[w]e are concerned primarily with the protection of society” then “we must consider the positive damage that is done by the retention of the death penalty.”

Snell opined: “There comes a time when further advance is held up until the law moves forward to a new position.” And it is here, as his writing does so often, that famous American writer James Baldwin can be of service in galvanizing citizens to engage in rightful—and righteous—action. Baldwin wrote: “a country is only as strong as the people who make it up and the country turns into what the people want it to become.”

Morally strong countries—countries composed of good people—don’t execute their citizens. Ever.

(source: Stephen Cooper is a former D.C. public defender who worked as an assistant federal public defender in Alabama between 2012 and 2015; bblogs.timeofisrael.com)

KENYA:

Man who killed wife narrowly escapes death sentence----Court Appeal concluded Ouma was not given a chance for mitigation before sentencing.

That Elijah Ouma and his wife Lilian Auma would be involved in a noisy fight every night was not news in their village but on September it was different.

"I want to kill somebody," was the shout of Ouma in the dead of the night as he walked back to his house.

Little did his parents and neighbour know that the person he would find to kill was his wife.

Ouma worked as a farmhand at another home in their village, where he also lived, as his wife and children lived in his house which was in the same compound as his parents.

But this family never enjoyed peace. The man frequently quarrelled with and beat his wife but reconciliation would ensue, making them continue living together.

So frequent was the squabbling and violence between them been that no one would respond when the fights and screaming happened. Villagers and neighbours got used to them.

But the night of September 3, 2014, the fights and screaming happened and it was final. That night Ouma came back from his working station and started his routine shouting, pacing around his parent’s home until his mother woke up to check on him.

The old woman saw him kick the door and called his wife who was asleep and could not open the door.

He kicked the door and got in, went straight to the bedroom and started beating up his wife who was a sleep. The violence led to Auma's death.

Ouma was was apprehended the following day, and was lated convicted in 2016 and sentenced to life.

But he got a reprieve late last month after a Court of Appeal voided his death sentence, sending his file back to the High Court for fresh direction on his re-sentencing.

The March 15 decision said that the High Court did not allow a wife batterer time to give his mitigation before he was sentenced.

"To justify a death sentence the court should have spoken to the mitigating factors, showing in black and white what the court considered. In the absence of any demonstration of factors that could have led to such a sentence then the appellant was prejudiced," the judgement said.

Ouma’s mother was the star witness for the prosecution, telling court that she saw him kick the door to get into the house and once in, he started beating his wife.

“[The old mother] then ran out [of the home] and onto the road screaming for help but no one responded,” the court papers read.

“The witness then remained outside and hid in the bushes. Just before daybreak; she went into [her son’s] house and found [Auma] lying on the floor covered with a bed sheet.”

The deceased’s body had cuts on the arms and legs. Next to the body was a broken stool and a jembe, as well as a broken chair.

Upon arrest and interrogation by local chief, Ouma said “shetani alinidanganya" (the devil misled me).

The postmortem revealed fractures on both bones of the right and left legs and the right lower arm, multiple cut wounds on the head and multiple bruising on face and trunk.

“The significant finding on internal examination was a fracture on the left side of the head which resulted in bleeding within the skull; the second spinal bone was dislocated from the third one while the spinal cord was compressed at the neck; the cause of death was severe head injury and spinal compression that resulted from fracture and dislocation,” the court papers read.

(source: the-star.co.ke)

SOMALIA:

Police commander given death sentence in Somalia accused of killing businessman

The police commissioner of Hiliwa district in Somalia’s capital Mogadishu Abditifatah Mohamed Qoslaye was given a death sentence by a military court in Mogadishu accused of abducting and killing a businessman identified as Ahmed Abukar on February 24.

Other police officer identified as Mohamed Abdi Qone was also sentenced to death while 5 other people convicted of involvement in the murder received jails terms between 10 and 15 years.

(source: somaliaguardian.com)

IRAN----execution

Execution of Inmate at Khorramabad Prison

On April 5, 2024, Khorramabad Prison carried out the execution of an inmate found guilty of murder, as reported by the Iran Human Rights Organization. The inmate, identified as Hassan-Ali Mirzania, aged 30, was convicted 4 years ago for the fatal shooting of 2 brothers with a hunting gun.

At present, there is no coverage of the execution from official sources or domestic media outlets within Iran. This absence of information raises significant questions regarding the transparency and accountability of the execution process.

In 2023, the Department of Statistics and Publication of Human Rights Activists in Iran registered the execution of 767 individuals. Out of these, 7 were carried out in public. Among the executed individuals whose genders were identified, 21 were female. Additionally, 2 juvenile offenders, defined as individuals under the age of 18 at the time of their alleged crimes, were also executed.

(source: en-hrana.org)

APRIL 8, 2024:

TEXAS:

Report: Evidence Favorable To Melissa Lucio Withheld From Her Death Penalty Trial

The Cameron County District Attorney’s Office is acknowledging that prosecutors withheld evidence favorable to Melissa Lucio, the Harlingen woman sentenced to death after being found guilty of killing her 2-year-old daughter.

In a joint statement, the DA’s Office and Lucio’s appeal attorneys agree that Lucio’s trial attorneys did not have access to information favorable to the defense during her capital murder trial in 2008. The statement was released to the McAllen Monitor late last week.

Lucio has steadfastly maintained that her daughter died after falling down a staircase at the family’s Harlingen apartment, and that she made a false confession to police after hours of interrogation.

Lucio had been scheduled to be executed April 27th 2022. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals stayed the execution based on filings from Lucio’s appeal attorneys which claimed, in part, that the state suppressed evidence in violation of the law.

An Agreed Findings of Fact has concluded that the outcome of Lucio’s trial would have been different had the evidence been disclosed. The latest developments are now under review by the trial court.

(source: KURV news)

OHIO:

Fix Ohio’s broken system of capital punishment now

To access Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost’s 2023 Capital Crimes Report: https://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/2023CapitalCrimesReport

Readers of true crime stories should waste no time in accessing Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost’s “2023 Capital Crimes Report,” a compendium of chilling, shocking and disturbing cases of the worst of the worst bloodlust offenses in the Buckeye State over the past 4 decades.

The 424-page report, released last week by the state’s top legal officer, hits close to home in its opening pages. They present a harrowing narrative in excruciatingly painful detail of the cold-hearted murders of Esther Cook and her daughter Ashley Dawn Cook in their Warren home shortly before midnight on Oct. 31, 1999. Stanley Adams beat and stabbed Cook, and beat, raped and strangled Ashley.

Adams was convicted in October 2001 and sentenced to death in 2004. Twenty years later, in one of this state’s many disheartening miscarriages of justice, Adams remains alive and well in the Chillicothe Correctional Institution, a poster boy for Ohio’s broken system of capital punishment.

Adams is one of 119 inmates on death row, including 11 from Trumbull and Mahoning counties. On average, those inmates have spent 21 years awaiting their well deserved date with death. Contributing to that increasingly prolonged delay is a moratorium placed on executions by Gov. Mike DeWine over the inability of Ohio and most other states to use safe execution drugs for lethal injection.

Since the state’s current capital punishment law was adopted in 1981, only 56 of some 341 death sentences have been carried out. In the past five years, zero executions have taken place. That’s a disturbing track record, particularly for families of victims and others seeking long-delayed delivery of juries’ well-reasoned verdicts.

Yost offers some poignant perspective on this plight: “The bottom line: Ohio’s death penalty is a farce and a broken promise of justice — and it must be fixed.”

We agree and once again call on members of the Ohio General Assembly to resolve this dilemma. Members could opt, as several other states have done, to adopt an alternative form of capital punishment.

Toward the end, Yost joined state Reps. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville, and Phill Plummer, R-Dayton, as they introduced legislation in January that would direct state officials to use nitrogen hypoxia for executions if lethal injection is not feasible.

Those lawmakers introduced House Bill 392 less than a week after Alabama became the first state in the country to execute someone by that method. The legislation deserves a full, fair and prompt hearing in the House Government Oversight Committee to determine if it may be the right fit for Ohio.

Further, legislators could act to limit the number of permissible appeals for convicts who repeatedly abuse the criminal justice system. Danny Lee Hill of Warren, for example, has been on death row for 39 years for raping, torturing and murdering a 12-year-old boy and has filed more than 25 appeals in his successful effort to delay death. So far, that strategy has worked just fine for him.

The other option, of course, would be to abolish executions. 2 bills in the Legislature — Senate Bill 101 and House Bill 259 — aim to accomplish that. Those bills, however, have been languishing in legislative committees for over a year.

We fully realize this issue is highly divisive, with Ohioans and Americans carrying very strong and differing beliefs. However, doing nothing is not the answer. And from our perspective, that’s exactly what Ohio’s Legislature has done. Frankly, it appears state House and Senate members have lacked the political will to fix what Yost most accurately calls “a broken system.”

If for no other reason, lawmakers should act in the name of fiscal responsibility. A state estimate shows death sentences have cost Ohio taxpayers up to $384 million to care for and carry on seemingly never-ending legal casework for death row inmates. Some estimate the cost of caring for death row inmates is five times higher than the cost of care for those sentenced to life in prison without the chance for parole.

Another major reason to act promptly defies dollars and cents. The emotional turmoil endured by families seeking justice for decades for their murdered loved ones is compounded by the seeming lack of any hope in sight for closure.

Dozens and dozens of examples of such family anguish can be gleaned from the pages of the attorney general’s “2023 Capital Crimes Report.” That powerful and damning report should serve as a call to action for responsible state legislators to finally act to end this state’s great farce. That action is needed now.

(source: Editorial, Tribune Chronicle)

ILLINOIS:

DEATH DUTY: 'My job was to save killer clown John Wayne Gacy's life'

To famed defence lawyer Karen Conti the most terrifying thing about serial killer John Wayne Gacy was the absence of menace.

To famed defence lawyer Karen Conti, the most terrifying thing about serial killer John Wayne Gacy was the absence of menace.

The Chicago contractor had been convicted of 33 counts of first-degree murder in 1984 for the rape, torture and murder of 33 young men and boys from around 1972 to 1978. In a macabre touch, Gacy — who moonlighted as a clown for charity— buried most of the bodies in a crawl space beneath his suburban bungalow.

For these sickening crimes, he rotund killer was sentenced to die in Illinois’ electric chair (later lethal injection).

Conti had the unenviable task of trying to save the life of the killer clown.

“It was a fluke,” she told The Toronto Sun from Chicago. “My late husband and I had a practice specializing in First Amendment cases. The government had now set his execution date and the prison was suing him. They hated him.”

That launched Conti on an odyssey to save Gacy from the needle. She says now that it had less to do with Gacy — who had a fair trial, superb lawyers and was clearly guilty — than other men and women on death row who might be innocent.

Conti is now telling the Gacy story from the front seat in Killing Time with John Wayne Gacy: Defending America’s Most Evil Serial Killer on Death Row.

“I have always been against the death penalty, and so I was added to the appeal,” Conti said, adding that Gacy’s everyman demeanour shocked her.

“He was completely normal, charming but a bit of a know-it-all. There was nothing out of the ordinary about him,” Conti said. “No one would think he was capable of the terrible crimes he was convicted of. He was a sociopath but seemed totally normal.”

Conti said the notorious killer was “not frightening” and she agreed when I quoted William Shirer from Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. Shirer described the Nazis as the “banality of evil.”

The lawyer added that suspected Gilgo Beach serial killer Rex Heuermann, a 60-year-old architect from Long Island, fits the template of normalcy.

“There’s a lot of similarities there,” Conti noted. “They can be very hard-working and productive in their day-to-day lives. They can be ambitious. Gacy cut his elderly neighbour’s lawns, went to church and would host neighbourhood barbecues.”

As the days ticked down in 1994 to Gacy’s express train to oblivion, Conti said her struggle was the death penalty itself. She had no illusions about John Wayne Gacy or the heinous crimes he was convicted of.

“No, I never had any doubts about his guilt, or what I was doing to try and save his life,” she said. “For a lawyer, it was the ultimate challenge, like running a marathon or climbing a mountain.”

She added: “To me, representing him was bigger than Gacy. It was about something bigger. We didn’t save Gacy, but we moved the needle against the death penalty in Illinois.”

The state eventually ended executions after 12 different men walked off the state’s death row. They were innocent.

“Twelve out of twelve. That’s not a very good batting average,” the lifelong Cubs fan said. “Particularly when it’s the state putting people to death.”

For seven months, from October 1993 to May 10, 1994, when Gacy got the big adios courtesy of a poison-packed needle jabbed into his chubby arm, Conti lived and breathed the case. She was in denial until the killer breathed his last.

“I don’t know if I ever came to grips with the fact he was going to be executed,” she said, adding that “Gacy was in denial mode, too. I think it helped him face what was coming.”

Gacy grew up with an abusive, alcoholic father, who inflicted blows to the part of his kid’s head which controls a person’s impulses and empathy. Gacy, of course, had none.

“Millions of people have grown up in worse circumstances and they don’t become sadistic killers. Sadly, these things aren’t out of the ordinary,” Conti added.

Thirty years after he was executed, Gacy’s twisted legacy continues to grow like a dead man’s fingernails. Cops are still identifying Gacy John Does at the Cook County morgue, and speculation about more victims has grown in volume. And there’s the nagging question: Did he act alone?

“Gacy did not commit all of these crimes alone,” Conti insisted. “I simply don’t believe a man his size could wiggle his way into the crawlspace under his house where he buried the bodies.”

His plausible connection to pedophile pimp John David Norman, who ran a nation-wide underage sex ring that supplied boys to sick men of power and influence, is one marker. A possible connection to Houston serial killer Dean “The Candyman” Corll is also tantalizing.

“Corll and Gacy were very similar. What Corll was doing was very similar to what Gacy was up to in Chicago.”

As for Gacy, despite fighting to save the killer clown’s life, Conti reserved her sympathy for the young boys and men whose lives he had so mercilessly snuffed out in a six-year rampage.

“He wasn’t a friend. Gacy was a shell of a person. A sick sociopath,” she said. “Still, it was difficult having a client die on your watch.”

When the end came, Conti was surprised that Gacy’s family, neighbours and friends were there for him. They cried, they hugged.

“They loved this guy. It was really hard to see,” Conti said.

(source: torontosun.com)

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

Cook County Clerk Karen Yarbrough dies at 73

Cook County Clerk Karen Yarbrough, a fixture in state and local Democratic Party politics who successfully championed legislation to ban the death penalty in Illinois, died Sunday. She was 73.

For decades, Yarbrough and her husband, Henderson, were political mainstays in west suburban Maywood, where he previously served as mayor, and Proviso Township. She represented the area for years in the Illinois legislature.

(source: Chicago Tribune)

MISSOURI----impending execution

Advocates for Missouri death row inmate Brian Dorsey plead for clemency with days to go before his execution

Missouri this week plans to execute death row inmate Brian Dorsey for the 2006 murders of his cousin and her husband, but a clemency petition shows scores of people have asked Gov. Mike Parsons to spare his life, citing Dorsey’s rehabilitation and what they call an unjust death sentence.

Dorsey is deeply remorseful for the murders, his clemency petition says, contending the killings of Sarah and Benjamin Bonnie happened while Dorsey was suffering a “drug-induced psychosis and alcohol-induced blackout,” making him incapable of the deliberation required for a 1st-degree murder charge.

Still, Dorsey accepts responsibility, the petition says, and in the years since has sought to atone: He has a spotless prison disciplinary record and works as a barber for the correctional staff, a position of immense trust.

Indeed, more than 70 correctional officers support the inmate’s clemency petition, it says, which also cites the support of five jurors from the penalty phase of his trial, a former Missouri Supreme Court justice and at least 3 Republican state representatives.

“His deep shame and remorse has shaped him, and apparently shaped the way he’s lived every day of his life since,” Megan Crane, one of his attorneys, told CNN. While Dorsey’s lawyers and advocates fight to have his sentence commuted, “that is still his focus in this final week: the shame and remorse he feels and reflecting on that.”

Dorsey also deserves clemency, his petition argues, because his attorneys at trial were ineffective due to a “financial conflict of interest.” They were paid flat fees of $12,000, the petition says, meaning their compensation would equal about $3.37 an hour if they did the several thousand hours of work capital cases require on average.

Executions in the US are in decline – but some jurisdictions lead the rest

Dorsey’s petition notes many of his friends and family members – including those he purportedly shared with the victims – are also opposed to his execution having written a letter asking Parson to impart mercy. A copy of the letter provided to CNN by defense attorneys redacted signatories’ names for their privacy.

Still, there are other members of the victims’ families who support Dorsey’s execution, scheduled for Tuesday evening, which they described in a statement to CNN as a “light at the end of the tunnel.”

Dorsey “was a close family member who was given a safe haven to get him out of a bad situation and turned this helping hand into the ultimate betrayal of a loved one,” the statement by Sarah Bonnie’s family says.

Dorsey’s actions took the couple – who enjoyed riding Harley Davidson motorcycles and camping, according to their obituaries – from their young daughter, who grew up without her parents at foundational moments of her life.

“First day of school, school parties, school dances, 1st date, sweet 16, 1st boyfriend and high school graduation,” the statement says. “All of this was taken from her by a family member that proclaimed to love her.”

CNN has attempted to reach members of Benjamin Bonnie’s family for comment but has not heard back.

Dorsey and his attorneys acknowledge “many people are and forever will be grieving the loss” of Sarah and Benjamin Bonnie, his petition says, adding, “We recognize that there are no words or efforts that can make this tragedy less painful. Our intention is not to cause more harm, but to do the opposite.”

The murders of Sarah and Benjamin Bonnie

Dorsey had long struggled with severe chronic depression, his clemency petition says. For years, he’d self-medicated with alcohol and crack cocaine, but his petition claims he was going through a withdrawal at the time of the killings, which had in the past caused him to hallucinate.

The murders happened on December 23, 2006, hours after Dorsey called his cousin asking for help, according to a ruling by the Missouri Supreme Court last month, which recounted the history of the case. Two drug dealers were in his apartment, Dorsey said, and he needed money to pay them.

Sarah and Benjamin went to Dorsey’s apartment, and the drug dealers left. They then took Dorsey back to their home, the ruling notes, and Dorsey spent the evening drinking and playing pool with Sarah and Benjamin’s family and friends.

Later that night, the ruling says, Dorsey entered their room with a shotgun and fatally shot them both at close range. Court records say Dorsey raped Sarah’s body, but Dorsey’s attorneys argue this remains an allegation because he was never charged with and never pleaded guilty to rape or sexual assault.

Ivan Cantu is scheduled to be executed in Texas on Feb. 28 for the murders of his cousin and his cousin's fiancee in 2000. Cantu says he has maintained his innocence, and new evidence uncovered in recent years raises questions about his case.

Dorsey locked the bedroom door, then stole several items and Sarah’s car, which he drove around as he tried to sell the stolen items to pay off his debt, the ruling says. Sarah’s and Benjamin’s bodies were discovered the next day by Sarah’s parents, who found the couple’s then-4-year-old daughter alone at the house.

Dorsey turned himself in on December 26 and was charged with 2 counts of 1st-degree murder. His guilty plea in March 2008 was followed by a sentencing trial, the filing says, where jurors heard testimony and evidence about his past, including his mental health problems, suicide attempts and substance abuse.

Dorsey was sentenced to death for each murder, court records show, and his conviction and death sentence have previously been upheld on appeal.

“Governor Parson and his legal team are in the process of reviewing Mr. Dorsey’s clemency petition,” Johnathan Shiflett, a spokesperson for the Republican governor, told CNN Thursday. Parson’s office intends to announce a decision before the execution date, Shiflett added, “typically at least 24 hours in advance.”

In a previous statement announcing he had sought an execution date for Dorsey, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey said he was seeking to “enforce the laws as written, which includes carrying out the lawful sentence that has been upheld by multiple courts, including the nation’s highest court.”

Dorsey still has litigation in both state and federal courts that could potentially halt his execution. It’s typical in capital cases for litigation to continue up until the last minute before an inmate is put to death.

Attorneys’ payment disincentivized work, petition claims

At the time of his murder trial, Dorsey was represented by 2 attorneys appointed by the Missouri State Public Defender, each of whom was paid a flat fee of $12,000, his clemency petition says, regardless of whether the case went to trial. The petition says this created a conflict of interest for Dorsey’s attorneys: “to work for Brian’s benefit was to the detriment of their own livelihoods.”

Put another way, the payment scheme disincentivized the work needed in a capital case, and Dorsey’s petition contends this was why his attorneys had him plead guilty without a guarantee of a life sentence and claims the attorneys did not adequately investigate.

“If they had they would have known what we know now, which was Brian had lifelong chronic depression, and that he had turned to self-medicating with alcohol and crack cocaine at this point because other treatments had failed,” Crane, one of Dorsey’s current attorneys, said. “And he had a history of experiencing psychosis when withdrawing from crack, experienced paranoid and persecutory delusions and hallucinations.”

“That is a defense to capital murder,” she said. “If they had done the basic interviewing of their client and investigation, they would have known they had a defense, and they would have used that to either negotiate a plea deal with a benefit of a life sentence, or they would have gone to trial because they had a defense.”

Christopher Slusher, one of Dorsey’s trial attorneys, declined to comment when reached by CNN Thursday. The other, Scott McBride, did not immediately respond.

In a previous appeal, both lawyers testified the flat fee did not affect the decisions they made in the case, and both could have requested more money if they needed it, court records show. The courts dismissed that appeal after a three-day hearing.

In the years since, however, the Missouri State Public Defender has done away with paying flat fees to attorneys in death penalty cases: In a letter included with Dorsey’s petition, its director writes the practice was found to violate guidelines by the American Bar Association, which says flat fees in such cases are “improper.”

Former Missouri Supreme Court Justice Michael Wolff, another of Dorsey’s advocates, described this element of Dorsey’s case as a “rare failing of the legal system itself” in his own letter to the governor.

Wolff was on the state Supreme Court when it upheld Dorsey’s direct appeal, he wrote, but the justices were not aware of the flat fee arrangement at the time. This “defect,” he said, “undoubtedly influenced everything,” and should warrant a life sentence.

Executing Dorsey, Wolff added, “will dishonor our system of capital punishment.”

‘Extraordinary rehabilitation’

Dorsey’s petition strongly emphasizes what it calls his “extraordinary rehabilitation,” which his advocates say merits a commutation to life in prison.

“If Brian Dorsey has not been rehabilitated, then the word ceases to have any meaning at all,” the petition says.

Dorsey’s petition points to his work as a staff barber as just one illustration of this rehabilitation. For 11 years, he has cut the hair and shaved the beards of wardens, staff and chaplains at the Potosi Correctional Center, trusted with tools that he could otherwise use to harm people.

“The Brian I have known for years could not hurt anyone,” one corrections staffer wrote in support of Dorsey’s request for clemency – one of several quoted by his petition, which redacts the staffers’ names for their privacy. “The Brian I know does not deserve to be executed.”

Were Dorsey’s sentence to be commuted, he’d like to continue his work as a barber, Crane said, as well as his Sunday phone calls and talking with his family, all of which are “meaningful enough for it to be a life worth living.”

“He has seen his work and service he’s providing the prison is both a way to be atoning,” she said, “and a way to feel like he is giving back or doing something positive, in spite of or because of the horrible thing he did.”

“The death penalty is supposed to be reserved for the worst of the worst, that’s what the US Supreme Court has told us,” Crane said. “And what Brian’s clemency package is about and the support attests to is that there’s no question that Brian is not the worst of the worst.”

(source: CNN)

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

Corrections officers, relatives of Brian Dorsey urge Gov. Mike Parson to halt execution

Missouri is set to execute Brian Dorsey Tuesday for a 2006 double murder in New Bloomfield. Dorsey's case has attracted intense national and local attention. A coalition of corrections officers, politicians, lawyers and even Dorsey's former high school football coach are calling on Gov. Mike Parson to halt the execution.

Those calls are becoming more urgent after the Missouri Supreme Court denied a stay of execution for Dorsey Friday. A Parson spokesperson said the governor will announce his decision on Dorsey's clemency application Monday.

Dorsey was sentenced to death in 2008 after he pleaded guilty to the murder of his cousin, Sarah Bonnie, and her husband, Ben Bonnie.

According to previous KOMU 8 reporting, the Bonnies took Dorsey into their home after he told them two drug dealers were trying to collect on his debt. That night, Dorsey stole the Bonnie's shotgun and killed them in their bed. The Bonnies' 4-year-old daughter was also in the home at the time, though she was found unhurt.

Dorsey's lawyers argue he did not receive a proper defense from his initial lawyers, who were paid a flat fee. The attorneys each received $12,000 from the Missouri Public Defender's Office to represent Dorsey. According to a report from the nonprofit news outlet The Marshall Project, Dorsey's lawyers would have earned $3.37 per hour if they put in the necessary time for a death penalty case.

The Missouri Public Defender system no longer uses a flat fee in death penalty cases. In a letter supporting Dorsey's clemency application, Mary Fox, the State Public Defender director, said a flat fee gives lawyers no incentive to spend time with client and provide effective assistance. The American Bar Association has recommended against using flat fees in capital punishment cases since 2003.

Calls for clemency

Dorsey filed a petition Sunday asking the U.S. Supreme Court to stay Tuesday's execution. The petition argues Dorsey is fully rehabilitated. It points to broad support for Dorsey's clemency application, including more than 70 former corrections officers. It argues Dorsey's execution would violate the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution because it would serve no legitimate form of justice.

A former Missouri Supreme Court justice, who originally voted to uphold Dorsey's death sentence, wrote a letter to Parson urging clemency. Michael Wolff said the decision is one of the "rare cases where those of us who sit in judgement of a man convicted of capital murder got it wrong."

5 former jurors also wrote a letter to Parson urging Dorsey's sentence to be commuted to life without parole, according to his lawyers.

In January, 72 current and former Missouri Department of Corrections officers sent a letter to Gov. Mike Parson asking him to halt Dorsey's execution. The letter described him as a model inmate who never got into trouble. Dorsey lived in Potosi Correctional Center's "honor dorm," which is reserved for well-behaved inmates.

"Generally, we believe in the use of capital punishment," the letter said. "But we are in agreement that the death penalty is not the appropriate punishment for Brian Dorsey."

The officers are not advocating for Dorsey's release but life without execution. No other Missouri death row inmates have received such a public display of support from corrections officers.

Tim Lancaster, who worked at Potosi for 27 years, signed the letter. He described Dorsey as a "unicorn" because he never received a conduct violation, even though he's been incarcerated for 17 years. Potosi houses nearly 900 inmates, Lancaster said. There might be two or three who don't have citations and have been there as long as Dorsey, according to Lancaster.

"There's some officers that hand out violations for too many pencils, you know, hanging towels on the end of their bunks," Lancaster said. "He never received one violation. That's a true testament to his behavior."

Dorsey was staff barber at Potosi, which the letter described as a high-level job for an inmate. The staff barber cuts the hair of corrections officers, including Lancaster, who described Dorsey as quiet and respectful.

There are dozens of other corrections staff members who support the letter but did not sign it, according to Lancaster. He said he thinks those staff might fear retaliation.

"These staff members coming out en masse like this, you know, if they go ahead with the execution it's going to be a slap in their face," Lancaster said. "Because of all the hard work they've committed to help these guys rehabilitate."

Some of Dorsey's relatives are also asking Dorsey's execution to be halted. Jenni Gerhauser is both Brian Dorsey's and Sarah Bonnie's cousin. Gerhauser said she spoke at Bonnie's funeral and testified on Dorsey's behalf at his trial. She has not stopped speaking for him.

"I think people like to believe that he's this evil, cold, calculating killer," Gerhauser told KOMU 8 in an interview. "It couldn't be further from the truth. You know, Brian is this sweet, compassionate, loving, teddy bear kind of a guy."

Gerhauser said the death penalty is meant for the "worst of the worst," and that's not Dorsey. 18 years after the murders, Gerhauser said she still can't wrap her head around what happened.

Dorsey struggled with mental illness for years, according to his lawyers, and even attempted to take his own life. When treatment failed to alleviate his depression, Dorsey began self-medicating with alcohol and crack cocaine and was in a drug-induced psychosis the night of the murders, his lawyers said. They argue he didn't have the necessary intent to be charged with first-degree murder.

"The Brian I know would never hurt anybody," Gerhauser said. "I mean, if you will, there was a monster that killed my cousin. And that monster is crack cocaine."

Gerhauser is from the Springfield area but said she regularly visited Dorsey in Jefferson City when they were growing up. In high school, Gerhauser saw Dorsey more often. He played football for Jefferson City High School. Gerhauser went to Kickapoo High School. When the two schools played each other in football, Gerhauser was at the game.

"And they would stomp us every year," Gerhauser said. "But you know, he would never rub it in."

Dorsey played on the 1988 Jefferson City High School football team, which won a state championship. It was coached by Pete Adkins, the winningest high school football coach in Missouri history. Adkins wrote an op-ed in the Jefferson City News Tribune calling on Gov. Mike Parson to spare Dorsey's life. Adkins described Dorsey as a "good kid" who worked hard.

"I wish I had known Brian was struggling and began to use drugs. I think he would have listened to me." Adkins wrote. "Unfortunately, I wasn't there when he needed me. I believe I might have been able to save Brian, if only I had known what was going on with him."

Not everyone is calling for the execution to be stopped. In January, a statement sent to KOMU 8 from Sarah Bonnie's family asks Parson to avoid extending any clemency to Dorsey, citing the Bonnie's child and the trauma she has experienced over the last 17 years.

"We think of all the things that she has missed out on during her life without her parents," the statement said. "First day of school, school parties, school dances, 1st date, sweet 16, 1st boyfriend and high school graduation. All of this was taken from her by a family member that proclaimed to love her."

The statement says the family has a ritual every year to go to the cemetery and release balloons so her "parents could receive them as gifts from her."

"We have had to try and help keep her memories alive so she wouldn’t forget them," the statement said.

Gerhauser said she's been accused of taking sides. But, Gerhauser said she adored Sarah Bonnie. Gerhauser spoke at her funeral at the request of Bonnie's father. It was a hard ask because of the tension surrounding the situation, Gerhauser said.

Gerhauser described Bonnie as tenacious, feisty and a great mother. She said nobody could pull themselves up from a difficult situation like Bonnie could.

"I truly felt somebody needed to speak for Sarah," Gerhauser said. "Just as I'm speaking for Brian right now. Because I love them the same."

(source: KOMU news)

SOUTH DAKOTA:

Attorney General Jackley discusses philosophy on death penalty cases----Northern State seminar comes less than month after office pursues capital punishment case

South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley’s take on the death penalty is strong yet nuanced.

He’s both prosecuted and defended death penalty cases.

And as a Catholic, he’s been able to justify capital punishment within his religious beliefs.

Protecting “innocent life” is what he’s obliged to do, Jackley told Northern State University criminal justice, sociology and political science students during a visit to campus on Thursday.

Rep. Dusty Johnson demands National Guard fund incentive program

Among other things, students asked him how his personal morals and ethics affect his job. When it comes to the death penalty, Jackley referenced Genesis 9:6 in the Bible.

“Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed. For in the image of God, he made man,” the verse reads.

The students have been discussing capital punishment in class and have also heard from speakers with other viewpoints.

Jackley told class about how his office works and detailed different capital punishment cases with which he’s been involved. He said that as far as he knows, he’s 1 of only 2 attorneys in South Dakota who have defended and prosecuted death penalty cases.

(source: The Dakota Scout)

CALIFORNIA:

California Prosecutor Seeks Sentence Reductions for Death Row Inmates. Other Prosecutors Should Follow Suit

Last week, Jeff Rosen, the District Attorney in California’s Santa Clara County, asked the superior court to resentence all of the people from his county who are now on the state’s death row. This request is a genuinely unprecedented and important step in the ongoing fight against capital punishment in the United States.

Prosecutors, who play a critical role as gatekeepers in the death penalty system, generally try to put people on death row rather than take them off it. According to the Los Angeles Times, Rosen is “the only prosecutor in California to have made such a blanket request.”

As the Times said, “[W]hile many prosecutors around the state in the nation have stopped the use of the death penalty moving forward, Rosen is the first to look back and answer the question—with collective action—if it isn’t fair now, how could have been fair then?”

Other prosecutors in California and around the nation should ask themselves that question and follow Rosen’s example.

Prosecutors set the tone for the way the death penalty is or is not used in the jurisdictions where they serve. As the Death Penalty Information Center said in 2013, “Each decision to seek the death penalty is made by a single county district attorney, who is answerable only to the voters of that county.”

As the DPIC noted, the way prosecutors have used that discretion meant:

Only 2% of the counties in the U.S. have been responsible for the majority of cases leading to executions since 1976. Likewise, only 2% of the counties are responsible for the majority of today’s death row population and recent death sentences. To put it another way, all of the state executions since the death penalty was reinstated stem from cases in just 15% of the counties in the U.S. All of the 3,125 inmates on death row as of January 1, 2013 came from just 20% of the counties.

For a long time, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, was one of those counties. It offers a stark example of the difference a single prosecutor can make in the world of the death penalty.

Lynne Abraham, who served as Philadelphia District Attorney from 1991 to 2010, earned the title of one of the “deadliest DAs” in the United States for her enthusiastic pursuit of death sentences. As the Philly Voice put it, “While in office, Abraham obtained 108 death sentences.”

Under her leadership, about 40% of murder convictions in Philadelphia started as death cases, and a disproportionate number of the people for whom she sought such a sentence were Black.

At various times Abraham described herself as a “passionate” supporter of capital punishment and that she felt “nothing” about pursuing it.

Abraham was not alone. An article in The Intercept says that “The annals of the American death penalty are riddled with such prosecutors.” The Intercept singles out prosecutors like “‘Cowboy’ Bob Macy, who spent 21 years as the district attorney in Oklahoma County, Oklahoma, and personally secured 54 death sentences, kept a personalized set of baseball cards on his desk that featured his ‘accomplishments’” and “Donald Myers, who secured 39 death sentences over a 40-year career as the top prosecutor in Lexington County, South Carolina, [and] was known as ‘Doctor Death.’”

Looking again at Philadelphia shows how changing the DA can dramatically change the death penalty.

Fast forward to 2017. Seth Williams, who was then DA, sought a death sentence in only 12% of murder cases.

Williams’s successor, Larry Krasner has gone much further. He promised during his 1st campaign for DA that he would never seek the death penalty.

Not only has he made good on that promise, but in 2019 Kasner asked Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court to declare capital punishment unconstitutional. He called it “unreliable and arbitrary because it has historically, and unevenly, targeted men of color.”

As The Intercept reports:

To come to that conclusion, his office had studied 155 death sentences handed down in Philadelphia between 1978 and the end of 2017…. The results were dismal: A majority of the defendants were poor and had received deficient legal representation. Seventy-two percent of the cases were eventually overturned, the majority resulting in a lesser sentence.

Throughout his time as Philadelphia DA, Krasner has been very open about saying that the death penalty “really is not about the worst offenders. It really is about poverty. It really is about race.”

Krasner is a leading reform prosecutor, and he is one among many in that group who have come out against the death penalty. In 2022, as NBC News reported, “56 elected prosecutors from 26 states pledged to work to effectively end the death penalty, including by refusing to support the execution of people with intellectual disabilities, seeking commutations, and helping to overturn sentences in cases of racial bias, negligent defense counsel or other misconduct.”

Santa Clara Country’s Jeff Rosen is not one of them. In fact, he once supported the death penalty.

But, in some ways, what he is doing is even more consequential than what someone like Krasner has done. He is confessing error and trying to right wrongs that may have been done to those prosecuted and sentenced to death in the past.

As Rosen explained in his request for the court to resentence the 14 death row inmates from Santa Clara County, “We are not confident that these sentences were attained without racial bias. We cannot defend the sentences and we believe that implicit bias and structural racism some role in the death sentence.”

Rosen told the Los Angeles Times that his request for resentencing does not mean that things “are as bad today as they were 50 years ago. I completely reject that idea. But,” Rosen observed, “I also trusted that as a society we could ensure fundamental fairness of the legal process for all people. With every exoneration, with every story racial injustice, becomes clear to me that this is not the world we live in.”

Rosen believes that because of this country’s changing death penalty attitudes, “many of the crimes that led to the death penalty decades ago would not have garnered the same punishment today. Some of the perpetrators were convicted as teenagers, some were accessories to the crime at a time when laws made fewer distinctions. Many have been in prison for more than 30 years. Some had unfair trials.”

What Rosen is hoping to accomplish by reopening old cases is to right wrongs and make the past accountable to the present. His effort is a reminder that doing justice, and ensuring that justice is done, has no statute of limitations.

It is a lesson that other prosecutors should learn.

(source: Opinion; Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College----verdict.justia.com)

TAIWAN:

KMT calls for child abuse death penalty amendment

Article 286 of the Criminal Code should be amended to impose the death penalty or life imprisonment on those guilty of child abuse leading to death, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus has proposed.

Under the current law, “a person who maltreats a minor under the age of 18, or impairs the mental or physical health or development thereof by other means” would be imprisoned for up to 5 years, while offenses that lead to the death of a minor could result in imprisonment for up to 10 years.

In its proposal, the KMT caucus called for the introduction of the death penalty or life sentencing for the abuse of children aged 6 or younger that leads to their death. For abuse that does not result in death, the minimum sentence would be raised from 6 months to 7 years under the amendment.

Hand-written cards and flowers are pictured outside the New Taipei City Hall on March 18 commemorating the death of a one-year-old boy nicknamed Kai-kai, allegedly from abuse at the hands of his caregiver.

The KMT caucus said the motivation for the proposal came from the public reaction to the death of a 1-year-old boy, nicknamed Kai-kai (??), who had allegedly been abused to death by a licensed in-home childcare provider in December last year.

The caregiver, surnamed Liu, was arrested and detained in January in connection with the case.

“Article 286 of the Criminal Code was previously revised in May 2019 to increase the criminal liability for child abuse,” a statement from the caucus said.

“However, since then 25 children nationwide have died as a result of severe abuse. This shows that the previous revision has not curbed child abuse cases, and there is a need to increase criminal penalties.”

Nine proposals on the amendment were introduced by KMT legislators during the most recent legislative session. In addition to the version introduced by the caucus, one other version introduced by KMT legislators Hsu Hsin-ying and Hung Meng-kai was also submitted for review.

In that version, stricter punishments are stipulated for the abuse of children aged three or younger. Under this version of the amendment, those abusing children up to the age of three would face imprisonment of between five and 12 years, while those whose abuse of a child aged three or younger that leads to the child’s death would face the death penalty or life imprisonment.

(source: taipeitimes.com)

CHINA:

3 children face death penalty in China for beating 13-year-old classmate to death leaving him 'disfigured beyond recognition': Heartbroken father says 'I hope they pay with their lives'----The teenager was brutally killed on March 10 and buried in a greenhouse

3 children are facing the death penalty in China for beating their 13-year-old classmate to death leaving him 'disfigured beyond recognition'.

The 3 suspects, all aged under 14 at the time of the murder, are accused of bullying their classmate, named only as Wang, over a long period before killing him in northern China's Hebei province last month.

'He was beaten alive and his body was disfigured beyond recognition,' Wang's father wrote on Douyin, a Chinese social media platform. 'I hope the government will be fair, open and just, punish them severely, and that the killers will pay with their lives.'

The grim details of the case, in which the killers buried Wang's body in an abandoned greenhouse, drew public attention to how the law deals with juveniles accused of serious crimes.

In 2021, China lowered its age of criminal responsibility from 14 to 12 for 'special cases' such as inflicting death by 'extremely cruel means', which means the boys could face the death penalty over the murder.

In the last recorded moments before the 13-year-old boy's death, surveillance cameras showed him sitting on a scooter, surrounded by three classmates on March 10. An hour later, his phone went dead, kicking off a frantic search by relatives.

The following day, police made a sickening discovery: the boy's body, buried underneath a tarp in an abandoned vegetable greenhouse.

Police in Feixiang district of Handan city identified the boy only by his last name, Wang. In a statement on March 17 they said the boy had been killed on March 10 and that the suspects were detained the following day.

A police investigator told state broadcaster CCTV on March 18 that the crime had been premeditated, with the suspects digging out the pit twice, once the day before and again the day of the killing.

Wang's relatives and their attorney said in interviews with Chinese media and in posts on social media that the boy had long been a victim of bullying, and was forced to give money to one of his classmates before he was killed.

They said police identified the suspected killers after reviewing the surveillance footage and questioning the classmates.

The provincial prosecutor said today that it had received a police request last month to criminally try the suspects, surnamed Zhang, Li and Ma.

It said it had concluded that the three were between 12 and 14 when they 'intentionally committed murder, causing the death of the victim Wang'.

'The circumstances were serious and they should be held criminally responsible,' the provincial office said, adding that the country's top public prosecutor had reviewed the decision.

'While handling cases strictly in accordance with the law, the procuratorial organs will... further strengthen the prevention and treatment of juvenile crimes,' the provincial prosecutor continued.

Under Chinese law, murder is punishable by imprisonment or the death penalty.

State media have given Wang's death widespread coverage, though there are signs that Chinese authorities are keeping a close eye on public sentiment.

On March 17, the family's attorney, Zang Fanqing, was abruptly cut off on a live broadcast after saying he and Wang's father were barred from seeing the boy's body. The next day, Zang said on social media that they were allowed to see the body.

A public statement from police on March 17 asked the public not to spread rumors to protect the victim's privacy and avoid further harm to the boy's family.

His family has signaled they intend to pursue criminal charges. In a video posted on social media, Wang's father said the sight of his son's body was 'crueler than I imagined.'

'Your father isn't scared, he is only upset and furious,' Wang's father wrote, addressing his son. 'Wait for your father to avenge you!'

Media reports said the three boys were 'left-behind' children, a phrase used to describe kids in the countryside often cared for by grandparents because their parents work in faraway cities.

Zhang Dongshuo, a defense attorney in Beijing unaffiliated with the case, said that Wang's death is the latest in a series of juvenile murder cases in China that have sparked debate on how old a child should be before being held responsible for a crime.

'Generally speaking, these kinds of cases involving minors are rare,' Zhang said. 'But recently more and more of these cases have been reported by the media, and it's been triggering discussion in Chinese society over revising the age of criminal responsibility.'

In 2019, a 13-year-old boy who confessed to sexually assaulting and murdering a 10-year-old girl avoided criminal charges because Chinese law at the time stipulated that only those over the age of 14 could be held criminally liable.

Two years later, the the age of criminal responsibility was lowered to 12, but the government mandated that prosecution only take place if approved by the Supreme People's Procuratorate, China's highest prosecuting authority.

Zhang added that the lack of parental guidance for 'left behind' children has been a longstanding social issue, but that the question of how they should be raised has not been fully resolved.

'Many people think schools and the government should take responsibility for children's education, but that means if the relevant government departments and schools don't educate them effectively, then it's highly likely this minor is left in an educational vacuum,' he said.

(source: dailymail.co.uk)

NIGERIA:

Justice For Ummukulsum

At last, a Kano state High court has sentenced 47-year-old Chinese national, Frank Geng-Quangrong, to death by hanging for the gruesome murder of his 22-year-old Nigerian girlfriend, Ummukulsum Sani. We recall that the Kano Police command arrested Geng – Quangrong and charged him for culpable homicide after compelling evidence showed that he murdered Miss Sani with whom he had relationship, at her residence in Janbulo quarters, Kumbotso LGA of Kano, in September 2022.

As should be expected, condemnation trailed Miss Sani’s murder in Kano and other parts of the country with most Nigerians demanding that the culprit face full wrath of the law. Good enough, the Kano state government did the needful by ensuring diligent prosecution of the matter.

During the trial, Geng-Quangrong claimed he killed his estranged girlfriend in self-defence but the trial judge, Justice Sanusi Ado-Maaji described his testimonies and evidence as inconsistent. He, accordingly, dismissed same and pronounced death sentence on the accused.

Geng-Quangrong was sentenced for acting in ways that contravenes section 221(b) of the Kano Penal Code Law.

With the trial judge’s verdict, it can be said without any iota of doubt that justice has not only been done, but has manifestly been seen to have been done. Even though the judgement cannot bring Miss Sani, it will provide some form of consolation for her family that the killer has been served justice.

Fundamentally, the reaction that followed the court’s verdict not only in Kano but in some states across the country showed that Nigerians were impressed with the prompt manner with which the Kano state government handled the matter.

In Geng-Quangrong’s China, death penalty is applicable to offenses ranging from murder to drug trafficking and those found wanting are executed by lethal injection or shooting. Therefore, coming from China where capital punishment gets widespread support among the populace, the convict knows very well the implication of his action. Good enough, he got what he rightly deserved.

As a newspaper, we applaud the judge for this expeditious judgement and urge the Kano state governor, Abba Kabir Yusuf whose responsibility it is to give the final nod before execution, to do that without hesitation. The governor should, once the convict exhausts all windows for appeal, not waste time in signing the death warrant. Anyone who kills loses the right to life, pure and simple.

But even as we commend this decisive capital punishment verdict on the Chinese, it is trite to take a look at the execution of death row inmates in the country. How has Nigeria fared as far as execution of death row inmates is concerned?

Available records indicate that about 3,298 persons are on death row in the country. Quangrong will make an addition to the list. Unfortunately, death sentences are rarely carried out in Nigeria. This has got to change.

We are tempted to believe that the state governor’s reluctance to approve execution of convicts has greatly frustrated the implementation of capital punishment with the repercussions being that it emboldens killers to murder with reckless abandon.

It is on record that some states enacted laws that not only criminalizes kidnapping but provides for capital punishment for kidnappers, especially those who kidnap and kill their victims.

However, due to political expediency, governors have been very reluctant to sign death warrants.Since 2012, no governor has signed death warrants even though the nation has one of the most congested prisons in the world with some of the inmates being on death row.

Governors must set aside whatever sentiments they nurse and do the needful by signing death warrants especially when such emanates from a murder-based prosecution like that of Quangrong.

We are against abolitionists and others who have been consistent in championing an end to the death penalty because we believe very strongly that the movement is unjust and clearly supports injustice. Every life matters hence, anyone who kills should be killed.

(source: Editorial, leadership.ng)

SERBIA:

Vucic, 'I'll propose death penalty for those who kill children'----Serbian president: '40-year sentence is not appropriate'

Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic said he will propose to the new government the introduction of the death penalty for those responsible for heinous crimes, such as the recent killing of little Danka, only 2 years old, or last year's massacre at the Belgrade school.

In a televised interview, the president said he believes even a 40-year prison sentence is inadequate for a crime such as the killing of a 2-year-old girl, an affair that has aroused great emotion and outrage throughout the country.

Less than a month from now will mark the 1st anniversary of the massacre at the school in Belgrade, where on May 3 a 13-year-old boy, firing his father's gun, killed 9 of his peer students and a security guard, injuring numerous others.

(source: ansa.it)

SAUDI ARABIA:

Saudi father forgives son’s killer days before execution

In a remarkable display of forgiveness, Saudi citizen Ati Al Maliki from Makkah has extended a pardon to the convicted killer of his son, Abdullah. The pardon, granted just days before the scheduled execution slated for April 17, came without any request for compensation in return.

The touching moment was captured in a viral video, where Al Maliki publicly announced his decision to forgive Shaher Dhaifallah Al Harithi, the young perpetrator. The act of clemency, showcased amid the holy month of Ramadan, resonated deeply with viewers.

The announcement drew a crowd around Al Maliki, who expressed admiration and gratitude for his act of compassion. This heartfelt scene unfolded on the night of the 27th of Ramadan, a significant period often associated with the blessed Night of Power.

The incident has sparked widespread praise on social media platforms, with many commending Al Maliki’s demonstration of forgiveness and empathy. In Saudi Arabia, individuals convicted of premeditated murder typically face death sentences unless pardoned by the victim’s relatives, with or without compensation.

Al Maliki’s act of mercy serves as a powerful reminder of the values of forgiveness and compassion, especially during this sacred time of reflection and spiritual renewal.

(source: arabtimesonline.com)

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

Bobby Chemmannur mobilizes efforts to secure 34 crore to halt Abdul Rahim's execution in Saudi Arabia

(see: https://keralakaumudi.com/en/news/news.php?id=1282747&u=)

IRAN:

Iran’s Execution Rate Likely to Surge Again as Crackdown on Dissent Persists

The first 3 months of 2024 puts Iran well on the way to retaining its status as the country with the world’s highest rate of executions per capita. In 2023, the country witnessed an 8-year high in executions, largely attributed to a surge associated with the regime’s crackdown on dissent following a nationwide uprising in 2022.

This surge resulted in over 870 executions in 2023, with several directly linked to defendants’ involvement in the previous year’s uprising. At least nine individuals were executed on charges such as “enmity against God” or “spreading corruption on Earth.” Dozens of similar death sentences are reportedly pending, raising concerns among activists that the regime may intend to implement them once international attention to Iran’s human rights abuses diminishes.

Following the October 7 attacks and the eruption of a significant conflict in the Middle East, which the clerical regime claimed ownership for and boasted about its ties with the involved aggressors, the regime has further escalated the rate of executions.

However, the crackdown extended far beyond state-sanctioned executions. According to the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK), over 30,000 protesters were arrested between the onset of the 2022 uprising in mid-September and the year’s end. Iranian authorities indirectly acknowledged this estimate later, announcing that nearly the same number had been granted amnesty, although this assertion is subject to dispute.

Multiple political prisoners, predominantly in their 20s and 30s, who were reportedly released, were subsequently found dead with claims of suicide. Many of the victims’ families allege that they were subjected to severe torture or even poisoning.

The same phenomenon is evident in recent reports about relatives of persons killed during that uprising being arrested or re-arrested. On April 2, human rights activists highlighted the case of Saeed Farokhi Pour, who had been arrested the previous day at Behesht-e Zahra Cemetery after attending a memorial for his son Amir-Mehdi Farokhi Pour. By coincidence, that arrest coincided with a report from the Center for Human Rights in Iran detailing the prosecution of Mahsallah Karami, whose son Medhi Karami was hanged on January 7, 2023, for his participation in the uprising.

The elder Karami has been detained since August, facing charges of assembly and collusion against national security and propaganda against the state, and also stands accused of financial corruption on account of receiving compassionate donations to help support him and other families who are grieving losses and pursuing justice for the authorities who killed their loved ones.

Although there is no immediate indication that Karami faces a threat of execution, there are other means by which Iranian authorities have killed and continue to kill protesters and dissidents. On March 24, a 20-year-old woman named Sara Tabrizi was found dead in her father’s Tehran home, leading to speculation that she had committed suicide after being arrested the previous December, subjected to torture and threats, released, but then kept under severe pressure before being summoned back to the Intelligence Ministry on March 23.

The clerical regime has also escalated its pressure on former political prisoners, supporters of the Iranian Resistance, and individual dissenters who have been active in the past, as a means to intimidate the public.

As the end of Ramadan draws near, the regime seeks to conceal its post-election internal turmoil and the fallout from its regional conflicts. Therefore, the regime is expected to continue its pattern of high rates of executions, arbitrary arrests, and forced disappearances. History suggests that capital punishment under this regime is not about justice but rather a political tool.

(source: ncr-iran.org)

APRIL 7, 2024:

TENNESSEE:

Tennessee Legislature to debate child rape death penalty bill

The Tennessee State Legislature will be discussing a new bill that would strengthen the punishment for those convicted of the rape of a child.

Sponsored by Representative William Lambert of Portland, House Bill 1663 would authorize the death penalty for those convicted of child rape.

Currently under Tennessee law, a convicted suspect would receive at minimum 25 years and up to the maximum of 60 years in prison.

Additionally, a Supreme Court decision in the 2008 case Kennedy v. Louisiana prohibited the death penalty from being applied to such cases due to Eighth Amendment provisions.

However, Representative Lambert believes if this bill were to be passed and challenged back up to the Supreme Court, there could be a different outcome.

He told one committee, “I think the current U-S Supreme Court is much more 10th Amendment friendly, they’re much more State’s Rights friendly, and I’m confident that this could be overturned. I can’t guarantee that it will but it can be. If the fear of losing their own life saves even one kid, the fear of a defendant, saves even one kid from being raped by a monster out there, because if they do that they face the death penalty, then it’s worth passing in my humble opinion.”

The bill will be debated on the State Senate floor on Monday.

(source: WDEF news)

MISSOURI:

Missouri Supreme Court set to hear Governor Parson's clemency challenge among others

The Supreme Court of Missouri has scheduled one docket of cases for oral argument next week.

Beginning at 9 a.m. Wednesday, April 10, the Court is scheduled to hear:

* SC100292, Shawn Flaherty v. State of Missouri, an appeal from Buchanan County involving ineffective assistance of counsel.

* SC100408, Lisa Schermerhorn v. GT Striping LLC, an appeal from Clay County involving application of the acceptance doctrine.

* SC100352, State ex rel. Governor Michael L. Parson v. The Honorable Cotton Walker, a proceeding originating in Cole County involving a challenge to the governor’s exercise of clemency authority in a death penalty case arising in St. Louis County.

(source: KRCG news)

IDAHO:

Prosecutors seek the death penalty against man accused of slaying of 4 University of Idaho students

Prosecutors say they are seeking the death penalty against a man accused of stabbing 4 University of Idaho students to death late last year.

Bryan Kohberger, 28, is charged with 4 counts of murder in connection with the deaths at a rental house near the Moscow, Idaho, university campus last November. Latah County Prosecutor Bill Thompson filed the notice of his intent to seek the death penalty in court on Monday.

A not-guilty plea was entered in the case on Kohberger's behalf earlier this year. A hearing in the case is scheduled for Tuesday.

The bodies of Madison Mogen, Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin were found on Nov. 13, 2022, at a rental home across the street from the University of Idaho campus. The slayings shocked the rural Idaho community and neighboring Pullman, Washington, where Kohberger was a graduate student studying criminology at Washington State University.

Police released few details about the investigation until after Kohberger was arrested at his parents’ home in eastern Pennsylvania early Dec. 30, 2022. Court documents detailed how police pieced together DNA evidence, cellphone data and surveillance video that they say links Kohberger to the slayings.

Investigators said traces of DNA found on a knife sheath inside the home where the students were killed matches Kohberger, and that a cellphone belonging to Kohberger was near the victims’ home on a dozen occasions before the killings. A white sedan allegedly matching one owned by Kohberger was caught on surveillance footage repeatedly cruising past the rental home around the time of the killings.

But defense attorneys have filed motions asking the court to order prosecutors to turn over more evidence about the DNA found during the investigation, the searches of Kohberger's phone and social media records, and the surveillance footage used to identify the make and model of the car. The motions are among several that will be argued during the hearing Tuesday afternoon.

In an affidavit filed with the motions, defense attorney Anne Taylor said prosecutors have only provided the DNA profile that was taken from traces found on the knife sheath, not the DNA profiles belonging to 3 other unidentified males that were developed as part of the investigation.

Defense attorneys are also asking for additional time to meet case filing deadlines, noting that they have received thousands of pages of documents to examine, including thousands of photographs, hundreds of hours of recordings, and many gigabytes of electronic phone records and social media data.

Idaho law requires prosecutors to notify the court of their intent to seek the death penalty within 60 days of a plea being entered. In his notice of intent, Thompson listed 5 “aggravating circumstances” that he said could qualify for the crime for capital punishment under state law; including that more than one murder was committed during the crime, that it was especially heinous or showed exceptional depravity, that it was committed in the perpetration of a burglary or other crime, and that the defendant showed “utter disregard for human life.”

If a defendant is convicted in a death penalty case, defense attorneys are also given the opportunity to show that mitigating factors exist that would make the death penalty unjust. Mitigating factors sometimes include evidence that a defendant has mental problems, that they have shown remorse, that they are very young or that they suffered childhood abuse.

Idaho allows executions by lethal injection. But in recent months, prison officials have been unable to obtain the necessary chemicals, causing 1 planned execution to be repeatedly postponed. On July 1, death by firing squad will become an approved back-up method of execution under a law passed by the Legislature earlier this year, though the method is likely to be challenged in federal court.

(source: Associated Press)

UGANDA:

The Real-Life Consequences of Uganda’s Anti-LGBTQ+ Legislation — Interview With a Local Trans Advocate

Uganda made international headlines this week as its Constitutional Court upheld the bulk of a draconian law that would impose the death sentence for “aggravated homosexuality.” But for LGBTQ+ activists within the country, the death penalty isn’t the only specter that looms in the judgment’s aftermath. Over the past 15 years, Ugandan authorities have endeavored to expand the scope of the country’s criminalization of homosexuality and to bolster its arsenal of punitive options. And with each codification of homophobia, citizens see an endorsement for violence against the country’s beleaguered LGBTQ+ community, resulting in a veritable panopticon of homophobic zeal.

Following the court decision, JURIST spoke with Liz,* a social worker and transgender-rights advocate in Kampala who has devoted her life to providing trans Ugandans with the resources she lacked as a child and young adult navigating her gender identity and expression.

Having identified as a girl from early childhood, Liz’ gender expression has courted reactions ranging from disapproval and disavowal to arrest and violence. Perhaps following from these decades of abuse, courage reverberates from her every word. It is thus telling that when she speaks of fear in Uganda, her fear is not limited to the authorities who recently won a court case authorizing the imposition of capital punishment for homosexuality; her fear is directed toward society at large.

“Whenever these laws are introduced to society, the result is violence,” Liz said in an interview from the Ugandan capital on Friday. “People start to think that anyone who wears a rainbow is gay. People start to think that someone who usually has facial hair and shaves is gay. … Ultimately these laws embolden the community to commit violence, verbal abuse and cyber bullying against people who they think might be gay. These laws spark and perpetuate violence.”

By the time Uganda enacted its first modern “anti-homosexuality act” in 2009, Liz was a teenage girl. She had been identified as male at birth but knew from early childhood that this sex assignment had been erroneous. As a child, she didn’t have the resources to make sense of these feelings.

“By the time I was 10, I knew I was a trans woman. I didn’t like men’s clothes. I preferred dresses, and I liked to wear makeup to school. People didn’t know what to make of it; they would assume it was because I had sisters, or that I was trying to be dramatic,” Liz said. She recounted her parents’ ad nauseum warnings not to wind up gay, and a dearth of support to help her navigate the feelings she was grappling with.

After graduating from high school, she discovered that the internet could be a gateway to sharing the trans experience. She found videos of trans women living in their truth and realized life could expand beyond her closeted experience. But a cousin caught her watching videos of trans women and reported it to her parents. Not only did her parents disown her; they outed her to her employer, a local airport, which promptly fired her. She found herself alone and resourceless.

This alienation prompted Liz to contemplate suicide. But her university years would show her that a compassionate and supportive community existed, even if only in the shadows of Ugandan society.

“When I went to university, I started to find other people like me, whether on social media or in real life. It was during this period that I began to feel like I was really becoming me,” she said.

Since then, she has devoted her life to creating the resources she was never afforded. “It was this experience that gives me the courage to talk to young trans women — women who are just considering coming out, or even those who aren’t ready to yet — and tell them to be proud of who they are,” she said.

She now works as a social worker and mentor, helping trans women who are grappling with some of life’s toughest blows — those who have been excommunicated from their families, driving them into poverty; those who have contracted HIV and other life-altering diseases; and those struggling with mental illness. She runs a halfway house for unhoused trans women, which was subjected to police raids even before the latest iteration of the anti-homosexuality act. She is a Global Ambassador with the Black trans organization Reuniting of African Descendants (ROAD), which she says has been generous with supporting her and other trans women in her community. She also volunteers with the local trans advocacy group Talented Youth Community Fellowship Uganda.

And beyond all of this, she decrypts the esoteric language of Uganda’s law so trans women of all educational backgrounds can know what they’re up against. “These women need to know in lay language what they are facing,” she said.

Each bolstering of Ugandan anti-homosexuality legislation has precipitous consequences.

“They literally don’t want LGBTQ+ people to exist,” Liz says, reflecting on the societal impacts of the country’s anti-gay legislation. “You see beatings, you see bullying, and you even see landlords evicting tenants who they think are gay.”

Since becoming a trans advocate, Liz has been arrested three times on various charges related to helping LGBTQ+ Ugandans. She readily admits that her most recent arrest ended in bribery; she tapped into the resources she had accumulated as a trans advocate to collect funds to pay off the police to secure her freedom.

But these arrests remain on her record, potentially implicating her in “aggravated homosexuality;” Part 3 of the Anti-Homosexuality Act stipulates that a person can be made to “suffer death” for committing “serial offenses” of the law.

Nonetheless, Liz and her community persevere. They have taken a variety of security precautions and self defense trainings to protect themselves from potential police and societal harms. After one of her arrests, Liz fled for several months to Kenya, but feeling that there was far too much work still be done in Kampala, she returned to Uganda.

As societal and legislative pressure mount, Liz questions whether she can commit to staying for the long haul. “I can’t hold up the flag when I’m dead. I can’t advocate for my community when I’m dead,” she said.

Liz’ life has never been easy. And as the anti-homosexuality legislation continues to gain steam in Uganda, it would be naive to assume her plight will soon improve. But for her, the threat is existential, and she has no choice but to continue fighting.

She urged the international community to continue pressuring Kampala to change course, voicing optimism that what has worked before may hold renewed promise.

She urged the authorities in Kampala to stop scapegoating the LGBTQ+ community; to take ownership of their shortcomings, and stop ambling to blame others.

And she expressed disappointment with the courts of Uganda. “Instead of working to apply the law to uphold the rights of their people, they used the law to discriminate — to push back — to infringe upon the fundamental rights” of Uganda’s LGBTQ+ community.

(source: Ingrid Burke Friedman | JURIST Editorial Director, jurist.org)

SOUTH AFRICA:

The death penalty is no solution to SA’s crime crisis

Recent calls for the reinstatement of the death penalty in South Africa are worrying. It is understandable that the increasing incidence of very gruesome crimes against women and children in particular and other crimes in general, have left the community totally devastated, angry and shocked. In this circumstance the reinstatement of the death penalty seems to be the only recourse.

In his book, Hind Swaraj, Gandhiji wrote about his views on the need for societal change as a way to rise above criminal activities. Behind the simple statement “an eye for an eye will end up making the whole world blind” is this understanding that revenge and retribution do not solve societal problems. A concerted effort to change people’s thinking and bring back the humanity, compassion, and love in the lives of people will result in a society where such gruesome crimes will not take place.

I refer to the book “When the State Kills”, which provides clearly all the reasons why the death penalty should be abolished. Systematically the book outlines research which shows that the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime; that over the centuries the world has seen many cases where courts have made mistakes in their findings and if the accused is alive one can release him, but if the death penalty is imposed there is nothing that can be done to correct the injustice; that it is important to think of the mental trauma that this act of killing has on the ones who are entrusted to carry out the punishment; that a society where life becomes of little consequence, whether from the side of the state or the public, gruesome crimes will proliferate; that research reveals that often the poor are the victims of the death sentence while the wealthy are able to evade it through various means not least by engaging the most articulate lawyers; and that many countries abolished the death penalty with very little consequence of increasing crime rates.

Spiritually, every act of cruelty, every evil thought has the effect of reducing our humanity even when the thought is directed towards one who has wronged us. The wrong-doer suffers from his/her own conscience and consequences of the act of evil but the victim or the sufferer and his/her family suffer not only the loss of a loved one, but also anger and desire for revenge. Our scriptures teach us that these negative emotions of anger only have an adverse affect on us.We suffer the physical and mental effects of anger and desire for revenge on our bodies.

There are many examples of people who have risen above such anger and done extraordinary things. A father whose son was killed by a pizza delivery man, reached out to the father of the man who killed his son and together they set up an organisation to deal with trauma and racism, and help the man in prison realise the seriousness of his crime and rehabilitate him. These stories are replicated all over the world where reconciliation and rehabilitation has successfully happened. Is this not a better way to deal with criminal conduct than the death penalty?

It is a matter of what comes first, the egg or the hen, that one has to look at whether one should look at the proliferation of gruesome crimes or at the gruesomeness of the state taking on the authority to kill. At the end it is our own thoughts that determine who we are and what matters to us. Let us consider the statement made by Nelson Mandela at the Rivonia Trial, “I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal for which I hope to live for and to see realised. But my lord, if it needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die” and Mahatma Gandhi’s statement, “I am prepared to die but there is no cause on earth for which I am prepared to kill.”

Both these leaders talk about self-sacrifice and not about taking life.

The more important issue facing humanity as a whole is how has modernisation changed us from a community in which we were able to live and extend hospitality to strangers passing by, to the present day situation where we are estranged from each other to the extent that we have gates, fences, security and weapons to safeguard us. We do not readily open our doors to strangers. We live in fear of being mugged. This is dehumanising us. We are unable to accept human beings as fellow travellers on this earth and instead we label people as thieves and murderers. People are not born with these attributes, modern living and inequalities drives people to behave in an anti-social manner.

The death penalty is final, once killed you cannot bring them back. So when we call for implementation of such an extreme act does it not dehumanise us? Yet there are many people who believe that revenge, punishment befitting an act against another is normal and it is justice.

Anger drives them to call for the death penalty. But given a chance to think, people will realise that their suffering will not go away through an act of revenge. So what is real justice? As Gandhiji said, real justice is in helping to transform people to become humane again and desist from acts that hurt others. Let us help to transform our society and move away from violence.

(source: Opinion; Dr Ela Gandhi is a peace activist; iol.co.za)

INDIA:

Man Who Was Twice Sentenced To Death In 2 Trials Acquitted In 3rd Retrial

In a notable development in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, a man who had been convicted and sentenced to death two times for the alleged rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl was acquitted after the 3rd trial.

Judge Prachi Patel presiding over the case observed, "no matter how grave the crime is, the burden of proof to convict the accused always lies on the prosecution. The court must always remain vigilant and ensure that the court's findings are based on the evidence presented before the court and not influenced by emotions."

Anokhilal, the accused, was charged with offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act 2012. These charges include Sections 363 (kidnapping), 366 (kidnapping or inducing a woman to compel her marriage), 376 (2) (sexual assault), 377 (unnatural offenses), and 302 (murder) of the IPC, as well as Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act.

Anokhilal was accused of sexually assaulting and killing a minor girl, approximately 9 years old, on January 30, 2013. The girl was reported missing on January 29, 2013, from her residence in a village in Madhya Pradesh, and her body was discovered the following day.

In 2013, Anokhilal was convicted by a special court in Madhya Pradesh's Khandwa district for the rape and murder of a 9-year-old , and the court swiftly sentenced him to capital punishment following a brief trial of less than 2 weeks.

However, in 2019, the Supreme Court overturned this ruling, ordering a retrial. Subsequently, in 2023, the Khandwa court once again sentenced Anokhilal to death. This decision was later overturned by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which remanded the case back to the special court. Following a third trial, conducted recently, Anokhilal was acquitted.

The special court found numerous discrepancies in the DNA reports, which ultimately led to Anokhilal's acquittal. The judge highlighted errors in the collection, sealing, and analysis of the samples.

Crucially, it was revealed that the semen found at the crime scene belonged to another individual, suggesting the involvement of someone else in the heinous act.

Moreover, the court dismissed the police's assertion that Anokhilal's flight from the scene was incriminating evidence, suggesting he may have returned simply to collect his wages.

Expressing dissatisfaction with the “last seen with” theory(based on which he was convicted in earlier rounds), the Court observed, "The deceased was last seen with accused Anokhilal on 30.01.2013 and her dead body was seen on 01.02.2013 at 06:30 am. That is, approximately 36 hours after they were last seen together, the deceased was found dead in a mutilated state. There is no evidence regarding what happened in these 36 hours. Therefore, in this case also, the evidence regarding the last time they were seen together is of rare nature and is an unreliable evidence of weak nature. Therefore, the accused cannot be found guilty on this basis alone."

In the context of the DNA report, the court emphasized that although male DNA was detected on swabs collected from the victim's body, it highlighted Dr. Pankaj Srivastava's acknowledgment that Anokhilal's DNA was not present in these samples. This observation, the Court said, "points towards his innocence and the only scientific evidence here is enough to acquit the accused. The involvement of any other person in the crime of rape completely excludes the presumption of guilt of the accused."

The Court expressed surprise at the fact that, despite having the entire deceased body at their disposal, the investigators chose to use a stain from the victim's pajamas as the sole DNA reference profile. The Court deemed this a significant flaw in the investigation, emphasizing that it is improper to consider a cloth stain as representative of the victim's DNA profile, particularly when it is clear that the victim was sexually assaulted by someone other than the accused.

The Court held, "The report is being accepted as scientifically correct and accurate science and D.N.A. The test, despite all its flaws, remains negative and points to the innocence of the accused. After considering the suitability of other witnesses, it has been concluded by the Court that the theory of last seen is evidence of a weak nature."

"Due to the above discrepancies, the DNA report has been prepared incorrectly and scientific procedures have not been followed," the Court added.

On March 20, after spending approximately 11 years behind bars, Anokhilal was finally released.

Project 39A of the National Law University Delhi provided legal assistance to Anokhilal. P39A intervened in the matter after the 2nd trial and assisted the appeal before the Madhya Pradesh High Court. It briefed Sr. Adv Anil Khare in the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Jabalpur).

Shreya Rastogi (Director- Death Penalty Litigation and Director - Forensics at Project 39A) appeared and argued on behalf of Anokhilal in the 3rd trial in Khandwa Sessions Court. Shreya Rastogi was assisted by Project 39A Associates - Sakshi Jain, Maria Sahayaselvan, Saloni Ambastha, and Stuti Rai.

(source: livelaw.in)

APRIL 6, 2024:

TEXAS:

Favorable evidence was withheld from Melissa Lucio during death penalty trial

The Cameron County District Attorney’s Office and appellate attorneys for Death Row inmate Melissa Lucio agree that favorable evidence was “withheld” from the defense during her 2008 trial.

She was convicted in July 2008 of the murder of her 2-year-old daughter, Mariah Alvarez, and was sentenced to death.

Lucio has maintained her innocence and said that her daughter died following a fall down a staircase at her Harlingen apartment. She has also maintained that she falsely confessed following about 5 hours of interrogation at the Harlingen Police Department.

Her appeal has garnered national attention, which gained traction with the 2020 documentary, “The State of Texas vs. Melissa.”

Lucio was nearly executed on April 27, 2022, but on April 18, 2022, Lucio filed a writ of habeas corpus that claimed the state used false testimony; previously unavailable scientific evidence would preclude her conviction; that she is actually innocent; and that the state suppressed favorable, material evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, which stipulates that prosecutors must turn over exculpatory evidence to defense attorneys.

It is that last issue that prosecutors and Lucio’s appellate attorneys agree on, which is the subject of a Jan. 11 agreed findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Vanessa Potkin, who is Lucio’s appellate attorney and who is with the Innocence Project, and Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz released a joint statement to MyRGV.com regarding the development.

That statement references the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, or CCA, stay of execution and how that court ordered the trial court to consider new evidence along with other claims regarding the fairness and reliability of Lucio’s conviction.

“Following CCA’s remand and in response to the Court’s directive, the Cameron County District Attorney’s Office undertook further review of Melissa’s case,” the statement reads.

It then references the agreed findings of fact and conclusions of law submitted to the trial court.

“Under Texas procedure the trial court must make a recommendation to the CCA which is the only court that can vacate a conviction. We are hopeful that Melissa’s case will be resolved.”

CPS RECORDS

On April 25, 2022, just 2 days before her scheduled execution, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals determined that those four claims met the requirements for her writ of habeas corpus and stayed her execution.

In the agreed Jan. 11 findings, which has yet to be signed by a judge, the parties agreed that Lucio is entitled to relief on the claim that had that exculpatory evidence been provided to Lucio at her trial, there’s a reasonable probability that the outcome “would have been different.”

During that trial, Lucio argued that her child died during the fall and the evidence that had been “withheld” included firsthand statements about Alvarez’s deteriorating condition following that fall that would have corroborated Lucio’s defense that her child died from a head injury sustained during that accidental fall two days before her death.

“The Court finds that the suppressed evidence would have led defense counsel to further investigate additional evidence confirming that accidental cause of death and non-abuse explanations for the extensiveness of the child’s bruising,” the findings stated.

The evidence in question includes Child Protective Services, or CPS, reports and sworn statements from her children that the parties agree were suppressed at trial.

“Collectively, the suppressed evidence was material in that it undermines confidence in the outcome of Applicant’s capital conviction because it provides evidentiary support for the defense theory that Mariah’s death resulted from an accidental head wound consistent with a fall down the stairs,” the findings stated.

The 1st piece of evidence that was suppressed was a CPS investigation report.

While Lucio and her husband, Robert Alvarez, were being questioned at the Harlingen Police Department, a CPS investigator was also interviewing witnesses, including Lucio’s children, which detectives had knowledge of.

“The Court finds that, rather than disclose Arreola’s Investigative Report, the State produced to defense counsel a document that purported to represent Investigator Arreola’s work on the case … but omitted critical aspects of the full report, including the descriptions of Arreola’s interviews with five of Applicant’s children, which she conducted on the night of Mariah’s death, at the Harlingen Police Department, while Applicant and her husband were being questioned,” the findings stated.

Those interviews reveal that one of Lucio’s children, Robert “Bobby” Alvarez, who was 7 at the time, was present when the 2 year old fell.

“Applicant’s teenaged daughter Alexandra stated that she saw bruises on Mariah’s eye ‘from when she fell at the previous apartment,’” the findings stated.

That CPS report also revealed that all of Lucio’s children told the CPS investigator that their mother wasn’t abusive to them or to her toddler daughter and that one of her children said “he has never seen anyone hit Mariah.”

Another of Lucio’s children told the CPS investigator that she “didn’t believe that her [mother] would hit Mariah” and that the only discipline she used was spanking them on the butt.

“Two other children, Rene (age 9) and Selina (age 15) likewise told Investigator Arreola that they had never seen their mother hit Mariah or her other children,” the findings stated.

That report also included information that Alvarez’s condition declined following the fall in the days before her death.

“Specifically, Alexandra told Investigator Arreola that ‘Maria had been throwing up,’ which Applicant ‘thought … was because she ate a bad tamale,’ and that Mariah then stopped eating,” the findings stated.

It also showed that Alvarez was having difficulty breathing the night before she died.

“Additionally, while the prosecution at trial attributed Mariah’s dehydration at the time of death to abuse, the suppressed report contains Alexandra’s account that Applicant repeatedly tried to get Mariah to drink something in the 2 days between her fall and her death, and that Applicant was visibly distressed by Mariah’s deteriorating condition,” the findings stated.

SWORN STATEMENTS

Those findings also stipulate that 2 sworn statements to police by two of Lucio’s children that contained favorable evidence were also suppressed.

“Instead of providing the defense with Alexandra and Daniella’s full sworn statements from the night Mariah died, prosecutors gave the defense only summaries of their statements that omitted the exculpatory information discussed directly below,” the findings stated.

The statements again corroborated Lucio’s account of her child’s injuries and declining health in the days between her fall and her death.

“Further, Alexandra’s observation of Applicant’s concern for Mariah over a 48-hour period prior to her death contradicted other evidence that Applicant inflicted a fatal head wound on Mariah within 24 hours of her death and then showed little concern as to her condition,” the findings stated.

That statement said Lucio and her husband were awake all night with the 2 year old the night before her death because she “had been breathing heavily.”

The other statement said that the child “looked really healthy and active” two weeks before her death and that she “didn’t notice anything to be wrong with her.”

“Daniella likewise averred that on the day of her death Applicant was ‘worried’ about Mariah because she had been ‘sleeping all day’ and ‘wouldn’t eat,’ because Mariah would close her mouth very tight and wouldn’t open it,” the findings stated. “Daniella also observed Maria ‘breathing heavily.’ Further, Daniella informed police that, before she died, Alexandra had called her to tell her about Mariah’s fall down (the) steps.”

Lastly, the parties agree that the cumulative impact of the suppressed evidence “provides evidentiary support for the defense that Mariah’s head injury was accidental, and counters the State’s evidence that the injuries could have only been the result of intentional abuse.”

“Further, the parties agree and this Court finds that disclosure of the suppressed evidence would have allowed defense counsel to present evidence to establish a fall occurred and to meaningfully challenge testimony suggesting that Applicant was lying about Mariah’s accidental fall,” the findings stated.

At trial, a detective testified that only Lucio alleged her child fell down the stairs and that there was no physical evidence to corroborate that assertion.

“Had defense counsel been aware of the contemporaneous witness statements provided to police and CPS workers that corroborated Applicant’s account of Mariah’s fall, the defense could have meaningfully challenged Det. Cruz’s testimony that implied Applicant made up the fall,” the findings stated.

This suppressed evidence has been provided to a forensic pathologist and a law enforcement expert who have concluded that the child’s cause of death “was an accidental fall resulting in head trauma.”

“The Court finds that the cumulative effect of the suppressed evidence discussed above was material and that there is a reasonable probability that, in light of all the evidence in this case, the outcome of Applicant’s case would have been different had the withheld evidence been timely disclosed,” the findings stated.

Lucio is incarcerated at the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Patrick L. O’ Daniel facility in Gatesville, Texas.

(source: myrgv.com)

WEST VIRGINIA:

Mingo deputies withdraw AG candidate endorsement due to remarks on trooper's death

The Mingo County Deputy Sheriffs' Association said it has voted to rescind its previous endorsement in the race for West Virginia Attorney General following statements a candidate made regarding the shooting death of a state trooper in Mingo County.

Norman Mines, the association's president, said Thursday that "an overwhelming majority" of the association voted to rescind its endorsement of Mike Stuart, a Republican state senator running for the statewide office.

"We feel that with statements that you have made publicly about the death of Sgt. Cory Maynard and the use of pictures of Sgt. Maynard's family is distasteful and should not be used for sympathy votes," Mines wrote in a letter to Stuart.

Full statement from Norman Mines:

First, I want to say that personally, I have always supported Mr. Stuart as the US Attorney for the Southern District of WV and also as a Senator. Most police officers, including myself, do feel that the death penalty should be an option for heinous crimes such as the killing of a police officer. The Deputy Sheriffs' Association vetted Mr. Stuart and felt that he was a good choice for Attorney General at the time. After we published our support letters, we received information about details, that I won’t go into, out of respect for the family that Mr. Stuart released in interviews and on the Senate floor concerning the murder of Sgt. Cory Maynard. We feel that it was very distasteful and the death of such a remarkable man should not be used for political gain.

Maynard was shot and killed on June 2, 2023, after responding to a shooting complaint in the Beech Creek area of Mingo County.

Timothy Kennedy, 29, of Matewan has been indicted on a 1st-degree murder charge for Maynard's death. In January, a Mingo County grand jury also indicted Kennedy for 1st-degree robbery, disarming a law enforcement officer and 2 counts of attempted 1st-degree murder. The 2 attempted 1st-degree murder charges are for the victim in the original shooting investigation, Benjamin Baldwin, and another trooper. The remaining charges are related to Maynard's murder.

He has pleaded not guilty to the charges and remains in the Western Regional Jail without bond as defense attorneys plan to seek a change of venue for the trial that is currently set for Sept. 3.

Stuart has been outspoken about seeking legislation in West Virginia that would allow for the death penalty in cases in which first responders are murdered in the line of duty.

“If you target first responders in the line of duty leading to death, the death penalty should be on the table,” Stuart said in a statement in January before the start of the legislative session.

Stuart has also been vocal about the issue on his campaign Facebook page. His posts drew criticism from Maynard's widow, Rachel Maynard, as she urged Stuart to stop posting about the case as it prepared to go to trial. She also publicly asked Stuart for privacy for the sake of her two young children. "Stop using my husband as a political advertisement, especially since the original judge recused themselves for doing just this," she said in a previous comment on the Facebook page. "By ignoring my requests, you are proving you do not care about law enforcement and their families, you only care about your re-election."

Maynard told Eyewitness News on Friday that she has since been blocked from posting on his campaign page.

She went on to say that she appreciates the support from Mingo County and knows Stuart is aware of her concerns and her desire to keep things private for the sake of her and Sgt. Maynard's children.

She also said no other politician has spoken about details of her husband's murder.

Even though he justifies it as he was pushing this death penalty bill, it was unethical to speak publicly, multiple times about unpublic details of Cory's murder with zero regard for my family's privacy," Maynard said.

Stuart said he is sorry Maynard has "had to endure this agony." In a statement to Eyewitness News, he went on to say, "I am sorry if my advocacy for the death penalty has brought pain to her or her family or if she has interpreted my actions as political. My intentions are to protect our first responders to avoid these terrible events in the future."

Full statement from Sen. Mike Stuart:

As a former United States Attorney and top federal law enforcement official in southern WV, my top priority was protecting the public and all of the men and women in law enforcement that risk their lives each day. I felt that obligation not only to the law enforcement officers but their families. There is no ordinary day for law enforcement officers across West Virginia. Every day and every call is fraught with danger.

I pray each day for Corey Maynard’s family. He was a hero in service to the people of West Virginia. There are no words adequate to express my sympathies and no words possible to bring comfort to the terrible event that ended with his loss of life in the line of duty. Rachel Maynard has had to endure a pain no person should ever endure. My heart aches for her and her family.

Protecting our first responders and law enforcement officers is of paramount importance. It has been a passion of mine for many years. Patrolman Cassie Johnson, Sheriff’s Deputy Baker in Nicholas County, and Sgt. Corey Maynard- these are tragedies that happen too often. Then there are the cases like Trooper Abe Bean in the eastern panhandle who lost his leg as the result of being shot in the line of duty. We need to do all in our power to prevent these tragedies from occurring.

Since serving as the United States Attorney and seeing up front, close, and personal the dangers of law enforcement, I have been an outspoken advocate for the death penalty for the intentional killing of a first responder in the line of duty. I have been outspoken on the subject for many years. I introduced a bill in the State Senate last year and again this year. The tragic cases across West Virginia, including Patrolman Johnson and Sgt. Maynard, demonstrate the need for stronger punishment including the death penalty.

I am sorry that Rachel Maynard had to endure this agony. I am sorry if my advocacy for the death penalty has brought pain to her or her family or if she has interpreted my actions as political. My intentions are to protect our first responders to avoid these terrible events in the future. She and her family have endured an agony no person should endure.

As a state, this is an important policy discussion. We need to discuss the important issue of the death penalty and we need to get tougher on criminals. As a policy leader, it is my obligation to do all I can to prevent future tragedies and we need to get tougher on crime. We must deliver justice when these terrible actions occur.

Stuart is running against West Virginia State Auditor JB McCuskey in the May primary for the Republican nomination for Attorney General.

(source: WCHS TV news)

FLORIDA:

Florida jury spares life of former death row inmate convicted of 5 murders----Jurors in Tavares Calloway’s resentencing failed to meet the 8-4 vote threshold required for death.

A Miami-Dade jury late Thursday night spared the life of a man sentenced to death 14 years ago for the execution-style murder of five people in a Little Haiti apartment almost 3 decades ago.

Jurors agreed unanimously that Tavares Calloway committed the murders. But they failed to meet the relatively new 8-4 vote threshold for death that was put in place last year by state legislators after Parkland shooter Nikolas Cruz didn’t receive the unanimous votes needed for a death sentence. Before the March 2023 bill passed in Tallahassee, a unanimous vote by jurors was required to send someone to death row.

Calloway is believed to be the 1st convicted killer of more than a dozen expected to be resentenced in Miami-Dade to have his life spared under the new guideline that now makes Florida the easiest state to condemn a killer to death row. A Broward jury spared the life of convicted killer Clark Paul late last year during resentencing under the new rule.

The jury’s decision for a life sentence at the end of a two-week trial came after state prosecutors and Calloway’s defense team painted polar opposite portraits of the convicted killer. Prosecutors portrayed him as a cold, calculating killer who stripped the men not only of their pants and shoes when they were murdered, but of their dignity as well.

Calloway’s defense attorneys explained how their client was a neglected child with drug-addicted and violent parents whose life began to turn around not long after the murders. They credited it to Calloway’s exploration of the church and his acceptance by the “church ladies.” Defense attorney Scott Saken told jurors Calloway learned to read and write and discuss the great philosophers like Aristotle and Plato while he was in prison.

The jurors’ decision, which came about eight hours after deliberations began and long after most of the victims’ family members and friends had gone home, had Calloway rubbing away the tears from his eyes with his freed hands. He gave co-counsel Carmen Vizcaino a big bear hug before being led away to jail by a gaggle of Miami-Dade Corrections officers.

“Justice prevailed,” Saken said outside the courtroom of the man he’s been representing for at least 15 years. “This thing goes back 26 years. He’s a different person and the jury recognized it. It’s a total rejection of the state’s theory.”

Lead prosecutor Miami-Dade Assistant State Attorney Abbe Rifkin and her co-counselors left quickly after the verdict.

A poor, neglected and violent upbringing

For jurors to actually vote to send Calloway to death row, they were required to vote unanimously on at least one of five aggravating factors set before them by Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Miguel M. de la O. They all agreed on one of them: that Calloway committed the 1997 murders, triggering a death penalty vote.

But they failed to agree unanimously that the crimes were committed as a result of a kidnapping. Or that the murders were heinous and cruel and premeditated, or done for any type of financial gain.

They couldn’t agree on those questions despite being shown the transcript of a sworn statement Calloway gave to police after he was taken into custody in 1998, in which he admitted his guilt. He told investigators he led one man into the apartment at gunpoint, then bound all five and covered their eyes and mouths with duct tape before shooting them in the head one at a time and stealing their drugs and money.

Instead, jurors seemed to put enough weight on mitigating factors told to them by Saken that claimed his client was the poor and neglected son of a drug-addicted mother and a violent father who beat him at will.

“It was a very mitigated guy and he’s a very mitigated guy,” Saken said.

Take off their pants, lie on floor

In 2010, jurors voted by a 7-5 margin to send Calloway to his death after state prosecutors told them the story of how he and an accomplice named Antonio Clark shot and killed 5 men — some who were small-time marijuana dealers — in a Little Haiti apartment.

In his statement to police, Calloway told of how an acquaintance told him about a target for a potential “lick,” or small-time ripoff. Before the murders, the state said, Calloway and Clark purchased gloves, hats and camouflage outfits at a flea market and scoped out the apartment.

Then on Jan. 21, 1997, after watching one of the men get out of his car, Calloway told police he approached him with a gun and ordered him into the apartment, where the screen and front door were already open. When they got there, 3 men were eating around a table, a 4th sitting on a couch.

With the gun pointed at the man’s head as a threat, Calloway said he ordered all five of them to take off their pants and socks and lie down on the floor. Then, after Clark went to the store to buy some duct tape, the men’s hands and feet were tied up and their eyes and mouths covered with the tape.

Calloway said they sat around talking for 3 hours, part of the time spent foraging the apartment for money and jewelry. They eventually found about 2 pounds of marijuana and about $600. A decision was ultimately made to kill all 5 of the men who could identify Calloway.

He told police he shot them in the head, one at a time. Rifkin tried to exploit that during her closing argument, showing jurors Styrofoam heads with eyes and mouths covered in tape and with markings showing where a bullet entered and left the bodies. She counted down, trying to show jurors what it must have been like for each of the men as Calloway made his way down the line.

Raising her voice, she shouted, “Bang. Bang bang. Bang bang bang. Bang bang bang bang. Bang bang bang bang bang,” until all 5 would have been shot and killed.

The bodies were eventually discovered by the girlfriend of one of the dead men, who told jurors she headed over to the apartment angrily because her boyfriend had failed to pick up their child at day care. She contacted police. The trail for the killers was cold for about a year.

Calloway was taken into custody after Clark brought up his name, while Clark was being investigated by police for another homicide.

The men killed by Calloway were Adolphus “Tank” Melvin, 27, Gary St. Charles, 22, Trenton Thomas, 26, Frederick McGuire, 31, and Melvin’s visiting nephew, Derwin Bernard Copeland, 28.

13 years later, Calloway was found guilty of capital murder and sentenced to death by a 7-5 vote. He was also found guilty of aggravated kidnapping, armed burglary and robbery.

During his closing argument Thursday, Saken told jurors they’ve “been given the power of God” in deciding whether Calloway lives or dies.

“We’re asking you to concentrate on the person,” he said. “The state wants you to focus on the crimes.”

(source: Tampa Bay Times)

ALABAMA:

Alabama murderer gives up appeals and asks to be executed so that victims’ families have ‘justice’

A convicted killer on death row in Alabama told NBC News he no longer wants to delay justice for the families of the five people he murdered eight years ago and is ready to pay the ultimate price for his crimes.

In his first-ever interview with a reporter, Derrick Dearman said he mailed nine letters earlier this week to Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, Attorney General Steve Marshall, as well as the judges and others involved in the horrific case, informing them he is dropping his appeals and wants to be executed.

Dearman, 36, said he is at peace with his decision.

“Now it’s time for the victims and their families to get the justice they rightly deserve to start the closure,” he said during a telephone interview from William C. Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore, Alabama.

Dearman said he has not yet told the victims’ kin of his decision, but he intends to write them letters as well.

“I have laid many nights thinking, what would I say to any of them if I ever had the chance, the opportunity to say something?” he said. “That’s part of the reason I’ve made my decision to have my sentence carried out. Words don’t have any weight in this situation. The only thing I would say is that everyone that was hurt by the actions to forgive me, not for myself, but for them. That way, they will free their heart up to be able to truly heal.”

Dearman made his announcement two months after the Alabama Supreme Court denied an application to appeal his sentence and upheld his 6 murder convictions. He was charged with six homicides because one of the victims, 22-year-old Chelsea Marie Reed, was 5 months pregnant.

Alabama has a fetal homicide law that applies to any stage of pregnancy.

Dearman, who is from Leakesville, Mississippi, said he went through the appeals process for the sake of his family — not for himself.

“They said, ‘Derrick just give us a few years in this appeal process,’” he said. “‘We deserve that, it’s our right as your family to fight for your life,’ and I said, ‘OK.’ That was almost six years ago, and I feel like I’ve given them the fair chance.”

NBC News has reached out for comment to Reed’s family and the families of Dearman’s other victims: Shannon Melissa Randall, 35; Robert Lee Brown, 26; Justin Kaleb Reed, 23; and Joseph Adam Turner, 26.

Dearman has already been forgiven by Brown’s father.

“I can’t bring my son back,” Robert F. Brown said in September 2016 at Dearman’s arraignment at circuit court in Mobile, Alabama. “I forgive this guy because he don’t know no better. I feel for his family.”

The tragic chain of events began on Aug. 20, 2016, when Dearman, armed with an ax and firearms, burst into a bungalow outside rural Citronelle, Alabama.

High on methamphetamine and enraged that his estranged girlfriend Laneta Lester had taken shelter in her brother’s home, Dearman attacked the victims while they were sleeping. Then he kidnapped Lester and Turner’s 3-month-old son, Darren, and fled to his father’s home across the border in Leakesville.

The first inkling that something horrible had happened on Jim Platt Road was when Lester and the infant, who had been released by Dearman, turned up at the Citronelle police station and told officers what happened.

Dearman said he surrendered to the Leakesville police when he had come down from his high and realized what he’d done.

“I am guilty plain and simple, I turned myself in and I pled guilty,” said Dearman. “Once I got moved over to county and spent a week down there, sleeping every day, my mind coming back to me a little bit more, little bit more, little bit more, I was just in shock. I couldn’t comprehend the magnitude of what had happened because those people were good people.”

Dearman, who struggled with addiction since he was a teenager, said the drugs turned him into a monster.

“Drugs turned me into a very unpredictable, unstable and violent person,” he said. “That’s not who I am. The person that committed these crimes and the person who I truly am is 2 different people.”

But, Dearman added, that was no excuse for what he did.

“It doesn’t change the fact that the crimes were committed,” he said.

Still, when he went before a judge, Dearman pleaded not guilty at first — for his family — to 6 counts of capital murder and 2 counts of kidnapping. “They knew that I wasn’t in my right mind, they knew that the sober me would have never done those horrible things,” he said. “I wasn’t even going to litigate my conviction. But I allowed my family to get up there and plead the courts, you know for, not to seek the death penalty.”

2 weeks after the killings, the crime scene — the Turner house — burned down. But not before detectives collected the evidence they needed against Dearman. Then in September 2018, Dearman fired his 2 court-appointed attorneys and pleaded guilty.

Under Alabama law, even a suspect who has pleaded guilty to capital murder must be tried by a jury.

And in October 2018, a jury convicted Dearman.

It wasn’t immediately clear what the protocols are in Alabama for a prisoner who wants to be put to death.

But Dearman already knows how he wants to die — and has opted for lethal injection. Currently, the state has scheduled an execution for Jamie Mills for May 30 and is seeking to execute a second inmate, Alan Miller, via nitrogen gas later this year. Miller, who survived a 2022 lethal injection attempt, filed a lawsuit this week to block the nitrogen execution, arguing the 1st execution under the new method caused cruel and prolonged suffering. Alabama performed the 1st-ever execution via nitrogen earlier this year on Kenneth Eugene Smith, who had also previously survived a lethal injection attempt.

“The execution ... I mean, does it scare me? Yes, and no,” Dearman said when asked about those failed executions. “On one side, you have, you know, worse complications, for whatever reason, you know, it’s very agonizing and painful. I mean, there is that chance, Alabama has been known to have trouble with their execution process.”

“Actually going through with it, I think about that least of all. My mind is so focused on trying to make sure to do the right thing,” he says. Dearman has also already chosen a spiritual adviser — the Reverend Dr. Jeff Hood.

“Though I’m vehemently opposed to the state of Alabama having the right to kill him, Derrick Dearman is competent to make his own decisions and I’ll continue prayerfully standing beside him as he proceeds,” Hood said.

Dearman says his decision does not mean he agrees with the death penalty for the men he lives with in Holman.

“There’s guys in general population that committed way worse crimes than half the guys on death row,” he said. “There’s some guys here on death row, if you would let them go today, they would never commit a crime and be productive members of society.”

Dearman said dying is preferable to spending the rest of his life in Alabama’s brutal prison system. But that’s not why he is seeking to be executed.

“Am I doing this because I can’t live with myself? No,” he said. “I made this decision for different reasons. One of those reasons is so that all parties involved, not just the victims and their families but my family as well, can kind of get some closure and begin healing and moving forward.”

(source: Yahoo News)

MISISSIPPI:

A man on death row wants the MS Supreme Court to reconsider an earlier ruling. Here's why

Attorneys for a man on death row and more than a dozen impartial advisors are asking the state Supreme Court to reconsider its January ruling denying prisoner Timothy Ronk post-conviction relief for a 2nd time.

"The right to effective lawyers is what has allowed innocent people, including people who had been sentenced to death, to be exonerated in Mississippi," Mississippi Office of Capital Post-Conviction Counsel attorney Krissy Nobile said. "In Ronk v. State, the Mississippi Supreme Court held that, while there may be a right to effective assistance of post-conviction counsel in death penalty cases, there is no longer a remedy for that right in Mississippi.

"We filed an amicus brief, which is sometimes referred to as a “friend of the court” brief, urging the Mississippi Supreme Court to reevaluate that decision."

Ronk, 44, was sentenced to death in 2010 in Harrison County for capital murder and an additional 30 years for armed robbery in the stabbing death of Michelle Craite in her Woolmarket home. His conviction and sentences were upheld on appeal in 2015.

Prosecutors alleged Ronk burned Craite's house after the murder, to cover up the crime. They said Ronk took items from Craite, including a ring and television, and gave them to a woman he met on the Internet. The items later were found by police at the other woman’s home.

Defense attorneys argued the stabbing was in self-defense.

Ronk was denied post-conviction relief in 2019 and again earlier this year.

Attorneys with the Mississippi Office of Capital Post-Conviction Counsel said a motion for rehearing is not intended to be a repeat of arguments already made, but is meant to point out "specific errors of law or fact" found in a court's opinion.

"In its Opinion, this Court changed decades of Mississippi law permitting death-sentenced inmates a mechanism to litigate the ineffectiveness of initial post-conviction counsel," Ronk's attorney wrote in motion for rehearing filed Wednesday. "The Court then addressed the merits of Ronk’s claims and denied relief."

The basis of the motion, according to court documents, is threefold. It is:

A petition challenging the finding of ineffective assistance of initial post-conviction counsel should not be considered a "2nd" petition since it is making new claims;

The court’s ruling violates 2 provisions of the Mississippi Constitution; and

Ronk’s prima facie (first impression) claims should be "remanded for an evidentiary hearing."

The 2 constitutional provisions referenced in the petition include a person's right to legal "remedy by due course of law" and no one should be barred from defending themselves in court.

In the Supreme Court's January decision, it overturned a precedent set in 2013 in another death row case in which a man was denied relief, also for ineffective assistance of counsel in post-conviction proceedings.

"In Grayson, this Court held that a death-sentenced prisoner may seek relief in a second petition if he could show that he received ineffective assistance from his initial post-conviction counsel," Ronk's attorneys wrote. "All in all, the PCR Act encompasses a remedy to right the wrong of an inmate being burdened with ineffective capital post-conviction counsel. Thus, even if Ronk is correct that the PCR Act and all its bars are substantive law, the Court should not write remedies out of the PCR Act any more than it should write remedies into the statute."

In addition, Ronk's attorneys say the term "second" is fluid rather than finite.

"The United States Supreme Court has found that the phrase '“'second or successive'”' is not self-defining," court documents said.

(source: Mississippi Clarion Ledger)

LOUISIANA:

Louisiana lawmaker tries to roll back death penalty by nitrogen gas with new bill----A bill filed by Sen. Katrina Jackson-Andrews proposes the change, which lawmakers approved in Gov. Jeff Landry's special crime session.

Attorney General Jeff Landry is pushing to expand methods for state executions from lethal injection to include nitrogen gas, hangings, firing squads and electrocution. He also wants to add more secrecy around carrying out the death penalty in Louisiana.

Louisiana lawmakers acting at the direction of Republican Gov. Jeff Landry approved a sweeping expansion of the death penalty earlier this year, adding nitrogen gas and the electric chair to the methods used to execute death row prisoners.

Now a state senator wants to remove nitrogen from that list, saying it evokes Nazi Germany's use of gas to murder millions of Jews in the mid-20th century.

"Louisiana must remain sensitive to the oppression that certain communities have suffered in the past and not promote methods that were used in an effort to eradicate an entire group of citizens,” said state Sen. Katrina Jackson-Andrews, D-Monroe, who filed Senate Bill 430 on Tuesday, the deadline for lawmakers to enter proposals in the ongoing regular legislative session.

The 2-page bill would simply strike nitrogen hypoxia from the list of approved execution methods.

Activism by a group called Jews Against Gassing compelled her to file the bill, Jackson-Andrews said in a joint statement issued with the group. Jews Against Gassing is comprised of activists with varied perspectives on the death penalty. "Louisiana should not engage in experimental methods of killing that invoke the Holocaust," the group said in a recent statement.

Rep. Nicholas Muscarello, R-Hammond, sponsored the bill to allow executions by nitrogen gas and electrocution in Landry's February special session on crime. The hotly-debated bill also moves to seal records related to the state's procurement of lethal injection and other drugs related to the execution process from public view. It takes effect July 1.

In an interview, Muscarello said he pushed for that method because, like the electric chair and lethal injection, it has precedent in other states: Alabama in January used nitrogen suffocation to execute a man sentenced to die for a murder-for-hire, a first-of its kind ordeal that anti-death penalty groups called inhumane and experimental; state officials said it ran as intended.

"These methods have been tried and true," Muscarello said. He added that he respects Jackson-Andrews' right to file a bill that reflects her beliefs and said he wants to "listen to the debate" before forming an opinion on it.

Louisiana has not executed anyone since 2010 amid a shortage of lethal injection drugs. Landry ran on an anti-crime platform and promised to resume executions once in office.

(source: nola.com)

KENTUCKY:

Kentucky death row inmates spend years waiting for executions that aren’t comi

Across the country, few people have been on death row longer than Karu Gene White.

White was 20 years old when he was convicted of taking part in the brutal murders of 3 elderly Breathitt County shopkeepers in February 1979. The following year, he was sentenced to death by execution.

Today, nearly 44 years later, White is still languishing on death row at the Kentucky State Penitentiary in Lyon County — awaiting an execution that may never come. And he’s not the only one.

Long delays in resolving capital-punishment cases are a persistent national problem. But in Kentucky, the time lapse is extraordinarily severe. Although Kentucky has fewer death-row inmates than most other states, inmates here have spent an average of 26 years on death row — the longest of any state in the country, according to a report issued last November by the U.S. Department of Justice.

And there’s little indication that change is likely any time soon.

Executions in Kentucky have been prohibited since 2010, when Franklin Circuit Court Judge Phillip Shepherd ruled that state regulations lacked “adequate safeguards” to prevent the execution of “insane” or “intellectually disabled” defendants. Shepherd also found a conflict between regulations requiring a combination of lethal injection drugs and state law allowing the use of either a single drug or a combination of medications.

And in 2019, Shepherd ruled that the state’s execution regulations were unconstitutional because they failed to provide for an automatic stay of the death penalty if a Department of Corrections review showed “reasonable grounds to believe the condemned inmate is intellectually disabled.”

State officials currently are considering an amended regulation that would address issues including inmates’ possible intellectual disability and insanity. Once the regulation is finalized, the litigation will continue.

So, for now, the 25 men and one woman sentenced to death in Kentucky are stuck, waiting to learn their fate. None have waited as long as Karu Gene White, who is now 65 years old.

His case is emblematic of a capital punishment system in Kentucky that many supporters and opponents alike say is badly broken and needs to be drastically overhauled if not eliminated altogether.

After interviewing more than 50 criminal-justice authorities, attorneys, legislators and others, including 2 former death-row inmates and several family members of victims, the Kentucky Center for Investigative Reporting found that the system which sentences people to death by execution is costly, riddled with delays and racial disparities, and inconsistently applied.

Since the reinstatement of capital punishment nearly 50 years ago, more than 1/2of the people sentenced to death in Kentucky have had their sentences reversed, according to a study reviewed by KyCIR. Those who remain on death row wage lengthy and expensive battles in court, trying to stave off their execution or prove their innocence.

Meanwhile, the families of victims are also left in limbo — some feeling that the justice promised to them was never delivered.

The topic of the death penalty in Kentucky received public attention last September, when a group of Republican state lawmakers proposed a sweeping plan for consideration during the 2024 legislative session to combat what they said is a violent crime epidemic plaguing the state.

Among the many issues raised in their proposal, the death penalty or life in prison without parole would have been allowed for someone knowingly selling fentanyl that subsequently resulted in a fatal overdose. And prosecutors would have been required to seek the death penalty in cases when a law-enforcement officer was intentionally killed while performing his or her duties.

House Bill 5 addressing various criminal justice-related issues, including possible capital punishment for the deaths of fentanyl users and first responders, was introduced in the state House of Representatives on Jan. 9. More than 1/2 of the 100 House members have signed on as sponsors.

The renewed attention to the death penalty as punishment for crimes in Kentucky comes as public support for the practice wanes. And some state lawmakers — opponents and supporters alike — say the end of the death penalty appears to be inevitable.

House Bill 38 to abolish the death penalty, and to replace it with life imprisonment without parole for inmates currently sentenced to death, was proposed in the state House of Representatives on Jan. 2. That bill has 8 sponsors.

3 House members have signed on to both bills.

Republican State Sen. Julie Raque Adams of Louisville co-sponsored a bill during the 2023 legislative session to abolish the death penalty and replace it with life without parole. But the bill went nowhere.

Raque Adams recently told KyCIR that she thinks life without parole is a “more devastating” sentence than execution. But she also is not optimistic that a death penalty abolition bill would be adopted during this session.

State Sen. Whitney Westerfield, a Republican from Fruit Hill in western Kentucky and chair of the senate judiciary committee, agreed with Raque Adams that any proposal to abolish the death penalty is unlikely to get much traction in this year’s legislative session.

Westerfield said in an interview that he has no plans to file such a bill, but would support the abolition of capital punishment if it came to a vote.

“I have some unsettled feelings about the state killing someone, even though they’ve been found guilty by a jury of their peers,” Westerfield said. “Life without parole seems a bit more acceptable to me.”

Republican State Sen. John Schickel, from Union in northern Kentucky, is a retired police officer and a death-penalty supporter. But he thinks ending capital punishment is just a matter of time.

“It appears to me that that will happen,” Schickel told KyCIR. “I don’t think it’s a good thing. I think it’s a bad thing. But I think it’s reality.”

‘A long time’

In January 2011, as Karu Gene White was concluding his 31st year on death row, I was a reporter for The Courier-Journal and wrote a story about White’s time in the criminal-justice system. That article raised many of the same questions about capital punishment in Kentucky that are still unresolved today.

When I reported then on White’s case, he’d outlived the attorney who prosecuted him, the judge who presided over his trial, and the Kentucky Supreme Court justice who wrote the December 1983 opinion upholding White’s conviction and referring to the “barbaric … bestial manner in which the victims were murdered.”

Through the years, at least seven trial-court judges had been involved with White’s case. One judge lost track of the case for 14 months and did not address the issue that was pending before him until after the newspaper contacted him for the 2nd time.

That judge, Gary Payne of Fayette County, acknowledged to the newspaper then that 31 years was “a long time” for a case to go unresolved. After Payne retired in 2011, White’s case had no judge assigned to it for more than a year.

Today, White has two pending legal challenges to his death sentence. Both — one in state court, the other in the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals — could take years to resolve. Either case could lead to White being removed from death row.

The state court case involves a 20-year-old legal claim by White that he is intellectually disabled and therefore ineligible by law for the death penalty. The federal court case alleges that White’s trial attorneys provided ineffective assistance during the penalty phase of his sentencing in March 1980. White also alleged during his trial that he was insane at the time of the murders.

Not only has White served more time on death row than any other Kentucky inmate, his time there is exceeded by sentences for only about a dozen inmates facing execution nationwide.

In 2019, White’s current attorneys proposed to the state attorney general’s office that White’s pending litigation be resolved with a sentence of life without parole for 25 years, and also agreed to waive his parole eligibility until 2029, when White would be 71 years old. That proposed offer also contained two alternatives — keep White in prison until 2032, at which time he would be 74 years old; or life without the possibility of parole. As part of each offer, White agreed to withdraw all pending litigation and to not file any future litigation challenging his conviction and sentence. But the attorney general’s office rejected the proposals. An office spokesperson recently declined to discuss it with KyCIR.

The state refused to allow a KyCIR reporter to visit death row at the Kentucky State Penitentiary, and also declined to provide photographs of it. Instead, the Department of Corrections gave the following description of death row in an email response to questions.

An agency spokesperson said the cells on death row — like all cells at the facility in western Kentucky — resemble small dormitory rooms, with a toilet, sink, bed and mattress with pillows, sheets and blankets. Each cell has a window and a front wall of bars. Each inmate gets their own cell and can take a shower each day. They have access to outside areas, games, tablets, televisions and books.They are provided 3 meals a day, have multiple pairs of shoes and regularly get clean clothes.

One thing that differentiates death-row inmates from other inmates is their clothes — on death row, inmates wear red uniforms.

Citing White’s “intellectual deficits” and his limited ability “to communicate in a reasoned manner,” one of his attorneys, David Barron of the state Department of Public Advocacy, declined to make him available for an interview.

Due to White’s intellectual disability, Barron said he doesn’t read much because he’s capable of doing so only at an elementary-school level.

For now, Barron said, White passes the days exercising, following University of Kentucky basketball, and keeping in touch with his grandson, whose mother — White’s only child — died in an ATV accident in 2021.

Disparities, costs

Since the reinstatement of capital punishment in the United States in 1976, 3 people have been executed in Kentucky. 2 of the 3 were voluntary, including Marco Allen Chapman, the last person to be put to death, in November 2008.

Individuals sentenced to death in Kentucky are 14 times more likely to have their sentence reversed than to be executed, according to a 2022 study by Frank Baumgartner, a political science professor at the University of North Carolina.

Baumgartner also found stark racial disparities in Kentucky death-penalty cases. His study concluded that cases with white victims are more than five times as likely to result in a death sentence as those with Black victims, and that crimes involving white female victims are 11 times as likely to bring about a death sentence as those with Black male victims.

When the killer is Black and the victim is a white female, the odds are more than 20 times greater for a death sentence than when both the killer and the victim are Black, the study found.

“These extraordinary racial disparities call into question the equity of the entire system,” Baumgartner concluded.

Capital punishment is also inconsistently applied across the state, he found.

In 85 of the state’s 120 counties not a single person has been sentenced to death since capital punishment was reinstated nearly 50 years ago. More than 30 death sentences have been imposed in just 2 counties, according to Baumgartner’s study. 19 death sentences have been meted out in Jefferson County, and 10 in Fayette County.

Baumgartner concluded that Kentucky’s use of capital punishment is deeply flawed, and “should ignite a conversation about what is the criminal justice value of a system that is so racially biased, ineffective, prone to error, and unreliable.”

Capital cases also can be extremely expensive to prosecute and defend.

In July 2018, Damon Preston, head of the state Department of Public Advocacy, testified before a legislative committee that a recent four-week death penalty trial in Fayette County had involved 8 full-time department employees at a total cost of about $80,000 for their pay and benefits. The verdict: one defendant was acquitted and the jury deadlocked on the fate of the other.

In all, an estimated $440 million has been spent since 1976 on Kentucky death-penalty cases by prosecutors, defense attorneys and the courts — the equivalent of $146 million per execution, according to a 2020 analysis by six current and former public defenders, including Preston.

“Kentucky spends an inordinate amount of money that it does not have, to implement a flawed and costly death penalty process,” the analysis concluded.

The analysis also noted that 93 recommendations stemming from a 2011 American Bar Association assessment of Kentucky’s death penalty “have not been fully and properly reviewed or acted upon by any branch of state government.”

“This fact alone calls into question the legitimacy of continuing to seek the death penalty in statutorily eligible cases in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, let alone the imposition of capital punishment,” the 2020 analysis concluded.

Asked who they think is responsible for the ABA’s recommendations not being “fully and properly reviewed or acted upon,” two authors of the 2020 analysis cited state legislators.

“Unfortunately, trying to understand the death penalty and fine tune it to eliminate bias and prejudice is not on the agenda of any policy makers in the Commonwealth,” Ernie Lewis, who headed the state Department of Public Advocacy from 1996 until 2008, said in an email response. “Few legislators have made this a priority.”

And Ed Monahan, who succeeded Lewis as head of the department and served in that capacity until September 2017, said “legislators have a profound lack of understanding of the arbitrariness and capriciousness of Kentucky’s administration of the death penalty.”

Monahan said the executive and judicial branches also bear some responsibility, because they “know about the serious deficiencies and yet they have repeatedly chosen not to implement remedies to ensure a fair and just process.”

The ultimate price

Public sentiment about the death penalty is mixed, according to a 2018 statewide poll of 625 registered Kentucky voters. Only 38% of the respondents thought the death penalty was the most appropriate penalty for aggravated murder cases, compared to 57% who preferred lengthy prison sentences for such cases.

And 53% of the respondents said they would support replacing the death penalty with a sentence of life in prison once they learned of the “substantially higher” costs associated with capital prosecutions compared to life without the possibility of parole.

Nationwide, abolition of the death penalty is becoming more commonplace.

23 states and the District of Columbia, most recently Virginia in 2021, have eliminated capital punishment, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

In December 2022, Oregon Gov. Kate Brown resentenced all 17 death row inmates in that state to life without parole.

Kentucky’s Constitution gives the governor the sole authority to commute death sentences. When asked last January about proposed legislation to abolish the death penalty, Gov. Andy Beshear said he thought capital punishment is appropriate “in limited circumstances,” according to a story by Spectrum NEWS 1.

“I believe that there are some crimes that are so horrific and some people that are so dangerous that (they) merit the existence of the death penalty,” the story quoted Beshear as saying.

Beshear did not respond to requests from KyCIR to discuss his thoughts about the death penalty.

Lewis, the former Department of Public Advocacy head and also a longtime death-penalty opponent, said: “It appears the only thing that will up the urgency level to bring about change would be the execution of a person who is proven to be innocent.”

Barron, the DPA attorney and who has represented defendants in death-penalty cases for more than 2 decades, said that in his experience, “a large number of people who support the death penalty either turn to opposition once they learn details regarding it or believe it should be imposed more restrictively than it is.”

Following a murder trial conviction, the jury typically recommends whether to sentence the defendant to death or to levy some other penalty. The judge cannot impose the death penalty if the jury votes for a different sentence or is unable to agree on a sentence. But the judge can reject the jury’s death-penalty sentence and impose a different one.

Former Jefferson Circuit Court Judge James Shake, who sentenced one defendant to death during his 24 years on the bench, told KyCIR that while he personally opposed the death penalty due to the time and expense involved, he considered it his duty to respect the jury’s decision.

“I didn’t think it was my obligation to change the law, just because I didn’t agree with it as a general principle,” said Shake, who retired in 2017. “I had actually hoped to get through my judicial career without having to impose it. But it’s not my position to substitute my judgment for the judgment of a properly sworn jury.”

Fed up families

Some of the most vocal advocates for the death penalty are family members of murder victims.

Powell County Sheriff Steve Bennett and Deputy Sheriff Arthur Briscoe were murdered in January 1992 while trying to serve twice-convicted felon Ralph Baze with warrants from Ohio. Baze was found guilty of the killings and has been on death row since 1994.

Bennett was the brother-in-law, and Briscoe the brother, of Lisa Briscoe Lally.

She told KyCIR that she thinks Baze should already be dead.

“We’re fed up with the delays. Fed up. Totally fed up,” Lally said in a telephone interview from her home in Nashville, Tennessee. “It’s like the state of Kentucky has forgotten how heinously my brother and brother-in-law were murdered.”

Baze “took two lives, his life needs to end. He’s had 29 years of living behind bars. Okay, that’s enough,” Lally said. “It’s now time for him to meet his maker. And I want to see his eyes on the gurney when he takes his last breath.”

Lally said she went to the Kentucky State Penitentiary in November 2022 “to sit outside and see where the man that killed my brother and brother-in-law 32 years ago was still living and breathing, still having three meals, having his every whim taken care of.”

Asked how she would feel about Baze’s death sentence being converted to life without parole, Lally replied:

“Totally opposed. Totally opposed. He shot my brother in the back of the head. So for anybody that thinks, ‘Oh, that’s okay. Just let him die in prison,’ well, they’re eating Froot Loops. They’re crazy. That’s a crazy idea. No way in hell are we going to be okay with that, with his sentence being converted.”

Another staunch supporter of the death penalty is Mary Lou Moore Herald, whose three relatives were killed in their Breathitt County grocery store by Karu Gene White and his 2 accomplices. And like Lally, Herald is frustrated by the lengthy delay in concluding the case in which her family members were murdered.

“How would you feel if everybody in your family has gone and this murderer is still alive and prospering?” she said.

Herald thinks White’s execution should have already happened.

“It’s been a long process that has put our family through a lot of turmoil, a lot of hell.”

(source: thetimestribune.com)

TENNESSEE:

Some TN Republicans wary of bill allowing the death penalty for child rapists

There have been nearly 38 convicted child rapists in Tennessee on average the last 10 years. If it were up to House Majority Leader William Lamberth (R-Portland), all of them would potentially be up for the death penalty.

This year, he sponsored a bill to allow the death penalty in cases of child rape. Recently, it passed the key Senate Judiciary Committee by a single vote.

Some Republicans have privately expressed frustration that the bill is a bit of a poison pill. Either they’re forced to vote what some see as “soft on child rapists,” or they’re forced to vote for a bill the U.S. Supreme Court sees as unconstitutional and one that likely comes with a hefty price tag.

“It’s a good bill,” Lamberth said when asked about it by reporters Thursday. “I’ll say that just because it’s my name at the top of it.”

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1977 that it was considered “cruel and unusual punishment,” which is a violation of the Eighth Amendment.

“The real question everybody should be asking is, ‘Is the death penalty truly a deterrent?’” House Democratic Caucus Chair John Ray Clemmons (D-Nashville) said.

But the House Majority Leader is hoping the high court reconsiders, following a similar law that lawmakers passed in Florida.

“There was a U.S. Supreme Court decision that found that those laws are unconstitutional in large part because there weren’t very many states that still had them on the books,” Lamberth said.

Democrats also pushed that the death penalty has been a source of racial inequality since its inception.

“We know still today that if you’re poor or a person of color, then you’re not going to get equal justice,” Rep. G.A. Hardaway (D-Memphis) said. “We know that there is no equity in the way that the law is applied.”

(source: WKRN news)

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

Tennessee bill could impose death penalty for child rape, raising testimony concerns

A new bill in the Tennessee legislature would make the death penalty a possible punishment for rape of a child.

The bill's sponsor, Representative William Lamberth, wants the crime to be punished more severely.

But opponents of the bill worry it could make it harder to get children to testify against their abusers, who are often family members.

"For someone convicted of rape of a child, should they face the death penalty? My answer is a resounding yes," Rep. Lamberth says.

Lamberth's bill would authorize the death penalty as a punishment for rape of a child.

It would apply to child victims between the ages of 8 and 13.

"One of the most heinous crimes for a child is to be raped by an adult. We have monsters that live among us in Tennessee," Rep. Lamberth says.

Under current law this is a class a felony and includes a sentence between 15 and 60 years.

Under the new bill, if an individual is convicted of aggravated child rape, the person could be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole or death.

"Last year--and our fiscal year goes from June to July--just in Hamilton County, we had 1,200 children come through our center," Kristen Pavlik McCallie says. "The disclosure rates as kids get older, are not as high."

Kristen Pavlik McCallie, Executive Director of the Children’s Advocacy Center of Hamilton County, says for every one case of sexual assault that's reported, there are five that are never reported.

"More than 1/2 the time, the person that is the perpetrator of these crimes is someone that is in the kids family, and 90% of the time, it's somebody that's known to the child," she says. For these reasons, some people have pushed back on the legislation.

"The 11-year-old will know that by telling the truth of what's happening to her, she could be the catalyst for the death of her father," says Hollye Gallion, a registered nurse.

Stephen Woerner represents the 45 child advocacy centers that serve all 95 counties in Tennessee.

He says there is fear this could affect time and money.

"They actually try the case twice, once for the conviction itself and then once for the death penalty. And then once that happens, there's nine constitutionally guaranteed appeals and it can take anywhere from 20 to 40 years to process all of that. During that time. The person is on death row. They're in a in a single cell by themselves. There is significant cost both on the prosecution and the defense side."

The Tennessee Lookout reports executions in Tennessee are on hold at the request of Governor Bill Lee because of problems with the protocol for administering lethal injections.

(source: ABC News)

MISSOURI----impending execution

Missouri’s 1st Execution of 2024 Scheduled for Man Whose Trial Lawyers Had Conflicts of Interest and Who Has Unprecedented Support for Clemency

CLEMENCY UPCOMING EXECUTIONS MISSOURI

Brian Dorsey, a Missouri death row prisoner scheduled for execution on April 9, 2024, has garnered widespread support for clemency from more than 70 corrections officials, a former Missouri Supreme Court Judge, multiple jurors, Democratic and Republican state legislators, faith leaders, and his family members — several of whom are related to the victims, Sarah and Ben Bonnie — all of whom have called on Governor Mike Parson to commute his sentence to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Noteworthy among these supporters is a group of 72 current and former Missouri correctional officers, who submitted and signed a letter asking Gov. Parson to grant Mr. Dorsey clemency and commute his death sentence. “Generally, we believe in the use of capital punishment,” these officers wrote. “But we are in agreement that the death penalty is not the appropriate punishment for Brian Dorsey.” All these officers know Mr. Dorsey personally from their time spent working at Potosi Correctional Center, where Mr. Dorsey has lived in an “honor dorm” and worked for over a decade as the staff barber, “a position of exceptional trust and respect.” The officers added that “[e]very one of us believe that Brian is a good guy, someone who has stayed out of trouble, never gotten himself into any situations, and been respectful of us and of his fellow inmates.” Multiple corrections officers submitted individual letters of support, with one writing that “Mr. Dorsey has accepted what he did and taken accountability for his crime. It is my impression that he has spent his time since then trying to do his best by being a role model to other inmates and providing a valuable service to staff.”

During his 17 years in prison, Mr. Dorsey has committed to improving himself and has remained infraction-free throughout his incarceration. In an individual letter to Gov. Parson, one corrections official says “when you spend time around Brian like I have, you can just tell that he has changed. Some inmates never change, no matter how many years they are in. But that’s not Brian… The Brian I have known for years could not hurt anyone. The Brian I know does not deserve to be executed.” Former Missouri Supreme Court Judge Michael Wolff also wrote to Gov. Parson urging him to grant clemency to Mr. Dorsey. Judge Wolff explained to Gov. Parson that the Court erred in upholding Mr. Dorsey’s death sentence, with his case being one of the “rare cases where those of us who sit in judgment of a man convicted of capital murder got it wrong.” Five of the jurors who sentenced Mr. Dorsey to death have also urged Gov. Parson to grant clemency, with one juror pleading that “by the grace of God, I hope you will find your way to give him a life sentence instead of death.” Both Republican and Democratic state legislators have also asked Gov. Parson to commute Mr. Dorsey’s sentence.

On April 1, 2024, attorneys for Mr. Dorsey filed a petition for certiorari with the United States Supreme Court, asking them to determine whether the flat fee paid to his appointed public defenders created an actual conflict of interest that violates his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel. Mr. Dorsey’s trial attorneys were each paid $12,000 to defend him — regardless of the amount of work they did. According to a 2010 report commissioned by federal courts, the average time spent by defense attorneys in capital cases is 3,557 hours, which means that each of Mr. Dorsey’s attorneys would have been paid $3.37 per hour spent on his case, if they spent the average time preparing a defense. Flat fee payments were a common practice across the United States, but the Missouri Public Defender System no longer uses them in death penalty cases because of the inherent conflict of interest that results. In 2003, the American Bar Association explicitly warned against the use of flat fees in death penalty cases, stating that “counsel in death penalty cases should be fully compensated at a rate that is commensurate with the provision of high-quality legal representation and reflects the extraordinary responsibilities inherent in death penalty representation.” The use of flat fees ultimately “discourages lawyers from doing more work than what is minimally necessary.”

Prior to his arrest in 2006, Mr. Dorsey did not have a history of violence but had suffered from depression for many years and had sought both inpatient and outpatient treatment. In efforts to alleviate the symptoms of his depression, Mr. Dorsey began drinking heavily and using crack cocaine. At the time of the crime, Mr. Dorsey was experiencing drug-induced psychosis, but Mr. Dorsey’s trial attorneys failed to investigate or present any mental health history. Had they hired an expert to evaluate Mr. Dorsey, they could have explained to the jury that he was incapable of forming the necessary intent to commit 1st-degree murder. Instead, his attorneys told him to plead guilty without any deal with the prosecution to remove the death penalty. The jury that sentenced Mr. Dorsey to death did not hear evidence of his substance abuse disorder and previous mental health history.

In his letter to Gov. Parson, Judge Wolff also references Missouri’s former flat fee system, saying it “undoubtedly influenced everything” in Mr. Dorsey’s trial. Sean O’Brien, a University of Missouri-Kansas City law professor told The Marshall Project that for lawyers paid in flat fees, “it can be a boost to your cash flow at the beginning, but it’s a drain on your cash flow if you actually do the work.” Mary Fox, the director of the Missouri State Public Defender System also wrote a letter to Gov. Parson telling him that her office stopped using flat fees after Mr. Dorsey’s trial and recognizes that such fees “remove the incentive to do an effective job.”

Megan Crane, an attorney for Mr. Dorsey told The Marshall Project that her client “says he wants to find a way to make people’s lives better to atone for what he’s done.” Mr. Dorsey has been placed in solitary confinement since the state announced his execution date and has been unable to continue his work as a barber. As Mr. Dorsey’s execution date approaches, Ms. Crane said that he “has tried to manage his expectations” about the possibility of clemency or court intervention. Mr. Dorsey “has taken full accountability since Day 1,” Ms. Crane said. “And the horror of the fact that he could have done this — I think that is still his focus in this final week.”

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

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

Condemned inmate could face 'surgery without anesthesia' if good vein is elusive, lawyers say----Attorneys for a condemned Missouri man say the state's execution protocol allows for “surgery without anesthesia” if the typical process of finding a suitable vein to inject the lethal drug doesn't work

Missouri's execution protocol allows for “surgery without anesthesia” if the typical process of finding a suitable vein to inject the lethal drug doesn't work, lawyers for a death row inmate say in an appeal aimed at sparing his life.

Brian Dorsey, 52, is scheduled for execution Tuesday for killing his cousin and her husband at their central Missouri home in 2006. His attorneys are seeking clemency from Gov. Mike Parson and have several appeals pending.

A federal court appeal focuses on how Missouri injects the fatal dose of pentobarbital. The written protocol calls for insertion of primary and secondary intravenous lines. But it offers no guidance on how far the execution team can go to find a suitable vein, leaving open the possibility of an invasive “cutdown procedure,” Dorsey's attorneys say.

The procedure involves an incision that could be several inches wide and several inches deep. Forceps are used to tear tissue away from a vein that becomes the injection point.

“It's surgery,” said Arin Brenner, a federal public defender and one of the attorneys representing Dorsey. “It would be surgery without anesthesia.”

Brenner said Dorsey faces a higher-than-normal risk of needing a cutdown because he is obese. His veins also might be compromised because he is diabetic and a former IV drug user.

A spokesperson for Attorney General Andrew Bailey didn't comment but referred to the state's response to the appeal.

“Cut-down procedures are rarely, if ever, used under Missouri’s execution protocol,” the response stated. “And in the event that a cut-down procedure were necessary, medical personnel have access to pain relieving medications.”

Medication would be inadequate and if the procedure is necessary, Dorsey should receive a local anesthetic, said Megan Crane, another attorney for him.

“It is extremely painful," Crane said. “Even if given an oral pain relief or an opioid, that will not relieve the pain.”

Lawyers for Dorsey say use of the surgical procedure would violate his constitutional guarantee against cruel and unusual punishment and also his right to religious freedom, because it would prevent him from having meaningful interaction with his spiritual adviser, including the administration of last rites.

The issue isn't theoretical. In Idaho, the scheduled execution of serial killer Thomas Eugene Creech in February was halted after a medical team unsuccessfully tried 8 times establish an IV. It is unclear whether, when or how the state might try again to execute him.

Missouri's execution process is shrouded in secrecy, so it's impossible to know if, or how often, cutdown procedures have been required. No independent observer sees the IV line inserted. The spiritual adviser doesn't enter the room until the preparation is complete. Witnesses sit in dark rooms with curtains drawn until corrections officers open them seconds before the drug is injected.

Attorneys for Dorsey wonder if a cutdown procedure was used in January 2023 when Amber McLaughlin was executed. It was believed to be the first execution of an openly transgender person in the U.S.

The Rev. Lauren Bennett of St. Louis served as McLaughlin's spiritual adviser. She recalled McLaughlin saying, “Ouch, ouch, ouch. It hurts," but said McLaughlin was unable to explain the cause of her pain before her death.

Issues with the IV have been problematic in executions elsewhere.

In 2014, Oklahoma inmate Clayton Lockett was declared dead 43 minutes after his execution began, at times writhing in pain and clenching his teeth through the process. A state investigation showed that the execution team repeatedly failed to insert an IV line in his arms, jugular vein, foot and subclavian vein in the upper torso, before eventually running a line through a vein in Lockett’s groin.

The review found that Lockett died after the line came loose, and that the deadly chemicals were pumped into the tissue surrounding the injection site instead of directly into his bloodstream. There is no indication in the report that Lockett was ever given an anesthetic.

In 2022, it took more than three hours to execute Joe Nathan James Jr. in Alabama. The state said the process was delayed because of difficulties establishing an IV line. Dr. Joel Zivot, a professor of anesthesiology at Emory University and an expert on lethal injection who witnessed the private autopsy, said he saw “multiple puncture sites on both arms” and two incisions in the middle of the arm, which he said were indications of efforts to perform a cutdown. It's unclear if he received anesthesia.

Messages were left Friday with corrections officials in Oklahoma and Alabama.

Dorsey, formerly of Jefferson City, was convicted of killing his cousin, Sarah Bonnie, and her husband, Ben, on Dec. 23, 2006, at their home near New Bloomfield. Prosecutors said that earlier that day, Dorsey called Sarah Bonnie seeking to borrow money to pay 2 drug dealers who were at his apartment.

Sarah Bonnie’s parents found the bodies the next day. The couple’s 4-year-old daughter was unhurt.

In the clemency petition, 72 current and former state correctional officers asked Parson, a Republican and a former county sheriff, to commute Dorsey’s sentence to life in prison, citing his virtually spotless record of good behavior while in prison.

“The Brian I have known for years could not hurt anyone,” one officer wrote. “The Brian I know does not deserve to be executed.”

A spokesperson said Parson is still reviewing the clemency request.

An appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court centers on the $12,000 flat fee for Dorsey's court-appointed trial attorneys. The appeal argues that with the flat fee, his lawyers had a financial incentive to resolve the case quickly. They encouraged Dorsey to plead guilty, but with no demand that prosecutors agree to life in prison instead of the death penalty.

Dorsey's attorneys also had asked the Missouri Supreme Court to stay the execution on the grounds that the Department of Corrections' acting director, Trevor Foley, has not been confirmed by the state Senate and is therefore unqualified to oversee an execution. The court denied that request Friday.

(source: ABC News)

OKLAHOMA:

Death penalty sought for Pottawatomie County man accused of killing wife, stashing body in culvert----Investigators said her body had been wrapped in a carpet and stashed inside a drain under a road

The Pottawatomie County district attorney is seeking the death penalty for a man charged with killing his wife and stashing her body in a rural culvert in September.

In October, law enforcement arrested Frank Byers in connection with the death of 30-year-old Makayla Meave-Byers, whose body was found in late September inside a culvert near Hamilton and Prospect roads between Etowah and Macomb.

Investigators said her body had been wrapped in a carpet and stashed inside a drain under the road. Authorities said it was unclear how long Meave-Byers' body had been there.

She had been reported missing after she was last seen on Sept. 15. Authorities said after her disappearance that Makayla allegedly left her home voluntarily with a man driving a white Chevrolet truck.

Investigators believed Byers shot Meave-Byers twice in the head because he wanted to begin a relationship with another woman. Authorities said blood and shell casings were found in her home.

(source: KOCO news)

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

Michael Smith's Final 3 Words Before Oklahoma Execution

Michael Smith, who was convicted for fatally shooting 2 people in 2002, gave his final 3 words before he was executed at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary on Thursday.

Smith confessed to 2 separate shooting deaths of Janet Moore, 41, and Sharath Pulluru, 22, but later tried to appeal his conviction. After spending over 20 years on death row and multiple failed attempts at an appeal, Smith died by lethal injection on Thursday mid-morning.

When asked if he would like to say any last words, Smith said, "Nah, I'm good," according to The Associated Press.

Smith's death was the first execution in Oklahoma this year. He was the 12th person to be executed since the state resumed executions in 2021.

Moore's son Phillip Zachary Jr. and niece Morgan Miller-Perkins were at the execution. In a statement read by Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond on the family's behalf, he said, in part: "Justice has been served."

"Janet and Sharath were murdered simply because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time; that was all. I am grateful that justice has been served," Drummond said in his own statement.

However, Smith said at a clemency hearing last month, "I didn't commit these crimes. I didn't kill these people." He claimed that he was "high on drugs," adding, "I don't even remember getting arrested."

He did express his "deepest apologies and deepest sorrows to the families," but did not take responsibility for the killings.

The Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board denied Smith clemency in a 4 to 1 vote.

According to prosecutors, Smith confessed to the police and 2 other people about his role in the killings. Prosecutors said he was a gang member and killed Moore because he was looking for her son, who he mistakenly thought had told the cops about his whereabouts.

After Smith killed Moore, he went after Pulluru, a store clerk who Smith believed had disrespected his gang during a newspaper interview, according to prosecutors.

Drummond said Smith, a member of the Oak Grove Posse Kerr Village Crips gang, was on the run for a separate killing at the time of the murders—which the attorney general said put him among the 10 percent of death row inmates who have killed multiple times.

Mark Henricksen, Smith's attorney, argued that his client should not receive the death penalty and instead should just get life in prison. He claimed that Smith was in a drug-induced haze when he confessed to the police and that key parts of his confession aren't supported by facts.

However, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals has said that Smith's confession was corroborated by "two additional confessions and physical evidence from both crime scenes."

Henricksen also argued that Smith was intellectually disabled, hoping to get lenience from the judicial system. Meanwhile, Drummond said Smith's IQ scores made his intellectual disability claim statutorily ineligible.

Newsweek reached out to Henricksen via online form for comment.

(source: newsweek.com)

IDAHO:

Court reaches magic number in death penalty jury of Chad Daybell

The trial of Chad Daybell continues Friday with day 5 of jury selection. Judge Boyce told attorneys on Day 1 that 50 jurors were needed before moving in to the next phase of selection, peremptory strikes. The court reached 52 potential jurors Thursday night before wrapping up, so it is not immediately clear why court resumed this morning with questioning another group of potential jurors.

CBS2's legal expert working with us on this case is Ryan Black with Attorneys of Idaho. Black believes that Judge Boyce has been very careful throughout this case to ensure that nothing goes wrong that could cause a mistrial and that could be the reason for the additional jurors being questioned, to build in a safety buffer.

Once court does move in to the next phase of jury selection, both the prosecution and the defense will have 16 peremptory strikes to use in removing potential jurors from the final jury. 12 jurors and 6 alternates are needed. Black tells us that once each side have used their 16 strikes, the lowest remaining jurors will make up the jury of 18 and the remaining will likely be dismissed by the judge.

Once the jury is seated and sworn in the trial will be set to begin in earnest.

Daybell faces 1st-degree murder charges for 3 people: His wife Tammy Daybell and JJ Vallow and Tylee Ryan, his then-girlfriend Lori Vallow Daybell's children. Chad and Lori were married on a beach in Hawaii just weeks after Tammy died.

The children's grandmother, Kay Woodcock became concerned after not being able to get ahold of the children for quite a while. Woodcock urged police to do a welfare check, which ultimately led to the realization that no one had seen JJ or Tylee in over a month, and Lori was continually lying about their whereabouts. The ensuing investigation led to the discovery of both JJ and Tylee's remains in Chad Daybell's backyard in eastern Idaho.

Daybell faces the death penalty if he is found guilty.

(source: idahonews.com)

CALIFORNIA:

DA resentences “Death Row” inmates to life without parole

Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen is moving to change the sentences of more than a dozen prison inmates from death into life behind bars with no chance of parole.

The move affecting 15 men comes 4 years after DA Rosen stopped using the death penalty, a decision made in the wake of the murder of George Floyd.

The long-serving district attorney said that he had lost faith in capital punishment as a fair and effective crime deterrent. The system, Rosen said, was a fruitless and unfair effort that left victims and perpetrators in legal limbo for decades. Moreover, California has a moratorium on the death penalty.

DA Rosen said: “The question is not whether these 15 human beings deserve the death penalty. It’s whether the 2 million people of Santa Clara County deserve the indignity and ineffectiveness of the death penalty. It’s an antiquated, racially biased, error-prone system that deters nothing and costs us millions of public dollars and our integrity as a community that cherishes justice.”

The DA’s unprecedented resentencing effort, which began with a filing in Superior Court, is seeking to change the sentences from death to life in prison without parole.

A California law allows district attorneys to resentence a person if they determine the sentences no longer serve justice. The DA said that all of the crimes committed by those sent to death row were horrible –and these violent and dangerous criminals should and will spend the rest of their lives in prison.

DA Rosen said: “Judges and juries of the People should decide where an inmate dies. God should decide when.”

Death penalty opponents throughout the country praised the move.

Bryan Stevenson, a widely acclaimed public interest lawyer who has dedicated his career to helping the poor and incarcerated, said: "I'm extremely encouraged by District Attorney Jeff Rosen's decision to reverse death sentences imposed in Santa Clara County. Leadership often requires that we do things because it's the right thing to do even when it may not be popular. I applaud the courage and the commitment to equality and justice that motivated this decision. We can create a safer, healthier and more just society without the death penalty and the history of racial bias and bigotry it carries."

Oscar Cantú, bishop of San Jose, said: “The Catholic Church stands with all victims of crimes, especially victims of heinous and violent crimes. As the bishop of San Jose, I also stand with and commend Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen for his prophetic and principled decision to reset the death penalty sentences in our county to life in prison. This decision is a significant step forward in respecting the sanctity of all human life, which is a core tenet of Catholic social teaching. It is a call to move away from punitive justice towards restorative justice that heals and rebuilds lives.”

(source: countyda.sccgov.org)

DR CONGO/FRANCE:

MAÎTRE FIRMIN YANGAMBI LIBOTE, A FORMER DEATH ROW PRISONER IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO, IS COMING TO FRANCE TO SHARE HIS VIEWS

Maître Firmin YANGAMBI LIBOTE, former political prisoner, former president of the Tshopo province bar association in Kisangani, lawyer at the International Criminal Court, human rights activist, and president of the NGO Peace on Earth, was sentenced to death in 2010 for illegal possession of war weapons and attempted organization of an insurgency movement.

While proclaiming his innocence, his sentence was reduced to 20 years of imprisonment during which he continuously contested the accusations. After 10 years, he was granted presidential pardon in March 2019.

His commitment to justice and fundamental rights has made him the target of multiple pressures, even after his release. Indeed, he continues to face numerous intimidations due to his activist activities. His story reflects the persistent challenges faced by human rights defenders in many regions of the world.

Next week will be an opportunity for Mr. Yangambi Libote to meet with high-level political figures and participate in several civil society initiatives, especially with young people. Join us on Monday, April 8th at 7:00 PM at the House of the Bar Association, 2 Rue de Harlay, Paris, to hear his testimony as well as the intervention of Marie-Lina Perez, Africa-Asia Manager at ECPM, who will discuss the decision of the Congolese authorities to lift the moratorium on executions (free entry, reservation required at education@ecpm.org).

THE LIFTING OF THE MORATORIUM ON EXECUTIONS IN THE DRC WILL BE A CENTRAL ISSUE OF MR. YANGAMBI LIBOTE’S VISIT

The presence of Me. Yangambi Libote is significant within a particular context in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Indeed, in a statement broadcasted on February 5, 2024, during the 8 p.m. edition of the national television news, the High Defense Council requested the Supreme Commander of the FARDC and the President of the Democratic Republic of Congo to lift the moratorium on the executions of death row prisoners, which was in place since 2003.

During the Council of Ministers on February 9, the State Minister requested the government to take note of this request. On March 13, the Ministry of Justice officially lifted the moratorium. This decision is of paramount importance; currently, more than 800 death row inmates are detained in prisons across the DRC, awaiting for execution.

In this context, the presence and testimony of Me. Yangambi Libote hold particular significance, providing an opportunity to raise awareness about the consequences of such a political decision.

(source: ecpm.org)

UGANDA:

Thousands facing death as country’s vile law takes hold----Thousands of people are once again living in fear of execution after a ruling upheld a country’s terrifying law.

People in Uganda are once again living in fear of execution after a ruling upheld the country’s terrifying anti-LGBTQ law.

The Uganda constitutional court this week upheld the country’s Anti-Homosexuality Act 2023 that was signed into law by President Yoweri Museveni in May. It includes the death penalty for “aggravated homosexuality” and was deemed one of the harshest anti-gay laws in the world.

The bill was challenged in court by activists who argued that it violates citizens’ constitutional rights and was responsible for over 600 human rights violations and abuses against the LGBTQ community since its enactment. Activist said the law unleashed a torrent of abuse against LGBTQ people including rape, arrest, torture and eviction.

“We decline to nullify the anti-homosexuality act 2023 in its entirety, neither will we grant a permanent injunction against its enforcement,” Uganda’s deputy chief justice Richard Buteera, said of the ruling.

However, the court voided certain parts of the law that it said were “inconsistent with right to health, privacy and freedom of religion”.

Speaking to the press after the ruling on Wednesday, Petition lawyer and human rights attorney Nicholas Opiyo said: “The court today decided that it is legal and lawful to discriminate against LGBT people. They decided that it is legal to exclude the LGBTQ community from participating in the affairs of their country simply on the basis of public sentiments and alleged cultural values.

“ I think it’s sad that the court played to public sentiments and did not apply the law. To that extent I think the court is wrong.”

This is not the first time LGBTQ Ugandans had to go to court to fight for their rights to exist. A similar situation occurred a decade ago when LGBTQ Ugandans challenged the “Anti-Homosexuality Act 2014” also known as “Kill the Gays Bill” due to its original death penalty clause in court.

The bill was passed by the Parliament of Uganda and signed into law by the President of Uganda Yoweri Museveni on 24 February 2014, but the bill was later nullified by the Constitutional Court of Uganda on procedural grounds on August 1 2014. Only for a similar bill to be introduced 10 years later and the constitutional court upheld it this time.

Frank Mugisha, a prominent Ugandan rights activist and one of the petitioners in the case said: “The court affirmed the sentiments of the homophobic Ugandan public albeit without any evidence on the record. Shame!”

Another activist Steven Kabuye, co-executive director of NGO Coloured Voice Truth to LGBTQ, who was nearly fatally stabbed in January, said the decision pushed the LGBTQ+ community in the country into “a Pandora’s box” and “the price of freedom to an ordinary LGBTQ+ Ugandan is death”.

Rejecting the nullification, the constitutional court scrapped only 2 sections and 2 subsections while declaring the rest of the law constitutional. The sections of the act that were abrogated had criminalised the letting of premises for use for homosexual acts and failure to report anyone engaging in homosexual acts to the police, both sections violates individual rights.

The White House Press Secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre called the court’s decision “a small and insufficient step towards safeguarding human rights” and vowed to continue to advocate for human rights in Uganda.

“The United States is deeply concerned about the remaining provisions, which undermine public health, human rights and Uganda’s international reputation,” Jean Pierre said in a press statement.

“No one should have to live in constant fear, nor be subjected to violence or discrimination. It is wrong.”

When the law was enacted in May 2023 the World Bank halted new loans to Uganda, and the United States announced visa and travel restrictions against Ugandan officials.

Many activists fear the court’s decision will give more credibility to the domino effect the Ugandan bill has already triggered in Africa. Philip, a Ghanaian activist, said he’s afraid the ruling will bolster the Ghanaian anti-gay bill that was just passed last month and is awaiting approval from the president.

“The bill passed by the Ghanaian parliament was a product of the Ugandan draconian bill which is still causing a crackdown across Africa. But with this ruling I’m afraid LGBTQ Ghana would meet the same fate as Ugandans. Because one thing Africans agree on no matter the religion or culture, is their disdain for homosexuality,” he told news.com.au.

In August, 8 people were arrested in Uganda under the law which carries the death penalty. Due to the petitions and ongoing challenges in court, the cases were deferred, but with the constitutional court upholding the law, the cases will now be going to trial and the death sentence is possible if found guilty.

Frank Mugisha, co-convener of Convening for Equality group (CFE), said that there have been over 180 cases of evictions, 18 cases of forced anal examinations, 176 cases of violations of torture, 159 cases of violations of the right to equality and freedom of discrimination, and 102 hospitalisations directly linked to the violations. And these are only cases that have been reported and documented.

Some activists believe that the Ugandan government is trying to bait donors for cash by scrapping two sections of the law.

Steven Kabuye said in an interview with Devex: “The Anti-Homosexuality Act 2023 has been re-edited, with articles that were objected by the World Bank and PEPFAR removed and the court slapped it back to the LGBTQ+ community in Uganda. We should not waver in our fight against this law. We should fight it now more than ever.”

Another LGBTQ rights activist, Ruth told news.com.au that the court decision has caused the LGBTQ community a great deal of pain.

“For the past months we’ve been hoping we could use our constitutional rights to save our skin and keep our heads. But the court decision has made us despair, and right now I can’t think of anything else that could save us other than the international community’s intervention,” she said.

Grim reality of country’s heinous new law

“We don’t have anything in Uganda. We’ve lost our families, friends, jobs and homes because we decided to live our truth. And today they’ve confirmed we’ve lost our rights too.

“Without our rights, we’re just defenceless preys waiting to be taken apart by homophobes who have made it their patriotic mission to terrorise us.”

(source: Daniela Anthony is a freelance writer based in Nigeria----news.com.au)

APRIL 5, 2024:

FLORIDA:

'Cold, calculated, premeditated': State seeks death penalty for alleged Palm Bay apartment shooter

The state has filed a notice of intent to seek the death penalty for 26-year-old Ta'Shawn Taylor after being accused of killing 3 victims and shooting 2 others in a Palm Bay apartment complex.

It was Jan. 20 when Palm Bay police received a 911 call regarding a shooting in a Woodlake apartment complex. Upon arrival, officers said they found three people dead and 2 people shot, including a 15-year-old.

The notice said prosecutors believe the murders were "committed in a cold, calculated and premeditated manner without any pretense of moral or legal justification."

Taylor became eligible for the death penalty after he was indicted on Feb. 20 on 3 counts of 1st-degree premeditated murder and 2 counts of attempted 1t-degree murder.

The 3 victims who were shot to death were identified as 79-year-old Stephen Suglam, 60-year-old Angela Suglam, and 31-year-old Lisa Suglam.

The case will be reviewed on May 3, but until then, Taylor will remain in custody in the Brevard County Jail without bond.

(source: WESH news)

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

Judge rules whether Nassau deputy killer's jurors have to be unanimous for death penalty

As jury selection gets underway in the sentencing phase for the 37-year-old Jacksonville man who killed Nassau County Deputy Joshua Moyers, jurors will not have to be unanimous in their recommendation of a potential death penalty.

Judge James Daniel issued his 17-page ruling Wednesday denying the motion by Patrick Rene McDowell's attorneys that Florida's revised capital sentencing is a violation of the ex post facto clause and inapplicable in his case.

When McDowell shot and killed the 29-year-old deputy during a traffic stop in 2021 and pleaded guilty to all counts 2 years later, a death sentence required a unanimous jury recommendation. However, and as the judge noted to McDowell at the time, the state was considering legislation to change the statute to only needing an 8-4 majority. The governor about a month later signed that amendment into law.

The defense contended the new standards cannot be applied retroactively.

The judge cited the State v. Victorino case that involved similar ex post facto concerns in the resentencing for the 2004 so-called Xbox murders in Deltona. When the resentencing began in 2023, the law still required a unanimous jury, but the new standards were passed on the day the jurors were sworn.

The 5th District Court of Appeal sided with allowing the 8-4 majority vote guidelines, stating the new law merely altered the methods employed in determining whether the death penalty can be imposed. The change "neither alters the definition of criminal conduct nor increases the penalty by which the crime of first-degree murder is punishable ... it does not constitute an ex post facto law."

Daniel deemed "There is no meaningful factual distinction between the instant case and Victorino."

Previously the judge also denied the defense's motion to seeking a change of venue for the sentencing phase due to pervasive publicity overwhelmingly negative against McDowell.

Daniel responded that significant pretrial publicity does not require a trial to be moved out of the jurisdiction. He cited a 1977 ruling that states, "Knowledge of the incident because of its notoriety is not, in and of itself, grounds for a change of venue."

"Based on the evidence thus far, the court cannot determine if 'the general state of mind' of the residents of Nassau County 'is so infected by knowledge of the incident' that twelve impartial jurors cannot be seated in this case," the judge's ruling stated.

What happened to Deputy Joshua Moyers?

About 11:45 p.m. on Sept. 23, 2021, McDowell and a woman were on Sandy Ford Road when Moyers decided to pull over the van he was driving, the Sheriff's Office said.

The woman later told investigators that when McDowell saw the deputy's lights activated, he said, "I'm not going to jail," according to court documents. When he pulled over, the deputy asked him to get out of the vehicle. McDowell instead shot Moyers in the face and then again after collapsing to the ground, the body-worn camera video shows.

McDowell, a troubled military veteran on drug-offender probation, was in a stolen minivan at the time. He fled briefly in the van before abandoning it and hiding under a shed with the woman. She said she convinced him to let her go and she called 911 when she was far enough away, according to court documents.

During the ensuing manhunt, officers and McDowell exchanged gunfire and he and a K-9 were wounded. But McDowell eluded authorities for several days until being tracked to a park near Callahan and taken into custody.

(source: Florida Times-Union)

ALABAMA:

Alabama Inmate Asks to Be Executed----Mass murderer Derrick Dearman says he wants the families of his victims to have closure

A death row inmate in Alabama says he wants to be executed so the families of the people he massacred in 2016 can have closure. Derrick Dearman tells NBC News that he has sent letters to Gov. Kay Ivey and other officials to let them know he is dropping his appeals. The 36-year-old says he's a little worried about the state's recent history of botched executions, but his mind is "focused on trying to make sure to do the right thing."

The crime. Dearman says he was high on meth when he murdered five people at a home in Citronelle, Alabama, with a gun and an axe in August 2016. He was convicted on 6 counts of murder because one of the victims, 22-year-old Chelsea Marie Reed, was 5 months pregnant.

The victims. Dearman also killed Shannon Melissa Randall, 35; Robert Lee Brown, 26; Justin Kaleb Reed, 23; and Joseph Adam Turner, 26. Turner was the brother of Laneta Lester, Dearman's estranged girlfriend, who moved in with the family to flee Dearman's domestic abuse, WKRG reports. After the murders, Dearman kidnapped Lester, along with Turner and Randall's 3-month-old baby. He turned himself in after traveling to his father's home.

Appeal rejected. In February, Alabama's top court upheld the murder convictions and said "the death penalty was the proper sentence in Dearman's case," WPMI reports. He tells NBC that he went through the appeals process for the sake of his family, but it's now time "for the victims and their families to get the justice they rightly deserve to start the closure." He says drugs turned him into a "very unpredictable, unstable and violent person," very different from the person he is now, but that doesn't excuse his crimes.

Death row. Dearman says his decision doesn't mean that his fellow death row inmates deserve to die. "There's guys in general population that committed way worse crimes than half the guys on death row," he says. "There's some guys here on death row, if you would let them go today, they would never commit a crime and be productive members of society."

The method. Dearman says he wants to be executed by lethal injection, not by nitrogen gas, which Alabama used for the 1st time earlier this year and plans to use again in an execution later this year.

(source: newser.com)

OHIO:

Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost’s report pushes for return to death penalty in state

Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost continues to push state lawmakers to change the state’s capital punishment system, which has not carried out a sentence in more than 5 years.

Yost’s annual Capital Crime Report, required by law, gives a procedural history and other information in every case that has resulted in a death sentence since reinstatement of the death penalty in 1981.

“No criminal penalty – capital or otherwise – should carry an empty promise of justice,” Yost said. “Ohioans on both sides of the death penalty debate can agree that our current system of capital punishment is unworkable, and something needs to change.”

HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE ON DEATH ROW IN OHIO?

From 1981 through the end of last year, 336 people have received a combined 341 death sentences, according to the report. 56 of those have been carried out. There are 119 inmates on death row.

Cuyahoga County has issued the highest number of death sentences at 70, followed by Hamilton County with 62 and Franklin County with 21. The most active death sentences are also in Cuyahoga with 18.

According to the report, condemned inmate spends an average of more than 21 years awaiting their sentence to be carried out – primarily due to the numerous avenues for appeal – before an execution date is set.

Also contributing to delays is the reluctance of pharmaceutical suppliers to provide lethal injection drugs for executions, Yost’s report said.

WHEN DID THE PUSH FOR THE DEATH PENALTY START?

As previously reported by The Center Square, Yost and Rep. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville, called for the resumption of carrying out death sentences after Alabama executed a man using nitrogen gas in late January.

That bill has yet to have a hearing in the House.

(source: mahoningmatters.com)

MISSOURI:

Missouri Attorney General seeks execution date for 2007 child murderer

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey announced that his office has requested the Missouri Supreme Court to set an execution date for Christopher Collings. In November 2007, Christopher Collings abducted, raped, and murdered 9-year-old Rowan Ford of Stella, Missouri, in Newton County. Afterward, Collings disposed of the victim’s body in a sinkhole near Powell, Missouri, in McDonald County. Additionally, Collings destroyed evidence by burning the rope he used to strangle the victim, the blood-stained clothing he wore during the attack, and his blood-stained mattress. Collings eventually confessed to the police.

Collings was convicted in Phelps County by a jury selected from Platte County. During the punishment phase of the trial, the jury determined that Collings had tortured the victim in a manner that was vile, horrible, and inhumane. The jury also found that Collings murdered the victim to prevent her from testifying against him regarding the rape.

Collings’s conviction and sentence have been reviewed by the Missouri Supreme Court, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court. No court has identified any legal errors.

After the Attorney General files a motion to set an execution date, Collings’s lawyers will have an opportunity to respond. If the Missouri Supreme Court decides to issue an execution warrant, the execution date will be set between 90 and 120 days from the Missouri Supreme Court’s order.

(source: KTTN news)

OKLAHOMA----execution

Oklahoma executes man convicted of double slaying in 2002

A man convicted of shooting and killing 2 people in Oklahoma City more than 2 decades ago was executed Thursday morning.

Michael Dewayne Smith received a lethal injection at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester and was pronounced dead at 10:20 a.m., Oklahoma Department of Corrections spokesperson Lance West said.

After the 1st of 3 lethal drugs, midazolam, was administered, Smith, 41, appeared to shake briefly and attempt to lift his head from the gurney before relaxing. He then took several short, audible breaths that sounded like snores or gasps. Oklahoma DOC Director Steven Harpe said after the execution that Smith “appeared to have some form of sleep apnea.”

A masked doctor entered the execution chamber at 10:14 a.m. and shook Smith several times before declaring him unconscious.

Smith appeared to stop breathing about a minute later. The doctor reentered the execution chamber at 10:19 a.m. and checked for a pulse before Harpe announced the time of death.

Smith was sentenced to die in the separate shooting deaths of Janet Moore, 41, and Sharath Pulluru, 22, in February 2002. He is the 1st person executed in Oklahoma this year and the 12th put to death since the state resumed executions in 2021 following a nearly 7-year hiatus resulting from problems with executions in 2014 and 2015.

Given the opportunity to say last words, Smith responded, “Nah, I’m good.”

Moore’s son Phillip Zachary Jr. and niece Morgan Miller-Perkins witnessed the execution from behind one-way glass. Attorney General Gentner Drummond read a statement on their behalf that said in part: “Justice has been served.”

Drummond, in his own statement, called Moore “a rock for her family” and said Pulluru “was an inspiration to his family” as the first member to come to the United States for an education.

“Janet and Sharath were murdered simply because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time; that was all. I am grateful that justice has been served,” Drummond said.

During a clemency hearing last month, Smith expressed his “deepest sorrows” to the victims’ families, but denied he was responsible.

“I didn’t commit these crimes. I didn’t kill these people,” Smith said, occasionally breaking into tears during his 15-minute address to the board, which denied him clemency in a 4-1 vote. “I was high on drugs. I don’t even remember getting arrested.”

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday morning denied a stay of execution requested by Smith’s attorneys, who argued that his confession to police was not sufficiently corroborated.

Prosecutors say Smith was a ruthless gang member who killed both victims in misguided acts of revenge and confessed his involvement in the killings to police and 2 other people.

They claim he killed Moore because he was looking for her son, who he mistakenly thought had told police about his whereabouts. Later that day, prosecutors say Smith killed Pulluru, a convenience store clerk who Smith believed had disrespected his gang during an interview with a newspaper reporter.

Smith’s attorney, Mark Henricksen, argued that Smith is intellectually disabled, a condition worsened by years of heavy drug use, and that his life should be spared and he should be allowed to spend the rest of it in prison. Henricksen said Smith was in a PCP-induced haze when he confessed to police and that key elements of his confession aren’t supported by facts.

(source: Associated Press)

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

Death row inmate execution was ‘heartbreaking’: Adviser----Michael Smith was found guilty of two 2002 murders

The execution of Michael Dewayne Smith was “heartbreaking” and lacked humanity, according to the Rev. Jeff Hood, Smith’s spiritual adviser.

Thursday morning, Smith received a lethal injection at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester and was pronounced dead at 10:20 a.m., Oklahoma Department of Corrections spokesperson Lance West said.

Hood went into the chamber with Smith and said the execution was slower than expected. As the execution proceeded, Hood said he expected Smith to make a final last statement, but he remained silent.

“For everyone there, it’s painful. It’s unnerving. … I looked at Michael, I could tell he was close to death. The last thing I saw was a little tear on his cheek. … I’m aware a lot of people don’t have sympathy for him. But it’s not something we have to do,” Hood said on “Banfield.” “We don’t have to kill each other in order to teach each other not to kill each other.”

Smith was convicted of 2 murders in Oklahoma City. The 1st victim, 40-year-old Janet Moore, was shot at her apartment. The 2nd victim, 24-year-old Sharath Pulluru, was shot 9 times at a convenience store, then doused with lighter fluid and set on fire.

Prosecutors said the evidence against Smith is overwhelming.

He became the 4th inmate in the nation this year to be put to death, the Oklahoman reported.

A total of 27 states in the U.S. have the death penalty. Oklahoma, Texas and Missouri are responsible for the most prison executions per capita since 1976, according to the nonprofit Death Penalty Information Center

5 states — Alabama, Florida, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas — carried out executions last year.

The public’s opinion is shifting, too. Half of Americans say the death penalty is administered unfairly, according to the findings of a November Gallup poll. That’s compared to 47% who said the practices are fair. Still, a plurality of voters say the death penalty isn’t used enough.

(source: newsnation.com)

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

US: Statement by the Spokesperson on the execution in Oklahoma

The European Union deeply regrets the execution of Michael Smith in the State of Oklahoma, and deplores the planned execution of Brian Dorsey in Missouri on 9 April.

The execution of M.Smith was the 1st that Oklahoma has carried out this year. To date, 37 states in the US have abolished the capital punishment in law or in practice, and we hope Oklahoma will eventually join these states.

As a matter of principle, the EU strongly opposes the death penalty at all times and in all circumstances. It is a violation of the right to life, fails to act as a deterrent to crime and represents the ultimate punishment that makes miscarriages of justice irreversible. 197 innocent people have been exonerated from death row in the United States to date.

The EU continues to call for the universal abolition of the death penalty and for States, that maintain the capital punishment, to implement a moratorium and move towards abolition, in line with the worldwide trend.

(source: eeas.europa.eu)

CALIFORNIA:

District attorney wants Santa Clara County convicts off death row----Jeff Rosen ceased pursuing death penalty cases in 2020; cites ‘diminishing likelihood’ of executions ever resuming in California for converting prisoner sentences

Building on a 2020 pledge to stop pursuing the death penalty, Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen is now seeking to remove all condemned South Bay prisoners from California’s death row.

This week, Rosen’s office is petitioning the county Superior Court to resentence 14 men — all being held in San Quentin State Prison — to terms of life in prison without the possibility of parole.

The reasoning Rosen gave in court filings is grounded in the death penalty being an irreversible punishment that requires an equity of due process that can’t be guaranteed. There is also, he added, a “diminishing likelihood” of executions resuming in part because of a moratorium by Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has also initiated the shutdown of the state’s death row.

“The state is dismantling death row, and it is time we recognize this reality and dismantle these sentences as well,” Rosen states in one of the resentencing motions.

Also in the motions — one filed for every condemned man convicted in Santa Clara County who agrees to being taken off death row — Rosen acknowledges “the enduring and indescribable pain” suffered by crime victims’ families and friends that “cannot be discounted or ignored.”

In an interview, Rosen said since his office ceased pursuing the death penalty 4 years ago, they cannot rationally continue to litigate and defend death sentences prior to that point.

“It flows logically because if you’re saying that for the same crime committed today you would not seek the death penalty, but someone else has been sitting on death row for 20 years, that’s not fair,” he said. “We want to try to treat people who have committed similar crimes similarly.”

Rosen also reiterated the change of heart he says drove him to end death penalty prosecutions by his office.

“I used to think that in a perfect world, in a perfectly fair society, there could be some crimes so horrible and awful that the appropriate response would be death,” he said. “But I’ve come to know what we all know, we don’t live in a perfect world where everything is fair, I just began to feel like we don’t have the moral authority as a society to execute someone.”

He added that converting the death sentences will inevitably free up his office’s resources to focus on local crimes, and offer closure to victims’ families instead of the decades-long limbo they currently experience awaiting some finality in their loved ones’ cases.

“That’s not fair to anybody. We’re trying to bring finality to these cases,” Rosen said. “At this point, it’s unlikely anyone will be executed.”

County Public Defender Molly O’Neal lauded the resentencing motions, calling them another step toward an eventuality in which California dispenses with capital punishment altogether.

“We have executed people who weren’t actually the killer. It’s such an extreme ultimate consequence, and we almost never get it right,” O’Neal said. “I truly believe we will get to a place where we will not use the death penalty. It takes out a revenge system that was never implemented fairly and was always a bad system.”

Bishop Oscar Cantú, of the Diocese of San Jose, said he is “very pleased” with the district attorney’s actions, which he says are in line with Catholic decrees by Pope John Paul II and Pope Francis.

“How we treat the worst of us says something about us as well,” Cantú said in an interview. “Those on death row are poor, almost all of them. Most of them are people of color. How the justice is administered is dubious and troubling. We don’t need capital punishment; we’re better off without it as a society.”

Both in the court filings and in the interview, Rosen noted what he considered fundamental inequities in death penalty sentences, which are determined by separate juries, all of whom must declare under oath their support for capital punishment. That has resulted, the filing argues, in sentencing juries that are predominantly white and lack diversity both culturally and in life experiences.

A recent court case involving a Santa Clara County death row inmate helps illustrate that point. Willie Branner, now 74, was convicted of murder in 1981 after a fatal shooting during a robbery; after more than 30 years of legal appeals, he got his sentence vacated and was granted the right to a retrial by a federal court this past December. The crux of his appellate argument was that the prosecutor who secured his conviction unconstitutionally rejected Black, Asian American and Jewish people from his trial jury.

Bryan Stevenson, a Montgomery, Alabama-based attorney who is credited with helping overturn dozens of death sentences — and whose memoir inspired the film “Just Mercy” — said in a statement that he was “extremely encouraged” by the proposal to remove death sentences originating in Santa Clara County.

“I applaud the courage and the commitment to equality and justice that motivated this decision,” he said. “We can create a safer, healthier and more just society without the death penalty and the history of racial bias and bigotry it carries.”

Rosen’s administration has secured capital punishment once during his 13 years as district attorney, in the case of Melvin Forte, who was sentenced to death in 2011 by a county judge. The judge based the decision on a jury recommendation reached the previous December, after Rosen was elected to his first term but before he was sworn into office. That 2010 jury finding occurred a few days after Rodrigo Paniagua Jr. was sentenced to death by a county judge for murdering his pregnant girlfriend and their 2 daughters.

Those 2 cases mark the most recent death sentences issued in Santa Clara County; the oldest is for 74-year-old David Ghent, who was sentenced in 1979, and has since secured his own retrial. Rosen’s office has sought the death penalty four times since then, eventually withdrawing the pursuit in 2 of the cases.

In the other 2 instances, a jury in 2020 returned a not guilty verdict in a child homicide, and in perhaps the most high-profile case, a sentencing jury rejected the death penalty and instead recommended a lifetime prison sentence without parole for Antolin Garcia Torres for the 2012 kidnapping and murder of 15-year-old Sierra LaMar near Morgan Hill.

Rosen said he does not expect across-the-board agreement with his resentencing motions. Already, one of the condemned men offered the legal relief, Christopher Spencer, has opted to continuing litigating his case as a capital defendant. The district attorney’s office is sending out letters to members of the victims’ families in all of the death penalty cases they are looking to resentence, and Rosen said he welcomes the chance to meet with him.

At least 1/2 of the prisoners who would be affected by the proposed resentencing have signaled an intent to agree, according to the office.

Rosen expressed confidence that his motions will hold up in court, citing state law that empowers district attorneys to recommend resentencing and rules requiring that such motions “may only be overcome if a court finds the defendant currently poses an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety.” His office argues that provision doesn’t apply since none of the resentencings would entail any prison release.

“We took the 1st step 4 years ago,” Rosen said. “This is the 2nd and final step.”

(source: mercurynews.com)

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

'Every DA... Should Follow Suit': Prosecutor Seeks to Commute County Death Sentences----District Attorney Jeff Rosen "is taking an important step to confront racism in the criminal legal system," said Smart Justice California.

In a potential model for other U.S. officials, Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen, "once a prosecutor who believed in capital punishment and one who rejects association with the progressive prosecutor movement, has been quietly preparing to ask courts to change the penalties of 14 men from his county who are waiting for that ultimate sentence to be carried out."

That's according toLos Angeles Times columnist Anita Chabria, who exclusively reported on the California prosecutor's efforts, inspired by learning about how the death penalty connects to the country's long history of killing and oppressing people of color.

As Chabria wrote:

In most cases, he wants the court to re-sentence these men (Santa Clara has no women on death row) to serve life without parole. But in a few separate cases, already completed last year, he has requested that they be given the chance of freedom.

Why? An inherent racism in our justice system handed down from slavery to mass incarceration and capital punishment, he cites as a main reason.

"[W]e are not confident that these sentences were attained without racial bias," his office wrote in a motion to courts expected to be filed in coming days in multiple cases. "We cannot defend these sentences, and we believe that implicit bias and structural racism played some role in the death sentence." "Rosen's unprecedented move (he is the only prosecutor in California to have made such a blanket request, and the only one I could find nationwide) has gone largely unnoticed. But it represents a new battleground in the fight over the death penalty," she asserted. "While many prosecutors around the state and the nation have stopped the use of the death penalty moving forward, Rosen is the first to look back and answer the question—with collective action—If it isn’t fair now, how could it have been fair then? "

The Santa Clara County district attorney previously pursued capital punishment in 4 cases—including one in which the jury ultimately found the man innocent in June 2020. A month later, Rosen announced he would no longer seek death sentences.

In a 2021 piece for The Appealarguing that Rosen should not be California's next attorney general, retired deputy public defender Michael Ogul wrote that "as someone who witnessed Rosen's attempt to execute an innocent man firsthand, his policy change is nothing more than a brazen attempt to selfishly further his political ambitions."

Rosen has said he changed his position on capital punishment after trips to the Legacy Sites, a museum, memorial, and sculpture park in Alabama that "invite visitors to reckon with our history of racial injustice in places where that history was lived." They were created by the Equal Justice Initiative, a legal group that represents clients sentenced to death and condemned to die in prison.

"We cannot ignore that the death penalty's roots stretch back to slavery and the lynchings that continued long after the Emancipation Proclamation," Equal Justice USA CEO Jamila Hodge said in a statement Thursday, welcoming Rosen's new resentencing effort. "As lynchings diminished, executions surged. Every time we end the death penalty or stop executions, we chip away at centuries of racial injustice."

The Ella Baker Center also celebrated the development, saying: "The death penalty is rooted in a legacy of racism—from the execution of enslaved people, to the terror and lynching of Black people, to the criminal legal system of executions we have today. We must end it."

Elisabeth Semel, director of the Death Penalty Clinic at the University of California, Berkeley, told the Times columnist that Rosen's "highly significant" move could push other prosecutors to reconsider capital punishment, rather than just reviewing specific cases.

"There is nothing, nothing that these cases have more in common than racial discrimination, whether we are talking about privileging white victims, meaning seeking the death penalty in white crime, or disadvantaging Black clients," Semel said.

In California, over a third of death row inmates are Black and a quarter are Latinx. None of them face imminent executions, thanks to a statewide moratorium imposed in 2019 by Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat reelected in 2022 after a failed recall attempt.

Rosen's initiative notably comes while "California is sliding back toward a tough-on-crime attitude, driven largely by an increase in organized retail [theft] and the fentanyl crisis," as Chabria pointed out Thursday in a separate Times piece about Newsom.

The governor—who "dismantled the death chamber and promised to do away with death row as a segregated (and expensive) cellblock," as Chabria detailed—is barred from running for a third term and considered a potential 2028 presidential candidate.

Democratic President Joe Biden, who is seeking reelection in November, campaigned on ending the death penalty at the federal level, but that lacks the support it would need to pass the divided Congress. He endured intense criticism in January over the U.S. Department of Justice pursuing the death penalty for a mass shooter serving life in prison without the possibility of parole.

The presumptive Republican nominee is former President Donald Trump, whose first term featured a "killing spree" in which the federal government executed 13 death row inmates. During a Tuesday campaign rally, Trump said that if elected, "I will ask Congress to send a bill to my desk ensuring that anyone who murders a police officer will receive immediately the death penalty."

(source: Jessica Corbett, commondreams.org)

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

Condemned killer of 12-year-old Polly Klaas makes new bid to overturn death sentence----Richard Allen Davis was sentenced to die in 1996

Richard Allen Davis, one of California’s most notorious convicted killers, whose 1993 kidnapping and murder of 12-year-old Polly Klaas inspired a crackdown on serial offenders, is making a fresh bid to overturn his death sentence in a San Jose courtroom Friday.

Davis’ lawyers argue that a recent criminal justice reform law that invalidated certain sentencing enhancements entitles Davis to have his sentence reconsidered. Sonoma County prosecutors and Polly’s father, Marc Klaas, who became a crime victim advocate after her murder, disagree.

“We had every expectation that the sentence of death recommended by the jury and imposed by Judge Thomas Hastings would keep him segregated from society for the rest of his life,” Klaas said in a statement. “We could not have been more wrong!”

The crime generated worldwide headlines and struck fear into the hearts of parents everywhere: On Oct. 1, 1993, Polly Klaas was having a slumber party with two friends at her mother’s Petaluma home when Davis, a stranger, entered her bedroom armed with a knife, bound and blindfolded the friends and kidnapped Polly. It was 10:30 at night. Her mother and younger sister were asleep in another room.

Police, unaware at the time of Polly’s kidnapping, helped free Davis’ car from a ditch on a private road a few hours later. He didn’t emerge as a suspect until nearly 2 months later when evidence of the crime was found near the ditch. Investigators learned that Davis had been paroled that summer after serving time for violently kidnapping a woman and had a history of violent crimes against women on a rap sheet that extended back to his childhood.

He was arrested on Nov. 30 for a parole violation. Davis provided investigators information that led them to Polly’s body on Dec. 4, buried in a shallow grave near Cloverdale.

Davis was charged with her murder, kidnapping, burglary, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon and attempted lewd acts on a child. His trial was moved to Santa Clara County because of intense publicity around the case.

Davis made obscene gestures at the San Jose court gallery as the jury delivered its death verdict in 1996. He still has another appeal pending.

Outrage over Polly’s murder by a career criminal helped drive California to adopt a series of tough-on-crime laws. Among them was one of the country’s toughest “3 strikes you’re out” laws calling for life sentences for repeat violent felons, and the state’s Megan’s Law sex offender registry.

But as California’s prisons swelled with convicts and the state faced federal court orders to address overcrowding, lawmakers and governors Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsom began peeling back many of the sentencing measures to reduce “mass incarceration.”

That included laws eliminating many sentencing enhancements for prior convictions. In 2021, the state approved a bill by Sen. Ben Allen, an El Segundo Democrat, that would make the elimination of those prior conviction sentencing enhancements apply retroactively. He said at the time his law would “improve fairness in the legal system.”

Lawyers for Davis argued in a February court filing that the law that took effect in 2022 invalidates Davis’ sentencing enhancements for four prior serious felony convictions and 3 previous prison terms and entitles him to a full resentencing.

But prosecutors with the Sonoma County District Attorney’s Office argue that the law doesn’t apply to his death sentence for Polly’s murder and would affect only two years worth of his prison sentence on other charges related to the crime.

Allen said Thursday that “our law was definitely not intended to undo the death sentences of condemned killers. I agree with the prosecutors on this issue of interpretation and hope they prevail in court.”

Davis, 69, isn’t likely to be executed any time soon no matter what the judge decides on his latest bid.

Capital punishment in California has been on hold since March 13, 2019, when Newsom signed an executive order for a moratorium on the death penalty in the form of a reprieve for all people sentenced to death. The order also calls for repealing the state’s lethal injection protocol and the immediate closing of the execution chamber at San Quentin State Prison. But it doesn’t provide for the release of any individual from prison or otherwise alter any current conviction or sentence.

Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen this week cited Newsom’s order in seeking to have condemned killers in cases county prosecutors handled resentenced to life without parole. His office isn’t handling Davis’ case.

Klaas, who this year is winding down the foundation named after his slain daughter that pushed for crime legislation and helped hundreds of families search for missing kids, feels the state’s rollback of tougher crime laws is a betrayal of victims’ families.

“I did have an expectation that as long as he’s on Death Row, even if he doesn’t get executed, I wouldn’t have to have him in my mind anymore,” Klaas said in an interview. “It takes decades-old cases of extreme pain and throws it back into everybody’s faces so we can give the criminal yet another chance. Where’s my consideration?”

Klaas added that “if Polly’s killer is somehow able to prevail, this is the tip of the iceberg.” He believes some 10,000 inmates could potentially be eligible for resentencing if that happens, and the efforts that he and others made to hold repeat offenders accountable will be undone.

“The pendulum is going right back to where it was,” he said, “in 1993.”

(source: Marin Independent Journal)

USA:

Progress and Impediments on Path to Abolition in U.S.

When President Biden won the 2020 election, he became the 1st successful U.S. presidential candidate to publicly oppose the death penalty. As part of his promise to work toward abolition, the Biden campaign noted that “Over 160 individuals who’ve been sentenced to death in this country since 1973 have later been exonerated.” In 2021, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a moratorium on federal executions, recognizing, among other things that “[s]erious concerns have been raised about the continued use of the death penalty across the country.” The President, his campaign, and the DOJ are right to express concern about a punishment that, even setting aside the immorality of state-sanctioned killing, has never been applied fairly, justly, or equally.

That made it especially disheartening when, earlier this year, the DOJ, led by an attorney general appointed by President Biden, announced that it would pursue the death penalty against Payton Gendron. In 2022, Gendron had killed 10 Black people in a racially motivated shooting in a Buffalo, New York, grocery store. Before the DOJ announced the capital charges, Gendron had already pled guilty to the murders in New York state court and was serving a life sentence with no possibility of release. Justice, to the extent that it can ever be achieved in such a heinous situation, had already been done.

The American Constitution Society spoke out against the decision, with one of the authors, ACS President Russ Feingold, observing that “By pursuing the death penalty in a single case, regardless of the facts of that case, the federal government validates state-sanctioned killings as a policy and a practice.” The fact is the death penalty in the U.S. is plagued with dysfunction. Any honest assessment of the criminal legal systems used to investigate, capitally charge, try, and ultimately execute people in the U.S. reveals a cruel, random, and ultimately tortuous practice.

Lack of adequate defense resources means that questions around innocence and culpability abound in death penalty cases. The most recent execution in the U.S., that of Ivan Cantu by Texas in February, happened under a cloud of doubt about witness credibility, including one witness who recanted his testimony. A court never considered these claims. To date, at least 195 people sentenced to death in the U.S. have been subsequently exonerated. The true number of people wrongly convicted or sentenced to death is difficult to know, but undoubtedly much higher.

The death penalty also magnifies racial disparities already present in the U.S. criminal legal system. Cases involving white victims are far more likely to result in prosecutors seeking the death penalty, and people of color, particularly Black people, make up a disproportionate share of those people ultimately executed. The mentally ill and intellectual disabled are also disproportionately reflected in the nation’s death row population. Combined with the fact that the death penalty is only actively used in a handful of counties in a handful states, the likelihood of facing execution is more a reflection of demographics and location than a reflection of the heinousness of any given crime.

Even the mechanics of executions are beset with problems. Idaho’s failed attempt to execute 73-year-old Thomas Creech in February (on the same day Texas killed Cantu) is only the most recent example. According to researchers, more than a third of executions attempted in 2022 were botched. States, too often operating in secret, tinker with untested drug protocols, experiment with nitrogen hypoxia, and consider returning to firing squads and the electric chair all in a futile attempt to find a “better” way to kill people. These are macabre experiments that deny the fact that killing is an inherently brutal and inhumane practice.

It is reasonable to see this litany of dysfunction and conclude that the death penalty in the U.S. is broken. In fact, for the first time since pollsters began asking the question, more Americans believe that the death penalty is applied unfairly than fairly. Unsurprisingly, public opposition to the death penalty is also at near all-time high.

But to say the death penalty is broken is to imply that it can be fixed or reformed to operate more justly. It cannot be. ACS understands this and focuses our work on highlighting the legal and moral failings that are inexorably bound up in the death penalty.

The U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment prohibits “cruel and unusual punishments.” Unfortunately, the current U.S. Supreme Court, controlled as it is by a conservative supermajority, has shown a near-total disregard for the cruelty of the death penalty. But the waning of the death penalty in the United States is becoming too hard to ignore. The fact that executions and death sentences are “unusual” has become undeniable.

Executions and death sentences have been trending down since their historic highs in the late 1990s. In the past two decades, eleven states have abolished the death penalty, bring the total of non-death penalty states to 23 out of 50. In addition, 6 states are currently under governor-imposed moratoria on executions. Even in most states that still have the death penalty, it is rarely used. In 2023, only 5 states were responsible for the 24 executions nationwide, and only seven states accounted for the 21 new death sentences. Even in these few states, only a handful of counties were responsible for the majority of death sentences and executions.

The rarity of death sentences and execution makes the death penalty all that more arbitrary and cements its unconstitutionality. Those facing death sentences are not the worst of the worst, but simply the random defendants caught up in the political, racial, and regional dynamics of a hopelessly dysfunctional death penalty system. In fact, the Death Penalty Information Center asserts that most of the 24 people executed in 2023 would not even be sentenced to death today, because of “[c]hanges in the law, such as the alternative sentence of life without parole, the elimination of non-unanimous death sentences in most states, the exclusion of people with intellectual disability from death penalty eligibility, and changes in the common and scientific understanding of mental illness and trauma and their lasting effects . . . .”

The death penalty in the U.S. is on its way out. It is losing at the ballot box and in the jury box. Soon the judiciary will have to acknowledge that it is an act, not of justice, but of arbitrary and unconstitutional vengeance. The question is how much more suffering and debasement we are willing to tolerate as the end of the death penalty in the U.S. draws nearer.

(source: RUSS FEINGOLD President & CHRISTOPHER WRIGHT DUROCHER, Vice President of Policy and Program; American Constitution Society)

JAMAICA:

Schoolgirl killer’s lawyer argues against death penalty for client

A lawyer representing the man convicted of the 2017 murder of 15-year-old schoolgirl Shineka Gray on Thursday argued against the crown seeking the death penalty for his client, who he suggested is capable of being rehabilitated.

Chumu Paris told the St James Circuit Court that the death penalty does not apply to his client, Gregory Roberts, because it should only be applied if the court finds that the convicted individual is incapable of reform.

“Murder is always a heinous crime but it is clear that the death sentence must be reserved for exceptional categories of cases within the more serious cases of offence,” stated Paris in his sentencing hearing submission to High Court Justice Bertram Morrison.

He used several case files in his submission to support his argument.

Paris also argued against what he said was the crown’s position in its submission, that sentencing should start at 50 years.

“What the crown is saying is that in the alternative of the death penalty, this man must serve that,” stated Paris.

He argued that absolute fairness was lacking in the case as he referenced Roberts’s co-accused, Mario Morrison, who pleaded guilty in September 2022 after entering a plea deal with the State and was sentenced to life in prison a month later.

“Interestingly, the former co-accused then became the crown’s main witness… he admitted to having sexual intercourse with a minor and was found with her phone [by the police] but he was never indicted for any of those,” Paris said.

He said the starting point presented by the crown should be rejected by the court.

“I submit my Lord that the particular range in dealing with this particular matter, I think it is safe to say, is within 15 years to life, but certainly nearer to 20 and upwards in considering a starting point,” stated Paris, adding “I am submitting that life imprisonment [or] 30 years would not be an appropriate starting point in this case.”

Shineka, who was a grade 10 student at the time of her death, was found dead 3 days after she had been reported missing. She was last seen alive in Montego Bay while on her way home from the funeral of a schoolmate.

Roberts and Morrison were later taken into custody in connection with the killing.

The sentencing hearing will continue on Friday when the Crown is expected to make its submission.

(source: jamaicaobserver.com)

UGANDA:

Uganda Cites U.S. Dobbs Decision in Ruling to Uphold Death Penalty for ‘Aggravated Homosexuality’----In other words, Uganda looked to the cruel, conservative logic of the U.S. legal system to justify its own law to kill queer people.

On Wednesday, Uganda’s Constitutional Court issued a ruling that upheld most of the provisions of a law that imposes the death penalty—by hanging—on people convicted of “aggravated homosexuality.” The court argues in favor of this monstrous position for a number of reasons. But a particularly chilling one is its citation of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health U.S. Supreme Court ruling from 2022, which overturned Roe v. Wade and has since led to a rash of brutal abortion bans across the country.

“In [Dobbs], the US Supreme Court considered the nation’s history and traditions, as well as the dictates of democracy and rule of law, to overrule the broader right to autonomy,” the Constitutional Court wrote in a 203-page judgment after a legal challenge from human rights activists. “The court considered the implications of upholding the right to autonomy under the guise of personal dignity … and held that it was time to return the permissibility of abortion and the limitations thereon to the people’s elected representatives as demanded by the Constitution and the rule of law. This is precisely what was done with the issue of homosexuality in Uganda.”

In other words, Uganda looked to the cruel, conservative logic of the U.S. legal system to justify its own law to kill queer people. Almost any act of state violence and dehumanization can be justified by the principle of upholding a “nation’s history and traditions.” That includes the government forcing pregnant people—including child rape victims, people at risk of death, or people who simply don’t want to experience the violence of forced pregnancy—to give birth against their will. And, according to Uganda’s Constitutional Court, this logic includes the state executing people for being gay.

The Anti-Homosexuality Act of 2023 was passed in May and vaguely defines “aggravated homosexuality” as acts that spread terminal illness, involve a “serial offender,” or a person with a disability. It also includes incest and pedophilia. After the law was passed, the U.S. announced sanctions and restrictions on Ugandan passports and the World Bank suspended lending, according to Reuters. Hundreds of Ugandans have since been subjected to attacks, arrests, and human rights violations based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. The act also included criminal penalties if a person failed to report a same-sex relationship to the government…but that was among the four provisions that the court struck down on Wednesday.

In upholding the death penalty, Uganda’s Constitutional Court also cited the “absence of consensus at the global level regarding non-discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, and sex characteristics”—which is certainly an indictment of the international community including the U.S., where anti-LGBTQ bills are spreading like a rash across state legislatures, primarily targeting trans youth and any references to or acknowledgment of queer identity in schools.

In Uganda, LGBTQ expression is criminalized under the national penal code, and includes a wide range of sexual acts that are “against the order of nature.” The Constitutional Court’s ruling is a terrifying outcome rendered especially chilling as it holds up a mirror to our own policy landscape, the natural conclusion of upholding “tradition,” and the international ripple effects of the U.S. Supreme Court’s cruelty.

(source: jezebel.com)

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

US Supreme Court Ruling Cited as Uganda Upholds Anti-Gay Death Penalty

The U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down Roe v. Wade was cited in Uganda's decision to uphold an anti-gay law calling for the execution of those who practice "aggravated homosexuality."

The Constitutional Court of Uganda on Wednesday used the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization as justification to largely uphold Anti-Homosexuality Act 2023, arguing that the U.S. court's conservative majority had established a new standard for "human rights jurisprudence" that places "history and traditions" over individual rights.

Dobbs, which in 2022 instantly criminalized abortion in many U.S. states, was cited as a "basis for the court decision" to uphold the gay death penalty law, which the Ugandan court said had been passed last year following "public outcry" over the supposed "forced recruitment of children into homosexual acts."

Uganda's constitutional court praised the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to strike down Roe v. Wade, writing that the court had "considered the nation's history and traditions, as well as the dictates of democracy and rule of law, to over-rule the broader right to individual autonomy."

The Ugandan court also cited an "absence of consensus at the global level regarding non-discrimination based sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics" as justification for the anti-gay law.

The law defines "aggravated homosexuality" as gay people who: engage in gay sex involving a minor; have HIV or disabilities; are elderly; or get convicted of non-aggravated homosexuality more than once.

Homosexuality not considered to be "aggravated" under the law is punishable by to a life sentence in prison, while "promoting" homosexuality carries a sentence of up to 20 years. Attempted homosexuality and aggravated homosexuality are punishable by sentences of 10 and 14 years, respectively.

While the death penalty for "aggravated homosexuality" was upheld, the constitutional court's decision did strike down some other parts of the law, including provisions that criminalized renting property "for homosexual purposes" and a requirement that Ugandan citizens "report acts of homosexuality" to police.

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, the first openly gay person to hold her position, called removing some provisions of the law a "small and insufficient step towards safeguarding human rights" in Uganda.

"[President Joe Biden] has said time and time again, no one should have to live in constant fear nor be subjected to violence or discrimination," Jean-Pierre told reporters on Wednesday. "It is wrong. We will continue to work to advance respect for human rights for all in Uganda and also around the world."

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken had a similar reaction, saying in a statement that the law's intact provisions "pose grave threats to the Ugandan people, especially LGBTQI+ Ugandans and their allies, undermine public health, clamp down on civic space, damage Uganda's international reputation, and harm efforts to increase foreign investment."

The Biden administration did not address the Ugandan court's citation of Dobbs as justification for largely upholding the law. Newsweek reached out for comment to the White House and State Department via email and online press contact form on Thursday.

Passage of the law in Uganda last year sparked international condemnation and resulted in repercussions that have included U.S. sanctions and travel restrictions for Ugandan officials.

The U.S. Supreme Court's Dobbs decision intensified a political firestorm over abortion rights and prompted some to predict that the court's conservative majority would soon turn their attention to overturning other rights that some conservatives oppose, including protections for the LGBTQ+ community.

In his concurring Dobbs opinion, conservative Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that he hoped to "correct the error" of the Supreme Court's rulings in Lawrence v. Texas, Obergefell v. Hodges and Griswold v. Connecticut—which struck down anti-sodomy laws, established same-sex marriage equality and established the right for married couples to use contraception, respectively.

(source: newsweek.com)

RUSSIA:

War Escalation, Xenophobia, Death Penalty Talks: What’s Next for Russia After Moscow Concert Massacre?

The March 22 attack on a concert venue near Moscow is likely to have extensive and far-reaching impacts on the country, experts warn.

The Crocus City Hall attack, Russia's deadliest in 2 decades, risks exacerbating already existing tensions in Russian society, leading to more state and law enforcement repression, as well as an increase in anti-migrant violence and xenophobia.

And as Russia enters the third year of its war against Ukraine, the attack — claimed by Islamic State (IS) militants but blamed by Russian authorities on Kyiv and “its allies” — could worsen Moscow’s already frigid relations with the West or lead to an escalation in the conflict.

Rise in anti-West sentiment

Top Russian officials have accused Ukraine and its Western allies of being partly responsible for the attack despite the fact that IS has claimed responsibility, while Kyiv strongly denies any involvement.

The U.S. had also warned Russian officials in advance that Crocus City Hall was a potential target for a terrorist attack, The Washington Post reported, citing U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

Memorial service for those killed in the attack at Crocus City Hall at a makeshift memorial.Sergei Kiselev / Moskva News Agency Sergei Naryshkin, the head of Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), said that Moscow did receive a warning from the American authorities about a possible terrorist attack but claimed the information was not specific.

Security Council chief Nikolai Patrushev, an influential hawk in Putin’s inner circle, said that “traces lead to the Ukrainian special services,” adding that “everyone is well aware that the Kyiv regime is not independent and is completely controlled by the United States.”

The accusations appear to be resonating with some Russians.

Russia’s Defense Ministry said Wednesday that “around 16,000 citizens” have signed up to fight as contract soldiers in Ukraine over the past 10 days alone, claiming that “most candidates” said they were motivated to “avenge those killed” at Crocus City Hall.

In the days following the attack, hundreds of people stood in long lines at several Moscow hospitals to donate blood to the wounded.

At least 3 people who came to donate blood told The Moscow Times that they believe in the aftermath of the attack “it is important to show strength and unity.”

One Muscovite added that "the country should unite in its war against the enemy," without specifying who the enemy is.

‘Normalization’ of torture

Following the tragedy, the Russian government faced widespread pressure to respond decisively.

Four suspected shooters were quickly arrested following the attack along with with several suspected accomplices.

Two days after the attack, the four men accused of killing more than 140 people appeared in a Moscow court with visible bruises and other injuries that human rights activists said were clear evidence of torture.

One of the suspects was seen being wheeled into court on a gurney, accompanied by a doctor and reportedly unconscious. Another was seen in court with a bandage where his ear should be after an unverified graphic video showed what appeared to be law enforcement agents cutting off his ear after he was detained.

When asked what the suspected gunmen’s treatment means for Russia, The Crew Against Torture, a prominent human rights NGO that monitors cases of torture, warned that the police’s brutal handling of the suspects could further “normalize” violence in Russian society.

“We witnessed one of the most large-scale and brutal attacks in the last 20 years and witnessed one of the most blatant tortures that followed this attack,” said lawyer and head of Crew Against Torture Sergei Babinets.

“The message [to society] is that you can behave cruelly and inhumanely with such people, without even fully understanding whether or not they are guilty and what role they played,” Babinets told The Moscow Times. “Instead of a proper investigation, they were subjected to violence.”

He warned that brutalizing suspected criminals sets a precedent that puts people who are believed to have committed less serious offenses at risk of the same treatment.

“This could lead to a dangerous precedent where law enforcement and security forces may adopt similar tactics in investigating other types of offenses," he said.

Death penalty returns to public debate

Following the attack, several public figures and officials have reopened the debate about restoring capital punishment and whether it is possible to execute the suspected gunmen.

Their comments led critics to warn of potential unforeseen outcomes — such as cases of miscarriage of justice — given Russia’s already liberal application of counterterrorism legislation.

The death penalty is technically legal in Russia but has been under a moratorium confirmed by the Constitutional Court since 1999.

Shortly after the Crocus City Hall attack, former President Dmitry Medvedev, who has become one of the most hawkish voices on Russia’s war in Ukraine, said that the suspects “should be killed.”

“Should we kill them? We should. And we will,” he said. “But it is much more important to kill everyone involved. Everyone. Those who paid, those who sympathized, those who helped. Kill them all.”

Ex-presidential candidate Leonid Slutsky, who heads the nationalist Liberal Democratic Party (LDPR), also called for lifting the moratorium on the death penalty at a plenary meeting in the State Duma.

Other officials have called for restraint, however. Lawmaker Pavel Krasheninnikov said that a decision with such wide-reaching consequences “must be made with a cool head” and not at a time when “emotions prevail.”

The Kremlin said it would not take part in the discussion about lifting the moratorium on the death penalty.

According to a survey conducted in 2022, 43% of respondents approved of the use of capital punishment in Russia.

At least two people who came to lay flowers at the makeshift Crocus City memorial told The Moscow Times that the death penalty could be an “appropriate” punishment if approved by the government.

Fears of rising xenophobia

Anti-immigrant sentiment appears to be on the rise after the 4 suspected gunmen were identified as citizens of the Central Asian republic of Tajikistan.

The Civic Assistance Committee, an NGO that assists refugees and migrants in Russia, told The Moscow Times that some migrants “are scared to [leave the house] to go to school.”

After the suspects’ identities were published, reports emerged of security services conducting widespread raids on migrant communities nationwide.

In Russia’s 2nd-largest city of St. Petersburg, authorities have been deporting migrants en masse following the attack, the legal rights group Perviy Otdel said.

In Yekaterinburg, local media reported that migrants who obtained Russian citizenship and went to replace their driver’s licenses with Russian ones — as is legally required — were handed summonses to the military registration and enlistment office.

Russian officials are also considering the creation of a new department tasked with overseeing interethnic and migration policies, the Vedomosti business daily reported, citing three sources close to the presidential administration and two sources close to the government.

Russia’s Interior Ministry also submitted a draft federal law to the government that would limit temporary stays for foreigners in Russia to a maximum of 90 days per year.

The proposed law would also mandate all foreign citizens to be photographed and provide their fingerprints upon entering the country.

(source: The Moscow Times)

APRIL 4, 2024:

OKLAHOMA----execution

Oklahoma executes Michael Dewayne Smith, convicted of killing 2 people in 2002

A man convicted of killing 2 people in Oklahoma more than two decades ago was executed Thursday, marking the state's 1st execution of the year. Michael Dewayne Smith received a lethal injection at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester and was pronounced dead at 10:20 a.m., the Department of Corrections confirmed to CBS News.

The execution followed the state's controversial decision to restore capital punishment in 2021 after bungled executions called its protocols into question.

Smith, 41, was sentenced to death in Oklahoma after his convictions 2 decades ago in the murders of Janet Moore, a 41-year-old mother, and Sharath Pulluru, a 22-year-old store clerk. The shootings that killed them were carried out separately on Feb. 22, 2002, while Smith was already on the run in the wake of a prior killing, authorities have said.

Oklahoma's execution process lasted just over 10 minutes on Thursday after beginning at 10:09 a.m., said the state prisons director, Steven Harpe, in a statement obtained by CBS News. Smith was declared unconscious at 10:14 a.m., according to that statement. A spiritual adviser joined Smith in the death chamber at his request, the director said. The inmate did not request a last meal.

"Today's event and the circumstances that led to it have affected many people — especially the family and friends of victims Janet Moore and Sharath Pulluru," Harpe said. "As an agency, we carried out the court's orders according to our high standards of professionalism and respect for those in our custody, ensuring dignity for everyone involved in the process."

Smith tried to appeal his sentence multiple times throughout most of his imprisonment, records show. Among other arguments made in his defense, Smith and his legal team have insisted that he is not responsible for either of the murders for which he was convicted, despite his previous confession to both crimes. They pushed for clemency on the grounds of an apparent former substance abuse problem and intellectual disability, since a U.S. Supreme Court decision on the latter would prevent Oklahoma from executing him. None of Smith's appeals were successful in court.

Ahead of a hearing in March that sealed Smith's fate, Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond put out a formal request to the state's Pardon and Parole Board, asking them to deny his plea for clemency.

"Michael Smith's outrageous claims of innocence have been repeatedly rejected in court," Drummond said in a statement. "He is a ruthless killer who has confessed to his crimes on multiple occasions. There is no doubt in my mind that his request for clemency should be denied."

Drummond alleged that evidence found at the scenes of both murders corroborated Smith's confession. He also dismissed the inmate's plea for lenience based on a supposed intellectual disability and noted that Smith's IQ scores rendered that claim "statutorily ineligible."

At the hearing, Smith denied his involvement in the murders but shared his "deepest apologies and deepest sorrows to the families" of the victims, the Associated Press reported.

"I didn't commit these crimes. I didn't kill these people," Smith said in emotional remarks. "I was high on drugs. I don't even remember getting arrested."

The parole board ultimately denied Smith's clemency petition in a 4-1 vote, and his execution was scheduled to move forward.

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals also rejected an emergency stay of execution for Smith earlier this week, CBS affiliate KOTV reported. His 3rd and final emergency plea to the criminal appeals court came on the heels of others in recent months that were denied, including one motion that sought post-conviction DNA testing, according to the station.

The court said in its opinion that conducting more tests would not change the validity of Smith's conviction, KOTV reported, noting the appeals court's references to "a very detailed, highly corroborated confession" that Smith gave to police, which was allegedly supported by other confessions and crime scene evidence.

CBS News contacted the Oklahoma Department of Corrections for comment but did not receive an immediate reply.

Smith was among 43 prisoners on death row in Oklahoma. He was the 1st executed there this year, and the 12th since the state resumed capital punishments after a 7-year break in 2021. That hiatus came in response to a string of botched lethal injections in 2014 and 2015, particularly the bungled execution of Charles Warner, a former death row inmate who witnesses said suffered excessively in the death chamber. It was later discovered that Oklahoma had used an incorrect and unauthorized drug in the lethal injection cocktail used for Warner's execution.

Oklahoma agreed to pause executions as investigations into what went wrong got underway. But the state went on to resume an execution schedule in late 2021, months before a federal trial was set to examine its lethal injection protocol. The state botched its first execution, of former inmate John Grant, by lethal injection upon its return to the schedule.

Oklahoma adopted its own state policy authorizing capital punishment in 1976, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. The 1st execution did not happen until 1990, and the state has put 123 prisoners to death since then. One federal execution has also been carried out in Oklahoma.

Another Oklahoma death row inmate, 60-year-old Richard Glossip, is currently trying to appeal his sentence and has so far gained more headway with state officials, including the attorney general, who have openly argued his innocence. The Supreme Court agreed in January to hear Glossip's case after Drummond claimed issues with his trial should invalidate the prisoner's conviction and sentence.

Smith becomes the 1st condemned inmate to be put to death this year in Oklahoma and the 124th overall since the state resumed capital punishment in 1990. Only Texas (587) has put more inmates to death since the death penalty was re-instated by the US Supreme Court on July 2, 1976.

Smith becomes the 4th condemned inmate to be put to death this year in the USA and the 1,586th overall since the nation resumed executions on January 17, 1977.

(sources: CBS News & Rick Halperin)

PENNSYLVANIA:

DA plans to seek death penalty against man charged with killing 3 relatives in suburban Philadelphia

Pennsylvania authorities said Wednesday they plan to pursue the death penalty against a man charged with killing his stepmother, sister and the mother of his children before officials say he fled in a stolen vehicle to New Jersey, where he was arrested last month.

Andre Gordon Jr. appeared for court in Pennsylvania for the 1st time since authorities said he carried out three fatal shootings on March 16 in the Levittown section of Falls Township, as well as a pair of carjackings nearby in suburban Philadelphia.

Arriving at magisterial district court not far from where authorities said the shootings happened, Mr. Gordon was wearing an orange jumpsuit and was shackled at the wrists and ankles.

Asked if he had anything to say, Mr. Gordon responded in a low voice: “Pray, pray to God.”

In the roughly 10-minute preliminary arraignment, Judge John Galloway denied bail and ordered Mr. Gordon, who appeared without an attorney in court, not to contact his minor children and other relatives who were witnesses to the crimes he is charged with.

Judge Galloway asked Mr. Gordon if he understood it was a preliminary arraignment to read the charges, including 3 counts of 1st-degree murder, against him.

“Not really,” Mr. Gordon said. The judge repeated the explanation and asked if Mr. Gordon understood. “Yes, sir,” he said.

Bucks County District Attorney Jennifer Schorn told reporters outside the court after the hearing that she decided to notify the court of her plan to seek capital punishment because of the “multiple killings and grave risk to others.”

“We had an opportunity to speak to the family and get their position,” she said. “Time will tell ultimately how this case unfolds. But we had to certify before formal arraignment.”

Earlier Wednesday, Mr. Gordon, 26, waived an extradition hearing in New Jersey and was transferred to officials in Bucks County, Pa., according to prosecutors and the New Jersey court's spokesperson.

Authorities have said Mr. Gordon carjacked a vehicle in Trenton, N.J., early on March 16 before driving to Levittown in Falls Township, Pennsylvania.

There he killed his stepmother and sister, the Bucks County district attorney said. He then drove to a 2nd home in Levittown and killed the mother of his 2 children, authorities said. He is also accused of injuring his children’s grandmother by bludgeoning her with a rifle.

The dead included Mr. Gordon’s 52-year-old stepmother, Karen Gordon; his 13-year-old sister, Kera Gordon; and 25-year-old Taylor Daniel, the mother of his 2 children, the district attorney said. Authorities have said Mr. Gordon’s children were present when he shot their mother.

Mr. Gordon then carjacked a second vehicle in Morrisville and returned to Trenton, authorities said. Police surrounded a home for hours in the belief that he was there, but Mr. Gordon apparently slipped out before a cordon went up. He was arrested, unarmed, when he was spotted walking down a street a few blocks away.

The mayhem forced the cancellation of a St. Patrick’s Day parade in Pennsylvania’s Bucks County and the closure of a Sesame Street-themed amusement park and a number of other businesses. Authorities issued a shelter-in-place order for several hours.

Officials have not released a possible motive for the attacks.

Pennsylvania Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro has said he would not allow executions to occur while he is governor, saying he wants the legislature to work to abolish it. The state’s most recent execution took place in 1999.

(source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)

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

Prosecutors plan to seek death penalty for alleged Bucks Co. family killer----On Wednesday morning, Andre Gordon, 26, waived his right to an extradition hearing. He was immediately head to Pa. to face charges in the slayings of his stepmother, teen sister and the mother of his children

A man who is alleged to have killed 3 members of his family during a shooting rampage in Levittown last month was immediately transported to Pennsylvania after having his extradition hearing waived at a New Jersey court on Wednesday morning.

On Wednesday morning, 26-year-old Andre Gordon was set to have an extradition hearing in Trenton, New Jersey, after he was arrested in the Garden State when he, allegedly, fled following the shooting deaths of his 52-year-old stepmother, Karen Gordon and his 13-year-old sister, Kera Gordon as well as the mother of his 2 children, 25-year-old Taylor Daniel.

Instead -- in an appearance from Mercer County Jail before Judge Robert Bingham II -- Gordon waived the right to the hearing and was ordered to be immediately transported to Bucks County to face charges in the slaying of three members of his family.

Gordon was being held in New Jersey on carjacking charges and weapon offenses.

He was released into the custody of Bucks County law enforcement officials.

At about 2:30 p.m., he arrived in a Bucks County courtroom where he had an arraignment hearing on the charges he faces in Pennsylvania, which include murder, aggravated assault, burglary, robbery and related offenses.

As he arrived, he told NBC10's Karen Hua to "pray to God."

"Pray to God. Pray to God. That's all I have to say," he said as he was lead into court.

In court, before Judge John Galloway, Gordon spoke in a subdued, quiet voice.

At the hearing, prosecutors said they will seek the death penalty against Gordon in this case.

Gordon was denied bail and his preliminary hearing was scheduled for April 16 at 2 p.m.

(source: NBC Philadelphia)

FLORIDA:

8 jurors to decide if Patrick McDowell will face death penalty in murder of Nassau County deputy----His defense lawyers filed motion, saying the 8-4 decision was unconstitutional

Only 8 jurors will have to decide if the man who admitted to killing Nassau County Sheriff’s Office Deputy Joshua Moyers will face the death penalty for the murder.

Patrick McDowell pleaded guilty to shooting and killing Moyers during a traffic stop in 2021.

Judge Daniel denied McDowell’s defense’s motion to strike down the new death penalty law, which requires only an 8-4 majority for a convict to be sentenced to death.

His attorney argued that the 8-4 rule violates McDowell’s constitutional rights, but the judge disagreed.

Jury selection starts Friday with the 1,200 potential jurors going to court to fill out a questionnaire. Those questions will also include asking for opinions on the death penalty.

(source: news4jax.com)

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

Tampa man convicted of killing his girlfriend and her child appeals death sentence to Florida Supreme Court----A jury unanimously recommended the death penalty in 2021.

A Tampa man who murdered his girlfriend and her son appealed his death penalty sentence on Wednesday.

A jury found Tyrone Johnson guilty of shooting and killing Stephanie Willis and 10-year-old Ricky "Ryon" Willis in 2018.

He was sentenced to death in December 2022 for one count of 1st-degree murder for killing Ricky and issued a life sentence for the other murder.

The Florida Supreme Court heard oral arguments where Johnson's attorney, Steven Bolotin, argued the jury was unfairly influenced by evidence. In Johnson's interrogation video, detectives are insinuating what Johnson did rather than asking, Bolotin argued.

Justice Charles Canady pushed back at Johnson's attorney's argument and said there were no direct statements from the detectives such as "we know you did it."

Another issue Bolotin briefly raised was with the testimony of one witness who he said "went rogue." Bolotin claimed the witness was threatened with a perjury charge if they were to recant their testimony.

The lawyer representing the state, Christina Z. Pacheco, referenced the 21-page order the judge who sentenced Johnson prepared.

"A precious child is dead. The murder was heinous, atrocious and cruel. And it was done after you murdered his mother, Stephanie," the judge wrote.

Pacheco argued that even if the court found an error within the case, it wouldn't impact Johnson's ultimate sentencing.

(source: WTSP news)

LOUISIANA:

Sen. Katrina Jackson-Andrews proposes bill to remove nitrogen hypoxia as method for death penalty

On April 2, Senator Katrina Jackson-Andrews (D-34) filed Senate Bill 430 to remove nitrogen hypoxia as an option to carry out the death penalty in Louisiana.

Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry signed a bill earlier this year that expanded the methods of execution in Louisiana to include nitrogen hypoxia. At the request of a newly formed coalition, Jews Against Gassing, Jackson-Andrews proposed that the method be removed as an option.

Jackson-Andrews said Louisiana must take all of its citizens into consideration when making new legislation.

“Although I am not for the death penalty by any means, it has long been the law in Louisiana,” Jackson-Andrews said. “However, earlier this year, a majority of the legislature passed a law that would allow for the same methods of extermination that were used to murder those of Jewish descent. At this time, I believe that Louisiana must remain sensitive to the oppression that certain communities have suffered in the past and not promote methods that were used in an effort to eradicate an entire group of citizens.”

The Jews Against Gassing coalition is a group of Jewish organizations, faith leaders, and individuals who all have varying views on the death penalty but unanimously oppose nitrogen hypoxia as a method to carry it out.

“Approximately 2.7 million people were killed by gas at the Nazi’s concentration camps,” said Dr. Naomi Yavneh Klos, Holocaust scholar, Loyola professor, and coalition steering committee member. “For Jews, the historical association of this execution method is chilling and undeniable.”

Read more about Jackson-Andrews’ proposed law on the Louisiana legislative website, at: https://legis.la.gov/legis/BillInfo.aspx?s=24RS&b=SB430&sbi=y

(source: KNOE news)

OHIO:

Ohio AG Yost continues to back capital punishment despite system’s shortcomings----In legally mandated report, Yost insists the punishment is just but the system is riddled with problems

“Damning.” That’s how Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost describes his own report on the state of Ohio’s capital punishment system. Yost paints a picture of a death penalty system that is “broken,” “enormously expensive,” and so sluggish inmates are “more likely to die of suicide or natural causes than execution.”

But Yost argues the death penalty itself isn’t the problem. Rather, it’s a capital punishment system that “makes promises of justice that it does not keep.” His solution? A new, controversial approach to kickstart executions.

The state of death row in Ohio

Currently there are 119 people on Ohio’s death row, and the state hasn’t carried out an execution since 2018. Because the state can’t get the drugs for its lethal injection protocol, Yost’s report acknowledges, none of those inmates face an imminent execution.

Already inmates spend more than 21 years on death row on average — a duration which has risen steadily since the early 2000s and seems likely to grow further. Yost chalks that up to the range of appeals in state and federal courts as well as through the governor’s clemency process.

It means death row inmates are dramatically more expensive than a typical inmate. While the exact cost of Ohio’s capital punishment system is difficult to quantify, Yost cites analysis prepared by the Ohio Legislative Service Commission suggesting death row inmates cost between $1 and $3 million more than life imprisonment; the researchers note that’s between two-and-a-half and five times as much as non-capital cases.

Yost’s back of the envelope math for Ohio puts the total added cost at $121 to $363 million.

“It’s a stunning amount of money to spend on a program that doesn’t achieve its purpose,” Yost’s report states.

Since Ohio enacted the death penalty in 1981, 336 people have received a death sentence, but only 56 of those sentences have been carried out. Yost portrays that track record as a failure to deliver justice. Meanwhile, the attorney general argues the 87 cases in which courts have reduced sentences or even released individuals due to ineffective counsel, prosecutorial misconduct, or successful appeals, don’t indicate shortcomings in Ohio’s capital punishment system. Instead, they depict an appeals process working properly.

“If we were starting from scratch to design a system for the ultimate punishment,” Yost writes, “whether that punishment is execution or, instead, life in prison without parole — neither death penalty opponents nor death penalty supporters would create anything like Ohio’s current system, which produces churn, waste, and endless lawsuits but nothing else.”

Despite all those hurdles, Yost stands by the death penalty.

“What is lacking is the political will to ensure that capital punishment is an effective tool for justice for those who perpetrate the most heinous crimes,” he argues in the report.

The Capital Journal asked Yost’s office for an interview or statement elaborating on why he still supports capital punishment in light of the system’s numerous challenges. They did not respond.

What to do about it?

Instead of starting from scratch, Yost offers a new path to the same destination. Back in January, he joined state Reps. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville and Phil Plummer, R-Dayton, as they introduced a measure directing state officials to use nitrogen hypoxia for executions if lethal injection is unavailable.

“Capital punishment is the law of the land today,” Stewart argued, “the law should be followed, and existing, duly-enacted capital punishment should be carried out to give the victims’ families the justice and finality that they deserve.”

The lawmakers introduced their proposal less than a week after the state of Alabama became the first in the country to execute someone by that method. According to the Associated Press, Kenneth Smith thrashed and gasped as Alabama officials administered the gas.

Ohio’s executions have not moved forward since 2018 because drug makers have refused to sell drugs for lethal injection to the state. Yost called it an “abdication of sovereignty of the state of Ohio” to let that refusal deter executions.

But in the wake of Alabama’s execution, the country’s three biggest nitrogen manufacturers have taken steps to ensure their gas isn’t used in executions.

Stewart and Plummer’s legislation attempts to address supply issues by reestablishing confidentiality provisions for suppliers of nitrogen gas and making any violations a fourth-degree misdemeanor. Citing the prevalence of nitrogen — there’s more of it in the air we breath than oxygen — Yost even floated the possibility of Ohio producing its own nitrogen gas.

Stewart said there are about 30 inmates on death row who have exhausted their appeal, and are waiting for an execution date. “And so if this bill were enacted, those executions could be carried out on the normal schedule.”

Yost argued, “This is not something that should be taken lightly, but at the same time, there are crimes that are so heinous, that are so against basic humanity, that they deserve the ultimate punishment.”

Still, the legislation doesn’t change anything about the legally-required appeals process, which Yost’s report repeatedly cites as a substantial driver of costs and delays. In the report, he criticizes the duration of the appeals process, but at the press conference argued those safeguards are worth it, to avoid making an “irreversible mistake.”

But at the same time he acknowledged the importance of the appeals process, Yost also cast doubt on exonerations.

“People use the word exoneration very loosely,” Yost argued. “In Ohio, you don’t have to prove actual innocence. The law now is simply that you have to prove that there was a fault.”

Those faults often take the form of prosecutorial misconduct, like Brady violations in which the prosecutor doesn’t share evidence with the defense that could support their case. While Yost insisted there’s no excuse for those violations, “that doesn’t mean the person was innocent.” Years after the fact, Yost argued, evidence or witnesses may no longer be available.

“So (prosecutors) fold their tent,” he said, “not because the person was actually innocent, but because they were technically innocent.”

Report reactions

While Yost lobbies for policy changes to spur the capital punishment system forward, some organizations question whether or how it can be salvaged.

The Catholic church for instance has been a steadfast opponent of the death penalty for years. Catholic Conference of Ohio Executive Director Brian Hickey argued the death penalty violates “the dignity of human life.” It’s a point on which the church is consistent. The same dignity of life argument underpins its opposition to abortion.

“Our position is there’s no humane way to carry out the death penalty,” Hickey argued. “There’s no humane way to strap down an individual who’s already in prison, and whether it’s nitrogen hypoxia, or some kind of drug, or even a firing squad, from our perspective it’s all inhumane.”

Hickey stressed the church stands with victims’ families and loved ones, ready to offer support directly and advocating for policy changes at the state level to help people heal.

“But at the same time, we’re very adamant that an execution can’t bring back the life of the person who was unjustly murdered,” he said, “and more violence and more taking a human life does not solve any problems.”

Robin Maher, who heads up the Death Penalty Information Center, explained her organization doesn’t take a position on capital punishment. Instead, it operates as a kind of clearing house for information about the death penalty, and if there are problems in how it’s applied the organization highlights them.

“It’s a bit bewildering,” she said, “to see a report that lays out all the ways in which the death penalty is not working correctly, and then conclude that the answer is to try to use it more.”

Maher argued the death penalty writ large sets up difficult expectations for victims’ families. After the sentence is reached, they obviously want to see justice carried out, but capital cases have a much more complex appeals process by necessity. Maher noted Ohio’s own track record of overturning earlier sentences illustrates the importance of that process, and she called Yost’s statements casting doubt on those decisions “surprising.”

She said that the mood around the death penalty has shifted substantially in the last 20 years, and potential jurors have significant doubts about its fairness, cost, and effectiveness.

“So when these cases are coming back, because of errors that were made, we’re finding the juries feel very differently,” she explained. “Even prosecutors feel differently about whether these cases are sufficiently death-worthy.”

That’s not an indication of guilty people being, as Yost described, “technically innocent,” Maher argued, but rather a societal change in what’s expected to reach a guilty verdict in a death penalty case.

Maher acknowledged the frustration Yost, Stewart, Plummer and other policymakers feel about the state of capital punishment. But she argued nitrogen hypoxia isn’t the solution they’re hoping it will be.

“(When) we talk about all of the problems with the death penalty, and the administration of the death penalty in Ohio, as it’s laid out in this report, pivoting to a new method of execution doesn’t solve any of those problems,” she explained.

“It seems to be a quick and easy solution, but it won’t be in practice,” she added. “It won’t solve any of the meaningful issues and problems that that this report identifies.”

(source: ohiocapitaljournal.com)

MISSOURI----impending execution

He’s on Death Row for Murders. Prison Workers Say He Should Be Spared. Brian Dorsey, who pleaded guilty to murder in the 2006 killings of Sarah and Ben Bonnie, is scheduled to be executed on Tuesday unless Missouri’s governor or the courts step in.

Among those asking Missouri’s governor to spare the life of Brian Dorsey, who was convicted of two murders and is set to be executed on Tuesday, were Roman Catholic bishops, law professors and national mental health groups.

There was also a less expected cohort seeking clemency: more than 70 current and former prison workers who got to know Mr. Dorsey behind bars.

That level of public support from correctional workers is rare in death penalty cases, though it remains to be seen whether it persuades Gov. Mike Parson, a Republican, to commute Mr. Dorsey’s sentence to life in prison.

Mr. Dorsey, 52, pleaded guilty to 1st-degree murder in the 2006 deaths of his cousin Sarah Bonnie and her husband, Ben Bonnie. His request for clemency made no claim of innocence. Instead, it argued that he had received inadequate representation from court-appointed lawyers and that he had turned his life around in prison, where he had a spotless record of behavior and worked for years as a barber for correctional employees.

“From my perspective after decades in corrections, I do not hesitate to say that executing Brian Dorsey would be a pointless cruelty,” Timothy Lancaster, a former officer at the prison where Mr. Dorsey was held, wrote in a recent column in The Kansas City Star. Mr. Lancaster described Mr. Dorsey as “an excellent barber and a kind and respectful man.”

Some members of Mr. Dorsey’s family, including some who were also related to Ms. Bonnie, supported the clemency request. Other members of Ms. Bonnie’s family issued a statement in January saying they hoped the governor would allow the execution to proceed.

“All of these years of pain we finally see the light at the end of the tunnel,” those relatives said in the statement, which was reported by local news outlets. “Brian will get the justice that Sarah and Ben have deserved for so long.”

Mr. Lancaster was among more than 70 current and former prison workers who vouched for Mr. Dorsey, whose lawyers released a copy of a letter the prison workers wrote to the governor but redacted most of their names, citing privacy concerns. The full list of names was provided to the governor’s office, the lawyers said.

The advocacy of so many corrections officials on behalf of Mr. Dorsey is “really remarkable,” said Robin M. Maher, the executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, which studies capital punishment and is critical of many of its facets. “I’ve never seen any other case with this kind of support from current and former corrections staff,” Ms. Maher said.

Mr. Dorsey’s application for clemency took note of the rare support, and said, “These state employees have nothing to gain, and potentially something to lose, by coming forward.”

Missouri has carried out 97 executions since 1976, ranking behind only Texas, Oklahoma, Virginia and Florida. Mr. Parson, a former sheriff, has not blocked an execution since he took office in 2018, though he has granted pardons to or commuted the sentences of hundreds of people convicted of less serious crimes.

Johnathan Shiflett, a spokesman for the governor, said on Monday that Mr. Parson would meet with legal advisers to review Mr. Dorsey’s clemency request. Mr. Shiflett said the governor typically announces his decision in such cases at least 24 hours before an execution is scheduled to take place.

The Missouri attorney general, Andrew Bailey, asked the State Supreme Court to set an execution date for Mr. Dorsey last year. He noted that “the lawful sentence that has been upheld by multiple courts” and said his office was “committed to obtaining justice for victims of heinous crimes.”

Executions in the United States have become less common in recent decades as support for capital punishment has decreased. Last year, 24 people were executed, down from the 98 executed in 1998.

Missouri officials say that Mr. Dorsey was having trouble with drug dealers and had sought help from his cousin and her husband in December 2006. The Bonnies invited Mr. Dorsey to spend the night at their home near New Bloomfield, Mo., in the central part of the state. After the couple went to bed that night, the authorities said, Mr. Dorsey took a shotgun and fatally shot each of them. Prosecutors also said that Mr. Dorsey sexually assaulted Ms. Bonnie, though he never was charged with that offense. The sexual assault accusation was presented at Mr. Dorsey’s sentencing; Mr. Dorsey’s lawyers said he has no memory of a sexual assault.

Mr. Dorsey, whose current lawyers assert that he was in a drug-induced psychosis at the time of the killings, pleaded guilty to two counts of first-degree murder. He was later sentenced to death.

Death notices and news stories published at the time said the Bonnie family had moved to the New Bloomfield area from Iowa about a year before the couple were killed. Mr. Bonnie, 28, was an auto mechanic who liked to fish, hunt and camp. Ms. Bonnie, 25, was an emergency medical technician who had worked in local government, belonged to a Methodist church and rode motorcycles. The couple had a 4-year-old daughter who was in the home but was not physically harmed.

Mr. Dorsey has asked state and federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, to intervene before the scheduled execution.

In his clemency application to the governor, Mr. Dorsey argued that he had received bad advice from court-appointed lawyers who received a flat fee to take his case and did little to explore potential mitigating factors or plea deals. Mr. Dorsey pleaded guilty without any agreement with prosecutors regarding sentencing. One of the lawyers who represented Mr. Dorsey at that stage of his case declined to comment, and an attempt to reach the other was not immediately successful.

The director of the Missouri public defender system, Mary Fox, supported Mr. Dorsey’s clemency application and said that her office no longer pays lawyers a flat fee in death penalty cases. Critics say flat fees can give lawyers an incentive to resolve a case quickly rather than spend additional time that might lead to an outcome more favorable for a defendant.

Michael Wolff, a former Missouri Supreme Court judge who was among a majority of members of that court to uphold Mr. Dorsey’s death sentence, also expressed concern about the work of Mr. Dorsey’s court-appointed lawyers. In a letter to Mr. Parson, Mr. Wolff wrote that Mr. Dorsey’s case was one of the “rare cases where those of us who sit in judgment of a man convicted of capital murder got it wrong.”

Megan Crane, a lawyer for Mr. Dorsey, said her client had been moved into solitary confinement after his execution date was set, bringing an end to his time as the prison barber. As the execution has drawn closer, Ms. Crane said, Mr. Dorsey has tried to manage his expectations about the possibility of intervention from the courts or the governor.

“He has taken full accountability since Day 1,” Ms. Crane said. “And the horror of the fact that he could have done this — I think that is still his focus in this final week.”

(source: New York Times)

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

More than 150 people call on Missouri governor to forgive Brian Dorsey’s death penalty----Prison guards, judges, jurors and prison workers have beseeched Mike Parson to commute capital punishment to life without parole

With less than a week until Brian Dorsey is scheduled to be executed at Potosi correctional center in Missouri for the 2006 killings of his cousin and her husband, an extraordinary effort is underway to have the 52-year-old’s capital sentence commuted to life without parole.

More than 150 people have called on the Missouri governor Mike Parson to commute Dorsey’s punishment – including more than 70 current and former prison workers, many of whom got to know Doresy behind bars, Republican state representatives, jurors and even the appeals judge who upheld Dorsey’s conviction and death sentence in 2009.

In an editorial for the Missouri Times last month, retired Missouri supreme court judge Michael Wolff wrote that he wished he’d had more information before making the decision with other jurists.

“In the case of Brian Dorsey, I now believe this is the rare case where we got it wrong,” Wolff wrote. “I am so convinced of our error that I have asked Governor Parson to grant clemency to Mr Dorsey.”

If Mr Dorsey is executed on April 9, it will dishonor our system of justice,” Wolff added, arguing that the appeals panel were unaware of how compromised Dorsey’s defense lawyers had been.

He wrote that a now disused system that was in place at the time – the state public defender system that paid Dorsey’s lawyers a flat fee – meant that the defendant hadn’t been adequately represented in the capital case.

Meanwhile, in a recent letter to the Kansas City Star news outlet, Timothy Lancaster, a former officer at Potosi, wrote that from his “perspective after decades in corrections, I do not hesitate to say that executing Brian Dorsey would be a pointless cruelty”.

Dozens of former and current Missouri department of corrections officers and prison staffers have written to Parson, the Star reported.

“We are part of the law enforcement community who believe in law and order,” the group wrote. “Generally, we believe in the use of capital punishment. But we are in agreement that the death penalty is not the appropriate punishment for Brian Dorsey.”

The letter describes how Dorsey stays out of trouble, is respectful toward officers and inmates, is housed in an “honor dorm” and is employed in the Potosi barber shop, where he cuts the hair of prisoners and officers.

Troy Steele, the former prison warden and a customer of Dorsey’s, has called him a “model inmate”.

Michelle Smith, co-director of Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty, told St Louis Public Radio that support for Dorsey’s clemency from corrections officers is significant.

“This is something that is unprecedented because [the officers] also are putting themselves on the line with signing this letter,” she said. “This is truly extraordinary. And it goes to the character of Mr Dorsey … They truly believe that Brian deserves clemency and [that] he is not someone who should be facing execution.”

Dorsey’s current lawyers say he was in a drug-induced psychosis at the time of the killings. He had been in debt to his dealers and on the night of 23 December 2006, he was with his cousin, Sarah Bonnie, and her husband, Ben, in New Bloomfield, Missouri.

Dorsey killed his cousin and her husband with a shotgun, and left with cash, a car and other property to pay off his debts. After the couple were found two days later, Dorsey turned himself in to authorities and pleaded guilty to 2 counts of 1st-degree murder.

Dorsey’s attorney Megan Crane wrote in a petition that her client had been incapable of deliberation – the requisite intent for capital murder – and that Dorsey had promptly taken full accountability for his actions.

Jenni Gerhauser, a cousin of the victim and the perpetrator, told USA Today that she supported the appeal for clemency. “We’re very much living in the middle of eye-for-an-eye country. But I wish people would understand it’s not that black-and-white,” Gerhauser said.

She said her cousin’s defense at trial was a “joke”.

Parson has never granted a request for clemency, according to the Star.

Andrew Bailey, the Missouri attorney general, said in a statement that his office wanted to enforce the laws as written, while also noting that Dorsey sexually assaulted Bonnie and there were other aggravating factors.

(source: The Guardian)

OKLAHOMA----impending execution

Petition urges Gov. Kevin Stitt to halt execution of death row inmate Michael Smith----After multiple failed attempts to avoid the death penalty, a private investigator said there is new evidence in the case

Loved ones of Oklahoma death row inmate Michael Smith will deliver a petition to Gov. Kevin Stitt's office on Wednesday, asking him to call off the scheduled execution.

Smith was sentenced to death after being convicted of killing 2 people – 40-year-old Janet Moore and 24-year-old store clerk Sharath Pulluru – in separate incidents on Feb. 22, 2002. His execution is scheduled for Thursday morning at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester.

After multiple failed attempts to avoid the death penalty, a private investigator said there is new evidence in the case.

"There’s a whole slew of problems with this case that have not been recognized or properly examined," said Makayla Saramosing, with Keefe Private Investigators.

Part of that evidence includes an affidavit the investigator said was signed by a state witness who testified during the trial. The witness said she was coerced into her testimony.

"They’re saying he confessed to this crime. So if y’all had so much of a solid confession, why do you have to coerce witnesses to get your conviction?" said Yusuf Smith, Michael's brother.

In early March, the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board denied recommending clemency for Smith. Before Smith's hearing, Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond asked that the death row inmate be denied clemency, saying he killed two people in a "double-murder spree simply because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time."

(source: KOCO news)

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

Michael DeWayne Smith scheduled to be executed Thursday at Oklahoma State Penitentiary----The state is set to carry out its first execution of 2024 at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester.

Oklahoma is set to carry out the state's 1st execution of 2024 and the 12th since capital punishment resumed in 2021.

Death row inmate Michael DeWayne Smith faces execution by lethal injection Thursday at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester for two 2002 murders. The execution is scheduled to begin at 10 a.m.

Smith, 41, will become the 4th inmate in the nation this year to be put to death if he doesn't get a last-minute stay. Alabama, Texas and Georgia already have carried out executions, according to a database kept by the Death Penalty Information Center.

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday denied for the 4th time his request for an emergency stay. Smith also was seeking an emergency stay at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Smith claims he is innocent even though he confessed to police. His attorneys also claim he is intellectually disabled.

Death row inmate Michael DeWayne Smith gets emotional as he speaks during his clemency hearing in March.

"I don't want to die, man," he told The Oklahoman Monday in a phone interview. "Who can ever be prepared to die, man? I sure don't want to die for something I didn't do."

He said he was framed by the same people that framed fellow death row inmate Richard Glossip.

"I have the same exact issues as Mr. Glossip," Smith said. "But due to the fact that I'm affiliated (with a gang) and I'm Black ... my case hasn't been given the same look as Mr. Glossip's has."

Glossip, 61, has become the state's most high-profile death row inmate because of the wide support for his innocence claim. The U.S. Supreme Court in January agreed to hear his new complaints about his 2004 retrial after the state attorney general said he wanted the murder conviction overturned.

"They all want to be Rich Glossip because he's getting all the action," Smith's spiritual adviser, Jeff Hood, said.

The Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board voted 4-1 March 6 to deny Smith clemency. That vote means Gov. Kevin Stitt cannot commute his sentence to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Smith told the parole board he was hallucinating from drug use when he confessed to police. "I didn't commit these crimes. I didn't kill these people. I was high on drugs," he said.

What to know about Michael DeWayne Smith's case

Smith was convicted at trial of 1st-degree murder for 2 fatal shootings in Oklahoma City on Feb. 22, 2002. Jurors agreed he should be executed for both deaths.

The first victim, Janet Moore, 40, was shot once at her apartment. The second victim, Sharath Babu Pulluru, 24, was shot nine times at a convenience store then doused with lighter fluid and set on fire.

Neither was Smith's original target, according to testimony at the 2003 trial.

At the time, he was 19 and a member of a street gang in Oklahoma City known as the Oak Grove Posse. He also was high on PCP and hiding from police, who had a warrant for his arrest on a 2001 murder case.

In the 1st shooting, Smith actually was looking for Moore's son, Phillip Zachary, because he mistakenly thought Zachary was a police informant, prosecutors said.

"It's her fault she died," Smith told police. "She panicked and she got shot. ... She like, 'Help! Help!' I'm like, I had to. I had no choice."

Smith next went to the A&Z Food Mart to shoot a worker over comments to the newspaper about a robbery at another food mart next door, prosecutors said. He instead killed Pulluru, who was filling in at the store for a friend.

A clerk at the Trans Food Mart had killed a fellow gang member during a robbery on Nov. 8, 2000. A worker at the A&Z Food Mart had told The Oklahoman in 2000 he was proud of his neighbor.

"The rest of the kids will learn a lesson by him being dead and stop doing these things," the A&Z Food Mart worker had said.

The shootings in 2002 came days before a trial for two other gang members involved in the robbery was set to begin. Smith confessed to his roommate and a neighbor before his arrest, according to their testimony at his trial.

Smith was convicted at a separate trial of second-degree murder for the fatal shooting of Otis Payne outside an Oklahoma City club on Nov. 24, 2001. He had admitted to police that he handed the gun to the shooter, David Burns. He was sentenced to life in prison for that crime.

Oklahoma's execution pace has slowed

Oklahoma resumed executions in late October 2021 after a hiatus of more than six years. By mid-2022, four had taken place, and 25 more were scheduled through the end of 2024.

The schedule proved to be too ambitious. Some inmates got stays, and the Oklahoma Department of Corrections had to be given more time between executions to reduce the stress on staff.

The last execution was in November. One scheduled for Feb. 1 was called off because the inmate, James Chandler Ryder, has mental health issues. The next one is set for June 6 but may be called off because the inmate, Wade Lay, also has mental health issues.

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals was asked in January for even more time, 90-day intervals, once the next 2 executions are carried out.

"The present pace of executions, every 60 days, is too onerous and not sustainable," said Steven Harpe, the executive director of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections.

(source: The Oklahoman)

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

Oklahoma prepares to execute Michael DeWayne Smith for 2002 murders

Oklahoma is scheduled to execute a man Thursday for fatally shooting 2 people in Oklahoma City more than 2 decades ago.

Michael DeWayne Smith, 41, will become the fourth inmate in the nation this year to be put to death if he doesn't get a last-minute stay. Alabama, Texas, and Georgia already have carried out executions, according to a database kept by the Death Penalty Information Center.

Smith would be the first person executed in the state this year and the 12th since capital punishment resumed in 2021. He is scheduled to receive a lethal injection Thursday at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester.

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday denied his request, for the 4th time, for an emergency stay. Smith also was seeking an emergency stay at the U.S. Supreme Court. Smith claims he is innocent even and told the parole board he was hallucinating from drug use when he confessed to police.

His attorneys also have claimed he is intellectually disabled.

"I don't want to die, man," Smith told The Oklahoman, part of the USA TODAY Network, on Monday in a phone interview. "Who can ever be prepared to die, man? I sure don't want to die for something I didn't do."

Michael DeWayne Smith's case

Smith was convicted at trial of 1st-degree murder for 2 fatal shootings in Oklahoma City on Feb. 22, 2002. Jurors agreed he should be executed for both deaths.

The 1st victim, Janet Moore, 40, was shot at her apartment. The second victim, Sharath Babu Pulluru, 24, was shot 9 times at a convenience store then doused with lighter fluid and set on fire. Neither was Smith's original target, according to testimony at the 2003 trial.

At the time, Smith was 19 years old and a member of a street gang in Oklahoma City known as the Oak Grove Posse. He also was high on PCP and hiding from police, who had a warrant for his arrest on a 2001 murder case.

Prosecutors claim that Smith was initially looking for Moore's son, who he mistakenly thought was a police informant.

"It's her fault she died," Smith told police. "She panicked and she got shot. ... She like, 'Help! Help!' I'm like, I had to. I had no choice."

Smith then went to a convenience store and shot an employee, who Smith believed had made comments to a newspaper about a robbery at another store, prosecutors said. He instead killed Pulluru, who was filling in at the store for a friend.

Smith was also convicted at a separate trial of 2nd-degree murder for the fatal shooting of a man outside an Oklahoma City club on Nov. 24, 2001. He had admitted to police that he handed the gun to the shooter.

The Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board voted 4-1 on March 6 to deny Smith clemency. That vote means Gov. Kevin Stitt cannot commute his sentence to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Oklahoma's execution pace has slowed

Oklahoma resumed executions in late October 2021 after a hiatus of more than six years. By mid-2022, four had taken place, and 25 more were scheduled through the end of 2024.

The schedule proved to be too ambitious. Some inmates got stays, and the Oklahoma Department of Corrections had to be given more time between executions to reduce the stress on staff. The last execution was in November.

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals was asked in January for even more time, 90-day intervals, once the next 2 executions are carried out.

"The present pace of executions, every 60 days, is too onerous and not sustainable," said Steven Harpe, the executive director of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections.

(source: USA Today)

USA:

Progress and impediments on path to abolition in U.S.

STATEMENT By Russ Feingold & Christopher Wright Durocher, on 3 April 2024

When President Biden won the 2020 election, he became the first successful U.S. presidential candidate to publicly oppose the death penalty.

As part of his promise to work toward abolition, the Biden campaign noted that “Over 160 individuals who’ve been sentenced to death in this country since 1973 have later been exonerated.” In 2021, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a moratorium on federal executions, recognizing, among other things that “[s]erious concerns have been raised about the continued use of the death penalty across the country.” The President, his campaign, and the DOJ are right to express concern about a punishment that, even setting aside the immorality of state-sanctioned killing, has never been applied fairly, justly, or equally.

That made it especially disheartening when, earlier this year, the DOJ, led by an attorney general appointed by President Biden, announced that it would pursue the death penalty against Payton Gendron. In 2022, Gendron had killed ten Black people in a racially motivated shooting in a Buffalo, New York, grocery store. Before the DOJ announced the capital charges, Gendron had already pled guilty to the murders in New York state court and was serving a life sentence with no possibility of release. Justice, to the extent that it can ever be achieved in such a heinous situation, had already been done.

The U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment prohibits “cruel and unusual punishments.” The current U.S. Supreme Court, controlled as it is by a conservative supermajority, has shown a near-total disregard for the cruelty of the death penalty. But the waning of the death penalty in the United States is becoming too hard to ignore. The fact that executions and death sentences are “unusual” has become undeniable.

Executions and death sentences have been trending down since their historic highs in the late 1990s. In the past two decades, eleven states have abolished the death penalty, bring the total of non-death penalty states to 23 out of 50. In addition, six states are currently under governor-imposed moratoria on executions. Even in most states that still have the death penalty, it is rarely used. In 2023, only five states were responsible for the 24 executions nationwide, and only seven states accounted for the 21 new death sentences. Even in these few states, only a handful of counties were responsible for the majority of death sentences and executions.

The rarity of death sentences and execution makes the death penalty all that more arbitrary and cement its unconstitutionality. Those facing death sentences are not the worst of the worst, but simply the random defendants caught up the in the political, racial, and regional dynamics of a hopelessly dysfunctional death penalty system. In fact, the Death Penalty Information Center asserts that most of the 24 people executed in 2023 would not even be sentenced to death today, because of “[c]hanges in the law, such as the alternative sentence of life without parole, the elimination of non-unanimous death sentences in most states, the exclusion of people with intellectual disability from death penalty eligibility, and changes in the common and scientific understanding of mental illness and trauma and their lasting effects . . . .”

(source: Text by Russ Feingold, President & Christopher Wright Durocher, Vice President of Policy and Program, American Constitution Society; World Coalition Against the Death Penalty)

NORTH KOREA:

NK kids face death penalty for distributing K-dramas: Seoul envoy

South Korean Ambassador to the UN Hwang Joon-kook stated that children in North Korea face grave human rights abuses, including receiving the death penalty for distributing South Korean dramas, during a UN Security Council meeting at UN headquarters in New York on Wednesday.

During the UNSC Briefing on Children and Armed Conflict, Hwang mentioned that children in North Korea face “egregious human rights violations,” despite North Korea being a signatory country to the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

“According to numerous public sources, including North Korean defectors’ testimonies, children in the DPRK are exposed to egregious human rights violations, including the death penalty for distributing South Korean dramas, detention to political prisons alongside their family members as collective punishment and widespread use of child labor,” said Hwang, referring to North Korea by its official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

Hwang added that North Korean children are facing a humanitarian crisis as the country's leadership spends its resources on nuclear and ballistic missile programs and luxury items.

Citing a report published by UNICEF, the World Health Organization and the World Bank Group, Hwang also noted that “17 percent of children in the DPRK are reported to suffer from stunted growth due to malnourishment.”

Meanwhile, Hwang argued that children affected by armed conflict are entitled to “special respect and protection” according to international humanitarian law, citing the conflict occurring in the Gaza Strip between Israel and Palestine, where seven aid workers from the nonprofit organization World Central Kitchen were recently killed in an Israeli airstrike.

“In the face of these dismaying challenges, it is imperative, first and foremost, that the Security Council stand firm on its zero-tolerance against the denial of humanitarian access to children,” Hwang mentioned.

(source: The Korea Herald)

AFGHANISTAN----execution

The Taliban hold another public execution as thousands watch at a stadium in northern Afghanistan----5th Public Execution

The Taliban held a public execution on Monday of a man convicted of murder in northern Afghanistan as thousands watched at a sports stadium, the third such death sentence to be carried out in the past 5 days.

The execution took place in heavy snowfall in the city of Shibirghan, the capital of northern Jawzjan province, where the brother of the murdered man shot the convict five times with a rifle, according to a witness. Security around the stadium was tight, said the witness, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media.

It was also the fifth public execution since the Taliban seized power in Afghanistan in August 2021 as U.S. and NATO troops were in the final weeks of their withdrawal from the country after 2 decades of war.

The Taliban, despite initial promises of a more moderate rule, began carrying out severe punishments in public — executions, floggings and stonings — shortly after coming to power. The punishments are similar to those during their previous rule of Afghanistan in the late 1990s.

Taliban government officials were not immediately available for comment.

U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said: “The public nature of execution is extremely heinous, and we continue to stand against the use of the death penalty.”

The Taliban’s supreme court said in a statement that Monday’s death sentence was carried out following approval from three of the country’s highest courts and the Taliban supreme leader, Hibatullah Akhundzada. The executed man, identified as Nazar Mohammad from Bilcheragh district in Faryab province, was convicted of killing Khal Mohammad, also from Faryab, it said. The killing took place in Jawzjan.

On Thursday in the southeastern Ghazni province, the Taliban executed 2 men convicted of stabbing their victims to death. Relatives of the victims fired guns at the two men, also at a sports stadium, as thousands of people watched.

Separate statements from the supreme court said a man and a woman convicted of adultery were flogged with 35 lashes each in northern Balkh province over the weekend. Two other people were given 30 lashes each in eastern Laghman province, also over the weekend, for allegedly committing immoral acts.

The United Nations has strongly criticized the Taliban for carrying out public executions, lashings and stonings since seizing power and has called on the country’s rulers to halt such practices.

(source: rawa.org)

INDIA:

Aaditya Thackeray demands capital punishment for Bilkis Bano rape convicts----He accuses BJP of sending wrong message by releasing the convicts

Shiv Sena (UBT) leader and MLA Aaditya Thackeray on Wednesday said that the convicts of the Bilkis Bano rape case should be awarded capital punishment by the court.

While campaigning for the party's candidate from Mumbai North East Lok Sabha seat, Sanjay Dina Patil, in the city's Muslim-dominated Govandi area, Thackeray said that his party's stand is that the people who raped Bilkis Bano should be awarded capital punishment.

Notably, Bilkis Bano was 21 years old and 5 months pregnant when she was gang-raped while trying to escape the horror of the communal riots that broke out after the Godhra train burning incident in February 2002. Her 3-year-old daughter was among the 7 family members killed.

They were sentenced to life imprisonment in the case.

"Our stand on the issue is that the religion of a woman doesn't matter. Punishment for exploitation is hanging. By releasing these convicts, BJP has sent the wrong message to women in the country. Maharashtra cabinet had a minister with allegations of exploitation of a woman, Uddhav Thackeray told him to get out," he said in his speech.

Thackeray also hit out at the Narendra Modi-led central government and accused it of having "dictatorial behaviour".

"25 leaders were raided by the ED from 2014 to 2014, and 23 leaders jumped to BJP. BJP's washing machine gave them relief. 40 traitors among us surrendered to the BJP to get protection from the ED....," he said.

“The BJP’s policy is (to make opponents join (them) or face (jail),” Thackeray said, hitting out at his former ally.

He also maintained that South India has slammed the door on the BJP, be it Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh or Tamil Nadu, as far as elections are concerned.

Mumbai, which has half a dozen Lok Sabha seats, will vote in the 5th phase on May 20.

(source: indiatoday.in)

UGANDA:

Uganda’s most prominent LGBTQ activist says newly upheld anti-gay law will prompt violence----Frank Mugisha said he is bracing for violence in the East African nation after its constitutional court upheld an anti-gay law that includes the death penalty.

P> Uganda’s most prominent LGBTQ activist condemned a constitutional court’s decision Wednesday to uphold an anti-gay law that permits the death penalty in certain cases.

Speaking with NBC News from New York City, Frank Mugisha called the ruling a form of “state-sanctioned homophobia” and said he is bracing for violence in the East African nation.

“This ruling intensifies violations towards the LGBT community,” Mugisha said. “It is like the judges have told Ugandans: ‘Go and get violent towards the LGBTQ community.’”

The African Equality Foundation

Ugandans around the world have protested the anti-gay legislation.Mark Kerrison / In Pictures via Getty Images file Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni signed the legislation into law last year, drawing condemnation from LGBTQ activists from around the world. Conversely, the law has broad support among the country’s population.

The law allows the death penalty in cases of “aggravated homosexuality,” which it defines as cases of same-sex relations involving a minor and other categories of vulnerable people, or when one of the individuals has HIV. A suspect convicted of “attempted aggravated homosexuality” can be imprisoned for up to 14 years, and the offense of “attempted homosexuality” is punishable by up to 10 years.

Homosexuality was already illegal in Uganda under a colonial-era law criminalizing sexual activity “against the order of nature.” The punishment for that offense remains life imprisonment.

More than 60 countries — mostly in Africa and the Mideast — have criminalized homosexuality, according to Human Rights Watch, but Uganda’s anti-gay law is considered one of the harshest.

The Biden administration sanctioned the Ugandan government and restricted visas of Uganda officials following the law’s passage last year. Uganda’s government then accused the United States of pushing an “LGBT agenda.”

Mugisha said the U.S. needs to do more.

“The U.S. government has got a very good relationship with Uganda,” Mugisha said. “I think there are so many bilateral relationships that they can engage in. It could be behind the scenes advocacy, it could be public advocacy, but they should engage more.”

Mugisha said he is worried about going back to his home country and facing what he described as “violence that would come from the state.”

“I am petrified,” he said. “If the judges can give such a ruling, that means there is no protection for any LGBTQ person in Uganda, and I’m not immune to that.”

“Uganda is ground zero for homophobia,” he added.

(source: NBC News)

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

Court fails to repeal callous anti-LGBTI law, puts people at risk

Responding to a decision by Uganda’s Constitutional Court to only revoke parts of the Anti-Homosexuality Act 2023 (AHA), a law which prompted rising attacks against LGBTI people, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for East and Southern Africa, Tigere Chagutah, said:

“We are dismayed that the Court has turned its back on its responsibility to fully uphold Uganda’s Constitution which protects the human rights of all people, including rights to equality and non-discrimination, protection of personal liberty, protection from cruel or degrading treatment, and privacy.

We are dismayed that the Court has turned its back on its responsibility to fully uphold Uganda’s Constitution which protects the human rights of all people, including rights to equality and non-discrimination, protection of personal liberty, protection from cruel or degrading treatment, and privacy.

Tigere ChagutahAmnesty International's Regional Director for East and Southern Africa

“It is shocking that an opportunity was missed to revoke a law that undermines the rights of LGBTI persons in Uganda, their allies, human rights defenders and activists by criminalizing consensual same-sex acts, ‘promotion’ of homosexuality with all its vagueness as an offence and contemplates the death penalty for the offence of ‘aggravated homosexuality’.

“As we mark the 10th anniversary of the African Commission’s Resolution 275 on the protection against violence and human rights violations against persons on the basis of their real or imputed sexual orientation or gender identity, the Government of Uganda must repeal the entire Anti-Homosexuality Act 2023 and ensure accountability for the attacks against LGBTI people.”

The Government of Uganda must repeal the entire Anti-Homosexuality Act 2023 and ensure accountability for the attacks against LGBTI people.

The Anti-Homosexuality Act, 2023 is one of the most extreme anti-LGBTI laws in the world in scope and penalties.

The AHA was approved by Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni on 30 May 2023. In December 2023, proponents of equality filed a petition in the Constitutional Court to challenge the constitutionality of the law. The petitioners argued that the law violates rights guaranteed in Uganda’s constitution, including freedom from discrimination and rights to privacy as well as freedom of thought, conscience, and belief.

In the days following the debate and passing to date, Human Rights Awareness and Promotion Forum (HRAPF), a Ugandan NGO, has documented 55 arrests under the law, three death penalty cases forwarded to the Director of Public Prosecutions, 8 forced anal examination cases, 254 evictions of persons accused to be or associate with LGBTI people and 202 other cases of actual or threatened violence.

Since a similar anti-LGBTI law, the Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Act, was revoked in 2014, there have been repeated efforts to further criminalize homosexuality. This includes the Sexual Offenses Bill in 2021 which criminalized any “sexual act between persons of the same gender,” as well as anal sex between people of any gender, with a penalty of up to 10 years in prison.

(source: amnesty.org)

GLOBAL:

Afghanistan

On March 23, 2024, Hibatullah Akhundzada, the Taliban’s supreme leader, announced in an audio broadcast aired on state television that it will resume publicly stoning women to death for adultery. “You may call it a violation of women’s rights when we publicly stone or flog them for committing adultery because they conflict with your democratic principles. [But] I represent Allah, and you represent Satan,” said Mr. Akhundzada, according to The Guardian’s translation of the broadcast. “The Taliban’s work did not end with the takeover of Kabul, it has only just begun,” he said.

Human rights groups criticized the declaration, which violates international human rights law. “Two years ago, they didn’t have the courage they have today to vow stoning women to death in public; now they do,” said Sahar Fetrat, an Afghan researcher at Human Rights Watch. “They tested their draconian policies one by one, and have reached this point because there is no one to hold them accountable for the abuses. Through the bodies of Afghan women, the Taliban demand and command moral and societal orders. We should all be warned that if not stopped, more and more will come.”

Democratic Republic of the Congo

On March 13, 2024, the Ministry of Justice formally lifted a moratorium on use of the death penalty to allow for the death penalty in cases of treason, terrorism, and urban banditry resulting in death. “The government’s decision to reinstate executions is a gross injustice for people sentenced to death in the Democratic Republic of Congo and shows a callous disregard for the right to life,” said Tigere Chagutah, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for East and Southern Africa. ECPM (Ensemble contre la peine de mort), an international abolitionist group, also criticized the move, warning that the majority of the over 800 death row prisoners (as of the beginning of 2024) are at risk of execution. The nation last carried out executions in 2003.

India

On March 6, 2024, 5 people were sentenced to death for the 2019 murder of politician Rama Chandra Behera. According to public prosecutor Aswini Kumar Mallick, the conviction was based on evidence in 94 documents and the testimony of 54 witnesses. The death sentence of Dinesh Paswan, who was convicted of the 2021 rape and murder of a three-year-old, was commuted to a 30-year term sentence by the Allahabad High Court on March 5. Project 39A, based at the National Law University in Delhi, found that 2023 had the highest death row population in nearly two decades, with 561 death-sentenced prisoners, and the imposition of 120 new death sentences.

Iran

Established by the United Nations Human Rights Council in November 2022 in response to the repression of widespread “Women, Life, Freedom” protests, the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran (FFMI) presented its first report on March 8, 2024, stating that “many of the serious human rights violations outlined in the present report amount to crimes against humanity.” The report’s recommendations included urging for a halt to all executions and releasing arbitrarily detained prisoners.

Despite a lack of transparency and cooperation from the nation, the report found that as of January 2024 at least 28 people had been sentenced to death in connection to the protests, at least 9 of whom have been executed and at least 6 of whom are awaiting execution. The Mission found consistent violations of defendants’ rights to fair trials and due process, repeated calls from state officials for expedited proceedings, and an absence of investigations into allegations of torture and/or coerced confessions before proceeding with executions. The report states that the 9 executions of protestors “amount[ed] to unlawful and arbitrary deprivation of their right to life and have violated the prohibition against torture and ill-treatment.”

The Mission identified over 100 individuals who have been charged with death-eligible offenses, including crimes which do not meet the international legal threshold of a “most serious” crime (i.e. intentional murder). Javad Rouhi, who was given three death sentences for the crime of apostasy, is one such individual; all death sentences against Mr. Rouhi were overturned, however, Mr. Rouhi subsequently died in custody following credible allegations of torture, one of several instances of deaths in custody following torture.

According to Norway-based Iran Human Rights, political prisoners across five prisons have been hunger striking every Tuesday for eight consecutive weeks in protest of the death penalty. The prisoners released a statement on the 8th night, the eve of Persian new year, reiterating their commitment to “protest the death penalty from behind bars in the coming year,” seeing it as their “moral duty” to act and referring to the practice as “medieval” and “state murder.” As of April 1, there have been 98 executions reported by Iran Human Rights.

Nigeria

On March 26, 2024, Chinese national Frank Geng-Quangrong was sentenced to death for killing his girlfriend, 22-year-old Ummukulsum Sani, in September 2022. “This is a signal that whoever is coming to a society should be prepared to comply with the extant laws of that society,” said Kano Justice Commissioner Haruna Dederi. Mr. Geng-Quangrong has three months to file for appeal.

Pakistan

On March 22, 2024, Aasiya Bibi was sentenced to death on 2021 changes of blasphemy for burning pages of the Quran. On March 20, two women, age 23 and 24, were sentenced to death for the March 2022 killing of their religious teacher, who they suspected of blasphemy. On March 11, 22-year-old student Junaid Munir was sentenced to death for sharing blasphemous content via WhatsApp in 2022.

Russia

The March 22, 2024 attack on Crocus City Hall, which resulted in at least 144 deaths according to state news agency RIA Novosti, has prompted discussions on possible reinstatement of the death penalty as punishment for the suspected assailants, 9 of whom have been detained as of March 29. Former president and prime minister Dmitri A. Medvedev has tweeted his support, saying it’s “necessary” to kill them. Lower chamber of parliament member Maria Butina has suggested that Belarus has the right to request extradition of the suspects since at least two of their citizens were also killed in the attack and could subsequently try them capitally, as the only European nation to retain the death penalty. Although Kremlin spokesperson Dmitri S. Peskov stated that it would not currently engage in discussion on restoring the death penalty, Vladimir Putin has publicly and repeatedly opposed the death penalty in the past, with statements as recent as 2022 and as far back as 2002. In a March 26 ceremony for young artists and educators, President Putin said it was “extremely important … to rely on these values of creativity, humanism and mercy,” which RT has reported to be “widely interpreted as a signal to lawmakers and the public to tone down the calls for administering the death penalty.” Mikhail Vinogradov, founder and president of the St. Petersburg Politics Foundation, wrote in a piece published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace that “no drastic decisions are likely” regarding Russia’s death penalty or migration policy.

Russia has maintained a moratorium for 28 years; it was first imposed by the Constitutional Court in 1999, which ruled that the death penalty could not be used until jury trials were implemented; following the implementation of jury trials in 2009, the court ruled that the moratorium would remain in place, stating that “[s]table guarantees of the human right not to be subjected to the death penalty have been formed and a constitutional and legal regime has emerged.” The court’s 2009 decision abided by Council of Europe’s rules, from which Russia was expelled in 2022. Some parliamentary proponents have argued that the Constitutional Court has the power to restore the death penalty, while chair of the court, Judge Valery Zorkin, has stated that the constitutionally provided right to life prevents the imposition of the death penalty and restoring the death penalty would require constitutional changes.

Saudi Arabia

Using data from 229 executions carried out from the beginning of January 2016 to end of February 2024, the European Saudi Organization for Human Rights found that 40% (93) of the people executed were from Al-Qatif, which constitutes 1.6% of the overall population and has been the site of protests since 2011. The report concludes: “The nature of the charges and the course of the trials, alongside the violations accompanying arrests and interrogations, clearly show that Saudi Arabia has used the death penalty over these years as a retaliatory method, aiming to intimidate and frighten the society.”

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

IRAN----executions

Iran executes 853 people in 8-year high amid relentless repression and renewed ‘war on drugs’

Robust international action is urgently needed to halt a horrifying surge in executions that saw Iran’s prisons transformed into sites of mass killings in 2023, said Amnesty International. In a new research briefing published today the organization highlights that at least 481 executions – more than half of the total 853 executions recorded in 2023 – were carried out for drug-related offences.

“Don’t Let Them Kill Us”: Iran’s Relentless Execution Crisis since 2022 Uprising reveals how the Iranian authorities have intensified their use of the death penalty to instil fear among the population and tighten their grip on power in the aftermath of the “Woman Life Freedom” uprising of September-December 2022. The briefing also raises the alarm over the disproportionate impact of the authorities’ lethal anti-narcotics policies on poor and marginalized communities.

The death penalty is abhorrent in all circumstances but deploying it on a mass scale for drug-related offences after grossly unfair trials before Revolutionary Courts is a grotesque abuse of power.----Diana Eltahawy, Amnesty International

The number of executions in 2023 is the highest recorded since 2015 and marks a 48% increase from 2022 and a 172% increase from 2021. Iran’s killing spree is continuing into 2024, with at least 95 recorded executions by 20 March. Execution numbers recorded by Amnesty International are minimum figures and the organization believes the real number is higher.

“The death penalty is abhorrent in all circumstances but deploying it on a mass scale for drug-related offences after grossly unfair trials before Revolutionary Courts is a grotesque abuse of power. The Islamic Republic’s deadly anti-narcotics policies are contributing to a cycle of ?poverty and systemic injustice, and further entrenching ?discrimination against marginalized communities, in particular Iran’s oppressed Baluchi minority,” said Diana Eltahawy, Deputy Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International.

Last year also saw a wave of executions targeting protesters, social media users and other actual or perceived dissidents for acts protected under international human rights law incurring charges such as “insulting the prophet” and “apostasy” as well as vague charges of “enmity against God” (moharebeh) and/or “corruption on earth” (efsad-e fel arz).

“Protesters, dissidents and members of oppressed ethnic minorities are among those executed as the authorities have weaponized the death penalty in an orchestrated bid to sow fear among the public and suppress dissent. Without a robust global response, the Iranian authorities will feel emboldened to execute thousands more people in the coming years with total impunity,” said Diana Eltahawy.

“Our shocking findings on the Iranian authorities’ ongoing assault on the right to life underscore the urgent need for the international community to press the Iranian authorities for an immediate moratorium on all executions. As the UN Human Rights Council votes this week on whether to renew the mandates of the Fact Finding Mission on Iran and the Special Rapporteur on Iran, it is vital to signal to the Iranian authorities that their abysmal human rights record will remain under international scrutiny and to ensure that an international independent investigative and accountability mechanism remains in place to collect and analyze evidence of crimes under international law.”

Revolutionary Courts issued 520 (61%) of the death sentences carried out in 2023. These courts have jurisdiction over a wide range of acts, including drug-related offences, which the authorities consider as “national security” crimes. The courts lack independence, operate under the influence of security and intelligence bodies, and routinely use torture-tainted forced “confessions” in grossly unfair summary trials to issue convictions.

Staggering increase in drug-related executions

The spike in executions in 2023 is driven largely by a distressing lethal shift in Iran’s anti-narcotics policy after Ebrahim Raisi’s rise to presidency and the appointment of Gholamhossein Eje’i as the Head of the Judiciary, both in 2021.

Amnesty International has analysed official statements from top executive and judicial authorities publicly criticizing 2017 reforms to the Anti-Narcotics Law, which led to a dramatic decline in drug-related executions between 2018 and 2020 and calling for increased use of the death penalty to combat drug-trafficking.

These official positions have translated into a horrifying upward trajectory since 2021, with 481 drug-related executions in 2023, constituting 56% of the total number of executions. This marks an ?89% increase from 2022 when 255 people were executed for drug-related offences and a 264% increase from 2021 when 132 people were executed for drug-related offences.

Iran’s Baluchi minority accounted for 29% (138) of drug-related executions in 2023 while constituting only about 5% of Iran’s population, exposing the discriminatory effect of the authorities’ anti-narcotics strategy on the most marginalized and impoverished communities.

Individuals executed for drug-related offences were often cruelly put to death in secret without prior notice to their families and lawyers.

Without urgent action from the international community, drug-related executions will continue to rise, amid ongoing efforts by the judiciary, legislative and executive branches to enact a new lethal anti-narcotics law which, if adopted, would expand the range of drug charges incurring the death penalty.

Executions as a tool of political oppression

Throughout 2023, in the aftermath of the “Woman Life Freedom” uprising of September-December 2022, the Iranian authorities also intensified their use of the death penalty as a weapon to quash dissent.

Our shocking findings on the Iranian authorities’ ongoing assault on the right to life underscore the urgent need for the international community to press the Iranian authorities for an immediate moratorium on all executions.----Diana Eltahawy, Amnesty International

In 2023, the authorities executed 6 men in connection with the 2022 uprising and one man in connection with the November 2019 nationwide protests. At least a further 7 people have been sentenced to death and are at imminent risk of execution in connection to the 2022 uprising and the November 2019 protests.

The rise in executions has led to prisoners on death row going on hunger strike and publicly pleading for interventions to stop their executions.

In May 2023, several days prior to their executions after grossly unfair trials, protesters Majid Kazemi, Saleh Mirhashemi and Saeed Yaghoubi smuggled a note out of prison pleading for help, stating: “Please don’t let them kill us.”

On 28 January 2024, another group of death row prisoners wrote an open letter announcing their hunger strike and asking for support to save their lives. “Perhaps with your help, these executions can be stopped. In whatever way you can, please be our voice…”

Executions of those arrested as children

Last year also marked a shocking escalation in the use of the death penalty against child offenders, with the executions of one 17-year-old boy and four youths convicted of crimes that took place when they were under 18 years old.

Hamidreza Azari was arrested when he was just 16 years old and executed less than seven months later after a grossly unfair trial that was expedited by prosecution authorities. The Iranian authorities shamelessly misrepresented his age as 18 in domestic media to evade accountability for violating international law which prohibits the imposition of death sentences on people under 18 at the time of the crime.

In recent months, authorities have misleadingly promoted a new directive from the Head of the Judiciary as a step towards “a further reduction” in death sentences against child offenders. However, Amnesty International’s analysis reveals that the directive fails to address long-standing inherent flaws in juvenile laws, and reaffirms the discretion granted to judges to sentence child offenders to death following flawed “maturity assessments”.

Amnesty International has repeatedly urged the Iranian authorities to amend Article 91 of the Islamic Penal Code to abolish the death penalty for crimes committed by children in all circumstances.

Background

The Iranian authorities refuse to provide public statistics of death sentences and executions. To record the number of executions carried out in 2023, Amnesty International worked closely with Abdorrahman Boroumand Centre, drawing from open sources, including reports by state media, independent media and human rights organizations. The organization also reviewed the execution logs of Iran Human Rights and Kurdistan Human Rights Network.

The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception, regardless of the nature or circumstances of the crime; guilt, innocence or other characteristics of the individual; or the method used by the state to carry out the execution.

(source: amnesty.org)

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

Iran turning its prisons into 'killing fields,' says Amnesty

Iran has turned its prisons into sites of mass killing with at least 853 people executed in the Islamic republic in 2023, over half of them on drug-related charges, Amnesty International said on Thursday.

The London-based group said in a report that stronger international action was needed to halt the rise in executions, otherwise "thousands" risked being hanged in the coming years.

The Iranian authorities have "persisted with their state-sanctioned killing spree which has turned prisons into killing fields," Amnesty said.

The figure for 2023 was up 48% on the previous year and 56% of executions involved drug-related charges, Amnesty said.

2 other NGOs, Iran Human Rights (IHR) and Together Against the Death Penalty (ECPM), published a report last month giving the slightly lower figure of 834 people executed in 2023.

The surge in executions came after Iran was convulsed by protests that erupted in September 2022. Nine people have been put to death in cases related to the protests.

Rights groups including Amnesty have warned that the authorities are using executions to instill fear throughout society and prevent any more demonstrations.

Amnesty said Iran's behavior had not changed this year, with at least 95 executions already recorded up to March 20.

The rights group added that its numbers were "minimum figures," and the real death toll would be higher.

"Without a robust global response, Amnesty International fears that the Iranian authorities will continue using the death penalty as a tool of oppression to execute thousands more people in the coming years," the group said in its report.

Among those executed was 17-year-old Hamidreza Azari, hanged in November in Razavi Khorasan province after being convicted over a deadly 2023 stabbing when he was 16.

His age "was misrepresented" as 18 by state media to "evade accountability," Amnesty said, adding that it had reviewed his birth certificate.

Amnesty said the Sunni Baluch minority concentrated in the southeast was being targeted disproportionately.

The minority "constitutes only about 5% of Iran's population but accounted for 20% of all executions in 2023," the report noted.

And the renewed surge in executions for drug offences was a particular concern, Amnesty said.

Iran's anti-narcotics legislation was modified in 2017 and executions for drug offences declined in 2018 and 2020 before dramatically rebounding last year.

"The death penalty is abhorrent in all circumstances but deploying it on a mass scale for drug-related offences after grossly unfair trials before Revolutionary Courts is a grotesque abuse of power," said Diana Eltahawy, Amnesty's deputy regional director for the Middle East and North Africa.

(source: voanews.com)

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

Iran’s Execution Surge: A Horrifying Rise in State-Sanctioned Killing

Amnesty International has released a scathing report, “Don’t Let Them Kill Us”: Iran’s Relentless Execution Crisis since 2022 Uprising, exposing a dramatic increase in executions in Iran. In 2023, the Iranian regime executed at least 853 people, marking the highest number in eight years. This report paints a grim picture of a multi-pronged attack on human rights, with the death penalty used as a tool for both political repression and a harsh response to drug offenses.

Execution Numbers Surge to Horrific Highs

The report lays bare the alarming scale of executions in Iran. With a staggering 48% increase compared to 2022 and a 172% jump from 2021, 2023 witnessed the most executions since 2015. This trend continues into 2024, with at least 95 executions documented by March. Amnesty International emphasizes that these numbers likely underestimate the true scale of the issue, as Iranian authorities refuse to release official statistics.

Drug War Fuels Execution Spree

A particularly disturbing aspect of the surge is the overwhelming number of drug-related executions. At least 481 people, constituting over 1/2 of the total executions, were put to death for drug offenses. This raises serious concerns about the effectiveness and fairness of Iran’s anti-narcotics policies. Critics argue that these harsh measures fail to address the root causes of drug trafficking while disproportionately impacting marginalized communities.

Amnesty International’s report highlights the plight of the Baluchi minority. Despite comprising only 5% of Iran’s population, the Baluchis make up a staggering 29% of those executed for drug offenses. This stark disparity exposes the discriminatory application of the country’s anti-narcotics policies, further marginalizing already vulnerable populations.

Executions as a Tool for Silencing Dissent

The report goes beyond drug offenses, revealing a chilling use of executions to suppress dissent. In the aftermath of the 2022 nationwide protests, Iranian regime authorities weaponized the death penalty to silence critics. At least six individuals were executed for protest-related charges, with seven more currently facing imminent execution. This blatant attempt to crush dissent through fear tactics underscores the systematic violation of human rights in Iran.

Executions of Minors: A Violation of International Law

The report exposes another deeply concerning trend: the execution of juvenile offenders. In 2023 alone, Iran executed one 17-year-old boy and four youths convicted of crimes committed when they were minors. This blatant disregard for international law, which prohibits the death penalty for crimes committed by persons below 18, further demonstrates Iran’s disregard for fundamental human rights.

Urgent Call to Action for the International Community

Amnesty International emphasizes the need for a robust international response to curb Iran’s execution spree. The report calls for several crucial steps:

Immediate Moratorium on Executions: A complete halt to all executions in Iran is essential to prevent further loss of life. This moratorium would provide a critical opportunity for reform and ensure the right to life is protected.

Independent Investigations: The international community must push for independent and impartial investigations into Iran’s human rights abuses, including the use of the death penalty. Unveiling the truth behind these executions is crucial for holding Iranian authorities accountable.

Ending Child Executions: Iran must immediately bring its practices in line with international law by abolishing the death penalty for all crimes committed by minors. Children deserve rehabilitation and a chance at a future, not a state-sanctioned death sentence.

Maintaining Scrutiny on Iran’s Human Rights Record

The report concludes by urging the UN Human Rights Council to maintain close scrutiny on Iran’s human rights record, including the use of the death penalty. Renewing the mandates of the Fact Finding Mission on Iran and the Special Rapporteur on Iran is vital to ensure continued monitoring and pressure for reform.

Amnesty International’s report serves as a stark reminder of the horrific human rights situation in Iran. The dramatic rise in executions, particularly the targeting of marginalized communities, political dissidents, and even minors, demands immediate international action. By implementing the recommendations outlined in the report, the international community can help prevent further bloodshed and push Iran towards a future that respects fundamental human rights.

(source: irannewsupdate.com)

APRIL 3, 2024:

TEXAS:

Texas Takes Intellectually Disabled Inmate Off Death Row----Randall Mays, who has an IQ of 63, was resentenced to life without parole.

Last week, a Texas criminal appeals court took a 64-year-old man off death row and resentenced him to life in prison without parole, after ruling that he was too intellectually disabled to be executed.

Randall Mays was sentenced to death in 2008 for the murder of 2 police officers in Henderson County, Texas. Since his sentencing, his lawyers have argued that Mays—who has schizophrenia and an IQ of 63—is too severely intellectually disabled to be executed. In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled in Atkins v. Virginia that executing intellectually disabled inmates violates the Eighth Amendment.

"Those mentally retarded persons who meet the law's requirements for criminal responsibility should be tried and punished when they commit crimes," Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in the majority opinion for Atkins v. Virginia."However, they do not act with the level of moral culpability that characterizes the most serious adult criminal conduct."

Questions about May's mental fitness to be executed are longstanding. In 2015, 2019, and 2020, judges stopped planned executions, citing concerns about mental fitness. According to The Texas Tribune, even an expert witness hired by the state of Texas testified that she couldn't dispute Mays' intellectual disability.

This latest ruling will solidify what almost a decade of delayed execution dates have made clear—that Mays' myriad cognitive issues render him unable to understand why he is being executed and, ultimately, unfit to be killed by the state.

"The evidence of Randall's intellectual disability is overwhelming. He has a 63 IQ," Benjamin Wolff, the director of the Texas Office of Capital and Forensic Writs, said in a statement to The Texas Tribune. "His intellectual deficits have been seen, and observed by others, throughout his life from childhood to military service, and throughout his adulthood."

However, the Henderson County District Attorney's Office, which originally prosecuted Mays, has expressed frustration that Mays was taken off death row. "While the justice [the families of the victims] deserve, and Randall Mays has earned is now not an option," District Attorney Jenny Palmer said in a statement, "we gain small comfort in being able to say with confidence that Randall Mays will die in prison."

(source: Emma Camp, reason.com)

FLORIDA:

YNW Melly Faces Death Penalty Following First Degree Murder Charges

YNW Melly could possibly face capital punishment if convicted in his upcoming murder trial.

Legally known as Jamell Demons, YNW Melly was initially indicted in 2019 and charged with the murders of Anthony Williams (YNW Sakchaser) and Christopher Thomas Jr. (YNW Juvy). According to reports, the shooting took place while the men were driving in Miramar, Florida. Prosecutors say Demons pulled the trigger while another individual, Cortlen Henry, was driving.

The trial for Demons was set to begin in July however Circuit Judge, Andrew Siegel, ruled that the prosecutors could not seek the death penalty because they failed to give the rapper’s attorney’s ‘proper notice’.

In last week’s ruling, the Fourth District Court of Appeal found that prosecutors acted properly and had already notified the court about the seek to death and was not required to repeat the notification.

(source: hot97.com)

ALABAMA:

INMATE’S LAWSUIT SEEKS TO BLOCK ALABAMA’S BID TO ARRANGE 2ND EXECUTION USING NITROGEN GAS

An Alabama inmate seeking to block the state’s attempt to make him the second person put to death by nitrogen gas has filed a lawsuit arguing the first execution under the new method was “botched” and caused cruel and prolonged suffering.

Attorneys for Alan Eugene Miller, who survived a 2022 lethal injection attempt, filed the lawsuit Friday in federal court in which they challenged the execution method and asked a judge to prevent a potential execution from going forward.

Miller’s attorneys argued that the first nitrogen execution in January left Kenneth Smith shaking and convulsing on a gurney as he was put to death. The suit argued that it would be a violation of the ban on cruel and unusual punishment to put him to death using the same protocol, which used a mask to deliver the nitrogen gas. They also argued the state is seeking to execute Miller to “silence” him in retaliation for speaking out about his failed lethal injection attempt, calling that a violation of his free speech and due process rights.

“Rather than address these failures, the State of Alabama has attempted to maintain secrecy and avoid public scrutiny, in part by misrepresenting what happened in this botched execution,” the lawyers wrote. They said Alabama was unable to conduct such an execution “without cruelly superadding pain and disgrace, and prolonging death.”

A spokeswoman for Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall did not immediately respond to a text message seeking comment on the lawsuit.

In February, Marshall’s office asked the Alabama Supreme Court to set an execution date for Miller using nitrogen gas. The court has not yet ruled on the request. Miller is scheduled to file a response with the court this week.

The request for an execution date comes as the state and advocates continue to present opposing views of what happened during the state’s first execution using nitrogen. Smith shook and convulsed in seizure-like movements for several minutes on the death chamber gurney as he was put to death on Jan. 25.

Miller was sentenced to death after being convicted of a 1999 workplace rampage in which he killed Terry Jarvis, Lee Holdbrooks and Scott Yancy.

Like Smith, Miller survived a previous lethal injection attempt. The state attempted to execute Miller by lethal injection in September 2022, but that execution was called off after officials were unable to insert an intravenous line into the 351-pound prisoner’s veins.

After that attempt, the state struck an agreement with Miller’s lawyers that it would never again seek to execute Miller by lethal injection and that any attempt to execute him in the future would be done with nitrogen gas. However, Miller’s attorneys argued that witness accounts of Smith’s execution contradict Marshall’s assertion that it was “textbook” and went according to the state’s plan.

A separate lawsuit filed by another death row inmate seeking to block the use of nitrogen gas said witness accounts show that Smith’s execution was a botched “human experiment.”

An attorney listed for Miller did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment on the lawsuit.

Miller said that during the aborted 2022 lethal injection attempt, prison staff poked him with needles for over an hour as they tried to find a vein and at one point left him hanging vertically as he lay strapped to a gurney.

Miller, a delivery truck driver, was convicted in the fatal workplace shootings of the three men. Prosecutors said Miller killed Holdbrooks and Yancy at one business and then drove to another location where he shot Jarvis. Each man was shot multiple times.

Testimony at Miller’s trial indicated Miller was delusional and believed the men were spreading rumors about him. Jurors convicted Miller after 20 minutes of deliberation and then recommended a death sentence, which a judge imposed.

(source: Associated Press)

OHIO:

Attorney general report says Ohio's death penalty is "unworkable" as he backs bill to change it

Ohio’s Republican attorney general says the state’s death penalty is “unworkable” as is, in his office’s latest report on capital crimes and punishment in Ohio.

And he’s backing a plan to make a major change to it.

Attorney General Dave Yost’s 2023 Capital Crimes Report estimates it would take $121 million to $363 million in legal costs to execute all 119 condemned people on Ohio's death row who are facing a combined 121 death sentences. Yost's report describes that as “a stunning amount of money to spend on a program that doesn’t achieve its purpose.”

"At present, an inmate on Ohio’s death row spends an average of 21.37 years on death row — mostly as a result of multiple avenues for appeal — before an execution is carried out," the report said. "And currently, because of the state’s inability to secure execution drugs, no Death Row inmate faces imminent execution. This means that an inmate is more likely to die of suicide or natural causes than execution."

The 424-page report covers the death penalty in Ohio from when the law was enacted in 1981 till Dec. 31, 2023, during which 336 people have received 341 death sentences. But it notes 56 executions have been carried out, which is 1 in 6.

"If we were starting from scratch to design a system for the ultimate punishment — whether that punishment is execution or, instead, life in prison without parole — neither death-penalty opponents nor death-penalty supporters would create anything like Ohio’s current system, which produces churn, waste, and endless lawsuits but nothing else," the report concluded.

Yost supports a bill to add nitrogen to lethal injection as an approved execution method. Gov. Mike DeWine has said the state hasn’t been able to acquire lethal injection drugs since the last execution in 2018, just before he took office. The bill’s Republican sponsors call it a needed solution to the drug impasse.

Meanwhile, there are bills in the House and Senate to abolish the death penalty in Ohio. While similar measures have been proposed for more than a decade, this time there's support from conservative Republicans including Reps. Jean Schmidt (R-Loveland) and Josh Williams (R-Sylvania).

(source: WYSO news)

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

Ohio AG asks elected officials to deal with state’s ‘costly and ineffective’ death penalty system

Attorney General Dave Yost is calling on the state’s elected officials to deal with Ohio’s “costly and ineffective capital-punishment system.”

The call comes amid the release of the state’s “2023 Capital Crimes Report.” The report provides the history of every case that has resulted in a death sentence since Ohio’s death penalty law was enacted in 1981.

From 1981 through Dec. 31, 2023, the report says, 336 people have received a combined 341 death sentences. Of those, 56 sentences have actually been carried out. The state last carried out an execution on July 18, 2018 – more than 5 years ago.

In Ohio, there are currently 119 Death Row inmates — seven in Trumbull County and four in Mahoning County. One of the area’s longest-serving inmates — Danny Lee Hill — was sentenced in 1986 but has remained on Death Row since then amid a series of appeals.

Other than the appeals process — which often draws out these death sentences — obtaining drugs used for lethal injection has been an issue. More recently, other states have been looking at alternative methods of execution, including electrocution or death by firing squad.

WKBN looked into the issue in 2022 and was told that any change to the state’s death penalty would have to be set in statute, requiring that to be initiated by the Ohio General Assembly.

According to a news release from Yost’s office, on average, an Ohio inmate on Death Row spends 21 years there before an execution date is set.

In January, Yost and 2 state lawmakers proposed a solution to the lethal injection drug impasse, announcing legislation to permit the use of nitrogen hypoxia as an alternative to lethal injection. The announcement followed the Jan. 25 execution in Alabama of murderer Kenneth Eugene Smith – the first time that a state used nitrogen, a colorless and odorless gas, in an execution.

Those in favor of the method say the execution proved that the method works, though critics have questioned it as Smith convulsed in seizure-like spasms for at least two minutes before his death, saying the effect the person would feel isn’t entirely known.

Meanwhile, other legislation has sought to completely abolish the death penalty.

(source: WOWK news)

TENNESSEE:

State Senate Update: Death Penalty Could Be Option for Convicted Child Rapists

The Senate Judiciary Committee has advanced legislation to increase the penalty for child rapists in Tennessee. Senate Bill 1834 would expand the death penalty to defendants convicted of rape of a child.

The legislation will strengthen existing state law by increasing the penalty for rape or aggravated rape of a child to death, life in prison without the possibility of parole, or life in prison. Current law classifies the offense as a Class A felony punishable as either a Range III offense, which carries a sentence of 40-60 years in prison, or a Range II offense, 25-40 years in prison.

The proposal builds on the General Assembly’s efforts in recent years to improve public safety, reduce recidivism rates and hold criminals accountable through smart-on-crime justice reforms. The General Assembly, in 2022, passed truth in sentencing laws that increased penalties for the most violent of crimes and now requires offenders to serve 85-100 percent of their sentences.

(source: mainstreetmediatn.com)

KENTUCKY:

Special judge to take over death penalty trial

One of the special judges presiding over Daviess Circuit Judge Jay Wethington’s courtroom said Monday he will preside over the first of two death penalty trials scheduled for this year.

Cylar L. Shemwell is set to go to trial in June on 3 counts of murder and 1 count of 1st-degree assault.

Retired Circuit Judge Tom Castlen will preside over the trial in Wethington’s place.

Wethington is expected to be off the bench at least through April, 30 as he recovers from injuries sustained in a fall that occurred last week.

In his place, retired Circuit Judges Tom Castlen and Joe Castlen have been appointed to handle cases in Wethington’s division.

Wethington said Monday he will assess whether he was recovered enough to return to work at the end of the month, but that he has turned Shemwell’s trial over to Tom Castlen.

Shemwell’s case is 1 of 2 death penalty trials scheduled for Wethington’s court this summer. Shemwell will go on trial June 3 on charges of murder and assault, in connection with the January 2019 shooting deaths of Jay Michael Sowders, Christopher Carie and Robert D. Smith at a home on Audubon Avenue.

All 2 men were all killed in the home after being shot in the head, in an incident captured on the home’s surveillance cameras. A 4th victim, Carman Vanegas, was also shot in the head, but survived.

The video shows a man prosecutors allege is Baines shooting the three men while a man alleged to be Shemwell watches. Vanegas was shot in another room off-camera.

Arnett B. Baines, 35 who was also charged with 3 counts of murder and 1st-degree assault in the Audubon Avenue shootings, is slated to go to trial on Aug. 5.

Wethington said he has spoken to both Tom Castlen and Commonwealth’s Attorney Mike Van Meter about the trial.

Leigh Jackson, head of the local Public Defender law office and lead defense attorney for Shemwell, said she was aware of the changes in judges.

Castlen, who was Daviess commonwealth’s attorney before becoming a judge, has prosecuted and presided over death penalty-eligible cases.

“It’s likely I’ll do Shemwell, and I’m going to have to be making some rulings, because there are some time constraints, in the Baines case,” Castlen said Monday.

One pending issue is whether or not jurors will be prevented from recommending the death penalty if Baines is found guilty. Baines’ defense team argued last month that Baines suffers from a cognitive impairment due to brain injuries and lead poisoning.

Castlen said he was reviewing the video of the March 15 hearing and filings on the issue, and would make a ruling by next week.

With Shemwell’s trial set for June, “I feel confident I will be with that case to conclusion” of proceedings, Castlen said.

Van Meter said the change in judges won’t affect his preparations for Shemwell’s trial.

“It’s my understanding Judge Castlen will preside over the Shemwell case. He certainly has the experience for it,” Van Meter said.

“I’m confident it will not affect the trial date,” Van Meter said.

Jackson said Castlen handled some hearings in the Shemwell case when Wethington was off the bench. Wethington retired as judge in 2022 but stayed on the ballot for that year’s election.

He was reelected and resumed his duties the following January.

The defense wants the case to go forward in June, Jackson said.

“It’s certainly not ideal” to change judges, Jackson said. “But our client has been in custody for five years” and is ready to have the trial proceed, Jackson said.

“My client’s family, his children, want a resolution,” Jackson said.

Both trials are expected to last several weeks.

(source: Owensboro Messenger-Inquirer)

MISSOURI----impending execution

Brian Dorsey set to be first person executed by Missouri in 2024. A former judge wants to stop it

17 years have passed since Brian Dorsey was sent to death row at Potosi State Prison. In that time, he’s had zero infractions and served as a barber.

More than 150 people have called for Gov. Mike Parson to grant Brian Dorsey clemency — including corrections officers, Republican state representatives, jurors, and the Missouri Supreme Court judge who upheld Dorsey’s conviction and death sentence in 2009.

Retired Missouri Supreme Court Judge Michael Wolff wishes he had more information when he and his colleagues upheld Brian Dorsey’s conviction and death sentence in 2009.

The facts of the case aren’t in dispute. Dorsey shot and killed his cousin Sarah Bonnie and her husband, Ben Bonnie. But it was Dorsey’s legal defense that’s drawn renewed criticism — and advocates for clemency.

“When my colleagues and I upheld his conviction and death sentence in 2009, we were unaware of how compromised his defense lawyers were,” Wolff wrote in an editorial for the Missouri Times. “If Mr. Dorsey is executed … it will dishonor our system of justice.”

Unless a court halts the injection or Gov. Mike Parson steps in, Dorsey will be executed on April 9. Wolff has joined more than 150 others — including corrections officers, Republican state representatives and several of the jurors who were part of the sentencing phase — in asking the governor to support the commutation of Dorsey’s sentence to life without parole.

Along with Wolff, Dorsey has gained an ally in Michelle Smith, co-director of Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty. The group is circulating a petition for clemency; it argues that killing Dorsey “does nothing to promote public safety and only serves to create further harm.”

Smith said the flood of support for Dorsey’s clemency from corrections officers is significant.

“This is something that is unprecedented because [the officers] also are putting themselves on the line with signing this letter,” she said. “This is truly extraordinary. And it goes to the character of Mr. Dorsey. …They truly believe that Brian deserves clemency and [that] he is not someone who should be facing execution.”

(source: KCUR news)

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

He Faces Execution. His Lawyers May Have Earned Less Than $4 per Hour.

Some death penalty lawyers get paid the same no matter how long they work on a case. Critics say it’s a perverse incentive when a life is at stake.

Brian Dorsey’s argument for why he should not be executed by the state of Missouri requires the kind of math familiar to any gig worker.

After Dorsey confessed to killing his cousins Sarah and Ben Bonnie with a shotgun in 2006, Missouri paid two lawyers $12,000 each to defend him. If they had worked 3,557 hours — the average time spent by defense lawyers in death penalty cases, according to a 2010 report commissioned by the federal courts — they would have each earned $3.37 per hour.Dorsey is scheduled to be put to death on April 9, and a growing number of scholars, lawyers and activists are asking federal courts, along with Missouri Gov. Mike Parson, to stop the execution. They argue that regardless of how much these lawyers worked, the way they were paid created a perverse incentive: Work less to earn more per hour.

Paying lawyers a flat fee is a common practice across the legal system, from drunken driving to divorce cases, and it has been a way for cash-strapped courts and public defenders to keep their costs under control. But it has attracted more criticism when a life is at stake.

Though many states have turned away from flat fees in death penalty trials, including Texas and Missouri, a Marshall Project and Los Angeles Times review of court filings and media reports found they paved the way to death row for at least 20 people in the last four decades. That figure does not begin to capture the scale of the issue, because some of the largest counties in California, including Los Angeles, paid flat fees in death cases for decades.

“Death sentences imposed under these systems often say more about the external funding limitations placed on counsel, and less about the nature of the crime or the culpability of the defendant,” said Emily Olson-Gault, director of the American Bar Association’s Death Penalty Representation Project.

Dorsey is 1 of at least 3 people on Missouri’s death row — out of 13 — whose lawyers were paid a set fee, according to the Missouri State Public Defender. So is David Hosier, who is scheduled to be executed on June 11. It’s impossible to tally the national scope of the problem, legal experts say, because courts don’t usually track such pay arrangements.

But using legal databases, The Marshall Project found death penalty cases in more than a dozen states — including California, Florida, Indiana and Arizona — that involved flat fees as far back as the 1980s, with pay ranging from $800 to $180,000.

Willie Pye was the most recent person executed in the United States, on March 20 in Georgia. His lawyer was paid a lump sum of $345,000 to represent every single felony defendant in rural Spalding County in 1996, the year Pye was sentenced to death, according to his clemency petition.

Michael Aed, who represents Ger Lee for his role in the murders of four people in Fresno County, California, told KFSN-TV that getting paid a flat fee would be “basically suicide for my business.” After the ACLU of Northern California sent a letter of protest, the county agreed to pay him hourly but didn’t change its system for the future. Fresno County officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Meanwhile, in Los Angeles County, records show a flat fee structure is still on the books for capital cases — and the rate has not increased for at least 3 decades. To the south in Orange County, lawyers say they’ve been asked to compete by bidding to get paid as little as possible. (A court spokesman in Orange County said there are relatively few death penalty cases there, and lawyers’ fees are determined on a case-by-case basis.)

“An attorney that isn’t going to put in any work or minimal work will probably be making $200 an hour,” said Southern California defense attorney John Aquilina. “Somebody that’s going to put in thousands of hours may generate a dollar an hour. And there’s really no supervision. There’s no restriction. There’s nobody who’s telling you you’re putting in too many hours or you’re not putting in enough hours.”

Low flat rates have also driven experienced lawyers away from taking court appointments to work on death cases. After a particularly time-consuming case that ended this year in Riverside County, California, Aquilina — who’s been a lawyer since 1981 — finally decided that he couldn’t take any more death penalty cases in counties that pay flat rates.

“It’s gonna be a cold, dark day before I take another one,” he said.

A spokeswoman for Riverside County said in an emailed statement that officials there have had “a number of meetings with capital defense attorneys and we understand their concerns.” But she broadly defended the use of flat fees, saying the system is “used widely” throughout the state and that the $70,000 to $130,000 rate per case is “comparable to our surrounding counties.”

Courts across the country have been paying flat fees since at least the 1970s, when the U.S. Supreme Court briefly abolished and then revived the death penalty. The Missouri State Public Defender, a state agency, began paying some lawyers this way in the 1980s, according to Sean O’Brien, a longtime defense attorney who teaches law at University of Missouri-Kansas City. It kept costs for the state under control amid a wider crisis in public defense funding. For the lawyers paid a flat fee, “It can be a boost to your cash flow at the beginning, but it’s a drain on your cash flow if you actually do the work,” O’Brien said.

Flat fees have been slowly falling out of favor ever since. In 2003, the American Bar Association said flat fees would “discourage lawyers from doing more than what is minimally necessary.” And in 2013, the Kansas Supreme Court struck down a death sentence in which the defendant’s lawyer was paid such a fee.

With a flat fee, lawyers don’t need to track their work. In the Dorsey case, “I don’t know if these trial lawyers made minimum wage or $5,000 an hour, and you can’t know,” O’Brien said. The director of the Missouri State Public Defender, Mary Fox, wrote in a letter to the governor that her office stopped using flat fees after Dorsey’s trial, recognizing that they remove the incentive to do an effective job.

In recent years, Dorsey’s current lawyers say they have made discoveries about his past that his original lawyers might have brought to the jury if they’d sought money for investigators.

According to their interviews with people from his past, he was a successful football player in high school, raising the question of whether head injuries might have played a role in his erratic behavior, as they have for many prominent athletes. He began using crack cocaine in high school, possibly as a way to treat his undiagnosed depression, and he attempted suicide twice. Doctors who examined his case recently wrote he was likely experiencing psychosis during the murders, undermining his 1st-degree murder charge, which requires intent in Missouri.

Prosecutors argued that Dorsey sexually assaulted Sarah Bonnie after killing her and poured bleach on her body. Because he pleaded guilty, these claims were not fully tested in court. (Dorsey has no memories of the crime, but his lawyers note he was never charged with rape, and only one police officer said he smelled bleach.) In media reports and court records, the Bonnies’ family members appear to be split on whether Dorsey should be put to death.

The lawyers who received $12,000 each, Scott McBride and Chris Slusher, declined to comment for this article. During a 2011 hearing over Dorsey’s appeal, they acknowledged they could have asked for more money for a fuller investigation but said that dwelling on his possible psychosis and other mitigating factors might have undercut their overall strategy: Accept blame, express remorse and seek mercy.

That strategy, they added at the hearing, was why they encouraged him to plead guilty in the first place. But this also happened to save them hundreds of hours of work. Dorsey’s current lawyer Megan Crane points out that they failed to use a tactic required by ethical standards: demand that prosecutors drop the death penalty in exchange for a guilty plea.

The Missouri Supreme Court and state attorney general have pushed back at his appeal and argue Dorsey has failed to find enough evidence that the flat-fee arrangement adversely affected his lawyers’ choices. “Attorneys are not exempt from the desire to balance working to earn money and having enough free time to enjoy their life outside of work,” Assistant Attorney General Terrence Messonnier wrote in a 2016 court filing, adding that an hourly rate might encourage lawyers to be less efficient and pad the bill.

There’s not much research comparing payment arrangements, but a 2012 Yale Law Journal study found that, in Philadelphia, public defenders who are paid a salary “reduce their clients’ murder conviction rate by 19% and lower the probability that their clients receive a life sentence by 62%” compared with private lawyers paid flat fees.

And when the ACLU pushed to end the flat-fee system in Los Angeles County in the mid-2000s, it was because civil rights attorneys had started to notice a stark difference in the outcomes. “All the cases that were going to trial and ending in death were handled by private, appointed counsel — and they were paid by this flat-fee contract,” said Natasha Minsker, a lawyer and consultant who was overseeing the organization’s death penalty work at the time.

Last week, Los Angeles County officials said they are “currently analyzing the issue” and “open to considering potential changes, including transitioning to an hourly rate to better align with the federal courts.” In the meantime, the county pointed out that lawyers can petition the courts for additional money.

Dorsey’s scheduled execution comes at a moment of flux for Missouri, which was an epicenter of executions a decade ago and now has dueling efforts in its state legislature to expand the death penalty and abolish it. (Both are led by Republicans.) Dorsey is also joining a wave of federal lawsuits around religious rights in the execution chamber. Missouri prison officials may set IV lines for lethal injection by making incisions — a procedure known as a “cut-down” — without pain medication, which Dorsey argues in court filings will interfere with his ability to speak with his spiritual advisor.

Dorsey’s lawyers argue that his death will be especially traumatic for corrections officers who spend their days with Dorsey. More than 70 of them have called for the governor to spare his life. They even allow him, as the prison barber, to use scissors to cut their hair. “They all attest to Brian’s rehabilitation, remorse and ultimately his redemption,” said Crane, his lawyer. “He says he wants to find a way to make people's lives better to atone for what he’s done.”

She noted that Dorsey’s original lawyers could have visited him more often, getting to see his remorse so they could fully convey it to the jury. But under the flat-fee arrangement, visiting him would have cost them money.

(source: themarshallproject.com)

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

Brian Dorsey Given Missouri Execution Date of April 9, 2024

Brian Dorsey is scheduled to be executed on Tuesday, April 9, 2024, inside the execution chamber at the Eastern Reception, Diagnostic, and Corrections Center in Bonne Terre, Missouri. 52-year-old Brian is convicted of murdering Ben and Sarah Bonnie in New Bloomfield, Missouri on December 23, 2006. For the last 16 years, Brian has been on death row in Missouri.

Brian had a history of depression, beginning in his childhood. He began drinking in high school and became addicted. Brain’s father was also depressed and an alcoholic. Brian had a dysfunctional childhood, as multiple members of his family struggled with substance abuse. Twice throughout his life Brian attempted to commit suicide.

By December 23, 2006, Brian Dorsey’s family was worried. Dorsey had called several family members asking to borrow money to pay 2 drug dealers. His cousin, Sarah Bonnie, and her husband Ben, went to Dorsey’s apartment in an attempt to help him. After Sarah and Ben arrived, the 2 drug dealers at Dorsey’s apartment left. Sarah and Ben then took Dorsey home with them.

The trio spent the evening drinking and playing pool, along with other family members. Before playing pool, however, a shotgun had to be moved off the pool table. It is estimated that Dorsey drank between 7 and 10 beers that night. He also drank part of a bottle of vodka after everyone had left and the Bonnies went to bed.

After drinking the vodka, Dorsey found the shotgun that had been moved earlier in the evening. He then went into Sarah and Ben’s bedroom and shot them both while they were in their bed. Both Sarah and Ben died from their injuries. After shooting them, Dorsey sexually assaulted Sarah’s body, and then poured bleach on her. He also stole several items from the home, including Sarah’s vehicle.

Dorsey attempted to sell some of the stolen items that night to pay off his drug debt. He also claimed the vehicle was his. Dorsey was noticeably intoxicated and had a bottle of vodka with him.

On Christmas Eve 2006, Sarah’s parents became worried when the young family never arrived at the family gathering. The Bonnie’s four-year-old daughter told her grandparents that her parents had been locked in the bedroom all day. After entering the bedroom, they found the bodies and called the police.

On December 26, 2006, Dorsey surrendered himself to the police, admitting what he did. Additionally, some of the stolen property was found on Dorsey. Police were also able to locate Sarah’s stolen vehicle, as well as more stolen property from their house.

Dorsey pled guilty to murder in March 2008. A jury then sentenced him to death for each murder.

The Missouri Supreme Court and the District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri have refused requests to halt Dorsey’s execution.

Pray for peace and healing for the family of Ben and Sarah Bonnie. Please pray for strength for the family of Brian Dorsey. Please pray that if Brian is innocent, lacks the competency to be executed, or should not be executed for any other reason, that evidence will be presented before his execution. Pray that Brain comes to find peace through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

(source: theforgiveneswsfoundation.org)

OKLAHOMA----impending execution

EMERGENCY STAY OF EXECUTION DENIED FOR MAN CONVICTED OF 2 MURDERS

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals unanimously denied an emergency stay of execution for Michael Dewayne Smith.

Smith was convicted and sentenced to death in 2 separate murders in 2002.

This was his third and final Emergency Request for Stay of Execution. OCCA previously denied his request and further affirmed District Judge Heather Coyle’s denial two weeks ago of Smith’s motion for post-conviction DNA testing.

The court issued its opinion on Tuesday, stating that further forensic testing would not undermine the confidence in Smith’s conviction.

The court noted Smith “gave a very detailed, highly corroborated confession to police.” His confession was also corroborated by “2 additional confessions and physical evidence from both crime scenes,” according to the order.

The court further clarified Smith’s motives for the shooting deaths of Janet Moore, a 40-year-old mother and Sharath Pulluru, a 24-year-old store clerk, were also corroborated.

Smith is scheduled to be executed at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary on April 4.

(source: newson6.com)

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

Following Stay of Execution, Oklahoma Court Finds Death-Sentenced Prisoner Incompetent to Be Executed Due to Serious Mental Illness

MENTAL ILLNESS OKLAHOMA

On March 28, Judge Michael Hogan of Pittsburg County ruled that James Ryder is incompetent to be executed after a hearing where experts established Mr. Ryder’s serious mental illness. “[We are] relieved the court reached the only logical conclusion… James has no rational understanding of why Oklahoma plans to execute him,” said Mr. Ryder’s attorney, Emma Rolls, following the decision. “James has suffered from schizophrenia for nearly 40 years and has little connection to objective reality.” Mr. Ryder, 62, was the first scheduled execution of 2024 in Oklahoma before the Court of Criminal Appeals issued a stay in December, ordering the hearing because Mr. Ryder had “raised substantial doubt as to his competency to be executed.”

Over two days, Judge Hogan heard substantial evidence of Mr. Ryder’s delusions. Mr. Ryder believes that the execution will only kill his body, while his soul “will go into an alien body which will be better than a human body.” He told a psychologist that he is “likely the only heterosexual male on earth” and that the U.S. government will collapse, enabling him to go to Russia and fulfill his duty to “raise a heterosexual son.” Prison records documented over twenty years of hallucinations and troubling behavior such as hoarding, eating rotten food, and “not showering for years.” Judge Hogan wrote that he could “go on ad nauseum discussing the irrational thought processes of Mr. Ryder but that is not needed” to find him incompetent.

The state had argued that Mr. Ryder was competent to be executed, and a spokesperson for Attorney General Gentner Drummond said after the decision that Oklahoma “will continue working to restore competency so justice can be served.” However, Ms. Rolls urged the state to “cease any further efforts” to carry out the execution, as Mr. Ryder’s condition “has deteriorated significantly over the years and will only continue to worsen.” Even the warden supervising Mr. Ryder, Jim Farris, has expressed concerns about Mr. Ryder’s competency; he wrote in a 2022 letter to the district attorney’s office that Mr. Ryder “may have become insane during his incarceration.”

The Supreme Court has held that a prisoner is incompetent to be executed if he does not have a “rational understanding” of the reason for his execution. That determination focuses on a specific period of time before the execution, so a person who is found incompetent can in theory be later found competent and executed. However, the process of “restoring competency” raises serious ethical and practical concerns for lawyers and medical professionals. For prisoners with severe mental disorders, a period of lucidity is often the exception, not the norm. Most states allow the forcible medication of death-sentenced prisoners to address safety concerns, including with psychotropic drugs, while non-incarcerated people typically have the right to refuse treatment. And the American Medical Association’s Code of Medical Ethics prohibits physician participation in executions, including “treating a condemned prisoner who has been declared incompetent to be executed for the purpose of restoring competence.” The Code affirms that the medical profession is “dedicated to preserving life when there is hope of doing so.”

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

IDAHO:

Chad Daybell trial: Husband of convicted 'doomsday' mom faces death penalty in murder trial----His wife, Lori Vallow, was convicted of the same crime nearly a year ago in a so called 'doomsday plot'

The man accused of murdering his wife's 2children is now standing on trial in Idaho.

Chad Daybell, the husband of Lori Vallow, who was convicted of the same crime nearly a year ago in a so called "doomsday plot" is facing multiple murder charges.

This trial is expected to last around nine weeks, with the attorneys questioning potential jurors about hardship and bias.

"This is a death penalty case. So, they're also looking for people who might hesitate to write the name down of Chad Daybell in acknowledgment that he should get the death penalty," said ABC News legal contributor Brian Buckmire. "We found in many people in this country, they may theoretically believe in the death penalty but it's very different when you're the person signing that letter to say someone dies."

In 2019, 7-year-old Joshua "JJ" Vallow and 16-year-old Tylee Ryan were reported missing, prompting a months-long search.

Prosecutors say Vallow and Daybell, who is a doomsday author, claimed her kids were zombies and killed them.

Their remains were found in a shallow grave in June 2020 on Daybell's property. The judge pointing out the depravity of the crimes.

Vallow was already in custody at the time of the discovery and was heard talking to Daybell on a jailhouse phone call during the search of his home.

Vallow: "What, are they at the house?"

Daybell: "No, they're out on the property."

Vallow: "Are they seizing stuff again?"

Daybell: "They're searching..."

Less than an hour later, Daybell was arrested.

Vallow and Daybell were charged with the children's murders. The criminal complaint alleges that Daybell endorsed religious beliefs that justified the homicides of the 2 children.

Vallow was also found guilty of murdering her husband's 1st wife, Tammy Daybell. After a jury found her guilty of killing all three people, she expressed no remorse.

Daybell is also charged with his former wife's murder and 2 counts of insurance fraud.

Jury selection is expected to last 2 weeks.

"I certainly think, based on the previous trial, that Mr. Daybell has a very large hill to climb," said Eric Rudich, managing partner and senior litigation consultant at Blueprint's Trial Consulting.

Daybell has pled not guilty to all charges. If convicted of murder, he faces the death penalty.

(source: ABC News)

USA:

Trump calls for cop killers to get ‘mandatory’ death sentence in wake of slain NYPD Detective Jonathan Diller

Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday demanded a mandatory death sentence for cop killers in the wake of the horrific murder of NYPD Det. Jonathan Diller.

The presumptive Republican presidential nominee, 77, was speaking at a campaign rally in Green Bay, Wis. where he called on Congress to pass legislation to ensure that those convicted of killing a police officer receive capital punishment — just days after he attended Diller’s wake in Long Island.

“I will ask Congress to send a bill to my desk ensuring that anyone who murders a police officer will receive immediately the death penalty,” Trump told the crowd, a line that drew a standing ovation.

“We’re going to do that, and you’ll see the whole situation come to a halt,” he added.

Trump has supported executing convicted cop killers repeatedly since at least 2015, during his first White House run, when he vowed to sign an executive order giving “anybody killing a police officer, the death penalty.”

In 2018, during a DC tribute to slain NYPD officer Miosotis Familia, the then-president again expressed his support for a mandatory death penalty.

In the runup to the 2020 election, after the ambush shooting of 2 Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies, Trump argued that if the wounded deputies didn’t survive the “animals” responsible for the crime should receive a “fast trial [and the] death penalty.”

“Only way to stop this!” he said in a tweet. The deputies – Claudia Apolinar and Emmanuel Perez-Perez – survived the shooting.

Capital punishment is legal in 27 states and at the federal level and has been outlawed in 23 states – including New York – and Washington, D.C.

Career criminal Guy Rivera, 34, allegedly shot and killed Diller during a routine traffic stop in Far Rockaway, Queens, last month.

Diller, 31, was shot and killed during a routine traffic stop in Far Rockaway, Queens, on March 25, 2024.

Suspect Guy Rivera allegedly opened fire on Diller on Monday evening after the cop approached the vehicle Rivera was in for parking in front of a bus stop.

Diller was shot once in the stomach below his bulletproof vest. The married father of a 1-year-old boy was rushed to Jamaica Hospital, where he was later pronounced dead.

Rivera was wounded when Diller’s partner returned fire. The suspect has 21 prior arrests and was found to have a shiv stored in his rectum during the shooting — in apparent anticipation of being sent to jail again.

Lindy Jones, the ex-con behind the wheel of the car during the shooting, was also arrested after a second gun was found in his car. Mayor Eric Adams has renewed his calls for Albany to address criminal recidivism following the shooting involving two suspects with lengthy criminal records. Follow The Post’s complete coverage of fallen NYPD Officer Diller’s wake

Rivera, who is facing charges of murder of a police officer, attempted murder and criminal possession of a weapon, was wounded in the deadly exchange of gunfire that killed Diller.

“Stephanie, the whole family, was so incredible,” Trump said of Diller’s widow and the slain detective’s loved ones. “The Diller family is so incredible.”

“It’s hard to explain how beautiful it was,” Trump said of the wake. “It was sad, horrible in so many ways, but the family – so many police officers in the family – Stephanie was incredible.”

He said it was “amazing to see the love and the respect” for Diller, noting that “thousands of policemen and women went up to that funeral parlor” and that there were lined “for blocks and blocks” outside the venue.

Trump described Diller’s infant son, Ryan, as “the most beautiful baby ever” and said Stephanie “didn’t want to know anybody else” after meeting her future husband in high school.

(source: New York Post)

GLOBAL:

Confirmed Executions for Drug Convictions Surge to New Global High

In July 2016, 3 Nigerians and 1 Indonesian were ferried to Nusa Kambangan, known as the “island of flowers,” off the coast of Java. A prison there, the so-called “Alcatraz of Indonesia,” holds people awaiting execution. Freddy Budiman, Humphrey Jefferson Ejike, Michael Titus Igweh and Seck Osmane, who had all been convicted on drug charges, were executed by firing squad.

450 people are currently held on death row in Indonesia. The majority are there for drug convictions.

“Indonesia still has 13 kinds of crimes that are punishable by death,” Aisya Humaida, a human rights lawyer and activist in the country, told Filter. “The top three are narcotics, murder and terrorism.”

Her blunt explanation of why drug convictions trigger capital punishment? “War on drugs.”

“Drugs become the tool to prove how powerful the Indonesian leader or other key persons are.”

The country’s aggressive drug war has repercussions far beyond the firing squad. “This situation leads to prison overcrowding, caused by the high number of people who use drugs.”

And as with other aspects of the drug war, there are political motives behind Indonesia’s executions. “Drugs also become the tool to prove to the public how powerful the Indonesian leader or other key persons are,” Humaida observed.

Since 2020, several countries have struck down provisions that allow or even require the death penalty for drug convictions such as trafficking. Yet such executions have still risen to a new global high, according to a report by Harm Reduction International (HRI).

The report—“The Death Penalty for Drug Offences: Global Overview 2023”—finds that at least 467 people were killed in 2023. That’s the highest number recorded since HRI began issuing these regular reports in 2007. The latest figure represents a 1,450 % rise since 2020—a year when executions fell sharply, as the pandemic took hold—and a 44 % increase on 2022.

“Despite how shocking this is, it’s not even a complete picture.”

Drug convictions led to 42 % of the world’s executions in 2023—the highest proportion of that total since 2015, notes HRI, which “opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception.”

And by the end of a year in which 375 new death sentences for drugs were confirmed—a 20 percent increase on 2022—at least 3,000 people, in 19 countries, were on death row for drug convictions.

Ajeng Larasati, a human rights and public health specialist with Harm Reduction International, stresses that the total numbers in the report are undercounts. “Despite how shocking this is, it’s not even a complete picture,” she told Filter.

5 countries—China, Kuwait, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Singapore—are confirmed to have carried out executions for drugs in 2023. But China and Saudi Arabia don’t reveal their totals. And at least 2 more countries—North Korea and Vietnam—are “assumed” to have carried out such executions, according to the report, but “state secrecy and censorship … prevent confirmation of a minimum figure.”

“Drug executions are used to stifle upheaval.”

One theory Larasati has about the increase is growing use of drug crackdowns to snuff out political dissent. That might explain Iran’s increased numbers. Iran was responsible for the vast majority of confirmed executions for drugs in 2023: at least 459, up from 256 in 2022. The September 2022 killing of Mahsa Amini in police custody—she was accused of inappropriate head covering—sparked protests there.

“Drug executions are used to stifle upheaval,” Larasati said.

She also pointed to “the failure of the international community to hold states accountable.” If bodies like the United Nations “keep silent and don’t do anything” about executions for drugs, she continued, national governments “are allowed to do this, with no consequences. So why stop? No sanction, no penalty, for continuing to execute people for drug offenses.”

Cruel sentences other than death, up to and including life imprisonment for drug convictions, have also increased, Larasati emphasized.

Kuwait’s single execution for drugs in 2023 was the country’s 1st since 2007, in “a significant step backwards,” notes the report. But in a rare hopeful sign, the number of countries that keep the death penalty on the books for drug convictions—currently 34—is one lower than in 2022.

In July 2023, Pakistan’s Control of Narcotics Substances Act abolished use of the death penalty for drug convictions. It was the first country to do so in “over a decade,” notes HRI.

What spurred Pakistan’s government to revoke the death penalty for drugs?

Haris Zaki, an advocate with Justice Project Pakistan, told Filter that even before this decision, convictions like murder and terrorism far more commonly triggered an actual execution. “But people still spent decades on death row for drugs.”

What spurred Pakistan’s government to revoke the death penalty for drugs? According to Zaki, it was a trade deal regarding textiles with countries in the European Union, which requires the country to conform to certain human rights standards.

Zaki described how the government had previously abolished the death penalty for other laws that he termed “low-hanging fruit”—like colonial-era laws concerning “train sabotage” or “stealing teacup sets from a train”—but eventually came around to drug convictions.

There was no fanfare. Zaki said the decision was so low-key that there are still judges who are confused about it.

Though Pakistan has seemingly ended one of the worst abuses of its drug war, Zaki’s organization has a great deal more work to do.

“There is an urgent need to counter over-incarceration for drug offenses and improve access to health/treatment for prisoners jailed for drug use, through the implementation of human-rights based sentencing guidelines and improved standards of health care in prisons,” a paper published by Justice Project Pakistan stated.

“Drug laws, policies, and drug control and treatment practices often do not take into account the right to the highest attainable standards of health and the need for voluntary access to harm reduction services and drug dependence treatment,” the paper added. Alternatives to incarceration, such as compulsory treatment, also cause harm, it noted—as does a lack of harm reduction measures, particularly in overcrowded prisons.

“There’s still a strong stigma around drugs,” Zaki said. “Some people have strong feelings.”

< (source: Tia Ganeva, filtermag.org)

CANADA:

Poll: Majority of Canadians support death penalty for murder----Robert Pickton parole issue reignites calls for changes to the system

In the first few months of 2024, Canadians were exposed to stories—particularly on social media—that reignited the debate on capital punishment. In British Columbia, the case of Robert Pickton was back in the spotlight after his impending eligibility for day parole was criticized by federal Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre.

Pickton, originally detained in 2002, was convicted for the murders of six women, but was charged in connection with 20 other disappearances. Pickton’s life sentence does contemplate the possibility of parole in 2027, although it is highly improbable that any board will approve it.

The Conservatives, who successfully connected with Canadian voters on the concept of mandatory minimum sentences when Stephen Harper was their leader, also hammered the current federal government on the decision to transfer Luka Magnotta—who was convicted of 1st-degree murder in 2014—to a medium-security facility in Quebec. Type the names “Pickton” or “Magnotta” on X, and you will be immediately exposed to tweets calling for the return of capital punishment.

Starting in 2020, Research Co. and Glacier Media have asked Canadians annually about their views on the death penalty for murder. Although our country eliminated this possibility in July 1976, we have consistently seen about half of Canadians voicing support for reinstating capital punishment.

We also asked Canadians to choose between 2 distinct approaches as possible punishments for convicted murderers. With this question, more than 1/2 of respondents express a preference for life imprisonment without parole, and not execution.

In this year’s survey, just over 1/2 of Canadians (53 %, down 5 points since 2023) think the death penalty is “sometimes” appropriate. About 1 in four (26 %, up 1 point) say it is “never” appropriate, while 14 % (up 5 points) say it is “always” appropriate.

The intriguing fluctuations on this question are related to ethnic origin. While 31 % of Canadians of European descent believe the death penalty is “never” appropriate, the proportions are lower among respondents whose origins are Indigenous (20 %), South Asian (15 %) and East Asian (10 %). Across the country, 57 % of Canadians support reinstating the death penalty for murder in Canada. This is the highest number we have recorded in 5 yearly measurements, up 3 points since 2023 and up 6 points since 2022.

Majorities in every region side with the return of capital punishment, starting at 52 % in Quebec, and rising to 57 % in Ontario, 58 % in British Columbia, 60 % in both Atlantic Canada and Alberta, and 62 % in Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Conservative voters in 2021 are more likely to endorse this course of action (69 %) than counterparts who voted for the Liberal Party (56 %) or the New Democratic Party (49 %). Canadians who support the return of the death penalty primarily cite 4 reasons: Deterrence (50 %), a punishment that fits the crime (also 50 %), saving taxpayers money and the costs associated with having murderers in prison (48 %) and closure for the families of murder victims (47 %). Fewer than3 in 10 (28 %) think murderers simply cannot be rehabilitated. For opponents of the death penalty, the main stumbling block is the possibility of wrongful convictions that lead to executions (67 %). Fewer think it is wrong to take a murderer’s life (45 %). 40 % prefer to abide by the decisions of judges when it comes to prison time, and more than a third (38 per cent) say capital punishment will not serve as a deterrent. Fewer than 1 in 5 (18 %) believe murderers can be rehabilitated.

The final question shifts the debate dramatically.

More than 1/2 of Canadians (55 %, up 2 points since 2023) prefer life imprisonment without the possibility of parole to deal with convicted murderers, while just over 1/3 (35 %, down 2 points) choose the death penalty. We had majorities of Canadians in every province arguing for the return of the death penalty. When the issue is analyzed within the context of the justice system, outright support for the death penalty stands at 37 % in Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta, 36 % in Ontario, 35 % in B.C., 34 % in Atlantic Canada and 33 % in Quebec. Almost 1/2 of Conservatives (48 %) still choose capital punishment, compared to 34 % of Liberals and 23 % of New Democrats.

This year’s survey is consistent with what we have reported in the past. There is a noticeable climb in the proportion of Canadians who support bringing back the death penalty, but it is not accompanied by a rejection of a system that would guarantee that convicted murderers would be behind bars for life.

It would have been easy for the leader of the opposition to come out in favour of reinstating capital punishment. Poilievre’s stance signals an intention to make parole—or other elements of current sentencing guidelines that might seem too temperate for outside observers—more difficult to attain for those currently imprisoned.

Mario Canseco is president of Research Co.

Results are based on an online study conducted from March 8-10, 2024, among 1,002 adults in Canada. The data has been statistically weighted according to Canadian census figures for age, gender and region. The margin of error—which measures sample variability—is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

(source: biv.com)

ARMENIA:

Life Imprisonment, in my Opinion, is a Much More Severe Punishment than the Death Penalty: Levon Kajaznuni

“There have been many cases when we spent the night at work,” Levon Kajaznuni, Deputy Head of the Division of Investigation of Grave Crimes of Investigative Department of Yerevan of the Investigative Committee said, within the framework of “Investigator Presents” series of interviews of Iravaban.net.

We talked with Mr. Kajaznuni about the investigator’s work, difficulties and fraud as well.

– Mr. Kajaznuni, you were recognized as the best investigator of the year of the Investigative Committee. Can you tell what distinguished you in 2023?

– I was distinguished for my work, because the person who has done a good job is recognized as the “Best Investigator”, based only on that criterion. Work done during preliminary investigation in criminal proceedings, quality of work, quantity, workload, and why not for human qualities as well.

– Which cases, as the Deputy Head of the Division of Investigation of Grave Crimes, were under your direct control, and what were their characteristics?

– Taking into account the special nature of the department, almost every case examined in the department for the investigation of grave crimes has its sound, severity, differing from criminal proceedings in some circumstance. The investigation is assigned to the Division of Investigation of Grave Crimes, so it would be difficult for me to note any of them, as each is important and resonant in its own way.P> – How did you decide to choose the work of an investigator? Was it a childhood dream?

– No, it was not a childhood dream. I made that decision, having a person working in the same system in the family, my father, I liked that job, and I decided to continue his path.

– It is constantly mentioned that the investigators work very hard. Can you mention if there were any cases when you spent the night at work?

– There have been many such cases, but it was not forcibly, it was due to work, because in order to perform certain actions urgently, it is necessary to spend the night here, work at night, so that the work and actions to be performed are ready in the morning. In the grave crimes department, that is, during the last five years, there have been quite a lot of such days.

– Can you name the last case that made you to stay longer at work?

– 10 days ago in the case of attempted murder in Ajapnyak administrative district, we spent the night in the administrative building, not only me, but also the entire staff.

– How many investigative cases have you conducted at the same time?

– In the Division of Investigation of Grave Crimes, the number reached up to 15-20, and in the regional departments it was more, up to 30-35, although I mention this about the period when I worked years ago, because currently the areas are more overloaded, it even exceeds 100. At the moment, the workload is less and that is normal.

– Are there investigative activities that are more attractive and more interesting in the process of preliminary investigation?

– Having more than 10 years of investigative experience, it will be difficult for me to note any investigative case, because each of those had its own characteristics, interesting aspects, but in my subjective opinion, the most interesting for me are the searches, the inspections of the scene, that is, such investigative actions that are carried out are outside the office.

– Let’s talk a little more objectively. Have there been cases, or maybe there are signs by which you decide that the questioned citizen is lying?

– If you mean the behavior of a person, then it will be difficult for me to make such a claim, because, in my opinion, every person performs certain movements, actions, expressions in different situations, that is, it cannot be said unequivocally that every person performing a given action is lying. Basically, we make claims about lying as a result of the analysis of data obtained in criminal proceedings.

– Who lies more, men, women or children?

– It can be said that everyone is lying, because we are talking about the investigative body, criminal proceedings. Basically, everyone lies if it is about a person who is suspected or accused of committing an act, so I cannot make a distinction.

– What is the first thing that comes to your mind when talking about your work?

– Taking into account, as I mentioned, every criminal proceeding examined and examined in the serious crime investigation department has its own uniqueness, sound, and importance, so it will be difficult for me to remember any criminal proceeding that was examined before. I remembered the last case, which I already mentioned.

– Have there been cases when you received threats related to any criminal proceedings? What have you done in such cases?

– No, there was no such incident; therefore I did not take any action.

– Have you ever met on the street those accused in the cases investigated by you or persons whose convictions have been served, how did they behave?

– There were such occurrences, but their behavior was very adequate, they just greeted, and passed, no incident happened.

-Which jobs are the most difficult both mentally and in terms of the volume of work? Have there been times when you wanted to forget the details of a particular case?

– The criminal proceedings in which the victims are minors are definitely psychologically difficult, that is, every crime against minors is mentally very difficult for me both to examine, to communicate with the person who committed the crime, to be objective. I try to remember those criminal proceedings as little as possible and forget those, which have already been examined. During the years of working in the investigative department of Avan and Nor Nork Administrative Districts, I examined such proceedings regarding the lewd acts against a minor.

– Do you follow the ongoing court investigations and verdicts in your cases? Have you attended the trial?

– I follow the stage of the trial from open sources, whether a guilty verdict has been or will be made against the person or not according to the stages of the investigation. As a result of monitoring, I can also reveal the omissions and mistakes made during the preliminary investigation, and exclude them during future proceedings. I have never participated in a criminal trial. Considering my position, status, I refrain from participating, because it may be misunderstood by the defense side.

– Do you believe that the penitentiary institutions in the RA today help people to change?

– Definitely, I think so, because in many cases, having been in penitentiary institutions for the purpose of conducting investigative activities, it is quite an unpleasant phenomenon to have the iron door close behind you, I can say that because I have not been on the other side, I do not know, but I think it is quite difficult and heavy when you are limited in your location, actions, daily life. According to me, in order to avoid it, a person should not commit a crime.

– There have been terrible incidents in the recent period (Pemzashen, cases of mother humiliating and beating a child on live TV, committing sexual acts against an elderly woman, etc.). After that citizens began talking about the death penalty. What is your opinion about this, is there a need to restore the death penalty?

– I think no, because, according to my subjective opinion, the death penalty is a very easy punishment for such phenomena, just deprivation of life and that is it, and life imprisonment, in my opinion, is a much more severe punishment, and these people should live a very long, rather long and live a life in the penitentiary institution.

(source: iravaban.net)

RUSSIA:

Off with their heads----How possible would it be to reinstate capital punishment in Russia?

Following the deadliest terror attack in Russia in 20 years, calls for the reinstatement of the death penalty have been heard in the State Duma, the country’s lower house of parliament, but it remains to be seen just how realistic lifting the decades-long moratorium on the use of capital punishment in Russia might actually be.

Irreversible up to a point

A moratorium on the death penalty that suspended the use of capital punishment without abolishing it outright was introduced in 1996 as a condition for Russia to join the Council of Europe, and it has been repeatedly extended by Russia’s Constitutional Court since then.

The last time the Constitutional Court made clear its position was in 2009, when it argued that the death penalty moratorium was “irreversible” and that lifting it would be incompatible with Russia’s international obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights, which provides for the unconditional abolition of the death penalty.

However, law professor Ilya Shablinsky stressed that this opinion was very much a product of its time, mirroring as it did “the Russian political elite’s view”. Then, Vladimir Putin retained generally good relations with European leaders and Russia appeared to be entering a period of modernisation and liberalisation under Dmitry Medvedev’s caretaker presidency.

By 2024, though, it became politically convenient for “aggressive supporters of the war” within the Russian government to push for the return of the death penalty, Princeton University researcher Yevgeny Roshchin says.

A dangerous weapon

Political scientist and researcher at the University of California Berkeley Ilya Budraitskis warned that the Russian authorities were seeking to exploit public anger following the Moscow concert hall shooting to push through a return of capital punishment.

Renowned Russian lawyer Sergey Pashin agreed, calling the death penalty “a very dangerous weapon” that would “give the security forces unjustifiably terrible power” and spur them to “lawlessness”. He also pointed out that criminologists had yet to find any evidence that the abolition of the death penalty led to an increase in crime.

Nonetheless, statistics show that many Russians support the return of the death penalty. According to a survey by the independent Levada Centre carried out in 2021, 41% of Russians believed that the death penalty should be restored, up from 31% in 2015. Only 17% agreed that the death penalty should be abolished once and for all.

What Putin says goes

Article 20 of the Russian Constitution, which relates to the death penalty, protects a person’s right to life, but says that “until its abolition, the death penalty may be established by federal law as an exceptional measure of punishment for particularly serious crimes against life”.

The Constitution only allows the death penalty to be considered in a jury trial and individuals charged with terror offences are not tried by juries in Russia, which would make it impossible to sentence convicted terrorists to death even if the death penalty were reinstated, Senator Andrey Klishas argued last week.

Putin signed a law finalising Russia’s exit from the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in February 2023. However, the new law did not specifically abolish Protocol No. 6 that refers to the death penalty, which exists as a separate document.

Pashin points out that lifting the moratorium on the death penalty would be “legally extremely difficult” and would require amending a “protected” article of the Russian Constitution, 1 of the 3 chapters dealing with constitutional order and fundamental human rights that cannot be amended without first adopting a new constitution.

Article 20, which guarantees every person’s right to life and covers the death penalty, is in Chapter 2 of the Constitution and cannot therefore be amended by parliament, making changing it “practically impossible” according to Pashin.

Still, Shablinsky believes that if the Kremlin wanted to reinstate the death penalty, the Constitutional Court would follow Putin’s lead and “simply carry out the order”. Putin could use the situation to his advantage, Shablinsky adds, calling the Crocus City Hall attack “convenient” as Putin could “start talking about how Russia needs to defend itself in wartime”.

Nevertheless, Pashin doubts that Putin would support lifting the moratorium, as he has repeatedly spoken out against the death penalty in the past, promising that it would never again be used in Russia. Pashin believes that even if Russia’s security agencies and Duma deputies attempt to curry favour by handing the president the “weapon” of the death penalty, Putin would likely reject it.

Had the calls to reinstate capital punishment come from the Kremlin, however, the necessary legislation would have been pushed through, Pashin added.

Killers in the Kremlin

New life is breathed into the debate about reinstating the death penalty in Russia whenever a major terror attack occurs. For now, it’s too early to say if the authorities are sincere in their public calls to bring back capital punishment given that the same arguments are parroted after every high-profile crime, political analyst Fyodor Krasheninnikov said. “Such discussions are attempts to distract people from the failure of the intelligence and security services”.

Yevgeny Roshchin believes that the public discussion of the death penalty benefits those who support the war in Ukraine as increased societal hatred helps to support the “psychological mobilisation” of the country’s citizens.

Shablinsky worries that should the death penalty be reinstated, it would be used by the authorities to get rid of those who oppose the Kremlin regime and the parameters around its use would soon be widened to include treason and military crimes such as desertion or voluntary surrender.

Budraitskis agrees with this prediction: “Today those worthy of the death penalty are terrorists, tomorrow it will be their accomplices, the day after that it will be those who merely justify their actions.”

Yet it is not quite clear why the Kremlin would bother to lift the moratorium on the death penalty given that Putin already kills his political opponents, Krasheninnikov argues.

Shablinsky agrees: “People are already in prison for their views. The death penalty will be just another instrument of punishment in the regime’s arsenal”.

(source: novayagazeta.eu)

UGANDA:

Uganda court upholds anti-homosexuality death penalty bill

Uganda’s Constitutional Court has upheld the country’s draconian anti-homosexuality bill.

The bill – which carries the death sentence for “aggravated homosexuality” – was being challenged in the court by activists who argued it violates citizens’ constitutional rights to equality and dignity.

“We decline to nullify the anti-homosexuality act 2023 in its entirety, neither will we grant a permanent injunction against its enforcement,” Uganda’s deputy chief justice and head of the court, Richard Buteera, said of the decision.

However, the court did find that certain parts of the law violate citizens’ right to health and that it is “inconsistent with right to health, privacy and freedom of religion”.

Reacting to the news, human rights attorney Nicholas Opiyo said for the court to base “decision on public sentiments, purported cultural values, and unfounded/unsubstantiated allegations of recruitment into homosexuality is strange, to say the least”.

“We disagree with the findings but look forward to receiving their detailed reasoning and consulting on our next steps,” he said.