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

MAY 1, 2024:

|

TEXAS:

Witness describes conditions in Texas prisons to jurors considering death penalty

More than an hour of testimony outside the presence of the jury kicked off the 3rd week of Jerry Elders’ capital murder trial Tuesday, with the defense challenging a witness the state brought in to testify about life in Texas prisons.

Elders was found guilty of capital murder on April 25. The state then began its punishment case, hoping to convince a Johnson County jury that Elders should be put to death.

Authorities have said Elders shot Burleson police Officer Joshua Lott 3 times during a traffic stop in 2021, fled and then kidnapped Robin Waddell at her home, stole her truck, shot her and pushed her out of her truck outside the Joshua Police Department.

The defense objection to a witness from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice was overruled around 10 a.m. Tuesday. The objection claimed that the witness was being presented as an expert but hadn’t proven he was qualified. Arguments outside the presence of the jury led Visiting Judge Lee Gabriel to decide he was qualified for the testimony he would provide.

Timothy Fitzpatrick, who has worked in Texas prisons almost his entire adult life and primarily at maximum security facilities, told the jury he has been assigned to 9 prisons and seen almost every type of custody from state jail felonies to death row. He’s worked jobs from a corrections officer to senior warden. Currently he works in records.

Fitzpatrick told the jury that if sentenced to life without parole, Elders would be in the general population. He would be in either a cell block or dormitory, giving him more freedom to move between housing, showers, toilets and the day room, where he could watch TV and socialize with other inmates. He would also be able to attend religious services with other inmates outside the cell block or dormitory.

If sentenced to death, Elders would be in a “pod,” a solitary cell without the opportunity to socialize with other inmates, Fitzpatrick testified. There would be no interaction with other inmates and his toilet would be in his room, combined with a sink, and he would have a stool welded to the floor in front of a small desk or shelf. Religious services would be “cell-side,” meaning he wouldn’t leave his cell for them. There is a small day room death row inmates have access to with a bench, small TV and a pull-up bar.

Meals work differently for general population inmates and those on death row, too, Fitzpatrick said. The general population eats together in the dining hall. Death row inmates are ordered to stand back away from their door while a tray of food is placed in their cell. They eat alone.

Death row inmates aren’t allowed to attend college courses during their sentence, something those in the general population can access if they want, Fitzpatrick said. Both can get their GED, with death row inmates getting cell-side classes, but those sentenced to death can only take classes if they’re able to do it completely by mail.

The state’s line of questioning seemed intended to convince the jury that a sentence of life without parole would be too cushy for a capital murderer. They brought up incentives used for motivating inmates to clean their living spaces or work harder, such as movie nights or ice cream parties.

Those aren’t available to death row inmates, but if Elders is sentenced to life without parole he would be able to participate in those events, Fitzpatrick said.

The state has tried previously to show the jury video of Lott being shot as well as audio recorded from Elders’ phone calls in the jail. The admissibility of those was questioned by the defense and they still haven’t been presented to jurors.

(source: Fort Worth Star-Telegram)

APRIL 30, 2024:

PENNSYLVANIA:

LDF, PARTNERS FILE AMICUS BRIEF ARGUING PENNSYLVANIA’S FELONY MURDER LAW VIOLATES STATE CONSTITUTION

The Legal Defense Fund, The Antiracism and Community Lawyering Practicum at Boston University School of Law, and the Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality, filed an amicus brief with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in support of a Black man named Derek Lee, who is serving a mandatory life without parole (LWOP) sentence for felony murder even though he did not kill or intend to kill anyone.

The amicus brief demonstrates that racial discrimination infects Pennsylvania’s felony murder law, explains that the law disproportionately targets Black people—especially young Black teenagers—, and argues that the law’s application to people like Mr. Lee violates the state constitutional protection against “cruel punishments.”

According to a recent state-backed audit that was undertaken because of serious concerns about the cruelty and lack of fairness in the application of Pennsylvania’s felony murder law, Black people in Pennsylvania have been convicted of felony murder at a rate that is more than 21 times higher than for white people in the state. As the amicus brief explains, the racial bias and disparities for felony murder in Pennsylvania stand out even within a state prison population where Black people are significantly overrepresented because of racial bias in other aspects of society and the criminal legal system.

“In a state where Black people are already overrepresented at 47% of the prison population and 48% of those awaiting execution, Black people constitute 70% of those serving mandatory LWOP sentences for felony murder,” said Professor Robert Chang, Executive Director of the Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality. “The particularly extreme racial bias and disparities for felony murder suggests strongly that something is deeply wrong with how the felony murder statute is operating in Pennsylvania.”

These racial disparities are particularly concerning because there is strong evidence that Black people serving mandatory LWOP sentences for felony murder are on the whole less culpable than white people convicted under the same law. Compared to Black people convicted of felony murder, white people are 4.5 times as likely to be involved in kidnapping, 4.9 times as likely to be involved in sexual assault, and 6.0 times as likely to be involved in arson. Additionally, as the amicus brief explains, white people are more likely to be principals who acted alone, rather than accomplices, which strongly suggests, as the auditors found, that the “statute’s broad application to both principals and accomplices to a felony related to someone’s death has a greater netwidening effect on Black people overall.”

Pennsylvania’s felony murder statute also disproportionately targets Black youth, whose age and capacity for rehabilitation can never be considered under a mandatory scheme, adding to the cruel and excessive nature of mandatory LWOP sentences for people who did not kill or intend to kill anyone. Black 19-year-olds are the single most common group to be serving mandatory LWOP sentences for felony murder in Pennsylvania, and will spend a greater proportion of their lives in prison than older people who commit the same or more serious crimes. An 18 or 19 year old and a “75-year-old each sentenced to life without parole receive the same punishment in name only.” Graham v. Florda, 560 U.S. 48, 70 (2010).

“Pennsylvania has one of the most punitive felony murder laws in the country and applies this law in a manner that disproportionately condemns young Black people to die in prison,” said Professor Caitlin Glass, Director of the Antiracism and Community Lawyering Practicum at the Boston University School of Law. “Given disturbing evidence suggesting that racial bias influences felony murder prosecutions, Pennsylvania’s permanent incarceration of people convicted of felony murder—many of whom neither killed nor intended to kill anyone—cannot withstand constitutional scrutiny.”

“There are scores of people in Pennsylvania, a disproportionate percentage of whom are Black, who rehabilitated decades ago but remain condemned to die in prison even though they did not kill anyone nor intend to kill anyone. They have taken extraordinary steps to redeem themselves and want to be role models and youth counselors in their communities. Under the cruel mandatory sentencing scheme currently in place, they will never get that opportunity, and we all lose as a result.” Adam Murphy, Assistant Counsel, Legal Defense Fund.

# # #

(source: Founded in 1940, the Legal Defense Fund (LDF) is the nation’s first civil rights law organization. LDF’s Thurgood Marshall Institute is a multi-disciplinary and collaborative hub within LDF that launches targeted campaigns and undertakes innovative research to shape the civil rights narrative. In media attributions, please refer to us as the Legal Defense Fund or LDF. Please note that LDF has been separate from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) since 1957—although LDF was originally founded by the NAACP and shares its commitment to equal rights.)

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

Death penalty in consideration for 2 of 3 accused of murder, dismemberment

District Attorney Richard Wilson will potentially seek the death penalty for Terry Parker and Ronda Parker, who have been accused of the murder of Michael Pruitt that occurred in Springfield Township.

Terry and Ronda Parker face charges of conspiracy to commit criminal homicide, abuse of a corpse, and tampering with evidence in the murder of Michael Pruitt, which occurred in March of 2024.

Summer Heil, who is accused of helping to attempt to dispose of the body and destroy evidence, faces charges of tampering with evidence, two counts of abuse of a corpse, and hindering apprehension.

This ad unit is new and hasn't been set up yet for your publication. Contact support@empowerlocal.com and we'll get the item set up.

The trio, each with their own lawyers, went before Magisterial District Judge Wilcox for their preliminary hearing on Friday, April 26. While the defense attorneys fought for a reduction of charges and/or charges withdrawn, MDJ Wilcox ultimately favored on the side of the commonwealth, represented by DA Wilson.

In Wilson’s opening statement, he made clear what he would be attempting to prove: He claimed that in early March of 2024, Terry and Ronda Parker made an agreement to lure Pruitt to Ronda’s home and keep him there until Terry could ultimately kill him.

He continued by claiming that once Terry arrived to Ronda’s house, Terry shot Pruitt multiple times before eventually firing the fatal shot to the head. He then claimed that, once Pruitt was deceased, Terry and Heil dismembered the body and burned it in an attempt to cover up the crime.

He reiterated the claim that all of this proves it was a conspiracy, a plan, to kill Pruitt.

The 1st of 12 witnesses called to the stand was Ronda Parker’s adult daughter, who was the first to report the alleged murder to the Pennsylvania State Police.

She testified to receiving text messages via Facebook Messenger on March 11 from her mother. The messages were allegedly screenshots of a conversation between Terry and Ronda Parker discussing the murder and, according to DA Wilson, went into detail describing how they allegedly killed Pruitt.

Ronda’s daughter testified that she was at work when she received these messages, along with a call from her mother in which she allegedly explained the situation.

Ronda’s daughter further explained in court that after she received this information she called 911. The dispatcher then transferred her call to PSP Towanda, who took her statement before she eventually went into the station.

The second witness called to the stand was PSP Towanda’s criminal investigation supervisor Corporal Jason Rasmus.

Rasmus testified to being notified of a possible homicide and eventually arriving on the scene of Ronda’s home in Springfield Township.

Wilson presented Rasmus, along with the judge and the defense attorneys, with an abundance of crime scene photos. Rasmus examined and explained each photo for the court.

The photos presented included the burn pit that contained the alleged remains of Pruitt, presumed blood on boxes and the side of the hallway in the home, a woman’s boot with what appeared to be human remains on the bottom, the area in which Pruitt was alleged dismembered, the kitchen that appeared to have a newly painted wall, the back hallway where the floor had been removed, and much more.

Rasmus testified that the wall of the kitchen appeared to have been newly painted when he arrived on scene, as there was also a paint bucket and paint brush. During cross-examination, Heil’s lawyer Matthew Diemer questioned the relevance of this, as Diemer claimed that Rasmus could not know exactly when the wall had been painted and, therefore, cannot prove it was removed due to the alleged crime.

Diemer continued this claim with the hallway floor being removed, but Rasmus stated that the inside of the home, specifically the floor, was filthy but the area in which the floor was removed was not. Rasmus stated that, because of this area not being soiled, he assumed the floor had been removed very recently.

The next witness to testify was fire marshal and PSP Corporal Justin Landsiedle, who explained he is experience in investigating fires with fatality and is a designated fire investigator.

He testified that, in reviewing the fire and raking through it, he smelled the unmistakeable odor of burning flesh and eventually found identifiable bones and joints. He further found that a tire was used for the fire, as he stated tires burn hotter and longer than wood.

Following him, Dr. Joe Adserias-Garriga, a forensic anthropologist and professor at Mercyhurst University, testified via Zoom.

She testified that she received photos from the PSP on March 11 and was on the scene to examine the remains with her students on March 12. In examining the remains, she and her students found what appeared to be potential bones and skeletal material, such as parts of a cranium, upper and lower limbs, ribs, vertebra, teeth, and jawbone.

She further testified that the remains were from a single individual and within those remains, she found evidence of gunshot trauma. She explained that, while she did not find a bullet, she found shards of metal belonging to what is believed to be a bullet within two areas of the remains.

During cross-examination from Diemer, Adserias-Garriga further stated that she found evidence of burning and dismemberment of the remains due to there being cut marks, or chop marks, to the body.

During Terry Parker’s lawyer Cornelius Rotteveel’s cross-examination, he asked the doctor to choose between an axe and a chainsaw in explaining the weapon used to dismember the body. She stated that, although she does not know the weapon used and is still examining the remains, she believes that the trauma found is more closely related to an axe rather than a chainsaw.

The next witness called was Trooper Cody Scepaniak, who testified to driving to Harrisburg on March 11 to interview Terry Parker.

Scepaniak stated before the court that Terry did not initially admit to anything regarding the murder. He further stated that when he asked Terry about the alleged bones found in the burn pit, Terry claimed they were animal bones.

Scepaniak testified that, after some time of interviewing Terry, he allegedly changed his story multiple times before he admitted to knowing Pruitt was deceased and further admitted that he and Heil had helped to dismember him.

A clip of this interview was played in court before the defense lawyers offered cross-examination.

Rotteveel showed some frustration toward Scepaniak when Rotteveel asked if the trooper could identify whether Terry was on drugs at the time of the interview, to which Scepaniak responded that he could not.

The following witness called to testify was Harrisburg PSP Trooper Michael Gragg, who testified via Zoom. Gragg explained that he served a search warrant on Terry’s residence in Harrisburg, where he allegedly discovered a Walmart brand axe along with two black-powder pistols in Terry’s bedroom closet.

Gragg’s testimony went alongside Luke Rosenbaugh, who works for Walmart’s investigation and security team out of Arkansas. Rosenbaugh became a part of the investigation as he supplied PSP with security footage, which allegedly captured Heil and Terry Parker purchasing an axe, shovel and three pairs of gloves at a self-checkout in a Walmart in Harrisburg.

This security footage was played in court, to which PSP Trooper Matthew Santiago testified to discovering the receipt for the gloves in Terry’s vehicle after serving a search warrant. Santiago further testified that the receipt for the axe and shovel was provided by Walmart.

PSP trooper Nathan Lewis was next on the stand, testifying to his interview with Ronda Parker. Lewis explained that he had to travel to Wellsburg, N.Y. in order to transport Ronda to the Towanda barracks.

Lewis further testified that Ronda allegedly explained that Pruitt arrived to her residence around Tuesday and was killed Friday evening. Ronda allegedly further explained the events of Friday evening to the trooper, stating that the shots began in the kitchen before Pruitt ran into the bedroom, where Ronda was with her 1-year-old child.

Lewis testified that Ronda described Terry as “excited but calm” during the incident and that she also apparently admitted to helping clean up the crime scene.

During cross-examination from Terry’s attorney, Lewis also testified that Ronda admitted to helping Terry lure Pruitt to her residence knowing what the outcome would be.

Trooper Miranda Musik’s testimony followed and led to the second abuse of a corpse charge added to Heil’s existing charges.

Musik testified to interviewing Heil, who allegedly told Musik that Terry and Ronda lured Pruitt to the home before explaining her role in dismembering the body. During the interview, Heil apparently further told Musik that Terry dismembered Michael with an axe while she helped by holding the limbs.

Heil’s additional charge comes from her alleged admission to Musik that she stabbed Pruitt’s body in the chest twice and the head once after he was deceased. An audio recording of Heil’s interviewed was played in court.

Wilkes-Barre PSP Trooper David Kittle’s testimony followed. Kittle testified to searching Terry’s vehicle and allegedly discovering a dashboard camera and Wilson provided photos of both the camera and the interior of Terry’s vehicle.

PSP Trooper Michael Morariu testified to analyzing the footage of the dashboard camera, which allegedly portrays Terry and Heil in the vehicle on March 10 at 11:56 p.m. discussing the plan to murder Pruitt. A portion of this footage was played in court.

Terry’s defense attorney mentioned the video being difficult to hear and understand during cross-examination. He also stated that the footage occurred after Pruitt was allegedly murdered and only includes Terry telling Heil about a conversation he had with Ronda rather than an actual plan for murder.

The defense called no witnesses for the preliminary hearing.

Ronda’s lawyer, chief public defender Patrick Beirne, asked the judge to dismiss Ronda’s charges.

Heil’s lawyer, Matthew Diemer, argued that two counts of abuse of a corpse was not applicable. Diemer also argued that tampering with evidence and hindering apprehension was not applicable due to the fact that Heil allegedly did not believe she was going to be in a murder investigation.

Terry’s lawyer, Cornelius Rotteveel, asked the judge to dismiss Terry’s criminal homicide charges since Terry allegedly cooperated and admitted to tampering with evidence. Rotteveel also argued that Ronda placed the blame on Heil and Terry, but not herself.

In Wilson’s closing statement, he reiterated what was presented to the court by the commonwealth and the witnesses. He argued that Heil knew what she was doing when she agreed to helping Terry and Ronda. He argued that Ronda helped Terry lure Pruitt to her residence, which shows the criminal conspiracy along with the Walmart purchase of three pairs of gloves. He ended in arguing that Terry admitted to killing Pruitt in the dashboard camera footage and showed no remorse.

Ultimately, MDJ Wilcox sided with the commonwealth.

In a later statement, Wilson explained that the charges were bound over on all of the accused, including the additional charges placed against Heil. He also explained that the next step will be the defendants’s formal arraignment, but the date is unknown as of now. Wilson explained that he will “decide whether to seek the death penalty” against Terry and Ronda “on or before that formal arraignment.”

(source: thedailyreview.com)

FLORIDA:

Judge denies 2 motions challenging execution, aggravating factors in Wade Wilson case----The motions challenged the legality of execution by lethal injection and the use of aggravating factors in the case.

About a month after a judge denied 6 motions filed by a man facing the death penalty for the 2019 murders of 2 women, he ruled against 2 other motions and in favor of 2.

Lee Circuit Judge Nicholas Thompson on April 25 denied two motions filed in the capital murder case against Wade Wilson, 29, of Fort Myers. The motions challenged execution by lethal injection and aggravating factors in his case.

Thompson on April 18 ruled in favor of two motions, although they're sealed in court records.

Wilson is charged with the first-degree murder of Kristine Melton, 35; grand theft of Melton's car; battery on Melissa Montanez, 41; first-degree murder of Diane Ruiz, 43; burglary of a dwelling belonging to Kent Amlin or Fannie Amlin; and petty theft from Kent Amlin or Fannie Amlin.

Since January, Wilson has challenged recent changes to death penalty recommendations by jurors; sought separate trials for the different charges; sought to bar victim impact evidence at trial; and hoped three aggravating factors would be dismissed in his case, alleging unconstitutionality.

Melton and Ruiz were killed within days of each other in October 2019. Melton was found dead in her home; Ruiz’s body was found in a field days after her disappearance.

Wilson was indicted by a Lee County grand jury in November 2019. He has been at the Lee County Jail since October 2019.

State prosecutors have said in court documents that on Oct. 7, 2019, Wilson stole Melton's car after killing her and visited Montanez in Melton’s car and use Melton’s cellphone to contact Montanez.

After Wilson attacked Montanez, Gardiner said, he fled in Melton's car and encountered Ruiz in Cape Coral, where police say he killed her and repeatedly drove over her body using Melton's car.

Wilson then entered a nearby business, where he confessed the homicides to an acquaintance. When the acquaintance dialed 911, Wilson fled on foot and broke into a nearby home, leading to the latter 2 of the 6 charges.

Authorities found Ruiz's body in Melton's car, along with both women's cellphones, according to court documents.

Wilson has at least twice faced additional charges since his initial incarceration at the Lee County Jail for the 2019 homicides. In April of last year, he faced charges in a narcotics scheme.

In October 2020, Wilson, along with a man accused in a domestic violence case, was thwarted in a bid to escape Lee County Jail.

Wilson and his cellmate at the time, Joseph Katz, 33, were both involved, authorities said.

The sheriff's office report said Wilson was the primary planner and instigator of the attempt.

Wilson is next due in court June 3.

(source: Fort Myers News-Press)

ALABAMA----impending execution

EXECUTION SET AS STATE MISCONDUCT REVEALED

Jamie Mills is scheduled to be executed in Alabama on 30 May 2024. He was convicted in 2007 of the murder of an elderly couple in 2004 and sentenced to death after the jury voted 11-1 for the death penalty. There is new evidence that the key prosecution witness, then facing the same capital murder charges as Jamie Mills, was offered a plea deal in return for her testimony, something the state denied at the trial. We urge the Governor to recognize that executive clemency serves as a failsafe against injustices left unremedied by the courts and to commute this death sentence.

TAKE ACTION: WRITE AN APPEAL IN YOUR OWN WORDS OR USE THIS MODEL LETTER

The Office of Governor Kay Ivey

State Capitol, 600 Dexter Avenue

Montgomery, AL 36130, USA

Email: https://contact.governor.alabama.gov/contact.aspx

Fax: +1 334 353 0004

Dear Governor

I am writing to urge you to grant clemency to Jamie Mills, who is scheduled to be executed in Alabama on 30 May 2024. In so doing, I do not seek to downplay the seriousness of violent crime or its devastating consequences.

It is deeply troubling that after more than a decade and a half of the state denying that there was any plea deal promised to the prosecution’s key witness in return for her testimony, it would now seem that this was false. That witness was herself facing capital murder charges in the same crime for which Jamie Mills now faces imminent execution. Her lawyer signed an affidavit earlier this year making clear that there was a deal agreed with the Marion County District Attorney in return for her testimony, that the capital murder charge, the death penalty, and the sentence of life without the possibility of parole would all be taken off the table if she testified against Jamie Mills.

The UN Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors require prosecutors to “respect and protect human dignity and uphold human rights, thus contributing to ensuring due process and the smooth functioning of the criminal justice system.” The District Attorney’s conduct in this case appears to have failed to comply with this standard, thereby bringing the criminal justice system into disrepute and undermining the integrity of the trial process, as well as confidence in the jury’s verdict. It is possible that, if the jury had known of any such deal, it would have weighed the testimony of this witness differently, and may have reached a different verdict, at either stage of the trial. International safeguards state that “Capital punishment may be imposed only when the guilt of the person charged is based upon clear and convincing evidence leaving no room for an alternative explanation of the facts.”

Without a court fully examining this new evidence on the merits, executive clemency remains the only route for remedy. I urge you to take that path.

Yours sincerely,

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

UA: 35/24 Index: AMR 51/7986/2024 USA Date: 29 April 2024

An 87-year-old man was found dead at his home in Guin, Alabama on 24 June 2004 with cause of death determined to be blunt and sharp force injury to his head and neck. His 72-year-old wife was also found, with multiple injuries.

She was alive, but died two and a half months later, with cause of death deemed to be complications associated with blunt force trauma. Money and medication were taken from their home. Jamie Mills and his common-law wife JoAnn Mills were arrested after items were found in the boot (trunk) of their car, including medication belonging to the victims, as well as clothing and tools with the victims’ blood on them.

Jamie Mills was charged with capital murder and tried in 2007. The state’s evidence consisted primarily of the testimony of JoAnn Mills (who had also been charged with capital murder) and the evidence of the items found in their car. JoAnn Mills testified that the day before the murders, she and her husband had stayed up all night smoking methamphetamine, and that the following day they went to the victims’ home to look for money for drugs and there Jamie Mills bludgeoned the couple. She testified that after they returned home, her husband called “BH”, a known drug user in the area, who came and purchased some of the pills. Jamie Mills’ defence was that he was innocent, that JoAnn Mills was lying, and that BH, who had been an initial suspect after being arrested with the victims’ pills and a large amount of cash, and who had been at the Mills’ home many times (including twice on the day of the murders), could have framed him, including by putting the items in the trunk of their car, which had no working lock.

JoAnn Mills had initially told police in two different statements that she suspected BH had planted the weapons in their car, and that he had brought stolen items to their home in the past.

In a later, third, new and different statement, she implicated Jamie Mills. At the trial, the prosecutor told the jury in closing arguments that the defence had failed to impeach JoAnn Mills’ credibility, and that she had been made no promises in return for her testimony. She herself testified that she had received no deal and asserted that her testimony would leave her still facing the possibility of the death penalty or life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. The prosecutor likewise testified there was no deal with JoAnn Mills. The defence lawyer further asked: “Not a promise, not a maybe, not a nudge, not a wink? Because we think it stretches the bounds of credibility that her lawyer would let her testify as she did without such an inducement.” To which the prosecutor responded “There is none… Have not made her any promises, nothing”.

The jury convicted Jamie Mills of capital murder. By 11 to one, the jury voted for the death penalty, which the judge imposed on 14 September 2007. Ten days later, the state dismissed the capital murder charges against JoAnn Mills.

She pleaded guilty to murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment with the possibility of parole.

On 26 February 2024, JoAnn Mills’ lawyer signed an affidavit stating that prior to his client’s testimony in 2007, the prosecutor had indeed promised to forgo the death penalty in her case and agreed to a life sentence with the possibility of parole if she agreed to testify against Jamie Mills. The affidavit reads: “Prior to Jamie Mills’ trial, I had several discussions” with the Marion County District Attorney (DA) “about a plea offer… Prior to testifying in Jamie Mills’ case, JoAnn and I met with [the DA] and the victims’ daughter. I presented JoAnn’s tragic mitigation history.

Based on JoAnn’s terrible childhood, the victims’ family agreed for JoAnn to get a plea to life with parole if she testified truthfully at Jamie Mills’ trial” and the DA agreed that he would “not pursue the capital charge” but rather “would agree to a plea to murder”.

This would mean that the DA lied when he told the trial court that JoAnn Mills testified without a “nudge”, or a “wink” or a suggestion or promise of a plea deal. It also means that JoAnn Mills’ response – “no” – elicited from her by the prosecutor’s question to her on the witness stand – whether there had been “any deals, offers or anything like that made to you” – was false. Moreover, her statement that she understood that following her testimony she would still “get either life without parole or death by lethal injection” – was also untrue.

Not just at the trial, but during post-conviction proceedings and appeals in state and federal courts, the state has asserted that at the time of Jamie Mills’ trial, the prosecution had no plea agreement with its central witness. When the US District Court upheld the conviction and death sentence in 2020, the federal judge wrote: “JoAnn testified at trial that she had not made any deals in exchange for her testimony. Mills thoroughly cross-examined her regarding whether she had made any deals in exchange for her testimony. The prosecutor stated that the State had not made any promises to JoAnn; that the State had not suggested that a promise might be made after she testified truthfully; and that there was not any inducement whatsoever for JoAnn’s testimony.” Lawsuits have now been filed by Jamie Mills’ lawyers in state and federal court with this new evidence revealed in the affidavit.

Every capital defendant must be given all due process guarantees under Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the USA ratified in 1992. International safeguards state that “Capital punishment may be imposed only when the guilt of the person charged is based upon clear and convincing evidence leaving no room for an alternative explanation of the facts.” There have been 1,587 executions in the USA since 1976, 73 of them in Alabama. Amnesty International opposes the death penalty unconditionally.

PLEASE TAKE ACTION AS SOON AS POSSIBLE UNTIL: 30 May 2024.

(source: Amnesty International USA)

TENNESSEE:

Tennessee bill authorizing death penalty for child rape awaits Gov. Lee's decision

A Tennessee bill that would authorize the death penalty as a punishment for rape of a child sits on Gov. Bill Lee's desk.

This bill allows prosecutors to go after the death penalty when it comes to heinous crimes against children, like sexual assault of a child under the age of 12. It passed both the House and the Senate last month.

Legislators say the person convicted would have to be 18-years or older. Supporters believe this would act as a deterrent. Critics say it might make it harder for the victim to come forward, especially if it's a loved one.

Republican Rep. William Lamberth disagrees, reading a letter from a victim.

“Since he was my grandfather, I would agree to the death penalty. Even for him. He molested many generations. And this needs to stop,” Rep. Lamberth said. But others believe different measures can be taken.

“It doesn't help them heal. And it also doesn't ensure that folks come forward. We can do the same thing by other means. There is no need to take this step. Of course, child rape is horrifying. No one should have to endure it,” Rep. Gloria Johnson said (D-Knoxville).

Gov. Lee has 10 days to sign or veto the bill. If there’s no signature, the bill becomes law.

(source: WZTV news)

ARKANSAS:

Arkansas Supreme Court Decision Allows New DNA Testing in Case of the ?“West Memphis 3,” Convicted of Killing 3 Children in 1993

On April 18, 2024, the Arkansas Supreme Court decided 4-3 to reverse a 2022 lower court decision and allow genetic testing of crime scene evidence from the 1993 killing of 3 8-year-old boys in West Memphis. The 3 men convicted in 1994 for the killings were released in 2011 after taking an Alford plea, in which they maintained their innocence but plead guilty to the crime, in exchange for 18 years’ time served and 10 years of a suspended sentence.

“This is monumental,” said Damien Echols, the only man originally sentenced to death for the crime and the defendant seeking the additional testing. “We appreciate the [Arkansas Supreme Court] giving this ruling and hope we can now once and for all solve this case, clear our names and find the person responsible for carrying out these horrendous crimes,” he said in a statement.

In the majority opinion, Justice Karen Baker wrote: “It is undisputed that Echols has been convicted of a crime, and as a result, he is entitled to seek relief pursuant to Act 1780.” Crittenden County Circuit Judge Tonya Alexander had previously denied Mr. Echols’ request for additional testing in 2022, interpreting state law to require defendants to be incarcerated at the time of a new DNA testing request.

Stephen Braga, lead defense counsel, expressed support for the recent ruling “upholding the plain language of the statute,” and explained to CNN that this “opens up the possibility that key evidence in the case can now be tested with the most advanced technology possible.” However, attorney General Tim Griffin, whose office argued the case, expressed his disappointment, stating the new ruling “undermines finality in long-closed criminal cases and will result in unserious filings,” and encouraged the legislature to clarify the law. Justice Barbara Webb shared similar sentiments in her dissenting opinion, writing that the ruling “obliterates any sense of finality in our criminal justice system.” She explained, “Their interpretation of Act 1780 means anyone who has ever been convicted of a crime — whether or not they be in State custody — can seek DNA or other scientific testing even if such testing would not prove that individual’s innocence.”

Specifically, the defense team seeks to use new technology, known as the M-Vac wet vacuum system, to carry out additional DNA testing on the victims’ shoelaces that were used to tie their own arms and legs together, as well as additional items of clothing. In 2020, defense counsel had reached an agreement with then-prosecuting attorney Scott Ellington to conduct such testing. But in 2021, Keith Chrestman, who replaced Mr. Ellington as prosecutor, directed Mr. Echols’ team to petition the court for permission.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

UTAH:

Even defense attorney struggles to understand double homicide suspect

For Utah defense attorney Edward K. Brass, the decades have not diminished how ominous it was to meet with clients at the Salt Lake County Jail that no longer exists.

“The old jail was in the basement adjacent to the courthouse, and it was difficult to get in and out of,” Brass said. “(The entrance) was very dark, reeked of oil and gasoline.”

The structure confronted attorneys with two underground entry points, unreliable fluorescent lighting, and a sour stench. Years later, Brass could still summon the memory of the odor. He found the smell as uninviting as the hulking metal doors that blocked both entrances.

“It had very heavy doors, and if one of the doors was left ajar, you could get stuck in an elevator or stuck in a visiting area for a long time,” he said.

Utah defense attorney brings star power to death penalty case

After Michael Moore’s parents learned their only son would be facing the death penalty for confessing to killing 32-year-old Jordan Rasmussen and 24-year-old Buddy Booth, they hired a very well-known defense attorney in Utah. Their choice: a chain-smoking, fast-talking, absolutely fearless man named Robert Van Sciver.

Van Sciver became locally famous for his legal knowledge, his flair for the dramatic and his hair.

“It was parted on the side,” Brass said, “but he was going bald and he was very vain about that. And so he would spend an inordinate amount of time every day, literally sort of knitting his hairstyle together – and using hairspray to make sure that it stayed in place.”

And Van Sciver brought the same kind of meticulous care – and confidence – to every courtroom fight.

“(He was a) very confident man, very capable trial lawyer,” Brass said. “I learned a lot from him. He was absolutely fearless. He’d take on any case. He was not afraid of anyone — he was a very brave guy.”

As an attorney practicing for around 5 years, working alongside veteran Utah defense lawyer Van Sciver made this Brass’s second death penalty case. He did whatever his mentor needed. And sometimes that meant writing legal briefs. Sometimes that meant visiting new clients in the jail.

A tough place to try and get to know someone

The room where attorneys met with their clients made up the worst aspect of those jail visits. It was a room the size of a walk-in closet, secured by a heavy, unwieldy door that locked the second it slammed shut. The room trapped attorneys in the visiting chamber with no way to communicate with the outside world.

It was a tough place to try and get to know someone.

“There was a mesh screen. You know, a wire mesh screen with heavy gauge wire, so that you couldn’t see the face of the person you were talking to. (That) for me is a huge disadvantage,” Brass said.

“I can’t really tell what kind of emotions a person is showing without being able to see their face. …It’s an important component in judging whether or not you’re getting accurate information, I think.”

Ed could only make out the rough contours of Michael Moore’s face as they began to talk.

“My memories of the 1st meeting were … this is a pretty ordinary guy,” Brass said. “That Michael is just a guy off the street. And didn’t seem like a person that had a lot of problems outwardly. Just seemed like a totally normal person.”

Ed knew the basic facts, and he knew about Moore’s confession. But he hoped to learn about Michael’s background. Get his perspective, and try to understand what led him to kill two people – one of whom he didn’t even know.

A baffling double murder suspect

The more Ed learned, the more baffling it all was.

Police arrested Michael Patrick Moore when he was 25 years old. He was born and raised in Salt Lake City — the only child of devout Catholic parents. He attended private Catholic schools and dreamed about attending medical school one day.

One old Salt Lake Tribune article about Moore said schoolmates called him ‘the shadow.’ Friends said Moore always wore suits to school, and never played sports. On Sundays, the Moore family arrived first at their Catholic church and always sat in the front pew.

Everyone described Michael as extremely intelligent. He even volunteered to help his coworkers study for their chemistry and calculus classes. He worked at Log Haven for 7 years, rising from groundskeeper to general manager.

Friends said the job helped transform him from shy to outgoing and friendly.

Brass couldn’t piece together a picture of this man that made sense. Most of the people in his situation have life-long struggles with drugs, alcohol and at least some criminal issue. Moore did not.

“All of a sudden, he’s involved with killing 2 people,” Brass said. “That was hard to wrap your head around at first.”

It wasn’t just Michael’s lack of criminal history that made his actions so hard to understand. It was his demeanor as they discussed what happened at Log Haven the morning of the murders.

“He was always very calm,” Ed said, “Very calm, and very well-spoken. Very bright.”

As he tried to conjure up a picture of Michael through the heavy mesh screen, it was almost as if he wasn’t talking to a person who’d snuffed out the lives of 2 young fathers. Or, a person who now faced the possibility of a firing squad.

“The thing that stunned me the most was that after talking about the fact that he killed two people, he thought that the police would see it his way and he was gonna get released,” Brass said. “He still thought that when I saw him (days later). There was just no question in his mind; he was going to be released.”

How prosecutors viewed their suspect

While the defense team struggled to understand why Moore murdered two men at Log Haven, prosecutors saw no such ambiguity.

“Michael Moore’s story was that he was in fear of his life. He had been told ‘You’re in danger with these folks,’” recalls prosecutor TJ Tsakalos. “And I’m going, ‘well, where is it that you would be so afraid that you had to take the gun for …the meeting that you called, and then shoot two people over it?’

“…I couldn’t get into his head as to why he was thinking the way he was thinking. …I came up with the term chameleon. I thought he could change colors to manipulate you. So my theory was, he made it up to try to justify what he did.”

None of them had to wait long for answers. Just six months after the murders, Michael Moore sat in a courtroom above that labyrinth of tunnels to the jail trying to convince a jury he didn’t deserve to face a firing squad for what he’d done.

“This homicide occurred in March and we were trying it by August the same year,” Tsakalos said. “This was on a fast track. It got done.”

Never a question of guilt or innocence

While the stakes don’t get any higher than a death penalty case, in this instance, there was never a question of guilt or innocence.

In fact, both sides would rely on the same basic facts. Michael Moore shot Jordan Rasmussen after driving him up the canyon on the morning of March 5, 1982. And then he killed Buddy Booth when he arrived while Michael was trying to dispose of Jordan’s body.

Then there was a long list of physical evidence, and, of course, that detailed confession.

Defense attorney Ed Brass said the Utah legal team knew they were fighting long odds.

“I think that we had the pair of twos as far as playing the poker hand goes,” he said.

And everyone knew the real fight was whether the 25-year-old should face a firing squad or spend his life behind bars. Prosecutor John T. Nielsen called it a ‘slam dunk’ death penalty case. Both families supported the efforts to send Moore to the firing squad.

“I remember seeing Michael Moore across from me,” said Buddy Booth’s widow Carla Maas. “ And him just looking at me. And it kind of – it scared me. It made me very nervous.”

And then prosecutors showed her the clothes her husband wore to work that day.

“It was bloody,” she said. “It was really tough. And all I could do was cry.”

And yet more than sadness spawned her tears.

“I was angry,” Maas said. “(And) was furious because …Why would he kill an innocent man? … I didn’t think he deserved to be on this earth…for killing two people. I felt that he deserved to die, as well.”

(source: kslnewsradio.com)

CALIFORNIA:

Death penalty under question as trial starts in slaying of Sacramento Officer Tara O’Sullivan

Venerando Jojie Ramos, the brother of Sacramento police Officer Tara O’Sullivan’s accused killer, grabbed a fistful of tissues to wipe his teary eyes as he paused while testifying Monday about his father’s bloody death.

He began to describe how his brother, then-5-year-old Adel Sambrano Ramos, began to press on his father’s wounds to stem the blood gushing “everywhere” in their home in the Philippines.

The testimony came during a bench trial in which Adel Ramos’ defense attorneys seek to show their client suffered trauma and developed intellectual disabilities. Sacramento Superior Court Judge James Arguelles will then decide if Ramos has the mental capacity to be tried for the death penalty in O’Sullivan’s death.

Adel Ramos, now 50, has pleaded not guilty to 13 counts, including the murder of O’Sullivan and attempted murder of other police officers, in a June 2019 North Sacramento standoff.

O’Sullivan, a 26-year-old rookie officer who had graduated just 6 months earlier from the Sacramento Police Department Academy, was shot as she attempted to help Adel Ramos’ girlfriend, Megan Jansa, move out of her home on Redwood Avenue. O’Sullivan died from gunshot wounds at a hospital.

Supporters of O’Sullivan filled 3 rows in the gallery to watch Monday’s proceedings.

Defense attorneys Jan Karowsky and Pete Kmeto will call upon Adel Ramos’ family, friends and a psychologist during the bench trial scheduled to last until next week. On Monday, they called upon witnesses who testified about Adel Ramos’ abusive uncle and the defendant’s inability to follow directions.

Ramos’ family members said the defendant was “stupid” while growing up. He mostly kept to himself, testified Gregorio Ramos, a childhood friend.

But prosecutor Jeff Hightower, who will call upon investigators and his own expert psychologist, argued Adel Ramos has no mental issues. That’s proven in part by the highly complex methods Adel is accused of deploying during the 8-hour standoff with law enforcement in 2019, Hightower argued.

The defendant dropped out of 9th grade while attending school in the Philippines by choice, Hightower argued in his opening statements. He began working in his early teen years and eventually brought his brothers to the U.S. to escape an abusive uncle, Hightower said.

Adel Ramos worked at McDonald’s before eventually establishing a 17-year career in the construction industry as a skilled carpenter, Hightower said. He was never fired because of his intellectual abilities, he said.

A workplace injury ended Adel Ramos’ career, after which he supported his family by selling marijuana and assembling firearms, Hightower said.

His intellectual abilities also shined when he established numerous barriers around his home during the standoff with police, Hightower said. Adel Ramos had live surveillance footage of his entire home looped back to him, and guns and hundreds of bullets were stashed around his home before police arrived, authorities said.

He also modified guns to fire faster with more bullets, Hightower said.

“He is navigating this world perfectly,” Hightower said.

(source: The Sacramento Bee)

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

Alameda County DA sets up hotline for those impacted by recent review of death penalty cases----Price investigating all 35 existing death penalty cases for possible evidence that Black and Jewish people were excluded from juries

Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price said her office has set up a hotline for those impacted by 35 death penalty cases that are under review over possible prosecutorial misconduct.

The DA’s office, which is reaching out to victims and survivors affected by the cases, released a phone number and email for anyone directly impacted the cases who hasn’t yet been contacted.

Victim-witness advocates can be reached at (510) 208-9555, and by email at shawn.mitchell@acgov.org. Lawyers are also available to answer questions about the status of each case.

On Monday, Price announced she is investigating all 35 of the county’s existing death penalty cases for possible evidence that Black and Jewish people were excluded from juries because of their race.

Price said her office was ordered to look into the cases by U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria after potential wrongdoing was found during the resentencing settlement of Ernest Dykes.

Dykes was convicted in 1993 of the attempted murder of Bernice Clark and the murder of her 9-year-old grandson Lance Clark during an attempted robbery and sentenced to death in 1995, according to Price’s office.

The cases go back as far as 1977 and it’s unclear how long the review process will take or how many prosecutors might have blocked jurors because of their race.

(source: thepleasantonweekly.com)

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

Did The Exclusion of Black and Jewish Jurors Impact Dozens of Death Penalty Cases?----Alameda County Prosecutors allegedly kept Black and Jewish people off of juries in death penalty cases.

A shocking allegation of racial bias in death penalty cases in Alameda County, California, could have massive implications for dozens of death penalty cases in the northern California county that encompasses Oakland.

Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria ordered a review of 35 death penalty cases in the county dating back decades after evidence emerged that prosecutors, in prior decades, were excluding Black and Jewish jurors in death penalty cases.

The allegations emerged amid an appeal hearing for Ernest Dykes, a 51-year-old Black man who was sentenced to death in 1995 after being convicted of murdering the 9-year-old grandson of his landlord Bernice Clark, and her attempted murder. Dykes previously won a stay of execution, arguing that he was not given a fair trial. And in 2019, Governor Gavin Newsom declared a moratorium on executions statewide.

According to Judge Chhabria, jury selection notes written by prosecutors and shared with Dyke’s defense team seemed to show a “pattern” of automatically excluding Black and Jewish jurors in death penalty cases.

“These notes—especially when considered in conjunction with evidence presented in other cases—constitute strong evidence that, in prior decades, prosecutors from the office were engaged in a pattern of serious misconduct, automatically excluding Jewish and African American jurors in death penalty cases,” wrote the judge.

The allegations cast further doubt on a system plagued by racial inequality. Black Americans are significantly overrepresented on death row. And Black Americans whose victims are white, are much more likely to receive the death penalty.

The notes from Dykes trial weren’t the only evidence of misconduct. “We have notes made by prosecutors in some of the cases, which indicates that Jewish jurors were being identified as Jewish and that Black people were being identified as Black and that they did not end up on the jury,” said Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price during a press conference. “And that has occurred in a number of cases.”

Price, who is Black, did not mince words when discussing the alleged wrongdoing of her predecessors.

“When you intentionally exclude people based on their race, their religion, their gender or any protected category, it violates the Constitution,” she said at a press conference last week. “The evidence that we have uncovered suggests plainly that many people did not receive a fair trial in Alameda County.”

(source: theroot.com)

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

San Quentin death row inmate found dead in his cell may have taken own life

A man who was condemned to death row at San Quentin State Prison in 1998 was found dead in his cell Monday and authorities are investigating it as a suicide, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

Daniel Jenkins, 68, was discovered unresponsive in his cell and pronounced deceased by Marin County Fire Medical Emergency Services at 6:59 a.m., according to the state.

The cause of death is pending the results of an autopsy; however, the death is being investigated as a suicide.

Jenkins was sent to death row on Oct. 6, 1998 in Los Angeles County for 1st-degree murder armed with a firearm, conspiracy to commit a crime, and 1st-degree attempted murder, according to the CDCR.

Jenkins was convicted of killing an off-duty Los Angeles Police Department Detective in 1985 as he picked up his 6-year-old son from daycare. The officer had just testified in a case against Jenkins.

(source: CBS News)

USA:

Man Charged With Carjacking Resulting In Death

In Orlando, Florida, United States Attorney Roger B. Handberg announces the filing of a complaint charging Jordonish Garcia Torres (28, Orlando) with carjacking resulting in death. If convicted, Garcia Torres faces a maximum penalty of death or life imprisonment.

According to the complaint, on April 11, 2024, Garcia Torres carjacked a woman at gunpoint in Winter Springs, Florida, and forced her to drive to a location in Osceola County where she was murdered by gunshot and burned while in her vehicle.

A complaint is merely a formal charge that a defendant has committed 1 or more violations of federal criminal law, and every defendant is presumed innocent unless, and until, proven guilty.

This case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office, with assistance from the Osceola County Sheriff’s Office, the Drug Enforcement Administration, Homeland Security Investigations, the St. Cloud Police Department, the United States Postal Inspection Service, and the United States Marshals Service. It will be prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Stephanie McNeff and Michael P. Felicetta.

This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the Department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results.

(source: justice.gov)

CURACAO

Curaçao implements new law: No extradition to death penalty countries

Curaçao has taken a firm stance against extraditing individuals to countries where the death penalty is a possibility. With the upcoming implementation of amendments to the extradition law for Aruba, Curaçao, and Sint Maarten on May 1st, this decision reflects a commitment to human rights and justice.

According to Article 1 of the amendments, which includes sections 2b and 2c, individuals will not be extradited if the requesting country imposes the death penalty for the alleged crime. The only exception would be if the governor is sufficiently assured that such a penalty will not be executed.

These significant changes, along with others, have been detailed in the "Publicatieblad" A2024 number 33. Spanning 15 pages, these amendments are set to come into effect on May 1st, marking a pivotal moment in Curaçao's legal landscape.

This move underscores Curaçao's commitment to upholding fundamental human rights principles and ensuring fair treatment for all individuals, regardless of their circumstances. By enacting these amendments, Curaçao joins a growing number of nations taking a stand against the death penalty and reaffirming their dedication to justice and humanity.

(source: Curacao Chronicle)

DR CONGO:

Tshisekedi Defends Return Of Death Penalty

President Félix Tshisekedi of Democratic Republic of Congo has defended the lifting of moratorium on death penalty arguing that it will be the best way to deal with traitors and infiltration in the country’s army.

The Congolese leader currently visiting France said during an interview with the press that the Congolese parliament took the decision, although controversial, to lift the moratorium on the death penalty.

“Although the Democratic Republic of Congo wants to be resolutely committed to respect for Human rights and to the rule of law, it cannot afford the luxury of any passivity when its security and that of its population is threatened,” said Tshisekedi.

According to him, “the ultimate objective pursued remains the guarantee of the security and well-being of all Congolese citizens while respecting international standards in terms of human rights and justice”.

Tshisekedi said that the lifting of the moratorium on the death penalty will apply in particular to soldiers accused of treason against the nation.

According to the government, the reinstatement of executions aims to “rid our country’s army of traitors and to stem the resurgence of acts of terrorism and urban banditry leading to human deaths”, said Rose Mutombo, the Minister of Justice.

The poor performance of the Congolese army and its auxiliary militias in the face of the advancing M23 has fueled suspicions among the authorities of infiltration of the security forces. It is in this context that the High Defense Council requested to the Head of State to consider reinstatement of the death penalty to punish traitors.

Since mid-March, the government of the Democratic Republic of Congo has opted to reinstate the death penalty. While human rights organizations immediately denounced this decision, Kinshasa considers it a firm and determined “appropriate” response to put an end to treachery within the army.

(source: taarifa.rw)

TANZANIA:

MP advises govt to abolish death penalty

SPECIAL Seats MP Shally Raymond (CCM) has urged the government to abolish the death penalty due to many sentences not being carried out due to various reasons including the right to life.

However, she has asked the government to implement the advice given by MPs on the castration of men found guilty of rape and defiling.

Shally made the argument yesterday in the National Assembly when debating the Ministry of Constitution and Legal Affairs estimates for 2024/25 tuned at 441.26bn/-.

"He who is found guilty finds himself serving a long prison term against his sentence while those who accused him fail to see justice being done. I recommend that this penalty be cancelled if its implementation is not possible," she said.

She asked the Minister to provide the parliament with the statistics of death sentences carried out to the present since the enactment of the law to hang criminals so that legislators know the actual situation of the implementation of the law.

"It is better that a bill be brought here in parliament for amendment so that everyone knows that the government is not ready to implement the death penalty," she said.

She further challenged the government to provide information on the delay in criminal proceedings, especially murder proceedings citing the case of her relative’s murder which has been in court for more than ten years now despite the arrest of the suspect.

Regarding cases of rape and defiling of children, the Member of Parliament asked the government to strengthen the punishment against those found guilty of such offences.

She argued that such cases have not been handled properly where the accused are granted bail and returned to the streets regardless of the harm they caused to the victims.

"Bail is the right of the accused, but for these crimes, a bill should be brought to parliament to amend the bail procedure for those accused of these crimes to be effectively held accountable," she said.

She added that due to these crimes continuing to be committed against children of all genders, it is time for the government to see the importance of adopting the idea so that these people are dealt with properly.

(source: ippmedia.com)

INDONESIA:

Ministry Of Foreign Affairs: 166 Indonesian Citizens Face The Death Penalty Abroad

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs noted that 166 Indonesian citizens (WNI) are currently facing the threat of the death penalty abroad.

"Most of the cases are recorded in Malaysia related to narcotics trafficking, then others are spread across other countries such as in the Middle East, namely related to murder," said Director of Protection for Indonesian Citizens and BHI of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Judha Nugraha, quoted by ANTARA, Tuesday, March 5.

Based on gender, Indonesian citizens who face the death penalty consist of 133 men and 33 women.

Meanwhile, based on the case, Indonesian citizens who face the death penalty for being involved in the murder case of 58 people and drug trafficking cases 108 people.

"In various handling efforts, because this is a case that we classify as a high profile case, we want to make sure the state is present from the beginning of the case," said Judha.

He ensured that the government through Indonesian representatives abroad provided legal assistance by providing lawyers and translations for Indonesian citizens.

Indonesian citizens are sought to gain consular access so that their rights can be fulfilled during the legal process.

"The role of the government (Indonesia) here is not to provide impunity, so we will not intervene in the substance of the case in court because it is the jurisdiction and sovereignty of local law," said Judha.

In addition to legal assistance, the government is also making diplomatic efforts, especially for cases that have been decided to have permanent legal force (inracht), including through sending a letter of application for pardon from the Indonesian ambassador and from the President of the Republic of Indonesia.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is also trying to carry out a family engagement and a family reunion to bring the families of Indonesian citizens together with Indonesian citizens in prison.

"This is important to give them the opportunity to let go of each other's longing, so they feel more comfortable because they can have direct contact with their families," said Judha.

(source: voi.id)

TAIWAN:

ANALYSIS/Key arguments from constitutional court's debate on death penalty

Taipei, April 30 (CNA) Taiwan's constitutional court debated the constitutionality of the death penalty on April 23, in a case brought by 37 petitioners who are currently on death row.

Throughout the 5-hour-long debate, attorneys representing the petitioners, Ministry of Justice (MOJ) officials, and expert witnesses offered their opinions and answered questions from the justices.

Here are 5 of the main themes covered:

1. The death penalty violates the right to life and equality, and it violates the principle of proportionality

The main argument made by the petitioners' attorneys was that the provisions of the death penalty in Article 33 of the Criminal Code and other laws violate the "the right of existence" and the guarantee of equality enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of China (Taiwan's official name).

Attorney Lee Hsuan-yi argued that the state and society should not "abandon, discriminate against, or exclude" any individual and stressed that "embracing each and every one with an equal heart" is the "fundamental requirement" of the Constitution.

Another attorney for the petitioners, Nigel Li, contended that every individual has their human dignity and deserves to be treated with respect and equality, and that killing a person because they are too evil would violate the core values of the Constitution.

No one, including judges, is entitled to end the life of another person, Li said.

"Based on the rule of law, we condemn the defendant who commits murder," he said. "Let us not...respond to violence with violence."

Kuo Yung-fa, head of the MOJ's Department of Prosecutorial Affairs, responded that while the Constitution upheld "the right of existence," it also allowed for "restrictions," including in Article 23, which is used as the basis for the proportionality argument.

The "deprivation of life" imposed on those who commit the most serious offenses should be considered a form of restriction, Kuo said, calling the death penalty "the last resort" available to judges.

Court proceedings have been "very rigorous" in recent years, as only 1 of 476 murder cases in Taiwan from 2019 to 2023 resulted in a final court ruling handing down a death penalty sentence, Kuo said.

Taiwan's legal system also allows for appeals that can help prevent wrongful verdicts, Kuo added.

Given those circumstances, the death penalty does not violate the right to existence nor infringe upon human dignity, and it was in line with the principle of proportionality required by the Constitution, Kuo said.

Li disagreed, questioning if the sacrifice of taking away a life was proportional to the benefit of strengthening an unsubstantiated deterrent effect.

2. The Taiwanese public supports the death penalty

The MOJ said opinion polls it has commissioned show that around 80 percent of Taiwanese support keeping the death penalty.

Attorney Chen Shu-chen, who spoke on behalf of the Association for Victims Support (VAS), cited the group's 2024 poll in which 87 of the 90 respondents who had a family member murdered in the past three years approved of the current practice.

"The public has strongly expressed their stance," Chen said, urging the court not to "ignore [public opinion]."

Another attorney for the petitioners, Jeffrey Li, countered by citing Judicial Interpretation No. 603, which said opinion polls could only serve as a reference, not a basis, for constitutional court interpretations because they were not always credible.

He also contended that the MOJ had "oversimplified" the results of opinion polls, which hinted at more support for abolishing the death penalty if there were alternatives.

A survey commissioned by the MOJ in 2008 found that 56 % of Taiwanese would approve of ending the death penalty if alternatives, such as life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, were in place, he said.

3. The death penalty violates a United Nations' treaty on civil rights

Activists opposed to the death penalty have long cited the United Nations' International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Taiwan codified into domestic law in 2009, to support their case, and it sparked debate.

The petitioners' attorneys argued that the death penalty violated Article 6 of the convention, which asserts "the inherent right to life" and that "no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life."

Nigel Li also cited the final clause in the article, which reads: "Nothing in this article shall be invoked to delay or to prevent the abolition of capital punishment."

The MOJ argued, however, that the article essentially calls for limiting the application of the death penalty.

It stipulates that a "sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes in accordance with the law," the MOJ's Kuo said, arguing that the offenses committed by the 37 petitioners were consistent with that description.

Lin Li-ying, a Supreme Prosecutors Office prosecutor, said a Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR was actually aimed at abolishing the death penalty, but that Taiwan never agreed to it.

4. The constitutional court should not determine the fate of the death penalty

Chien Mei-hui, deputy head of the MOJ's Department of Prosecutorial Affairs, asked the court to leave the death penalty issue to the discretion of the Legislative Yuan, Taiwan's lawmaking body.

The constitutional court should "fully respect [Taiwan's] policy on crime and the legislature's discretionary authority" and refrain from breaching the principle of the separation of powers, Chien argued.

She said countries such as Germany, the United Kingdom and France had taken decades, or even a century, to formulate "a political consensus" in society before pushing for the abolition of the death penalty.

Similarly, Cheng Shan-yin, an honorary law professor at Kainan University, argued that allowing "a few people" to decide such a contentious issue, referring to the 12 justices reviewing the case, is "dangerous" and that the law should conform to "a collective belief system."

Yen Chueh-an, a National Taiwan University law professor, disagreed.

The issue of the death penalty revolves around the question of the boundaries of state authority, Yen said, arguing that addressing such matters "is essentially the duty and function of a constitutional court."

Yen also defended the legitimacy of the court in handling the matter, saying the justices' authority was derived from the people because they were nominated by the president and approved by lawmakers, both of whom are popularly elected.

5. The death penalty does not deter crime

Speaking for the petitioners, Nigel Li said that while some justified the death penalty as a deterrent against crime, such a belief lacked "empirical evidence."

According to Li, studies done in Taiwan on this topic have not separately examined the deterrent effect of the death penalty and life imprisonment, and it was therefore impossible to know how effective the death penalty is in deterring crimes, he argued.

Jimmy Hsu, a research professor at the Institutum Iurisprudentiae of Academia Sinica, retorted, however, that if the court were to declare the death penalty unconstitutional due to its lack of a proven deterrent, it would open the door for challenges to the legitimacy of life imprisonment and fixed-term imprisonment on similar grounds.

With 3 justices having recused themselves from the case, the remaining 12 are expected to make a judgment in July at the earliest.

According to the Constitutional Court Procedure Act, a majority of the judges presiding over the case would have to rule in favor of the petitioners for the death penalty to be overturned.

In the event that the justices end up in a 6-6 tie, they will convene further discussions until a judgment is reached.

(source: focustaiwan.tw)

INDIA:

Accused gets death sentence in Kerala

(see: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kozhikode/accused-gets-death-sentence-in-kerala/articleshow/109717859.cms)

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

HC stays death penalty order in 2014 Bengali couple murder case

(see: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/dehradun/hc-stays-death-penalty-order-in-2014-bengali-couple-murder-case/articleshow/109706618.cms)

MALAYSIA:

2 ex-cops's death sentence commuted, jailed 40 years for 'execution-style murder' of Indonesian mechanic

2 former policemen who were convicted for the murder of an Indonesian man in 2011 escaped the noose after the Federal Court today commuted their death sentence to a maximum of 40 years' jail.

A 3-judge panel led by Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, who sat with Justices Datuk Nordin Hassan and Datuk Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera, made the unanimous decision to set aside the death penalty.

They ordered wheelchair-bound Corporal Ailias Yahaya, 70, and Lance Corporal Saiful Azlan Shah Abdullah, 60, to serve the sentence from the date of their arrest on Jan 22, 2006.

Earlier, deputy public prosecutor Tetralina Ahmed Fauzi objected to the duo's application to have their death sentences replaced with imprisonment.

Ailias and Saiful Azlan, who were the applicants, were convicted of the murder of mechanic Yusrizal Yusuf by the Shah Alam High Court.

Tetralina described the crime committed by the duo as rare, as the deceased, from the time of his arrest to his death, was under their control.

The deceased, she said, was arrested by the duo at the Sungai Pelong police station in Kuala Selangor following a report made against him.

"Ailias had told two prosecution witnesses that they could beat and vent their anger on the deceased when he was detained at the station's meeting room.

"The two had beaten, punched and kicked the deceased until he bled and there were blood stains on the room's wall, carpet and notice board.

"The applicants and a prosecution witness had brought the deceased, who was handcuffed, to Ladang Caledonia in a car.

"Saiful Azlan borrowed a pistol from an accused who had been acquitted and discharged. He ordered the deceased to alight from the car and kneel.

"He shot the deceased in his head thrice from behind while Ailias stood at the front, according to a prosecution witness.

"The shots were fired at close range between 6 to 10 feet and the shots were fired from a pistol which is government property belonging to the police.

"The applicants, as policemen, had abused their power and took the law into their own hands with the execution-style murder.

"On these grounds, the prosecution as respondent, requests for the application to be dismissed and for the death sentence to be upheld, If not, a maximum jail term should be imposed," she said.

In reply, defence counsel Muhammad Fadhli Sutris said an imprisonment of 30 years was appropriate for the duo due to their age and poor health conditions.

He said Ailias and Saiful joined the force in 1976 and 1982 respectively. They had received certificates of appreciation as well as excellence service awards for their work.

He said it was not a rare case involving police, citing an example of former cop Mohamed Ya'cob Demyati who was convicted for the murder of singer Sabi'ul Malik Shafie, better known as Along Spoon.

"I humbly and respectfully ask the court to impose an imprisonment of 30 years on them.

"If they are given jail from 35 up to 40 years, I am not sure if they can survive, given their health condition," he said.

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

Man who stabbed girlfriend to death escapes death penalty

A former construction company manager who murdered his Indonesian girlfriend by stabbing her 28 times 6 years ago was spared the death sentence by the Court of Appeal today.

A 3-judge panel chaired by Justice Datuk Hadhariah Syed Ismail, in a unanimous decision, substituted the death penalty imposed on Sobri Abdul Wahab with a 30-year jail term and 12 strokes of the rotan.

Hadhariah said the Shah Alam High Court did not err in its decision, adding that its conviction against Sobri, 46, was safe.

"There is no merit in Sobri's appeal and his plea of insanity at the time of the incident could not be proven.

"The conviction is upheld but the death sentence is replaced with 30 years' jail and 12 strokes of the rotan," she ruled.

She ordered him to serve the jail sentence from the date of his arrest on March 10, 2018.

In mitigation, defence counsel K.A Ramu pleaded that his client was insane and was not under medication at the time of the incident.

"He could have fled the country if he was of sound mind after the murder," he said.

Deputy public prosecutor Ng Siew Wee objected to the plea.

"He behaved normally, and he was not medically insane," she said.

On Dec 31, 2021, the Shah Alam High Court sentenced Sobri to death after finding him guilty of the murder.

Judge Datuk Abd Halim Aman, in his judgment, said schizophrenia was not the cause of Sobri's action at the time of the incident.

He said Sobri was aware that he committed the murder.

He was charged with the murder of Gusnima, 38, at an apartment in Section U8, Bukit Jelutong, Shah Alam, between 6pm and 8pm on March 10, 2018.

It was reported that prior to the incident, Sobri had gone to her house to ask her to marry him.

(source for both: nst.com.my)

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

Ex-storekeeper’s death sentence for strangling girlfriend commuted to 30 years’ jail

The Federal Court here today commuted the death sentence of a former storekeeper to 30 years in jail for strangling his girlfriend with her headscarf almost 16 years ago.

Shahrul Nizam Mohd Shah’s application for a review of his death sentence under the Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023 was granted today by a 3-member panel, including Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Federal Court judge Datuk Nordin Hassan and Datuk Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera.

Justice Tengku Maimun, who delivered the court’s decision, set aside the death sentence and substituted it with a 30-year jail term.

She ordered Shahrul Nizam to serve the sentence starting from the date of his arrest on October 8, 2008.

Shahrul Nizam, 51, was found guilty by the High Court in Shah Alam in 2010 for killing his colleague, Nurul Hazira Bharum, 26. He committed the crime after learning that she was going to marry another man.

The offence was committed at his rented house in Kampung Gombak in Kuang, Rawang, Selangor between 9am and 10am on October 7, 2008.

His appeals were dismissed by the Court of Appeal and Federal Court in 2012 and 2015 respectively.

In his defence, Shahrul Nizam told the High Court that he and Nurul Hazira, a clerk, had planned to commit suicide by drinking poison “like Romeo and Juliet,” claiming that Nurul Hazira forced him to drink the poison first causing him pass out.

Shahrul Nizam said that when he woke up, Nurul Hazira was already dead, and he ran to a neighbour’s house for help. He claimed that Nurul Hazira had confided in him, saying she was not in love with the man who proposed to her and instead asked Shahrul Nizam to marry her. However, he wanted her to wait as he had no money.

A post-mortem report revealed that Nurul Hazira died of suffocation due to strangulation and that no poison was found in her body.

His lawyer Subash Ramasamy requested the court to set aside the death sentence and substitute it with a 30-year jail term. Deputy public prosecutor Tetralina Ahmed Fauzi did not object to the application.

(source: malaymail.com)

PAKISTAN:

Court hands over capital punishment to husband, imposes fine Rs five lac for killing wife

The husband, who mercilessly murdered his wife on suspicion, has been sentenced to death by the court, while the additional sessions judge Kot Addu pronounced death penalty for the criminal.

The court handed over capital punishment to Allah Bakhsh, who brutally killed his wife on suspicion, and also imposed a fine of Rs. 500,000 on the convict.

The culprit will also face an additional 6 months in jail for non-payment of the fine.

According to prosecution a case of murdering his wife has been registered against him at the Mahmood Kot police station. Last year, he had brutally murdered his wife on mere suspicion within the jurisdiction of Mahmood Kot police station.

(source: app.com.pk)

SAUDI ARABIA:

Halt Executions of Child Offenders----Death Penalty for Alleged Crimes Committed as Children

Saudi Arabia’s court of appeal in April 2024 approved death sentences for two Saudi men for protest-related crimes allegedly committed as children, Human Rights Watch and 26 other organizations said today in a joint statement. Saudi authorities should immediately halt executions for child offenders.

Saudi Arabia’s Specialized Appellate Court upheld the death penalty sentences for Yousif al-Manasif and Ali al-Mabyook, for alleged crimes they committed when they were between the ages of 14 and 17 and referred the cases to the Supreme Court for final approval. Al-Manasif and al-Mabyook, both from the eastern province, where most of the country’s Shi’a minority live, were arrested between April 2017 and January 2018 and appeared before a court in 2019.

“Saudi Arabia is investing billions of dollars in major entertainment and sporting events to distract from its repressive rights environment, while people charged with crimes as children remain on death row,” said Joey Shea, Saudi Arabia researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Saudi Arabia should quash the decision to execute al-Manasif and al-Mabyook and start living up to its promise to end the child death penalty.”

The charges on which the young men were convicted were almost entirely based on their confessions. Human Rights Watch has documented rampant abuses in Saudi Arabia’s criminal justice system, including coerced confessions against children later sentenced to death, that make it highly unlikely that al-Manasif and al-Mabyook received a fair trial. At least 5 people sentenced to death as children remain in danger of execution at any moment.

The Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which Saudi Arabia is a party, includes an absolute prohibition on capital punishment for crimes committed by children. Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all countries and under all circumstances as it is unique in its cruelty and finality and is inevitably plagued with arbitrariness and error.

“If the Saudi leadership genuinely wants to be seen as a rights-respecting country, it needs to immediately halt all execution orders and commute all death sentences, including the egregious cases of al-Manasif and al-Mabyook.” Shea said.

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

Escalating Concerns Over the Lives of Minors Threatened With Death in Saudi Arabia

The undersigned organizations express their grave concern for the lives of minor defendants particularly the two young men, Yousif Al-Manasif and Ali Al-Mubaiouq, who are at imminent risk of execution in Saudi Arabia following confirmed information that the Specialized Criminal Court of Appeal (SCCA) has upheld their death sentences. Their cases were therefore referred to the Supreme Court which will render a final judgment. Approximately a year ago, the Supreme Court upheld final death sentences against Ali al-Subaiti. In addition, final death sentences had been approved by the Supreme Court about a year ago for both Abdullah Al-Derazi and Jalal Al-Labad. The Supreme Court is considered the final judicial stage before execution, which occurs after the king's signature.

Considering Saudi Arabia's past practices, it is difficult to predict the exact time frame between case referral to the Supreme Court, its approval, and execution. Previous cases indicate that the lives of the minors sentenced by “discretionary punishment” (taazir), are at imminent risk of execution.

As it is expected that there will be cases of minors that have not been identified, with the latest developments, the situation of minors who have been monitored by organizations to have received death sentences:

Jalal Al-Labad and Abdullah Al-Derazi: The sentence has been approved by the Supreme Court and execution can occur at any moment after the king's signature. Yousif Al-Manasif and Ali Al-Mubaiouq: The sentence is currently before the Supreme Court.

Jawad Qureiris and Ali Al-Subaiti: The sentence is before the specialized criminal appellate court.

Mahdi Al-Mohsen: A preliminary sentence from the specialized criminal court.

The Saudi Arabia authorities subjected the young men to human rights violations while in detention, including enforced disappearance, solitary confinement for months, and various forms of torture. The risk of execution is exacerbated by the fact that the judiciary in Saudi Arabia is not independent and is thereby unable to protect individuals against arbitrary death sentences. Individuals who are charged for acts related to their peaceful activism, are usually sentenced on the basis of the counterterrorism law and torture-trainted confessions are used as sole evidence for their conviction.

The undersigned organizations point out that the approval of new death sentences against individuals who are sentenced for acts committed as minors, contradicts Saudi Arabia's narrative that it has halted juvenile death sentences. For instance, in a statement announcing the promulgation of Royal Decree No. 46274, the Saudi Human Rights Commission mentioned that the death penalty against such individuals and against minors would be annulled. Saudi Arabia has reiterated this announcement on multiple occasions before the Human Rights Council and in other international human rights foras. This is in addition to a flagrant violation of its international obligations, given that Saudi Arabia is a state party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which clearly prohibits the death penalty against minors.

Despite this announcement, Saudi Arabia executed the minor Mustafa Al-Darwish in June 2021 and continued issuing and approving similar death sentences. Instead of halting executions, the government has resorted to cryptic and unsubstantiated responses to communications from UN special rapporteurs regarding their cases.

Since the beginning of 2024, Saudi Arabia has executed 47 individuals. 12 of these sentences were issued by the Specialized Criminal Court. The Ministry of Interior did not specify the nature of the sentences issued against them, but they are likely taazir sentences.

The undersigned organizations believe that the approval of new death sentences against minors exposes the reality of Saudi Arabia's successive promises regarding the death penalty in general and the death penalty against minors in particular. It is impossible to envisage reforms or changes without immediately halting arbitrary death sentences, especially against minors on charges that are not considered the most serious, and after unfair trials.

Undersigned organizations:

ACAT-Belgium (Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture)

ACAT-Germany (Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture)

ACAT-Liberia

Arab Council Foundation

ALQST

Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy (BIRD)

Capital Punishment Justice Project (Australia)

Children Education Society (CHESO)-Tanzania

Death Penalty Focus

ECPM (Together against the death penalty)

European Saudi Organization for Human Rights

Federal Association of Vietnamese Refugees in the Federal Republic of Germany

German Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (GCADP)

International Harm Reduction Organization (HRI)

Human Rights Watch

Legal Awareness Watch Pakistan (LAW)

Legal Defence and Assistance Project (LEDAP)

MENA Rights Group

Mwatana for Human Rights

NUFC Fans Against Sportswashing

Organization Abolition Death Penalty of Iraq

Project on Middle East Democracy

Salam for Democracy and Human Rights (SALAM DHR)

The Advocates for Human Rights

The Transitional Justice Working Group - TJWG (South Korea)

Americans for Democracy & Human Rights in Bahrain (ADHRB)

World Coalition Against the Death Penalty

(source for both: Human Rights Watch)

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

Human rights organizations urge Saudi Arabia to end executions of child offenders

A global coalition of human rights organizations sounded the alarm on Monday over the fates of young men facing imminent execution in Saudi Arabia for crimes allegedly committed when they were minors.

In an open letter, the advocacy groups argued that Saudi Arabia’s decision to move forward with the executions of several young men for crimes committed when they were minors flies in the face of the nation’s planned reforms and international standards.

The advocacy groups, which included global organizations like Human Rights Watch and the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty, as well as regional and national groups from around the world, wrote:

The approval of new death sentences against minors exposes the reality of Saudi Arabia’s successive promises regarding the death penalty in general and the death penalty against minors in particular. It is impossible to envisage reforms or changes without immediately halting arbitrary death sentences, especially against minors on charges that are not considered the most serious, and after unfair trials.

The letter focused on 7 young men, most of whom are members of the country’s Shi’a religious minority, and all of whom have been sentenced to death for crimes allegedly committed between the ages of 14 and 17. The Shi’a minority makes up some 10-15 % of Saudi Arabia’s population, according to the US Commission on International Religious Freedom.

The country’s Specialized Criminal Court of Appeal (SCCA) recently upheld the death sentences of 2 of these men — Yousif Al-Manasif and Ali Al-Mubaiouq. Once the Supreme Court rules, the Saudi king will be presented with the execution orders to sign. Execution can occur at any moment thereafter, and per the human rights groups, timing is often difficult to predict.

The SCCA decision placed Al-Manasif and Ali Al-Mubaiouq among the ranks of several other young men awaiting execution as a result of offenses allegedly committed when they were minors, including Jalal Al-Labad and Abdullah Al-Derazi, whose execution orders are awaiting the king’s signature; Jawad Qureiris and Ali Al-Subaiti, who are awaiting SCCA appeals rulings; and Mahdi Al-Mohsen, who has been preliminarily sentenced to death by the SCCA.

The groups also slammed Saudi authorities for human rights violations experienced by young detainees, including “enforced disappearance, solitary confinement for months, and various forms of torture.”

Saudi Arabia has long been criticized for its prolific and public use of the death penalty, including for non-violent crimes. Last September, Amnesty international Director for the Middle East and North Africa Heba Morayef wrote:

In August alone, Saudi Arabia executed an average of 4 people per week, including 1 Pakistani man who was executed for drug smuggling. The death penalty is prohibited under international law for drug-related offences, which do not fall under the category of “most serious crimes.”

Amid broader efforts to rehabilitate their international reputation, Saudi authorities have claimed in recent years they planned to end capital punishment for juvenile offenders and non-violent crimes, but have failed to deliver on these vows.

(source: Ingrid Burke Friedman, JURIST Editorial Director----jurist.org)

SYRIA:

Including Malaysian aviation engineer | HTS carries out exec*ution against 9 people in April

HTS carries out the death penalty against those accused of “working for an opposition party and those involved in killings and bombings”, while the courts run far from the media, in a step that doesn’t differ from the policies implemented against prisoners inside the regime’s prisons.

Prisoners face the most severe types of torture, cruel treatment, illegal deprivation of liberty, and “forced absence” in prisons, despite repeated search attempts by the detainees’ families, but the final result is inevitable death.

SOHR activists documented 9 cases of execution by HTS including a Malaysian person, in April.

(source: syriahr.com)

IRAN---executions

10 Inmates Executed in Shiraz, Isfahan, and Qaen, Kahnuj----In recent days, 10 inmates were executed in various prisons across Iran, including Dastgerd Prison in Isfahan, Qaen Prison, and Adelabad Prison in Shiraz, as well as Kahnuj Prison.

The Iran Human Rights Organization reported the execution of 3 inmates convicted of murder in Adelabad Prison, Shiraz, on April 21. The executed individuals were identified as Hossein Tavana Kodiani, 49; Taleb Akbari, 43; and Reza Masroor, 43, a father of 2.

The 1st inmate had committed murder 4 years ago. The 2nd individual was involved in a murder during a fight, while the 3rd, a farmer, committed murder in a dispute over farm water.

According to Haal Vsh, on April 28, 2024, 3 inmates were executed for drug offenses in Qaen Prison, located in South Khorasan province. 2 of the inmates were identified as Mohsen Karami (Rakhshani), 27, and Brahui (1st name unknown). Karami was arrested for drug offenses 4 years ago. A source cited in the report mentioned that these inmates did not have a final visit with their families before their execution.

Haal Vsh also reported the execution of 3 inmates in Dastgerd Prison, Isfahan, on April 29. One of the individuals was identified as Din-Mohammad Mirakhani, a resident of Iranshahr. All 3 were convicted of drug offenses.

Lastly, the Baloch Activists Campaign reported the execution of Mehdi Bamari, aged 24, in Kahnuj Prison in Kerman Province. He had been convicted of murder 2 years ago and was executed on the same day as the other inmates.

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.

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)

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

Iran’s death sentence for rapper sparks protests and undermines criticism of US----Regime’s effort to exploit US campus crackdown damaged by treatment of Toomaj Salehi

An Iranian court’s decision to pass the death sentence against Toomaj Salehi, a popular Iranian rapper and regime opponent, has led to international protests and damaged Iran’s fledgling efforts to exploit crackdowns on unrest in US university campuses over Gaza as an abuse of human rights.

Crowds gathered in the US, Europe and Canada on Sunday to support Salehi, while dozens of political prisoners in Iran’s Ghezel Hesar prison issued a statement condemning the death sentence, calling it “the culmination of gross human rights violations in Iran”. Salehi has also won the support of major US rappers, as well as human rights groups.

The Iranian press has been closely following the campus unrest in the US and France, including reports that 900 American students have been detained in April. The social media account of the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said: “See what is happening in the world. In western countries, in England and France, and in states across the US itself, people are coming out in huge numbers to chant slogans against Israel and America. US & Israel’s reputation has been ruined. They truly have no solution.”

But even some reformist Iranian newspapers said the regime’s propaganda in the international arena had suffered reputational damage as a result of the surprise decision to issue the death sentence against a singer associated with defiance, but not violence against the regime.

Ever since he shot to prominence, Salehi has been distinguished by his personal bravery and determination to help unite the Iranian Women, Life, Freedom movement.

Salehi was arrested in October 2022 in Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari province after making public statements in support of the nationwide protests caused by the death in police custody of Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old Kurdish Iranian woman arrested for allegedly wearing an “improper” hijab.

After reports by UN experts that he had been beaten in jail, in July 2023 he was handed a jail sentence of 6 years and 3 months.

In November last year, after more than a year in jail including more than 200 days’ solitary confinement, the supreme court released him on bail due to a technical flaw in the sentencing – only for him to be arrested again by plainclothes officers two weeks later. He had recorded a song outside the jail in which he had been held, claiming he had been tortured in jail including through adrenaline shot injections.

In a surprise move last week the Isfahan revolutionary court raised his punishment to the death penalty, a decision that has been described as unprecedented. In what may be a sign of a power struggle between the two courts, he was sentenced for “corruption on Earth”. He has 20 days to appeal.

The actor Nazanin Boniadi told a rally at the weekend: “When he takes to the streets, when he puts pen to paper, when he uses his voice, the regime trembles. Why? Because he speaks for the people. Things that the people do not dare to say, he says.”

Kaveh Shahrooz, a Canadian activist in Toronto, said he was personally blown away by Salehi’s courage. “There are people outside Iran in this city who are scared of talking and Toomaj was talking about them inside. His talent and his empathy and social conscience are hard to deny and his courage is hard to believe and his courage is contagious.”

Iran is in the throes of a new crackdown against women deemed to be flouting the Islamic dress code and is also increasing executions, the number of which, according to the Norway-based Iran Human Rights, has already reached 147 this year.

Salehi has previously said that Iranians “are living somewhere horrific. You are dealing with a mafia that is prepared to kill an entire nation in order to keep its power, money and weapons.”

His uncle in Germany Iqbal Iqbali said Iran was “at a stage where the explosion of the anger of the Iranian people against boundless tyranny is imminent”.

(source: The Guardian)

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

Iraj Sanambari Executed in Arak

Iraj Sanambari, a man on death row for drug-related charges, was executed in Arak Central Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a man was executed in Arak Central Prison on 27 April. His identity has been established as 37-year-old Iraj Sanambari who was sentenced to death for drug-related charges.

An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Iraj Sanambari was arrested for drug offences around 3 years ago and sentenced to death.”

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

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.”

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

Ali Movahedi Executed in Karaj

Ali Movahedi, a man sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder, was executed in Karaj Penitentiary.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a man was executed in Karaj Penitentiary (Karaj Central Prison) on 18 April. His identity has been established as Ali Movahedi who was sentenced to qisas for murder.

An informed source told IHRNGO: “Ali Movahedi was transferred to solitary confinement in preparation for his execution a day prior (17 April) to his execution. He was arrested for murder charges 8 years ago.”

At the time of writing, 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.

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

3 Men Executed for Drug Offences in Tabriz

Sohrab Hokmabad, Amir Moharami and Davoud Namiari were executed for drug-related charges in Tabriz Central Prison. 2 other prisoners were returned to their cells.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, three men were executed in Tabriz Central Prison on 27 April. Their identities have been established as Sohrab Hokmabad, 36-year-old Amir Moharami and 33-year-old Davoud Namiari who were sentenced to death for drug-related charges by the Revolutionary Court.

An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Sohrab Hokmabad and Davoud Namiari were arrested for drug charges three years ago and Amir Moharami was arrested 2 years ago.”

Sohrab, Davoud and Amir were transferred to solitary confinement in preparation for their executions in a group of 5 on 25 April. The woman and 1 of the men were returned to their cells for unknown reasons.

At the time of writing, none of their executions have been reported by domestic media or officials in Iran.

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.”

(source for all: iranhr.net)

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

4 executions in Shiraz and Karaj prisons in Iran

In the last days of April and the beginning of May, 4 prisoners executed in Shiraz and Karaj prisons, but this news not reflected by the domestic media so far.

According to the Iranian Human Rights Society, on Monday 29 April 2024, 4 prisoners executed in Shiraz and Karaj prisons. In Shiraz, on Sunday, April 21, 2024, three prisoners executed in Shiraz Central Prison on charges of murder. These 3 prisoners were 49-year-old Hossein Tawana Kodiani, 43-year-old Reza Masrour from Kovar Fars, 43-year-old Taleb Akbari. All three of these prisoners charged with murder.

The news of the execution of these 3 prisoners has not been published by domestic media and websites related to the judiciary.

Execution in Karaj Central Prison

A prisoner named Ali Movahedi executed on Thursday, April 18, 2024. This prisoner charged with murder. He has been in prison for 8 years.

The news of the execution of this prisoner has not been reflected in the domestic media so far.

At least 59 prisoners executed within last month. At least 37 prisoners executed in the last 10 days.

9 prisoners executed in a single day in Iran

7 prisoners transferred for execution the death sentence in Iran

Iran has the highest number of executions in proportion to the population

According to the resolutions passed in the United Nations General Assembly, the government of Iran has the highest number of executions in proportion to the population.

Most of the trials conducted in Iran are outside the international standards and are unfair. Historically, execution has been a tool of the dictators’ power and rule to intimidate and subjugate the people.

The dictatorship that has been ruling Iran for 40 years has been using executions to suffocate and stabilize its rule permanently. Stopping execution and repression means the destruction of this oppressive government.

(source: en.iranhrs.org)

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

4 More Prisoners Executed in Iran

Authorities of the Islamic Republic executed 4 more prisoners over the weekend as death penalties continue to rise in the country.

The Iran Human Rights Organization reported that 3 inmates were executed on April 27 in Tabriz Prison for drug-related offenses.

The inmates were identified as Amir Moharrami, 36, Davoud Namyari, 33, and Sohrab Hokmabad.

Mohammadi was convicted 2 years prior, while Namyari and Hokmabad's convictions were 3 years old.

The report also mentions that 2 other death row inmates, a man and a woman, were briefly moved to solitary confinement but later returned to the general prison population.

The woman faced murder charges, while details about the man's charges remain undisclosed.

Iraj Sanambari, a 37-year-old man from Arak, was executed on April 27, 2024, at Arak Central Prison, according to a report by the Hengaw Organization for Human Rights.

Sanambari had been convicted by the Arak Revolutionary Court on drug-related charges 3 years before his execution.

According to a report by Amnesty International, Iran has reached its highest level of death sentence execution in the last 8 years, with the judiciary of the Islamic Republic executing 853 people in 2023 alone.

The report indicates that 481 executions, more than 1/2 of the total, were related to drug crimes.

This marks an 89 % rise in the death penalty compared to 2022, when 255 people were executed for drug-related offenses. The latest numbers also show a staggering 264 % increase compared to 2021, when 132 individuals faced execution for similar charges.

(source: iranwire.com)

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

Iran commutes death sentence for billionaire tycoon

Iran’s judiciary said Tuesday it had commuted a death sentence handed down against a billionaire business tycoon convicted of pocketing $2.8 billion while circumventing US-led sanctions for the oil ministry.

Following an appeal for clemency, Babak Zanjani, 50, was sentenced instead to 20 years behind bars, judiciary spokesman Asghar Jahangir told reporters.

For all the latest headlines follow our Google News channel online or via the app.

“With the approval of the head of the judiciary, (Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei) and the agreement of the (supreme) leader (Ali Khamenei), his death sentence was overturned and was commuted to 20 years of imprisonment,” Jahangir said.

The judiciary chief had taken into consideration “his cooperation during his time in prison” and his return of properties held abroad, Jahangir added.

Zanjani had been found guilty of the capital offence of “corruption on earth” after a lengthy public trial in 2016, a rarity in Iran where high-profile cases are normally held behind closed doors.

Zanjani denied any wrongdoing throughout the trial, insisting that the only reason the missing funds had not been paid to the oil ministry was that sanctions had prevented a planned transfer from taking place.

In media interviews since, he has said repeatedly that he was tasked by the administration of then president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with evading restrictions on Iran’s access to the international banking system to repatriate hard currency receipts in return for commission.

Ahmadinejad’s successor Hassan Rouhani repeatedly accused his predecessor’s 2005-13 administration of corruption, triggering a series of prosecutions over alleged illegal commission payments.

Zanjani is one of the most high-profile Iranian business figures targeted with asset freezes and travel restrictions by the European Union and the United States for their role in helping their government to evade sanctions.

(source: english,alarabiya.net)

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

37 Executions, Including 1 Woman, in the Past 10 Days

Ali Khamenei, in fear of a popular uprising, continues to carry out brutal executions of prisoners. Today, Monday, April 29, the regime’s executioners hanged 3 prisoners in Isfahan prison. On Sunday, April 28, Rashed Baluch and Hojjat Shams Khani were executed in Bandar Abbas, and another Baluch compatriot named Mansour Naroui was executed in Gonbad Kavous. On Saturday, April 27, 3 prisoners named Sohrab Hokmabad, Amir Mahrami, and Davoud Namiari were hanged in Tabriz Central Prison, and Iraj Sanamiri was hanged in Arak Prison. On Tuesday, April 23, two prisoners were hanged in Gorgan and Arak.

On Wednesday, April 24, Khamenei’s henchmen executed at least 8 prisoners, and on April 21, they executed 16 prisoners, the names of 19 of whom were listed in the NCRI statement released on April 25.

Thus, the number of registered executions in the past 10 days has risen to at least 37 prisoners.

In another criminal act, agents of the repressive State Security Forces opened fire on the car of 2 young men named Mohannad Khashnan and Younes Chah Ahmadi in Bandar Abbas on Saturday, April 27, which resulted in the car catching fire and the death of both young men.

The Iranian Resistance once again calls on the United Nations, relevant bodies, the European Union, and its member states to take immediate action to stop the torture and execution machine in the mullahs’ warmongering dictatorship and save the lives of thousands of prisoners on death row. The ringleaders of this regime, especially Ali Khamenei, Ebrahim Raisi, and Gholamhossein Ejehi, who have always been among the top officials and perpetrators of crimes against humanity and genocide in the past 45 years, must be brought to justice. Their impunity is a green light for the continuation of slaughter and crime.

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

APRIL 29, 2024:

OKLAHOMA:

Leader Munson Says Death Penalty Bill Grossly Violates Transparency

The Oklahoma House of Representatives passed SB 1702 off the floor, which makes the entire death penalty process, doctors, drugs used, records, and photographs confidential. It makes it so no person or entity involved in the execution can be identified. If signed into law, it would apply to all past executions and future executions.

“This is a scary bill that pulls the wool over an already non-transparent, problematic process,” said House Democratic Leader Cyndi Munson, D-Oklahoma City. “This bill essentially makes it impossible for the families of those who undergo the death penalty to find out what happened on the execution table, what drugs were used, and who was administering the drugs. It eliminates the responsibility needed for those who are killing people in the name of the State of Oklahoma. It greatly impedes transparency, which should be of utmost importance for those in charge of ending the lives of Oklahomans. It is also unfair to taxpayers who pay for these executions and deserve to know what process their tax dollars are funding. I know the Governor values transparency in state government, so I urge him to veto SB 1702.”

(source: poncacitynow.com)

INDIA:

Death sentence to Nelliyambam double-murder case accused

(see: https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/kerala/accused-arjun-sentenced-to-death-in-nelliyambam-double-murder-case-1.9520602)

TAIWAN:

Why death penalty is still needed in Taiwan

The Constitutional Court on Tuesday last week held a debate over the constitutionality of the death penalty. The issue of the retention or abolition of the death penalty often involves the conceptual aspects of social values and even religious philosophies.

As it is written in The Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay, the government’s policy is often a choice between the lesser of two evils or the greater of two goods, and it is impossible to be perfect.

Today’s controversy over the retention or abolition of the death penalty can be viewed in the same way.

UNACCEPTABLE

Viewing the situation in Taiwanese society and weighing the pros and cons, if the death penalty were to be completely abolished, the vast majority of Taiwanese would find it difficult to accept such a decision emotionally.

If a person is so brutal and vicious that their humanity is extinguished, then the state’s public power might be justified in inflicting the death penalty, which is in defense of the righteousness of the heavens, in line with the world’s laws and order and in keeping with the religious purpose of advising people to follow virtue.

If the possibility of a “miscarriage of justice” is a concern, then we should appropriately strengthen the system by improving the procedures of trial and execution.

In the design of the criminal legal system, the death penalty should be used sparingly or not at all, but such a penalty should not be completely abolished. Many countries that are advanced in democracy and the rule of law, such as the US and Japan, have not abolished this kind of penalty yet, so we can learn from them.

In our criminal legal system, the death penalty is no longer the only punishment for certain major crimes, as the law has been amended to “death penalty or life imprisonment” — known as the “relative death penalty”. This gives judges some room for discretion in light of the circumstances of each case. As for future improvement of the legal procedures involved in the death penalty, it can remedy the flaws pointed out by supporters of its abolition.

This is exactly something that the government can still work on.

Looking at current practice in the judicial system, judges quite often regard the “possibility of correction” as a “gold standard of death exemption” for defendants in major crimes.

Such a myth in law enforcement leaves the victims dead, with injustice unredressed and the surviving family members unconvinced.

How can we do justice to the rights of victims, and how can we satisfy the legal sentiments of good people?

PRISON CAPACITY

As far as the law is concerned, “possibility of correction” is not grounds for exemption from the death penalty, not to mention that it is an uncertain concept.

Moreover, if the death penalty is really replaced by life imprisonment, such a replacement would not only cost taxpayers money to support the prisoners for a lifetime, but also take up more space in prisons.

It is no wonder that prisons are always overcrowded, making it difficult to manage them, resulting in numerous problems and even expanding the number of prisons across Taiwan.

What a shame for the country.

(source: Opinion; Hsu Wun-pin is the honorary chair of the Chinese Association for Human Rights----Taipei Times)

INDONESIA:

Indonesian court sentences 45 kg meth dealer to death

The Medan District Court in Indonesia on Wednesday sentenced a prisoner who was behind the distribution of 45 kg crystal methamphetamine to death.

"The court sentenced the defendant Nasrun alias Agam to the death penalty," said Judge Eriyanto Siagian.

Eriyanto continued, "Nasrun committed actions that did not support the government's program to eradicate drugs, instead of reflecting on his previous mistakes."

The court also handed down life sentences to four other suspects and imposed a 20-year prison term and a 5 billion rupiah (around 300,000 U.S. dollars) fine on another suspect.

Promised 200 million rupiah (about 12,000 dollars) by Nasrun alias Agam, the 5 suspects transported 45 kg crystal methamphetamine from Kualanamu Airport in North Sumatra to Aceh and ultimately Lampung on Oct. 3, 2023.

(source: english.news.cn)

PAKISTAN:

‘MQM worker’ sentenced to death for killing 4policemen in Karachi’s Korangi

An antiterrorism court (ATC) on Wednesday sentenced a man, said to be associated with the Muttahida Qaumi Movement, to death for killing 4policemen in a targeted attack in a Korangi area in 2015.

The ATC judge found Mohammad Asif, alias Katoo, guilty of killing Assistant Sub-Inspector Aqeel Ahmed, constables Mohammad Anwar, Jameel Ahmed and Mohammad Akhtar at the Hanif Nihari House in Korangi.

However, the court acquitted co-accused Faheem Ahmed Lodhi due to lack of evidence.

The verdict was pronounced after recording evidence at the judicial complex inside the central prison.

The judge also handed down a collective 18-year additional imprisonment for the offences under Sections 397 (robbery or dacoity), 324 (attempted murder) read with Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act and under Section 23(i) of the Sindh Arms Act 2013.

The court imposed a fine of Rs800,000 on the convict and in case of default he would undergo an additional 17-month imprisonment.

However, the court ruled that all the sentences would run concurrently.

According to the prosecution, the policemen were having lunch at the eatery when Asif, Mohammad Bilal, and Abdul Salam had opened shot them dead. The attackers escaped and also took away the policemen’s official weapons.

One year later, the investigating officer received information that eight suspects had been killed in an encounter and from them some official sub-machine guns were recovered.

The IO visited the crime scene with a witness, who identified Bilal and Salam, who had been killed in the encounter.

Later, the Zaman Town police arrested Asif in another case and the IO officially shown him arrested in the targeted killing case of the policemen.

The defence counsel pleaded that his client was falsely implicated in the case due to his association with the MQM.

He said that the case was politically motivated.

(source: dawn.com)

IRAQ:

Dhi Qar Criminal Court issues a death sentence by hanging of a terrorist criminal who killed members of the Army

Dhi Qar Criminal Court issued, on Sunday, a death sentence by hanging for a terrorist criminal who carried out terrorist operations against the Iraqi army.

Media Center of the Supreme Judicial Council stated, in a statement received by the Iraqi News Agency (INA), that " the Criminal Court of Dhi Qar, issued a death sentence by hanging on a terrorist criminal belonging to ISIS gangs who carried out terrorist operations against the Iraqi army”.

"The criminal killed 2 members of the Iraqi army and injured another in Babil governorate, Jurf al-Nasr area, and also attacked army and police stations with firearms", the statement added.

The statement noted " The sentence was issued based on the provisions of Article II /1 /3 /5 with reference to Article IV/ 1 of the Anti-Terrorism Law No. 13 of 2005".

(source: ina.iq)

SAUDI ARABIA:

Saudi Arabia’s Controversial Execution: Citizen Nouman al-Dhafiri’s Case Sparks Global Outcry----Unveiling the Human Rights Concerns and Political Implications Behind the Saudi Government's Decision.

In a move that sparked controversy and condemnation in human rights circles, Saudi authorities executed the citizen “Nouman al-Dhafiri” after his trial, where he was accused of committing “criminal acts involving betrayal of his country and adopting a terrorist approach,” according to a statement by the Saudi Ministry of Interior.

While activists asserted that this death sentence came in the context of opinion-related cases and opposition to the ruling authority, the statement pointed out that the execution of citizen Nouman al-Dhafiri was carried out “for committing criminal acts involving betrayal of his country, aiming to disrupt the public order of the state, destabilize society and its security, and adopting a terrorist approach that allows the shedding of blood, wealth, and honor, and endorsing terrorist ideology and actions.”

The ministry revealed that based on information available to the security authorities, the arrest of “Nouman bin Aafat bin Madhi al-Dhafiri,” a Saudi national, took place on 6-6-1442, and the investigation by the public prosecutor’s office – according to the Ministry of Interior – led to charging the aforementioned individual with committing those criminal acts.

Executed in Riyadh

The ministry’s statement disclosed that the death sentence was executed on Saturday, 18-10-1445, corresponding to 27-4-2024, in the Riyadh region.

This death sentence against the citizen called “Nouman al-Dhafiri” has sparked sharp criticism of the authorities in the kingdom, with some asserting that this judgment comes within the context of targeting opponents of the crown prince through always ready vague charges of “terrorism and threatening state security.”

In this context, the writer Ahmed bin Rabeh said: “The Saudi authorities today executed one of its citizens (Nouman al-Dhafiri), and a statement by the Saudi Ministry of Interior indicates that the execution came on the basis of charges related to al-Dhafiri’s opinion and his opposition to the ruling authority.”

Death Sentences in the Kingdom

According to a report by Human Rights Watch, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is one of the largest countries that carry out death sentences in the world.

The International Amnesty Organization has documented numerous cases in which authorities sentenced individuals to death on frivolous charges, ranging from a few tweets on Twitter to drug-related crimes, following extremely unfair trials that did not meet international human rights standards.

In stark contrast to the repeated promises of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to reduce its use of the death penalty, the Saudi authorities executed 196 people in 2022.

This is the highest annual number of executions recorded by Amnesty International in the country over the past thirty years. The number of executions in 2022 increased threefold compared to those carried out in 2021, and it is at least seven times higher than the figure recorded in 2020.

In the past year, 2023, 100 people were executed, revealing their appalling disregard for the right to life.

In July 2023, the Specialized Criminal Court in Saudi Arabia sentenced Mohammed al-Ghamdi to death solely for tweets criticizing the Saudi authorities.

His brother, Dr. Saeed bin Nasser al-Ghamdi, told Amnesty International that the death sentence was an act of revenge against his political opinions.

(source: watanserb.com)

IRAN----executions

Execution of 3 Inmates in Tabriz Prison for Drug Offenses

On April 27, 2024, 3 inmates were executed in Tabriz Prison for drug-related crimes, according to the Iran Human Rights Organization.

The inmates were identified as Amir Moharrami, 36, Davoud Namyari, 33, and Sohrab Hokmabad. Moharrami was arrested and convicted 2 years ago, while Namyari and Hokmabad were convicted 3 years ago.

Two days before the executions, the report stated that along with the 3 executed inmates, 2 other death-row inmates—a man and a woman—were also moved to solitary confinement in anticipation of their executions. However, they were later returned to the public ward of the prison. The woman was convicted of murder, while the man faced charges related to drug offenses. The report did not disclose their identities.

No official sources or domestic media outlets within the country have provided coverage of these executions at the time of writing.

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)

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

Death Sentence for an Inmate Implemented in Arak

At Arak Central Prison, the death penalty of a prisoner identified as Iraj Sanambari, previously charged with drug-related offenses, was carried out.

According to a report obtained by the Hengaw Organization for Human Rights, in the early hours of Saturday, April 27, 2024, Iraj Sanambari, 37 years old, from Arak, was executed within the confines of Arak Central Prison.

Iraj Sanambari had been apprehended 3 years ago and subsequently convicted by the Arak Revolutionary Court on charges associated with drug offenses.

At the time of this report, no official announcement regarding the execution of this prisoner has been made through government-affiliated media outlets, particularly those affiliated with judiciary of Islamic Republic of Iran.

(source: hengaw.net)

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

Execution Requested For Two Afghan Suspects Accused Of Teen Rape

Amid record numbers of executions in Iran, 2 young Afghan men face capital punishment after allegations of sexual assault of a teenage boy.

The complaint was lodged by a teen known only as Hani, who said that on September 20, when playing football near a local prayer ground, he was allegedly approached by four motorcyclists. According to his account, 2 of the men, described as Afghan, brandished a knife, forced him onto a motorcycle, and transported him to a secluded garden where the assault occurred.

Medical examinations at a forensic center corroborated the teenager's claims, as reported by Etemad. However, the two Afghan men denied any involvement, blaming the assault on their two accomplices who remain at large.

With the investigation complete, the case is set to be discussed in the Criminal Court of Tehran Province. Meanwhile, the teen has requested the execution of the suspects and stated he is not willing to offer reprieve.

Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International are among the organizations that have criticized Iran for its adherence to capital punishment, especially its application to cases involving juveniles and individuals under 18 at the time of their offense.

According to data released by Amnesty International, Iran ranks 2nd worldwide in the number of executions carried out, following China.

Iran executed at least 834 people last year, a new record for the regime since 2015 as capital punishment is surging in the country.

(source: iranintl.com)

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

Jîna Amini's mother protests death penalty given to Kurdish rapper Tumac Salihi

The death penalty given to rapper Tumac Salihi on 24 April, has been met with reactions and protests all over the world. Salihi was arrested by the Iranian regime during the "Jin, Jiyan Azadi" uprising. Among those condemning the death penalty sentence is Müjgan Eftekhari, the mother of Jîna Amini, the young Kurdish woman who died in police custody.

In a post, Eftekhari wrote: "Dear Jîna, I have received news that devastated me again. Do not let Tumaj's mother suffer as I suffered."

(source: anfenglishmobile.com)

APRIL 28, 2024:

TEXAS:

Robert Roberson legal team asks Court of Criminal Appeals for new trial in death penalty case

The legal team for death-row inmate Robert Roberson is asking the Court of Criminal Appeals to give him a new trial.

The defense argues the science on which the conviction was based is flawed, that the lead detective in the case has now come to believe in Roberson’s innocence, and that Texas has already granted new trials in similar cases.

Roberson was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death in 2003 in Anderson County for killing his 2-year-old daughter, Nikki Curtis. He has long maintained he does not understand what happened to his daughter and that he had no intent to harm her or cause her death.

The Court of Criminal Appeals stayed a 2016 execution and sent Roberson's case back to the trial court to consider the merits of 4 distinct claims, including a "junk science" claim.

An evidentiary hearing initially began in August 2018 but was continued after the District Clerk found a box of 15-year old evidence, including lost CAT scans of Curtis in the Anderson County Courthouse basement.

That hearing was finally conducted in 2021. District Court Judge Deborah Evans then made a recommendation that was sent back to the Texas Court of Appeals to determine whether Roberson would receive a new trial. In January 2023, the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals upheld the death penalty based on the findings from that new hearing.

‘Debunked’

This week, Gretchen Sween, Roberson’s attorney, asked the court to reconsider its decision in 2023 “based on the showing that his conviction was based on the debunked Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Trauma hypothesis used to convict him in 2003.”

“The decision is entirely up to the court, but the Court of Criminal Appeals has, occasionally, decided to reconsider a decision when it is clear that key facts or law have changed.”

Sween said prosecutors representing the state in Dallas County have agreed that Andrew Roark should get a new trial after he also was convicted using the same SBS/AHT hypothesis. Roark was convicted in 2000.

Sween said the same "child abuse expert" testified for the state in both Roark and Roberson’s trials.

“The new filing shows how a huge amount of her testimony was virtually identical in these 2 cases in which she had diagnosed SBS and then gave a graphic opinion of her belief that both men had committed child abuse through violent shaking and blunt impact,” Sween said. “It does not make sense that the state of Texas would admit that the science has changed and a new trial is necessary in one county (Dallas) but not acknowledge the same changed science in another county (Anderson).”

In their filings, Roberson legal team said both convictions hinged on the hypothesis that a child was the victim of intentionally inflicted violent shaking and head trauma known as Shaken Baby Syndrome; that “both cases were tried in the same era (2000 and 2003, respectively) when a version of SBS, now universally rejected, was viewed as medical orthodoxy; and both trials featured the very same child abuse expert, Dr. Janet Squires – who opined that three medical findings, often referred to as the “triad” of subdural bleeding, cerebral edema aka brain swelling and retinal hemorrhage – supported the inference that abusive shaking/blunt impact was inflicted on a child.”

The Suggestion to Reconsider also cited a new Texas law, passed in 2021, that allows parents accused of child abuse based on an in-house “child abuse specialist” – like Squires – to obtain a second opinion and present a conflicting opinion to the court.

Texas passed that law to respond to the problem of caregivers being unfairly accused of child abuse when they brought sick or medically fragile children in for medical care. Roberson’s legal team said had this law been in place when Roberson brought Nikki to the hospital, he might never have been convicted of her murder.

In its description of what really occurred the day Nikki died, his legal team stated, “Roberson was a special education student when he dropped out of ninth grade and has autism, undiagnosed at the time of his daughter’s collapse. He was unable to explain his chronically ill two-year-old daughter’s complex medical condition when he took her to the emergency room, after she fell out of bed when sick with a high fever, undiagnosed pneumonia and on drugs that doctors prescribed that we now know are unsafe for children her age and in her condition. The hospital staff did not know Mr. Roberson had autism and misinterpreted his demeanor as a lack of concern for his gravely ill daughter.”

The Suggestion to Reconsider also stated there is a problem with the prosecution’s proposal, which the court accepted, in that it cited the trial testimony of the lead detective, Brian Wharton, but failed to acknowledge that Wharton, in his most recent testimony before the court, testified that he had come to believe that Nikki died of natural and accidental causes and does not believe that justice was served in Roberson’s case.

The Suggestion to Reconsider also stated that in 2003, when Roberson’s trial occurred, the consensus in the medical community was that a child who presented with Nikki’s set of internal symptoms must have been violently shaken or possibly struck against a blunt surface by the last person with the child at the time. However in the last 20 years, the version of the shaken baby hypothesis put before his jury as “fact” has been entirely debunked by evidence-based science and that courts in at least 17 states have exonerated parents and caregivers who were wrongly convicted under the controversial shaken baby hypothesis.

(source: palestineherald.com)

PENNSYLVANIA:

Jury awards $16 million to Philadelphia man who was wrongly convicted of murder----This is the largest wrongful conviction payout in the city's history.

A jury says the city of Philadelphia owes a historic $16 million to a man who spent 25 years on death row for a murder he didn’t commit. James Dennis received the death penalty back in 1991 after being convicted of killing a high school girl. A federal judge overturned the sentence in 2013 and said detectives and prosecutors covered up evidence that proved Dennis didn’t commit the crime. It’s the largest wrongful death conviction payout in the city’s history.

A jury says the City of Philadelphia owes a historic $16 million to a man who spent 25 years on death row for a murder conviction that was later overturned.

James Dennis was accused of killing a girl in High School in 1991 and he received the death penalty.

A federal judge overturned the conviction in 2013, saying detectives and prosecutors covered up evidence that proved Dennis didn't commit the crime. He was later released from prison.

This is the largest wrongful conviction payout in the city's history.

A spokesperson for the city told NBC10 they are exploring ways to challenge the verdict.

The city's statement read in part:

“As the municipal claims against the City were dismissed at the end of the trial, the City is reviewing this decision with the detectives’ counsel. While we respect the judicial process, we will be exploring legal avenues to challenge this verdict.”

(source: nbcphiladelphia.com)

ALABAMA:

Alabama sets July execution date for man convicted of killing delivery driver

The execution date for a man convicted in the 1998 fatal shooting of a delivery driver who had stopped at an ATM has been set for July 18, Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey announced Thursday.

Keith Edmund Gavin, 64, will be put to death by lethal injection, which is the state’s primary execution method.

The announcement came a week after the Alabama Supreme Court authorized the execution to go forward.

Gavin was convicted of capital murder for the shooting death of William Clinton Clayton, Jr. in Cherokee County in northeast Alabama. Clayton, a delivery driver, was shot when he stopped at an ATM to get money to take his wife to dinner, prosecutors said. A jury voted 10-2 in favor of the death penalty for Gavin. The trial court accepted the jury’s recommendation and sentenced him to death.

Gavin’s attorney had asked the court not to authorize the execution, arguing the state was moving Gavin to the “front of the line” ahead of other inmates who had exhausted their appeals.

The state is also scheduled to execute Jamie Mills by lethal injection on May 30. Mills was convicted for the 2004 slaying of a couple during a robbery.

Alabama in January carried out the nation’s 1st execution using nitrogen gas, but lethal injection remains the state’s primary execution method.

(source: Associated Press)

IDAHO:

Chad Daybell trial: Focus remains on the murder of Tammy Daybell

On day 12 of the Chad Daybell trial, the focus remained on the suspicious death of the self-proclaimed doomsday prophet's first wife. Daybell is the Idaho man accused of murdering two Arizona children, whose bodies were later found in his backyard.

Daybell's current wife, Lori Vallow, was the children's mother, and she's since been convicted of killing them.

5 witnesses took the stand on April 26 to testify against Daybell, who could face the death penalty if he's found guilty.

Steve Schultz, a funeral director and former neighbor of the Daybells when they once lived in Utah, says he was suspicious after 49-year-old Tammy Daybell suddenly died in October 2019. He asked a Daybell relative if Chad killed his wife. Schultz also says he learned the self-published doomsday fiction author shared visions of the end of times.

"A date of the Second Coming when that would happen, also of the catastrophes that would follow. Deer Creek dam breaking, Utah County being flooded, white tents in a city being developed for the chosen, the elected, the people." — Steve Schultz

Chad is accused of killing Tammy, and conspiring with his then-lover Lori Vallow in the murder. Tammy worked at an elementary school where the principal, Rich Garner, says staff wanted to go to her funeral, but Chad wasted no time, organizing the funeral 4 hours away from East Idaho in just days.

Death of Chad Daybell's ex-wife Tammy remains focus

On the 12th day of the Chad Daybell trial in Idaho, lawyers remained focused on the death of his first wife Tammy Daybell. FOX 10's Justin Lum has more on the story.

Garner: "I asked, ‘Is there anything we can have a memorial or do something here? ’Cause we’re all gonna want to come and do something for Tammy? Is it only gonna be a Tuesday funeral?’"

Prosecutor: "What was his reaction?"

Garner: "He said I don’t wanna inconvenience or put anybody out."

A former friend of Daybell's, Whitney Arnold, testified about meeting Chad's new wife Lori weeks after Tammy's death. She asked if Lori had any children.

Arnold: "Her answer was, ‘Yes, I have 7 children.’"

Prosecutor: "Did she tell you whether or not she had children at home?"

Arnold: "Actually, that was a specific question, and she said, ‘All of our children are out of the home.’"

Lori actually had 2 missing children, JJ Vallow and Tylee Ryan. They were last seen alive less than a month after moving from Chandler, Arizona to Rexburg, Idaho in early fall 2019.

By March 2020, Lori was in jail on child abandonment charges, but Chad was free, and met with his friend Ron Arnold, a local realtor. Arnold says Chad wanted to put a manufactured home on his property.

Prosecutor: "You were asked what Mr. Daybell’s beliefs or intentions were for putting a manufactured home on his property and that one of those reasons was to live with his wife Lori when she got out of custody, correct?"

Ron Arnold: "Yes."

Prosecutor: "Based on what you know now, do you think there may have been a different reason that they wanted to put that home on the property?"

Ron Arnold: "Yes."

Family members have confirmed to FOX 10 that the 2 sets of human remains found on Chad Daybell's Idaho property belong to JJ Vallow and Tylee Ryan.

In June 2020, authorities discovered the remains of JJ and Tylee buried in that same backyard, leading to Chad's arrest.

The trial continues on April 29. More than 30 witnesses have testified.

(source: Fox News)

USA:

Prison officers traumatized by rate of executions in US death penalty states----Pursuit of ‘non-stop executions’ causing psychological distress to corrections staff as states urged to widen gap between executions

The relentless pursuit of “non-stop executions” by a rump of US death penalty states is exposing prison staff to extreme levels of psychological and physical stress, according to traumatized corrections officers who are appealing for help.

Though capital punishment is generally on the wane in America, with only 5 states carrying out executions last year, those states that remain active are showing a renewed determination. In some states, the pace of judicial killings is now so intense that prison guards are kept in an almost permanent state of readiness, with mock executions staged on a rolling basis.

In Oklahoma, officers at the state penitentiary in McAlester, which houses the death chamber, are so stretched by the schedule of 25 executions set in 2022 by the Republican-controlled state that the state’s own attorney general and the head of the prison service have appealed to the courts for a more staggered approach. They have requested that the gap between executions be widened from 60 to 90 days, so far to no avail.

The unprecedented move to try to cool the pace of executions followed a joint letter to the state’s attorney general, Gentner Drummond, from nine former senior corrections officials. They warned that staff were being subjected to “lasting trauma” and a “psychological toll” that included post-traumatic stress disorder, alcohol abuse and distress due to the “non-stop executions”.

Justin Jones, the director of Oklahoma’s department of corrections between 2005 and 2013, was one of the letter’s 9 authors. He told the Guardian that a pending execution affected not just those employees actually deployed in the death chamber but every worker in McAlester.

“It’s not just those working the IVs and injections. You’ve got case managers, correctional officers, staff working with surviving victims, others working with the family of the soon-to-be executed,” Jones said.

With an execution set every 60 days, mock executions – in which the entire execution process is put through a dress rehearsal – are conducted constantly, within earshot of the prisoners and staff offices. Hearing the procedures can be profoundly triggering.

“It affects your mental state when it becomes so routine,” he said.

The culture of the prison is such that staff very rarely talk about their emotional responses. “We don’t talk about it. Correctional officers are public servants on the lowest salaries in state government, and they get home at the end of the day and just absorb it,” Jones said.

In his 8 years as corrections director, Jones himself witnessed 27 executions. As the top prison official, it was his job to receive the governor’s final go-ahead and then call the death chamber and issue the order for the execution to begin.

He continues to be haunted by the experience, and has made a point of forgetting the deceased prisoners’ names to protect himself. “I can remember their faces, and a little bit about their last words. But I intentionally have not remembered names.”

Jones fears that when staff are put under such extreme pressure they are more likely to make mistakes. That’s an especially sensitive subject in Oklahoma, given the state’s parlous track record of botched executions.

Judicial killings were halted in the state for 6 years after the gruesome execution of Clayton Lockett in 2014. He writhed and groaned on the gurney for 43 minutes.

Despite such concerns, calls for the brakes to be applied to Oklahoma’s breakneck execution schedule have so far failed. An appeals court judge responded to the request to extend the space between killings to 90 days by telling staff to “suck it up” and “man up”.

The comments have dismayed and angered current and former staff. “You really need to be careful what you say when you are talking about people who are doing the ultimate that government ever asks anyone to do – kill another human being,” Jones said.

Bobby Cleveland, executive director of Oklahoma Corrections Professionals, which advocates for prison staff, said that members were outraged. “They are really mad that a judge would make that kind of comment. He doesn’t know what it’s like to be a corrections officer.”

The chair of the criminal justice and corrections committee in the state assembly, Justin “JJ” Humphrey, was also scathing about Judge Gary Lumpkin’s remarks. “To talk about executing somebody, and just ‘suck it up’ – that’s a pretty callous statement.”

Humphrey worked as a prison officer for 20 years, and has observed the emotional wear and tear. “Anybody that thinks that executing somebody is no problem has not been a part of the process,” he said.

Staff and death row inmates often spend years in close proximity. More than half of all prisoners on death row have been there for more than 18 years, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

Over that time, a cold-blooded murderer can mature and change. That was the case with Brian Dorsey, 51, who was sentenced to death in Missouri for killing his cousin and her husband.

More than 60 former and current corrections officers wrote to Missouri’s governor, Mike Parson, in January imploring him to spare Dorsey’s life. Describing themselves as generally in favour of the death penalty, they said that the ultimate punishment was not appropriate for a prisoner who had grown to become “one of the most trusted in the institution” and a “model inmate”.

Missouri nonetheless went ahead with Dorsey’s execution earlier this month.

Tim Lancaster worked in Missouri corrections for 27 years, retiring in 2021. He got to know Dorsey very well over an 8 year span; the inmate was the designated prison barber and would cut his hair twice a month.

“Brian just kept to himself, never got into trouble. He was polite, respectful. No way was he the worst of the worst.”

Lancaster said the act of sitting in a barber’s chair with his back to a death row inmate bearing a sharp pair of scissors was in itself a sign of how completely Dorsey had reformed himself. “There’s some on death row who would never get near the scissors, let alone cut somebody’s hair. But you learn their behaviors, and I got to trust Brian more and more.”

Lancaster said that when he heard the news that Dorsey had been killed he felt let down. He has since talked to current corrections staff and found them to be similarly riled up. “That’s bullshit, shouldn’t have happened,” one current corrections officer told him.

“You’re working with a prisoner for 10 years, you’ve interacted with them every single day, and you can feel they’ve changed,” Lancaster said. “They’ve really rehabilitated, and that’s the department’s goal – to rehabilitate offenders.”

But in Dorsey’s and in many other cases, an ironic moment is reached when corrections officers, whose main duty it is to rehabilitate prisoners, are told to kill a rehabilitated prisoner.

“All of a sudden they flip the switch, and now it’s like: ‘OK, we’re going ahead and killing them,’” Lancaster said. “There has to be an underlying effect from that, without a doubt.”

(source: The Guardian)

CUBA:

Cuban regime threatens protesters with the death penalty----Otto Molina Rodríguez, president of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme People's Court of Cuba, assured that those who intend to "overthrow the government" would be committing a crime of sedition.

The Cuban Observatory for Human Rights claimed that the Cuban regime is threatening protesters with the death penalty. The organization maintained that human rights must be guaranteed and the death penalty must be immediately eliminated from Cuba's penal code.

The observatory's reaction came after an episode of the TV news program "Hacemos Cuba," broadcast by Canal Caribe (which belongs to the state television system), featured senior officials from the Ministry of the Interior and the justice system defending the actions of the police during the wave of protests and referred to the crime of sedition, among other charges, to threaten to those who promote or participate in protests that have the intention to "overthrow the government."

"It no longer only remains an issue of public unrest ... but the intention is to subvert order, our rule of law and social justice so that they can fulfill their purposes of colonizing us," said Otto Molina Rodríguez, president of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme People's Court of Cuba.

The Official Gazette of Cuba, in article 121, explains that those who "disturb the socialist constitutional order" can face the charge of sedition, which in Section A establishes that they will be punished "with deprivation of liberty of 10 to 30 years, perpetual deprivation of liberty or death, if the crime is committed in exceptional situations, disasters or affects the security of the state, or during serious disturbance of public order, or in a military zone, resorting to weapons or exercising violence."

The Cuban Observatory for Human Rights stated that it "condemns the threat of applying the death penalty, carried out this Thursday on Cuban national television against those who participate in demonstrations on the island."

And, per a report by Spanish newspaper ABC, "At least 225 protesters from the historic protests of July 11 and 12, 2021, (11J) were prosecuted for this alleged crime, and of them, at least 222 have already been sentenced to an average of 10 years of deprivation of liberty, according to Prisoners Defenders (PD)."

Furthermore, ABC recalled that "in Cuba, capital punishment has been in moratorium since 2003, when it was applied for the last time against 3 young Cubans who hijacked a boat to try to reach the United States, though without causing fatalities. Between 1959 and 2003, thousands of Cubans were put to death, most of them in the first years of the dictatorship and their crimes consisted of opposing the regime of the Castro brothers."

Concerns about statements from Castro officials were also expressed by several Cuban media outlets. CubaNet maintained that the intention of the Cuban ruling party is to send a message that it will not tolerate social protests and that it will use all the power of the state to repress citizens who demand freedom.

"The 'Hacemos Cuba' program left a clear message: the Cuban dictatorship will not tolerate social protest and will use all the force of the state to repress any demonstration that it considers a threat to its power. The threats with the crime of sedition, the accusations against alleged 'terrorists' and the staunch defense of police action are examples of the regime's strategy to silence public discontent and maintain absolute control of the country," CubaNet noted.

(source: voz.us)

CHILE:

Chile in mourning after murder of 3 Carabineros officers

3 non-commissioned officers of Chile's Carabineros Police were killed early Saturday in an ambush in the town of Cañete, near the city of Concepción, in the Bío Bío region some 500 kilometers south of Santiago. The crime, which is still under investigation, shocked the entire country. President Gabriel Boric Font promised it would not go unpunished and other officials even called for the reinstatement of the death penalty.

The victims -1st Sergeant Carlos Cisterna Navarro, 1st Corporal Sergio Arévalo Lobos, and 1st Corporal Misael Vidal Cid- were reported to be driving along Route P72 when they were ambushed by an armed group, who shot them and then set fire to the vehicle.

The insecurity problem in southern Chile grew deeper with this occurrence in an area already gripped by Mapuche rebel activity. Boric decreed three days of national mourning. “Early this morning we received the serious and painful news of an attack in the province of Arauco in which 3 carabineros were killed,” he wrote on X while convening an emergency meeting with Ministers Carolina Tohá (Interior), Maya Fernández (Defense) and other officials to coordinate “immediate actions to respond to this cowardly attack.”

“I assure Chileans that there will be no impunity and that we will find the whereabouts of the perpetrators of this terrible crime,” he wrote. “Know, Carabineros de Chile, that you are not alone,” he also posted. “We will not rest until we find those responsible,” he also said before traveling to the Biobío region along with the Army, Air Force, and Navy chiefs, in addition to a group of lawmakers and the Supreme Court Chief Justice.

“As President of the Republic, I do not rule out any of the legal tools at our disposal,” said Boric from the crime scene area. “The best weapon we have to fight these criminals, these ruthless people who have committed this horrendous crime, is unity, that is why the State is present,” Boric also said. “In order to face this situation, there must be neither left, nor right, nor officialism, nor opposition; Chile has to be there,” he insisted.

“We are going to make decisions accordingly, with a cool head. With the information given to us by the police together and working in a coordinated manner all the powers of the State,” he added. “Today in Chile, there is a tearing, there is sorrow, there is rage. We - as a government - also have it and we know that the Carabineros institution and, particularly, the families of those who have been brutally murdered, are in immeasurable pain,” he acknowledged.

Tohá and Carabineros Director General Ricardo Yáñez also traveled to the area of the crime, from where images of the burned Carabineros pick-up truck were shown. “The truth is that I cannot be more hurt, more sad. With rage. Why do they kill us? Why do they keep persecuting us?” said Yáñez about the crime committed on Carabineros Day. “This was not random,” he stressed. “To kill a carabinero is to kill the soul of Chile,” he added.

“The Fire Department received a report of a vehicle on fire and, when they arrived at the scene, they discovered that it was a Carabineros patrol, in a vehicle that was engaged in the control of precautionary measures in the area. And, inside the vehicle, they discovered the 3 deceased officers, in this burnt condition,” Tohá explained.

Following Boric's instructions, Yáñez was to remain in the area, together with Minister Fernández and Interior Undersecretary Manuel Monsalve to coordinate the investigation.

Meanwhile, Bío Bío Governor Rodrigo Díaz called for the reinstatement of the death penalty and urged Boric's administration to submit a bill before Congress in this regard. “I hope that the Government will send a bill to Parliament and that it will be accepted by the parliamentarians. For example, to reinstate the death penalty for those who murder police officers. These carabineros or any other police officer,” he said in a statement. He also suggested “that the Public Defender's Office should never defend people who murder police officers.”

Former presidential candidate and rightwing opposition leader José Antonio Kast also called for the dismissal of Tohá and Monsalve: “The President of the Republic, Gabriel Boric must decree a state of siege today. He must summon today the Armed Forces and the Police Forces and pursue these murderers to exhaustion, to lock them up, condemn them, and apply to them the full rigor of the Law, but that is not enough. The President must today also dismiss his security team: Carolina Tohá, Manuel Monsalve, [and] Mr. [Eduardo] Vergara,” he stressed. “President Boric, the time has come to wake up,” he added.

The area of the crime is under military guard due to repeated arson attacks perpetrated by radical Mapuche groups allegedly fighting for their ancestral lands now in the hands of foreign forestry companies. Last week, Mapuche leader Héctor Llaitul of the Arauco-Malleco Coordinating Committee (CAM) was found guilty of “violent usurpation of land”, theft, and “attacking authority” and could face up to 25 years in jail in a sentence to be announced on May 7.

Boric has long ago decreed the militarization of the Arauco province, together with other localities in the neighboring Araucanía region in a move to curb Mapuche violence.

(source: en.mercopress.com)

INDONEISA:

The Death Penalty For The Legendary Critic, Ignatius Waluyo Alias Kusni Kasdut

Kusni Kasdut once jumped into defending Indonesia's independence in the revolutionary war. He struggled against the Dutch. However, his services were not needed when Indonesia became independent in a complete manner. His fate was delayed, he lived tenuously.

He also tried the black world. He did not hesitate to rob, kidnap, and kill to survive. He became a legendary criminal until his crimes ended by the New Order (Orba) government. There is no mercy for Kusni Kasdut. He was sentenced to death.

The totality of the man whose real name is Ignatius Waluyo in the revolution war (1945-1949) is second to none. He joined the struggle against the Dutch. The movement of the people from the East Java Front was his choice. He served as a freedom fighter very well. Waluyo, who later became known as Kusni Kasdut, was able to do many roles.

Instead of just carrying weapons, Kusni Kasdut was good at seeking revolution funds. Kusni perpetuated the funds at all costs. Putting the wealth of the rich, especially. This step made him like a Robin hood. It is said that all of this is because Kusni Kasdut often shares his looted products with the poor in the city.

However, Kusni Kasdut's heroism had to end when the Netherlands officially recognized Indonesia's sovereignty in 1949. Kusni Kasdut had to be willing to swallow the bitter pill. The state ignored it. He was denied entry to the military.

The narrative made his life even more ultimate. There is no reliable skill to make money. Kasdut's cusni also chose a shortcut: to enter the black world. He perpetuated the crime in every action he made in getting money. From robbing to killing.

His most popular action was killing a wealthy Arab named Ali Badjened in 1953. then, the action of Kusni Kasdut stealing diamonds at the National Museum (sometimes also known as the Gajah Museum) on May 31, 1961. This action made him the most wanted fugitive in Indonesia.

It was in Kebon Sirih that Kusni Kasdut before committing a gold robbery at the National Museum, once killed a wealthy Arab named Ali Badjened in 1953. Kusni Kasdut in his action was accompanied by Bir Ali, Cikini's son.

Ali Badjened was robbed in the afternoon when he had just left his residence in the Awab Alhajiri area. He died at the same time from a bullet fired from Jeep by this criminal. The incident was shocking at that time because the problem of robbery by killing a victim had not happened much as it is now," wrote Alwi Shahab in the book Batavia, Flood City (2009).

The New Order government did not remain silent. The crimes committed by Kusni Kasdut were considered too numerous and terrible. The position of the New Order is clear. The owner of power does not want to lose to criminals. Kusni Kasdut was then told everywhere.

Kusni Kasdut was caught shortly after the robbery. The government can't wait to impose a sentence. All for the calculation of the sentence of Kusni Kasdut in prison. He had to bear the penalty for killing a police officer in Semarang, Ali Badjened in Jakarta, robbery at a national museum, and other crimes.

The power of attorney finally moved by passing a death sentence to Kusni Kasdut in 1969. Kusni Kasdut did not then accept the death penalty. He continued to try to run the action of escaping from prison many times. He also managed 5 times (lastly escaped in October 1979) and fled before finally being recaptured. The test that made him move to prison

. The frequent attempt to escape made Kusni Kasdut frustrated. He finally resigned. However, that does not mean Kusni Kasdut was unable to do anything about it. The only option that makes the most sense to Kusni Kasdut is to apply for clemency to President Suharto in 1979. Even if it ends in failure.

The New Order considers the crimes committed by Kusni Kasdut to be extraordinary. The Kasdut cusni also had to mourn his fate in accepting the execution of death in Gresik, East Java on February 16, 1980. The punishment also made the Legendary Criminalist go forever.

On his grave, it will only be written: Ignatius Waluyo. His black name, Kusni Kasdut, has long been declared to run out. All he wanted to leave was a?bangsaant name. It is a kind of symbol that he is not a human who once boasted crimes that were not arbitrary, but an ordinary person who died in faith.

And he didn't joke, in front of the Kalimat prison house before leaving for the execution site, when he said: Hopefully, on my last trip I won't find the devil... Get rid of it...! 3 bullets right into his heart and 5 others around his stomach. The duties of 12 people from the police shooting squad that morning, February 16 at around 04.35, are finished: Kusni Kasdut, 52 years old, is declared to have been shot to death, wrote Tempo Magazine's report entitled Ignatius Waluyo's Last Rescue (1980).

(source: voi.id)

VIETNAM:

Truong M Lan appeals against death sentence in bank fraud case----In the appeal, Lan presented several reasons for the risks involved in the process and requested the court of appeal to reconsider the charges against her in the first-instance trial.

Truong M Lan, Chairwoman of property developer Van Thanh Phát Group, on April 26 filed an appeal against the entire first-instance verdict in the case that occurred at Van Thinh Phat Group JSC, Saigon Commercial Bank (SCB) and relevant companies, units and organisations.

In the appeal, Lan said she had joined the restructuring process of SCB but did not misappropriate its funds. She presented several objective reasons for the risks involved in the process and requested the court of appeal to reconsider the charges against her in the first-instance trial.

Many other defendants have also submitted appeals to the H? Chí Minh City People's Court.

Earlier, on April 11, Lan was sentenced to death for "embezzlement", 20 years behind bar for "giving bribes" under the 2015 Penal Code, and another 20 years for "violating regulations on banking operations and other activities related to banking activities" under the 1999 Penal Code. The aggregate sentence is the death penalty.

In addition to the above sentences, the court also ordered Lan to compensate the outstanding debts of 1,243 loans worth 673.85 trillion VND (28 billion USD) as of October 17, 2022 (the date when the case was prosecuted) to the SCB.

According to the indictment of the Supreme People's Procuracy, Lan built a vast network of about 1,000 subsidiaries and affiliated companies under the V?n Thanh Phát umbrella, entrusting their management to relatives. Despite not holding any official position at Saigon Commercial Bank (SCB), Lan was its major shareholder, controlling between 85% and 91.5% of the shares.

Lan and her accomplices selected and appointed their relatives to key positions at the bank, formed a number of SCB units specialising in lending and disbursement at Lan’s request, established and used thousands of "ghost" companies. The group colluded with leaders of many related businesses to commit crimes, and created bogus loan profiles to withdraw money from the bank, among other acts.

L From October 9, 2018 to October 7, 2022, Lan directed the creation of 2,527 fake loan records, with a total value of VNÐ1,066 trillion VND (US$44.4 million). As of October 17, 2022, Lan and her accomplices still owed VNÐ677.28 trillion ($26.7 million) in loans, which are all bad debts. After deducting the value of collaterals, the bad loans valued at around 498 trillion VND.

The remaining 85 defendants were given sentences from three-year suspended imprisonment to life in prison.

(source: vietnamnews.vn)

BANGLADESH:

Narayanganj 7 murders: Relatives still await execution of verdict -- The 10th anniversary passed on Saturday

The gruesome 7 post-abduction murders in Narayanganj saw their 10th anniversary pass on Saturday. The verdict in the case was pronounced in 2017. But the execution of the verdict still remains elusive for the victims’ near and dear ones.

On April 27, 2014, the 7 people were first kidnapped and they were later found dead in the Shitalakshya River.

A lower court in Narayanganj in 2017 handed down death penalties to 26 accused, while 9 others were sentenced to different jail terms.

In 2018, the High Court upheld capital punishment for 15 and commuted the capital punishment of the remaining 11 to life imprisonment.

But the case has been awaiting disposal at the Appellate Division for the last 5 years and a half, drawing ire from the victims’ relatives.

Those who were sentenced to death by both courts include RAB-11 former commander Lt Col (ret) Tarek Sayeed Mohammad, former RAB company commander Major Arif Hossain, Lt Col (dismissed) M Masud Rana and former Nayaranganj City Corporation (NCC) councillor and expelled Awami League leader Nur Hossain.

The family members of the deceased said they were happy with the lower court verdict but the delay at the apex court is leaving them frustrated.

However, they still expect that the Appellate Division will uphold the lower court’s judgment, paving the way to its implementation.

The complainant of the case, Selina Islam Beauty, widow of slain NCC councillor Nazrul Islam, said: “We’ve been waiting for justice for 10 years now. The people loyal to the killers are directly and indirectly frightening us.

“Losing our breadwinners, we’ve become helpless. Now we want the government to at least ensure justice,” she said.

Abul Khayer, whose son Tajul Islam was among the 7 killed, said that he was skeptical about getting justice.

“The trial process advanced in an expedited manner following the prime minister’s promise in this regard. But we don’t understand why it is taking so much time at the Supreme Court,” he said.

Victim Jahangir’s widow Nupur Begum, expressing similar sentiments, said: “We keep hoping for justice, which we have yet to get. We’re getting tired of the delay (in justice).”

The plaintiff’s lawyer Sakhawat Hossain Khan told Bangla Tribune that the case has been awaiting disposal at the apex court for long, despite the lower court pronouncing its verdict early on.

“Some disgruntled RAB officials and NCC councillors are linked to the case. They have long been trying to foil the trial. But we want the case to be disposed of at the earliest and the verdict carried out,” he added.

Narayanganj District and Sessions Judge Court Public Prosecutor Moniruzzaman Bulbul said that the 7-murder case was a much-talked-about across the country.

“As the case is at the Appellate Division, I hope it will be disposed of soon,” he added.

On April 27, 2014, NCC Panel Mayor Nazrul Islam, his 3 associates and driver were abducted in Fatullah.

At the same time, a senior lawyer at the District Judge’s Court Chandan Kumar Sarkar, and his driver were abducted on their way to the capital.

3 days after the incident, the bodies of 6 of them, including Nazrul and Chandan, were recovered from the River Shitalakhya.

The following day, the body of Nazrul’s car driver Jahangir was recovered from the river.

Later, Selina Islam Beauty, widow of Nazrul, filed a case against 6 people while Chandan’s son-in-law filed the other case.

(source: dhakatribune.com)

KUWAIT:

Kuwait Court Upholds Death Sentence in Mosque Bombing

Kuwait's appeals court Sunday upheld the death penalty for the main organizer of the bombing of a Shiite mosque claimed by the Islamic State group that killed 26 people.

The court however reduced the death sentence handed out to the alleged leader of IS in Kuwait, Fahad Farraj Muhareb, to 15 years in prison.

A lower court in September issued the death penalty to Muhareb and Abdulrahman Sabah Saud, who drove the suicide bomber to the mosque site on June 26.

It also handed out jail terms of between 2 and 15 years to 8 others, including 5 women, and acquitted 14 others.

In Sunday's ruling, the appeals court acquitted 1 of the 5 women.

There was tight security for the hearing, with armored vehicles outside the Kuwait City court complex and helicopters patrolling overhead.

Judge Hani al-Hamdan said that the cases of 5 men sentenced to death in absentia for their role in the bombing were not reviewed because they remained at large.

Under Kuwaiti law, sentences issued in absentia are not reviewed by higher courts until convicts appear.

4 of the men at large are Saudis, including 2 brothers who smuggled the explosives belt used in the attack into Kuwait from neighboring Saudi Arabia. The 5th is a stateless Arab.

A total of 29 defendants, 7 of them women, had been on trial on charges of helping the Saudi suicide bomber carry out the attack on a Shiite mosque in the capital, which was the bloodiest in Kuwait's history.

During the initial trial, Saud confessed to most charges but he denied all of them in the appeals court.

Among those acquitted Sunday was Jarrah Nimer, owner of the car used to drop off the bomber.

An IS-affiliated group calling itself Najd Province claimed the Kuwait City bombing as well as suicide attacks at 2 Shiite mosques in Saudi Arabia in May.

Najd is the central region of Saudi Arabia.

The Sunni extremists of IS consider Shiites to be heretics and have repeatedly attacked Shiite targets in the region.

Kuwaiti courts have already issued several verdicts on IS supporters and financiers.

(source: naharnet.com)

IRAN----executions

Prisoner Executed in the Prisons of Islamic Republic of Iran

The execution sentence of Yavar Amin-Khah, a prisoner previously convicted of drug-related offenses, was carried out at Saveh Central Prison, situated in the Markazi Province.

According to a report received by the Hengaw Organization for Human Rights, at the early hours of Wednesday, April 24, 2024, 37-year-old Yavar Amin-Khah, a father of a young child, was executed at Saveh Central Prison.

Yavar Amin-Khah, an Azeri individual from Saveh, was arrested 3 years ago on charges related to drug crimes and subsequently sentenced to death by the judicial system of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

As of the compilation of this report, the news of this prisoner’s execution has not been announced in the state media, particularly those close to the judiciary.

(source: hengaw.net)

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

Call for Urgent Action to Save Reza Rasaei and Habib Deris, 2 Political Prisoners Facing Execution

The Iranian Resistance calls on the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the UN Human Rights Council, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Iran, and other human rights bodies, as well as the European Union and its member states, to take urgent action to save Reza Rasaei and Habib Deris, 2 political prisoners sentenced to death and on the brink of execution. The absurd death sentence for imprisoned artist Toomaj Salehi must also be unequivocally annulled, free of clerical regime machinations.

Reza Rasaei, 34, a Kurdish compatriot, was arrested by the IRGC’s intelligence agency in December 2022 and subjected to brutal torture to extract forced confessions. His case, while he is detained in Dizelabad Prison in Kermanshah, has been forwarded to the execution enforcement office.

Habib Deris, an Arab compatriot, was arrested in February 2019 and, after enduring brutal torture, was sentenced to death along with five other Arab compatriots. Habib was transferred to solitary confinement on Wednesday, April 24.

Ali Khamenei, surrounded by internal and external crises, has intensified the crimes and issuance of execution orders to divert public attention and prevent uprisings from gaining momentum.

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

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

Say their names to save their lives

#FreeToomaj

"When you hung nooses around our youth's necks, you should've known one day someone was going to stand up" – Toomaj Salehi

While the global media is busy focusing on how the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) is waging a proxy war against Israel, there's very little coverage on the war the IRI is waging against its own people. There's been some hue and cry about Mahsa Amini's murder at the hands of the notorious morality police in September 2022, which sparked nation-wide protests carried out by men and women alike, against a regime that, besides its multitude of corruptions, has established a gender-apartheid state since its inception in 1979. However, as a member of the Iranian diaspora, I feel it necessary to write about the latest injustices within the land of my roots.

While the world's attention is focused on the political tensions between Israel, Iran, and their allies, the IRI has used this opportunity as a cover to unleash a new wave of brutal crackdowns on Iranian women. Despite the lack of freedom of the press, citizen journalism has been eye-opening because it is through videos and photos leaked by the people, that we get to see how women refusing to wear the hijab are beaten, assaulted, and dragged into white vans by the morality police. Bodily bruises are the least of their problems; many are raped, and some are killed. Even minors are not spared. Iranian schoolgirls have been poisoned, and teenagers like Armita Gerawand (17), Sarina Esmaeilzadeh (16), and Nika Shakarami (16) have been found dead.

Sara Hossain, a barrister at the Supreme Court of Bangladesh and chair of the Independent International Fact Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran, led an investigation along with her team and spoke at the UN General Assembly in March 2024 against the brutalities of the regime. The mission's findings showed that "disproportionate force" was used against peaceful protestors, killing at least 551. These protestors were "viciously beaten and arrested while dancing, chanting, writing slogans, or simply honking car horns in peaceful acts of solidarity." Moreover, prisoners were "subjected to sexual and gender-based violence," "gang rape, rape with an object, beatings, floggings, and electric shocks." And worst of all, "children were subjected to extrajudicial killings, torture and rape, and held in detention along with adults."

Ironically, however, it is the men who are given the official death penalty through sham trials in kangaroo courts, the latest victim of which is 33-year-old dissident rapper, Toomaj Salehi, whose lyrics voice his outcry against oppression, injustices, and deprivation of liberties faced by Iranians under the now-45-year-old regime. Imagine if Tupac Shakur, a politically conscious activist and rapper, whose music is noted for addressing racism, police brutality, and marginalisation of African-Americans, was sentenced to death for his lyrics. Or imagine Bangladeshi rebel poet Kazi Nazrul Islam being handed out the death penalty for voicing his protest against colonialism, tyranny, and inequality. Toomaj Salehi is the Tupac or the Nazrul of Iran, and the beloved voice of Iranians. But he is now on state-sanctioned death row.

Toomaj was first arrested on October 31, 2022, after he publicly supported the Zan, Zendegi, Azadi (Woman, Life, Freedom) movement. After many months of solitary confinement as well as physical and psychological torture, he received a brief release on bail on November 18, 2023. On November 27, 2023, he shared a video revealing that he refused to admit to false charges despite the employment of intimidation tactics and in spite of various forms of torture and ill-treatment used to get a forced confession out of him. This gutsy video had severe repercussions. Three days later, Toomaj was violently abducted and imprisoned once again. He was charged with "moharebeh" (waging war against God) and "spreading corruption on earth," and sentenced to death by the Islamic Revolutionary Court. If this sentence goes through, "the world's bravest rapper", as he has been called by various international news outlets, will be lynched from a crane, for exercising his right to freedom of expression.

So what can we, as Bangladeshis, do for Toomaj or others like him? We need to say their names to save their lives. This has worked in the past. For example, in 2020, when three young Iranian men were handed out the capital punishment for protesting against high gas prices, a wave of online protests took place, with over 10 million retweeting the hashtag #StopExecutionsInIran, which resulted in the suspension of those executions. Now, more than ever, we need to mobilise to save the life of Toomaj Salehi, an innocent victim of a regime that, according to the BBC, is the world's second-most prolific executioner, and according to Amnesty International, executed 853 people in 2023 alone. Let us not underestimate the power of hashtag activism—an influential tool for raising awareness and promoting social and political change. All we need to do is use the following hashtags on social media: #FreeToomaj #ToomajSalehi #StopExecutionsInIran

Let Toomaj Salehi's words strike a chord in our hearts, a chord that will spur action, no matter how small: "If you've seen people's pain/ but you've turned a blind eye/ witnessed the oppression of the innocent/ and just walked by/ you're an accomplice to the oppressor/ you, too, are a criminal" (from his song Soorakh Moosh, meaning "Rat Hole").

May we not be apolitical at the hour of need; may we not be indifferent in the face of injustice.

(source: Noora Shamsi Bahar is a senior lecturer at the Department of English and Modern Languages, North South University, and a published researcher and translator----The Daily Star)

APRIL 27, 2024:

TEXAS:

Finally! DA admits hiding evidence in Melissa Lucio’s case

The prosecution, the defense and the judge all agree now that evidence hidden by the Cameron County District Attorney from Melissa Lucio’s trial counsel should cause the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to reverse her conviction!

Lucio was sent to death row in 2008 for causing the death of her 2-year-old daughter Mariah Alvarez. Exactly 2 years ago, in April, 2022, she was waiting to be executed in Texas when she got a stay of execution with 2 days left to live.

The young child had accidentally fallen down a concrete staircase leading to their 2nd-floor apartment and died from head trauma. The DA accused Lucio of beating little Mariah and murdering her.

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

In an extremely 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. The judge finally agreed to it and it has been sent to Texas’ highest criminal court.

Kept from their mother for 17 years

On April 15, Lucio’s children issued the following statement: “We are grateful to our mother’s legal team for their hard work to bring the truth to light and to DA 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. We hope and pray the Court of Criminal Appeals will agree with the District Attorney, the defense, and the judge and our mother can come home to her family. It’s been 17 years that we have been without her. We love and miss her and can’t wait to hug her.”

Lucio’s case has gathered 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 was 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 Gov. Greg Abbott and the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles to grant her clemency. The stay was granted before the board had a chance to vote.

A friend of the court brief filed by the Innocence Project and The Innocence Network on behalf of Lucio stated: “Police interrogation may sometimes psychologically pressure even innocent people to confess to crimes they did not commit. When the interrogated suspect is a battered woman, as she was in this case, such risks are heightened, and the need for expert testimony to explain these risks to lay juries are more acute.”

At trial, the defense tried to present expert testimony to educate the jury about why Lucio, as a victim of sexual abuse and domestic violence, would be more likely to admit to something she did not do. But the trial court refused to allow the testimony. Instead, it allowed a Texas Ranger to say that he knew she was guilty from the time he first laid eyes on her, because of her slumped posture and downcast eyes.

Judge Stephen A. Higginson, of the 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals wrote in a dissenting opinion in Lucio v. Lumpkin on Feb. 9, 2021: “A battered woman was convicted of capital murder because, in a case lacking direct evidence, prosecutors told the jury that, five hours into interrogation, in the middle of the night after the discovery of her dead child, [Lucio] accepted a seasoned interrogator’s suggestion that she was responsible, ultimately agreeing with him that she ‘did it.’”

In Texas there are now seven women on death row, and several have cases of innocence that are waiting for a judicial review that would reverse those convictions. Women are rarely sentenced to death and even more rarely are executed.

The Cornell Center on the Death Penalty Worldwide reports there are 52 women, including 5 trans women on death rows across the U.S. 18 death-sentenced women have been executed in this country since 1976. 6 of those were in Texas and all but 2 were in Southern states.

(source: Gloria Rubac)

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

Johnson Co. prosecutors seek death penalty----Johnson County prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for convicted murderer Jerry Don Elders. Elders was found guilty of shooting a Burleson police officer and then killing a woman after carjacking her.

Testimony continued Friday in the punishment phase of the trial for convicted murderer Jerry Don Elders.

Prosecutors presented several witnesses in their effort to push for the death penalty.

"It breaks my heart, it physically makes me sick to my stomach to see everything we’ve gone through," said Kim Bamburg, Elders' sister.

Bamburg sobbed at times and told the jury her brother blamed others, including the victims, for his actions during the April 2021 fatal shooting spree.

On Thursday, a jury convicted Elders of capital murder after he shot and wounded Burleson police officer Joshua Lott during a traffic stop.

He also kidnapped, shot and killed 60-year-old Robin Waddell during a carjacking.

[PROSECUTOR: "Has he blamed Officer Lott for what happened?"]

"Yes," Bamburg replied.

[PROSECUTOR: "Has he blamed Officer Lott for him shooting Robin Waddell?"]

"Not to my knowledge," Bamburg said.

[PROSECUTOR: "Has he said to you, if Officer Lott would’ve reacted differently he never would’ve made it to Robin’s house?"]

"I believe so, yes, Bamburg replied.

The 2nd day of the punishment phase included several state witnesses.

Elders, at times, took notes as prosecutors worked to convince jurors that he would be a danger to society, even a prison society.

They're asking for the death penalty.

Another witness, Amber Allen, says she twice-married Elders while he was in jail and got it annulled each time, only to marry him a third time when he was released.

She says she believed he cared for her, but mainly he used her because he needed money and company.

[PROSECUTORS: "You feel the letters and phone calls and communication you had throughout your various three marriages, you feel like you were manipulated to giving him what he wanted."]

"To a degree," Allen said.

Testimony in the punishment phase will resume Tuesday morning.

(source: FOX news)

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

State to seek death penalty for 2nd person accused of burning, killing Kilgore woman Sheriya Grant----During his arraignment hearing, the state read the indictment against Allen Sutton, the father of Grant's unborn child, and he entered a not guilty plea.

Prosecutors announced Friday they will seek the death penalty for the 2nd of 3 people accused of burning and killing a Kilgore woman, who has been missing since 2016, and her unborn child.

Allen Lamont Sutton Jr., Laneshia Lashae Young and Edward Brager are all charged with capital murder in connection with the disappearance and death of Sheriya Grant, 20.

She was 8 months pregnant in 2016 when she went missing. Indictments allege the trio struck her with a blunt object and set her on fire using an accelerant. Her body has never been found.

During his arraignment hearing, the state announced they intend to seek the death penalty for Sutton, who was the father of Grant's unborn child. Prosecutors also read the indictment against Sutton and he entered a not guilty plea.

Because the offense happened in 2016, the prosecution said most of the DNA evidence is complete.

The state previously announced on Feb. 29 that they would also seek a death sentence for Young, who was Grant's cousin.

Sutton, who will be tried first, has his trial set for March 17, 2025. Young's trial is set for Sept. 2, 2025. Brager's trial is currently scheduled for Nov. 3, 2025, according to judicial records.

If found guilty of capital murder, a person faces life in prison without parole or the death penalty. Prosecutors have not announced if they will seek the death penalty for Brager at this time.

Sutton and Young have previously been arrested and sentenced to prison after being found guilty of tampering with evidence.

In Rusk County, Sutton was sentenced to 10 years in prison on April 17, 2019, for tampering with physical evidence related to the killing of Grant in connection with the concealment of a trunk liner missing from a car he shared with Young.

An appellate court’s ruling revealed Sutton was in a relationship with Young. While Young was serving jail time, Sutton lived with and impregnated Grant, who is Young's cousin.

Sutton and Grant's roommate said Grant told her that she loved Sutton, who “choked Grant and told her he would kill her.” Young also assaulted Grant in Sutton’s presence three months before she disappeared, the roommate said.

Sutton and Young jointly owned a car that was repossessed after Grant disappeared, the ruling said. The creditor noticed the car was missing a trunk liner, spare tire and jack, with traces of Grant’s blood found on the underside of the trunk’s lid.

The judge said in the ruling the wiring looked like a person was “trying to escape the trunk.”

Sutton was charged with solicitation of capital murder in Gregg County in 2019; however, the judge dismissed the charge in June 2023. Young was sentenced in July 2021 to 8 years in prison on a charge of tampering with physical evidence in connection with the case.

Sutton and Young were indicted for capital murder out of Smith County in December 2021, while Brager was indicted for the same charge in June 2022.

(source: CBS News)

PENNSYLVANIA:

Jury awards $16 million to a Philly man whose death-row murder conviction was overturned----Jimmy Dennis spent 25 years on death row and in solitary confinement for a murder conviction a judge later called a "grave miscarriage of justice."

A jury has awarded $16 million to a Philadelphia man whose murder conviction was overturned after he spent 25 years on death row — the largest wrongful conviction payout in city history.

James Dennis, 53, always insisted he was innocent and had been sentenced to death for a 1991 murder he did not commit.

A federal judge overturned his conviction in 2013, calling it a “grave miscarriage of justice.” She said homicide detectives ignored or “covered up” evidence that proved Dennis did not shoot a high school girl to death for her gold earrings. And she ordered prosecutors to hold a new trial for Dennis or set him free.

Three years later, while Dennis was waiting for that trial to begin, prosecutors offered him a deal. If he pleaded no contest to third-degree murder, they would agree to his immediate release from prison.

Lawyers for the city later argued that because Dennis had not been acquitted, he should not be able to sue for damages over what he described as the willful misconduct of police and prosecutors who built the case that wrongfully put him behind bars.

A jury on Thursday said that wasn’t the case.

After a 9-day trial, jurors said Dennis was owed $16 million — $10 million in compensatory damages from the city, and $3 million from each of the 2 detectives who the jury determined “engaged in malicious or wanton misconduct,” said Dennis’ attorney, Paul Messing, of the Center City-based firm Kairys, Rudovsky, Messing, Feinberg & Lin.

As the jury read the verdict, Dennis broke down. Through the night and into Friday afternoon, he said, he cried tears of relief that a jury of his peers saw his innocence — but also tears of sorrow for all that he had lost.

“I haven’t stopped crying,” Dennis said Friday afternoon. “I’m crying for my dad, who never got to see me come home.”

Dennis’ lawyer, Messing, added: “Jimmy Dennis had his life taken away from him, and nothing is going to bring that back. But I can tell you that this jury verdict has brought him an important sense of vindication.”

A spokesperson for the city Law Department said officials were “exploring legal avenues to challenge” the $16 million jury verdict.

The District Attorney’s Office declined to comment.

The verdict was the latest chapter in a case that, for years, gripped the city and nation — both in the cruel nature of the 17-year-old girl’s slaying, and the pleas of innocence from a rising young musician charged with her death.

Dennis, a 21-year-old R&B singer from West Oak Lane, was convicted in 1992 in the shooting death of Chedell Ray Williams, an Olney High School student. Police said Williams was fatally shot after she was accosted over a $450 pair of gold earrings — a crime that enraged city residents and officials.

Dennis maintained his innocence from the beginning, insisting that he had been riding a SEPTA bus from his father’s home at the time of the murder, a detail that another bus rider later corroborated.

Still, a jury convicted Dennis of 1st-degree murder — largely on the testimony of 3 eyewitnesses — and sentenced him to death.

It was later determined that detectives and prosecutors involved with the case had buried key evidence that, if presented to a jury, might have persuaded the panel to find Dennis not guilty, said Messing.

There was evidence that a critical eyewitness — the only person who said he was sure that he could identify the killer if he saw him again — told police after being shown Dennis’ photo that he was “definitely not the killer,” Messing said. But that was not turned over to Dennis and his lawyers.

Among the other evidence withheld was a document that corroborated Dennis’ alibi that he was on a bus around the time of the murder, police reports that impeached the credibility of an eyewitness, and additional relevant documents, Messing said.

Detectives Manuel Santiago and Frank Jastrzembski investigated the case. Both are awaiting trial on perjury charges in a separate case after prosecutors said they lied on the witness stand in the retrial of a man whose murder conviction had been overturned.

A defendant who pleads no contest does not accept or deny responsibility for the charges, but waives the right to a trial and agrees to accept the penalty. That, Messing said, means that in Dennis’ case, there was no admission of guilt, which allowed his lawyers to file a lawsuit over the misconduct.

Lawyers for the city countered that Dennis had foreclosed that opportunity by choosing not to go to trial and thus, not securing a verdict affirming his innocence. Dennis, city lawyers wrote in a 2018 court filing, “now seeks to profit from the murder he committed by bringing this lawsuit.”

Messing said Dennis’ decision to plead was an impossible choice after years of torture.

Dennis was desperate to get out of jail — his father died while he was incarcerated, his mother was ill, and his children were grown, Messing said. He had spent 25 years of his life in solitary confinement, trapped alone inside a windowless cell for up to 24 hours a day. His meals were slid under the door. Visitors were few and far between, and he was given only a few hours of fresh air each week.

“It is an unspeakably horrible existence,” Messing said. “Frankly, I don’t know how he and others have survived it.”

The lingering effect of that emotional harm has left Dennis unable to work, Messing said. He still lives in Philadelphia, but rarely leaves home, struggles with depression, and has been surviving on the few resources he has.

“This vindication, even more than the money, is something that will help him better reintegrate into society,” Messing said. “The future is now open to him in a way that it wasn’t before yesterday.”

(source: Ellie Rushing, The PHiladelphia Inquirer)

ALABAMA:

Alabama just added its 166th person to Death Row. The appeals process could take decades

With the recent conviction of Jeremy Tremaine Williams for murder and rape of a child, Alabama’s Death Row population grew to 166. Yet, it could be decades before Williams is executed for his crimes due to the lengthy appeals process.

“If I’m realistic, I’ll die before him,” said Russell County District Attorney Rick Chancey in an interview after Williams was given the death penalty. “He’ll be here long after I’m gone.”

In fact, one inmate has waited on death row since January 1982, according to the Alabama Department of Corrections website. And another inmate sentenced to death from Russell County has been on death row since 1997, according to the ADOC website. Williams was recently found guilty of raping, strangling, and killing 5-year-old Kamarie Holland in Phenix City in December 2021.

He was sentenced to death on 4 counts of capital murder by Judge David A. Johnson. Williams must now go through the appeals process in order for the death sentence to be upheld and enacted.

Here’s the appeals process as outlined in a document by former Alabama State Attorney General Luther Strange on the attorney general’s website:

One type of appeal is the direct appeal. A defendant sentenced to death is entitled to an automatic appeal to the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals.

The court can affirm or reverse the conviction, sentence, or both. If the Court of Criminal Appeals affirms the conviction and sentence the defendant can then file a petition with the Alabama State Supreme Court to hear the case.

If the Alabama Supreme Court doesn’t hear the case, then the appellant may file a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court. If the state Supreme Court does hear the case and affirms the conviction and sentence, then the appellant may file a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court.

The appellant will then become known as “the petitioner” can then file a petition for a “writ of certiorari” with the U.S. Supreme Court.

A “writ of certiorari” is a request for the Supreme Court to order a lower court to send up the record of the case for the Supreme Court to review, according to uscourts.gov. If the U.S. Supreme Court refuses to hear the case then the defendant’s direct appeal is completed.

(source: ledger-enquirer.com)

KENTUCKY:

Motion to remove death penalty option fails in 2019 triple homicide case, mediation on the table

The death penalty is still on the table if a guilty verdict is returned later this year in the case against Cylar Shemwell, one of two men charged with murder for a 2019 triple homicide. However, the case could never make it to trial if both parties agree to a deal through mediation.

Shemwell, now 36, is facing 3 counts of murder alongside Arnett Baines, now 35, for the shooting deaths of Robert D. Smith Jr., 35; Jay Michael Sowders, 43; and Christopher Carie, 18. They both face a 1st-degree assault because a 4th person, Carman Vanegas, who was 35 at the time, was also shot in the head but survived.

Judge Joe Castlen is now presiding over the case, filling in for Judge Jay Wethington while he is on medical leave. A hearing Friday afternoon included discussions on final motions before the trial, which is scheduled to start on June 3.

The motion to dismiss the death penalty was initially filed in March 2022 by the defense counsel but was deemed “premature to make a determination” by Wethington. Defense lawyer Leigh Jackson on Friday said that given that the trial is a month away, this would be an appropriate time to revisit the motion.

Jackson argued that Shemwell’s involvement in the incident is not enough to determine that Shemwell intended to murder the victims.

“In the video, it is clearly an individual other than Mr. Shemwell shooting Jay Sowders, Robert Smith, and Chris Carie. Mr. Shemwell is present, and we don’t dispute that,” Jackson said. “ … But there is no obligation on Mr. Shemwell’s part to report the crime or to try to stop these crimes. We don’t have any evidence that shows active participation in the planning and execution of these crimes and certainly nothing that shows he shared the intent of mens rea of Mr. [Arnett] Baines.”

Shemwell’s trial was originally going to take place after the one for Baines. However, Baines’ trial was postponed due to the defense needing time to argue a failed motion to remove the death penalty.

Because of the order of the 2 trials, Jackson argued it is “disproportionate to Mr. Shemwell” for him to be facing the death penalty when “we know he’s not the shooter.”

Commonwealth Attorney Mike Van Meter argued that, like the Commonwealth vs. Bredhold trial, the death penalty doesn’t have standing until the “jury recommends the death penalty” as a punishment.

“[The defense’s] challenge to the constitutionality or the disproportionate aspects of the death sentence is not right for this Court’s review until the jury recommends the death penalty,” Van Meter said.

Castlen ruled that the death penalty should not be dismissed, citing Commonwealth vs. Ryan and Commonwealth vs. Guernsey for his reasoning.

Another hearing was scheduled for May, yet the 2 parties are also discussing mediation. They will meet with Judge Phillip Patton to discuss mediation prior to their final hearing on May 20 before the trial.

According to Kentucky law, mediation is an informal process in which a neutral 3rd person, called a mediator, facilitates the resolution of a dispute between 2 or more parties. The process is designed to help disputing parties reach an agreement on all or part of the issues in dispute. Decision-making authority remains with the parties, not the mediator.

(source: the Owensboro Times)

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

Death penalty cases to be mediated

Prosecutors and defense attorneys will attempt settle 2 upcoming Daviess County murder trials, where both defendants face the possibility of the death penalty.

Both Arnettt B. Baines, 36, and Cylar L. Shemwell, 37, of Owensboro will have their cases mediated next month.

Baines and Shemwell were charged with murder and 1st-degree assault in the Jan. 17, 2019 fatal shootings of 3 men at a home on Audubon Avenue.

Jay Michael Sowders, Christopher Carie and Robert D. Smith were all shot in the head during the incident, which was captured on the home’s security camera system.

A 4th person in the home, Carmen Vanegas, was also shot during the incident, but survived.

The cases will be mediated by retired Circuit Judge Phillip Patton. Mediation is a process where the appointed judge meets with both sides in the case, gives an opinion on how the jury would interpret the evidence at trial, and recommends a plea agreement. The parties are not bound by the judge’s recommendation.

Baines’ case will be mediated on May 7, and Patton will mediate Shemwell’s case on May 14. If the parties cannot agree on a settlement, Shemwell will go to trial in early June.

Baines’ trial is set for August.

The parties discussed mediation Friday during a hearing on motions in Shemwell’s case, including a motion to exclude jurors from considering the death penalty.

Leigh Jackson, lead attorney for the local public defender law office, argued Shemwell should not be considered for capital punishment because video from the incident shows Shemwell sitting and watching while a person alleged to be Baines shoots the 3 men in the head.

“Shown in the video is someone other than Mr. Shemwell shooting Jay Sowders, Robert Smith and Christopher Carie,” Jackson said. Shemwell, Jackson said, was “present” but had lived at the house.

Shemwell was not “an active participant,” Jackson said.

“There is no legal obligation on Mr. Shemwell’s part to report these crimes and there’s no legal obligation on Mr. Shemwell to stop these crimes,” Jackson said.

(source: messenger-inquirer.com)

TENNESSEE:

Sen. Jack Johnson declares victory for death penalty bill, but innocent people could die

Re: "Child rapists should be sentenced to death. That's why I backed this Tennessee Senate bill," by Sen. Jack Johnson, April 22.

Legislation sponsored by Tennessee Senator Jack Johnson and passed by the Tennessee General Assembly would expand the death penalty system in Tennessee.

The system is already unfairly applied, costs taxpayers millions more than the alternative sentences, and risks the execution of the innocent. Since 1972, in fact, 197 people have been exonerated from death rows across this country after evidence of their innocence was finally considered, including three from Tennessee.

Expanding the death penalty for a non-lethal crime will only expand the number of innocent people sent to death row. The damage of false accusations and imprisonment, let alone execution, can never be undone.

William Arnold Jr. was falsely accused of one of the crimes that would be eligible for the death penalty under this bill. (Re: "District attorney won't retry child rape case overturned by appeals court," June 29, 2020).

He spent seven years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit. If this legislation was law, he could have received the death penalty and been executed for a crime he didn’t commit. He is just one example.

How many innocent lives are we willing to risk when we already have sentences like life without parole for those who commit this heinous crime, a sentence that costs taxpayers less than the death penalty?

Davis Turner, Nashville

(source: Letter to the Editor, The Tennessean)

CALIFORNIA:

Federal, state lawssupport death penalty

Re: “DA has no right to dismantle death sentences” (Page A9, April 21).

Ron Matthias’ fact-filled article excellently rebuts the recent efforts of Santa Clara District Attorney Jeff Rosen to unilaterally commute the death sentences of all 15 of our county’s death row inmates. Rosen’s efforts ignore the following constitutional realities:

1. Our federal Constitution expressly recognizes: (a) the death penalty (see the 5th Amendment); and (b) that persons may be deprived of their lives (in addition to their liberties) as long as the government does so through a “due process of law” (14th Amendment).

2. Article 5, section 8(a), of our state Constitution expressly provides that even our governor “may not grant a … commutation to a person twice convicted of a felony except on recommendation of the [state] Supreme Court.” (Most death row inmates have multiple felony convictions.)

Accordingly, Rosen should review our constitutions before proceeding any further with his lawless, anti-democratic, anti-jury proposal.

John Haggerty, Santa Clara

(source: Letter to the Editor, East Bay Times)

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

Prosecutor Group Demands California Supreme Court Review State’s Death Penalty System, Charging It ‘Exhibits Troubling Signs of Racial Discrimination’

Prosecutors Alliance of California (PAC) this week issued a letter announcing its amicus curiae to the state Supreme Court, urging a review in “Office of the State Public Defender et al. v. Bonta (No. S284496), and asking for a hard look at the State’s death penalty rules.

PAC charged, “California’s death penalty system, in which prosecutors play a key role, exhibits troubling signs of racial discrimination in its application,” adding, “evidence alone would justify review here.”

PAC asserts the issues addressed in the petition are particularly important to them, noting in the letter the Alliance “since its inception has advocated for a criminal justice system that fairly and consistently respects defendants’ rights to equal protection under the law.”

In the letter, PAC commented that “review is particularly appropriate because of how many features of the state’s death penalty system open the door to potential racial discrimination,” claiming, “Racial discrimination of the sort observed in California’s death penalty system is antithetical to the state constitution’s equal protection guarantee and threatens to undermine the public trust and legitimacy on which the criminal justice system depends.”

PAC also believes, “Now is the right time and this is the right vehicle for the Court to review these issues, which demand an immediate and systemwide answer.”

According to the letter, “Prosecutors occupy a special position in the criminal justice system and are closely involved in each stage of a death penalty case, including investigating, charging, prosecuting, and sentencing. In exercising their duties, prosecutors must pursue justice both in particular cases and more broadly” and that “as stewards of the criminal justice system, prosecutors must work to safeguard public trust in the administration of justice.”

The Alliance argued, “Ongoing, widespread racial discrimination in the administration of the state’s death penalty is inconsistent with those values and undermines the legitimacy and trust on which prosecutors rely.”

In quoting the American Bar Association, PAC said, “The primary duty of the prosecutor is to seek justice within the bounds of the law. Consistent with that duty, the Alliance’s mission is to advocate for a criminal justice system that comports with the highest standards of justice and fairness—including the California Constitution’s mandate of ‘equal protection of the laws.’”

PAC added, “The petition for review raises serious questions as to whether California’s death penalty system, as administered, complies with that equal protection mandate. Overwhelming studies and statistics, across the state and over many decades, reveal significant and ongoing racial disparities in the death penalty’s application.”

“Prominent Public officials, including the Governor, Attorney General, and several district attorneys, have acknowledged that startling evidence and called for examination of the potential causes,” said PAC, adding, the state Supreme Court “has not had an opportunity to consider the equal protection implications of that troubling, longstanding imbalance,” asserting PAC petition gives the court “a valuable opportunity… to do just that.”

The Alliance stresses a “review is especially appropriate because the death penalty system provides many opportunities for racial discrimination to taint the process.” These opportunities span “from initial investigation to charging to jury selection and beyond.”

PAC notes, “the law permits—indeed, depends on—the exercise of substantial discretion by independent actors” also adding “as valuable and necessary as that discretion may be, it comes as a cost,” noting this cost is “the potential that racial bias, explicit or implicit will affect the outcome.”

The Alliance adds “as central actors in the death penalty system, the Alliance’s members urge the Court to provide guidance as to whether the system comports with the state constitution’s stringent demands. This is the right case in which to resolve that important question.”

“This Court’s ‘Duty (is) to ensure’ the ‘equal protection of the laws’ that the California Constitution guarantees…the Court has recognized” in Briggs v. Brown and Clean Air Constituency v. Cal. State Air Resources Bd. “that exercising its original jurisdiction to resolve the issues of statewide importance is appropriate even if there are alternative paths to review.”

PAC also states that “review via original jurisdiction here is superior to any alternatives, particularly given the fact- and county-specific nature of challenges under Penal Code section 745.”

According to the Alliance’s letter, these issues do not only matter to those accused but also prosecutors “and ultimately to the broader criminal justice system,” further claiming the legitimacy of the criminal justice system “depends on equal and fair application of the laws” and that because of this “[t]he Court should grant review.”

PAC also states, “The law abhors racial discrimination” and, “As this court has recognized, federal and state equal protection guarantees share a ‘core purpose’ of ‘doing away with all governmentally imposed discrimination based on race, thus ultimately helping to create a political system in which race no longer matters.’ California law in particular rejects racial discrimination, including in the criminal justice context.”

The letter adds, “Racial discrimination in the criminal justice context is doubly harmful” because “it not only violates the rights of defendants for whom race plays a role in their conviction or sentencing, but also erodes ‘public respect for… the rule of law.’ The members of the Alliance are particularly concerned about such an erosion of public trust…the lifeblood of the criminal justice system.”

According to the letter, “2 features of California’s death penalty system warrant prompt attention from this Court.”

The 1st of these features noted in the letter is that “there are alarming indications of racial discrimination in the way the system has operated over many decades.” The 2nd of the features is that “there are many points during a death penalty case in which racial discrimination could affect the outcome.”

Prosecutors Alliance of California wrote, “widely accepted evidence reveals troubling inconsistencies in the death penalty’s application. Racial discrimination is a ‘familiar and recurring evil that, if left unaddressed, would risk systematic injury to the administration of justice’”

The Alliance adds that “as the petition describes, statistics show that California’s death penalty system is far from one ‘in which race no longer matters,” claiming “evident racial disparities in the administration of the death penalty in California are well documented and manifest in two distinct, but related, ways…defendants of color are more often sentenced to death than their white counterparts.”

The letter cites a study that “analyzed homicide convictions between 1978 and 2002 and found—even after controlling for nonracial factors—that Black defendants were up to 8.7 times more likely, and Latino defendants up to 6.2 times more likely, to receive death sentences as compared to defendants of other races. PAC states that “unfortunately these disparities did not stop in 2002.”

According to PAC, “Another study from 1979 to 2018 found—again, even after controlling for race-neutral variables such as county size, demographics, and annual homicide rate—that Black suspects were more than twice as likely, and Hispanic suspects one-and-a-half times as likely to receive death sentences as compared to white suspects.”

Despite California’s population only being made up of 6.5 % Black or African American people, they make up 35 % of the state’s death row, according to the U.S Census Bureau.

Yet, other case studies highlighted by the Fair Punishment Project reveal even more problematic statistics, including how 89 % of defendants sentenced to death in Orange County between 2010 and 2015 were people of color despite the county’s black population of only 2 %. According to an article published in the Guardian, the only 22 people with death sentences imposed on them in Los Angeles between 2012 to 2019 were of color.

Additionally, a study conducted between 1990 and 1999 revealed that the death penalty was up to 67.1 % less likely to be imposed when a crime was committed against a person of color rather than a white person.

PAC noted, the dynamic of having a white victim and a defendant of color are the most likely to result in the death penalty, with studies showing that such cases result in defendants of color being 4.4 to 8 times more likely to receive a death sentence.

PAC also called out disparities in the death penalty system through case studies published by the ACLU and Ibid on Riverside County in California, which revealed that in addition to accounting for a third of the state’s overall death sentences, 75 percent of people on death row that were sentenced by Riverside are people of color.

According to PAC, the high rates of death sentencing upon defendants of color is even more concerning due to a high rate of wrongful convictions against people of color. An uncontested study further demonstrated that over half of exonerated defendants have been black, while Black people make up only 13.6 % of the U.S. population.

California’s death penalty has other outspoken critics, such as Gov. Gavin Newsom, who described it as “infected by racism,” and Attorney General Rob Bonta, who also evaluated its “disparate impact based on race,” said PAC.

PAC argues there is risk of racial discrimination present in every stage of the criminal justice process regarding death penalty cases, highlighting the stages of policing and investigation, charging, jury selection.

Based on studies cited by PAC, “police officers are more likely to associate Black faces with criminality. Other studies have likewise indicated biases of police officers and other investigative actors may be affecting which suspects and defendants enter the death penalty system in the first place.”

The authors of the letter additionally argued, “California’s death penalty statute relies on a substantial degree of prosecutorial discretion, and this discretion has the potential to be applied unevenly across racial lines.” PAC argues the broad definition of death eligibility risks decisions that are racially biased.

PAC states California state law has the highest death eligibility in the country, meaning that, “prosecutorial discretion can be the difference between a death sentence and a life in prison,” citing studies that have shown that “special circumstances are alleged disproportionately based on the race of defendants or victims.”

In terms of jury selection, PAC explains numerous reasons why people of color are frequently disproportionately excluded from juries for death penalty cases; peremptory strikes, income, and being disqualified to serve on the jury due to views that are less tolerant of the death penalty.

PAC calls for immediate review of the state’s death eligibility laws under the California Constitution’s equal protection guarantees, stating that “the petition raises serious concerns regarding the fundamental fairness of a central component of the State’s justice system.”

PAC argues Penal Code § 745, which prohibits sentences based on racial discrimination and allows defendants to protest decisions that were racially biased, is not sufficient in addressing the injustices caused by death penalty laws.

The authors state that “while specific instances of racial discrimination are significant and warrant relief, they are different in kind from the broader, systemic, and multifaceted sources of racial inequality in the imposition of the death penalty that the petition here identifies.”

PAC concluded by urging the court, “Only prompt exercise of this Court’s original jurisdiction can adequately address whether California’s current death penalty system comports with the state constitution’s equal protection guarantee.” (source: Maeve Haggerty is a 2nd year student at the University of Vermont pursuing a Bachelor's degree in Political Science and Global Studies----Davis Vanguard)

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

Federal Judge Orders Alameda County District Attorney to Review 35 Capital Cases Following Disclosure of Prosecutorial Misconduct in Jury Selection

On April 22, 2024, Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price announced that her office was ordered by a federal judge to review 35 death penalty convictions after the disclosure of evidence that several prosecutors intentionally excluded Black and Jewish people from serving on a capital murder trial in 1995. In a press conference, DA Price indicated that her office discovered the handwritten notes of former prosecutors that include discriminatory jury selection tactics, suggesting “serious misconduct” permeated the office in the 1990s. “It’s not limited to one or two prosecutors, but a variety of prosecutors,” DA Price said. “The evidence that we have uncovered suggests plainly that people did not receive a fair trial in Alameda County and as a result, we have to review all the files.” U.S. District Court Judge Vince Chhabria ordered that the notes be made public following their discovery in the case of Earnest Dykes, who was convicted and sentenced to death for the 1993 attempted robbery of an elderly woman and the murder of her 9-year-old grandson. Judge Chhabria wrote that these notes, “especially when considered in conjunction with evidence presented in other cases – constitute strong evidence that, in prior decades, prosecutors from the office were engaged in a pattern of serious misconduct, automatically excluding Jewish and African American jurors in death penalty cases.”

DA Price’s office released excerpts of the prosecutors’ notes, including 1 involving a Black female juror, where the unnamed prosecutor wrote, “Says race is no issue, but I don’t believe her.” In a separate note regarding another Black female juror, a prosecutor described her as “short, fat, troll,” and that she “seemed put out by? my [questions] about the [death penalty] – tried to avoid giving direct answer [sic] a lot of ‘I don’t knows’ – don’t believe she could vote [death penalty].” Additional notes released by the district attorney’s office indicate that prosecutors placed emphasis on jurors’ Jewish identities, specifically underlining the word ‘Jewish’ and noting another juror’s profession as a banker and questioning his religion. The prosecutor’s notes are followed by “nice guy – thoughtful but never a strong [death penalty] leader – Jewish background.” Brian Pomerantz, an attorney for Mr. Dykes, praised DA Price’s office for releasing these notes. “It is overwhelming for Mr. Dykes to learn that this kind of misconduct and prejudice was happening in his case. After 31 years in prison, he’s learning he didn’t get the fair trial he should have gotten. He’s always thought this… but to hear the DA’s office saying it themselves is profound.”

During the press conference following Judge Chhabria’s order, DA Price said that her decision to review all 35 cases not only stems from the judicial ruling, but also an ethical responsibility. “This is not about left or right or any kind of politics,” said DA Price. “This is about ethics.” In a statement, Senior Director of Color Of Change Michael Collins said that this information “is horrifying. We have known for a long time that prosecutors often engage in unethical practices, but this scandal, uncovered by DA Pamela Price, is unparalleled.” He continues that “for too long, prosecutors have sought to win at all costs, even if it means engaging in constitutional violations, civil rights violations and antisemitic and racially disparate practices that result in people sentenced to death.”

The Alameda County DA’s office started their review process about a month before the federal order and have been in contact with victims and survivors in the affected cases. “We recognize how terrible this is, and it is something we have to make right,” DA Price said. She added that “it’s outrageous. When you have this kind of misconduct, it impacts them first and foremost because have been misled… We have to be mindful of the impact that this has on them and address their needs as well as balancing the right of every defendant to a fair trial.”

DA Price’s review comes just a few weeks after a group of legal advocates, including the Office of the State Public Defender and Color Of Change, asked the California Supreme Court to “bar the prosecution, imposition and execution of death sentences” because of its disproportionate use on people of color. The court filings indicate that Black defendants are approximately 9 times more likely to be sentenced to death in California than all other races. Additionally, neighboring Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen recently announced that he would seek to resentence 15 men sentenced to death in Santa Clara to life sentences without the possibility of parole. DA Rosen cited the “diminishing likelihood” or any executions in California because of Governor Gavin Newsom’s 2019 moratorium on the death penalty. “The state is dismantling death row, and it is time we recognize this reality and dismantle these sentences as well,” said DA Rosen in a resentencing motion. Despite Gov. Newsom’s moratorium, nearly 700 prisoners remain on death row. California’s last execution took place in 2006.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

UNITED KINGDOM:

Edith Thompson: CCRC told to revisit hanged woman's pardon case

A panel has been told to re-examine the case of a woman hanged for the murder of her husband, 2 months after it rejected a bid for her to be pardoned.

Edith Thompson, 29, was found guilty of murdering Percy Thompson after he was fatally stabbed by her lover Frederick Bywaters in east London in 1922.

The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) had ruled the case did not meet the requirements for a royal pardon.

It has been told to return to the case after legal proceedings were launched.

Edith and Percy Thompson, 32, were returning to their home in Ilford after a night at the theatre on 3 October 1922 when he was stabbed to death by her lover, 20-year-old Bywaters.

During their investigation, police discovered letters revealing an affair between Edith and her husband's killer. The murder became a huge public sensation.

Despite there being little evidence against her, and the insistence of Bywaters that she played no part in her husband's death, both were found guilty of murder and executed at separate London prisons on 9 January 1923.

The case was referred to the CCRC by then-justice secretary Dominic Raab in 2023 following an application for a posthumous pardon by a firm of solicitors on behalf of Prof René Weis, Edith's heir and executor.

After a year, the panel found that while her trial may not now be considered fair, there was no new evidence available to meet the requirements for a pardon.

Earlier this month Prof Weis's solicitors started action for a judicial review over the decision against the CCRC and Justice Secretary Alex Chalk.

In their letter of claim, they said they were challenging the commission's decision "on the basis it is founded on an incorrect understanding and application of the law".

Among the arguments set out, they accused the CCRC of failing to address properly points such as the "biased summing-up of the trial judge", claimed new evidence had been provided and said the panel had failed "to recognise the wide scope" of pardons that had previously been issued.

In its response, seen by the BBC, the Ministry for Justice said Mr Chalk had instructed the CCRC to look at the case again, while also taking into consideration the arguments made in the challenge.

Reacting to the decision, Prof Weis said it "has to be a step in the right direction" as "it is a lasting stain on our justice system that Edith Thompson's innocence has not been officially acknowledged".

He added that her case had been one of the main reasons why the death penalty was abolished in the UK in the 1960s, having been brought up in debates about the issue at the time.

"That too is one of the reasons why she matters so much," he said.

A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: "After careful consideration, the Lord Chancellor has referred this case to the Criminal Cases Review Commission to again investigate any potential miscarriage of justice."

(source: BBC News)

INDIA:

The Human Side of Capital Punishment: Perspectives from India and Beyond

The foundation of all penalties is the same idea: that misconduct always has to have a consequence. The punishment is being meted out for two key reasons. One is the conviction that someone who has acted improperly should bear the consequences of their actions because it is both morally and practically right to do so; the other is the conviction that punishing wrongdoers deters others from acting improperly. The basis for the death penalty is the same as those of other penalties.

The debate over the death penalty considers the most pertinent issues in general while taking into account the current situation. The criminal justice system in India includes the death penalty as a fundamental component. With the strength of the Indian human rights movement growing, many are questioning the morality of the death penalty. This is a strange argument, though, since it is amazing and morally wrong to keep one person alive at the expense of many other members or potential victims in the community.

The Indian Penal Code's founders believed that the death penalty should only be applied seldom. Over a century after its introduction, the death penalty's place in the Penal Code has not changed in principle. However, the trend towards its repeal in many nations has influenced both judicial and legislative opinions on the matter. Over the past twenty years or so, the Criminal Procedures Code has undergone several minor modifications that are indicative of the legislative thought. Prior to the 1955 modification of the Criminal Procedures Code of 1898, a judge had to provide justification if the death penalty was not appropriate in a murder case.

One of those topics of human concern that sparks never-ending discussion but never yields results that can be verified by science and are acceptable to both sides of the argument is the death penalty. The question of whether or not to abolish has been debated in numerous countries and continues to do so in others.

The writings of utilitarians like Bentham and Beccaria, who maintained that punishment being an evil in and of itself should be just sufficient to curb the menace of the crime and that no excessive punishment, including capital punishment, ought to be inflicted where some lesser penalty could achieve the same result, led to the beginning of the campaign against the death penalty in England and throughout Europe. The opposition against the death penalty in England was led by the Romilly family, a few other reformers, and most recently Sydney Silverman resulted in the Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act, 1965's nearly complete repeal of the death penalty.

The current situation is very different from what it was at the end of the 18th century in England, when roughly 200 offences carried the death penalty. The death penalty is still allowed under Indian law, despite the fact that it has only been applied in the "rarest of rare cases" and is typically reserved for serious crimes with aggravating circumstances. The issue has drawn the attention of the government and public in India over the years.

High treason (Treason Act, 1814), violent piracy (Piracy Act, 1837), and setting fire to the Queen's ships, arsenals, etc. (Dockyards, etc. Protection Act, 1772) are still punishable by death in England. Regarding murder, the Act of 1965 stipulates a life sentence; however, the court may also suggest to the Secretary of State a minimum amount of time that, in its opinion, must pass before the defendant may be freed under section 29 of the Prisoners Act, 1952. It has been suggested in R v. Flemming (1973) that no such recommendation be made for a time frame shorter than 12 years.

The State of Michigan abolished the death penalty in 1847, with the exception of treason, starting the trend of abolishing capital punishment in the United States in the 19th century. Numerous other states have now followed suit.

The legal process by which the state executes a person as a warning for a crime is known as the death penalty or capital punishment. A death sentence is the result of a court order for someone to be punished in this way, whereas implementation is the result of strict enforcement. Capital crimes, also referred to as capital offences, are crimes for which the death sentence is an option. The Latin word "capitalis," which literally means "regarding the head" (referring to beheading as a means of execution), is where the word "capital" originates.

As per Encyclopaedia Britannica, the death penalty, often known as the capital punishment, is the imposition of a death sentence on an individual who has been found guilty of a criminal act by a court of law. A capital offence is any criminal charge for which the death penalty is an appropriate punishment. The crimes for which the death penalty is applied vary from state to state and nation to nation.

These offences include first-degree murder (planned), murder with special circumstances (premeditated, multiple, involved in another crime, including guns, involving a police officer, or a repeat felony), and rape with further bodily harm in various states in the United States injury, as well as the treasonous national offence. When a capital case is indicted, bail is usually not permitted.

Religious, philosophical, and ethical principles are at the heart of the current debate over the death penalty. However, accurate information may and should guide the creation of public policy. Since the sole major practical argument in favour of the death sentence is deterrence, the evidence supporting the capital punishment's unique effectiveness as a deterrent to murder is particularly significant. This paper's justification is to review and assess the preclusion evidence.

We need to appropriately define the question. We are not asking if the threat of punishment in general works as a deterrent to crime or if severe punishments for murder are appropriate. The question at hand is whether long incarceration or the death penalty, as it has been or may be used in the United States, is a more effective deterrence to murder. Is it possible that if New Hampshire's death penalty is increased, fewer murders will occur? If not, there are no reasonable advantages to the death penalty that balance its costs to society.

Capital Punishment

A careful examination of the debate in the Legislative Assembly of British India reveals that the topic of the death penalty was not brought up until 1931, when Bihar's member, Shri Gaya Prasad Singh, attempted to introduce a bill to do away with the death penalty for offences covered by the Indian Penal Code. However, after receiving a response from the then-home minister, the motion was rejected. In the 1946 Legislative Assembly discussion, Sir John Thorne, the Home Minister at the time, clearly stated twice the Government's position on the death penalty in British India before to independence. "The government does not think it is prudent to abolish the death penalty for any form of crime for which it is now applied.

India maintained many laws imposed by the British colonial authority after gaining independence, including the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (also known as the "IPC") and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (also known as "Cr.P.C. 1898"). The death penalty was 1 of 6 penalties allowed by the IPC to be used under the law. If the accuse is convict of an offence punishable by means of death, and the court sentence him to some other punishment than death, the court shall in its judgment utter the reason why sentence of death was not passed. In 1955, the Parliament repeal Section 367(5), CrPC 1898, extensively varying the position of the death sentence.

The death penalty was no longer the norm and courts did not require special reasons for why they were not daunting the death penalty in cases where it was a prescribed punishment. The Code of Criminal Procedure was re-enacted in 1973 ('CrPC'), and numerous changes were made, notably to Section 354(3):

When the guarantee relates to an offence that carries a death sentence or, in its place, a life sentence or a period of years in prison, the decision must justify the sentence given and, in the event of a death sentence, the unusual circumstances surrounding the sentencing. This was a significant departure from the circumstances that followed the 1955 amendment, which gave the death penalty and prison sentences equal chances in a capital case, and from the 1898 statute, which established the death penalty as the default punishment and required justifications for any other punishment that was imposed. Judges now sought to give a unique justification for imposing the death penalty.

In Section 235(2), which reads as follows: If the accused is found guilty, the judge shall, if not, proceed in accordance with the provisions of Section 360, attend to the accused on the question of sentence, and after that pass sentence on him in accordance with law. These amendments also introduce the possibility of a post-conviction examination on sentence, counting the death sentence.

Capital Punishment in India

No one may be deprived of their life or liberty unless the legal process has been followed, according to Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Every person has the constitutionally given right to life under Article 21.

The Indian Penal Code, 1860 stipulates that a number of offences, including murder, dacoity, waging war against the country, and criminal conspiracy, are punishable by death. The death penalty is also provided for by a number of additional laws, including the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act and the NDPS ACT.

The Constitution contains a clause allowing for the clemency of the death penalty under Article 72. This Article gives the Indian President the authority to pardon, commute, or remit death sentences under specific circumstances. In a same vein, Article 161 gives the State Governor the authority to bestow pardon. Furthermore, only the execution can take place if a Sessions Court's decision to apply the death penalty has been validated by the state's High Court. These steps are required to eliminate any possibility of error. These days, life in prison is the norm rather than the death penalty, which is rarely applied in the most extreme circumstances.

The Jagmohan Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh case was the 1st case in which the court was able to address whether the death penalty was constitutional. The appellant's council argued that all of the rights protected by Article 19(1) of the Constitution are eliminated by the death penalty. The second argument put forth was that there was no set standard or policy that guided the discretion used to determine which cases should result in the death penalty.

Thirdly, it was claimed that Article 14 of the constitution, which protects equality before the law, was broken by this unrestrained and unguided discretion. It was said that there were numerous instances in which two people committed murder, one of them received the death penalty and the other life in jail. The final point made was that there are no legal criteria that take various events and considerations into account when deciding whether to give someone the death penalty or life in prison.

Since the beginning of time, the death penalty has been a used kind of punishment that is effective in getting rid of criminals and is applied to the most heinous offences. The foundation of Indian criminal jurisprudence is a blend of reformative and deterrent views of punishment. In addition to forcing punishments to create a deterrent among criminals, the offender should also be given the opportunity to turn their life around. There are differing views in India on the death penalty; some support keeping the punishment in place while others are in favour of abolishing it.

India is one of the 78 countries that support the death penalty, arguing that it should only be applied in the "rarest of rare cases" and for "special reasons." Though neither the legislature nor the Supreme Court have determined what qualifies as a "rarest of rare case" or "special reasons."

Abolitionists contend that the death penalty as it currently exists violates citizens' fundamental right to life, with a focus on the constitution's protection of that right and its removal through legally recognised procedures. Legal experts abound who argue that the extraordinary retention of the death penalty in Indian criminal statutes is in direct opposition to an individual's right to life. It is said that these learned jurists probably don't consider the reality that even the right to life isn't a given.

Furthermore, "equality before law and equal protection of the laws" are declared in Article 14 of the Constitution, meaning that no one may face discrimination unless it is necessary to achieve equality. The preamble to the constitution finds resonance with the idea of equality incorporated under Article 14. It appears that capital punishment is the antithesis of a person's right to life for this reason. It is undeniable, nonetheless, that the Indian Constitution contains no express mention of the death penalty being undemocratic.

Conclusion:

The capital penalty is available for a wide range of offences under our nation's penal code. Sadly, though, there has been no decrease in these crimes in the nation as a result of the death sentence. India continues to apply the death penalty despite the fact that over 66% other nations have abolished it because they primarily think it has a deterrent impact. The three main notions of retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation form the foundation of the retaliatory system. The justifications for using the death penalty, deterrence and retribution, where society hassles revenge, fall short. It's clear that eliminating an assassin hasn't stopped a new murderer from emerging.

(source: Akanksha1; legalserviceindia.com)

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

Death Penalty for Odisha Man in Double Murder Case

(see: https://newskarnataka.com/india/orissa/death-penalty-for-odisha-man/27042024)

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

Man Gets Death Sentence For 2019 Nayagarh Killings

The additional sessions judge at Odagaon awarded death sentence to a man for killing 2 persons and causing the death of a 7-month-old foetus in Nayagarh district, 5 years back.

Terming it as a ‘rarest of rare’ case, additional sessions judge Manas Ranjan Rath said, “The citizens were in fear of their lives due to the havoc and depreciation created by him.

He committed a brutal and grotesque murder, creating a menace in society. Considering the aggravated and mitigating factors, nature of crime and its impact on the society, I am of the considered view that the act of the convict is a rarest of rare case and warrants capital punishment.”

The convict was identified as Niranjan Mallick (45). On January 17, 2019, Mallick, in a drunken state, attacked Lochan Sethi, a watchman, with a sharp-edged weapon multiple times at the vegetable market in Odagaon.

As police reached the spot, Mallick became even more aggressive and attacked them with the same weapon. Badani Pradhan, who was passing by, was also attacked and sustained critical injuries. Both Sethi and Pradhan were taken to the hospital, where they died during treatment. Later, Mallick attacked a pregnant woman, leading to the death of her unborn child.

“Mallick did not have any enmity with the 2 deceased. He committed the offence without any provocation. The court realised that the crime was a rarest of rare case and ordered capital punishment,” public prosecutor Indu Bhusan Mishra said, adding that the court has asked the district legal services authority to facilitate the payment of Rs 5 lakh as compensation to the legal heir of Sethi and Rs 2 lakh for the next of kin of Pradhan.

The incident had sent shockwaves across the state and had prompted chief minister Naveen Patnaik to announce Rs 2 lakh ex gratia each for the next of kin of 2 deceased.

(source: The Times of India)

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

Triple murder: Kerala High Court commutes death penalty of convict from UP----The Court refused to confirm the trial court's death sentence on finding that the crime could not be categorized as being a "rarest of rare" case, and in view of the rehabilitation prospects of the convict.

The Kerala High Court recently set aside the death penalty imposed on a man from Uttar Pradesh, who was convicted in a triple murder case, and sentenced him to life imprisonment instead [State of Kerala v Narendra Kumar].

Justices A K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Syam Kumar VM found that case would not fall under the category of the "rarest of the rare," which typically warrants the death penalty.

"While the facts and circumstances proved against the appellant before us clearly point to his involvement in a gruesome triple murder, we would not go so far as to categorise it as the 'rarest of the rare' so as to impose the death sentence on him. This is especially so because this is a case where we have sustained the conviction of the accused for the various offences with which he was charged solely based on circumstantial evidence," the Court said.

The Court passed the ruling on an appeal by the convict, Narendra Kumar (appellant), who hailed from Uttar Pradesh.

Kumar was earlier convicted by a trial court for the offence of murder under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for the brutal killing of his employer and the employer's parents.

According to the prosecution, Kumar had used a knife and axe to inflict fatal injuries on the victims and had also engaged in the robbery of valuables and electronic devices. He had absconded after the crime was committed but was eventually arrested.

The trial court, after analysing the evidence and considering the brutality of the crime, found Kumar guilty of the alleged offences and sentenced him to death.

Apart from the offence of murder, Kumar was also separately convicted under Sections 397 (robbery or dacoity with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt), 457 (lurking house-trespass or house-breaking at night), 380 (theft in dwelling house) and Section 461 (dishonestly breaking open receptacle containing property) of the IPC.

Kumar challenged the trial court verdict before the High Court, while the trial court forwarded the case records to the High Court so that the death sentence could be confirmed.

In a common judgment passed on April 25, the Kerala High Court found that the prosecution's case was built on circumstantial evidence.

Such evidence included reliance on the last seen theory (that the accused was last seen with the victims before their death), the act of Kumar fleeing after the crime, medical evidence and the recovery of stolen items. Witnesses had also identified the accused in the trial court.

The High Court proceeded to uphold Kumar's conviction.

However, it set aside the death sentenced imposed on Kumar while reasoning that the death penalty should only be reserved for those cases that qualify as “rarest of the rare" cases.

The Court also acknowledged a study by Project 39A of the National University of Delhi, which highlighted Kumar's difficult upbringing and his efforts towards self-improvement, indicating a potential for his rehabilitation.

It referred to the case of Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v. State of Maharashtra (2019), where it was held that the probability that a convict can be reformed and rehabilitated in society must be seriously and earnestly considered by the courts before awarding the death sentence.

It, therefore changed the punishment imposed on Kumar for the crime from a death sentence to one of life imprisonment.

"Taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant during the hearing on sentence, the reports obtained in relation to the appellant, and the probability of his reformation, we feel that the imposition of stricter terms of life imprisonment would strike the right balance between the conflicting interests of the appellant and the public at large and go a long way towards sustaining public confidence in our legal system," the High Court added.

The Court clarified that Kumar would have to serve at least twenty years in prison before he could be eligible for remission (government-approved early release from prison).

The High Court partly allowed the criminal appeal filed by Kumar on these terms and declined to confirm the trial court's death sentence in the matter.

Kumar (appellant) was represented by advocates M P Madhavankutty, Mathew Devassi, Ananthakrishnan A Kartha, and Remya M Menon.

Public Prosecutor Alex M Thombra appeared for the State.

(source: barandbench.co0m)

VIETNAM:

Vietnam tycoon appeals against $27 billion fraud death sentence

(see: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com//industry/cons-products/durables/from-germ-free-to-delicate-fabric-care-heres-how-to-choose-an-ideal-washing-machine-for-your-home/articleshow/109567070.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

MALAYSIA:

Activists, politicians urge the authorities to go beyond the moratorium, and abolish the death penalty----In its latest annual report, Amnesty International calls for full abolition of the death penalty. With the 2018 moratorium Malaysia has made progress, but that's not enough. Between July 2023 and January 2024, the death penalty was pronounced 26 times. For lawyer Michael Kong, “open public discussions about justice” are needed.

Amnesty International (AI) Malaysia, in its latest annual report on the state of human rights in the country released 2 days ago, calls once more for the full abolition of the death penalty.

While acknowledging some positive developments in 2023, a consequence of the moratorium on executions in force since 2018 and legislation approved in April 2023 removing mandatory death sentence for 12 offences, including drug trafficking, for AI, this is still not enough.

The human rights organisation wants the government to ensure that all resentencing efforts uphold the right to a fair trial with adequate time and resources given to the person charged.

Although the last execution by hanging dates back to 2017, AI steadfastly stands by its position, noting that the moratorium could be lifted at any time.

“Amnesty International opposes the death penalty unconditionally, for all cases and under any circumstances, as it is a violation of the right to life and is ultimately a cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment,” said Katrina Jorene Maliamauv, AI executive director, during the launch of the annual report.

For this reason, AI calls for the moratorium to be extended until the death penalty is completely abolished and all death sentences commuted.

Some laws have been adopted to remove mandatory death penalty, most notably the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023, and the Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023, which came into effect on 4 July 2023 and 12 September 2023 respectively.

This has “allowed a total of 1,020 prisoners who were sentenced to mandatory death or life imprisonment to file applications in court for a review of their sentences,” the report reads.

Despite these legislative changes, AI, after reviewing court decisions involving 139 people from 4 July 2023 to 4 January 2024, found that 26 cases (27 %) resulted in the death penalty.

The AI report ALSO found that 18 of these (69 %) were related to murder, while the remaining 8 (31 %) involved drug offences.

“While it's commendable that the country has moved towards abolishing the mandatory death penalty, it should not sit in the comfort of the praise," Maliamauv said.

For her, efforts to uphold human rights must continue beyond this point, especially considering the opposition to the complete abolition of the death penalty, above all by the families of murder victims.

Maliamauv places hope in open public discussions on justice and alternatives to the death penalty. Two lawyers who are also elected officials agree with AI’s stance.

"I am aware of the pros and cons of abolishing the death penalty, but one reason that appears very strong in favour of abolishing it, to me, is the fact that the death penalty is irreversible and irreparable, unlike imprisonment,” said Baru Bian, a Sarawak state assemblyman and lawyer, speaking to AsiaNews.

“But if a 'life imprisonment' is substituted for the death penalty, then it must be a sentence for the rest of the convicted person's natural life,” he added.

Michael Kong, from the opposition Democratic Action Party, also praised the steps Malaysia is taking towards a full abolition of the death sentence, but stressed the importance of extending the moratorium.

“With certain offences still carrying the death penalty, it is essential to ensure that no irreversible actions are taken while a concrete and final decision on this matter is pending,” he said.

Like Maliamauv, Kong also highlights the importance of a public debate. “The focus should remain on upholding human rights and exploring alternatives to the death penalty through open public discussions about justice,” he noted.

(source: asianews.it)

IRAN----executions

A young woman named Shahnaz hanged in Qezel-Hesar prison in Karaj

According to the Iranian state-media reports, at dawn on Wednesday, April 24, 2024, a young woman named Shahnaz was hanged in Qezel-Hesar prison in Karaj. Shahnaz had been held in prison for 3 years. She is the 5th woman hanged in Iran in 2024.

According to the information compiled by the Women’s Committee of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, with the execution of Shahnaz, the number of women executed in Iran since 2007 has reached 234.

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)

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

3 Men and a Woman Executed in Karaj

4 people including a woman and a possible juvenile offender were executed for murder charges in Karaj.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a man was executed in Ghezelhesar Prison in Karaj on 24 April. His identity has been established as Pejman Azizi (photo) who was sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder.

An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Pejman Azizi was very young at the time of arrest, it’s possible that he may have been a child offender.”

Iran Human Rights is investigating Pejman’s age at the time of the alleged arrest.

IHRNGO previously reported the executions of 2 other men named Shahram Sharghi and Alireza Aghayiat the prison that day.

Furthermore, Rokna reported the executions of 2 men and a woman in Karaj on 25 April.

According to the report, one of the men is alleged to have killed his 2nd wife on 16 April 2020. The 2nd man is alleged to have killed someone during a street fight on 29 September 2021. The woman allegedly killed her 70-year-old neighbour to steal their gold on 26 February 2022.

The 3 unnamed prisoners were sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder. The report does not specify the exact execution location of one of the men. The other man is reported to have been hanged in Ghezelhesar Prison and the woman is reported to have been executed in “Karaj Rajai Shahr Prison,” a prison that was closed last year.

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.

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.

Iran is the biggest executioner of women. In 2023, at least 22 women were executed for drug-related, murder and security-related charges in Iran. Hajar is the 2nd woman to be executed in January 2024. The unidentified woman is the 5th woman to be executed in 2024.

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

Unidentified Woman and 4 Men at Risk of Execution in Tabriz

4 unidentified men and a woman were transferred to solitary confinement in preparation for their executions in Tabriz Central Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, four men and a woman were transferred to solitary confinement on 25 April in preparation for their executions in Tabriz Central Prison. None of their identities have been established at the time of writing.

The four men are on death row for drug-related charges and the woman was sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder.

Iran is the biggest executioner of women. In 2023, at least 22 women were executed for drug-related, murder and security-related charges in Iran. Hajar is the 2nd woman to be executed in January 2024. At least 5 women have already been executed in 2024.

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

Javad Asgari Executed in Arak

Javad Asgari, a man sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder, was executed in Arak Central Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a man was executed in Arak Central Prison on 24 April. His identity has been established as Javad Asgari who was sentenced to qisas for murder.

At the time of writing, 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 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.

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

Yavar Aminkhah Executed for Drug Offences in Saveh

Yavar Aminkhah, a man on death row for drug-related charges, was executed in Saveh Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a man was executed in Saveh Prison on 24 April. His identity has been established as 37-year-old Yavar Aminkhah who was sentenced to death for drug-related charges by the Revolutionary Court.

An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Yavar Aminkhah was a father of a young child and had been arrested around 3 years ago.”

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

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.”

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

Protester Reza Rasayi at Imminent Risk of Execution; 23 Execution Recorded in 5 Days

Sources close to Reza Rasayi’s family have warned of the protester’s execution being carried out in the next few days. There has been a drastic rise in the number of executions in the past week, with at least 23 people executed in the last 5 days alone.

Iran Human Rights calls for the death sentences against Reza Rasayi and other political prisoners to be overturned. It also urges the international community to adopt a firm and sustainable policy to stop the daily executions in Iran.

IHRNGO Director, Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam said: “Raising the political cost of executions is the only way to prevent the execution of Reza Rasayi and other prisoners on the death row. People inside and outside Iran can raise this cost with daily campaigns against the death penalty, and the international community by putting pressure on the Islamic Republic.”

The risk of his execution being carried out in the coming days has greatly increased, according to Dadban quoting a source close to Reza Rasayi's family. “Neither his lawyer or family have heard any response to the Article 477 judicial review application filed months ago. His confirmed death sentence was previously sent to the Kermanshah Sentence Implementation by Branch 2 of the Kermanshah Criminal Court and all the administrative work has been completed,” the source said.

(Gholam) Reza Rasayi is a 34-year-old Kurdish protester of the Yarsani faith who was arrested in relation to the death of IRGC member Nader Beirami at a ceremony held for Yarsani leader, Seyed Khalil Alinejad, which people used as an opportunity to protest, holding “Woman, Life, Freedom” signs. Authorities falsely claimed the gathering which they violently crushed, was unrelated to protests.

Reza was the first defendant in a group trial of 11 defendants for charges of “participating in the murder of Nader Beirami with a cold weapon, participating in intentional bodily harm to the aforementioned with a knife and participating in disruption of public order by creating conflict, controversy and uproar” at Branch 2 of the Kermanshah province Criminal Court. In court documents obtained by IHRNGO, Reza denies the charges but after “investigations” he confesses to stabbing the officer. His co-defendants in the case were compelled to testify against Reza and were subsequently released or faced lighter sentences. One defendant later states that he never saw Reza stab the victim and his testimony was made “out of fear.” Reza did not testify against anyone else himself and denied the charges in later investigations and in court, stating clearly that his confessions had been extracted under torture. All other defendants also later retracted their testimonies which had been made “under torture.” The court also dismissed 2 expert testimonies in Reza’s favour including that of the Kermanshah Forensic Medical Examiner whose testimony meant the fatal blow could not have been committed by Reza.

In the judgement, the testimonies of torture were dismissed and despite a lack of evidence, the judge relied on elme qazi (knowledge of the judge- see page 41 of this report) to sentence him to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder on 7 October 2023. The IRGC officer’s family, who are the plaintiffs in the case, requested qisas, Reza’s execution.

Reza’s family were informed that his sentence had been upheld by Branch 17 of the Supreme Court on 24 December 2023. His appeal was rejected by Branch One of the Supreme Court without addressing the legal flaws and contradictions” according to HRANA news agency.

(source for all: iranhr.net)

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

Iran Executes 3 More Prisoners, Including Woman

The Islamic Republic's judiciary has executed 3 more prisoners, including a woman.

Rokna news agency reported on April 25 the 3 executions in Karaj for murder convictions.

Details of the first 2 cases, involving a middle-aged man who allegedly killed his wife and another man who fatally stabbed someone in a street fight, were limited.

Their identities remain undisclosed.

The third case involved Sahar, a woman convicted of murdering her 70-year-old husband and taking his gold.

The Supreme Court upheld the initial verdicts issued by the Tehran Criminal Court, leading to the executions.

In the past couple of weeks, Iran has witnessed a surge in the execution of prisoners.

However, these coincided with the country's conflict with Israel, diverting international attention away from the executions.

According to a report by Amnesty International, Iran has reached its highest level of death sentence execution in the last 8 years, with the judiciary of the Islamic Republic executing 853 people in 2023 alone.

The report indicates that 481 executions, more than 1/2 of the total, were related to drug crimes. This marks an 89 % increase in the death penalty compared to 2022 when 255 people were executed for drug-related offenses.

The latest numbers also show a staggering 264 % increase compared to 2021, when 132 individuals faced execution for similar charges.

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

International Campaign to Save Toomaj Salehi Gains Momentum

Thousands of people around the world are taking to the streets this weekend to protest against an injustice: the imminent death sentence imposed by Iran’s government against an innocent protest rapper named Toomaj Salehi.

Toomaj was first arrested in October 2022, in Iran, for supporting the popular Woman, Life, Freedom movement that erupted after the September 2022 death in police custody of Mahsa Amini. He had been hiding from security forces for two months before they found him.

His ordeal began on a cold night, that October, when Toomaj, 33, blindfolded and covered in blood, was detained by the authorities. He is accused of “spreading corruption on earth,” a grave charge in the Islamic Republic which is punishable by death.

Toomaj is a renowned rapper in Iran – as well as a mechanical engineer and lathe worker who uses his salary to produce protest songs against the Islamic Republic. He even sold his motorcycle to fund his music. Toomaj has been fearless in using his music to instil courage in others.

On Wednesday, Amir Raisian, one of Toomaj’s lawyers, confirmed to Iran’s Shargh newspaper the death sentence issued against the rapper by Branch 1 of the Isfahan Revolutionary Court. Toomaj’s account on X had already hinted at the verdict before the official announcement.

Toomaj’s post expressed concern not for himself but for the psychological wellbeing of his fans.

The death sentence has sparked widespread outcry in Iran and around the world. Politicians, artists, and civil society actors have joined forces in calling for the sentence to be annulled.

Protest demonstrations to support Toomaj are scheduled to take place in several global cities on the weekend of 27-28 April.

In late 2022, as the Woman, Life, Freedom movement was spreading across Iran and capturing imaginations around the world, Toomaj released songs criticizing the Iranian government and supporting protestors’ demands for more freedoms and women's rights.

He also posted pictures and videos of himself at the demonstrations and called for a change of government in his videos.

In July 2023, months after his first arrest, a court sentenced the artist to six years and three months in prison. But he was released on bail on November 18, 2023, after Iran’s Supreme Court, responding to an appeal, found "flaws in the original sentence" and returned the case to a lower court for reexamination and a possible retrial.

Toomaj was arrested again and returned to jail less than 2 weeks later. He then faced new charges after he had posted a video describing the torture he faced in prison during his initial detention.

A few months ago, during an appearance in a Clubhouse social media room, Toomaj discussed his lifelong passion for poetry. The ancient Iranian poet Omar Khayyam is his favorite. Writing poetry of his own has also been a sanctuary during challenging times.

Toomaj comes from an ethnic minority in Iran, the Lor Bakhtiari community, and he is a proud speaker of the Bakhtiari dialect. Raised amid the bustling streets of Isfahan and Shahinshahr, he earned two degrees, following his father into engineering. But his father also spent eight years in jail as a political prisoner.

Toomaj’s musical journey began at the age of 7 when he learned and mastered the tonbak – a traditional Iranian drum. His initiation into rap came through his brother and ignited a passion that has defined his life. By 2015 he was immersed in making music.

He was once detained for wearing a t-shirt covered in images of US dollars during a performance. In a conversation published to YouTube, he mused on the different meanings of his name, finally embracing the Turkmen interpretation of "brave rider" for himself.

Toomaj also finds solace and release in boxing – a daily ritual that anchors him except for those times when prison walls have closed in or gym doors have remained shut.

Iqbal Iqbali, Toomaj’s uncle, who lives outside Iran, said in a recent interview that his nephew had left him a message just hours before his arrest in which he voiced concerns about suspicious activities near his home.

Toomaj’s family and friends say he was injured during the arrest. Images that circulated at the time showed his bloody face after his capture.

The death sentence handed down against him has sparked a wave of outrage, grief, but also determination, with fans, fellow citizens and concerned people around the world seeing Toomaj as a powerful voice for the cause of freedom and human rights. His plight is the same as the plight of hundreds or thousands of Iranians: it is emblematic of Iran’s broader struggle for freedom and justice for all.

Civil activists, social media users, and ordinary Iranian citizens have denounced the death sentence. Many say Toomaj Salehi is the voice of the Iranian people and have vowed to amplify his message.

(source for both: iranwire.com)

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

Iranian Political Prisoners Condemn Looming Execution Of Rapper

A group of high profile political prisoners in Iran have denounced the death sentence handed down to dissident rapper Toomaj Salehi, calling it a sign of Iran's "inhuman nature and deep corruption."

Earlier this week, an Iranian revolutionary court sentenced the outspoken artist to death for his songs supporting the nationwide protests of 2022, charges that his lawyer, Amir Raeisian, claims he had previously been acquitted of.

Among the 14 political prisoners who have voiced their concerns are Nobel laureate Narges Mohammadi, former MP and daughter to former president Faezeh Hashemi Rafsanjani, reformist politician Mostafa Tajzadeh, civil rights activist Golrokh Iraee, political activist Abdollah Momeni, and Islamic scholar Sedigheh Vasmaghi.

The group stated that the Iranian government "reacts with extreme cruelty even to protests made in the language of art." A 20-day appeal period is available to 33-year-old Salehi, dubbed "the world's bravest rapper" by Western media. According to his lawyer, he intends to appeal the decision.

The statement read, "The punishment for our silence today is the death sentence for all of us tomorrow; they will silence every voice. This absolute horror will end with the infinite power of people's resistance in these occupied streets."

Unions and artists in Iran have also raised their concerns and asked for Salehi's penalty to be reduced. Khashayar Sefidi, suspended from art school in Iran for participating in the 2022 nationwide protest, announced on Saturday that he had begun a hunger strike at Iran Music House in Tehran to protest Salehi's harsh punishment.

“I am worried for Tomaj's life. I am worried, and there is nothing I can do. I can only show my support with what I have: my body and my will. To oppose the injustice against Toomaj and others like him,” Sefidi wrote in an Instagram post on Saturday.

Fars Province Teachers Trade Union also released a statement on Friday, calling Salehi's sentence "unfair" as "the judiciary doesn't see embezzlers and thieves stealing the public funds, but they arrest artists.”

Dozens of celebrities from singers to actors have been arrested since 2022, many of whom have been banned from work, had bank accounts frozen and been given travel bans, in addition to heavy fines and even prison terms.

Asserting that "the path of legal criticism and activism" has been blocked in Iran, these trade union activists wrote: "The suppressed anger of the people may flare up in the near future, leading to more radical movements in society."

Additionally, the Khuzestan Province Teachers' Trade Union has condemned Toomaj Salehi's court as "unfounded".

Iranians in diaspora have organized rallies over the weekend across four continents, from Australia to Europe and North America to protest the death sentence.

(source: iranintl.com)

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

Iran Risks Further Backlash for Death Sentence of Dissident Rapper, Says German MP

Iran's handing of a death sentence this week to dissident rapper Toomaj Salehi has drawn outrage from the Islamic republic's domestic and international critics, including a German lawmaker who says Tehran risks fueling the backlash if it moves toward executing the artist.

In an interview for the Friday edition of VOA's Flashpoint Global Crises program, German parliament member Ye-One Rhie said the Iranian government is using the death sentence to monitor who is still reacting to developments in Salehi's case and how they are reacting. Rhie has been acting as a "political sponsor" or advocate for the 33-year-old Iranian singer since shortly after his initial arrest in October 2022.

"The Islamic Republic of Iran is testing the waters," Rhie said, noting that Tehran did the same when it staged an unprecedented aerial assault on Israel earlier this month. Israeli forces largely thwarted the attack with military assistance from a coalition of Western allies and Arab neighbors.

Iranian state-approved newspaper Shargh first reported the death sentence against Salehi in an article published Wednesday, citing one of his lawyers who vowed to appeal it.

Salehi was charged upon arrest with "spreading corruption on earth," an offense punishable by death. Days earlier, he had posted videos on Instagram, showing himself joining a nationwide protest movement against Iran's Islamist government and releasing a music video denouncing the government for 44 years of "failure."

The rapper was sentenced last July to 6 years in prison, but Iran's Supreme Court reviewed the ruling and declared it flawed, enabling his release in November. He was re-arrested 2 weeks later, after posting another video online complaining of being tortured in custody.

Wednesday's report of Salehi's death sentence drew swift condemnations from other dissidents and artists in Iran and from Iranian teachers' trade unions.

VOA's Persian Service also received and vetted several videos that appeared to show protest actions inside Iran. VOA could not verify the videos independently because it is barred from reporting inside Iran.

One video shows a banner with Salehi’s image on a bridge over Tehran's Modarres Expressway, as a woman filming the scene says the date is April 25.

Another clip shows a Persian slogan citing Salehi scrawled onto a building's exterior wall in an unidentified location. The graffiti says: "We will return to the streets with strength."

Criticism of Salehi's death sentence also came quickly from the United States and U.N. human rights bodies. In a Wednesday post on the X platform, U.S. Deputy Special Envoy for Iran Abram Paley said the U.S. "strongly" condemns the move. U.N. rights experts issued a statement Thursday demanding that Iran release Salehi immediately and reverse the sentence.

As those calls were made, some Iranian state media appeared to downplay the possibility of Salehi being executed. In articles published Thursday, they cited Iran's Judiciary Media Center as saying that even if the Supreme Court confirms Salehi's death sentence upon appeal, a Pardon and Forgiveness Commission would review the case for possible commutation.

Rhie said her efforts to raise international awareness of Salehi's plight for the past year-and-a-half have kept his case on the radar and agenda of Western media and governments.

"It is important for the Iranian regime to know that Salehi has a status that they cannot touch. I would warn them against doing anything to him, because they don't want to know what the backlash would be," Rhie said.

While Iran has signaled that Salehi's death sentence could be reversed, the German lawmaker said she will keep up her fight. "I don't think that there is anything that will stop us from our activism," she said.

(source: voanews.com)

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

Statement: Iranian dissident rapper Toomaj Salehi sentenced to death----Index on Censorship has issued a joint statement with ARC and PEN America condemning a decision by an Iranian revolutionary court

Artists at Risk Connection (ARC), PEN America, and Index on Censorship strongly condemn the death sentence imposed on Iranian rapper and human rights defender Toomaj Salehi for “spreading corruption on Earth” issued by a revolutionary court in Tehran on Wednesday, April 24, 2024. Salehi now faces possible execution, as his lawyer plans to appeal the sentence.

On 22 April 2024, Toomaj Salehi’s lawyers were notified that Branch 1 of the Isfahan Revolutionary Court sentenced him to death on the charges of “participating in rebelling against state,” “gathering and colluding against national security,” “propaganda against state,” and “inciting riot.” Based on this decision, the charges amount to “corruption on earth,” which is punishable by the death penalty under the Islamic Penal Code. The ruling also includes a 2-year travel ban, a 2-year ban on practicing art, and mandatory participation in a “behavior management and knowledge skill” organized by the Isfahan Province Judiciary Courthouse.

“Salehi’s death sentence is an outrageous attack on human rights and free expression. We condemn this abhorrent act of the Revolutionary Court and demand the immediate release of Salehi, who has suffered constant persecution at the hands of the Iranian authorities since 2022,” said Julie Trébault, director of Artists at Risk Connection. “Artists like Salehi, who use their creativity to express dissent against draconian and unjust measures by authoritarian regimes, must be safeguarded from such deliberate violence in recognition of the universal and fundamental right to free expression and artistic freedom. We stand in solidarity with Salehi and other prisoners of conscience who remain detained and persecuted for championing artistic freedom and human rights.”

Salehi was arrested in October 2022 after publicly backing the mass protest movement triggered by the killing of Mahsa Amini by Iranian security forces following her arrest for allegedly improperly wearing her hijab. He had released rap songs and social media posts in support of the protests and criticizing the government. Salehi was sentenced to 6 years in prison but was freed on bail on November 18, 2023, after having spent 252 days in solitary detention. Upon his release, he appeared in a video in which he talked about suffering torture while in detention and was rearrested s weeks later.

In January 2024, Salehi was sentenced by Iranian authorities to 1 year of imprisonment. Additionally, his passport had been annulled for s years and was required to mandatorily participate in a behavioral management course.

Salehi’s charges and death sentence from the Iranian revolutionary court are in stark contradiction to the earlier verdict announced by Iran’s Supreme Court in November 2023, when it confirmed that it had identified “flaws in the original sentence” and ordered his release. Branch 1 of the Isfahan Revolutionary Court has dismissed the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling as an “advisory opinion” and added two more charges, which carry the death penalty.

Since the beginning of 2024, ARC notes the escalation in persecution and imprisonment of several Iranian artists and musicians. Earlier this week, ARC, PEN America, Cartooning for Peace, Cartoonists Rights, and Freedom Cartoonists Foundation condemned the arrest and mistreatment of Iranian cartoonist Atena Farghadani, calling for her immediate release. Iranian musicians, including rapper Vafa Ahmadpour (known as Vafadar), Saman Yasin, a Kurdish rapper, and Grammy award-winning Shervin Hajipour, have received sentences including imprisonment and travel bans.

PEN America’s Freedom To Write Index reported the jailing of at least 57 writers for their work in 2022, making Iran the second-highest jailer of writers in the world. On December 10, 2023, imprisoned Iranian writer, human rights activist, and 2023 PEN/Barbey Freedom To Write awardee Narges Mohammadi was honored with the Nobel Peace Prize in absentia. PEN America and ARC continue to demand her immediate release.

In 2023, Toomaj Salehi was Index on Censorship’s Freedom of Expression Award winner in the Arts category.

(source: indexoncensorship.org)

APRIL 26, 2026:

TEXAS:

Local Man Gets Death Penalty for Killing Ex and Her 10-Year-Old Child

A Euless man was given the death penalty by a jury in Tarrant County Wednesday after being convicted of killing his ex-girlfriend and her 10-year-old daughter in 2018.

Paige Terrell Lawyer, 44, was sentenced to death on April 24, having been found guilty of capital murder during the guilt-innocence phase of the trial last week. Jurors had the option of sentencing Lawyer to life in prison but deemed that the nature of his crime warranted the death penalty, reported the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

Medical examiners previously determined that O’Tishae Womack, 30, and Ka’Myria, 10, died of strangulation. Womack was a resident of Fort Worth and left behind twin 4-year-old boys, Zayden and Kayden.

O’Tishae was found by her sister Lashundra Womack, who went to her apartment after the deceased failed to show up for their daily walk, according to the Tarrant County District Attorney’s Office. O’Tishae was found on the kitchen floor with a plastic bag over her head and was bleeding from her face. Ka’Myria was found in an upstairs bedroom covered by a blanket.

“He brutally, with no justification, took the lives of two people,” Tarrant County Assistant District Attorney Lloyd Whelchel told the jury. “He is not going to change. … He is going to be a future danger. And you know that.”

Police had been called to the residence on two previous occasions, both times over reports of domestic violence. Lawyer was accused of attempting to strangle Womack on both occasions.

“2 lives were extinguished that day,” Tarrant County Assistant District Attorney Dale Smith said. “Both died as a result of strangulation, the defendant’s calling card.”

Lawyer fled Texas after committing the crimes and was arrested by U.S. Marshals in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, near Nashville a week later, per a report by Fox News. He is said to have confessed to his uncle, but it is not clear if the uncle notified law enforcement of the man’s whereabouts.

During the trial, prosecutors told the jury that Lawyer may have killed O’Tishae to prevent her from testifying against him in an upcoming domestic violence trial. During sentencing, jurors also learned that Lawyer had sexually assaulted Ka’Myria.

Lawyer’s DNA was found on the knot in the bag around O’Tishae’s head, under O’Tishae’s fingernails, on Ka’Myria’s shorts, inside Ka’Myria’s underwear, on a bleach bucket, and on a Lysol can. Lawyer’s fingerprint was also found on a mop handle in Ka’Myria’s blood.

The jury deliberated for roughly seven hours over two days before returning with the death penalty sentence.

“Your horrendous act has devastated our family,” O’Tishae’s sister Lashundra said after the sentence was read. “You took a huge chunk of our hearts. … You forever will be known as a murderer, a rapist, and a coward.”

Texas has approximately 180 inmates on death row currently. The most recent execution was on February 28, 2024, according to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. According to The Fort Worth Star-Telegram, the last Tarrant County death sentence was in November 2019, when a convicted drug cartel hitman was sentenced for the death of two people, one of whom was beheaded with a machete.

In Dallas, there have already been 65 murders and nonnegligent manslaughters this year, according to the City of Dallas crime analytics dashboard. FBI data showed Dallas police cleared just 39% of homicides in 2020.

Making the situation worse, the City allocated only $654 million to fund law enforcement, a significantly smaller budget than other high-crime cities like Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City. The Police Department currently employs around 3,000 officers, but according to a report from the City, about 4,000 officers are necessary to ensure public safety.

(source: The Dallas Express)

CONNECTICUT:

“LITTLE HOME MARKET”: THE CONNECTICUT COMPANY ACCUSED OF FUELING AN EXECUTION SPREE----Evidence points to Absolute Standards as the source of a lethal drug the Trump administration used to restart federal executions after 17 years.

THE INTERCEPT HAS uncovered new details about the small family business in Connecticut identified as having sold a lethal drug to the Federal Bureau of Prisons for use in the Trump administration’s unprecedented execution spree. Beginning in July 2020, the administration killed 13 people in the federal death chamber in Terre Haute, Indiana, over the course of 6 months.

Absolute Standards Inc., located on the outskirts of New Haven, produces and sells materials used to calibrate laboratory and research instruments. The company is registered with Connecticut as a “manufacturer of drugs, cosmetics, and medical devices” and employed just 21 people in the lead-up to the executions, records show.

John Criscio, the company’s owner, has denied that Absolute Standards played a role in supplying pentobarbital, a barbiturate used for lethal injection.

But according to a source The Intercept interviewed last year, Criscio and the company’s director, Stephen Arpie, acknowledged in a meeting that Absolute Standards produced the active ingredient for pentobarbital for use in the federal executions. The person, who met with Criscio and Arpie about the possibility of obtaining lethal injection drugs, asked that their name be withheld because they were not authorized to speak about the interaction. A separate unnamed pharmacy then used the active ingredient, or API, to make an injectable drug that would stop prisoners’ hearts.

“They went about explaining to us how they produce the chemical,” the person said of Criscio and Arpie. “They’d been reading about it in the papers. And they saw that people couldn’t get it. They were like, ‘Well, we make the standard, so we know how to make it. So we can just make it.’ They basically bragged about how they built this little home market.”

A 2nd person interviewed by The Intercept said they were also told by Arpie and Criscio that Absolute Standards made drugs for executions.

Like many of the 27 states capable of carrying out death sentences, the federal government has fought to keep the identity of its supplier hidden from the public. Earlier this month, the comedy news program “Last Week Tonight With John Oliver” named Absolute Standards as the Bureau of Prisons’ drug supplier, citing an anonymous source. The segment echoed reporting by Reuters, which noted in 2020 that the House Oversight Committee had sent a letter to Absolute Standards suspecting the business was the source of the drugs. At the time, Arpie told Reuters that he did not always keep track of the final use of his products and couldn’t rule out involvement.

Interviews conducted by The Intercept and documents obtained under public records laws bolster evidence that Absolute Standards, located in a state that abolished the death penalty in 2012, helped the Trump administration resume federal executions after a 17-year hiatus. A Connecticut congressional staffer raised concerns about the company’s role in the executions as early as April 2021, suggesting that states might be looking to follow the federal government’s lead. “As Absolute Standards has been identified as the only possible supplier of pentobarbital ingredients for executions,” the staffer warned, “the risk that Connecticut medicines will imminently fuel the death penalty in executing states across the country is high.”

When asked about pentobarbital, Criscio told The Intercept, “We don’t make that material.” Arpie did not respond to multiple requests for comment, and the BOP declined to comment.

The federal prison complex in Terre Haute, Ind., is shown Friday, Aug. 28, 2020. The scheduled federal execution at the facility of Keith Nelson, who was convicted in the killing of a 10-year-old Kansas girl, was back on track Friday after an appellate panel tossed a lower court's ruling that would have required the government to get a drug prescription before it could use pentobarbital to kill the inmate. (AP Photo/Michael Conroy) The federal prison complex in Terre Haute, Ind., on Aug. 28, 2020. Photo: Michael Conroy/AP IN AUGUST 2018, Absolute Standards applied to the Drug Enforcement Administration to become a bulk manufacturer of pentobarbital, according to a notice in the Federal Register. The designation allows for the production of chemicals “by means of chemical synthesis or by extraction from other substances.” A few months later, in October, the BOP received its first batch of the API for pentobarbital, according to a declaration by Raul Campos, then-associate warden of the BOP’s Federal Medical Center Carswell in Fort Worth, Texas. The declaration was submitted as part of litigation over the Trump administration’s lethal injection protocol.

(The Intercept requested Absolute Standards’ applications to become a bulk manufacturer of pentobarbital in August 2023. On Monday, the DEA declined to hand over those records, stating that they were exempt from disclosure, in part because they included “information that is classified to protect national security.”)

For years, pharmaceutical companies refused to sell pentobarbital for use in capital punishment, creating shortages that halted executions in some states that relied on the drug. Acquiring the API marked the end of a yearslong search for the BOP.

“We were looking for the drugs domestically and internationally,” a former BOP official with knowledge of the situation told The Intercept last year. The official asked that their name be withheld because they were not authorized to speak about the procurement of execution drugs. “There were a number of leads that looked promising and then ended up being dry.”

Eager to restart executions, the Trump administration had prioritized locating lethal drugs. But U.S. manufacturers did not want their products to be associated with killing people because they feared it would hurt their bottom line. “There’s such a lobby against the death penalty that any company who becomes identified as providing the drugs gets boycotted,” the BOP official said. “Those companies make more money from legitimate uses of the drug than they do from executions.” It was equally difficult to find drugs internationally, the official added, because of “shady characters” and issues confirming the legitimacy of suppliers.

A team within the BOP general counsel’s office, led by then-general counsel Kenneth Hyle, was in charge of vetting potential suppliers. “More often than not, the companies they identified turned out to be nonviable,” the official said. Hyle did not respond to requests for comment.

The former official did not remember how the BOP identified Absolute Standards but said there was a team of people calling suppliers off a list. “I know that we had people that were just calling every company that they could to find out if they were able and willing to produce it.”

Only a small group of people knew the name of the API supplier, according to the official, who was only aware that it was a small company based in Connecticut. “I had no reason to ask for the name,” the official said.

The API failed its first quality assurance test in October 2018, according to the declaration submitted by Campos. Another batch of the pentobarbital ingredient passed testing in February 2019 and was sent to a compounding pharmacy to be made into an injectable solution. The BOP has not revealed the identity of the compounding pharmacy. The former BOP official told The Intercept that they did not remember the name of the pharmacy, only that it was located somewhere in the South.

“The fear was that publicity would result in this company no longer wanting … to do business.”

Typically, the government logs payments to vendors in an online database, but there is no public record of any BOP payments to Absolute Standards. “I don’t recall how it was done. It was probably not done through their normal payments process,” the former BOP official said. “Everything was done discreetly, because again, the fear was that publicity would result in this company no longer wanting to be willing to do business.”

After learning that the BOP had secured execution drugs, officials from other states started inquiring about whether they could buy from the same company. An official from Nebraska, which was prevented in 2015 from importing drugs from India, asked the BOP about its source. The Nebraska Department of Correctional Services did not respond to questions about the communication.

In April 2019, an attorney adviser from the Justice Department’s Office of Legislative Affairs emailed colleagues to notify them that a staffer from South Carolina Rep. William Timmons’s office had asked about the federal government’s execution drugs. “Specifically, they ask 1. Does the Federal Government have the ‘cocktail’? 2. Could they transfer it to states under existing law?” the email read.

Timmons’s deputy chief of staff, Heather Smith, told The Intercept that the employee who inquired with the BOP no longer worked for the representative. Smith did not know whether the employee ever talked to Absolute Standards.

South Carolina has not conducted an execution since May 2011 due to drug shortages. But last September, officials announced that the state had secured pentobarbital. After The Intercept requested records detailing communications between the South Carolina Department of Corrections and Absolute Standards, the corrections team replied that such information was exempt from disclosure, citing in part a state secrecy law that shields records disclosing the identity of people and companies involved in executions. The corrections department did not comment when asked whether its response meant that Absolute Standards was providing the state with execution drugs.

In the summer of 2020, as the federal executions got underway, Reps. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., and Jamie Raskin, D-Md., started to raise questions about Absolute Standards’ involvement. They sent a letter to the company on July 14, the same day the government killed Daniel Lewis Lee, the first person to die in the execution spree, stating that they’d seen redacted testing reports “indicating that your company has assisted DOJ in securing and/or testing pentobarbital for death penalty executions.” The lawmakers posed a list of 11 questions to Absolute Standards about its work in the executions. The company did not reply, emails obtained by The Intercept show.

There is no public record of further investigation by the lawmakers into Absolute Standards.

Pressley’s office did not return multiple requests for comment, and Raskin’s press secretary told The Intercept to contact the House Oversight Committee. Nelly Decker, the communications director for Oversight Committee Democrats, wrote in an email that she had “nothing more to add” on the inquiry.

“The risk that Connecticut medicines will imminently fuel the death penalty in executing states across the country is high.”

In April 2021, Jennifer Lamb, the district director for Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., brought Absolute Standards to the attention of state Attorney General William Tong. “It appears the company may have supplied the US Department of Justice with ingredients used to make pentobarbital for use in federal executions,” Lamb wrote.

“There are several states that are now actively looking to follow the federal government’s lead in acquiring this drug and resuming executions,” she continued. Describing Absolute Standards as the only possible supplier of pentobarbital ingredients for capital punishment, Lamb warned that Connecticut could be complicit in clearing the way for executions across the country.

The following month, Tong sent a letter to Absolute Standards informing its owners that “Connecticut has a strong public policy against executions.” Providing drugs to carry them out, he wrote, “is contrary to the values and policies of this state.” Tong requested details about the company’s activities, expressing concern that the business might “also be providing pentobarbital, or contemplating providing the drug, for use by individual states in their attempts to execute human beings.” Connecticut Assistant Attorney General Joshua Perry, named in the letter as the point of contact for future correspondence, declined to comment.

After John Oliver named Absolute Standards as the BOP’s source, a spokesperson for Tong told CT Insider that the attorney general was reviewing the company but had not launched an investigation. The outlet also reported that state lawmakers are now exploring legislation to ban Connecticut companies from selling lethal injection drugs.

ABSOLUTE STANDARDS IS known for its flexibility in the scientific industry. “They can pivot pretty easily as far as what the needs are of whatever industries,” said Meredith Millay, director of product management at Emerald Scientific, a company focused on cannabis science that has worked with Absolute Standards for a decade and sells products made by the Connecticut business. “If you need something and you can’t find what you need … they are small enough to where you can put in a special request and get custom standards made.”

Absolute Standards has boasted about the “world class manufacturing” and “internationally recognized quality” of its analytical reference materials and performance evaluation samples, compounds used to calibrate lab equipment and increase the precision of scientific analysis conducted by a wide range of entities. Criscio started the business in 1990, later employing his son and daughter. The company is registered with the DEA to manufacture Schedule II through V drugs, according to documents filed with the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection. When asked about Absolute Standards and the API for pentobarbital, the DEA said it “does not comment on specific registrants.”

In recent years, the company netted contracts with the U.S. Department of the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency, contracts and invoices obtained through records requests show. In 2017, for example, the company sold the Interior Department $88,500 worth of analytes in substances such as ethanol and soil. State agencies such as the California State Water Resources Control Board and the New York Office of Cannabis Management list Absolute Standards as one of a handful of vendors approved to conduct testing to ensure the quality of lab results.

Criscio has vehemently denied his company’s role in executions. Last October, The Intercept visited the Absolute Standards office, a small one-story building covered in weathered aluminum siding. When The Intercept inquired about Criscio at the reception desk, a woman said that he was out for the rest of the week. But later in the afternoon, Criscio arrived at the office, wearing a sweatshirt emblazoned with the NASA logo.

“I have no idea what you’re talking about. Nothing to talk about,” Criscio told The Intercept in the parking lot after being asked whether his company supplied execution drugs. “You’re on private property. If I have to, I’ll call the police. Is that what you want me to do?” He then went inside.

After The Intercept approached another man outside to ask about pentobarbital, Criscio reemerged and called the police, telling the operator, “I have two people on my property refusing to leave, harassing my employees.”

“I’m ready to have a fucking heart attack right now. Get off my fucking property,” he said, growing increasingly agitated. “I do not know what you’re talking about. That’s all I have to say. I’m not gonna say no more.”

The Intercept left a note at an address listed for Arpie, the company’s director. He did not reply and has not answered subsequent phone calls, text messages, or emails.

In early April, after the John Oliver segment, Criscio maintained that his company did not supply drugs for the federal executions.

“Yeah, no, we don’t make that material,” he told The Intercept. “I’m the owner of the company. I’m telling you there’s no comment. Thank you, goodbye.”

(source: Lauren Gill, Daniel Moritz-Rabson----theintercept.com)

FLORIDA:

Florida man charged with 1st-degree murder in rape, killing of Madeline 'Maddie' Soto

A Florida man facing dozens of sexual assault charges in connection to the February killing of 13-year-old Madeline "Maddie" Soto is now charged with capital murder in her death, court records show.

Stephan Sterns, already accused of 60 child sex abuse-related charges, was charged with first-degree murder on Wednesday, according to Osceola County Circuit Court records. The Kissimmee Police Department and the Orange County Sheriff's Office initially arrested Sterns in connection to the case on Feb. 29.

Madeline "Maddie" Soto disappeared on Feb. 26 from her home in Kissimmee, a city about 20 miles south of Orlando. The girl's body was found on March 1.

Sterns was the last person to see Maddie alive, according to an X post by the Orange County Sheriff's Office.

He's slated to be arraigned on the new charge Monday before Judge Keith Carsten.

If convicted of capital murder, Sterns faces the death penalty.

(source: USA Today)

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

Jury votes to recommend death penalty for Nassau County cop killer Patrick McDowell----The jury decided to recommend the death penalty by a vote of 11-1 for McDowell's crime of killing Nassau County Deputy Joshua Moyers.

A Nassau County jury has decided to recommend Patrick McDowell get the death penalty for the murder of Nassau County Deputy Joshua Moyers, a crime he pleaded guilty to on March 10, 2023.

11 jurors voted for McDowell to be put to death while just 1 recommended McDowell receive a sentence of life in prison.

The decision came after three hours and a half hours of deliberation. The trial itself lasted for 20 days.

Nassau County Sheriff Bill Leeper said McDowell is a "liar, cheater, druggie, and a murderer," and that was "proven in court."

"He's a cop killing, evil person, and he deserves to die a violent death just like he gave deputy Moyers. He does not deserve any better than that," Leeper said.

Thursday morning, court proceedings took an unusual turn when before closing arguments, McDowell asked if the judge would reopen the evidence phase of the trial so that he could take the stand. McDowell read a letter to the courtroom, saying he deserves to be put to death over receiving a life prison sentence.

In the letter, McDowell said "this is a plea for justice." He told the jury it made him sick to watch people try to excuse what he did, said he never once considered Moyers's life and just "killed him to get away," and testified that if someone murdered his loved one this way, he'd want them dead.

"I do not deserve to live a long life in a place full of people who will praise and revere me as a cop killer. I deserve what I gave him. He deserved better, but I do not. Let me be clear, this is not a plea for my life or for my death. This is a plea for justice for Deputy Moyers and his family," part of McDowell's letter read.

When closing arguments began, prosecutors said in 5 minutes McDowell undid everything his defense presented to the jury over the last week.

The case began in September 2021, when McDowell shot Moyers in the face and back during a traffic stop. McDowell, who had been to jail several times, said he was trying to avoid going back to prison.

This led to a 5-day manhunt that spanned several counties. Moyers was eventually brought into custody with help from a K9 officer.

Years of pretrial hearings led up to McDowell's April trial, with debate over changing venues and the admission of evidence from psychiatrists.

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

'This is a plea for justice': Nassau Co. cop killer reads letter, prefers to receive death sentence----Patrick McDowell made the decision during closing arguments Thursday, despite him saying his attorneys are "very much against" it.

Before closing arguments began Thursday in the penalty phase of the death penalty trial for a Nassau County cop killer, Patrick McDowell - the man who will soon learn his fate on whether he lives or dies, read a letter to the courtroom, preferring to receive the death sentence.

The court session was supposed to begin at 8:30 a.m., but according to First Coast News, On Your Side's Renata Di Gregorio who is present, the session started late due to private conversations between attorneys and the fallen deputy's family members. The session didn't start until around 9:30 a.m.

"I have to make certain at this point in time that this decision by you in this request being made ... in a manner that it's an informed decision, it's voluntarily made without any coercion, you understand that?" the judge asked McDowell.

McDowell insisted, nodding his head yes, and agreed to take the stand. He said his attorneys were "very much against" it.

The death penalty trial for McDowell has been going on over the past two weeks. He confessed and pleaded guilty to killing Nassau County Sheriff's Deputy Joshua Moyers during a traffic stop in 2021.

In the letter, McDowell said "this is a plea for justice." He told the jury it made him sick to watch people try to excuse what he did, said he never once considered Moyers's life and just "killed him to get away," and testified that if someone murdered his loved one this way, he'd want them dead.

"I do not deserve to live a long life in a place full of people who will praise and revere me as a cop killer. I deserve what I gave him. He deserved better, but I do not. Let me be clear, this is not a plea for my life or for my death. This is a plea for justice for Deputy Moyers and his family," part of McDowell's letter reads.

While McDowell read the letter, his dad, who has been there for most of this penalty phase of the trial, wasn't in the courtroom. After he finished reading, Moyers's dad and a woman he has been sitting with throughout the phase, were seen wiping away tears.

When closing arguments began, prosecutors said in 5 minutes McDowell undid everything his defense presented to the jury over the last week.

(source for both: First Coast News)

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

The verdict's in: Jurors agree on sentence for Nassau deputy killer----Patrick McDowell to become the first defendant in a Nassau case to be executed in 75 years

It’s taken 6 days of jury selection, eight days of sentencing hearings testimony and 913 days of grieving for slain Nassau County Deputy Joshua Moyers to come to a conclusion: Patrick McDowell should be executed for taking the 29-year-old’s life, jury’s recommended Thursday.

The 37-year-old Jacksonville man pleaded guilty to killing Moyers during a September 2021 traffic stop in which he and his female passenger had been doing drugs in a stolen minivan while he was already on probation. Jurors were tasked with deciding whether he should receive the death penalty or a life in prison sentence and needed at least an 8-4 majority as opposed to unanimous. They voted 11-1 in favor of death.

McDowell showed little emotion while the verdict was read. Moyers' family shed some tears and hugged each other and prosecutors.

Much of the testimony the last two weeks focused on the same theme of McDowell changing dramatically for the worse after returning from two deployments to Iraq both as a decorated U.S. Marine and a military security contractor suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and getting addicted to drugs.

In about an hour testifying himself, McDowell expressed deep regret for his actions that night and apologized to the Moyers, law enforcement and the Nassau County community for his “selflessness” and “cowardly” execution of a man “better than me.”

McDowell and others even noted he grew up with a stepfather police officer, a stepbrother FBI agent and a birth father with ties the Veterans Treatment Court that McDowell had initially done well in but relapsed.

He also pledged to spend the rest of his days, no matter what the jury decided, doing “everything I can to try to make right what I’ve done.”

Patrick McDowell's defense attorneys displayed this photo of his wedding day with Shauna McDowell during her testimony at his April 19 sentencing hearing in the death of Nassau County Deputy Joshua Moyers.

But then in his final return to the stand Thursday before closing arguments, he changed course and even acknowledged it was against his attorneys' wishes. He basically told the jury to punish him with death.

"I don’t want your mercy, and I definitely don’t deserve it," he said. "I can’t take away the pain I’ve caused, but I can pay for it, so make me pay for it.”

The prosecution also stressed that drugs and PTSD are no justification for so coldly shooting a law enforcement officer in the face at close range and then again to make sure he was dead.

Moyers’ fiancee, mother, father and brother also provided emotional and powerful victim impact statements about their lives caving in from all sides since his death.

Both his mother and brother said they’ll just suddenly burst out sobbing. To a person, it was clear that Moyers was all about service and integrity.

“He lived and breathed law enforcement,” fiancee Ivy Carter said.

Notably, they never said McDowell’s name or disparaged him or his family.

“We thank the jury for their time and diligent attention to this most important matter," State Attorney Melissa Nelson said afterward. "Their recommendation recognizes Josh’s service in life as well as the cold and calculated manner of his death. Josh’s family, fiance´e, friends, and fellow officers have suffered immense pain from hissenseless murder. I hope today’s end of the penalty trial may begin the healing they deserve."

How many people have been executed in Florida?

Of the 278 inmates on Florida’s death row, there currently are no cases from Nassau County, according to the state Department of Corrections. Of the 301 people executed in Florida since 1924, only two have been from Nassau.

Willie Walker was 33 when he was executed for rape in 1937, and Flem Griffis was 30 when he was executed for murder in 1949, according to the department.

(source: jacksonville.com)

ALABAMA----new execution date

Alabama governor sets execution date: Keith Edmund Gavin to die by lethal injection

Another Alabama death row inmate is set to die this summer.

Gov. Kay Ivey set July 18 as the execution date for Keith Edmund Gavin, who was sentenced to death for the March 1998 murder of William Clayton Jr. in Cherokee County.

Ivey set the timeframe for the execution of Gavin to occur beginning at midnight on Thursday, July 18, and expiring Friday, July 19.

Gavin is set to die by lethal injection at William C. Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore. It’s the only prison in the state with an execution chamber and where most death row inmates are housed.

It’s the second lethal injection set for this summer. Ivey set May 30 for the execution of Jamie Ray Mills.

The executions will be carried out by the state’s 3-drug lethal injection cocktail instead of the new method of nitrogen gas because neither Gavin nor Mills opted to change their methods of execution when they had the opportunity in 2018.

In Gavin’s case court records show Clayton, a courier service driver, had parked his van to use an ATM machine in downtown Centre. He was finished with deliveries for the day and was stopping at Regions Bank to get money to take his wife to dinner.

Records stated that Gavin shot Clayton during an attempted robbery, pushed him into the passenger’s seat, and drove off in the van. With an investigator from the district attorney’s office in close pursuit, Gavin stopped the van, got out, shot at the investigator, and fled.

Gavin was soon apprehended, and Clayton was pronounced dead at a hospital.

Two eyewitnesses positively identified Gavin as the shooter, including his cousin, who was an employee of the Illinois Department of Corrections. The cousin testified about trips he and Gavin had made to Centre and on that day saw Gavin fire shots at the driver of the van. Gavin also fired shots at an investigator as he fled, according to testimony.

The slaying came just a few months after Gavin had been released on parole from prison in Illinois after serving 17 years of a 34-year sentence for murder.

Following his conviction, Gavin’s appeals failed in state and federal court. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to review his case in 2005 and again in 2017.

In 2016, Gavin filed a new appeal alleging jury misconduct and ineffective counsel during the penalty phase of the trial.

In 2020, a federal judge in Birmingham upheld the state court decision denying Gavin’s jury misconduct claim. But, the judge ruled in favor of Gavin on the claim of ineffective counsel. The judge found that his original lawyers failed to pursue all the reasonably available mitigating evidence that could have influenced the decision on Gavin’s sentence. The mitigating evidence included Gavin’s upbringing in a gang-infested housing project in Chicago and the effects of his imprisonment in Illinois.

The state appealed that decision. A 3-judge panel from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals later said Alabama’s Court of Criminal Appeals had reasonably determined that Gavin failed to establish that any failure by his lawyers was prejudicial. The appeals judges’ ruling reversed the previous order on ineffective counsel.

Ivey’s announcement comes after a change in the way Alabama sets execution dates. Prior to January 2023, the Alabama Supreme Court issued a death warrant, good for one 24-hour period. Now, the Alabama governor sets a time frame for the execution. The change allows the Alabama Department of Corrections more time to carry out executions, after a slew of lethal injections had to be called off because they couldn’t be completed before midnight on their respective dates.

(source: al.com)

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

Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey sets execution date for death row inmate Keith Edmund Gavin

Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey on Thursday set the execution date for Keith Edmund Gavin.

The state's window to execute Gavin starts at midnight July 18 and ends at 6 a.m. July 19. The execution will be carried out by lethal injection.

"Although I have no current plans to grant clemency in this case, I retain my authority under the Constitution of the State of Alabama to grant a reprieve or commutation, if necessary, at any time before the execution is carried out," Ivey said in her letter to Alabama Department of Corrections Commissioner John Hamm.

Gavin, now 63, was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death in November 1999 for the March 1998 killing of William Clayton Jr., a driver for a courier company. The jury recommended the death penalty by a 10-2 vote. He was also on parole in Illinois at the time, after serving 17 years on a 34-year murder conviction.

Gavin is scheduled to be Alabama's 3rd execution this year, following Kenneth Smith, who was executed by the state via nitrogen hypoxia Jan. 25, and Jamie Ray Mills, whose execution date is set for May 30.

(source: montgomeryadvertiser.com)

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

Juror Who Sentenced Toforest Johnson to Death Now Believes He Is Innocent

INNOCENCE ALABAMA

“At a new tri­al, an informed jury can hear what we didn’t: all of the evi­dence. I am con­vinced and know in my heart that Mr. Johnson is inno­cent. But I believe a full and fair tri­al is the only way to prove it.”

Monique Hicks, 1 of the 12 people who served on the Alabama jury that convicted Toforest Johnson and sentenced him to death, said in an op-ed published on April 22, 2024 that she now believes Mr. Johnson deserves a new trial. Ms. Hicks recounts the new evidence that has come to light in the case and writes, “My role in the wrongful conviction of an innocent man keeps me awake at night.”

Mr. Johnson’s conviction rested on the testimony of a single witness who, despite not knowing Mr. Johnson, claimed to hear his voice confessing to the crime on the phone and who was secretly paid a $5,000 reward. For 2 decades, local officials repeatedly denied the existence of any reward paid to their star witness. Only after defense counsel received information from a retired state employee did the state finally admit it. Numerous Alabama legal officials support a new trial, including the current District Attorney, the original trial prosecutor, a former Chief Justice, and a former Attorney General. 

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

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

Prosecutors seek death penalty for Opelika mom and man accused of murdering 1-year-old

On Tuesday, a Lee County Judge ruled there is enough evidence to send the Capital Murder case against 32-year-old Dorothy Hight, and her male friend, 29-year-old Seth Kendrick, to a Lee County Grand Jury to consider official indictments.

Investigators are calling the alleged murder of 1-year-old Ezekiel Norville one of the worst cases of child abuse they’ve seen, as 90% of the child’s body, including his genitals, was covered in deep purple bruises, lacerations, or burns. Hight is Ezekiel’s biological mother.

“The court finds probable cause that each of these defendants should be bound over to be considered by the grand jury for Capital Murder,” Judge Russell Bush ruled.

Opelika police were called to the 200 block of 24th Street on February 19, where they discovered Hight and Kendrick on the front porch attempting CPR on the 13-month-old baby boy, who investigators refer to as EN. During Tuesday’s probable cause, we heard from an Opelika investigator who testified Hight blamed her son’s injuries on others, including the medical staff who tried to help him.

“Hight later stated that EN only had a burn mark on his face and a bruise on his stomach when he left in the ambulance, and the hospital staff or the ambulance service must have caused all the other bruises. Hight also believes Kendrick is responsible for the death because of his erratic behavior,” Sgt. Brandon Hutto testified.

Detectives said Kendrick told them the baby had fallen but was okay.

“Kendrick stated he turned around for a second and heard a thud, and EN had fallen in the shower; however, he seemed fine. Kendrick later put EN in a hammock that was hanging above the mattress, and then he went to a convenience store located on Pepperell Parkway at approximately 10:45 to buy a Coca-Cola. When he came back around 11:30, he checked on EN and noticed he was not breathing, and that’s when he woke up Hight and began CPR,” Sgt. Hutto testified.

Investigators told the court they can’t find any evidence Kendrick went to the store, but two witnesses came forward to tell police Kendrick contacted them in a panic. The conversations were memorialized in text and by a voice recording.

“The text message read: ‘man, I need you to call me right now, baby’s life is at stake, I don’t know if he is dead or not, please, please, please, please call.’ Kendrick called a witness at 12:20 a.m. and was crying and stated, ‘I think I killed him. I think I’m going to jail. I was only trying to help an old friend, and detectives are at my house.’”

According to court documents, Ezekiel had bruising on his forehead, cuts/burns to his right cheek and nose, and deep-colored bruises on his stomach and chest resembling the form of fists and fingers. 1/2” circular burns were located on his chest under his cheeks and chin. Ezekiel’s buttocks, legs, and thighs showed extensive bruising, and he had a soiled diaper with dried feces. Investigators say on the back and left side of Ezekiel’s head, an oval-shaped mark resembling a belt was observed, and his genitals appeared to have a cut or burn, with severe bruising in the abdominal area.

Hutto said during his testimony that the medical examiner ruled the child’s death a homicide by blunt force trauma.

“There was a brain bleed, coagulated blood on the skull, appeared to be two fractured ribs,” Hutto said.

Investigators said when they went into the home, it was filthy, with trash and dog feces on the floor, and several meth pipes scattered around the house.

Hight’s attorney argued his client was asleep during the time of the incident, based on both the defendant’s statements. Prosecutors countered, saying the significant injuries occurred over a long period of time, causing Ezekiel to cry and scream in pain.

“The officer testified this is the worst that he has ever seen,” said District Attorney Jessica Ventiere. “The child is covered in head to toe with bruises, and his penis appears to have abrasions and burns.

“Even assuming Hight was asleep during some point in time, the time it would’ve taken to cause the extent of injuries this child sustained would cover quite a bit of time where the child would be screaming, and the child would be making noises and crying. To believe she would sleep through all this and is totally innocent is a theory by the defense, but not supported by the facts or what we know about human nature.”

The Lee County District Attorney’s Office is seeking the death penalty. Bond remains denied for both defendants.

(source: CBS News)

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

What’s the appeals process for death sentences in Alabama?----Alabama just added its 166th person to death row. The appeals process could take decades

With the recent conviction of Jeremy Tremaine Williams for murder and rape of a child, Alabama’s Death Row population grew to 166. Yet, it could be decades before Williams is executed for his crimes due to the lengthy appeals process.

“If I’m realistic, I’ll die before him,” said Russell County District Attorney Rick Chancey in an interview after Williams was given the death penalty.

“He’ll be here long after I’m gone.”

In fact, one inmate has waited on death row since January 1982, according to the Alabama Department of Corrections website. And another inmate sentenced to death from Russell County has been on death row since 1997, according to the ADOC website.

Williams was recently found guilty of raping, strangling, and killing 5-year-old Kamarie Holland in Phenix City in December 2021. He was sentenced to death on 4 counts of capital murder by Judge David A. Johnson. Williams must now go through the appeals process in order for the death sentence to be upheld and enacted.

(source: ledger-enquirer.com)

KENTUCKY:

Kentucky lawmakers move forward to reinstate death penalty after 15-year ban

Attorney General Russell Coleman has taken action to end the Commonwealth’s ban on the death penalty.

On March 7, Coleman filed a motion with the Franklin Circuit Court to lift a 15-year ban on the death penalty, per the Attorney General’s office.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center, in July 2019, the Commonwealth’s execution protocol was found unconstitutional because regulations could allow intellectually disabled prisoners to be executed. The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2002 decision in Atkins v. Virginia prohibited the use of capital punishment against those with an intellectual disability.

In March, the Beshear Administration published an amended capital punishment regulation, which would comply with the court’s 2010 ruling.

“For almost 15 years, Kentucky has been bogged down by delays as violent criminals tie up our legal system with costly litigation as they seek to avoid justice,” said Attorney General Coleman. “The survivors of the victims of these horrific crimes have suffered in limbo for long enough. They deserve the justice that was lawfully delivered by a jury.”

“As a prosecutor, I took an oath to uphold the law as passed by the people’s representatives. That’s exactly what I intend to do,” Coleman said. “Now that Governor Beshear’s administration has restarted the process to legally impose the death penalty, it’s finally time to deliver justice for victims and their families.

The motion claims that all grounds for the temporary injunction against the enforcement of lethal injection protocols have been resolved, and the ban should be lifted.

“Our office argued to end the Court’s 15-year ban because of our commitment to Kentucky’s law and the pursuit of justice,” Coleman said. “We hope the Court gives victims’ families the closure they have been promised for so long.”

(source: FOX News)

ILLINOIS:

'Killer Clown' John Wayne Gacy's death row attorney reveals why he likely had dozens more victims — and help

John Wayne Gacy killed more than 33 victims, and the "Killer Clown" didn't do it alone, his lawyer believes.

Karen Conti was a fledgling attorney in the early 1990s when she defended the most infamous serial killer at the time during his final death row appeals from 1993 to his execution by lethal injection May 4, 1994.

Gacy was convicted of 33 murders, but Conti said she's certain there are more victims.

"I'm almost positive about that," she told Fox News Digital. "Gacy traveled during his crime spree, and he traveled to rural areas to do construction work. I actually saw his business records, which were meticulously kept.

"He was gone for two or three weeks at a time, and he was in the middle of this crime spree. I just can't imagine why he would stop killing during that time."

Almost all of his victims he was convicted of killing were buried in his home and throughout his Norwood Park Township, Illinois, property about 15 miles north of Chicago.

Gacy often traveled to more rural areas, according to Conti, which "would have made it easier to solicit, abduct young men and boys and to bury the bodies."

"We didn't have a database that was integrated at the time, but my guess is that if some podcast or sleuth were to go to these areas and look at these business records and try to figure out if there were people that went missing, they may connect the dots and conclude that what I'm saying is true," Conti said.

She believes there are at least 20 more victims of Gacy's killing spree that extended beyond the suburban town's boundaries.

And she's "convinced" Gacy had help, most likely from two men who lived with and had sex with Gacy during his crime spree.

"They were taking money and drugs from him, and they testified at trial that they actually dug the trenches underneath the house," Conti said. "To me, it's impossible for them not to have known what they were doing and why they were doing that.

"And it's impossible for me to believe that Gacy, who was very portly, could actually go down into that crawlspace and carry bodies down there and bury them alone."

She referenced a victim who escaped Gacy's clutches in 1978, Jeffrey Rignall, who had testified during the trial that Gacy used a chloroform rag to knock him out after offering him a ride home from a local bar, according to court documents.

He was in and out of consciousness during a brutal sexual assault detailed in court documents and woke up next to a statue in a Chicago park.

During Rignall's testimony, he said Gacy was "aided at one point by an accomplice," which was documented by a West Virginia University research paper on the insanity defense.

The research paper included a footnote saying no one else was arrested in the sexual assault on Rignall.

But prosecutors didn't want to "dirty up" the case against Gacy by bringing other suspects into the picture, Conti told The U.S. Sun in a March interview. So, potential co-conspirators were never introduced.

"It's my really strong feeling that these 2 young men helped procure the young men for Gacy and helped tie them down and maybe even help perpetrate the crimes, certainly helped bury the bodies," Conti said.

Something that stood out to Conti was Gacy's dry, cynical sense of humor that continued to his final moments.

"Gacy, for all of his evil acts, did not appear to be evil, and that is exactly why he got away with it," she said. "He was very genial. He was affable. He was glib. He could be very aggressive with the other males on the team, but not so much with me. He was a little softer with me."

Conti was a trailblazer as a 29-year-old lawyer and the only woman on Gacy's death row defense team.

"The other thing that was really interesting was his sense of humor," she said. "Because, although obviously nothing he did was funny, he used his sense of humor to sort of deflect away from the darker side of him and to get people to like him.

"And I think that was one of his tools in doing his crimes. These people (like Gacy) are very manipulative and very interested in manipulating the people around them. And Gacy certainly was that."

As he was being led to his death, Gacy told the guards he wished they had the electric chair, she said during an April 2 interview on "The Fuzzy Mic."

"And the guards were like, ‘Why?’ And he was like, ‘Because then I’d ask you to hold my hand,'" Conti said.

The dark humor and anecdote seemed to contradict Gacy's supposed last words: "Kiss my a--."

Turns out that's just an urban myth.

"I had a conversation with the prosecutor, who died a few months ago," Conti said, "and he was with Gacy when he died. And I asked him, ‘Did he actually utter those words?’ And he said, ‘No.’"

In reality, he didn't say anything.

Her final impression of Gacy was that he wanted to be caught by police, and he was "relieved" to be behind bars. Otherwise, he would kill again.

"He was in a frenzy (when he was arrested)," Conti said during the "Fuzzy Mic" interview. "A lot of serial killers, they start out killing once a year. Then, it ramps up. And they need more violence. They need more victims," Conti said. "So, I think Gacy, at the end, it was just wearing at him.

"And I think he knew if he was ever out again, he would go back to killing."

She said he was sexually abused, had head injuries as a kid and had repressed homosexual tendencies.

With the murders, "I think he was trying to almost kill himself over and over," she said.

Conti received death threats, a bomb threat and nearly tarnished her own career at 29 by taking Gacy's case, she said.

After Gacy died, and years had passed, the threats and evil looks turned into strangers' intrigue.

She's been a trial attorney in Chicago for 37 years, is a law professor and now an author who recently published "Killing Time" about her interactions with Gacy.

"It's more the story of how a young lawyer takes on this case, and with the public backlash, how I had to forge a relationship with somebody who was the epitome of evil," Conti said about her book.

The book explores "how this person (Gacy), who did the most inhumane acts you can imagine, had humanity in him and had a family who loved him."

(source: FOS News)

OKLAHOMA:

The Accused is a Tramp: How the Slut-Shaming of Brenda Andrew Put Her on Death Row

How do most people end up on death row in America? First, you’ve had the misfortune to be arrested and tried in one of the few states that still cling to this vindictive form of punishment. You’re likely to be male, poor, under-educated, black, Hispanic or Native American. You’ve got a criminal record. Your prosecutor was running for reelection or higher office. You were convicted of killing a white woman. Your lawyer was probably inexperienced, operating on a tight budget or incompetent.

But that doesn’t fit the profile of Brenda Andrew, the only woman on death row in Oklahoma. Andrew’s terrible journey to death row began when she fell in love with someone she got to know in a Bible study group at her church. The love affair ended with the murder of Andrews’ estranged husband, Rob, killed by her lover James Pavatt. Pavatt confessed to shooting Andrew’s husband and told the cops and prosecutors he acted alone.

But the prosecutors weren’t satisfied. They wanted Brenda Andrew, too, and charged her with being part of a murder plot with Pavatt to kill her husband and collect the life insurance money. In 2004, Brenda and Pavatt were both convicted of capital murder and the prosecutors asked the jury to impose the death penalty against both defendants. The case against Andrews was thin, much thinner than the case against Pavatt. In order to try to secure a death penalty verdict against Brenda, they put her character on trial, her sexual character. They accused her of being a bad wife, a bad mother, and a sexual predator.

Women are regularly sent to prison for murder in the US. In 2020, more than 2000 women were convicted of homicide offenses. But rarely are they sentenced to death. There are only 48 women on death row in the entire country. And few of them have the life story of Brenda Andrew: a white, educated, middle-class Christian mother of two with no criminal record.

No, Brenda Andrew doesn’t fit the modern profile of a death row inmate. The case against her is as old as the country itself, as old as the Salem Witch Trials. Andrew didn’t need to be put to death because she committed murder. She needed to be executed because her sexual allure was so intoxicating that she could seduce others to commit murder for her.

+++

Brenda Andrews met James Pavatt in 1999 at the North Pointe Baptist Church in Edmond, Oklahoma. Both were married, unhappily it seems. The Pavatt and Andrews families socialized together. Ate dinners at each other’s houses. A sexual attraction developed between Brenda and James while they were teaching Sunday school classes together. They launched into an affair. It wasn’t Brenda’s first fling. Pavatt’s marriage unraveled. His wife, Suk Hui, filed for divorce in 1991. News of the affair spread through the church and both were asked to stop teaching Sunday school.

James Pavatt was an insurance broker. He sold some policies to his friends Brenda and Rob, including an $800,000 life insurance policy. Brenda was the prime beneficiary.

By the time of Pavatt’s divorce, Brenda and Rob’s 17-year marriage was also on the rocks. A few months later Rob moved out, leaving Brenda with the couple’s 2 children, Tricity and Parker. Soon the Andrews’ were also seeking a legal separation. Rob tried to have Brenda removed as his beneficiary.

Then strange things began to happen. Someone cut the lining to the brakes on Rob’s car. Rob, an ad executive, called the cops. He blamed Brenda and James. No charges were filed.

But a few weeks later, Rob drove to Brenda’s to pick up the couple’s two children for a Thanksgiving dinner with his family. Brenda asked Rob if he could light the pilot on the furnace. Brenda and Rob were in the garage talking, while the kids were inside watching TV. Then, according to Brenda’s story, two men dressed in black and wearing masks appeared in the driveway, carrying shotguns and fired into the garage. Rob was hit twice, killing him. Brenda emerged with a gunshot wound to her arm. Brenda called 911, telling the operator: “I’ve been shot. My husband and I, we’ve been shot.”

The cops arrived to discover Rob’s body on the floor of the garage. He had 2 wounds from a 16-gauge shotgun: 1 to the chest and 1 to the neck.

There were holes in Brenda’s story, gaping ones. For example, her superficial gunshot wound wasn’t from a shotgun. There was evidence Brenda or James had surreptitiously altered Rob’s life insurance policy to make her the owner. The cops quickly focused on Brenda and James as the prime suspects. But before they could be arrested, Brenda and James absconded to Mexico, taking the 2 Andrews children with them. The money lasted only 3 months. James called home frequently, begging his daughter Janna to send them cash, not knowing she was relaying each conversation to the FBI. In February, they crossed the border back into the states at Hidalgo, Texas, were promptly arrested, and extradited back to Oklahoma to face trial.

+++

Brenda was born in 1963 in Enid, Oklahoma to a devout Christian family called the Evers. She was a good student, attended church several times a week, and like many teenage girls in the Bible Belt, excelled at activities like baton-twirling. She met Rob Andrews when she was a senior in high school through her older brother. They began dating and Brenda eventually followed Rob, who was a couple of years older than her, to Oklahoma State University in Stillwater, Oklahoma. 2 years later, in June 1984, they were married and soon moved to Texas. By 1990, they were back in Oklahoma and had welcomed their first child, Tricity. Rob was working for an ad agency. Her husband didn’t want Brenda working outside the house, so she became a stay-at-home mom, growing increasingly bored and restless.

By the time Brenda gave birth to Parker in 1994, the marriage was on the skids. She told friends she should have never married Rob. She began to look elsewhere for affection, romance and sexual gratification. In 1999, Rob introduced her to his new friend James Pavatt, a 44-year-old insurance broker, who attended the local Baptist church. Brenda and James hit it off, almost immediately.

By all accounts, Brenda liked sex. On occasion, she dressed provocatively, at least in the eyes of the god-fearing people of Edmonds, Oklahoma. She showed cleavage, wore hot pants and short skirts in public. She’d had multiple sexual partners. She’d had sex before marriage and affairs while married. She liked to flirt. She dyed her hair. Surely, none of these things are all that uncommon, even for Oklahoma.

But Brenda’s husband had been murdered and Brenda’s boyfriend had killed him. Brenda had to pay. Not just for the murder of Rob Andrew, but for the mesmerizing power she exerted over James Pavatt. Brenda’s erotic magnetism had corrupted a good man, a Sunday school teacher. She’d seduced him into committing murder. And that kind of dangerous force not only needed to be punished, it needed to be extinguished.

Pavatt and Andrews were charged with the same crimes: 1st-degree murder and conspiracy to commit first-degree murder. The case presented against him was all about the facts: the guns, the insurance policy, the flight to Mexico. Andrew’s trial was about her being a slut, a dangerous woman, the alleged danger being her sexual appetite. The trial of Brenda Andrew was less about the evidence and motives for the murder and more about how Brenda could have convinced Pavatt to shoot Rob. It was some kind of sex magic, practiced by a temptress.

They indicted her character. She was a lustful woman, a harlot who was never faithful. She was called a “hoochie” by a witness. Pavatt was referred to repeatedly as “one of her lovers.” In his opening statement, the prosecutor told the jury, “Brenda had extracurricular activities. She liked to cheat on Rob…throughout the marriage Brenda had a boyfriend on the side.” She was accused of making passes at teenagers who were replacing a deck at her and Rob’s house. One of the items the prosecutor flourished as damning of Andrew’s guilt was a book the cops found in the second drawer of the nightstand next to her bed: 203 Ways to Drive a Man Wild in Bed by Olivia St. Claire (No relation, as far as I know..) The prosecutors put about as much emphasis on this book as they did on the altered insurance policy.

The prosecution put on a witness who told the jury that Brenda wore leather skirts and had rolled up her hair “really big.” The state claimed this ridiculous evidence demonstrated “her ability to manipulate and control men.”

As evidence of her witch-like ability to “control men,” the prosecutors called one of Andrew’s former lovers, Rick Nunley, whose affair with Brenda had ended four years before the murder. Even though their affair was remote in time from the murder and Nunley said that Brenda had never spoken ill of her husband or expressed any intention or desire to harm or kill him, the testimony was permitted, purely, it seems, to sex-shame Brenda before the jury:

Prosecutor: When did you begin to have a more than friendly relationship with the Defendant Brenda Andrew?

A: In the late Fall of ’97, probably late October or early November of ’97.

Q: Was there something [in] particular that caused that relationship to escalate?

A: Brenda seemed to experience common marital problems that I also experienced and we shared those things over the years, that may have contributed to it. […]

Q: Now, at the time you began your affair with Brenda Andrew were you married, sir?

A: I was married, however, we had filed for divorce I think on October 1 of 1997.

Q: And was Brenda Andrew married?

A: Yes.

Q: Was she married to Rob Andrew?

A: Yes.

Q: Did Rob Andrew know about your relationship with Brenda Andrew at the time it was going on?

A: Not to my knowledge.

…

Q. Had your affair ended with Brenda at the time you’re testifying about, around the 1st of October of 2001?

A. Yes. We had stopped seeing each other that way for a number of years.

Q. And while you were having an affair with Brenda Andrew was that a sexual relationship?

A. Yes.

…

Q: You testified that Brenda Andrew was a very hospitable person. She was really hospitable to you, wasn’t she, Mr. Nunley?

A: Yes.

Q: And she was hospitable to Mr. James Higgins as well, wasn’t she?

A: I haven’t heard his testimony.

Q: She was hospitable to Mr. Pavatt as well, wasn’t she?

A: I haven’t heard his testimony either.

In the state’s closing arguments jurors were treated to the spectacle of the prosecutor in Brenda’s case, Gayland Gieger, hauling a suitcase toward the jury box, from which he extracted a pair of her thong panties, which he waved in front of them, saying, to audible gasps in the courtroom: “This [dangling a pink thong] is what we found in [the suitcase]. It’s been introduced into evidence. The grieving widow packs this [brandishing a red thong] to run off with her boyfriend. The grieving widow packs this [pulling out a black thong] to go sleep in a hotel room with her children and her boyfriend. The grieving widow packs this [pulling out a lacy bra] in her appropriate act of grief.”

Not only did the prosecution suggest that Brenda was a sex-crazed adulterous, but they also argued (against all evidence from people who knew her) that Brenda was a bad mother, whose execution would in some depraved way benefit her children: “Would a good mother allow her children to read murder mysteries with their father laying in his grave?” “Would a good mother take them out of school…and have them eat tuna fish and wash dishes in a pot and live on the beach?”

The appalling tactic, which an appellate judge later said had “no purpose other than to hammer home that Brenda Andrew is a bad wife, a bad mother and a bad woman,” worked. The jury convicted Brenda of first-degree murder and two days later sentenced her to death.

In Brenda’s case, as in so many others of women convicted of spousal murder, the enhancing factor was not the “profit motive” of the insurance policy, but the adultery, the penultimate transgression. The sociologist David Baker studied 42 cases of women given the death sentence by American courts between 1632 and 2014 and found that the women’s sexual affairs were used as evidence against each of them.

Brenda Andrew has been on death for 20 years now. Her character has been grossly savaged by the state, not only in her trial and its penalty phase, but she has been repeatedly dehumanized and humiliated, reduced to some kind of contagious sex object, in every appeal her lawyers have brought before state and federal courts. But is this 60-year-old woman still a threat to the men of Oklahoma? Does she retain the power of sexual enchantment, the ability to seduce men from behind bars and bend them to her murderous will?

In his dissenting opinion in Brenda’s appeal, 10th Circuit Judge Robert E. Bacharach wrote:

The state focused from start to finish on Ms. Andrew’s sex life. This focus portrayed Ms. Andrew as a scarlet woman, a modern Jezebel, sparking distrust based on her loose morals. The drumbeat on Ms. Andrew’s sex life continued in closing argument, plucking away any realistic chance that the jury would seriously consider her version of events.

Bacharach rightly said the evidence was so prejudicial and irrelevant that it fatally tainted the entire trial against Andrew and he would have overturned not just her death sentence but her conviction for murder as well.”

Brenda Andrew may well have helped arrange the murder of her husband. But by all accounts, Brenda is not the cold, morally depraved, sexual deviant portrayed by the state in its morbid quest to execute her. Brenda was a dutiful and doting mother. She was a kind and considerate neighbor, who helped care for a friend stricken with Alzheimer’s. She was described by a former boss as a good employee when her husband allowed her to work. Brenda’s cousin said she was “the glue” that held her family together after their father died prematurely. Until she moved to Stillwater, Brenda helped raise and care for her brother, who suffered from a severe mental impairment. This woman is not a witch.

Now Brenda’s fate rests with a Supreme Court that has rejected its own precedents in favor of divining Constitutional meaning through historical traditions, traditions that in this case a jurist like Samuel Alito is likely to trace back to the Court of Oyer and Terminer, set up by Governor William Phips in 1692, to decide the fate of the Salem women accused of practicing witchcraft. At the time of the Salem trials, women were regularly whipped for cheating on their husbands. By contrast, there’s not a single record of a man being prosecuted for adultery.

We’ve come a long way, baby.

(source: Jeffrey St. Clair is editor of CounterPunch)

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

Oklahoma prosecutors charge 5th member of anti-government group in Kansas women's killings

Oklahoma prosecutors charged a 5th member of an anti-government group on Wednesday with killing and kidnapping 2 Kansas women.

Paul Jeremiah Grice, 31, was charged in Texas County with 2 counts of 1st-degree murder, 2 counts of kidnapping and conspiracy to commit murder.

Grice told an Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation agent that he participated in the killing and burial of Veronica Butler, 27, and Jilian Kelley, 39, of Hugoton, Kansas, according to an arrest affidavit filed in the case.

Grice is being held without bond at the Texas County Detention Center in Guymon, a jail official said. Court and jail records don't indicate if Grice has an attorney who could speak on his behalf.

Four others have been charged in connection with the deaths and are being held without bail: Tifany Adams, 54, and her boyfriend, Tad Cullum, 43, of Keyes, and Cole, 50, and Cora Twombly, 44, of Texhoma, Oklahoma.

Butler and Kelley disappeared March 30 while driving to pick up Butler’s 2 children for a birthday party. Adams, who is the children's grandmother, was in a bitter custody dispute with Butler, who was only allowed supervised visits with the children on Saturdays. Kelley was authorized to supervise the visits, according to the affidavits.

A witness who spoke to Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation agents said all 5 suspects were part of “an anti-government group that had a religious affiliation,” according to the affidavit. Investigators learned the group called themselves “God’s Misfits” and held regular meetings at the home of the Twomblys and another couple. (source: Associated Press)

IDAHO:

'There has been a real loss of confidence and support': Experts weigh in on death penalty in Idaho----Idaho's recent failed execution of serial killer Thomas Creech led to a flurry of questions, including what is next?

In late February, Idaho failed to execute its longest-serving death row inmate, Thomas Creech, after medical staff were unable to establish a vein to insert the IV line for the lethal injection, according to the Idaho Department of Correction.

Creech has spent about 5 decades behind bars for murder and has avoided execution a dozen times. As a result of the failed execution, his death warrant expired.

The execution attempt garnered national attention and provoked many questions about the death penalty: What happens after a failed execution? Will the state seek another warrant? Will declining public opinion impact their decision?

The Ada County Prosecutor's Office has yet to share its plans for Creech. They could go to trial court and ask for another warrant. However, a spokesperson could not comment because of "pending litigation."

Creech will remain on death row until he dies of natural causes or is executed. Regardless of what happens, national experts KTVB talked to said the failed execution reflects a lot of the problems with the capital punishment system nationwide.

"Idaho has had problems at all different levels in carrying out capital punishment," said Robert Dunham, Death Penalty Policy Project director. "So, it's up to the legislature and the governor to decide what to do. But the public is losing faith in this policy, and that's something that they should take seriously."

Currently, there are 8 people on death row in Idaho, including Creech: Azad Abdullah, Timothy Dunlap, James Hairston, Erick Hall, Gerald Pizzuto, Jonathan Renfro and Robin Row. Most have been there for more than 2 decades, similar to death row inmates in other states.

More than 1/2 of all prisoners currently sentenced to death in the U.S. have been on death row for more than 18 years, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

Center Executive Director Robin Maher said it takes a long time to work through appeals, which are important to ensure the ultimate injustice is not committed — executing someone innocent.

Dunham also said in a lot of cases, people on death row have not been given fair trials.

"And so, their convictions or death sentences have been overturned once, twice, sometimes as many as 5 times," he added. "Mr. Creech's case is an example of this."

The people on death row are reflective of a different era when the death penalty was more popular, Maher said. Now, 50% of the population does not believe their government can use the death penalty fairly.

"We've seen a downward trend toward the number of new death sentences, which is reflective of juries wanting to sentence people to death," she said. "But more than that, we're seeing isolated use of the death penalty in just a few places around the country. And those are decisions that are largely made by elected prosecutors and not by the American public."

The death penalty is legal in 27 states, but 6 of those have paused executions because of executive action. Right now, high-interest cases where prosecutors are seeking the death penalty keep drawing attention to the Gem State.

Those include Bryan Kohberger, the man accused of stabbing to death four University of Idaho students in fall 2022; Jeremy Best, who is charged with two counts of 1st-degree murder in connection with the deaths of his wife and their unborn child, and Chad Daybell, whose triple murder trial is currently underway in Ada County.

In Idaho, there are no active death warrants, nor is there an "order" to who is up for execution next. It just depends on the inmates' individual cases, an IDOC spokesperson said.

Dunham said IDOC did the right thing calling off Creech's execution when they did. He called the decision "human" and "appropriate," especially when compared to recent failed executions in Alabama.

(source: KTVB news)

CALIFORNIA:

It’s long past time for California to abolish the death penalty

Executions in the United States have been carried out in deeply distressing ways in recent years. In January, Alabama executed Kenneth Smith by suffocating him using nitrogen gas, which isn’t even used to euthanize animals due to ethical concerns. This month, Missouri killed Brian Dorsey despite more than 70 correctional officers and members of the victim’s family advocating for clemency. Botched executions are routine, with individuals sometimes strapped to a gurney for hours.

By keeping the death penalty on the books, California continues to prop up this inhumane and ineffective system of punishment. A moratorium is not enough. It’s time for California to finally join the 23 states and 112 countries that have already eliminated the death penalty.

While Governor Gavin Newsom has overseen the dismantling of the state’s death chamber and the ongoing transfer of individuals off segregated death row units, California still has the largest population of individuals condemned to death in the country by far and many prosecutors in the state continue to pursue death sentences. This comes at a massive cost without any tangible public safety benefits.

Luckily, we’re again seeing momentum toward ending capital punishment in California.

Earlier this month, a group of civil rights and legal organizations filed a groundbreaking petition in the California Supreme Court arguing that “stark racial disparities infect California’s capital punishment system” and it is therefore unconstitutional under the state’s Equal Protection guarantees.

This week, the Prosecutors Alliance of California filed an amicus letter brief in the case urging the court to grant review. Prosecutors are obligated to seek justice, yet the crucial role many continue to play in upholding California’s death penalty system undercuts that commitment. There is no justice to be found in state-sponsored killings that are disproportionately applied to people of color.

Some prosecutors across California have already taken steps to end the death penalty. The petition to the Supreme Court came on the heels of Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen announcing he would resentence all 14 people from his county still on death row.

DA Rosen’s initiative follows efforts in San Francisco – where former District Attorney Chesa Boudin resentenced the last remaining individual from the city on death row in 2020 – and Los Angeles, where LA District Attorney George Gascón committed to not seek the death penalty upon assuming office and has already resentenced 29 condemned individuals. Sadly, DA Gascón’s opponent wants to bring the death penalty back and has not indicated that he will continue this important resentencing work.

But the courageous district attorneys moving forward on ending the death penalty recognize that we cannot seek justice through a costly capital punishment system that is rife with racial disparities, risks killing the innocent, and fails to deter crime.

As last week’s lawsuit lays out, racism is inseparable from the application of the death penalty. This has been true since early in California’s history. While lynching is most associated with the South, at least 350 people were lynched in California in the state’s early years, with many victims of Mexican descent. This legacy continues in modern capital punishment. A study from 1979 to 2018 found that – even after controlling for variables like felony murder, annual homicide rate, and county size and demographics – Black individuals were more than twice as likely and Hispanic individuals were 1.5 times more likely to receive a death sentence than white individuals. Defendants of all races are up to 8.8 times more likely to be condemned when at least one of the victims is white.

Death sentences have also been imposed on innocent individuals at alarming rates. Since 1973, at least 197 people who were wrongly convicted and sentenced to death have been exonerated. Five of those were in California, all of them people of color.

This deeply flawed and ineffective system comes at a great financial cost. According to a 2021 report from the California Committee on Revision of the Penal Code, the death penalty costs taxpayers $150 million a year. Not only would these resources be better spent invested in crime prevention and support for crime victims, but the post-conviction review process for capital cases generally takes more than 30 years, and this prolonged process can be traumatizing to victims’ families.

Yet, some are willing to ignore the injustices and hefty cost engrained in capital punishment because they believe it makes us safer. But research doesn’t back that up. There is no evidence that abolishing the death penalty leads to increases in crime. One study found that among 11 countries that abolished the death penalty, 10 experienced a decline in murder rates in the decade following abolition. And eliminating the death penalty and resentencing cases does not mean that people who remain a threat to public safety will be released; they simply need not be sentenced or put to death. There is simply no justification for California to maintain capital punishment, and now is the time to act. While we wait for the state Supreme Court to decide the case, elected prosecutors can fulfill their obligation to justice by refusing to seek the death penalty and by resentencing past capital punishment cases.

The death penalty is a stain on our values as Californians, and we must finally stop perpetuating cycles of punishment and violence and instead invest in healing and rehabilitation.

(source: Cristine Soto DeBerry is the Founder & Executive Director of the Prosecutors Alliance of California----Orange County Register)

USA:

Mike Farrell on the Death Penalty----Actor and human rights advocate Mike Farrell spent time with the LA Progressive discussing the death penalty. Please watch and share.

Actor and human rights advocate, Mike Farrell joined me, Sharon Kyle, for a chat about the work of the organization he has headed for several decades, Death Penalty Focus (DPF). While not the founder, Mike has been its president since the early 1990s. According to Farrell, the organization was founded simply because, at the time, California was in a situation where the United States Supreme Court had ruled that the death penalty violated the 8th Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment.

From 1972 to 1976, all capital punishment executions were suspended, and all death sentences were reduced to life imprisonment. Then, in 1976, the Supreme Court's Gregg v. Georgia ruling reinstated the death penalty under certain circumstances. The federal death penalty was not reinstated until 1988, which was the year that Death Penalty Focus was founded.

The mission of DPF is ultimately to abolish the death penalty. Using public education, grassroots organizing and political advocacy, media outreach, and domestic and international coalition building, DPF, with Mike Farrell at the helm, has had a significant impact on the use of capital punishment in the United States.

Currently, just 27 states use the death penalty, and of those, six have governors who have placed capital punishment on hold. This includes California, where Governor Gavin Newsom said, “I will not oversee the execution of any person while Governor...Our death penalty system has been, by all measures, a failure.”

The other governors who have taken a similar stand are:

Pennsylvania, Gov. Josh Shapiro announced the continuation of the hold on executions begun by Gov. Wolf. (2023)

Oregon, Gov. Kate Brown continued Gov. Kitzhaber's hold on executions. She commuted all death sentences of those on death row in 2022.

Arizona, Gov. Katie Hobbs stated: “Under my administration, an execution will not occur until the people of Arizona can have confidence that the state is not violating the law in carrying out the gravest of penalties.” Jacques Billeaud, Arizona gov­er­nor won’t pro­ceed with exe­cu­tion set by court, Associated Press, March 3, 2023

Ohio, Gov. Mike DeWine told The Associated Press on Dec. 8, 2020, that lawmakers must choose a different method of capital punishment before any inmates can be put to death in the future, and it’s "pretty clear” there won’t be any executions next year.

Tennessee, Gov. Bill Lee halted executions in 2022 and ordered a review of the state's execution protocol. He later announced that executions would not take place until the protocol had been fixed. “It’s a very important issue that has to be done correctly,” Lee told reporters on January 5, 2023. “And we will take the time to fix the protocol and to make certain that we don’t move forward until everything’s in place.”

According to San Francisco Magazine, DPF is the strongest voice in California’s abolition movement. The LA Progressive couldn't agree more.

(source: Sharon Kyle JD is a former president of the Guild Law School and is the publisher and co-founder of the LA Progressive)

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

Supreme Court Refuses to Review Prosecutorial Misconduct in 2 Death Penalty Cases Despite Dissents

For the 1st time in at least 5 years, Supreme Court justices last week issued dissents from the Court’s denial of review in 2 capital cases on the same day.

Both cases involved official misconduct. One alleged that Texas prosecutors illegally struck 13 women from Dillion Compton’s jury because of their gender. The other argued that California police illegally questioned Kurt Michaels after he invoked his right to remain silent, leading to a statement that prosecutors wrongly used against him at trial.

Gender Discrimination in Texas Jury Selection

At Dillion Compton’s trial, the State used 13 of its 15 strikes to remove women from the jury pool—which was 55% women—leaving a jury that was only 33% women. The 23 female prospective jurors outnumbered the 19 male potential jurors, but men outnumbered women 2-to-1 on the jury, which had only 4 women and 8 men.

The prosecutor said he struck the women because of their hesitations about imposing the death penalty, and on appeal, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals declined to compare individual jurors side-by-side and instead found that most of the struck women had less favorable views on the death penalty than most of the men who were not struck.

The Court denied review of the state court’s decision on April 15. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented from the denial of review, writing that she would have summarily reversed the state court’s decision and ordered a correct analysis of Mr. Compton’s gender discrimination claim.

“This case illustrates the hazards of analysis by aggregate,” she wrote, detailing an example from the record. V.P., a woman struck by the State, strongly supported capital punishment, rating her support at a 5 out of 6. Justice Sotomayor explained:

She endorsed punishment as more important than rehabilitation and agreed that capital punishment was “absolutely justified” and “just and necessary.” She was “concern[ed]” about life in prison instead of the death penalty because sometimes the prisoner could “continu[e] to do harm to others while in prison.” When questioned about mitigation during voir dire, she said that reading the mitigation special issues made her angry, because “some people use just whatever—you know, they blame—I don’t like the blame game.”

In contrast, a man who was not struck by the State expressed more hesitations about the death penalty:

That prospective juror, P. K., wrote that he was opposed to the death penalty except in some cases, and that he would be “very conflicted” about returning a verdict of death, underlining “very” for emphasis. He agreed that “[c]apital punishment is not necessary in modern civilization” and embraced the idea that “[e]xecution of criminals is a disgrace to civilized society.” He thought that Texas used the death penalty “too often.”

The example shows the prosecutor’s reason for striking V.P. was a pretext for illegal discrimination. As Justice Sotomayor reasoned, when the State applies a reason true of many women potential jurors to another woman “not based on what she says, but based on the fact that she is a woman, it crosses the line into invidious discrimination.”

Just because “most” or “nearly all” women in the jury pool had hesitations about the death penalty, Justice Sotomayor wrote, “does not mean that V.P. did.”

The state court erroneously “allowed the views of other female prospective jurors to infect its assessment of the State’s justification for V.P.’s strike,” the dissent concluded. Its aggregate analysis “directly contradicts the principle that striking even 1 prospective juror for a discriminatory reason violates the Constitution.”

The Right to Remain Silent in California

Justice Jackson dissented from the denial of Kurt Michaels’s request for review of the Ninth Circuit’s divided decision finding that it was harmless error when the prosecutor was permitted to use his confession at the penalty phase to persuade the jury to sentence him to death.

After Mr. Michaels was arrested and read his Miranda rights, he invoked his right to remain silent and not answer any questions about the accused crime. The police kept questioning him anyway, leading to a more than 2-hour-long taped confession that was admitted at the both the guilt and penalty phases.

At the penalty phase, DPIC details, the mitigating evidence presented by Mr. Michaels’s defense included his serious history of mental illness, he attempted suicide at age 11, was abused by a violent alcoholic father who molested his sister and tried to run both children over with a car; he suffered brain damage from physical trauma and meth use; he was only 22, had no violent criminal record, and had served in the Marine Corps at the time of the crime. Evidence also showed that Mr. Michaels’s girlfriend had asked him to kill her mother because her mother sexually abused her.

The prosecution played the taped confession and heavily relied on it at the penalty phase. It took the jury more than 3 days of deliberations before it returned a verdict of death.

The State conceded that the confession should not have been admitted at trial because officers violated Mr. Michaels’s constitutional right to remain silent. But it argued that the error was harmless because other witness testimony corroborated the basic facts in the confession.

On appeal, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a divided set of opinions on the use of the confession at the penalty phase. The majority agreed with the State, but Judge Marsha Berzon wrote in dissent that confessions are uniquely capable of overpowering mitigating evidence in the eyes of jurors.

“Given the substantial evidence in mitigation and the fact that the jury deliberated on the penalty for more than three days, it is my firm view that there is a real probability a single juror might have spared Michaels’s life,” Judge Berzon wrote, “but for the improperly introduced evidence used at trial.”

Indeed, the Supreme Court has made “crystal clear” that wrongfully admitted confessions cannot be treated like other evidence when conducting a harmless-error analysis, Justice Jackson wrote in dissent. A confession “is not a mere recitation of facts”—it can “provide indelible intangible information about the defendant that can have a ‘profound impact . . . upon the jury.’”

The Court has long held that confessions must be evaluated for harmless error using “extreme caution” because, Justice Jackson wrote, “[e]ach and every mannerism—the way the defendant speaks or laughs about a horrific act, his pauses or intonations when describing gruesome details, his gestures or body language when recounting his rationale—might be significant to a jury tasked with deciding his fate.”

Here, the dissent argues, the Ninth Circuit majority failed to exercise the required caution. It ignored the “powerfully demonstrative nature of the confession,” failed to consider the “uniquely prejudicial nature of hearing him describe the crime in such specific, horrific detail,” and “discounted the potential effect on the jury of watching Michaels repeatedly laughing about disturbing details of the crime.” Instead, the majority treated the confession as “simply a collection of cumulative facts.”

Because the appeals court failed to apply the harmless-error standard properly, Justice Jackson would have summarily reversed.

“[T]he Fifth Amendment protects everyone, guilty and innocent alike,” she concluded, adding that “courts must be careful to safeguard the rights that our Constitution protects, even when (and perhaps especially when) evaluating errors made in cases stemming from a terrible crime.”

(source: Equal Justice Initiative)

CHINA:

Man who fatally stabbed wife during divorce cooling-off sentenced to death

A man who killed his wife during their divorce cooling-off period was given a death penalty in the first trial by a court in Guangzhou, South China’s Guangdong Province on Thursday.

2 weeks after submitting their divorce application, the 36-year-old victim surnamed Zhou was stabbed to death by her 37-year-old husband Zhao Liuchao outside an industrial park in July 2023, despite being accompanied by six relatives and friends at the time.

The Guangzhou Intermediate People’s Court announced the verdict of the first trial against the defendant in accordance with the law. Zhao was sentenced to death for the crime of intentional homicide and deprived of his political rights for life.

According to the victim’s younger sister Zhou Mei (pseudonym), after the verdict was pronounced, the judge asked the defendant whether he had anything to say on the verdict and the defendant asked the judge whether he would be immediately executed. After he was given an affirmative answer, he said he did not intend to kill his wife on purpose and was taken away, the Xiaoxiang Morning News reported on Thursday.

Zhao and Zhou were married in 2011 and they applied for divorce at the marriage registration office of the local civil affairs bureau in Pingyu county, Central China’s Henan Province on July 7, 2023. On the evening of July 30, 2023, the victim was accompanied by six relatives and friends and met the defendant outside of a local industrial park.

When the defendant arrived at the meeting place, he rushed to the victim and took out a knife to stab her and the other people, leading to the death of the victim and other 4 people being wounded.

According to the court, the defendant deliberately and illegally deprived others of their lives, resulting in one death, and 4 other people suffering minor injuries. His actions have constituted the crime of intentional homicide.

Zhao displayed a high degree of subjective malignancy, employed cruel means in committing the crime, and caused severe consequences, thus, he should be severely punished, the court concluded.

According to reports, the victim was born in Leizhou, South China’s Guangdong Province in 1987. In 2008, the 2 people got married and had a son and a daughter. In Jul 7, 2023, the couple applied for divorce in Henan and Zhou returned to Guangzhou for work.

According to Zhou’s younger sister, the defendant appeared to remain calm, agreed to get divorced and signed the divorce agreement during the first week of the cooling-off period before divorce.

However, Zhao soon regretted his actions and asked Zhou to meet again. Since the defendant’s attitude was very volatile, Zhou was worried that the defendant would exhibit violent behaviors. So, Zhou went to the appointment in the company of her younger sister, elder brother and 4 other male friends.

According to Guangzhou Municipal People’s Procuratorate, Zhou filed for divorce due to her husband’s long-term domestic violence with the civil affairs bureau in Henan. After Zhou returned to Guangzhou, Zhao repeatedly threatened Zhou over phone for a meeting and threatened to kill her family.

According to Zhou’s younger sister, the results of Zhao’s psychiatric assessment showed that he had no mental issues.

The divorce cooling-off period was introduced as part of the 1st-ever Civil Code in China on January 1, 2021. It requires couples to wait a month after reaching a settlement and then go together to collect their divorce certificates.

The policy sparked heated discussion after release, with some questioning whether extending and complicating the process of divorce is a right path to take for a broken marriage.

Experts noted that the cooling-off period only applies to the circumstances of the divorce agreement but not the litigation, in which the victims of domestic violence need to seek to their own protection in court.

(source: globaltimes.cn)

MALAYSIA:

8 death row inmates’ sentences commuted

The Sabah Government continued its momentum in managing the economy in line with the commitment and spirit of the Sabah Maju Jaya (SMJ) when it posted record high state revenue of RM6.973 billion last year.

On Oct 12, 2018, the High Court here sentenced Faizul to death after finding him guilty of murdering his former girlfriend one Asrina Sahran, 15, at 9.10pm on Oct 11, 2016 in front of a house at Kg Ranau, Kota Marudu.

Faizul lost his appeals at the Court of Appeal on Nov 26, 2019, and at the Federal Court on Oct 4, 2021.

Earlier, Faizul’s counsel Hamid Ismail submitted, among others, that the applicant was remorseful and that it was not the rarest of the cases as the applicant stabbed the victim once and also surrendered to the police after the incident.

He was also co-operative.

Hamid proposed 30 years’ imprisonment.

The prosecution, as respondent, applied for the death sentence to be maintained and argued, among others, that it was a crime of passion in which the applicant acted on the rejection of the deceased of his proposal.

The single stab wound on the bowel area led to the victim’s fatal end due to blood loss.

The prosecution submitted that should the court allowed the application, they would apply for a jail term of not less than 35 years.

Meanwhile, the other 4 death row inmates, who had their death sentences for murder set aside and commuted with imprisonment were Indonesians Alsar Imagu, 44, Hasyim Rahman, 50, Rewang Tempe, 41, Baharudin @ Kadir Abu Nawas, 42.

They were convicted and sentenced to death by the separate High Court in Sandakan and Tawau.

The apex court allowed their applications and replaced Alsar’s sentence with 33 years’ jail while the rest of the men’s sentences were substituted to 30 years each.

Alsar, Hasyim, Rewang and Baharudin, who were respectively arrested on Aug 1, 2023; Sept 25, 2011; March 12, 2012; and Nov 14, 2014 were ordered to serve the imprisonment sentence from the date of their arrest.

Alsar, Rewang and Baharudin were also ordered to be caned 12 times each while Hasyim was sparred the whip due to his age.

The other 3 individuals, whose application for review was allowed and their death sentences for drug trafficking were set aside and substituted were Andy Majudil, 43, and foreigners Romi Ali, 34, Juris Rualdes, 54.

Their sentence was commuted to 30 years each.

Andy, Romi and Juris, who were arrested respectively on Nov 19, 2013, Feb 4, 2013; and Sept 29, 2014, were ordered to serve the imprisonment sentence from the date of their arrest.

They were convicted and sentenced to death by the separate High Court here and Tawau for trafficking drugs weighing 7,124.25gm (Juris), 1,155.96gm (Romi), and 745.6gm (Andy).

Andy and Romi were also ordered to be caned 12 times each while Juris was sparred the whip due to his age.

In Thursday’s proceedings, the prosecution objected to the application of the murder case and did not object to the review application of the drug trafficking case.

Attorney-General’s Chambers (Appellate and Trial Division) head Datuk Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar, Deputy Public Prosecutors Mohd Amril Johari and Zulkipli Abdullah appeared for the prosecution as respondents.

Alsar, Hasyim and Baharudin were represented by counsel Farazwin Haxdy, while Rewang and Romi were represented by counsel Jhassary Kang while counsel Shahlan Jufri representing Andy and Juris.

(source: dailyexpress.com.my)

INDIA:

Nayagarh Double Murder Case: Court Awards Death Penalty To Accused

Nayagarh Additional District Sessions Court on Friday convicted and awarded death penalty to a murder accused for killing 2 persons brutally in Nayagarh district 5 years back.

According to sources, this is the 1st case in Nayagarh district in which a murder accused has been sentenced to the death penalty. The accused who was sentenced to death is Niranjan Mallik, a resident of Kushdhipi village under Odgaon police station.

Going by the petition, Niranjan had killed 2 persons in Odgaon and injured 3 persons on January 17, 2019.

On the fateful day, Niranjan had attacked security guard Lochan Sethi, who was on duty at Odgaon Market. He hacked the watchman with the help of a wooden stick. He then barged into the house of a woman identified as Badni Pradhan near Odgaon cinema hall and killed her.

The court pronounced the order after hearing the statement of 27 witnesses and going through the police investigation report.

(source: ommcomnews.com)

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

Hc Commutes Death Penalty To Life

(see: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kochi/hc-commutes-death-penalty-to-life/articleshow/109607414.cms)

TAIWAN:

Death Penalty Abolition: A Potentially Historic Moment in Taiwan

Michelle Kuo is a visiting professor at the National Taiwan University and the author of Reading with Patrick. Albert Wu is an Associate Research Fellow at the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica. Together they write the newsletter A Broad and Ample Road.

The Taiwanese Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP), led by Chuanfen Chang and Hsinyi Lin, has been advocating for death penalty is unconstitutional and that public opinion is gradually shifting in favor of abolition.

On Tuesday, April 23rd, the Taiwanese Constitutional Court will review the constitutionality of the death penalty. This is a closely watched case here, and potentially a historic moment. As we’ve written previously, the death penalty is divisive (Chinese version here) in Taiwan.

To make sense of the situation, we talked to 2 people at the helm of the Taiwanese Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP), and whom we admire deeply: Chuanfen Chang, an eminent author and the chairperson of TAEDP, and Hsinyi Lin, its executive director. This interview, conducted in early March, explores the highs and lows of their work, public opinion, and Tuesday’s hearing.

Albert: Can you explain the background of this case?

Chuanfen: The core argument is that the death penalty is unconstitutional. There are several other arguments, but that’s the heart of it. The last time the lawyers submitted the application, the year before last, there were 38 petitioners in total. One person passed away last year on death row.

We actually initiated the first application in 2006, but didn’t hear from the constitutional judges. We had no idea if they even received the appeal, so we just kept submitting new ones. It was the only thing we could do: the judges have complete discretion over whether to process appeals.

In 2010, a discussion in the media went viral: some people complained that there had been no executions for almost four years. After that, the constitutional judges stated officially that they weren’t going to process our applications.

Albert: So why do you think the Constitutional Court has chosen to hear the cases now?

Hsinyi: This is merely speculation, but we think the political timing is good. The election has just finished, and the next one is in two years. By then they’ll be concerned about the public atmosphere.

If they reach the conclusion that the death penalty is constitutional, it will mean all thirty-seven people on death row have run out of procedural options. It’ll be basically impossible for them to file another appeal to interpret the constitution. Theoretically, if the next Minister of Justice approves, 37 people will be executed.

I believe [the judges] have considered it thoroughly already. It’s hard to believe they made the decision hastily, and feel like it’s okay to kill 37 people even though the constitutional conclusion has been reached. Again, we’re speaking as social activists and as optimists.

Chuanfen: This is also the most liberal court we’ve ever had, and it’s possible that it’ll be the most liberal court for the foreseeable future.

Albert: Why is that?

Chuanfen: They were all nominated by President Tsai. However, this court will only last until October 31. In August or July there will be a new round of nominations.

Michelle: The death penalty is very divisive in Taiwan, and your NGO is the only anti–death penalty organization here. I know that you have to endure a lot of hateful comments. Do the critics ever bother you? Or do they just make you more driven?

Hsinyi: I’ve found over time that people who make hateful comments—for instance, that they want to kill or rape our staff—are in the minority. Most pro–death penalty people are not like this.

There’s a vendor in the night market I frequent who recognized me and told me she supports the death penalty. I was surprised, because I hadn’t shown up in the media recently. Another time I was about to get off the metro and a passenger came up and asked if I was Hsinyi. She gave me a handmade cake and encouraged me to keep doing what I do. The cake looked awesome but I couldn’t help but be skeptical—like, what if she was trying to poison me? [Laughter]

I care more about messages from people on death row. Sometimes they tell us they don’t want TAEDP’s help anymore and are thinking about ending their lives. It’s hard for me to tell them to hang on—I know if I were them I wouldn’t be able to bear the decades of imprisonment either. It’s really a dilemma. I reply to the effect that once a person is executed, it’s hard to stop more executions from happening—so please hold on, for the sake of others.

Chuanfen: I agree with Hsinyi. I don’t watch TV or read the newspapers anymore. It’s just toxic. To me, the comments are not about the issue itself—they’re about insulting TAEDP.

Some still affect me, though. I consciously avoid revealing details about my personal life. I feel like I’m always on an invisible battleground. I have to be aware and prepared at every single moment. That sense of caution never disappears.

Michelle: TAEDP apparently has an average rating of 1.4 on Google.

Hsinyi: I honestly feel it would be better if it were 0. You know, 1.4 isn’t high, but it’s also not low enough. Once I got a notification from Google saying they had to remove a 5-star review because they thought it might be fake—it was so different from the others.

Michelle: I actually tried to give it 5 stars this morning, and I don’t think it went through.

[Laughter]

Michelle: Why do you think the issue provokes so many people here? I wonder about the claim that this issue is “local” to Taiwan. When you read about the death penalty in Lithuania, Spain, and France, you find it was incredibly popular when it was abolished.

Chuanfen: I don’t think pro–death penalty sentiment is particular to Taiwan. There are high rates of support in many countries. But researchers have found that the design of polls—especially questionnaires—is decisive. If the questions are simply yes-or-no, pro–death penalty sentiment is usually high. But if alternatives are shown as options, the results differ remarkably. For instance, if you ask people whether they support alternatives to the death penalty so long as the state ensures a difficult standard for parole, or a system where the incarcerated persons compensate victims, over 70 percent of Taiwanese citizens are willing to accept abolition of the death penalty.

I think there’s a phenomenon of false support, and it’s worldwide. The only thing particular to Taiwan is the crazy, hateful speech you find on social media. Those amplify the extreme opinions. I date this to 2010; before then I didn’t feel such hatred.

Hsinyi: I think the media has been crucial. We used to have to compose long texts for press releases, carefully considering each word. But nowadays the news is instant and contains less information.

Michelle: Do you feel attitudes have changed in the past 5 years? There are a lot of recent movies and TV shows about the death penalty. Miao Poya may have lost, but she got many votes in Da’an. I get the sense the issue is less divisive among young people.

Hsinyi: I’m quite optimistic about this. Although there are no official figures to prove our growth, the fact of TAEDP’s survival means there must be supporters.

Chuanfen: I do feel that public opinion is gradually changing, in a positive way. Take this last election: the death penalty had never been a hot topic in an election before. Although Miao Poya didn’t win, she’s the first pro-abolition candidate to ever get so many votes. It proves that the issue is no longer the drag in elections here, and I’m hoping this will help to expand our reach.

Hsinyi: Of course, it hurts every time a person is executed. When they restarted executions in 2010, we were completely heartbroken.

We visited the Minister of Justice, Tseng Yung-fu. We’d actually submitted the application for constitutional interpretation already; however, some people on death row hadn’t entrusted their cases to us yet and thus weren’t on the list of petitioners. We were told we had ten days to submit an application on their behalf. The Minister signed the execution docs in only 4 days.

He actually blamed me: he told me it was my fault because I didn’t send out the application soon enough. On one hand, I blamed myself; on the other hand, I was angry. Why was he, a murderer, entitled to accuse someone else? I was determined to contribute more.

Chuanfen: I think it’s crucial at this moment to engage in social education. There’s a big gap between how people think about the death penalty and what it actually is. It’s essential to shed light on that gap, regardless of the final result of the constitutional interpretation. And I hope people will come out to support abolition. They sometimes avoid talking about it since it causes disputes with their family, and so on—that’s how “the spiral of silence” happens. Minorities feel even less likely to speak up.

I truly hope there will be more meaningful discourse. But we actually don’t want it to be centered around TAEDP. It would be better if the citizens conveyed their support through diverse channels, as individuals or as organizations. Commenting on social media is good too. These are all ways to communicate with judges.

Michelle: Why isn’t the death penalty mentioned in transitional justice in Taiwan, as it is in most countries?

Chuanfen: Because we haven’t even transitioned yet.

[Laughter]

Hsinyi: In 2000, the first party rotation occurred and President Chen Shui-bian declared we would gradually abolish capital punishment. He also initiated transitional justice. That was the only moment the 2 things were connected. Today I don’t think there’s a general agreement that being pro–transitional justice means supporting abolition.

Chuanfen: Think about the Soviet Union. Capital punishment was the main tool for oppressing dissidents in authoritarian times in Lithuania and Hungary. This only happened in Taiwan during the White Terror period in the ’50s or ’60s, and the scale wasn’t as big. In 2000, the White Terror wasn’t revealed or researched. I feel it’s only in the last decade that we’ve become aware of the role of the death penalty in our authoritarian time.

Albert: What do you think the differences and similarities are between the constitutional case of same-sex marriage and that of the death penalty?

Hsinyi: I think this time is even more difficult. The pro-abolition population is less vocal than the pro–same-sex marriage population was. And the latter was cross-party, to a certain extent. I guess it’s because people have more friends who are LGBTQ, while they’re less likely to have friends on death row.

Chuanfen: True. Compared to the same-sex marriage issue, it’s a less emotional base.

Hsinyi: We tend to avoid highlighting particular names, to prevent a situation where the victim is provoked and says things that get public attention, which increases the chance of execution.

Michelle: A lot of abolitionists face the dilemma of having to convince the public of a penal alternative to death row by saying, “Don’t worry, there’s still life without parole.” I’m personally against life without parole. How does TAEDP deal with it?

Chuanfen: We are against it too.

Hsinyi: For the abolitionists, a life sentence is equal to the death penalty. There are debates about the reasonable number of years for a long-term sentence. Currently, in Taiwan, 25 years is the standard of parole. That's extremely strict and if there’s nothing done during the prison sentence to help them adjust it’s useless and a waste of money. That standard was the alternative to the death penalty back when they were about to abolish it. Now, even though abolition failed, the 25-year sentence still exists. It makes our criminal law extremely strict.

Michelle: What, if anything, can we learn from the U.S. model?

Chuanfen: The U.S. is a complex country. Each state implements different laws concerning the death penalty. Some have abolished it, other states haven’t. After Furman v. Georgia people thought capital punishment should be abolished, but the abolition was later overturned. Even though so much effort has been put into improving the death penalty, it’s still not perfect. How many people on death row were executed during the improvement process? How much has been spent, and how many people have died for it?

We do worry that constitutional judges in Taiwan will come to a compromise stance that capital punishment can be constitutional after its flaws are dealt with. In that respect, the U.S. experience could be helpful.

The Death Penalty Information Center announces the number of wrongful convictions each year. At first, it was probably like one case a year, but with the development of scientific evidence the number started rising. That shows that, the more we want to improve the death penalty, the more unjust cases are proven. More and more states gradually abolished the death penalty, or stopped executions. It’s the overall trend of the movement.

That seems to be positive to our movement here. However, we don’t really consider the horror of the death penalty, and we don’t put enough effort into improving judicial procedure.

Michelle: When have you felt the most hope about your work, and when have you felt the most pessimism?

Hsinyi: I’ll say it was in 2006 that I felt the most hope. In Taiwan, the executions were done secretly: we only knew someone had been killed after the fact. In the case of, we learned that the Minister of Justice had signed the document approving the execution, which would take place in several days. We started campaigning right after learning this and it ended up working. We stopped the execution, for the first and last time. That’s when I felt like we could really change things.

In 2007 I decided to be a full-time activist for TAEDP. Over the next four years, nobody was executed. I was new in the field and I worked really hard to learn more. I taught myself legal terms. I felt exhausted sometimes but also hopeful.

But in 2010, when executions restarted, that’s the time I felt the most pessimism. There was a huge difference in terms of how I felt, meeting people on death row, before and after 2010. I used to have faith when I visited them and told them there was absolutely a chance we could abolish the death penalty. I would say it in a genuine and cheerful tone, and they felt hopeful too. But after 2010, saying those things no longer felt the same. I still told them there was no need to worry, but I didn’t feel firm about it. You could also sense their anger, a kind of emotion I’d never seen them show before. It wasn’t anger at us, though—it was the anger that comes from worry and disappointment.

TAEDP hosts a monthly group that writes letters to people on death row in Taiwan. One penpal has a Go game that has been ongoing for five years; each letter contains a single move.

Chuanfen: I joined TAEDP in 2004. I wasn’t that active at first. I didn’t really get involved until 2010, when the death penalty became a viral topic in the media, in newspaper headlines every day. People were furious at the government. They said they felt deceived. They said the death penalty didn’t work because the government wasn’t executing people. The mainstream media quoted anonymous online comments, wondering out loud if we should test new vaccines on people on death row.

I was astonished and shocked, and I felt the urgency to do something. During this time TAEDP became a public target as well and was criticized for months.

Hsinyi: In 2010, after four people were executed, the Minister of Justice said that was just the beginning. He was going to execute the other forty-one people on death row. We were determined to stop it. The discussion was active not only in newspapers but also on TV news. People called with hateful words. TAEDP thought about appearing on a TV show but decided not to. We didn’t want to provoke more hatred.

Albert: Why did the authorities choose to restart the execution in 2010?

Chuanfen: It started at the congress meeting that February. The legislature asked why nobody had been executed, and this gained great media attention. Wang Tsing-fong, the Minister of Justice at the time, was forced to step down after she clarified that she wasn’t going to execute anybody.

Albert: Who was the legislator?

Chuanfen: It was Wu Yu-sheng.

Hsinyi: The new Minister of Justice held several hearings to gauge public opinion. But he started executing people right after the last hearing was over. It seemed like they didn’t actually care about the discourse; they only wanted to create an image.

It was a horrible experience. Chuanfen wrote the book (The Difficulty of Killing) from this perspective. If I had to point to a positive takeaway from the period, it would be the book. The content was valuable.

Chuanfen: However, it also seems to be a pattern that both sides, supporters pro- or anti-abolition, speak out actively whenever there’s something like a major criminal case going on.

But as for my moment of greatest hope: I will say it’s now.

(source: Kim Chan, Editor; international.thenewslens.com)

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

Taiwan constitutional court should determine death penalty, abolitionists say----Anti-death penalty alliance refutes scholars argument court ruling would be 'dangerous'

The head of an international coalition of death penalty abolitionists has criticized a scholar for saying that it is “dangerous” for the constitutional court to abolish the death penalty.

On Tuesday (April 23) Taiwan’s constitutional court debated the constitutionality of the death penalty. In response, Honorary Professor in the Department of Law at Kainan University Cheng Shan-yin argued it would be dangerous for just the court’s justices, to decide the issue.

Opinion polls have shown that 87.8% of Taiwanese oppose the abolition of the death penalty.

Director of the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty Aurelie Placais told Taiwan News she disagreed with Cheng’s argument that it would be inappropriate for the court to potentially overrule public opinion. She said that because the court hands down the death sentence the courts should be able to determine if that practice is continued.

“It is really an exceptional punishment, and the court is imposing that sentence, so they of course should have a say in whether it is constitutional or not,” Placais said. She added that of the countries that have abolished the death penalty, about half have done so through a constitutional process, and half through a legislative process.

According to the Taiwan NGO, Taiwan Innocence Project, 7 people sentenced to death in Taiwan have subsequently been found innocent. “The judiciary is aware that there are flaws, and there will always be room for miscarriage of justice no matter how good your judicial system is,” Placais said.

Placais expressed understanding for those who call for the death penalty when severe crimes are committed but maintained that states should not be able to kill their citizens. “When something terrible happens, you want the person to be punished. It’s a very emotional response, and it's normal,” she said.

“But it should not be the answer of the state. The state has a duty to protect its citizens, no matter who they are, and there are ways to protect society that do not involve the death penalty.”

Asked if President Tsai Ing-wen should intervene in her final days as president to overturn the death penalty, Placais said she should not. “I think it’s something for the court to decide, it should not be something political."

The issue of the death penalty was politicized during Taiwan’s general election in January. Candidates from the Kuomintang and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) supported capital punishment, with the former accusing the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) of de-facto abolition.

On the campaign trail then DPP candidate President-elect Lai Ching-te said that a high degree of public support would be needed to abolish the death penalty. Meanwhile, TPP candidate Ko Wen-je argued the high level of public support in Taiwan for the death penalty stemmed from its long-time use in Chinese societies.

However, Placais refuted this “cultural” argument for the death penalty. “Countries that execute the most people have nothing in common,” she said.

The states that executed the largest number of people in 2022 were China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the U.S. Placais pointed out that these 5 countries have different religions, systems of government, and cultures.

“So it's very difficult for us when we look at the broader picture to understand what is really a cultural value when there are so many different countries that have the death penalty and that use it.”

(source: taiwannews.com.tw)

IRAN----executions

3 Men Executed in Ghezelhesar Prison

Ali Khoshavaz, a man on death row for drug-related charges, and Shahram Sharghi and Alireza Aghayi, who were sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder, were executed in Ghezelhesar Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a man named Ali Khoshavaz was executed in Ghezelhesar Prison in Karaj on 21 April. He was sentenced to death by the Revolutionary Court.

Iran Human Rights previously reported the executions of Abdolbari Pashtu and Alireza Pourshahbaz for drug offences at the prison that day.

Furthermore, 2 other men were executed at the prison on 24 April. Their identities have been established as Shahram Sharghi and Alireza Aghayi who were both 35 years old and from Tehran. They were sentenced to qisas for murder.

An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Ali Khoshavaz was executed for just 5kg of drugs. Shahram Sharghi was arrested 14 years ago and Alireza Aghayi was arrested 5 years ago.”

At the time of writing, none of their executions have been reported by domestic media or officials in Iran.

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. Baluch minorities who constitute 2-6% of Iran’s population, made up 30% of drug executions in 2023.

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.

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

Kurdish Farzad Khademi Executed in Saqqez

Farzad Khademi, a Kurdish man sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder, was executed in Saqqez Central Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a Kurdish man was executed in Saqqez Central Prison on 25 April. His identity has been established as Farzad Khademi from Saqqez who was sentenced to qisas for murder. IHRNGO reported that he was transferred for execution on 23 April.

An informed source previously told IHRNGO: “Farzad Khademi was arrested for the murder of a man named Tirdad Atashafrouz on 2 July 2020 and sentenced to qisas. The murdered man was a member of the Kurdistan Freedom Party who’d surrendered but was shot dead by Farzad Khademi over a personal dispute.”

At the time of writing, 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 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)

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

19 Executions and Crackdowns, Especially Against Women, to Prevent Popular Uprising

Amidst mounting internal and external crises, Ali Khamenei, in fear of a popular uprising, is sending more and more prisoners to the gallows each day. The number of registered executions has reached 19 in just the past 4 days, with 13 prisoners executed on Sunday, April 21, and 6 more on Wednesday, April 24.

On April 24, Jaber Talebi was hanged in Amol, Javad Asgari in Arak, Alireza Aghaei, Pejman Azizi, Shahram Shoghi, and another prisoner in Qezelhessar Prison. Hossein Ali Sobhani was hanged in Gorgan on April 23 and Farzad Khademi in Saqqez on April 25.

The goal of religious fascism the increasing trend of executions and the intensification of repression, especially the savage suppression of women under the pretext of improper hijab, is to prevent a popular uprising against the oppression of the mullahs. Es’haq Jahangiri, the former Vice President of the regime who has been in government positions for decades, said 3 days ago: “The sound of the breaking of people’s bones can be heard, we must solve the economic problem of the people”.

The Iranian Resistance calls on the United Nations, relevant bodies, the European Union, and its member states to take immediate action to stop the machinery of repression and execution in Iran. The ringleaders of this regime, especially Ali Khamenei, Ebrahim Raisi, and Gholamhossein Eje’i, must be brought to justice for four decades of crimes against humanity and genocide. Dealing, negotiating, and appeasing the regime of terror, execution, and fear is tantamount to trampling on international values and recognized human rights.

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

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

Protesting Rapper Toomaj Salehi Sentenced to Death

Today, on Wednesday, April 24, 2024, Amir Reisian, the lawyer of Toomaj Salehi, a protesting artist, wrote on his personal page on X: “Branch One of the Revolutionary Court in Isfahan has issued a death sentence for Toomaj Salehi.

As the lawyer of the case, he announced further details in an interview with Shargh Network: “Branch One of the Revolutionary Court in Isfahan, in an unprecedented move, did not execute the Supreme Court’s ruling regarding Toomaj Salehi’s case from the year 2022. Instead, they deemed it “guidance” and emphasized the court’s independence. Toomaj Salehi has been sentenced to the harshest punishment, which is execution, on charges of spreading corruption on Earth.”

Reisian further stated, “The Revolutionary Court in Isfahan has considered the charges of subversion, conspiracy, assembly and collusion, propaganda against the system, and incitement to riot as a whole falling under the category of spreading corruption on Earth, according to Article 512 of the Penal Code. Emphasizing the extensive nature of the corruption, they have issued the death sentence for Mr. Salehi. This is despite the fact that the same branch had not previously confirmed the extent of the charges of spreading corruption on Earth.”

However, the more surprising aspect is that the initial court, in addition to the death penalty, has also considered a supplementary sentence for Toomaj Salehi. He has been sentenced to a two-year travel ban, a two-year prohibition on artistic activities, and participation in behavioral management and judicial skills classes in Isfahan. The court has also deemed the suspended sentence applicable to Toomaj Salehi.”

Ye-One Rhie, a member of the German Parliament and political sponsor of Toomaj Salehi, described the issuance of the death sentence for this protesting rapper as ‘inhumane’ on her personal page on X and stated: “It is still completely unclear how this verdict came about. It is unbelievable how irresponsibly and arbitrarily the Iranian regime treats defendants. It is impossible to recognize the rule of law in the chaos of the courts in charge.”

Toomaj’s political sponsor further said: “This verdict would not be reached in this way in any international trial based on the rule of law. I call for a full investigation of this case by the Iranian regime and the immediate release of Toomaj Salehi.”

This protesting rapper was arrested on Monday, October 30, 2022, during the nationwide protests, in the village of Gerdabishah, which is located in the Gandoman district of Borujen city in Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari province.

Toomaj Salehi was released from Isfahan Central Prison on the evening of Sunday, November 18, 2023, after enduring 1 year and 21 days of imprisonment, with 252 days of it spent in solitary confinement. He was granted temporary release on bail until the completion of the trial process.

On November 30, 2023, Toomaj Salehi was detained for the 2nd time by a number of armed security forces in the city of Babol. The arrest was accompanied by violence and severe beatings. He was later transferred to Dastgerd Prison in Isfahan and is currently held there as a prisoner.

(source: iran-hr.com)

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

Narges Mohammadi Condemns Death Sentence of Iranian Rapper Toomaj Salehi

Narges Mohammadi, the imprisoned Nobel Peace Prize laureate, has condemned the death sentence of protest rapper Toomaj Salehi.

"Toomaj's death sentence signifies the death of our vibrant movement. Let us rally for the survival of the movement that defines our existence," she said in a message from Evin prison.

Mohammadi's statement, posted on her official Instagram page, adds: "The resilient, united hands of the Iranians will not permit the raising of Toomaj Salehi's gallows. Dismantle the death sentence and the noose before they are torn apart by the outcry of the Iranian people."

From her confines in Evin prison, this prominent dissident further asserted: "Toomaj Salehi epitomizes the resounding voice of the Woman, Life, Freedom movement and its anthem."

"His execution would signify the death of our vibrant movement. Let us unite in defence of our movement, which is our essence. Let us all rise together. Our defiance is against Toomaj's execution; our defiance is for breaking chains, for life, for freedom," she said.

Mohammadi condemned the "vengeful, cowardly, and barbaric executions" as a "blight upon the dark and putrid robe of the authoritarian religious government," and implored, "Let us not allow the blood of another young soul to stain the purity of our homeland. We have the power to prevent it. We can."

A Revolutionary Court in central Isfahan sentenced Iranian rapper Toomaj Salehi to death on Wednesday.

Salehi was initially arrested in October 2022 after voicing support for the nationwide Woman, Life, Freedom protests that had erupted the previous month.

He released songs criticizing the government and supporting the protests demanding more freedoms and women's rights.

He also posted pictures and videos of himself during the demonstrations.

In July 2023, a court sentenced the artist to 6 years and 3 months in prison for "corruption on Earth."

He was released on bail on November 18 after the Supreme Court, responding to an appeal, found "flaws in the original sentence" and returned the case to a lower court for reexamination and possible retrial.

Salehi was returned to jail less than 2 weeks later to face new charges after publicly discussing his torture in prison in a video.

(source: iranwire.com)

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

#SaveToomaj: Iran urged to spare rapper after 'grotesque' verdict

Iranian authorities on April 25 faced pressure to release and clear a prominent rapper sentenced to death in a verdict supporters say is merely revenge for his music backing anti-government protests.

Toomaj Salehi, 33, one of the best-known figures arrested in a crackdown on protests that began in 2022, risks being hanged after the conviction on the syariah charge of “corruption on Earth” by a Revolutionary Court.

The verdict, which can still be appealed, stunned activists as the lower court disregarded a move by the supreme court to overturn a prison sentence Salehi had been given on the same charge.

“This grotesque manipulation of the judicial process aims to silence dissent,” said Mr Hadi Ghaemi, the executive director of the New York-based Centre for Human Rights in Iran (CHRI).

“Toomaj’s imprisonment stems from his vocal advocacy against state oppression.”

Supporters used the hashtag #SaveToomaj on social media in a bid to create momentum for an international campaign for his life to be spared.

“This is devastating news and we must all be outraged and do everything in our power to #SaveToomaj. He is a national hero and treasure,” Iran-born British actor Nazanin Boniadi wrote on X, formerly Twitter.

The announcement of the death sentence comes with Iran in the throes of a new crackdown against women deemed to be flouting the Islamic dress code and also ratcheting up executions, which according to Norway-based Iran Human Rights (IHR) have already reached 130 in 2024.

The verdict was announced shortly after another rapper arrested in the crackdown, Saman Yasin, who had initially been sentenced to death by a lower court, was sentenced to five years in prison, a term to be served in exile in the eastern Kerman province.

“We call for their immediate release. These are the latest examples of the regime’s brutal abuse of its own citizens, disregard for human rights, and fear of the democratic change the Iranian people seek,” said the office of the deputy US special envoy for Iran, Mr Abram Paley.

‘Desperation’

The French foreign ministry said it strongly condemned the “unacceptable” verdict against Salehi, saying it “comes on top of numerous other death sentences and unjustifiable executions linked to the 2022 protests in Iran”.

Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani of Italy said he “strongly condemns” the verdict.

9 men have been executed in protest-related cases involving killings and other violence against security forces. Rights groups have said the trials have been grossly unfair.

At least 6 other men remain at imminent risk of execution after being given death sentences in cases linked to protests, according to IHR.

Salehi was arrested while in hiding in October 2022 during the peak of the protest movement sparked by the death in custody of Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old arrested by Iran’s morality police for an alleged breach of strict dress rules for women.

The months of protest following Amini’s death on Sept 16, 2022 saw hundreds of people killed including dozens of security personnel, and thousands more arrested.

Rights groups say Salehi was subjected to torture and ill-treatment, forced to repent on camera and denied medical treatment and access to his lawyer.

Salehi was subsequently released on bail after spending over a year behind bars but was rearrested less than two weeks later after saying he was tortured in detention. He is currently believed to be held in the central city of Isfahan.

“Issuing the death penalty for expressing opinions and creating artistic works is a sign of the desperation of the Islamic Republic regime and its fear of popular protests,” said IHR director Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam.

10 UN experts, who are independent of the United Nations, said they were “alarmed by the death sentence and the alleged ill-treatment of Mr Salehi”.

“Art must be allowed to criticise, to provoke, to push the boundaries in any society,” they said in a statement.

(source: straitstimes.com)

APRIL 25, 2024:

TEXAS----new death sentence

Man found guilty of murdering mother and her daughter sentenced to death----Otishae Womack and her daughter Kamyria were found dead in an apartment in April 2018

The man found guilty for murdering a mother and her 10-year-old daughter at a home in Fort Worth in 2018 has been sentenced to death.

Paige Lawyer received the death penalty Wednesday morning.

Otishae Womack and her 10-year-old daughter, Kamyria, were found strangled to death at a residence in the Verona Apartment community off Shady Lane Drive and Woodhaven Boulevard, about a half a mile north of Interstate 30, in April 2018.

Fort Worth Police arrested Lawyer days later after the murder in Tennessee.

After victim impact statements were read in court, Lawyer began arguing from his seat and was led out of the courtroom.

(source: nbcdfw.com)

FLORIDA----female faces death penalty

State seeks death penalty for Florida mom accused of making kids drink bleach, killing 1

The state of Florida has filed is seeking the death penalty for 38-year-old Florida mother in the murder of her 3-year-old child.

The incident happened on May 8, 2022.

Authorities say Joanne Zephir first stabbed her husband. Hours later, she forced her 2 children -- ages 3 and 8 -- to drink bleach, and then strangled her 3-year-old child to death.

The husband and 8-year-old were treated at the hospital and survived.

WFTV in Central Florida reports Zephir told deputies that a voodoo spell made her harm her children.

She became eligible for the death penalty after an Osceola County grand jury indicted her on 1st Degree Murder with a Weapon in February, which is a capital felony. She was also indicted on Attempted 1st Degree Murder with a Weapon and Attempted Felony Murder with a Weapon.

(source: WEAR TV news)

ILLINOIS:

Walking,” to Speak Friday in Chicago on Death Penalty

Sister Helen Prejean who is known around the world for her passion against the death penalty will be joining the Catholic Lawyers Guild this Friday (April 26) for a dynamic and thought-provoking community event.

Sr. Helen has been instrumental in sparking national dialogue on capital punishment and in shaping the Catholic Church’s vigorous opposition to all executions. She is a tireless advocate against the death penalty and was the nun whose story was depicted in her book entitled “Dead Man Walking,” which was turned into a feature film starring Susan Sarandon (as Sr. Helen) and Sean Penn.

The event consists of a plated lunch at 11:30 a.m. followed by Sr. Helen’s presentation with an opportunity for Q&A at the University Club, 76 E. Monroe St., Chicago.

Sr. Helen will speak on “The Journey of The Catholic Church to Recognize the Death Penalty as a Pro Life Issue.” Her organization, based in New Orleans, is Ministry Against The Death Penalty, at https://www.sisterhelen.org/

Registration is required and open to all. Go to www.clgchicago.org/luncheon

(source: Chicago Crusader)

OKLAHOMA:

Oklahoma plans to execute a man who didn’t commit a murder

Death penalty opponents are bracing for the anticipated execution of an Oklahoma man who even the state acknowledges did not kill anyone.

Tremane Wood has been on Oklahoma’s Death Row since 2004 for participating in a robbery-turned-homicide in which the actual killer received a life sentence.

Yet Wood ended up on Death Row “after being convicted of what’s called ‘felony murder’ for participating in a robbery during which his older brother unexpectedly and tragically killed someone,” assistant federal public defender Amanda Bass said during an April 24 webinar hosted by Equal Justice USA. “Under Oklahoma’s felony murder rule, the state could and did seek the death penalty against Tremane without ever having to prove that he killed anyone or that he intended to kill him.”

The American Civil Liberties Union describes felony murder as a legal doctrine in use nationwide allowing authorities to charge defendants with 1st- or 2nd-degree homicide when death results from the commission of a felony.

In Oklahoma, the law “removes the state’s obligation to prove the ‘intent to kill’ requirement while subjecting the defendant to the same level of punishment. According to state statute, when an individual is convicted, pleads guilty or pleads nolo contendre (does not contest charges), the punishment is either life with or without the possibility of parole or the death penalty,” the ACLU explained.

Bass, who is part of the legal team representing Wood, said her client is the only inmate on Oklahoma’s Death Row for a felony murder conviction.

“It is innately unjust and it reflects a kind of policy judgment that state legislatures make about wanting to penalize people through this extreme sanction,” Bass said. “It’s a law that is still on the books in Oklahoma and, as a result, you can have people like Tremane who are facing execution even though the actual killer has gotten a lesser sentence.”

Bass was invited to participate in the webinar to highlight the disparities inherent in the death penalty and in the nation’s wider criminal legal system, said Sam Heath, event moderator and leader of EJUSA’s evangelical network.

The criminal legal structure is based on fear and a thirst for revenge that disproportionately targets the poor and people of color, Bass said. Other than the desire to see people punished, most arguments for capital punishment aren’t getting much traction even from many supporters.

“We know that the death penalty is wildly expensive. We know that the death penalty does not deter crime. We know that it’s applied in an arbitrary manner. We know that it’s done in a torturous manner, and we know that it is not a path of healing for murder victims’ families and their recovery from what’s happened to them,” Bass asserted.

Wood’s case highlights the economic disparities that influence the prosecution and sentencing phases in capital cases.

The deck was stacked against her then 22-year-old client when a judge decided he and his brother, both charged with murder, would be tried separately, Bass explained. As a result, Wood was assigned a solo practitioner from a list of death-qualified lawyers, while his brother, who admitted to the killing, was defended by a legal group with multiple attorneys and investigators with death penalty experience.

Wood’s attorney “put up no defense for him and admitted later that he didn’t do much at all to represent Tremane or to investigate his case,” Bass said. “We have an invoice from this lawyer showing that over the nearly two years that he was assigned to represent Tremane before trial, he worked only 80 hours on Tremane’s case, and 60 of those hours were just showing up for the trial.”

As a result, the jury did not learn that Wood’s brother had confessed, that he had been heavily pressured by his brother to participate in the robbery or that Wood nevertheless experienced significant remorse for the killing, Bass said. “When you compare that to the zealous representation his brother had from three experienced capital defense lawyers, 2 investigators who scoured the earth for information relevant to his defense, you can see the difference in sentencing outcomes.”

Bass said she and her team are trying to convince the trial and appellate courts in Wood’s case to consider evidence not presented at trial or subsequently uncovered.

Meanwhile, attorneys are preparing a case to seek clemency once an execution date is set.

“We have to get people to care about his case and to make him an individual and to humanize him to Oklahoma decision makers.”

And there is a way for individuals and churches to help, Bass said. “One of the things you can do is go to Tremane’s website and sign the petition for clemency. We have to get people to care about his case and to make him an individual and to humanize him to Oklahoma decision makers so that he’s not just a number in line to be executed.”

Heath added that some Oklahoma leaders are growing weary of the state’s capital punishment system and its many flaws.

One evidence of the problem is a bipartisan commission’s 2017 report recommending extension of a 5-year execution moratorium that expired in 2020. While the recommendations were rejected, the effort shows doubts exist about the way Oklahoma executes inmates.

Also noteworthy is the state’s decision to scale back a plan to execute 25 prisoners between August 2022 and December 2024. Instead of executing 11 inmates last year, for example, it executed 4.

And legislation was introduced this year to remove the death sentence as an option for those charged with felony murder, Heath said. “That bill did not make it out of the committee, but I think it reflects a growing level of understanding and interest.”

(source: Baptist News)

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

Bill that would seal past and future death penalty records passes in the House----If signed into law, the bill would grant confidentiality to any person or entity involved in the state's executions such as doctors or medical suppliers.

The Oklahoma House of Representatives passed a bill, 68-14, that would make the death penalty process confidential on April 24, and before that, SB 1702 passed in the Senate on March 11.

Now, it's up to Gov. Kevin Stitt to sign it into law.

If signed into law, this would bar access to records tied to past and future executions. This includes confidentiality for any person or entity involved in an execution such as doctors or drugs used.

"The identity of all persons who participate in or administer the execution process and persons who produce or supply the drugs, medical supplies, or medical equipment for the execution shall be confidential and shall not be subject to discovery in any civil or criminal proceedings," the bill says.

Any medical supplies purchased for the execution would also not be subject to the Oklahoma Central Purchasing Act, which requires all state agencies to go through certain procedures when purchasing any products, supplies, services, or equipment.

However, the bill does require the warden to invite certain people to be present for the executions, including:

A physician from the county where the crime occurred

The county's district attorney

The judge who issued the death penalty

Law enforcement officials who investigated the crime or testified in court

Secretary of Public Safety, "as well as any other personnel or correctional personnel deemed appropriate"

At the defendant's request, the following people may be invited as well:

No more than 2 ministers

No more than 5 persons, relatives, or friends

The bill says immediate family members would be given a separate area to witness the execution than other non-family member witnesses; "however, if there are multiple deceased victims, the department shall not be required to provide separate areas for each family of each deceased victim," the bill says.

Instead, the Department of Corrections will broadcast the execution through a "closed circuit television system."

Additionally, "reporters from recognized members of the news media shall be admitted upon proper identification, application, and approval of the warden."

House Democratic Leader Rep. Cyndi Munson believes the bill impedes transparency and urged Gov. Kevin Stitt to veto the bill.

This is a scary bill that pulls the wool over an already non-transparent, problematic process," she said. "This bill essentially makes it impossible for the families of those who undergo the death penalty to find out what happened on the execution table, what drugs were used, and who was administering the drugs. It eliminates the responsibility needed for those who are killing people in the name of the State of Oklahoma."

Additionally, she said it keeps taxpayers in the dark about what their tax dollars are being used for.

"It is also unfair to taxpayers who pay for these executions and deserve to know what process their tax dollars are funding," Munson said.

5NEWS has reached out to Sen. Julie Daniels, the author of the bill.

For the full text of SB 1702, click see: https://legiscan.com/OK/text/SB1702/2024

(source: 5newsonline.com)

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

Oklahoma attorney general asks Supreme Court to halt execution of condemned convict

Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond this week asked the Supreme Court to halt the execution of a condemned man whose death sentence has been criticized by an archbishop and other Catholic advocates.

Drummond announced the filing on his website on Tuesday. In his petition to the Supreme Court the attorney general detailed “why the execution of Oklahoma death row inmate Richard Glossip should be halted and his conviction remanded back to district court.”

Glossip was first convicted in 1998 for allegedly ordering a handyman at a motel Glossip managed to murder the motel’s owner. Glossip was largely convicted on the handyman’s testimony.

Since his initial conviction, two independent investigations have uncovered serious problems with his trial, including allegations of police misconduct and what were reportedly incorrect instructions given to the jury in the case. Prosecutors had also reportedly failed to correct false testimony in Glossip’s trial.

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals upheld Glossip’s death sentence in April of last year, even though the state had previously admitted error and asked the appeals court to overturn the sentence. Drummond called that decision “remarkable and remarkably flawed.”

By “dismissing this extraordinary confession by the state,” Drummond’s office said this week, the appeals court engaged in a “flawed whitewashing of federal constitutional violations.”

The court should “vacate the judgment of conviction and order a new trial” for Glossip, Drummond’s filing said.

Archbishop: Court’s review ‘offers hope’

The U.S. Supreme Court announced in January that it would review Glossip’s case. At the time, Oklahoma Archbishop Paul Coakley told CNA that the high court’s decision “offers hope in furthering the cause toward one day abolishing the death penalty.”

“With new evidence and the state of Oklahoma’s admission of errors in the case prompting the Supreme Court review — issues that seem to be more and more prevalent — we can clearly see reason to reconsider institutionalized violence against the incarcerated as we hopefully move to respect the dignity of life for all human persons,” Coakley told CNA.

The Death Penalty Information Center says on its website that Oklahoma has the highest number of executions per capita of any U.S. state since the death penalty’s reinstitution in 1976. It is second only to Texas in total number of inmates put to death.

Glossip’s case has drawn support from other anti-death penalty Catholics. Krisanne Vaillancourt Murphy, the executive director of Catholic Mobilizing Network, said last year that Glossip “should not be put to death … not ever.”

“No state should have the power to take the lives of its citizens,” she said at the time. “As we see in Mr. Glossip’s case, the system is too broken, too cruel, too disrespecting of human dignity."

“We give thanks to God that Richard Glossip has been granted a temporary stay of execution,” Vaillancourt Murphy said shortly thereafter, “and we pray the Supreme Court decides to formally take up his case.”

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).

St. John Paul II, meanwhile, called the death penalty “cruel and unnecessary” and encouraged Christians to be “unconditionally pro-life.”

The former pope argued that “the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil.”

This is not the 1st time Glossip’s case has been to the highest court in the land. In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court in Glossip v. Gross ruled that lethal injections using midazolam to kill prisoners on death row do not constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

(source: Daniel Payne is a senior editor at Catholic News Agency)

CALIFORNIA:

Death penalty jury review: Berkeley cases involved murders, dismemberment----The Alameda County District Attorney’s Office is reviewing dozens of death row cases, several of which have Berkeley ties, after new records arose indicating prosecutors may have deliberately excluded prospective jurors who were Black or Jewish.

A review of death penalty cases ordered this week in Alameda County after prosecutors found evidence that Black and Jewish residents were deliberately excluded from juries in the high-stakes trials will likely include several with roots in Berkeley, decades of court records and press reports show.

The cases include numerous grisly murders, including one involving a former Berkeley waterfront commissioner convicted of murdering and dismembering another, the records and reports show.

In an order issued Monday U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria said that notes from prosecutors that surfaced during an ongoing petition in one death penalty case showed “strong evidence” that in years past, the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office had shown a pattern of working to keep Black and Jewish candidates out of cases involving capital punishment, perhaps based on the belief that those candidates would be less likely to convict defendants who could be sentenced to die.

The current district attorney, Pamela Price, said in a press event the same day that one of her deputies had found the notes and turned them over to Chhabria and to the death row inmate’s legal team, and that her office would begin reviewing dozens of cases where defendants were sentenced to death, some dating back nearly half a century.

Price’s office did not immediately confirm which cases it is reviewing, though in a statement Monday, officials said Chhabria had directed them “to review all death penalty cases.” The statement enumerated 35 cases; state corrections records name 39 inmates on death row from Alameda County, though three of those appear to be duplicates.

One of those Alameda County cases was against now-80-year-old Enrique Zambrano. Zambrano, who has been on death row since 1993, was convicted of the 1988 killing and dismemberment of Luis Reyna, a former friend and fellow Berkeley waterfront commissioner, according to court records.

At the time of Reyna’s killing, Zambrano was on bail, facing charges that he had attacked a UC Berkeley professor and his wife — charges about which Reyna had intended to testify for the prosecution, according to court records.

Another Berkeley man currently on death row, 47-year-old Grayland Winbush, was convicted in 2003 of killing 20-year-old Erika Beeson with a knife and belt during a 1996 robbery in Oakland, according to court records.

At 33, Darnell Williams Jr. is one of the youngest prisoners on death row, according to state records. He was sentenced to death 8 years ago, convicted of killing 8-year-old Alaysha Carradine at a 2013 sleepover and 22-year-old Anthony Medearis III at a West Berkeley dice game.

Williams shot but did not kill two other children and their grandmother the night he killed Alaysha Carradine. He was out for revenge, targeting the family of the man he believed had killed a friend of his, authorities said at the time. In addition to the killings, he was convicted of three counts of attempted murder.

Erven Blacksher, now 69, was convicted in 1999 of the 1995 slayings of his sister, 46-year-old Versenia Lee and her son, 21-year-old Torey Lee, SF Gate reported in 2011 when the Supreme Court upheld Blacksher’s conviction, ruling he had been competent to stand trial notwithstanding a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia. Blacksher lived with the Lees in Berkeley, according to a 1995 report in The San Francisco Examiner. Court records on Blacksher were not immediately available.

The notes that prompted the review of the death penalty cases came from jury selection in a trial against now-51-year-old Ernest Dykes, who was convicted in 1995 of murdering 9-year-old Lance Clark and trying to kill the child’s grandmother, Bernice Clark, during a robbery. The elder Clark owned the apartment building where Dykes and some of his family lived.

The notes appear to show that the prosecutors who handled the case identified Jewish and Black people and sought to exclude them from the jury pool based on their race and ethnicity. They came to light during a court proceeding related to an ongoing petition filed by Dykes, who won a stay of execution in 2011 and filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

He made several allegations of improprieties during his trial and about California’s death penalty in general.

California still houses inmates sentenced to the death penalty, but capital punishment has been carried out only intermittently since the 1960s. Executions paused in 1967 but resumed in 1992 after a series of bans and reinstatements. In 2019 an executive order from Gov. Gavin Newsom instituted a moratorium on executions, and the state earlier this year said it was moving forward on a plan to move condemned inmates from the death row at San Quentin prison to other facilities.

A 2020 report by the UC Berkeley Death Penalty Clinic concluded that “racial discrimination is an ever-present feature of jury selection in California,” excluding not just Black and Jewish prospective jurors but other candidates of color as well.

(source: berkeleyside.org)

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

Will a state supreme court challenge end California’s ‘racist’ record-setting death row for good?----California has more people on death row than any other state in the country — and a governor who opposes capital punishment. A new audacious legal challenge to the death penalty in the state supreme court is seeking to finally end executions forever, Josh Marcus reports

When he was on death row for a murder he didn’t commit, a lot went through Shujaa Graham’s head.

Sometimes, he thought about ways to keep his mind and body sharp: push-ups, sit-ups, books from the prison library. Graham, who grew up in a family of share-croppers on a plantation in Louisiana, was first sent to prison at age 18 for a $35 robbery, for which he was sentenced to life.

He learned to read and write on the inside and became a dedicated activist, advocating for better conditions, protesting violence from prison staffers, and working with the Black Panthers. It was this activism, he believes, that led to him being wrongfully convicted for the 1973 murder of a prison guard and sentenced to death.

Sometimes during his 6 years on California’s death row, he drifted into despair. Not feeling suicidal exactly, but submerged in a pain so deep that he began to feel indifferent about the prospect of falling asleep and never waking up.

More than anything though, Graham, would dream about getting out and fighting the racism he saw in the prison system and capital punishment process.

“I dreamt that one day if I ever got out, I would do what I’m doing right now, and I would die doing it,” he said in an interview with The Independent from his home in Maryland.

Eventually, after the California Supreme Court found that prosecutors had systematically excluded African-American jurors over the course of Graham’s multiple trials, the activist was exonerated and released in 1981.

Now, as part of the exoneree organization Witness to Innocence, he has joined a group of civil rights organizations launching a campaign in the state that once prepared to execute him.

Earlier this month, the coalition filed an ambitious petition to the state supreme court: they argued that California, a state known for its progressive values, was presiding over a death penalty system shown statistically to disproportionately target minorities for decades, a reality so fundamentally and obviously racist that it violated state constitutional guarantees to equal protection under the law.

The coalition argues the appeals court should bar California officials from pursuing or carrying out any death sentences for the foreseeable future. If successful, it would be a seismic change: California has quietly maintained the largest death row in the nation for years.

“Not a day goes by that I don’t think about what happened to me,” said Graham. “That’s why I continue to fight today.”

The recently-filed legal brief, from groups including the Legal Defense Fund, the American Civil Liberties Union, LatinoJustice, the Office of the State Public Defender, and others, is believed to be the first such challenge to the death penalty in state history.

That unprecedented challenge is required to root out the “persistent” racism in the way the state uses its capital punishment law, according to Patricia Okonta, an attorney at the Legal Defense Fund.

“After reviewing those studies and seeing really how pervasive it is, and how much the statue is infected with racial bias, the urgency was undeniable,” she said.

The action names California Attorney General Rob Bonta as its defendant, who has himself called the death penalty “inhumane” and accused it of having “long had a disparate impact on defendants of colour.”

“We are reviewing the petition and will be filing our response by the court’s May 6th deadline,” his office said in a statement to The Independent.

In California, Black defendants can be nearly nine times more likely than all others to get a death sentence, while Latinos are more than six times as likely. Regardless of the race of the suspect, they are up to 8.8 times as likely to be sentenced to death if one of their victims is white. California also sends a higher percentage of its young people of colour to death row than any other state.

The legal filing also alleges other issues with the process, like a lack of uniform criteria guiding prosecutors on when to seek the death penalty, leaving wide room for personal discretion, and the “death qualification” process, whereby potential jurors who oppose capital punishment are struck from capital juries. As a result, the groups argue, the process “systematically ‘whitewashes’ the capital eligible pool” because Black people tend to oppose capital punishment more than their white peers.

The problems are too pervasive, and the appeals process too slow, for legal challenges in individual cases to suffice anymore, the coalition argues. For example, the supreme court challenge calls the state habeas process, where death row prisoners can challenge issues outside the original trial record, often little more than “a legal fiction” for those behind bars.

A robust body of history and scholarship shows the death penalty’s historical links to racism, lynching, and extra-judicial violence, especially in the US South. And indeed, the seven states that have carried out the most executions in modern US history — Texas, Oklahoma, Virginia, Florida, Missouri, Georgia, and Alabama — among the few states to continue actively executing people in recent years — are largely states of the former Confederacy.

What’s less remarked upon, however, is that California is a part of this conversation, too.

“California has substantially more individuals on death row than any other state in the country,” Ms Okonta said.

Currently the state’s death row has roughly 640 people waiting for executions, more than double the next largest death row, in Florida, which had 286 people as of early 2024.

The hundreds of people on death row in California exist in a strange political suspended animation, with the Golden State unable to commit to either permanently ending or unabashedly using the death penalty.

In 2019, during his first term in office, Governor Gavin Newsom issued an executive order putting a moratorium on the death penalty and shutting down the state’s death chamber at San Quentin State Prison. His reasoning sounded not unlike the civil rights groups currently challenging his attorney general in the state supreme court.

“Our death penalty system has been, by all measures, a failure,” Governor Newsom said at the time. “It has discriminated against defendants who are mentally ill, black and brown, or can’t afford expensive legal representation. It has provided no public safety benefit or value as a deterrent.”

The governor’s office also noted the staggering cost of maintaining this system: since 1978, the state had spent $5bn on a death penalty system that executed 13 people.

The governor has continued moving the state to a post-execution paradigm, even while its death penalty system continues to exist.

Since 2020, the state prison regulator has been piloting a programme transfering death row inmates to the general prison population. Ironically, the move was in part a response to a 2016 voter mandate, Proposition 66, which sought to drastically speed up the death sentence process, but also required death row inmates to work in prison to pay restitution to their victims.

The 20 women on California’s death row have all been transferred out of the state’s female death row at Central California Women’s Facility. In March of this year, the state announced plans to transfer the remaining 457 condemned men out of San Quentin. Newsom plans to transform the infamous prison overlooking San Francisco Bay into a Scandinavian-style correctional facility with a focus on rehabilitation, education, and job training.

At the same time, the governor’s moratorium hasn’t stopped prosecutors from continuing to seek new death sentences.

??Since the governor officially suspended executions in 2019, 20 people have received death sentences, 80 % of them people of colour, according to the complaint with the state supreme court.

The Democrats running to eventually replace Newsom in 2027 all say they oppose capital punishment and wouldn’t approve further executions, all but ensuring that California won’t see these new death sentences carried out in the near future.

And AG Bonta, thought to be an eventual candidate for governor, has pushed for even further action.

“The Attorney General personally believes that the death penalty is deeply flawed and immoral — and that it’s wrong for California,” his office recently told The San Francisco Chronicle. “The Attorney General applauds the Governor for his moratorium on executions but there is more work to be done.”

So why, with the political stars seemingly aligned over ending the death penalty, has execution remained in California? Voters, it turns out, aren’t as sold as the Democratic political class on the idea of ending capital punishment.

Most recently, voters shot down ballot measures in 2012 and 2016 to abolish the death penalty in the state and replace it with life sentences without parole. Some prosecutors still want the punishment too, going so far as to appeal, ultimately unsuccessfully, to federal court to defend their ability to use it even after Newsom signed his moratorium.

The divisions over the death penalty in California mirror the larger twilight zone of capital punishment across the country. A slim majority of states, 27, still retain the death penalty, though only 5 states executed people in 2023, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

Death penalty appeals in individual cases can last decades, and capital punishment regimes across the country have faced persistent issues accessing and using lethal injection drugs, which many mainstream pharmaceutical suppliers will no longer provide to the prison system. Many states have temporarily paused their capital punishment systems, often in response to botched executions, or to resorted to novel methods like nitrogen gas, which the UN has likened to “torture.”

Public opinion polls reflect a similar ambivalence over the punishment. By the end of 2023, a slim majority, 53 per cent, said they support the death penalty for those convicted of murder, while a small majority also said they believe the death penalty is applied unfairly in America, according to Gallup.

The White House has also straddled this line. President Joe Biden campaigned on passing a law to eliminate the federal death penalty, and is the first US president to openly oppose capital punishment. While his Justice Department under Attorney General Merrick Garland has temporarily halted federal executions, the DoJ has continued to seek or defend death sentences in high-profile cases like the mass shootings in Pittsburgh, Buffalo, and Charleston.

A Trump re-election, meanwhile, would likely mean a dramatic change. Trump presided over a massive federal execution spree in office. Despite signing 2018’s First Step Act, which shortened certain sentences and sought to eliminate racial disparities in drug sentences, the former president has also called for strengthening the death penalty and using it against those charged with drug crimes.

The future of the death penalty, in other words, is on uncertain ground.

For his part, Graham, the California exoneree, now has another component of his dream.

His initial hope to get off death row and back to freedom came true. He went and lived a whole life, got married, had 3 children, started his own landscaping business, and appreciated things he thought he might never see again, like sunrises and sunsets.

Graham, 73, said he feels he’s “on the other side of the hill” in his own life, but he hopes to live long enough that capital punishment is a thing of the past, as it is in most other Western democracies.

“If I can just live for a day when someone walks up to me and says, ‘What was capital punishment? What was racism?’, and I say, ‘It’s a thing of the past.’ That’s what I fight for,” he said.

(source: independent.co.uk)

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

Death Penalty Cases in California Under Review After Evidence Reveals Jewish and Black Jurors Were Intentionally Excluded----According to local officials, handwritten notes from prosecutors were found during an appeal case from a previously sentenced man.

35 death penalty cases have been placed under review in Alameda County, California following the discovery of handwritten notes pointing to the intentional exclusion of Jewish and Black people from juries.

In a statement released this week, Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price said her office had been directed by U.S. Federal District Court Judge Vince Chhabria to "review all death penalty cases," as the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is intended to bar such discriminatory conduct. The handwritten notes from prosecutors, per Price's office, were found by a Deputy District Attorney while working on the appeal of Ernest Dykes, who was sentenced back in 1995.

"Any practice by prosecutors to eliminate potential jurors because of their race betrays that core pillar of the criminal justice system," Price said Monday.

L At a press conference, excerpted below, Price said the suspected misconduct could stretch back decades and is believed to encompass a number of cases involving multiple prosecutors. Furthermore, any such misconduct is not necessarily exclusive to cases involving a death penalty sentence.

Regional outlet The Oaklandside reports that Judge Chhabria’s order, dated April 22, states that the handwritten notes in question "constitute strong evidence that, in prior decades, prosecutors from the office were engaged in a pattern of serious misconduct, automatically excluding Jewish and African American jurors in death penalty cases."

This week, Price admitted that the larger process of reviewing these cases will take "a long time," though she didn’t provide an exact timeline. Potentially, Price noted, cases as far back as 1977 could be affected. Price also spoke on the current status of Dykes' case, specifically, reminding the press that those discussions and related processes remain ongoing at this time.

(source: complex.com)

USA:

Supreme Court Roundup: Justices Hear Oral Arguments on Ineffective Assistance of Counsel, Cruel and Unusual Punishment; Defend Positions on Stays

Justices Debate How Courts Should Assess Aggravating and Mitigating Factors in Capital Cases on Appeal

On April 17, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Thornell v. Jones, a case implicating the test for ineffective assistance of counsel—and the first and only oral argument in a death penalty case scheduled this term. Arizona appealed the Ninth Circuit’s decision vacating the death sentence of Danny Lee Jones, which found that Mr. Jones was prejudiced by his attorney’s failure to present key mitigating evidence as to Mr. Jones’ brain damage, childhood physical and sexual abuse, and psychiatric problems. The case marks the second time the Supreme Court has considered a Ninth Circuit ruling on ineffective assistance of counsel in Mr. Jones’ case; the Court summarily overturned the Ninth Circuit’s 2011 decision in his favor. (See DPIC’s earlier reporting on the case.)

Under Strickland v. Washington (1984), an attorney is ineffective when 1) his performance is deficient, and 2) the deficient performance prejudices the defendant. When an attorney fails to present certain evidence, a court weighs the new evidence alongside the aggravating and mitigating factors present in the case and asks whether there is a “reasonable probability” that the outcome might have been different if the attorney had presented the new evidence at trial. All parties in this case agreed on the first prong—that Mr. Jones’ attorney, Lee Novak, performed deficiently at trial—but the oral arguments focused on whether the appellate courts properly weighed the factors when determining prejudice.

At oral argument, all the justices appeared to agree with Arizona that the Ninth Circuit did not properly account for the aggravating factors when it considered the new evidence of Mr. Jones’ traumatic life experiences and mental disorders. “The circuit court did lay forth the fact that it should balance aggravating and mitigating, but I accept that it really didn’t do that,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor said early in the questioning. Justice Elena Kagan later said that the Ninth Circuit “completely ignores all the aggravating evidence” and “has to look at the good and the bad.” The justices also discussed whether, in addition to the Ninth Circuit, the federal district court that conducted the evidentiary hearing weighed the factors properly. The district court found no prejudice against Mr. Jones. Justice Kagan said that the district court may have “misunderstood its role”; instead of weighing the evidence based on a “reasonable probability” of a different outcome, it “seemed to think that it was the factfinder” and made new conclusions about the quality of evidence before imposing what appeared to be a higher standard.

Some members of the Court have increasingly leaned on the concept of “finality” as rationale in recent decisions, and the issue arose again at this oral argument. While Mr. Jones asked that, in the event of a loss, the Court vacate and remand the case to give the Ninth Circuit another chance to conduct the Strickland analysis, Arizona asked the Court to go further and decide on its own whether Mr. Jones’ death sentence should stand based on his counsel’s performance. When Justice Sotomayor asked the state attorney why he sought the more serious and much less common remedy, he answered “finality” and argued that the case “has to end at some point.” Justice Gorsuch later echoed those words, asking whether there was “some value to everybody having some finality in this case” and arguing that “we have the whole record before us and nothing’s changed in 20 years.” Justice Sotomayor, on the other hand, pushed back. “That’s nice,” she told Arizona’s counsel, “but we’re not factfinders, and we generally don’t weigh evidence. There’s thousands of pages in this record.”

The Court will likely issue its decision in the case by the end of June.

Court Appears to Sidestep Challenge to “Evolving Standards of Decency” Test

On April 22, the Court heard oral argument in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, a case involving a “camping ban,” a municipal law that targets unhoused people by criminalizing sleeping outside. While not a capital case, Grants Pass involves the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment, which has been assessed under the “evolving standards of decency” framework for over 60 years. The Court applied this test to reach landmark rulings exempting certain groups from execution, including Ford v. Wainwright (1986) (people experiencing insanity), Atkins v. Virginia (2002) (people with intellectual disability), Roper v. Simmons (2005) (juveniles), and Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008) (people who commit non-homicide crimes). In an amicus brief filed last September, the attorneys general of twenty states asked the Court to grant review in Grants Pass in order to strike down the “evolving standards of decency” test, arguing that courts “should not be tasked with judging the changing winds of society’s evolving morals” and should instead “return to declaring what the law is.” They advocate an “originalist” test, which purports to interpret the Eighth Amendment under its meaning at ratification in 1791. (Critics have argued that originalism “cherry-picks” historical evidence, lending itself to the subjectivity it claims to cure, and fixes the analysis at a time when women and people of color lacked basic rights.) “It’s clear that for at least some originalists on the Court, ‘evolving standards of decency’ is a travesty, and on their wish list of things to get rid of,” said capital punishment scholar Carol Steiker ahead of the Grants Pass argument.

Sections of the brief are virtually identical to an amicus brief filed 5 days earlier by thirteen of the same attorneys general in the death penalty case Hamm v. Smith, in which the Court has yet to issue a certiorari decision. Alabama appealed the case last August after lower courts vacated Joseph Clifton Smith’s death sentence based on a finding of intellectual disability under Atkins. The Court has pushed its decision on Smith back months, rescheduling five times and relisting the case twelve times after it was first considered at conference. This makes Smith a significant outlier in a docket where few cases are ever relisted, and only about 20% of relisted cases are relisted more than 4 times.

However, the challenge to “evolving standards of decency” appears to have faded at least from Grants Pass; neither of the parties mentioned the test at Monday’s oral argument. The justices and advocates instead focused on whether the law punished the “status” of being homeless. Additionally, the states filed a new brief in March that dropped the argument opposing “evolving standards of decency” entirely. Though Professor Steiker said that altering the test would have a “major effect” on capital punishment cases, she also commented in 2022 that she found a full upheaval “unlikely.” She doubted that all the justices would be willing to “throw out 50 years of precedent, dozens of cases,” and predicted instead that the Court would “nibble around the edges in lessening restrictions on the death penalty.”

Justices Share Philosophies on Stays

On April 15, in Labrador v. Poe, the Court allowed portions of Idaho’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors to take effect by voting to stay the district court’s injunction against the law. While Poe is also a non-capital case, the decision provoked written statements by multiple justices defending their positions on issuing stays, which offer insight into the Court’s approach to stays of execution in capital cases.

Ethel Rosenberg

In a concurrence joined by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Justice Brett Kavanaugh noted that stay applications “can require this Court to assess the merits on a tight timeline—without the benefit of many reasoned lower-court opinions, full merits briefing, and oral argument.” He acknowledged that “that scenario is not always optimal for orderly judicial decisionmaking.” However, he rejected the idea that those factors should lead the Court to defer to lower court rulings. “The emergency docket has always existed, and both the Court and even individual Justices acting in chambers have made a plethora of important decisions for the Nation in an emergency posture,” he wrote. One of the “important decisions” he cited in support of the Court’s emergency authority was Rosenberg v. United States (1953), which vacated stays of execution for Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, the only people put to death for peacetime espionage in American history. Their execution generated wide criticism, and the couple’s sons continue to fight to prove Ethel’s innocence. (Ethel’s execution by electrocution was also botched; she had to be strapped back into the chair for additional charges, and witnesses reported smoke rising from her head).

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justice Sotomayor, dissented from the decision and argued that the Court must “proceed with reason and restraint” when intervening in emergency cases. “Few applicants can meet our threshold requirement of ‘an exceptional need for immediate relief,’ by showing that they will suffer not just substantial harm but an ‘irreversible injury…occurring during the appeals process that cannot be later redressed,’” she wrote. She stressed the importance of “respect for lower court judges—no less committed to fulfilling their constitutional duties than we are and much more familiar with the particulars of the case.”

Death-sentenced prisoners facing execution are some of the few applicants who can demonstrate an “irreversible injury,” their death, if they do not receive emergency relief—yet the Supreme Court routinely lifts lower court stays of execution, stays issued by judges in lengthy decisions with much greater familiarity with the case facts. The Supreme Court, by contrast, typically provides no explanation. These decisions occur on the “tight timeline” that Justice Kavanaugh admits undermines the Court’s ability to make a reasoned decision. In the 2018 through 2022 terms, the Court has lifted 4 times as many stays of execution as it has granted. The Court has granted 89% of requests by states to lift stays of execution, compared to 3% of prisoner requests to stay an execution.

Justices Jackson, Sotomayor, and Kagan have regularly dissented from the Court’s decisions lifting lower court stays. “In my view, we should resist being conscripted into service when our involvement amounts to micromanaging the lower courts’ exercise of their discretionary authority,” wrote Justice Jackson in Poe.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

US MILITARY:

Prosecutor Says Sept. 11 Suspects Can Be Held Past War Crimes Sentence----The argument, in a pretrial hearing, dealt with the unresolved question of whether a prisoner who completes such a sentence is entitled to release from military detention.

Regardless of the outcome of their someday trial, the men accused of plotting the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, can be held forever as prisoners in the war against terrorism in a form of preventive detention, a military prosecutor told the presiding judge on Wednesday.

Defense lawyers were asking the judge to rule that, if convicted, Mustafa al-Hawsawi, one of the suspects in plotting the attack, would have any sentence to a term of confinement reduced by the number of days he was held by the United States before trial. He has been held since 2003.

The argument, in a pretrial hearing in the decade-old Sept. 11 case, was the latest installment over a long-running, unresolved question of whether a prisoner, once he completes a war crimes sentence, is entitled to release from military detention.

Col. Joshua S. Bearden, an Army prosecutor, said the answer was no. He urged the judge to reject the request as both premature, because the government is seeking the death penalty in the case, and beyond the scope of his authority.

No date has been set for the start of the trial of the 4 men accused of conspiring in the commercial airliner hijackings that killed nearly 3,000 people on Sept. 11, 2001.

Mr. Hawsawi has been held for the past 20 years but not as punishment or exclusively for trial, Colonel Bearden said. The prosecutor said the charges against Mr. Hawsawi were separate from the detention that keeps him “off the battlefield” in the U.S. war with Al Qaeda.

Mr. Hawsawi is accused of helping some of the hijackers with finances and travel arrangements from the United Arab Emirates on behalf of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described mastermind of the Sept. 11 plot. The two men were captured together on March 1, 2003, in a raid on a house in Rawalpindi, Pakistan.

“Make no mistake about it,” Colonel Bearden said. “The conflict is still going on. Hostilities still exist.”

Sean M. Gleason, a lawyer for Mr. Hawsawi, a Saudi national, argued that his client was in pretrial detention from the moment of his capture because the United States had already issued an arrest warrant for him and prepared a secret indictment against him. By that measure, he said, the prisoner was so far entitled to 253 months of sentencing credit.

Mr. Hawsawi’s lawyers wrote in their brief that even though “the death penalty lurks as a potential sentence,” that should not prevent the judge from granting relief “that would open the door to a different sentence.”

His lawyers have separately asked the judge to dismiss the case because of Mr. Hawsawi’s torture in U.S. custody.

Defense lawyers for the suspects raised the issue as a pretrial matter, arguing that military commissions defendants should be entitled to sentencing credit just like other U.S. military or criminal defendants.

In 2010, the Pentagon added a rule to the Manual for Military Commissions specifically stripping war crimes judges of the right to award such credit. But Mr. Gleason argued that Congress never included that provision in the various laws that created military commissions, and so his right to credit was essentially retroactive.

The judge, Col. Matthew N. McCall, did not ask questions on Wednesday about the overarching preventive detention doctrine. But he asked why one “criminal process” should not be “run like any other criminal process.”

“They are law of war detainees forever, until the hostilities have ceased,” Colonel Bearden replied.

James G. Connell III, representing another defendant, Ammar al-Baluchi, has similarly sought sentencing credit. Mr. Connell argued that a defendant, especially when he considers whether to plead guilty to a crime, should know how much credit he would receive for time served.

Mr. Connell also disputed the prosecutor’s characterization of Mr. Baluchi as a “law of war detainee” in his first years in the C.I.A.’s secret overseas prison network, known as black sites. Prisoners held under the law of war are entitled to visits from delegates of the International Committee of the Red Cross, he said. The Sept. 11 suspects were captured in 2002 and 2003 but were not allowed to meet Red Cross representatives until October 2006, a month after their transfer to Guantánamo Bay.

Of the 30 detainees at Guantánamo Bay, 11 have been tried or convicted; 16 have been approved for transfer to other countries, with security arrangements; and three are indefinite detainees without charge or trial being held under that doctrine as prisoners of the forever war against terrorism.

(source: Carol Rosenberg reports on the wartime prison and court at Guantánamo Bay----New York Times)

INDONESIA:

Indonesian court sentences 45 kg meth dealer to death

The Medan District Court in Indonesia on Wednesday sentenced a prisoner who was behind the distribution of 45 kg crystal methamphetamine to death.

"The court sentenced the defendant Nasrun alias Agam to the death penalty," said Judge Eriyanto Siagian.

Eriyanto continued, "Nasrun committed actions that did not support the government's program to eradicate drugs, instead of reflecting on his previous mistakes."

The court also handed down life sentences to 4 other suspects and imposed a 20-year prison term and a 5 billion rupiah (around 300,000 U.S. dollars) fine on another suspect.

Promised 200 million rupiah (about 12,000 dollars) by Nasrun alias Agam, the 5 suspects transported 45 kg crystal methamphetamine from Kualanamu Airport in North Sumatra to Aceh and ultimately Lampung on Oct. 3, 2023.

(source: xinhua.net)

TAIWAN:

Explainer: Taiwan’s Constitutional Court Debate on Death Penalty (Part One)

Attorneys for 37 death row petitioners challenged the constitutionality of death penalty, arguing it lacks empirical deterrence and involves "cruelty as vengeance."

Taiwan’s constitutional court debated whether the death penalty is constitutional on Tuesday, with attorneys representing 37 petitioners on death row challenging the constitutionality of the punishment.

Lawyers, officials from the Ministry of Justice, expert scholars, and the representatives of National Human Rights Commission each presented their views. The News Lens sums up their points of contention and tracks public views surrounding the most severe sentence in Taiwan.

What is the origin of the constitutional challenge?

The current constitutional challenge stems from Taiwan's oldest death row inmate, 72-year-old Wang Xinfu. He was sentenced to death in 2011 for allegedly inciting the murder of 2 police officers. However, more than 13 years have passed and the execution has stalled.

Wang argues that the death penalty is unconstitutional and also seeks to challenge the interpretations in the previous constitutional rulings of Grand Justices Nos. 194, 263, and 476, which upheld its constitutionality.

Attorneys: Is vengeance acceptable in court ruling?

At the beginning of the court, Nigel Li, lawyer for the petitioners, pointed out that the death penalty involves intrusion into the body, inflicts pain, and deprives life, all in the name of "deterrence" and "vengeance" to maintain social order.

However, he questioned how much deterrence the death penalty truly achieves, noting the lack of empirical research in Taiwan on this matter. Thus, he argued that sacrificing life due raises questions of proportionality and benefit, something the judicial system has not yet addressed.

Many years ago, death row convicts were executed publicly as a means of deterrence. But such public executions were abolished because “it is cruel and counterproductive to rehabilitation." It suggests the fact that the true purpose of the death penalty today is "cruelty as vengeance.”

However, in reality, the law does not permit victims nor government representatives to enact revenge or retribution even as a form of compensation.

MOJ: Defend the penalty and self-restraint of the judges

Kuo Yung-fa, head of the Ministry of Justice’s (MOJ) Department of Prosecutorial Affairs, said that while the constitution upheld "the right of existence," it also allowed for "restrictions," citing Article 23 of the legislation.

Kuo emphasizes that the death penalty remains “the last resort” to judges and is imposed on those who commit "the most severe life offenses in Taiwan.” According to the MOJ data, only 1 out of 476 murder cases in Taiwan from 2019 to 2023 resulted in a final court ruling to impose the death penalty.

Kuo’s deputy Chien Mei-hui said the death penalty remains “highly controversial" in Taiwan and called judicial authorities to exercise "self-restraint."

Jimmy Hsu, professor from the Academia Sinica, believes that the purpose of the death penalty is proportionate punishment. Extremely serious crimes, such as premeditated murders committed in a cruel manner, evoke a deep pain from the victim and their families, as well as fears from the community. Hence, it is necessary to impose severe punishment to commensurate with the level of responsibility for the behavior.

Can judges represent the public views directly?

Cheng Shan-yin, an honorary professor in the Department of Law at the Kainan University, argues that it is dangerous for “a few people” to decide on whether the death sentence should be carried out, referring to 12 grand judges who are reviewing the case.

He suggests that these deliberations be left to the discretion of the legislative body or decided by the public through a referendum.

Hsu, also expressed a similar view, saying the fundamental rights of people should be decided collectively by Taiwan.However he conceded that public discourse has been absent.

However, Yen Chueh-an, professor of Law at National Taiwan University, pointed out that many people believe that grand judges lack a popular mandate. However, grand justices are nominated by the president, who holds the highest executive authority and has a popular mandate.

The nominations then require approval by the Legislative Yuan, the highest popularly elected body. Therefore, the grand judges possess a dual popular mandate. Yen said that it may be an indirect popular mandate, but to claim that grand justices lack a popular mandate is quite peculiar.

The part-2 article will look into the the effectiveness and purpose of the death penalty, as well as the petitioner's arguments regarding the right to life and human dignity.

(source: international.thenewslens.com)

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

Will Taiwan abolish death penalty this year?

Taiwan's Constitutional Court on Tuesday debated the island's death penalty and discussed whether it violates the rights guaranteed under the Taiwanese constitution.

The democratic island is known for its strong human rights record and progressive stance on marriage equality and LGBTQ+ rights. In 2019, Taiwan became the first place in Asia to legalize same-sex marriage.

Court challenge sparks heated debate

Beijing considers self-ruled Taiwan to be Chinese territory, and President Xi Jinping has made "reuniting" the democratic island with mainland China a long-running centerpiece of his strategic policy.

Taiwan's long-awaited debate on the death penalty is considered a historic step that human rights groups believe will decide the future of capital punishment in the democratic island and perhaps further distinguish it from China, which is considered "the world's leading executioner," according to a 2022 report by Amnesty International.

While the final ruling on the constitutionality of the death penalty is not expected to be made before the end of September, the debate surrounding capital punishment has become heated.

"It's been a debate that's rumbled on for too long [in Taiwan]," Saul Lehrfreund, co-executive director of the Death Penalty Project, an organization that provides free legal representation to those facing the death penalty, told DW. "I'm happy that the court have an opportunity now to consider whether or not the death penalty is constitutional."

The debate came after Taiwan's 37 death row inmates, with help from the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty, a coalition of NGOs and research institutes, petitioned for a constitutional review of capital punishment.

"If we can understand the process of a criminal's downfall, why do we focus on killing the fallen angel while overlooking the Satan who led them astray?" one of the attorneys told the court.

The defendants, represented by officials from Taiwan's Ministry of Justice (MOJ), claimed that capital punishment is considered only "as a last resort" which does not violate the protection of the right to life.

Basic rights guaranteed in Taiwan's constitution "can be restricted within the framework of legal preservation and the principle of proportionality," MOJ officials added.

What are Taiwanese people saying?

Polls cited by the Taipei Times suggest that a majority of Taiwanese oppose the abolition of the death penalty.

A 17-year-old student, who spoke to DW on condition of anonymity, said that she is in favor of keeping the sentence. "I believe that murder should be punished with the death penalty," she told DW, adding that it should be given regardless of the factors behind the crime.

Another student, in his 20s, holds a similar point of view. He told DW that since murderers have taken away someone's life, it should be "a form of equality" for the legal system to do the same.

But for those supporting the abolition of capital punishment, the execution of perpetrators could only offer temporary solace to victims' loved ones, rather than long-term comfort.

"I think there should be well-established measures for explanations and compensation to the families," said Mr Hong, a 40-year-old office worker. "It may feel like you have taken revenge at the moment, but in reality, it doesn't seem to have any lasting impact on the family."

To what extent should public opinion be considered?

According to a 2022 report by Amnesty International, close to three quarters of governments around the world have abolished the death penalty in law or practice, almost none of which ended the death penalty due to the public demand or support for it, Lehrfreund pointed out.

Rather, he told DW, the public "followed the political lead or the judicial lead" and have eventually accepted abolition.

Human rights groups believe constitutional interpretation could pave the way for formal abolition of death sentences since Taiwan only legalized same-sex marriage after the Constitutional Court ruled the ban on it unconstitutional.

But the MOJ argues that the same-sex marriage and death penalty cases are not comparable because the application of the death penalty relates to criminal policy.

Death penalty 'main instrument for creating fear

Although Taiwan has taken steps towards abolishing capital punishment, for example it removed mandatory executions for certain crimes, the island may still impose the death sentence for over 50 different crimes, including murder, robbery and drug trafficking.

"Taiwan has said for many years that they're on a road to abolition," Lehrfreund told DW. "But my question is, is that road too long politically and that not enough progress has been made politically to move away from the death penalty?"

Hong, who supports the abolition of capital punishment, also believes the issue is often being used as "some kind of political maneuvering."

"I don't think it's going to be easy to reach a consensus," he said, "because after all, the Constitutional Court has to take into account the majority of the people in [Taiwan]."

The most recent death-row inmate to be executed in Taiwan was Weng Jen-hsien, who had been convicted of murdering six people, including his parents and their caregivers, and was executed in Taipei in 2020.

It was Taiwan's 2nd execution since President Tsai Ing-wen took office in 2016.

Taiwan's Constitutional Court is expected to issue its ruling on capital punishment between July and September.

(source: Deutsche Welle)

INDIA:

Not Rarest Of Rare: Kerala High Court Refuses To Impose Death Sentence On UP Native Narendra Kumar For Triple Murder

The Kerala High Court has declined to impose death sentence upon Narendra Kumar, a native of Uttar Pradesh convicted for committing triple murders in Kottayam on May 17, 2015.

He was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to the death for the brutal murder of his employer Praveenlal and his parents Lalasan and Prasannakumari.

The Division Bench comprising Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. was dealing with Kumar's appeal and the Sessions court reference for confirmation of sentence. It held,

“While the facts and circumstances proved against the appellant before us clearly point to his involvement in a gruesome triple murder, we would not go so far as to categorise it as the “rarest of the rare” so as to impose the death sentence on him. This is especially so because this is a case where we have sustained the conviction of the accused for the various offences with which he was charged solely based on circumstantial evidence."

As per the prosecution, the accused used a knife and axe to inflict injuries on heads and necks of the deceased persons. He also committed robbery of ornaments and electronic gadgets. He was also convicted and sentenced for the offences under Sections 397 (robbery, dacoity with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt) 457 (lurking house trespass or house breaking), 380 (theft in dwelling house) and 461 (dishonestly breaking open receptacle containing property) of the IPC.

The Court observed that brutal and heinous murder was committed by the accused on his employer and family.

The Court also took note of all the circumstantial evidence against the accused that link him to the murder such as absconding after the crime, last seen theory, conduct, medical evidence, recovery of articles and stolen property. It also noted that all witnesses identified the accused in Court.

Based on the circumstantial evidence before the Court, it stated that the chain of events was established and that the accused was guilty of murder. It said, “If all the circumstances mentioned above are taken together, they lead to only one inference namely, that in all human probability the murder of the deceased was committed by the appellant alone and none else. When all the links are established, they together exclude any reasonable hypothesis of the innocence of the appellant.”

Death Sentence Reference

Regarding the death sentence reference, the Court referred to the landmark decision in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980), where the Apex Court held that the death penalty could only be imposed in the 'rarest of rare' cases.

The Court also referred to the decision in Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v. State of Maharashtra (2019) to find whether the accused could be reformed and rehabilitated before awarding death sentence.

Based on the orders of the Court, Project 39 A of the National University of Delhi conducted a mitigation study to consider the probability of reformation of the accused. Their report indicated that the accused had a childhood full of adversities ranging from poverty, neglect, abuse as well as discrimination. The report further stated that he got married very young and had a marital life full of conflicts. It also stated that he had attempted to commit suicide and lacked the support and love from any closed ones.

The report also stated that the accused shows resilience and was making conscious efforts such as developing new skills for reintegration into the society. The report stated that the accused has the motivation to become a better person and to lead a better life. The report concluded thus, “Thus, a second chance at life will enable Narendra to have a valuable, meaningful life and be a productive member of his family and society.”

Relying upon Mohd. Farooq Abdul Gafur and Another v. State of Maharashtra (2010), the Court stated that primacy has to be given to life imprisonment over death penalty when case was based on circumstantial evidence alone. In the facts of the case, the Court stated that the entire prosecution case was based on circumstantial evidence only.

Thus, the Court refused the death sentence imposed upon the accused under Section 302 of the IPC and modified his punishment thus, “we deem it appropriate to modify the sentence to one of life imprisonment with the further condition that he shall undergo mandatory imprisonment without remission for a period of 20 years. Save for the aforesaid modification of the sentence in respect of the offence under Section 302, we uphold the impugned judgment of the trial court.”

While allowing the criminal appeal in part, the Court upheld the conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court under Sections 397, 457, 380 and 461 of the IPC.

Counsel for Accused: Advocates M.P Madhavankutty, Mathew Devassi, Ananthakrishnan A Kartha, Remya M Menon

Counsel for State: Public Prosecutor Alex M Thombra

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 266

Case Title: State of Kerala v Narendra Kumar & Another

Case Number: D.S.R.NO.1 OF 2018, CRL.A.NO.319 OF 2017

(source: livelaw.in)

YEMEN:

Nimisha Priya case: Kerala mother reunites with nurse daughter on death row in Yemen jail

On Monday, 22nd April, Premakumari and Samuel undertook an overnight car journey from Aden to Sana'a and reached the Houthi-controlled region on Tuesday. With the support from Indian diplomatic representatives, they completed the formalities that were required to meet Priya, which eventually led to their meeting on Wednesday afternoon.

After a seven-year-long wait and multiple court battles in India, Premakumari, a senior citizen hailing from Kerala, has been able to meet her daughter Nimisha Priya, a nurse who is on death row in a Yemeni prison. Priya's India-based lawyer Subhash Chandran confirmed that the mother-daughter duo met at the jail in Sana'a, Yemen, in the afternoon hours of Wednesday. He said that the jail authorities had permitted the mother-daughter duo to spend a few hours together and even allowed them to have lunch on the premises.

Since 2017, India strictly prohibited its nationals from travelling to Yemen, owing to the deteriorating internal security situation there. Only those with special permission from the Indian Government can undertake travel to Yemen, for others it is a punishable offence.

Hopeful of meeting her daughter who is on death row in a prison in Houthi-controlled Sana'a, Premakumari travelled from Kochi in Kerala to Aden, Yemen, during the weekend. She is being accompanied by Samuel Jones, who has been helping the family in getting access to Priya and attempting to get her released from jail.

On Monday, 22nd April, Premakumari and Samuel undertook an overnight car journey from Aden to Sana'a and reached the Houthi-controlled region on Tuesday. With the support from Indian diplomatic representatives, they completed the formalities that were required to meet Priya, which eventually led to their meeting on Wednesday afternoon.

Priya's India-based lawyer Subhash Chandran told WION that they are making attempts to meet the family of Talal (the victim) and plead for mercy. This is a possibility, owing to the concept of 'Diyah' or 'Blood Money', which is practised in Islamic Sharia Law. 'Diyah' is the compensation paid by the perpetrator's family, as demanded by the victim's family.

Recently, thousands of people from Kerala and even non-resident Keralites crowdfunded Rs. 34 crores or around USD 4 million, to pay 'Diyah' and free Keralite Abdul Rahim who has been on death row in Saudi Arabia. Rahim is said to have accidentally caused the death of a differently-abled child that he was taking care of.

Hailing from a poor family in Kerala's Palakkad district, Nimisha went to Yemen in 2008 and worked as a nurse in a Government-run hospital in Sana'a. Eyeing better earning opportunities, she quit her job and started her own clinic.

Priya's lawyer maintains that Priya and another woman had started a clinic with Talal, who had later subjected them to physical and mental abuse and confiscated their passports. In a desperate bid to escape the abuse and flee, it is said that Priya and the Yemeni woman had drugged Talal, which is suspected to have led to his death. The case got further complicated after Talal's mutilated body was found by the authorities in Yemen. Nimisha's lawyer maintains that she was only responsible for drugging the abuser and that she isn't aware of what transpired after her escape bid.

(source: wionews.com)

IRAQ:

At least 13 people executed amid alarming lack of transparency

The Iraqi authorities must immediately halt all executions, said Amnesty International today, after at least 13 men were put to death on 22 April in Nasiriyah Central Prison, in the southern governorate of Thi Qar, following their conviction on overly broad and vague terrorism charges.

Amnesty International is concerned that many more people may have been executed in secret amid a disturbing lack of transparency regarding executions in Iraq in recent months. Security sources had previously confirmed to the media the execution of 13 men on 25 December 2023 – the first recorded mass execution since November 2020. But activists and lawyers who represent prisoners on death row told Amnesty International that scores more have been executed since 10 April adding that the authorities did not give advance notice to the prisoners or their families and lawyers.

“Iraq’s recent executions are alarming and disheartening. For years, a legacy of human rights violations and abuses have plagued Iraq’s justice system, landing thousands on death row after grossly unfair trials,” said Razaw Salihy, Amnesty International’s Iraq Researcher.

“Executions carried out after trials that don’t meet international human rights standards may amount to arbitrary deprivation of life. The Iraqi government must immediately establish an official moratorium on executions and work towards abolishing the death penalty entirely.”

Out of the men executed on 22 April, 11 were convicted on the basis of their affiliation to the so-called Islamic State armed group. The lawyer of the other two men executed on 22 April told Amnesty International that they were convicted of terrorism-related offences under the Penal Code after a grossly unfair trial and had been detained since 2008. The lawyer and relatives of the two men said they were tortured and then forced to sign documents that they were not allowed to read. The lawyer said a judge later informed them that the documents were confessions and sentenced them to death. The men had applied for a re-trial due to their allegations that their confessions were obtained under torture. Amnesty International looked into documents issued in 2020 by the judicial committee in charge of reviewing these requests, which stated that a review of the cases could not be carried out as per the law because the casefiles had been lost.

“The fact that 2 of those executed may have been denied the opportunity of a fair trial and did not have their cases reviewed because their casefiles were lost is utterly callous and outrageous. The use of the death penalty is appalling in all circumstances, but carrying out executions after blatantly unfair trials underscores the cruelty of this injustice,” said Razaw Salihy.

“They were tortured to ‘confess’ and the authorities want to brand them as terrorists. They [authorities] lost their files and executed them like they do not matter,” their lawyer told Amnesty International.

Lawyer for 2 of the executed men

2 lawyers told Amnesty International that as many as 150 individuals are at imminent risk of execution after President Abdul Latif Rashid reportedly ratified their death sentences. According to official court documents reviewed by Amnesty International, on 22 October 2023, the Federal Appeals Court sought the ratification of the death sentences of 51 individuals from the office of the Presidency. Over 8,000 prisoners are believed to be on death row in Iraq.

Information available to Amnesty International indicates that an unspecified number of prisoners were executed on 6 January. Further, an activist told Amnesty International that the family member of a prisoner on death row at Nasiriyah said that guards removed at least 12 prisoners from their cells in mid-April and never brought them back, and that the guards later informed the rest of the cell mates to help themselves to the belongings of the men that were taken. Amnesty International is concerned that those men may have been executed.

On 21 February, Amnesty International sent two letters to the office of the President of Iraq and the Ministry of Justice respectively, requesting information about the number of death sentences ratified, the process of ratification, the number of executions, as well as the measures taken to guarantee the basic rights of those facing execution, including due notice to prisoners, their families and their lawyers prior to execution. However, the organization has yet to receive a response.

Background

Amnesty International has consistently documented flaws in Iraq’s judicial processes that deny prisoners a fair trial. Iraq’s courts have routinely accepted torture-tainted “confessions” as evidence and sentenced individuals to death based on those confessions, and they have routinely failed to investigate allegations of torture. Defendants were either denied legal representation or given a court-appointed lawyer whom they could not meet privately. Thousands have been convicted of broad and vaguely worded terrorism-related offences.

The organization has also documented grave concerns regarding the overcrowded and inhumane conditions of detention in Nasiriyah Central Prison where individuals on death row are held, as well as allegations of torture and other ill-treatment and denial of medical care. There have been scores of deaths in custody at the prison which lawyers and relatives of those on death row told Amnesty International are a result of those conditions.

(source: Amnesty International)

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

Iraq hangs 11 convicted of 'terrorism' in a week, confirms security and health sources----Under Iraqi law, terrorism and murder offences are punishable by death, and execution decrees must be signed by the president

Iraqi authorities have executed at least 11 people convicted of "terrorism" this week, security and health sources said Wednesday, with rights group Amnesty International condemning an "alarming lack of transparency".

Under Iraqi law, terrorism and murder offences are punishable by death, and execution decrees must be signed by the president.

A security source in Iraq's southern Dhi Qar province told AFP that 11 "terrorists from the Islamic State group" were executed by hanging at a prison in the city of Nasiriyah, "under the supervision of a justice ministry team".

A local medical source confirmed that the health department had received the bodies of 11 executed people.

They were hanged on Monday "under Article 4 of the anti-terrorism law", the source added, requesting anonymity due to the sensitivity of the issue.

All 11 were from Salahaddin province and the bodies of 7 had been returned to their families, the medical official said.

Iraqi courts have handed down hundreds of death and life sentences in recent years for people convicted of membership in "a terrorist group", an offence that carries the death penalty regardless of whether the defendant had been an active fighter.

Iraq has been criticised for trials denounced by rights groups as hasty, with confessions sometimes said to have been obtained under torture.

Amnesty in a statement on Wednesday condemned the latest hangings for "overly broad and vague terrorism charges".

It said a total of 13 men were executed on Monday, including 11 who had been "convicted on the basis of their affiliation to the so-called Islamic State armed group".

The 2 others, arrested in 2008, "were convicted of terrorism-related offences under the Penal Code after a grossly unfair trial", Amnesty said citing their lawyer.

The Britain-based rights group denounced "a disturbing lack of transparency regarding executions in Iraq in recent months".

"The Iraqi government must immediately establish an official moratorium on executions and work towards abolishing the death penalty entirely," said Razaw Salihy, Iraq researcher at Amnesty.

In late January, UN experts looking into capital punishment in Iraq expressed their "deep concern at reports that Iraq has begun mass executions in its prison system".

The independent experts, who are appointed by the UN Human Rights Council but do not speak on its behalf, mentioned in their statement executions carried out late last year in the same Nasiriyah prison.

The statement said that "13 male Iraqi prisoners -- previously sentenced to death –- were executed on 25 December 2023", calling it "the largest number of convicted prisoners reportedly executed by the Iraqi authorities in one day" since November 16, 2020, when 20 were executed.

The IS group overran large swathes of Iraq and neighbouring Syria in 2014, proclaiming its "caliphate" and launching a reign of terror.

It was defeated in Iraq in 2017 by Iraqi forces backed by a US-led military coalition, and in 2019 lost the last territory it held in Syria to US-backed Kurdish forces.

But its remnants continue to carry out deadly hit-and-run attacks and ambushes, particularly from remote areas and desert hideouts.

(source: wionews.com)

IRAN----executions

Iran Executes 4 as Death Penalties Surge

The Islamic Republic of Iran executed 4 prisoners as death penalties continue to rise in the country.

Death sentences were carried out for 4 prisoners at Arak and Karaj prisons. The prisoner include Javad Askari, Ali Reza Aghaei, Pezhman Azizi, and an inmate known as "Shahram," who had been previously convicted of premeditated murder and drug-related offenses.

Ali Reza Aghaei had been sentenced to death 5 years ago for premeditated murder, while Pezhman Azizi and Shahram faced the same fate for drug-related offenses.

Javad Askari, a prisoner from Arak convicted of premeditated murder, had his execution sentence carried out at the Central Prison of Arak.

The news of these executions had not been disclosed in government-affiliated media outlets, particularly those aligned with the State.

In the past couple of weeks, Iran has witnessed a surge in the execution of prisoners.

However, these coincided with the conflict with Israel, diverting international attention away from the executions.

According to a report by Amnesty International, Iran has reached its highest level of death sentence execution in the last eight years, with the judiciary of the Islamic Republic executing 853 people in 2023 alone.

The report indicates that 481 executions, more than half of the total, were related to drug crimes.

This marks an 89 % increase in the death penalty compared to 2022 when 255 people were executed for drug-related offenses. The latest numbers also show a staggering 264 % increase compared to 2021, when 132 individuals faced execution for similar charges.

(source: iranwire.com)

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

Inmate Executed in Saqqez Prison

An inmate convicted of murder was executed in Saqqez Prison on April 25, 2024, as reported by Kurdpa.

Farzad Khademi, a resident of Saqqez in Kurdistan province, received a death sentence for murder approximately 3 years ago.

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.

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)

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

Popular Rapper Sentenced to Death for Dissent----Revolutionary Courts are Key Tool in Authorities’ Brutal Repression

An Iranian court has issued a death sentence to the imprisoned popular rapper Toumaj Salehi on speech-related charges, Human Rights Watch said today. The legal proceedings and sentence against Salehi, 33, are a cruel and outrageous assault on fundamental freedoms and the right to a fair trial.

Amir Raeesian, Saheli’s lawyer, told the Shargh media outlet on April 24, 2024, that Branch 1 of Isfahan’s Revolutionary Court had sentenced his client to death on the charge of “corruption on earth.” In November 2023, Iran’s Supreme Court struck down Salehi’s 6-year prison sentence related to this case, referred the case back to the court of first instance, and released him on bail. Iranian security forces rearrested Salehi 12 days later.

“Iran’s revolutionary court judges act like they are empowered to assault citizens’ basic rights and make a mockery of any existing legal safeguards,” said Tara Sepehri Far, senior Iran researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Toumaj Salehi’s outrageous verdict is just latest manifestation of Iran’s brutal justice system. He should be released immediately.”

On October 30, 2022, the authorities violently arrested Salehi, a musician and vocal critic of the government, amid protests following the death in morality police custody of Kurdish-Iranian woman Mahsa Jina Amini the previous month. The authorities held Salehi in solitary confinement and brought multiple charges against him including “corruption on earth,” a vague charge that can carry the death penalty. The Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) reported that government security forces beat Salehi in custody.

On July 10, 2023, Branch 1 of Isfahan’s Revolutionary Court ruled that the threshold for the “corruption on earth” charge against Salehi had not been substantiated, and instead sentenced him to 6 years in prison under article 286 of the Islamic Penal Code. Article 286 punishes crimes against national security or disruption of public order on a large scale with up to 5 years in prison or a death sentence if it meets the threshold of “corruption on earth.”

On November 18, Raeesian told Shargh that Salehi had been released on bail after the court struck down the sentence and referred the case back to the court of first instance. Upon his rearrest on November 30, the authorities opened a new case against him for accusing his interrogators of abuse in a video published online. On January 1, HRANA reported that Salehi had been sentenced to one year in prison and a 2-year travel ban as punishment in the new case.

On April 18, Branch 1 of Isfahan’s Revolutionary Court held a new trial for Salehi. Raeesian said that the authorities added charges in the case, and the court ultimately convicted Salehi and sentenced him to death for the “corruption on earth” charge. Raeesian alleged that the ruling had significant legal errors, including contradicting the supreme court verdict. He said that they will appeal the verdict.

Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all circumstances because it is inherently cruel and irreversible.

Since the crackdown against protests, Iran’s judicial authorities have drastically increased the use of vaguely defined national security charges against protesters that carry the death penalty, including for destroying public property. Following grossly unfair trials in which many defendants have not had access to legal counsel of their choice, the authorities issued 25 death sentences in connection to the protests. As of April 2024, the government has executed 8 who were convicted in connection to the protests The Supreme Court has overturned another 11 death penalty convictions.

Among those arrested during the protests was a Kurdish-Iranian rapper, Saman Seyedi, known as “Yasin.” He was sentenced to death on “enmity against the state” charges, including for alleged “weapon possession and conspiracy to threaten national security,” but the Supreme Court struck down the sentence. On April 21, HRANA reported that Branch 15 of Tehran’s Revolutionary Court had sentenced Seyedi to 5 years in prison.

“The Iranian government has made unfair courts a cornerstone of its vicious repression of popular dissent,” Sepehri Far said.

(source: Human Rights Watch)

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

Iranian rapper sentenced to death, says lawyer

An Iranian rapper jailed for supporting anti-government protests has been sentenced to death, his lawyer has said.

Toomaj Salehi in his songs supported protests in 2022 that erupted over the death of Mahsa Amini, a woman who died in police custody after allegedly wearing an "improper" hijab.

One of Mr Salehi's lawyers, Amir Raesian, said the rapper would appeal against the issuing of a death sentence.

Iranian authorities have not commented.

Mr Salehi was first arrested in October 2022 after making public statements in support of protests and he was charged with numerous offences.

He was sentenced in July 2023 to 6 years and 3 months prison after avoiding a death sentence due to a Supreme Court ruling.

But in January, Isfahan's Revolutionary Court accused Mr Salehi of new charges in addition to those he had been acquitted of earlier, his lawyer said.

A really simple guide to Iran's protests

Speaking to newspaper Sharq on Wednesday, Mr Raesian said the revolutionary court ignored Supreme Court's ruling for clemency and instead issued new charges before handing down "the harshest punishment".

The charges he was found guilty of included corruption on earth on several charges, "Baghi" [armed rebellion], assembly and collusion, propaganda against the ruling establishment and inciting riot.

Mr Salehi has 20 days to appeal against the ruling.

Before the 2022 protests, established artist Mr Salehi was already an outspoken and figure and was banned from performing in concerts, instead posting his songs on social media.

Through his songs and lyrics he boldly criticized the leadership of Iran for their corruption and crackdowns on dissent.

Following his 2023 sentencing to six years in prison, he was released on bail in November of the same year but rearrested a few days later on charges of sharing "false claims without evidence", an apparent reference to a video message he posted claiming to have been "tortured" and pressured by intelligence ministry agents.

Recently Iranian police have intensified their presence on the streets to enforce Islamist dress codes for women.

The verdict by an Islamic revolutionary court appears to be a calculated message signalling the regime's strength and determination to suppress any form of dissent.

(source: BBC News)

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

IHRNGO Condemns Rapper Toomaj Salehi’s Death Sentence and Calls for International Reaction

Rapper Toomaj Salehi who was arrested during the “Woman, Life, Freedom” nationwide protests has received the death penalty.

Condemning the death sentence against Toomaj Salehi in the strongest terms, Iran Human Rights calls for the international community to pay special attention to the intensification of repression in Iran.

IHRNGO Director, Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam said: “Issuing the death penalty for expressing opinions and creating artistic works is a sign of the desperation of the Islamic Republic regime and its fear of popular protests. The global community and the people of Iran must strongly react to this inhumane verdict."

In an interview with Sharq newspaper, one of Toomaj Salehi’s lawyer, Amir Raeisian stated that his client had been sentenced to death for charges of efsad-fil-arz (corruption on earth) and denied reports that he had been pardoned.

Amir Raeisian said: “In a move that is unprecedented in its kind, Branch One of the Isfahan Revolutionary Court did not implement the Supreme Court’s decision in Toomaj’s 2022 case, it sentenced Toomaj Salehi to the maximum sentence for efsad-fil-arz charges, the death penalty.”

“Branch One of the Isfahan Revolutionary Court considered the charges of ‘disrupting public order, spreading lies and inciting riots through cyber crimes’ to be within the jurisdiction of Branch 2 of the Isfahan Criminal Court and has not issued a verdict for those charges. The Court has also dropped the charges of ‘connection with hostile governments and insulting the leader.’ The reason for this is that the court had acquitted him of the charges in its previous ruling,” the lawyer further said.

On social media, his other lawyer, Mostafa Nili reported that they would be appealing the decision within the legal time frame.

Toomaj Salehi is a rapper who was previously arrested in 2018 and 2021. He was in hiding during the “Woman, Life, Freedom” uprising when he was violently arrested in Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari province on 30 October 2022. He was subjected to torture and ill-treatment, forced to repent on camera and denied medical treatment and access to his lawyer. Toomaj was subsequently released on bail after spending a year and 21 days behind bars with 252 days spent in solitary confinement. However, he was violently rearrested just 12 days later after speaking out against the torture he was subjected to behind bars. He is held in Isfahan Central Prison.

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

Hadi Mirgozar Executed in Gilan

State media reported the execution of Hadi Mirgozar for murder charges at an unspecified prison.

According to Haft Sobh newspaper, a man was executed on 10 April. He was sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for the murder of a woman named Elham Sarlatibut the exact location of his execution has not been specified in the report.

An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “The executed man was named Hadi Mirgozar and he was executed in a Gilan province prison.”

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 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.

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

Hossein Ali Sobhani Executed in Gorgan

Hossein Ali Sobhani, a man on death row for drug-related charges, was executed in Gorgan Central Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a man was executed in Gorgan Central Prison on 23 April. His identity has been established as 37-year-old Hossein Ali Sobhani from Sari who was sentenced to death for drug-related charges by the Revolutionary Court.

An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Hossein Ali Sobhani was arrested in October 2021 and sentenced to death.”

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

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."

(source for all: iranhr.net)

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

Iranian rapper sentenced to death over aiding protests: Media

An Iranian court issued a death sentence for a popular rapper imprisoned over backing the nationwide protest movement sparked by the death of Kurdish woman Zhina (Mahsa) Amini nearly 2 years ago, local media reported on Wednesday.

Toomaj Salehi, 33, is a well-known rapper in Tehran and was arrested in October 2022 by Iranian security forces. Outlets affiliated to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) at the time described him as “one of the leaders of the riots,” saying he was caught “while trying to flee in the western border region.”

The Isfahan Revolutionary Court “sentenced Toomaj Salehi to the severest punishment of death on charges of corruption on earth,” Salehi’s lawyer Amir Raisian told Iran’s reformist Shargh Daily newspaper.

“The Isfahan Revolutionary Court considered the accusations of aiding in sedition, assembly and collusion, propagating against the system and calling for riots … to be among the examples of corruption, and with emphasis on asserting the extent of the corruption has issued the death sentence for Salehi,” Raisian said, adding that the court’s verdict has “obvious legal conflicts.”

The lawyer said that the Isfahan court “emphasized its independence” and did not agree to implement the Supreme Court’s ruling while issuing the death sentence, and stressed his desire to appeal the decision.

“The contradiction with the ruling of the Supreme Court is considered the most important and at the same time the strangest part of this ruling,” Raisian said.

Salehi was freed on bail on November 2023, Raisian told Shargh at the time, due to objections found in his original sentencing. He was sent back to prison shortly after.

Amini, 22, died in police custody on September 16, 2022 after being arrested for allegedly wearing a lax hijab. Her death sparked Iran’s largest protest movement in the past four decades, initially calling for greater freedoms for women before turning into a full-blown antigovernment revolution. Hundreds of people were killed and thousands arrested as authorities launched a brutal crackdown on dissent.

The Islamic republic became the subject of heavy international criticism and sanctioning for its repression of the demonstrators.

(source: rudaw.net)

APRIL 24, 2024:

TEXAS:

Recent research on eyewitness memory may be Texas death row inmate's last hope

A California psychology professor says new research on memory suggests witness testimony casts doubt on the guilt of a Texas man on death row — long before the witness implicated him in a 1998 murder after being "hypnotized" by Farmers Branch police.

Scientific research for decades has concluded eyewitness testimony is unreliable and witnesses commonly make mistakes during the first test of their memory.

But University of California San Diego professor John Wixted said his and other research that has gained traction since 2020 suggests witness memories are the most accurate and reliable on a first memory test, especially when a witness is more confident in what they say they remember.

“This came as a shock to the field because this says that, actually, eyewitness memory is not inherently unreliable,” he said. “Just like every other kind of forensic evidence, there's conditions under which it's reliable and conditions under which it's unreliable, and you better figure out which applies when you're listening to an eyewitness.”

Wixted shared his research with roughly 30 people gathered for an educational forum at Southern Methodist University about Charles Don Flores, who was sentenced to death by a Dallas County jury in 1999 for the murder of Elizabeth “Betty” Black in her Farmers Branch home.

The 54-year-old, his attorneys and supporters have long argued Flores is innocent. He has now exhausted his state and federal appeals options, and his execution date is yet to be set.

Black’s neighbor Jill Barganier was a key eyewitness. She initially said she saw two men — both white, according to other witnesses, and at least one with long hair — getting out of a multicolored Volkswagen and walking toward Black’s home that morning. She later picked Richard Childs out of a photo lineup as the driver but did not initially identify Flores.

Police later put Barganier under forensic hypnosis — a process of obtaining testimony that’s been scrutinized for decades and is now inadmissible as evidence in criminal trials in Texas. She then identified Flores — who is Hispanic, had short hair, and described himself as always being "big" in an interview with Texas Public Radio — as the passenger in the car at the crime scene at his trial.

But Wixted said Barganier’s initial identification of the two men who entered Black’s home was most likely correct, and the fact that she did not identify Flores at first points to his innocence.

“We're not just impeaching the witness' testimony,” Wixted said. “We're talking about new, substantive evidence of innocence that was never considered by anybody, and now he's out of appeals and heading for execution.”

Even further, Wixted said testing Barganier’s memory and presenting Flores as a possible suspect — even though he didn’t match her description — only served to taint her memory. He said this builds on previous arguments that police hypnosis is a flawed practice, including a Dallas Morning News investigation into other criminal cases where it’s been used.

Holly Bowen, an assistant professor of psychology at SMU, explained there are several myths about how human memory works. Memory isn’t static and thorough like a recording device. It’s flawed and malleable, and current goals, motivations and knowledge can easily shape what people remember, she said.

“Eyewitnesses want to be helpful, so imagine how frustrating it is to continually be questioned about a memory that you just don't have,” she said. “Victims want, you know, justice. They want closure. And I think the evidence indicates that this combination of things can really lead to the creation of false memories.”

Miguel Solorio was recently exonerated based on Wixted’s research. He was convicted in a 1998 drive-by shooting murder in Whittier, California and sentenced to life without parole in 2000. Among other things, Wixted, Solorio’s lawyer Ellen Eggers and advocates pointed out that witnesses initially didn’t identify Solorio in an array of suspect photos police showed them.

A judge agreed and exonerated Solorio November 2023.

“I know there are many other innocent people in prison who were not identified from the first lineup,” Solorio said. “Their cases deserve to be reviewed.”

Childs, the other suspect in Black’s murder, pleaded guilty to shooting the woman as part of a plea bargain after Flores' conviction. Childs, who got out on parole in 2016 after serving less than half his sentence, is white.

“I think there's a specter of racism in here that has to be emphasized,” said Gretchen Sween, Flores’ attorney. “They wanted the bad guy to be this unaffiliated Hispanic guy who lives in a trailer park in Irving who had drug issues, and who their likely informant, Richard Childs, was trying to ensnare in a drug deal.”

An execution date was set for Flores in 2016, but the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals stayed his execution after his attorneys challenged the use of hypnosis. In May 2020, the court upheld a Dallas court’s ruling that Flores couldn’t contest his conviction under the state’s junk science law and denied Flores a new trial. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to look at Flores’ case in 2021.

Senate Bill 338, which took effect in September 2023, makes witness statements obtained through police hypnosis inadmissible in criminal trials, but it cannot apply to Flores’ case, Sween said.

Wixted said he has attempted to reach out to Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot’s office to talk about the case, but that meeting hasn’t happened. Creuzot’s office has exonerated people as recently as last year.

A spokesperson for the DA’s office said in an email the DA does not set execution dates and the office has given Flores' team "everything they have requested and more than they are entitled to," declining to comment further on the case.

Sween said a new trial with consideration for this new research is all she’s asking for.

“It's a terrible miscarriage of justice,” she said. “The courts have so far been slamming the doors. All we want is a chance to let science into the room and not this tale of corruption and, you know, horrible misrepresentation of how human memory actually works.”

(source: KERA news)

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

Fort Worth man facing death penalty for murdering girlfriend, her 10-year-old daughter

A North Texas man convicted of murdering his girlfriend and her 10-year-old daughter 5 years ago could soon learn his punishment.

Paige Terrell Lawyer was found guilty of capital murder in a Tarrant County courtroom last week.

Prosecutors said he strangled 30-year-old Otishae Womack and 10-year-old Kamyria Womack in April 2018. Their bodies were found inside their apartment on Shady Lane Drive in Fort Worth.

Police had made several prior domestic violence visits to the apartment. In 2 of those cases dating back to January 2017, Lawyer was accused of choking his girlfriend.

A medical examiner ruled both the mother and daughter died from strangulation.

The man accused of killing a 9-year-old Dallas girl pleaded guilty to a lesser charge after his murder trial ended with mistrial.

U.S. Marshals arrested Lawyer a week after the crime in Murfreesboro, Tennessee.

Jurors are now deliberating on his punishment.

He faces life in prison without parole or a possible death sentence.

(source: FOX News)

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

Texas inmates are being ‘cooked to death’ in extreme heat, complaint alleges----With the threat of another hot summer ahead, advocates asked a federal judge to declare 100-degree-plus conditions in uncooled Texas facilities unconstitutional.

April signals the beginning of blistering heat for much of Texas. And while the summer heat is uncomfortable for many, it can be deadly for the people incarcerated in Texas’ prison system where temperatures regularly reach triple digits.

With another sweltering summer likely ahead, prison rights advocates on Monday filed a complaint against Texas Department of Criminal Justice executive director Bryan Collier, arguing that the lack of air conditioning in the majority of Texas prisons amounts to cruel and unusual punishment.

The filing came from 4 nonprofit organizations who are joining a lawsuit originally filed last August by Bernie Tiede, an inmate who suffered a medical crisis after being housed in a Huntsville cell that reached temperatures exceeding 110 degrees. Tiede, a well-known offender whose 1996 murder of a wealthy widow inspired the film “Bernie,” was moved to an air-conditioned cell following a court order but he’s not guaranteed to stay there this year.

Monday’s filing expands the plaintiffs to include every inmate incarcerated in uncooled Texas prisons, which have led to the deaths of dozens of Texas inmates and cost the state millions of dollars as it fights wrongful death and civil rights lawsuits.

The plaintiffs ask that an Austin federal judge declare the state’s prison policy unconstitutional and require that prisons be kept under 85 degrees Fahrenheit. Texas jails are already required to keep facilities cooler than 85 degrees, and federal prisons in Texas have a 76 degree maximum.

Between June and August last year, the average temperature was 85.3 degrees — the 2nd hottest on record behind 2011. And this year does not look to be much cooler. The most recent winter season ranked warmest on record for the contiguous U.S., according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Scientists have found that climate change has resulted in more severe and longer lasting heat waves. In the last decade, Texas has experienced over 1,000 days of record-breaking heat, compared to a normal decade.

In the hot summer months, those concrete and metal cells can reach over 130 degrees, formerly incarcerated Texans said during a Monday press conference. Legal representatives hope to prove those conditions are unconstitutional.

“What is truly infuriating is the failure to acknowledge that everyone in the system —all 130,000 prisoners— are at direct risk of being impacted by something that has a simple solution that has been around since the 1930s, and that is air conditioning,” attorney Jeff Edwards told reporters. Edwards was the lead attorney in a 2014 prison rights case that cited the nearly 2 dozen Texas prison inmates who died from heat stroke over the previous two decades. That case culminated in a settlement, where TDCJ agreed to install air conditioning at the Wallace Pack Unit near College Station.

About 2/3 of the inmates housed across TDCJ’s facilities live in areas without air conditioning. Advocates and inmates’ families have long fought to cool prisons in a state where summer temperatures routinely exceed triple digits and pose dangerous conditions to inmates and correctional officers.

Although the state has not reported a heat-related death since 2012, researchers and inmates’ families dispute those statistics. A 2022 study found that 14 prison deaths per year were associated with heat. Last year, a Texas Tribune analysis found that at least 41 people had died in uncooled prisons during the state’s record-breaking heat wave.

Health problems that have been linked to excessive heat include renal diseases, cardiovascular mortality, respiratory illnesses and suicides, Julie Skarha, a epidemiology researcher at Brown University who authored the 2022 study, told reporters on Monday.

Skarha said while death certificates may not list heat strokes — a condition when the body can no longer control its temperature— as the official cause of death, her research indicates that many prisoners have died from heat-related causes.

“Heat deaths haven’t magically stopped,” the lawsuit states. “TDCJ has simply stopped reporting or admitting them after the multiple wrongful death lawsuits and national news coverage.”

TDCJ spokesperson Amanda Hernandez declined to comment on the lawsuit, saying the agency does not comment on pending litigation. But she emphasized that the department has been adding more air conditioning units since 2018.

“Each year we’ve been working to add cool beds, and we’ll continue to do so,” she said.

She also pointed to the departments’ “enhanced heating protocols” which are activated from April to October and include providing ice water to inmates and allowing them to purchase fans and cooling towels from the commissary.

Lawyers argue that these mitigation tactics are insufficient to combat the state’s sweltering temperatures. To survive the heat, incarcerated people report having to flood their toilets or sinks and lie down in the water on the cell floor to try to cool their bodies, the lawsuit states.

“This isn’t an unpredictable event,” said attorney Erica Grossman, who is one of the lawyers representing the plaintiffs. “It gets hot every summer, and much like every other building in Texas —including buildings that have animals — we cool the building.”

TDCJ staff who work in the facilities are similarly impacted by the heat, said Michele Deitch, a senior lecturer at the University of Texas at Austin's School of Law and LBJ School. The excessive heat invades all aspects of life in prisons: Staff must do physical work in heavy uniforms in the heat; the heat results in more violence among those incarcerated; and it leads to more use of force against prisoners, she said.

The TDCJ states on their heat mitigation protocols that staff are “encouraged to increase their water intake” during the hot summer month and are allowed to wear cooling towels and dri-fit compression shirts.

New research Skarha has conducted found that the number of assaults that occur in prisons without air conditioning increased as much as five times during summer months compared to that number in climate-controlled facilities.

Prison rights advocates say the state could easily fund air conditioning units across its prisons but has simply been unwilling to do so. During the last legislative session —when the state recorded a record surplus— the House proposed spending $545 million to install air-conditioning in most of the prison facilities lacking it. But the final budget did not include any money dedicated to air conditioning.

The House also passed a bill requiring prisons to be kept between 65 and 85 degrees, which is required already in jails and most federal facilities. But the bill failed in the more conservative Senate.

“We have the resources. We just seem to not have the compassion to do it,” Rep. Carl Sherman, D-DeSoto, said during the press conference. Sherman was one of the authors of the bill that would have regulated prison temperatures.

The Legislature did allocate approximately $85 million for “additional deferred maintenance projects,” in Texas prisons, and TDCJ is using that money to pay for air conditioning units. Hernandez estimated that those dollars will provide air conditioning for an estimated 10,000 inmates.

(source: Texas Tribune)

CONNECTICUT:

Amid claims a CT company is selling lethal injection drugs, lawmakers push for a ban----Vows come after Hamden-based company accused of making lethal injection drug did not respond to officials’ questions for years, records show.

Connecticut lawmakers are vowing to push for legislation that would bar any company in the state from selling drugs meant for use in lethal injections following claims a Hamden company may be doing just that.

“We banned the death penalty,” said state Rep. Josh Elliott, a Democrat who represents Hamden. “So this is a natural extension of the state banning capital punishment by regulating life-ending drugs that could be used elsewhere.”

Lawmakers disagree on how to approach potential legislation, and experts say any new law could face court challenges.

But the promises come as state officials grow frustrated with the Hamden company, Absolute Standards. Records recently obtained by CT Insider show the company has not responded to repeated questions from federal and state officials for years about claims it may be manufacturing a drug for use in lethal injections.

In recent weeks, the firm also has not responded to repeated requests for comment from CT Insider over the phone, via email and at its office.

Officials and advocates have long suspected that Absolute Standards might be on a closely-guarded list of companies that supply and test drugs for use in lethal injections.

The HBO show Last Week Tonight with John Oliver seemed to confirm those suspicions in early April, when it reported that the company may have supplied the federal Bureau of Prisons and the state of Arizona with pentobarbital, citing public records, court documents and an unnamed “confidential source.”

Soon after, Connecticut Attorney General William Tong told CT Insider that his office is “looking at” the company’s reported activities.

“We're definitely aware of it and have been focused on it for some time,” Tong said.

Tong spokesperson Elizabeth Benton later clarified the office is reviewing the company but has not launched an investigation.

While the attorney general’s review moves forward, some lawmakers have vowed to take action.

Every other year, the Connecticut General Assembly meets for a short session with special rules that limit who can propose bills. Lawmakers were already in the middle of this year’s short session, which runs from Feb. 7 through May 8., when the Absolute Standards issue resurfaced.

Because of that, Elliott said any bill to stop the sale of lethal injection drugs by Connecticut companies won’t come up until the legislature reconvenes in early 2025.

Sen. Saud Anwar, D-South Windsor, said he wanted to propose a bill this year in his role as co-chair of the Public Health Committee, but state Senate rules and the short legislative session made that impossible. Still, Anwar said he does still plan to push for a measure to stop the sale of lethal injection drugs this year.

“I will explore with the leadership to see if anything can be done during this session,” he told CT Insider.

Whatever the Attorney General’s Office or other state officials find regarding Absolute Standards, Anwar said it’s important for lawmakers to address the issue.

“I’m interested to have a law in the books for the state of Connecticut,” he said.

Sen. Gary Winfield, D-New Haven, was heavily involved in Connecticut’s repeal of the death penalty in 2012 and now co-chairs the Judiciary Committee. He said that he plans to reach out to Anwar on this issue.

“Judiciary will be involved with it one way or another,” Winfield said.

Winfield also criticized Absolute Standards for not responding to past requests for information from state and federal officials.

“The lack of response is disturbing and irresponsible,” he said. “At least clear up what’s going on.”

Asked about Absolute Standards last week, state House Speaker Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, said he was aware that the state attorney general is looking into the company and expressed some concern about the allegations.

“It doesn't sound good,” Ritter said during a brief exchange with reporters at the capitol. Asked whether he wished to expand on those comments Monday, Ritter declined to comment further.

It’s unclear if the legislature can successfully stop the sale of the drug to the federal government or other states, said former state Rep. Michael Lawlor, who served as the state’s Undersecretary of Criminal Justice when Connecticut banned the death penalty in 2012.

“Yes, they can pass a law,” Lawlor said. “But I would imagine that it would be challenged in federal court by the company, with financial backing from death penalty advocates.”

“I don’t know if you can successfully stop that or block them,” he added. “But it’s worth a shot.”

3 letters, no response

For years, state and federal officials’ repeated attempts to get information from Absolute Standards have faced roadblocks.

At least 3 times, CT Insider has learned, state and federal officials have reached out to the company with no response.

The 1st letter sent to Absolute Standards came from the U.S. House Oversight Committee’s Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties on July 14, 2020.

Then subcommittee chair Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., and member Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., wrote that they had records suggesting the company had helped federal officials “in securing and/or testing pentobarbital for death penalty executions.”

The administration of former President Donald Trump restarted federal executions in 2019 after a 16-year pause. President Joe Biden placed a moratorium on federal executions, but his Justice Department continues to press for the death penalty in some cases.

The letter from House Oversight gave Absolute Standards 14 days to answer a list of questions and submit documents.

The company never responded, according to subsequent correspondence from federal officials that was obtained by CT Insider.

House Oversight Committee officials did not respond to CT Insider’s request for comment.

The next communique came nearly a year later, on April 19, 2021, when U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro — whose congressional district includes Absolute Standards’ office — followed up on the letter from Raskin and Pressley.

“As the congresswoman for Connecticut’s Third Congressional District, I am concerned that supplying a lethal injection drug for use in human executions might be contrary to the values held by many individuals in our state,” DeLaro wrote in the letter.

Again the company did not respond, a spokesperson for DeLauro said.

Three days after DeLauro's letter, one of her staffers emailed the office of Connecticut Attorney General William Tong to relay the congresswoman’s concerns about Absolute Standards and share information about the company.

“There are several states that are now actively looking to follow the federal government’s lead in acquiring this drug and resuming executions,” said the email, which CT Insider obtained through a public records request.

“As Absolute Standards has been identified as the only possible supplier of pentobarbital ingredients for executions, the risk that Connecticut medicines will imminently fuel the death penalty in executing states across the country is high,” the email added.

Tong’s staff exchanged a series of internal messages that appear to discuss the email from the DeLauro staffer, but the Attorney General’s Office almost completely redacted those emails before releasing them to CT Insider. The office did not give a reason for the redactions. (CT Insider has filed a complaint with the state’s Freedom of Information Commission over the office withholding information without providing a rationale, as the law requires.)

A third time officials reached out to Absolute Standards, and a third time they received no response.

Tong sent the company a letter and email on May 25, 2021, that said the state had “a powerful interest” in regulating the manufacture and sale of pentobarbital.

“I am concerned that manufacturing and selling this drug for use in lethal injections is contrary to the values and policies of this state, as articulated by both the Connecticut legislature and the Connecticut Supreme Court,” Tong wrote.

Absolute Standards never responded to that letter, and the Attorney General’s Office hasn’t reached out to the company since, Benton said.

The company is not required to respond to any of the written inquiries, Benton said.

Tong’s office spoke with the anti-death penalty group Reprieve on June 9, 2021, in a call arranged by Brian Stull, a senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union’s Capital Punishment Project, internal emails show.

“Reprieve has some additional ideas about potential CT-law violations to offer about the reported conduct of Absolute Standards,” Stull wrote.

Asked about the meeting, Stull said he did not have any additional information to add.

Reprieve declined to comment on the meeting but said it was “concerned” that the House Oversight letter went unanswered.

“We know poor quality drugs purchased through illicit means are known to cause botched executions, as well as endangering public health by undermining the supply chain for medicines,” Maya Foa, the group’s joint executive director, said in a statement.

Officials in Tong’s office also discussed Absolute Standards during an internal policy meeting on June 10, 2021, in a section of the meeting meant for old business, records show. A short note underneath that agenda item is also redacted.

Benton declined to comment on what happened in those meetings.

Consumer protection not investigating, agency says

There’s been some confusion even among Connecticut officials about who should look into Absolute Standards, and how.

Hamden Mayor Lauren Garrett said she spoke with Tong’s office after the Last Week Tonight segment ran and asked them to investigate Absolute Standards.

“I am morally opposed to the death penalty,” she told CT Insider in a text message when asked about the company. “I’m surprised that in a state that does not allow the death penalty, we would have a company manufacturing lethal injection drugs.”

In follow-up text messages between Garrett and Justin Kronholm obtained by CT Insider through a public records request, Kronholm first said the attorney general’s office was looking into the matter before saying the state Department of Consumer Protection was looking into it.

Benton referred questions to DCP, which said it is not currently investigating Absolute Standards and has never conducted an investigation of the company.

“There have been no allegations received by the department that Absolute Standards has engaged in illegal manufacturing or sale of controlled substances,” spokesperson Kaitlyn Krasselt said. “They maintain the necessary credentials to manufacture drugs in the State of Connecticut, and oversight of the ultimate use of the products they manufacture falls outside the department’s jurisdiction.”

Garrett said the City of Hamden doesn’t have the authority to take any action against Absolute Standards, and she hasn’t reached out to the company directly. But she said she “absolutely” plans to keep pressing state officials on the issue.

Absolute Standards has held a valid license with DCP to manufacture several classes of drugs, including controlled substances, since at least 2011, according to agency documents. That license will come up for renewal at the end of July, records show.

The company is not required to provide information on how a drug is used when applying for a license or for a license renewal, Krasselt said. Documents show that the company has renewed its license annually for years, and there have been no complaints or discipline filed against the company, according to Krasselt.

DCP documents also show that Absolute Standards held a valid federal registration to produce pentobarbital that expired in June of 2019. Documents indicate that the company applied again for a registration with the federal Drug Enforcement Administration in 2021, but it is unclear if its registration is current.

DEA officials said Tuesday in an email they “do not comment on specific registrants” when asked if the company must provide information on the use of the drugs they are seeking to register.

(source: Joshua Eaton, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER----stamfordadvocate.com)

NORTH CAROLINA:

The Executioner’s Last Meal

<>P> Out of all the meals consumed on death row, most people on the outside only know about the "last meal" requested by the condemned, provided out of some sense of dignity and humanity as window dressing for state-sponsored killing. They imagine lavish meals savored by hardened killers—and the invectives hurled by politicians as they pander to constituents about the extravagant cost.

But the public never hears about the executioner’s meal. I was not sentenced to death until March 18, 1999. Prior to that, as a "safekeeper" at Central Prison awaiting my capital trial in 1998, I experienced two executions. The 1st being North Carolina’s last use of the gas chamber, though I didn’t know it at the time. I just knew the state was putting people to death. My 1st execution on death row occurred a mere 8 days after I got there. The feeling was different since I had been sentenced to death. It was exponentially heavier. I would feel that enormous weight and grinding pressure thirty-three times before executions stopped in 2006.

We heard talk about the executioner’s meal before on Unit Two, the old death row, but no one saw it. The idea of it spurred vicious imaginings. However, between 2002 and 2006, after death row had been moved to the new Unit Three, we witnessed something no one facing death should: A party the night of the execution.

The most galling part was the sheet cake.

At the time, the prison-staff break room was located in the main hallway of Unit Three. 2 large plexiglass windows made it a sort of fishbowl: anyone could look in, whether the lights were on or off. On the day of an execution, the break room door was locked, and 2 long tables appeared, hugging the walls. Stacks of paper plates, napkins, Solo cups, and plastic utensils anchored one table, while a mess of food spread out over the other. Usually, there would be a half dozen two-liter bottles of soda, oversized family bags of chips, dips, cheeses, crackers, jars of cocktail sausages, trays of cookies, and that enormous sheet cake covered in colorful swirls of frosting. I know because I could see it. The meal was, for those of us shuffling back and forth from the chow hall, on full display. In 2003 there were 7 such feasts.

Wide-eyed, and with barely concealed smiles, prison staff would deny that this was a celebration of any kind. No, they told us, on the night of an execution, extra staff were called in, just in case they had to quell a riot. And all those guards and executioners, well, they had to eat something. Execution nights are long nights, they insisted. Their denials were clearly lies, always delivered lightly with a guilty child’s who me? impudence.

Birthday cake is an odd requirement for a supposedly utilitarian staff meal, but there it was, served on execution night. We prisoners began to think of it as the executioner’s last meal, and one year, it was.

As of 2023, no one has been put to death in North Carolina since 2006. Executions were initially stopped because doctors refused to participate in them, and the European makers of one of the drugs used in lethal injections refused to export it to US prisons. Ongoing litigation over North Carolina’s Racial Justice Act, which allows death row prisoners to challenge their sentence if it was "sought or obtained on the basis of race," has kept the de facto moratorium in place. Given the evolving standards of decency in the criminal justice system, the decline in capital sentences and executions, a high rate of death sentences reversed on appeal, and the increasing number of innocent people exonerated from death row, North Carolina may never put another prisoner to death. But until the state abolishes capital punishment, my friends and I know that our "last meal" may come much earlier than we hope.

What would you eat for your last meal? Would you even have an appetite, knowing that, in a matter of hours, after hugging and kissing your loved ones goodbye, your life would end? On death row, we rarely discuss last meals.

In 2006 the day before he would have been put onto death watch— the final 72 hours of isolation before the lethal injection—my friend JT received a stay of execution. I asked him about the last meal. "Eating?" He shook his head. "Who can think of food when you’re preparing to die? I probably would have refused it." Newspapers report the condemned’s last meal in the same paragraph as their final words, how long it took for the death to occur (and whether any step was "botched"), who attended the execution, and whether the prosecutor and victims’ families made a statement. Lumping that information all together furthers the misconception that the last meal is eaten in smug satisfaction, at expense of the victims and the public.

For all the handwringing about extravagant last meals, those of us who know executions know that the gustatory requests of the condemned are seldom, if ever, met. Those awaiting death frequently refuse a last meal; others find that their facility allows them only to choose from what’s on the standard chow hall menu that day. Visions of delivery drivers lining up with steaks from one place and milkshakes from another are almost laughably false. So, no, prisoners don’t sit around drooling over what we would request, because we have no illusions that it would ever be provided. Discussions like that would just be feeding a fantasy, contrasting bitterly with the bleak food-as-required-calories system we actually live (and may eventually die in).

Excerpted from Witness: An Insider's Narrative of the Carceral State © 2024, Lyle C. May, Haymarket Books.

(source: Lylc C. may, theappeal.org)

FLORIDA:

Death penalty discussed again for mom accused of drowning autistic son in 2020----Even though it was mentioned that state attorneys are willing to work with defense attorneys to come up with a plea, so far, no details of a potential offer have been released

State attorneys once again mentioned the death penalty could be on the table for a Kendall woman caught on video allegedly pushing her son into a lake in 2020.

Even though it was mentioned Tuesday that state attorneys are willing to work with Patricia Ripley's defense attorneys to come up with a plea deal, so far no details of a potential offer have been released.

Ripley, 48, faces charges including murder in the 1st degree, kidnapping, child abuse with great bodily harm, attempted murder and several others in the May 2020 killing of 9-year-old son Alejandro, who had autism and was non-verbal.

Police said Ripley had taken her son to a lake behind a housing complex near 103rd Avenue and Kendall Drive and attempted to leave him in the water to drown. Police said video footage confirmed that Ripley pushed her son into the water and left him there by himself.

At the time, witnesses told NBC 6 that they saw a person run into the lake to rescue the young boy after neighbors had screamed for help.

That same evening, police said Ripley succeeded in killing her son at another location, a golf course canal, where his body was discovered by authorities on May 22nd, authorities said.

According to an arrest report, Ripley recanted her story and admitted she had led the boy into the canal, saying "he's going to be in a better place."

Earlier this year, Ripley got a new judge assigned to her case. Ripley has a tentative trial date of August 26, 2024.

(source: nbcmiami.com)

OHIO:

Convicted child killer on death row seeks to get conviction tossed out

After 3 decades, it still doesn't make sense to Robert Garrett.

"Why? What did she do? She was 10 years old." His daughter, Amber, was stabbed to death and dumped in the woods in West Harrison, Indiana in 1991.

Now, the man who's been on death row since 1993, convicted of killing Amber, wants that conviction thrown out.

Jeffrey Wogenstahl is taking the issue of jurisdiction to the Ohio Supreme Court, arguing the state didn't sufficiently prove the murder took place in Ohio.

"This is a unique case and a unique jurisdictional issue," says Jeffrey Wogenstahl's attorney, Kimberly Rigby. "And because of that, this issue was missed. It was missed by the trial court. It was missed by trial council. It was missed by direct appeal council, as we're arguing here. It was missed by us, when we originally filed the motion to reopen in 2015 before this court. However, that does not take away from the merits and magnitude of this jurisdictional issue in this case."

"This case is not about an unconstitutional, or mandatory or conclusive presumption. This case is about finality," says Philip Cummings, who's representing the state of Ohio. "Jurisdiction has been determined. It's been determined by this court to have been properly exercised here."

"I think Mr. Wogenstahl is saying that the statute creates a mandatory, conclusive presumption and that's unconstitutional," argues Cummings. "Because that deprives the defendant of due process, because it relieves the state of the burden of proving jurisdiction, but that's a flawed premise."

Former Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters is now one of the justices on Ohio's Supreme Court.

Deters recused himself from these proceedings, because he prosecuted Jeffrey Wogenstahl.

(source: WKRC news)

TENNESSEE:

Lawmakers Pass Bills Allowing Death Penalty for Child Rapists----Death penalty opponents say it's really about overturning federal precedent.

GOP lawmakers still want to kill child rapists in Tennessee and while laws to do it have passed both chambers, death penalty opponents question motives behind the legislation.

If the governor signs the bill, adults over the age of 18 could face the death penalty if they rape a child under the age of 12. However, judges could also levy lesser punishments to those convicted.

The legislation was sponsored by 2 powerful lawmakers: House Majority Leader Rep. William Lamberth (R-Cottontown) and Senate Majority Leader Sen. Jack Johnson (R-Franklin).

The House version of the bill passed Tuesday. The Senate version passed earlier this month.

In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court said a similar idea from Louisiana was “not proportional punishment for the crime of child rape.” In a Tennesseean op-ed published Monday, Johnson said he sponsored the legislation “in an effort to challenge the 2008 Supreme Court ruling.” That part rang a sour note for Tennesseeans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (TADP) which said the statement shows “what this bill is really about.”

“Bottom line: This bill is about overturning Supreme Court precedent and not about protecting our children,” reads an email newsletter sent from the group Tuesday. “If protecting kids was the priority, then lawmakers would listen to the child service providers who continue to publicly share their concerns that this legislation will only chill the reporting of this crime since 90 percent of offenders are family or friends of the child. It will also trap children in decades of capital litigation that will only serve to re-traumatize them, particularly if they have to testify over and over again.”

Such legislation is on brand for the GOP’s tough-on-crime platform. Conservative lawmakers believe the threat of death is equal to the some crimes and their laws may make some re-consider their actions. But the bill could also open a big door for lawmakers down the road.

Current law says a “defendant guilty of first degree murder” must get a sentencing hearing in which they’ll get the death penalty, a life sentence, or a life sentence without the possibility of parole. This GOP bill removes “first degree murder” wherever it appears in current law and replaces it with “an offense punishable by death.” This would add child rape this year. But it seems to crack the door open for lawmakers to add other offenses in the future.

For now, though, Johnson and Lamberth are focused on child rapists, who Johnson called “monsters” in his op-ed.

“Child rape is the most disgraceful, indefensible act one can commit, leaving lasting emotional and psychological wounds on its victims,” he wrote. “As a legislator, and more importantly, as a human being, our responsibility to protect the most vulnerable comes first.”

However, the notion of upending the Supreme Court ruling was on Lamberth’s mind even as he presented the House version of the bill earlier this year. He vowed then to fight for its implementation in court. He noted that in 2008, the court’s ruling came because “not enough states had this type of penalty on the books.”

“We’re seen other decisions by the Supreme Court overturned,” Lamberth said. “I believe this particular makeup of the court, it leans more towards state’s rights.”

Death penalty executions remain on hold in Tennessee after a scathing report in December 2022 found numerous problems with the state’s execution protocols.

2 death penalty bills failed in the legislature last year. One would have added firing squads to the state’s options for executions. Another would have brought more transparency to the execution process.

One death penalty bill passed last year. It gave the Attorney General control over post-conviction proceedings in capital cases, rather than the local District Attorneys. That bill was ruled unconstitutional in July by Shelby County Criminal Court Judge Paula Skahan.

(source: memphisflyer.com)

OKLAHOMA:

Oklahoma AG files brief to halt Richard Glossip's execution

Oklahoma State Attorney General Gentner Drummond is asking the Supreme Court to halt Richard Glossip's execution.

Drummond filed a brief with the court today about the"remarkable and remarkably flawed decision” by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals to uphold Glossip’s conviction and death sentence for the 1997 murder of Barry Van Treese.

Drummond claims Glossip’s prosecutors committed a Brady violation by not sharing potentially exculpatory evidence with the defendant and violated Napue by knowingly allowing false testimony that prevented Glossip from receiving due process.

In May 2023 the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case of Richard Glossip, but several extensions have been granted, most recently one on April 4.

Glossip was convicted of the 1st-degree murder of Barry Van Trease in 1998. An appeals court overturned that conviction for ineffective assistance of counsel, but a 2004 retrial led to another conviction.

In an April 4 update the Supreme Court granted a motion for a further extension of time to file the briefs on the merits. That extension ended April 23, 2024. The time to file the brief of Court-appointed amicus curiae in support of the judgment is extended to and including July 8, 2024.

(source: KJRH news)

CALIFORNIA:

Dozens of death penalty cases under review for racial bias in jury selection

Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price said Monday her office is reviewing dozens of death penalty cases over possible prosecutorial misconduct.

At a press conference in front of a federal courthouse in San Francisco, Price said she’s investigating all 35 of the county’s existing death penalty cases for possible evidence that Black and Jewish people were excluded from juries because of their race.

“The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to a trial by an impartial jury of one’s peers,” Price said. “Any practice by prosecutors to eliminate potential jurors because of their race betrays that core pillar of the criminal justice system.”

Price said her office was ordered to look into the cases by U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria after potential wrongdoing was found during the resentencing settlement of Ernest Dykes. Dykes was convicted in 1993 of the attempted murder of Bernice Clark and the murder of her 9-year-old grandson Lance Clark during an attempted robbery and sentenced to death in 1995, according to Price’s office.

The cases go back as far as 1977 and it’s unclear how long the review process will take or how many prosecutors might have blocked jurors because of their race.

“It will take a long time,” Price said. “We don’t know how long. Each case we will have to review individually.”

Some of the existing evidence includes hand-written notes about specific people who were left off juries that identify them as Black or Jewish, she said.

“Additionally, we have the transcripts of some of the ways in which the jurors were questioned,” Price said. “It’s not limited to one or two prosecutors. It’s a variety of prosecutors.”

Price said people who think they might have been impacted by these cases can contact the county’s Victim-Witness Advocates at (510) 208-9555 or shawnmitchell@acgov.org.

(source: piedmontexedra.com)

USA:

Articles of Interest: Reprieve Issues New Report on Botched Executions and Racial Disparities

LETHAL INJECTION

A new report issued April 17, 2024 by the UK-based international human rights organization Reprieve found racial disparities in the occurrence of botched executions in the United States. As reported in The Guardian, Reprieve analyzed all lethal injection executions between 1976 and 2023. It chronicled 73 confirmed botched procedures and found that 8% of executions of Black people were botched (37 times out of 465 executions), compared with 4% for white people (28 out of 780).

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

RUSSIA:

Survey finds small majority of Russians in favour of reintroducing the death penalty

Over 50% of Russians would support the reinstatement of capital punishment, a survey carried out by independent pollster Russian Field in April revealed on Tuesday.

The telephone survey of 1,631 respondents found 53% of respondents in favour of restoring the death penalty, while 39% were against and 7% found it difficult to answer.

Residents of small towns and villages and men are more likely to support the return of capital punishment than people in larger towns and women, the researchers wrote, adding that opposition to the reintroduction of the death penalty decreases with age.

Respondents who didn’t go on to further education and those who don’t use social media and messenger apps are significantly more likely to support the restoration of the death penalty, Russian Field added.

Respondents were most in favour of the death penalty for paedophilia (57%), murder (56%) and terrorism (46%). Women are significantly more likely to support the death penalty for paedophilia and murder, whereas men do for terrorism.

While the death penalty is provided for under Russian law, no executions have been carried out since 1996, when then-President Boris Yeltsin decreed a moratorium on its use, which was subsequently upheld by the Constitutional Court in 1999.

Following the deadly terror attack on a concert hall in Moscow in late March, a number of Russian lawmakers have called for lifting the decades-long moratorium on the use of capital punishment, despite senator Andrey Klishas dismissing these discussions as “unfair speculation”.

(source: novavagazeta.eu)

NIGERIA:

The constitutionality of death penalty: Need to amend the law (2)

“Nelson Mandela would have been hanged in 1964 but for the discretionary power of the judge to substitute imprisonment”.

LAST week, I began a discussion on proprietary of Nigeria’s retention of the death penalty. I concluded last week’s piece with the examination of the argument that the death penalty deters criminals. My view, as stated last week, is that it does not.

Death penalty as strong response to certain crimes

A further argument for the retention of death penalty is that some crimes are horrific and their effects so profound that only the death penalty could indicate society’s disapproval of the conduct of those who committed them. Crimes in this category may include the deliberate extermination of over six million Jews by the Nazis during World War Two and for which some major leaders of the Nazi regime paid with their lives. A further example is that of Timothy McVeigh, the American terrorist who, in 1995, bombed two Federal Buildings in Oklahoma, leading to the death of 168 people and injured over 600 others. He was executed in 2001. In Nigeria, an example that readily comes to mind is that of the late Lawrence Anini, the underworld kingpin who in the ’80s terrorised the then Bendel State, killing numerous policemen. I doubt if anyone could really argue that the crimes ascribed to these persons are not deserving of death penalty.

Death is irreversible

However, despite the arguments for the death penalty, there are some arguments against it which cannot be ignored. Life is sacrosanct. It is a gift given by God. It is like a line connecting two distant points; the points being birth and death. If this line is broken, it cannot be reconnected. Therefore, it is agreed that death is final and conclusive and incapable of being reversed. What therefore happens where someone is wrongly convicted of an offence, sentenced to death and executed, only for facts suggesting or even establishing innocence to be revealed after his death?

As scary or farfetched as the above scenario might sound, it is one that has played out in recent history. In 1927, Ferdinando Sacco and Bartolomev Vanzetti were tried, convicted, sentenced to death and executed in Boston, Massachusetts for murder. Fifty years later in 1977, the governor of the state issued a declaration admitting that the two had not received a fair trial. In 1953, Derek Beltley was hanged in the United Kingdom for murder. However, in 1993, he received a royal pardon which was in 1998 followed by a decision of the Court of Appeal which quashed his entire conviction for murder.

The decision was made following evidence establishing his innocence, including the revelations that his supposed “confessional statement” had been doctored by police officers. James Hanratty was one of the last people in the UK to be sentenced to death for murder. He was hanged at Bedford Gaol on April 4, 1962, after being convicted of the murder of scientist Michael Gregsten, who was shot dead in his car near Clophill, Bedforshire in August 1961. Gregsten’s mistress, Valerie Storie, was raped, shot and left paralysed in the same incident.

In Nigeria here, some decades back, a national daily reported the public execution, by firing squad, of some persons convicted of armed robbery. As was customary after the first round of shots had been fired at the condemned men, a doctor on hand to certify their deaths moved closer to examine them. To the doctor’s surprise he found one of them, mortally wounded and barely alive, muttering almost inaudibly. What was however shocking was not the fact that the man was still alive but the words coming out of his lips even as life was draining out of him.

He kept muttering in Yoruba: “Iku oro.. lai se lai jale!” Which can be loosely translated to mean: “Oh what a painful death… when I have committed no crime… when I have not stolen”. Law students are taught very early that much premium is placed, in certain circumstances, on statements known as dying declarations, made by persons at the point of death when they have lost all hope of survival. If applied to the scene described above, it is difficult to argue that that particular condemned man was still deceptive when he insisted on his innocence even to the point of death.

Therefore, as no judicial system is perfect and because obvious cases of miscarriages of justices occur, it has been argued that long terms of imprisonment be made to replace the death penalty in Nigeria and other countries that still retain it. After all, if it is discovered that a man has been wrongly convicted he can still be released from prison. The Innocence Project in the United States of America has succeeded in securing the release of numerous persons after they had spent decades in prisons.

The death penalty around the world

However, in acknowledgement of the realities of our time, I suggest an amendment to the law to permit judges, where mitigating circumstances exist, to impose terms of imprisonment rather than the death penalty in capital offences. At the moment, judges do not have any such discretion as the death penalty is mandatory.

In 1964, a similar discretion was exercised in favour of a man tried and convicted of sabotage and conspiracy to violently overthrow the government of South Africa. The trial Judge rejected the prosecution’s application for the imposition of the death penalty and on the contrary sentenced the accused to life imprisonment. This convict spent 27 years in jail and returned to lead his country through a phase of democratic reforms. That man was Nelson Mandela. This man whom the whole world wished speedy recovery from his health challenges, could have been at the end a hangman’s noose in 1964 but for the discretionary power of the judge not to impose death penalty in appropriate cases.

Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965 in Great Britain

The Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965 (c. 71) is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It abolished the death penalty for murder in Great Britain (the death penalty for murder survived in Northern Ireland until 1973). The act replaced the penalty of death with a mandatory sentence of imprisonment for life.

The 1965 Act amended the Homicide Act 1957, which had already reduced hangings to only four or fewer per year.

The 1965 Act was introduced to Parliament as a private member’s bill by Sydney Silverman MP. The Act provides that charges of capital murder at the time it was passed were to be treated as charges of simple murder and all sentences of death were to be commuted to sentences of life imprisonment. The legislation contained a sunset clause, which stated that the act would expire on July 31, 1970 “unless Parliament by affirmative resolutions of both Houses otherwise determines”. Resolutions were passed in the Commons and Lords on December 16 and 18, 1969, thereby making the Act permanent.

Previously all murders carried the death penalty on conviction, but the 1957 Act limited the death penalty to the following cases:

* Murder in the course or furtherance of theft; s.5(1)(a)P> * Murder by shooting or by causing an explosion; s.5(1)(b)

* Murder in the course or for the purpose of resisting, avoiding or preventing a lawful arrest, or of effecting or assisting an escape or rescue from legal custody; s.5(1)(c)

* Murder of a police officer acting in the execution of his duty, or of a person assisting a police officer so acting; s.5(1)(d)

* Murder of a prison officer acting in the execution of his duty, or of a person assisting a prison officer so acting, by a person who was a prisoner at the time when he did or was a party to the murder; s.5(1)(e).

In all other cases murder carried the mandatory penalty of imprisonment for life.

Section 1 of the Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965 abolished the separate category of capital murder, and all murders now carry the mandatory penalty of imprisonment for life.

(source: Afe Babalola, vanguardngr.com)

VIETNAM:

CNA Explains: How a death sentence in Vietnam links to a massive anti-corruption drive----CNA’s Tung Ngo looks at Vietnamese tycoon Truong My Lan’s billion-dollar fraud case and the wider implications of the Communist Party’s “blazing furnace” graft crackdown.

Vietnam continues to reel from the fallout of its largest financial fraud case ever, which has led to real estate tycoon Truong My Lan being sentenced to death and put a spotlight on problematic practices in the banking sector.

The case involves some US$27 billion and 42,000 victims. Its exposé also marks a high point in an anti-corruption campaign dubbed “blazing furnace” and overseen by the Communist Party of Vietnam.

Who’s been caught?

The graft crackdown has resulted in forced resignations of Vietnamese presidents and government leaders, as well as jail time for top officials and businessmen.

But Lan is the 1st businesswoman to face the death penalty - and also the most high-profile case to date.

The 67-year-old went from helping her mother sell cosmetics at a market stall to helming one of the biggest real estate brands in Vietnam, Van Thinh Phat Holdings Group. It has been a poster firm for attracting investors and contributing to economic growth.

Key to Lan’s rise to power was the Saigon Joint Stock Commercial Bank, also known as SCB, where prosecutors say she held a more than 91 per cent stake through auxiliaries.

Over a decade leading up to her 2022 arrest, Lan lent herself US$44 billion in illegal loans from the bank, to finance Van Thinh Phat’s projects. She did this by utilising hundreds of shell companies and collateral assets with inflated valuations.

Lan has repaid parts of the loans but still needs to front up the remaining US$27 billion on top of her death sentence. She’s also set to stand trial for separate charges of money laundering and fraudulent bond issuance.

Lan’s schemes were made possible by corrupted officials: A former inspector at Vietnam's central bank was sentenced to life in prison for taking US$5.2 million in bribes to ignore the wrongdoings at SCB.

With her vast wealth and influence, Lan also had close connections in Vietnam’s political circles, and is widely considered to be allied with former Communist Party leaders – specifically those previously punished by the ruling faction for a variety of wrongdoings prior to her own fraud case coming to light.

"The case could be just the tip of the iceberg that has been broken," said Pham Van Hoa, a delegate of Vietnam's lawmaking body in November. “There may be other icebergs that have not been broken.”

What's been the fallout?

SCB, Vietnam’s largest by assets, misled 83-year-old Ho Thi Le Hang into buying fraudulent bonds under Lan’s Van Thinh Phat Holdings Group.

One of an estimated 42,000 victims, Hang hopes to get back the US$500,000 - all of her life savings, raised from selling 2 plots of her ancestors’ land - she parted with. While some bond issuers have defaulted their debt obligations, the rest of the bonds have been frozen.

After Lan’s arrest in October 2022, Vietnam's central bank placed SCB under special supervision to stop a run - that is, customers were withdrawing their money in fear of the commercial lender’s potential failure.

This week, it was reported that the central bank had pumped US$24 billion in special loans as of the beginning of April, in a bid to prevent SCB from collapsing. That’s equivalent to one-fourth of the country's foreign exchange reserves.

Meanwhile, insiders have expressed concerns over how underlying problems in Vietnam’s banking sector have gone unnoticed.

From 2012 to 2020 SCB passed, without red flags, audit checks by local offices of top global firms including Ernst & Young, Deloitte and KPMG. Yet after Lan’s fraud was exposed, separate audits showed more than US$18 billion in accumulated losses.

Her case has also highlighted the issue with “cross-ownership” in Vietnam's banking sector, where private businesspeople - including real estate developers like Lan - also hold key positions at commercial banks, effectively using them as personal ATMs.

"Financial institutions need to put an end to the practice of providing loans to specific companies, projects in its own ecosystem or backyard firms under the same group that would endanger the healthiness and safety of the bank," Vietnamese Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh said in December.

Vietnam has since amended laws to strengthen shareholder limits at banks. But experts say regulation alone is not enough in the absence of effective enforcement.

“There is no guarantee that it will be the last case … Violators have bypassed the laws easily,” Dr Nguyen Tri Hieu, a banking insider, told CNA. “I am not surprised at the fraud. But I am surprised at the magnitude of it.”

Why is Vietnam stoking this “blazing furnace”?

The fall of Lan and her financial empire is part of a long-running, unprecedented anti-corruption crackdown led by Nguyen Phu Trong, general secretary of the Vietnam Communist Party.

Trong, a staunch communist theoretician, views corruption as the gravest threat to the regime’s survival and has vowed to conduct his campaign “without no-go zones and exceptions.”

“The anti-corruption campaign plays a very important role in enhancing the image of the Communist Party,” Nguyen Khac Giang, a visiting fellow at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute think tank, told CNA.

"It doesn't really bode well with the popular understanding of the party (when) you see so many high-profile officers being corrupted."

What’s been the impact on Vietnam?

The crackdown and its clean-ups - including the threat of - have generated slowdowns in the bureaucratic system and disruptions in critical services, said Giang.

And Lan’s case in particular may have served to highlight lax government oversight of financial systems, possibly affecting confidence in doing business in Vietnam.

Investors may be further unnerved by the political turmoil and infighting that experts say the anti-graft drive has become a tool for.

All this, at a time when Vietnam is struggling to maintain economic growth targets.

But John Rockhold, chairman of the Power and Energy Working Group at the Vietnam Business Forum, told CNA: “We see the government’s actions in anti-corruption and cleaning things up as a positive move.

“A lot of people are saying they are more nervous about moving forward and making a mistake, and that it’s better maybe to sit back and wait and let things work out.”

(source: channelnewsasia.com)

MALAYSIA:

Man spared the noose, jailed 35 years for killing girlfriend's 6-year-old son

The Court of Appeal (CoA) set aside a man's death sentence by the High Court and replaced with 35 years' jail and 12 strokes of the rotan for murdering his girlfriend's 6-year-old son in Perlis in 2018.

A 3-member panel chaired by Justice Datuk Hadhariah Syed Ismail, who sat with Justices Datuk Azman Abdullah and Datuk Azmi Ariffin, made the unanimous decision.

Justice Azmi said the Kangar High Court trial judge did not err in its decision to convict the appellant, Noraizuwan Hamali, whose appeal has no merit.

"The conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Penal Code is safe to be upheld. Therefore, we dismissed his appeal against the conviction," he said.

On the sentence, Azmi said the court took into consideration the enforcement of the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023.

"After looking into the appellant's mitigation, we unanimously found that it, in this case, does not justify the death penalty against him.

"Therefore, the death sentence meted out by the High Court is set aside and replaced with 35 years' jail from the date of his arrest on April 19, 2018 and 12 strokes of the rotan," he said in the judgment dated yesterday which was uploaded on the judiciary's website.

Noraizuwan was accused of murdering Muhammad Rayyan Hidayat Hairil Khan on April 18, 2018 between 3.45pm and 12.10am at a house in Kampung Jejawi in Kangar.

At the end of the defence case on Jan 21, 2022, the High Court judge had found him guilty as charged and handed down the sentence.

Dissatisfied, Noraizuwan filed a notice of appeal to the CoA.

Justice Azmi said based on the entire evidence, it was clear that Noraizuwan's defence that the boy had fallen twice, at the playground and in the toilet where he had hit a pail, were lies.

"It was purely plain denial that did not raise any reasonable doubt in the prosecution's case.

"The lies of the appellant had strengthened the evidence of the prosecution's case," he said.

On April 19, 2018 at about 12.10am, Tuanku Fauziah Hospital emergency department's Dr Koo Shao Chang performed cardiopulmonary resuscitation and intubated Rayyan who was brought in unconscious but failed to save him.

Dr Koo's examination on Rayyan found bruises on his brows and eyes, under his chin, on his stomach and arms as well as blood stains on his eyes.

Pathologist Dr Mohd Suhani Mohd Noor's (SP6) post mortem results showed at least 47 injuries on Rayyan and confirmed that the cause of death was blunt force trauma to the abdomen.

SP6 had stated that the patterns of injuries on the boy could be categorised as non-accidental and it was not caused by a fall.

"SP6 estimated that the deceased had died before he arrived in the hospital and the new injuries were inflicted within 2 hours.

"SP6 visited the house to verify claims of the boy sustaining bruises after falling on a pail in the toilet but no evidence was found," said Justice Azmi.

The mother of the deceased had known Noraizuwan for eight months and they rented the house together.

On the night of the boy's death, Noraizuwan went to fetch the mother from her workplace, claiming that the deceased had a stomach ache after eating at the kindergarten.

While on the way home, he had told the mother that "she should not be angry if anything happened to her son."

Upon arrival at home at about 11.55pm, she found the deceased lying down motionless and covered in a blanket before she rushed him on a motorcycle to the hospital where he was declared dead.

(source: nst.com.my)

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

Malaysia urged to extend moratorium on executions----Amnesty International Malaysia says while there has been a moratorium on the execution of death row inmates since 2018, it can be lifted at any time

Amnesty International Malaysia has commended Malaysia for the abolition of the mandatory death penalty and for imposing a moratorium on the execution of the death sentence, which has led to an overall decrease in the use of the death penalty by the courts.

However, the rights group urged the government to extend the moratorium on executions until the death penalty is fully abolished.

The NGO noted that while there had been a moratorium on the execution of death row inmates since 2018, it could be lifted at any time.

“Amnesty International opposes the death penalty unconditionally, for all cases and under any circumstances, as it is a violation of the right to life and is ultimately a cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment,” its executive director Katrina Jorene Maliamauv said during the launch of its annual report.

“The moratorium must be extended until the death penalty is fully abolished and all death sentences commuted.”

The Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023 came into effect on July 4, 2023, after it was passed by Parliament earlier that year, where several laws were amended to remove the mandatory death penalty.

Instead of the mandatory death penalty, as provided in several laws, the act stipulates a jail sentence of a minimum of 30 years and not exceeding 40 years, with a minimum of 12 strokes of the cane where applicable.

Additionally, the Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023, which came into force on Sept 12, 2023, has allowed a total of 1,020 prisoners who were sentenced to mandatory death or life imprisonment to file applications in court for a review of their sentences.

Despite these legislative changes, Amnesty International found that when reviewing judicial decisions involving 139 individuals from July 4, 2023 to Jan 4, 2024, there were 26 cases (27%) that resulted in the death penalty. It found that 18 of these cases (69%) were related to murder while the remaining eight cases (31%) involved drug offences.

Maliamauv said Malaysia was among the minority of countries that imposed the death penalty for drug-related offences.

Noting the opposition to the full abolishment of the death penalty, especially among family members of murder victims, she voiced hope that this could be resolved through open public discussions about justice and alternatives to the death penalty.

“While it’s commendable that the country has moved towards abolishing the mandatory death penalty… it should not sit in the comfort of the praise,” she said, adding that efforts to uphold human rights must continue beyond this point.

(source: freemalaysiatoday.com)

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

Death sentences of 10 in Sabah set aside

The Federal Court on Tuesday commuted the death sentences of 10 individuals who were convicted of murder (7) and drug trafficking (3).

The 3-member bench comprising Justices Datuk Zabariah Mohd Yusof, Datuk Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal and Datuk Rhodzariah Bujang allowed 9 review applications under the Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court Act.

The Apex Court set aside the inmates’ death sentences and substituted them with imprisonment of between 30 and 36 years.

7 of the prisoners whose death sentences for murder were set aside and commuted were Duis Akim, 49, Hendry Motodud, 43, Vincent Gisup, 42; Firman Fani, 35, Menase Ladang, 36, Musdar Rusli, 47, and Bakri Ruka, 53.

The other 3 prisoners whose death sentences for drug trafficking were set aside and substituted were female China nationals – Cheng Jinhui, 33, Lan Yi Ling, 35, and Yu Jing, 30.

Their sentences were commuted to 30 years’ jail from their respective date of arrest.

In the case of Duis, Hendry and Vincent, the Apex Court substituted their death sentences with 30 years’ jail from their date of arrest on June 22, 2001.

“However, the period when they were acquitted by the Court of Appeal is to be excluded i.e. July 10, 2007 until Jan 11, 2012,” held the court in an unanimous decision.

The trio were also ordered to be given 12 strokes of the cane each.

Duis, Hendry and Vincent were first freed on July 10, 2007 of a joint charge of murdering one Wilfred Thomas, 34, on May 26, 2001, at 2am, at the 7-Eleven store in Donggongon, Penampang.

On Jan 11, 2012, their 5 years of freedom came to an end when their acquittal was overturned and were sentenced to death by the Court of Appeal.

Their appeal to the Federal Court was dismissed on Oct 18, 2013.

Meanwhile, Firman, an Indonesian who committed double murder saw his death sentence substituted with 30 years’ imprisonment each, to be run concurrently from the date of his arrest on June 16, 2009 and was ordered to be caned 12 times on each charge.

Firman was on Nov 15, 2010 sentenced to death by the High Court here for murdering 2 Filipinos, 1 Jasfar Erman, 20, and one Md Mukarim Archedy, 21, at the pedestrian walk near a bus station in Jalan Tunku Abdul Rahman between 4.30pm and 4.50pm on April 15, 2009.

His appeal was rejected by the Court of Appeal on March 22, 2013.

Federal Court dismissed his appeal on Aug 18, 2015.

Menase, meanwhile, saw his death sentence commuted to 32 years’ jail from the date of his arrest on Oct 29, 2014 and was ordered to be given 12 lashes of the cane.

Menase was on Jan 25, 2017 sentenced to death by the High Court here after he was found guilty of murdering his girlfriend, one Hamidah Laka, 29, at 1.30pm on Oct 20, 2014 at a vegetable farm in Mesilou, Kundasang, Ranau.

His appeal against conviction and sentence was rejected by the Court of Appeal on July 16, 2018, while the Federal Court dismissed his appeal on June 26, 2019.

Musdar’s death sentence was substituted with 30 years’ jail from the date of his arrest on May 2, 2012 and was also ordered to be given 12 lashes of the cane.

Musdar, an Indonesian, was on July 19, 2016 sentenced to death by the Court of Appeal for murdering his wife, one Intan Bago, on May 2, 2012, at 6.30pm at a worker house in Kg Arau, Genting Tanjung plantation, Kinabatangan.

His appeal was dismissed by the Federal Court on March 20, 2018.

Bakri, who appealed against his death sentence on two counts of murder pursuant to the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023, has his sentence substituted with 36 years’ jail for each case, to run concurrently from the date of his arrest on Jan 12, 2016.

He was on March 18, 209 sentenced to death by the Sandakan High Court for murdering his ex-wife, one Hasura Sima, 36, and stepson, one Basri Jamaluddin, 24, on Jan 11, 2016 at 5.20am and 5.21am, respectively, at a worker house in an estate in Kinabatangan.

Bakri’s appeal to the Court of Appeal was rejected on July 25, 2022.

For the drugs trafficking cases, Cheng Jin Hui was found guilty and convicted of trafficking 1,397.1gm of syabu at 11.25pm on July 6, 2014 at the passengers’ examination area at the arrival hall in Terminal Two of the Kota Kinabalu International Airport (KKIA). Cheng’s appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed on Sept 4, 2018.

Her appeal to the Federal Court was also dismissed.

For Lan Yi Ling, she was on March 2, 2015 found guilty by the High Court here of trafficking 336gm of syabu at 6.30pm on Aug 17, 2014 at the International Arrival Hall in Terminal 1 of the Kota Kinabalu International Airport (KKIA), here.

Her appeal to the Court of Appeal and Federal Court was dismissed on Nov 30, 2015 and Sept 19, 2016, respectively.

In Yu Jing’s case, she was convicted by the High Court here on Oct 15, 2015 for trafficking 3,492.4gm of syabu at 11.10pm on June 22, 2014 at the Passengers’ Examination Unit, Arrival Hall of Terminal 2, Kota Kinabalu International Airport.

Her appeals to the Court of Appeal and Federal Court were rejected respectively on Nov 28, 2016 and March 20, 2018.

In Tuesday’s proceedings, the prosecution objected to the application of the murder case and did not object to the review application of the drug trafficking case.

Deputy Public Prosecutors Ng Siew Wee and Zaki Asraf Zubir appearing for the prosecution as respondent. Duis, Hendry and Vincent were represented by counsel Datuk Seri Rakhbir Singh, Firman, Menase, Musdar and Bakri were represented by counsel Farazwin Haxdy. Cheng, Lan and Yu Jing were represented by counsel David Tan.

(source: dailyexpress.com.my)

TAIWAN:

Overcoming family tragedy, attorney urges death penalty abolition in court debate

Taipei, April 23 (CNA) Taiwan's constitutional court debated the death penalty on Tuesday, with 1 attorney representing death row convicts sharing a personal story to call for an end to state retribution, while Ministry of Justice officials maintained that capital punishment does not violate the right to existence.

Lee Hsuan-yi, who spoke on behalf of the 37 petitioners challenging the constitutionality of the death penalty, shared how he overcame his "anger" and "strong desire to end the life of [the person who killed his grandmother] with his own hands."

According to Lee, his grandmother Lin Li-e was attacked by a robber on a Taichung street and subsequently died from a severe head injury in 1996, when he was still in high school.

It took him 28 years to shed a belief in "responding to violence with violence," he said, as he eventually came to realize that the key to preventing similar tragedies from happening was not going after the perpetrator but addressing the root causes behind serious offences.

Nigel Li, another attorney representing the petitioners, argued that the death penalty was essentially an act of revenge.

"The law forbids the victim from seeking vengeance, and hence the constitution should not allow the government to seek revenge in the name of retribution," he said.

Li also questioned the deterrence effect of the death penalty, noting that such assertions are not supported by "empirical evidence" and that depriving the convicted of their lives in exchange for unproven deterrence contradicted "the principle of proportionality" enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of China.

The debate, held at the Judicial Yuan in Taipei on Tuesday, was also attended by officials from the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) -- the top government agency overseeing the death penalty -- who sought to defend the current system as constitutional.

Kuo Yung-fa, head of the MOJ's Department of Prosecutorial Affairs, said that while the constitution upheld "the right of existence," it also allowed for "restrictions," citing Article 23 of the legislation.

"The deprivation of life" imposed on those who commit the most serious offences should be considered a form of restriction, Kuo said, noting that the death penalty remained "the last resort" available to judges.

Court proceedings have been "very rigorous" in recent years, Kuo went on, as only one out of 476 murder cases in Taiwan from 2019 to 2023 resulted in a final court ruling to impose the death penalty.

Meanwhile, Kuo's deputy Chien Mei-hui said the abolition of the death penalty remains "highly controversial" in Taiwan and called for "self-restraint" on the part of judicial authorities.

It is "rare" internationally for a constitutional court to abolish the death penalty by passing a judgement, she said, adding that the issue should be decided by the legislative branch of the government through law amendments to better "reflect public opinion" in Taiwan.

The debate, which was live-streamed and open to the public, was part of a constitutional court review on whether the death penalty is constitutional.

With three grand justices having recused themselves from proceedings, the remaining 12 are expected to make a judgement 3 months after the debate at the earliest.

According to the Constitutional Court Procedure Act, a majority of the justices presiding over the case would have to rule in favor of the petitioners for the death penalty to be overturned.

In the event that 6 grand justices uphold the death penalty as constitutional and the other six deem it otherwise, the grand justices will convene further discussions until a judgement is reached.

(source: focustaiwan.tw)

IRAN----executions

Iran Executes 3 Amid Sharp Rise in Death Penalties

The Islamic Republic of Iran has executed 3 more prisoners amid a significant rise in death penalties in the country.

According to a report by the Haalvsh human rights organization, inmates convicted of drug-related crimes were executed in Taybad Prison, located in Razavi Khorasan province.

Among them were Esmaeil Esmaeil-Zadeh, 37, and Mohammad-Amin Mohammad-Pour, 38, both members of the Sunni community.

The 3rd executed individual was an Afghan national whose identity remains undisclosed.

These individuals received their death sentences from the Revolutionary Court in Taybad 4 years ago.

No official sources or domestic media outlets in the country have covered these executions.

In the past ten days, Iran has witnessed a surge in the execution of prisoners. However, these coincided with the conflict with Israel, diverting international attention away from the executions.

According to a report by Amnesty International, Iran has reached its highest level of death sentence execution in the last eight years, with the judiciary of the Islamic Republic executing 853 people in 2023 alone.

The report indicates that 481 executions, more than half of the total, were related to drug crimes.

This marks an 89 % increase in the death penalty compared to 2022 when 255 people were executed for drug-related offenses. The latest numbers also show a staggering 264 % increase compared to 2021, when 132 individuals faced execution for similar charges.

(source: iranwire.com)

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

Execution of Inmate at Gorgan Prison for Drug Offenses

On April 23, 2024, officials at Gorgan Prison executed an inmate convicted of drug offenses, as reported by the Iran Human Rights Organization.

Hossein-Ali Sobhani, 37, from Sari, was executed for drug-related crimes after serving over 2-year prison term.

As of the time of writing, no official sources or domestic media outlets within the country have covered the execution.

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)

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

3 Men Including Afghan National Executed in Taybad

Amin Mohammadpour, Esmail Esmailzadeh and an unidentified Afghan man were executed for drug-related charges in Taybad Prison. At least ten Afghan nationals have been executed in Iranian prisons in 2024, constituting 8% of all executions.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, at least 3 men were executed in Taybad Prison in Khorasan Razavi province on 21 April. 2 of the men’s identities have been established as 38-year-old Mohammad Amin Mohammadpour from Kish and 35-year-old Esmail Esmailzadeh (photo) from Taybad. They were sentenced to death for drug-related charges by the Revolutionary Court.

The identity of the 3rd man who was an Afghan national has not been established at the time of writing

An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Mohammad Amin Mohammadpour was a father of 2 who was arrested for drug charges 3 years ago. Esmail Esmailzadeh was arrested for the same charges 4 years ago.

At the time of writing, none of their executions have been reported by domestic media or officials in Iran.

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. Baluch minorities who constitute 2-6% of Iran’s population, made up 30% of drug executions in 2023.

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.

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. The unidentified Afghan man is the 10th Afghan national executed in 2024.

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

Farzad Khademi at Risk of Execution in Saqqez

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

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a death row prisoner was transferred to solitary confinement in Saqqez Central Prison on 23 April. His identity has been established as Farzad Khademi from Saqqez who was sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder.

An informed source told IHRNGO: “Farzad Khademi was arrested for the murder of a man named Tirdad Atashafrouz on 2 July 2020 and sentenced to qisas. The murdered man was a member of the Kurdistan Freedom Party who’d surrendered but was shot dead by Farzad Khademi over a personal dispute.”

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 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)

APRIL 23, 2024:

TEXAS:

A PROSECUTOR ASKED TEXAS TO KILL MELISSA LUCIO. NOW HE SAYS SHE SHOULD BE FREED.----If the courts agree to vacate the conviction, Lucio will have spent 16 years on death row for a crime that never happened.

ON THE NIGHT that 2-year-old Mariah Alvarez died, a Child Protective Services investigator made her way to the Harlingen, Texas, police station to interview the toddler’s siblings.

Mariah’s lifeless body had arrived at a local hospital covered in bruises, which authorities immediately assumed were evidence of abuse. Her mother, 38-year-old Melissa Lucio, who had a history of being investigated by the child welfare agency, tried to explain that Mariah had fallen down a flight of stairs. But the police subjected Lucio to a punishing late-night interrogation lasting more than 5 hours. After repeatedly denying that she killed her daughter, Lucio finally conceded that she was responsible. In 2008, Lucio was convicted of murder and sentenced to die.

The possibility that Mariah’s death was not murder but the result of a tragic accident was never investigated. Police ignored evidence that included a report compiled by the child welfare investigator, Florence Arreola, who interviewed several of Mariah’s siblings while Lucio was being interrogated in another room. The children corroborated their mother’s account, reiterating that Mariah had fallen down the stairs 2 days earlier. Lucio had never abused Mariah, they said, and the only injuries they saw on the toddler were bruises “from when she fell.”

Jurors at Lucio’s trial never heard these statements. Cameron County District Attorney Armando Villalobos withheld Arreola’s report from the defense, casting Mariah’s death as the violent culmination of “a cruel and brutal life” at the hands of her mother. Despite Lucio’s insistence that she was innocent, the DA’s office spent years defending her conviction, seeking an execution date in 2022. Lucio came within 2 days of execution before the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals intervened, sending the case back to the trial court to consider whether withholding the evidence had violated Lucio’s constitutional rights.

In a dramatic reversal, the DA’s office now admits that Villalobos failed to disclose the exculpatory statements. Today, Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz agrees with Lucio’s attorneys that, had the records been disclosed, Lucio likely would not have been convicted. In a joint filing with the attorneys, Saenz told the trial court that Lucio’s conviction should be overturned.

On April 12, 2 years after Lucio narrowly avoided execution, Cameron County Judge Arturo Nelson signed off on the agreement. The case is now back before the Court of Criminal Appeals, which will decide whether to grant the joint request to vacate Lucio’s conviction. If it does, Lucio will have spent 16 years on death row for a crime that never happened. There is no timeline for the court to rule.

In a statement, Lucio’s family thanked her legal team and the district attorney’s office alike. “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.”

THE CASE AGAINST Melissa Lucio was full of red flags, from a coerced interrogation and reliance on junk forensics to lackluster defense lawyering and prosecutorial misconduct. “I’ve been doing capital defense work in Texas for 30 years,” Sandra Babcock, a Cornell Law School professor who is now part of Lucio’s defense team, told The Intercept in 2022. “And this is by far the weakest capital case I’ve ever seen.”

Lucio was prosecuted by embattled District Attorney Villalobos, who used the case to boost his tough-on-crime reputation as part of his reelection campaign. At the time of Lucio’s 2008 trial, Villalobos was facing corruption charges and a challenger who had taken him to task for failing to prosecute child abuse cases. In the wake of the conviction, Villalobos became known as the man who sent the first Latina woman to Texas’s death row. The district attorney was subsequently sentenced to 13 years in federal prison for racketeering and extortion.

Lucio was represented by defense lawyer Peter Gilman, who had never handled a death penalty case and went on to work at the DA’s office immediately after the trial. A mitigation specialist who worked for Gilman later said that the lawyer had refused to pursue exculpatory evidence that could have saved his client’s life.

The state’s evidence against Lucio went mostly unchallenged until 2010, when veteran forensic pathologist Thomas Young reviewed the medical evidence. Young concluded that there had been a rush to judgment by medical examiner Norma Farley, who told the court that simply upon seeing Mariah’s body, she knew that the child had died from abuse. “This child was severely abused,” Farley told the jury at Lucio’s trial. “I mean, it would have been evident to a first-year nursing student.”

But Farley’s examination didn’t occur until after Lucio had been interrogated for hours and admitted to hurting her daughter, and it was conducted while one of the interrogating officers was present — meaning Farley was already aware of the cops’ theory of the crime before she conducted her review. These factors undoubtedly skewed her conclusions, according to Young, who said such dynamics are all too familiar in forensic pathology. “You develop a belief, and come hell or high water, you’re going to defend your belief,” he told The Intercept. Young found that the fall had likely caused Mariah’s brain to swell, which, left untreated, had cascading physical effects that developed over several days, including a coagulation disorder that caused widespread bruising. In his view, the medical evidence was absolutely consistent with an accidental fall — as Lucio and her family had always insisted.

Nonetheless, the case flew under the radar until documentarian Sabrina Van Tassel took it up in her 2020 film “The State of Texas v. Melissa.” The film revealed additional evidence that Lucio was telling the truth about the fall that ultimately killed Mariah, including footage of interviews that child welfare counselors conducted with two of Lucio’s sons, both of whom said Mariah had fallen down the stairs. Interviewed for the film, Gilman was dismissive of the notion that the kids could have been crucial witnesses. “I didn’t feel like any of the children would be helpful,” he said.

IN THE YEARS Van Tassel spent working on the documentary, she became convinced that the evidence the state had provided to Lucio’s defense attorneys was incomplete. A number of Lucio’s children told Van Tassel that they had been interviewed at the police station, yet there was no record of those conversations in the case file. “I knew there were things that were missing,” Van Tassel said.

Nevertheless, the film contained significant revelations that catapulted the case into public view. After Lucio’s 2022 execution date was set, the documentary became a critical organizing tool, fueling a campaign to save Lucio’s life. The group Death Penalty Action held screenings in the Rio Grande Valley and across the state, accompanied by members of Lucio’s family. Outside the DA’s office in Brownsville, activists put up signs in English and Spanish that read “Watch the Film.” At one point, Lucio’s son John approached Saenz, who succeeded Villalobos as district attorney, on his lunch break, urging him to reconsider Lucio’s case. “I know for a simple fact that my mother is an innocent woman,” he said.

Meanwhile, Lucio’s cause attracted a powerful and unlikely ally: North Texas Republican state Rep. Jeff Leach, co-chair of the House Criminal Justice Reform Caucus. Leach, a self-professed supporter of capital punishment, and his caucus co-chair, Democratic Rep. Joe Moody, rallied an unprecedented level of support for Lucio among an ideologically diverse group of more than 80 state representatives — more than half the members of the Texas House, a body that rarely comes to a decisive consensus about anything.

Leach vowed to do “everything I can … in every way possible” to stop Lucio’s execution. In April 2022, he and Moody convened a committee hearing to question Saenz, who had requested Lucio’s execution date. They implored the district attorney to step up and withdraw it. But Saenz brushed off their concerns, saying he had no reason to ask for the death warrant to be withdrawn.

With Lucio’s execution date looming, her lawyers, including Vanessa Potkin, director of special litigation for the Innocence Project, filed a new challenge to Lucio’s conviction before the Court of Criminal Appeals, pointing to the defects in the case and arguing that Lucio was innocent of killing her daughter. It was a long-shot appeal to a court known for its hostility to death row defendants claiming innocence. So it was welcome but startling news when the court issued a last-minute stay of execution, sending Lucio’s claims back to the district court for further vetting. Among the claims was that the state had withheld records from the defense, including the reports from Arreola, the child welfare investigator.

In a statement following the stay, Saenz said he welcomed the opportunity to prosecute Lucio again. But nine months later, he quietly signed a joint filing with Potkin acknowledging that his office had withheld exculpatory evidence from Lucio’s defense. “There are uncontroverted facts and the parties agree,” the lawyers wrote, that there was a “reasonable probability” that the outcome of the trial “would have been different had the evidence been disclosed.”

The agreement, which was signed in January 2023, remained out of the public eye until earlier this month, when a local reporter broke the news, including a statement from Potkin and Saenz saying the case was now in the hands of the courts. The Court of Criminal Appeals “is the only court that can vacate a conviction,” the statement read. “We are hopeful that Melissa’s case will be resolved.” A week later, a district court judge signed off on the agreement, sending the case up to the CCA.

Van Tassel got the news in a message from Lucio. “I’m coming home soon, sis!” Lucio said.

“We were just overwhelmed, you know. Overwhelmed with joy,” Van Tassel said. Yet she is cautious not to celebrate prematurely. “Part of me doesn’t want to rejoice too much because we’ve been through so much.” After the exhilaration of the stay of execution, the surge of publicity faded. Lucio sometimes felt forgotten while she waited on a court system that showed no sense of urgency. Lucio’s mother, Esperanza, died last fall, shortly after Lucio herself was hospitalized with abdominal pain. Lucio was unable to attend the funeral. “She died without seeing her daughter again,” Van Tassel said of Esperanza, who had hoped to see Lucio walk free. “How horrible is that?”

Weeks before news broke about the agreement between Lucio’s lawyers and the state, Van Tassel started a GoFundMe in anticipation of Lucio’s release. Her family will need considerable help getting Lucio on her feet as she reacquaints herself with the outside world. Lucio hopes to get a fresh start, perhaps in a different town, where she can rebuild her life from scratch. “I have no clothes,” she told Van Tassel in one recent message. “I don’t even know what size I am.”

(source: theintercept.com)

LOUISIANA:

Louisiana Senate Committee Approves Legislation Supported by Jewish Community to Remove Nitrogen Hypoxia as Possible Method of Execution

On April 16, 2024, the Louisiana Senate Judiciary B Committee unanimously voted to advance a bill that would remove nitrogen hypoxia from the state’s available methods of execution. Introduced by state Senator Katrina Jackson-Andrews, Senate Bill 430 is supported by the Jews Against Gassing Coalition, an organization consisting of Jewish Louisiana residents who oppose state-sanctioned gas executions. “We recognize, of course, that the gassing of innocent victims in the Holocaust is quite different from executing a convicted criminal,” said Naomi Yavneh-Klos, a member of the coalition and Loyola University professor. “But for Jewish people, and really anyone with knowledge of the Holocaust, the historical association with this execution method is chilling and undeniable, eliciting a visceral response that evokes not justice, your goal, but genocide.”

Nitrogen hypoxia was quickly approved for use in Louisiana in a special legislative session called by Governor Jeff Landry last month. During this same session, the legislature also adopted electrocution as a method of execution, while passing secrecy laws to protect those involved in carrying out an execution and the procurement of any materials needed.

Mirroring the efforts of many other Jewish communities, the Jews Against Gassing Coalition has spearheaded local efforts to stop “the State of Louisiana [from] utilizing a method similar to the method of extermination used by Nazi Germany to annihilate millions of [their] Jewish ancestors.” In 2022, the ACLU of Arizona, on behalf of Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Phoenix, sued the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation & Reentry (ADCRR), asking the Maricopa Superior Court to rule that the use of cyanide gas violates the Arizona Constitution’s protection against cruel and unusual punishments. In 1992, Arizona voters largely voted against the use of lethal gas for executions, but those sentenced to death prior to the reversal date fell under the old law which permitted lethal gas as an execution method. “Under no circumstances should the same method of execution used to murder over one million people, including Jews, during the Holocaust be used in the execution of people on death row,” said Jared Keenan, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Arizona. “Arizona has acknowledged the horrors of cyanide gas as a method of execution and eliminates it in all but a narrow set of cases — it’s time the court eliminates the use of cyanide gas for execution once and for all. Regardless of where people stand on the matter of capital punishment, it’s clear that use of the barbaric practice is cruel and must be abolished.”

Arizona’s last execution by cyanide gas took place in 1999, when the state executed Walter LaGrand. Those who witnessed Mr. LaGrand’s execution reported watching an “agonizing and excruciating” scene in which it took nearly 20 minutes for him to die. Since then, just one individual nationally has been put to death using gas. In January 2024, the state of Alabama executed Kenneth Smith for a 1998 murder-for-hire using nitrogen gas. According to media witnesses, Mr. Smith “writhed violently” on the gurney before “gasping and struggling for air.”

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

TENNESSEE:

Child rapists should be sentenced to death. That's why I backed this Tennessee Senate bill----Sen. Jack Johnson: "I feel very certain that the Supreme Court believes there is a strong, compelling state interest to protect children, and we believe this Court will support Tennessee’s efforts."

On April 9, Senate Bill 1834 passed 24-5 on the Senate floor allowing the death penalty in child rape convictions.

In an effort to challenge the 2008 Supreme Court ruling, I sponsored this legislation with my friend, and Senate Republican Caucus Chairman, Ken Yager, R-Kingston, and wholeheartedly believe that Tennessee got it right.

By permitting this severe punishment, we are sending a clear message that we will never tolerate the exploitation and abuse of children.

On June 25, 2008, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the ban on cruel and unusual punishment in the U.S. Constitution excludes the death penalty for child rape.

This case, Kennedy v. Louisiana, involved a man who was sentenced to death after raping his 8-year-old stepdaughter. The high court claimed that the death penalty is not a proportional punishment for cases that do not take a victim's life.

Was the life of a rapist more valuable than the life of an innocent child who will be permanently scarred forever? In Tennessee, the answer is no.

Child rapists are monsters and not mythical

Child rape is the most disgraceful, indefensible act one can commit, leaving lasting emotional and psychological wounds on its victims. As a legislator, and more importantly, as a human being, our responsibility to protect the most vulnerable comes first.

Let me be clear – this legislation does not require a judge to sentence an offender to death. However, in cases where the evidence is clear, this is an appropriate punishment for such egregious crimes.

Critics of this legislation argue that the death penalty is an unjustifiable punishment and ineffective. However, in cases where a rapist is preying on the vulnerability of a child and inflicting permanent harm on them, a severe form of justice is the consequence they must face.

Last year, Franklin soccer coach, Camilo Hurtado Campos, was indicted on dozens of charges, including 14 counts of rape against boys ranging from the ages of 9 to 17.

Authorities say the victims were drugged and raped while unconscious. These unthinkable crimes were committed right here in my hometown.

The monsters who commit crimes aren’t mythical; unfortunately, they are closer than we think. These crimes are a heartbreaking reminder that atrocities such as these happen in our communities. Our duty is to protect these children from predators and ensure their safety and well-being is put above the life of their rapist.

Capital punishment provides justice for victims

The death penalty serves as a form of justice for victims and their families. For survivors, knowing their perpetrator is held accountable gives invaluable validation and peace of mind. Our hope is that SB1834 will deter future acts of child rape.

The prospect of facing death may cause these violent offenders to think twice before committing such heinous crimes.

Allowing the death penalty in cases of child rape is a necessary punishment. We are sending a message that Tennessee will never tolerate the abuse of children.

I’m proud of SB1834. By upholding the death penalty, we reaffirm our commitment to protecting children and holding child rapists accountable for their actions. I take great pride in the oath I took when becoming your State Senator to keep Tennesseans from harm and ensure our community is the safest place to live and raise your family.

All 5 justices who supported the 2008 opinion are no longer members of the U.S. Supreme Court (Kennedy, Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer). 3 of the 4 justices who authored the dissenting opinion are still sitting justices (Roberts, Alito and Thomas). Given the makeup of the current court, there is a strong possibility that Kennedy v. Louisiana could be overturned.

I feel very certain that the Supreme Court believes there is a strong, compelling state interest to protect children, and we believe this Court will support Tennessee’s efforts. (source: Opinion; Tennessee State Senator Jack Johnson, R-Franklin, represents District 27 which includes part of Williamson County. He is the Senate Majority Leader and is a member of the Commerce and Labor, Finance, Ways, and Means, and Ethics Committees----The Tennessean)

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

Death penalty for child rapists clears final legislative hurdle, heads to governor’s desk

A controversial bill that would allow the state to seek the death penalty for those convicted of rape of a child passed the House of Representatives Monday, clearing the final legislative hurdle before becoming law in Tennessee.

HB1663, by House Majority Leader William Lamberth (R-Portland), would allow for those convicted of rape or especially aggravated rape of a child in Tennessee to be sentenced to death.

The move received considerable pushback from Democrats, who argued the General Assembly was passing a blatantly unconstitutional law. The bill was also not favored by Sen. Kerry Roberts, who said while he disagreed with the Supreme Court decisions that made and affirmed that the death penalty was considered cruel and unusual punishment, passing the law was not going to help overturn Kennedy v. Louisiana, as some of his colleagues might hope it would.

Despite attempts to amend the bill by Roberts, the Senate adopted the bill 24-5, with Sen. Todd Gardenhire (R-Chattanooga) joining Democrats opposed.

The last stop for the bill in the legislative branch was the House Monday, April 22.

During floor debate, Democrats made the same arguments their Senate colleagues made, pointing out that the death penalty does not serve as a proper deterrent of the heinous crime. Rather, they said, the law would make it more likely victims don’t come forward.

Rep. Aftyn Behn said allowing for the death penalty at all was “incompatible with the right to life,” and having this law on the books would not help victims of the crimes themselves.

Rep. Gloria Johnson echoed Behn’s comments, saying rape of a child and aggravated rape of a child were already crimes that require 100% of sentences be served. Adding in the possibility of the death penalty was not the best way for the state to enforce the crimes.

Lamberth said he understood hesitance for the death penalty generally, but the worst of the worst crimes necessitated the worst punishments in order to serve justice to the victims.

“The atrocities they have suffered deserve the severest of punishments,” he said on the floor of the House.

Ultimately, the bill passed on party lines, 77-19-1, with Clarksville Democrat Ronnie Glynn Present Not Voting.

The bill now heads to Gov. Bill Lee‘s desk for his signature.

(source: WKRN news)

KANSAS:

Judge denies Carr brothers’ request for new sentence in death penalty murder case

A judge has denied a request by death-row inmates Jonathan and Reginald Carr to be resentenced in a December 2000 crime spree that included 5 murders.

The Carr brothers filed motions in November requesting a new hearing to determine whether the evidence supports the death penalty. Their lawyers also sought new pre-sentencing reports and journal entries in the case.

Sedgwick County Chief Judge Jeffrey Goering ruled from the bench on Monday, saying he has no authority to overrule a 2022 Kansas Supreme Court decision that upheld the Carr brothers’ convictions and sentences.

The Carrs are expected to appeal Goering’s decision.

It’s the latest appeal in a court case that has gone to the highest levels of the state and federal court systems over the past 22 years.

The Carrs were convicted of robbing, sexually assaulting and murdering 29-year-old Aaron Sander, 27-year-old Brad Heyka, 26-year-old Jason Befort and 25-year-old Heather Muller and injuring a 5th victim in an brutal execution-style shooting in a snow-covered soccer field at 29th North and Greenwich. They also carjacked and robbed a 23-year-old man and shot to death 55-year-old Wichita Symphony cellist Linda “Ann” Walenta.

Jonathan Carr, now 44, and Reginald Carr, 46, were in their 20s when they invaded an east Wichita home on Dec. 15, 2000. They forced the 5 people inside to have sex, raped the women and took them to withdraw money from ATMs before shooting shooting them each in the head.

Jonathan Carr appeared at Monday’s hearing. Reginald Carr waived his right to attend. Both are incarcerated in solitary confinement at the El Dorado Correctional Facility.

The Carr brothers were sentenced to death in 2002. In 2014, the Kansas Supreme Court overturned their death sentences because the prosecutors tried them together. 2 years later, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed that decision. The state Supreme Court upheld the brothers’ convictions and sentences in 2022, saying evidence against them was so overwhelming that jurors would have recommended the death penalty despite trial errors.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a 2nd appeal last year. The brothers are expected to file additional, “indirect” appeals, which typically look at issues such as whether a defendant received effective representation from their defense attorney at trial and possible misconduct. A successful indirect appeal could result in a new trial but that isn’t common.

Sedgwick County District Attorney Marc Bennett said Monday that the Carr brothers’ are likely to continue to appeal various aspects of the case for years to come.

“I’m not going to hazard a guess on how long it will be,” Bennett said. “Probably longer than I’ll be district attorney. We’ll see.”

CALIFORNIA:

Allegations of Prosecutorial Bias Spark Review of Death Penalty Convictions in Alameda County

Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price announced Monday that a federal judge has directed her office to review all death penalty convictions for signs of prosecutorial misconduct.

The directive from Judge Vince Chhabria of the U.S. District Court of Northern California comes after evidence indicating Alameda County prosecutors may have excluded Black and Jewish jurors was found in the case of Ernest Dykes, who sits on death row.

The discovery of notes highlighting the race and ethnicity of potential jurors in Dykes’ case has led to the latest allegation that prosecutors systematically prevented Black and Jewish residents from serving on death penalty juries in the 1980s and 1990s. The rejection was based on the belief that Black and Jewish jurors were more likely to oppose the death penalty.

“These notes — especially when considered in conjunction with evidence presented in other cases — constitutes strong evidence that, in prior decades, prosecutors from the [Alameda County District Attorney’s office] were engaged in a pattern of serious misconduct, automatically excluding Jewish and African American jurors in death penalty cases,” Judge Chhabria wrote in an Monday court order.

The misconduct allegations in the county were the subject of a state Supreme Court hearing in 2005. State and federal law bars prosecutors from removing jurors based on race or ethnicity.

“Judge Chhabria is very much aware the District Court has reversed a number of convictions based on similar evidence,” Price said. “For too long, prosecutors have not been held to a high standard and have not had accountability.”

Dykes was convicted in 1995 for the murder of 9-year-old Lance Clark and the attempted murder of his grandmother, Bernice Clark, during a robbery at an East Oakland apartment complex. An appeal of his sentence is currently before Judge Chhabria.

According to data from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, there are currently 37 people on death row who were convicted in Alameda County, including Dykes. Price’s office told KQED it is reviewing 35 cases. The review could lead to resentencing or retrials.

Price said one of her deputies found handwritten notes about potential jurors while reviewing Dykes’ case file at the request of Judge Chhabria. Price’s office shared some of these notes with KQED.

In one example concerning a Black female juror, an unnamed prosecutor wrote, “Says race is no issue, but I don’t believe her.” Another note described a different Black female juror as “short, fat, troll,” and that she “seemed put out my Q’s about the D/P — tried to avoid giving direct answer [sic] a lot of ‘I don’t knows’ — don’t believe she could vote D/P.” The unnamed prosecutor, apparently, used “Q’s” as an abbreviation for questions and “D/P” for the death penalty.

Other notes appear to document whether the author believed prospective jurors were Jewish, writing at the top of a juror questionnaire, “Jew? Yes.” In notes about another juror, “Banker. Jew?” is followed by “Nice guy — thoughtful but never a strong DP leader — Jewish background.”

Colton Carmine, a former deputy district attorney, was the lead prosecutor in Dykes’ trial. Carmine was assisted in jury selection by former Deputy District Attorney Morris Jacobson, now an Alameda County Superior Court judge. According to Price, it is not clear who the handwriting in the case file belongs to Carmine, Jacobson or someone else.

No Black or Jewish jurors heard Dykes’ case.

“The notes appear to indicate a disdain for Black women,” Price said. “The fact that they were singled out in the way in which they are in the notes, and ways that other jurors were not, is very telling.”

Defense attorneys for Dykes, who is at the California Health Care Facility, a state prison for incarcerated patients with protracted medical needs, hope the review creates an opportunity to unearth and address a decadeslong problem.

“This has been there for 20 years, and it keeps coming up in cases,” said Brian Pomerantz, who represents Dykes as well as two other people on death row after being convicted in Alameda County.

A review of 26 juries conducted by defense attorney Lawrence Gibbs, in conjunction with attorneys for Habeas Corpus Resource Center, found that in death penalty cases between 1984 and 1994, Alameda prosecutors removed every single juror who identified themselves as Jewish and nearly 90% of jurors with apparent Jewish surnames as long as they still had peremptory strikes available to them.

Evidence of systematic removal of Black female and Jewish jurors has led to at least three people convicted in Alameda County being resentenced and is at issue in at least three pending Alameda death penalty appeals, including Dykes’. The allegation was the focus of a 2005 state Supreme Court hearing in which Carmine testified that prosecutors were trained to exclude Jewish jurors. The Supreme Court rejected misconduct claims.

“This should not be the legacy of this office,” Price told KQED. “The prosecutors who participated in this practice — if we determine that they did, in fact, have this practice — undermined the conviction integrity of every one of these cases, and now the victims, the witnesses, and the defendants have to bear the brunt of it.”

Price said her office has begun outreach to the survivors and victims of crimes that resulted in death penalty sentences. Her office also created a hotline for them to contact the office with questions about the review.

“It’s outrageous. When you have this kind of misconduct, it impacts them first and foremost because they have been misled,” Price said. “We have to be mindful of the impact that this has on them, and address their needs as well as balancing the right of every defendant to a fair trial.”

In 2019, Gov. Gavin Newsom declared a moratorium on death sentences. Earlier this month, Santa Clara District Attorney Jeff Rosen announced he would resentence all 15 people with death row convictions in the county.

In statewide referendums in 2012 and 2016, approximately 60% of Alameda County residents voted in favor of ending the state’s death penalty. The propositions failed.

Earlier this month, a group of legal advocates led by the Office of the State Public Defender asked the state Supreme Court to “bar the prosecution, imposition and execution of death sentences” because the death penalty is disproportionately applied to people of color in California. According to their court filings, Black defendants are roughly nine times more likely to be sentenced to death than defendants of all other races, in part because of the exclusion of people of color from juries, they argued.

A 2021 report by the Committee on the Revision of the Penal Code found that between 2010-2020 Alameda juries sent 3 people to death row. All 3 are Black.

Price said her office plans to review each case separately.

“We will follow the string or the trail wherever it leads,” Price told KQED. “We will not cover this up.”

(source: KQED news)

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

DA Will Review All Alameda Death Penalty Cases After Prosecutors Discover Evidence of Prosecutorial Misconduct – Exclusion of Jews and Blacks From Jury Service

Alameda County DA Pamela Price announced that her office will review all death penalty cases after evidence of what appears to be the exclusion of Jewish and Black jurors was found during the resentencing settlement of Earnest Dykes

The direct comes from US Federal Court Judge Vince Chhabria.

Dykes was convicted in 1993 of attempted murder of Bernice Clark and the murder of her 9-year-old grandson Lance Clark during an attempted robbery and sentenced to death in 1995 in Alameda County.

While reviewing the case, a Deputy DA found handwritten notes that the DA’s office believes show that prosecutors had intentionally excluded Jewish and Black female jurors from the jury pool.

Those notes, the DA’s office said were then disclosed to the defense and the court.

In light of this discovery, Judge Chhabria has directed a review of all death penalty cases from Alameda County for any potential signs of prosecutorial misconduct in the form of the exclusion of jurors based solely on race.

“The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to a trial by an impartial jury of one’s peers,” said DA Pamela Price.

She added, “Any practice by prosecutors to eliminate potential jurors because of their race betrays that core pillar of the criminal justice system.”

As the Ninth Circuit has pointed out, “[I]t does not matter that the prosecutor might have had good reasons to strike the prospective jurors. What matters is the real reason they were stricken.”

She continued, “A Wheeler violation is prejudicial per se because racial discrimination in jury selection undermines the structural integrity of the criminal tribunal itself. My office is committed to following Judge Chhabria’s direction in reviewing all death penalty cases in Alameda County for any signs of being tainted by prosecutorial misconduct from the past.”

Color Of Change noted in a release that in 2006, a whistleblower prosecutor from the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office told courts that a judge had advised him to remove a Jewish person from a death penalty jury.

The release noted, “The prosecutor testified under oath of the practice of removing Black and Jewish people from juries, but the California Supreme Court ultimately found insufficient evidence of misconduct in a case that could have overturned dozens of death sentences.”

“This is horrifying,” said Michael Collins, Color Of Change’s senior director of state and local government affairs. “We have known for a long time that prosecutors often engage in unethical practices, but this scandal, uncovered by DA Pamela Price, is unparalleled. The prosecutors and judges implicated in this scandal engaged in racist and antisemitic practices and sent people to their deaths.”

Collins added, “For too long, prosecutors have sought to win at all costs, even if it means engaging in constitutional violations, civil rights violations and antisemitic and racially disparate practices that result in people sentenced to death. We know of 35 people who will have their cases reviewed, and hopefully overturned, but there are likely many more.”

35 death penalty cases have been identified and are now under review by the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office. The District Attorney’s Office is reaching out to victims and survivors whom these crimes may have impacted.

(source: David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard----davisvanguard.org)

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

Prosecutors in California excluded Jewish and Black jurors, records suggest----Pamela Price, the Alameda county district attorney, is reviewing 35 death penalty cases after judge cites ‘pattern of misconduct’

A California district attorney’s office is reviewing more than 30 death penalty cases after it unearthed records suggesting prosecutors deliberately excluded Jewish and Black jurors from capital trials.

Pamela Price, the Alameda county district attorney, whose jurisdiction includes Oakland, announced Monday that her office had uncovered handwritten notes by former prosecutors documenting discriminatory jury selection tactics in the 1990s. US judge Vince Chhabria, who is overseeing a case that led to the records discovery, has directed Price’s office to conduct the review of other cases, she said.

Chhabria wrote in an order on Monday that the “notes – especially when considered in conjunction with evidence presented in other cases – constitute strong evidence that, in prior decades, prosecutors from the office were engaged in a pattern of serious misconduct, automatically excluding Jewish and African American jurors in death penalty cases”.

The district attorney’s office released excerpts of prosecutors’ notes from the case of Ernest Dykes, who was sentenced to death in 1995 in Alameda county and whose appeal is ongoing. The documents show prosecutors marked down when prospective jurors were Jewish, repeatedly writing “Jew?” next to some people’s names and in one case appearing to mark when they confirmed the person was Jewish.

In another record, a prosecutor referred to a Black woman as a “short, fat, troll”. A prosecutor also remarked that a Black woman “says race no issue but I don’t believe her”. The prosecutors who wrote the notes were not named.

The district attorney’s office said it disclosed the notes to Dykes’ lawyers and Chhabria, and the judge allowed the records to be publicly released this week.

“The sixth amendment of the US constitution guarantees the right to a trial by an impartial jury of one’s peers,” Price said in a statement. “Any practice by prosecutors to eliminate potential jurors because of their race betrays that core pillar of the criminal justice system.”

Price said her office has identified 35 cases that could be impacted and that it will review “for any signs of being tainted by prosecutorial misconduct”. It’s unclear what timeframe the cases cover, but Price said the office was potentially looking as far back as 1977.

Brian Pomerantz, an attorney for Dykes, who was convicted of murder and attempted murder, praised Price for bringing the records to light. “It is overwhelming for Mr Dykes to learn that this kind of misconduct and prejudice was happening in his case. After 31 years in prison, he’s learning he didn’t get the fair trial he should have gotten. He’s always thought this … but to hear the DA’s office saying it themselves is profound.”

Pomerantz said the problem of discriminatory jury exclusion in Alameda county was systemic. A previous review by lawyers who represent capital defendants found that between 1984 and 1994, Alameda district attorneys removed every juror who identified themselves as Jewish if they still had peremptory strikes, KQED reported. Evidence of the exclusion of Black women and Jewish people from juries has led to three people being resentenced in the county, the outlet reported.

“This is horrifying. We have known for a long time that prosecutors often engage in unethical practices, but this scandal, uncovered by DA Pamela Price, is unparalleled,” Michael Collins, with racial justice group Color of Change, said in a statement. “For too long, prosecutors have sought to win at all costs, even if it means engaging in constitutional violations, civil rights violations and antisemitic and racially disparate practices that result in people sentenced to death.”

The revelations come as California’s governor has issued a moratorium on executions and has moved to shutter the state’s infamous death row facilities, transferring people with death sentences to the general population of prisons. The district attorney in nearby Santa Clara county also recently moved to resentence all of the men on death row in his jurisdiction, saying he was “not confident that these sentences were attained without racial bias”.

(source: The Guardian)

TAIWAN:

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT TO HEAR CHALLENGE TO DEATH PENALTY LAW

On 23 April 2024 the Constitutional Court of Taiwan will hear a challenge on the constitutionality of the death penalty in the country. Amnesty International Taiwan and the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty are among several non-governmental organizations intervening in the case, in support of the full abolition of the death penalty.

The constitutional challenge arises from the case filed by Wang Xinfu (Petition No. 2022), the oldest person on Taiwan’s death row, consolidated with petitions by 37 others. The Constitutional Court has set 23 April to hear arguments on several questions, including:

whether the death penalty is unconstitutional as it infringes on the right to life and other constitutional rights, such as the right to be free from torture;

what the penological purposes of the death penalty are;

what other measures could be considered in its place;

and, if the death penalty system is considered constitutional, to what crimes and what circumstances of the defendants it should be applicable, as well as through what procedures.

In the joint briefing filed on 8 April, Amnesty International Taiwan and the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty argued that the use of the death penalty in Taiwan constitutes a violation of human rights as guaranteed under the Constitution of Taiwan (Articles 8 on personal freedom and procedural guarantees in case of arrest and conviction; and 15 on the right to existence). The organizations hold that the death penalty violates the human right to life and the right not to be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as reflected in the development of international human rights law and standards.

Amnesty International Taiwan, the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty and its members have long raised concern at the use of the death penalty in Taiwan, including in relation to proceedings in several cases that violated constitutional and international standards for a fair trial and resulted in the imposition of the death penalty. Among other examples, Amnesty International Taiwan has long been campaigning on behalf of Chiou Ho-Shun, who was sentenced to death in 1989 for kidnapping and murder. The most recent investigation report written by Kao Yung-Cheng, a member of Control Yuan, highlighted that police officers had subjected Chiou Ho-Shun to torture and other ill-treatment during the investigation process to obtain “confessions” of guilt.1 The organization has been calling on the President of Taiwan, Tsai Ing-wen, to use her power to grant pardon to commute the death sentence imposed on Chiou Ho-Shun.

Although no executions have been recorded in Taiwan since 2020, the two organizations further stated in their submission that the retention of the death penalty in the country sets it against the global trend, which remains overwhelmingly in favour of its abolition. The number of fully abolitionist countries has continued to grow and has now reached 112, while the numbers of executing countries and executions recorded yearly have been declining.

The 2 interveners further argued that international human rights law and standards set out the reformation and social rehabilitation of people in detention as the primary goal of penitentiary systems and alternative punishments should reflect this aim.

Eeling Chiu, Director of Amnesty International Taiwan, said: “This historic challenge to the constitutionality of the death penalty in Taiwan is an opportunity not to be missed. The death penalty is a violation of human rights and human dignityand must be consigned to the history books once and for all. The protection of human rights cannot be compromised on.”

Aurelie Plaçais, Director of the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty, added: “The world is watching, alongside the people of Taiwan, the proceedings before the Constitutional Court. As more and more countries continue to take steps to abolish the death penalty, its failed promise of safety is evident for all to see. It is time for Taiwan to join the overwhelming majority of the world’s countries and abolish this punishment.”

(source: World Coalition Against the Death Penalty)

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

Taiwan's Constitutional Court debates death penalty legality

Taiwan’s Constitutional Court held a crucial debate on whether the death penalty violates constitutional guarantees of human rights. This session is a part of a larger review prompted by 37 death row inmates who are challenging the constitutionality of capital punishment.

The petitioners’ legal representatives presented their arguments from multiple perspectives, including the psychological progression of crime victims' families, the principle of non-retaliation, and the availability of alternative punishments. Li Hsuan-yi, whose grandmother was a robbery homicide victim in 1996, described his transformation from wanting to seek revenge to studying criminology and exploring the root causes of criminal behavior. He emphasized the need to address these root causes rather than perpetuating a cycle of violence.

Another petitioner’s lawyer, Li Nien-tsu, argued against the death penalty on constitutional grounds, stating that revenge is an arbitrary action driven by emotion rather than rational standards. He made his statement by pointing out that "killing is not a Taiwanese value."

On the other side, the Justice Ministry defended the death penalty, asserting that it does not inherently violate the right to life or dignity, nor does it constitute torture if carried out without cruelty. The ministry’s Prosecutorial Affairs Director Guo Yong-fa says that the death penalty aligns with both retributive justice, prevention and societal expectations, balancing the condemnation of extreme violations against individual rights.

The debate concluded in the morning with plans for further discussion by the justices in the afternoon. A decision on the constitutionality of the death penalty is expected between July and September. The decision will mark a significant milestone in Taiwan’s legal history, potentially leading to a reevaluation of the role of capital punishment in the country.

(source: rti.org.tw)

MALAYSIA:

Trio’s death sentence for murder of 7-11 worker replaced with 33-year jail term----They were also ordered to be whipped 12 times each for slashing the worker to death in Sabah in 2001.

The Federal Court sitting in Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, today commuted the death sentence of three men to 33 years in jail each for the murder of a convenience store worker in Penampang in 2001.

A three-member bench chaired by Justice Zabariah Yusof also ordered Duis Akim, 49, Vincent Gisup, 43, and Hendry Motutud, 44, to be given 12 strokes of the rotan for killing Wilfred Thomas, 34.

They are expected to be released from prison in 2026, following a one-third remission given to inmates for good behaviour.

Justices Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal and Rhodzariah Bujang were the other judges who heard the matter which had come before the apex court following the abolition of the mandatory death penalty last year.

The trio’s case was brought up under the Revision of the Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023.

Deputy public prosecutor Ng Siew Wee urged the bench to retain the death penalty or, alternatively, to impose a jail term of between 35 and 40 years.

“Each of them was armed with a 12-inch parang and slashed the victim who sustained 12 slash wounds,” she said, adding that the crime was a gruesome murder.

Lawyer Rakhbir Singh, who appeared for the three men, pleaded for leniency as they had spent long years in prison.

The murder took place at a 7-Eleven outlet in Donggongon at 2am on May 26, 2001.

On July 10, 2007, the High Court acquitted them after calling for their defence.

However, following an appeal by the prosecution, the Court of Appeal reversed the High Court’s ruling and sentenced them to death in 2012.

The Federal Court affirmed the conviction and sentence the following year.

(source: Free Malaysia Today)

IRAQ:

Iraq sentences two ISIS-linked individuals to death

On Monday, the Central Criminal Court under the Iraqi Judiciary Council handed a death sentence to two individuals linked to ISIS.

The Council's Media Center stated that the convicted individuals were "actively involved in ISIS's financial, administrative, and combat operations."

Notably, ISIS controlled 1/3 of Iraq and Syria at its peak in 2014. Though it was beaten back in both countries, the terrorists continue to wage insurgent attacks.

Despite the 2017 defeat, ISIS remnants still pose a threat in Iraq by attacking the security forces and civilians. The terrorists concentrate in remote areas amid security vacuums between the Iraqi forces and the Peshmerga, such as Kirkuk, where joint military operations are regularly conducted.

The group is estimated to have 5,000 to 7,000 members and supporters spread between Syria and Iraq, roughly half of them fighters, a U.N. report said.

Late last year, the organization announced it had appointed a previously unknown figure - Abu al-Hussein al-Husseini al-Quraishi - as its leader after the previous leader was killed.

(source: shafaq.com)

YEMEN:

Nimisha Priya: Family of Indian nurse on death row in Yemen to seek pardon----Nimisha Priya has been in a prison in Yemen for a 2017 murder

The family of an Indian nurse who is on death row in Yemen has travelled to the war-torn country to seek a pardon from the victim's relatives.

Nimisha Priya from India's Kerala state was convicted of the 2017 murder of a local man, Talal Abdo Mahdi.

In November, Yemen's Supreme Judicial Council rejected her appeal, clearing the way for her execution.

But as Yemen follows Sharia law, she can secure a pardon by paying diyah or "blood money" to the victim's family.

On Tuesday, her mother Prema Kumari, husband Tomy Thomas and 11-year-old daughter Mishal, arrived in Yemen's capital Sanaa, accompanied by Samuel Jones, a member of a lobby group called Save Nimisha Priya International Action Council. They will attempt to meet Nimisha in Sanaa central jail where she is being held.

They will then travel to meet the victim's family to persuade them to spare Nimisha's life in return for blood money.

In December, Prema Kumari had told the BBC that she wanted to travel to Yemen to seek "forgiveness" from Mahdi's family.

"I will apologise to them, I'll tell them, take my life, but please spare my daughter. Nimisha has a young daughter who needs her mother," she had said.

The family had been unable to travel to Yemen earlier since a 2017 Indian government ban on citizens travelling there remains and those needing to travel need special permission.

Nimisha's mother Prema Kumari is in Yemen to secure her daughter's release

The Indian ministry of external affairs had rejected their request, saying Delhi didn't have a diplomatic presence in Yemen to ensure their safety.

The Save Nimisha Council then filed a petition in the Delhi high court, seeking permission for Nimisha's mother and daughter to travel to Sanaa. The court allowed them to travel but said the Indian government would not be liable if anything goes wrong.

Sanaa is controlled by Houthi rebels who have been locked in a prolonged civil war with Yemen's government, which is based in the southern city of Aden. India does not recognise the Houthis so a trip to Yemen for Indian citizens could be fraught with dangers.

The daughter of a poorly-paid domestic helper, Nimisha went to Yemen in 2008 and initially worked as a nurse in a government-run hospital in Sanaa, but later quit her low-paying job to start her own clinic in 2014.

As the law in Yemen mandated her to have a local partner, she opened the clinic jointly with Mahdi, a local store owner.

She was found guilty of murder after Mahdi's chopped-up body was discovered in a water tank.

(source: BBC News)

IRAN----execution

Prisoner executed for drug-related charges in Kerman

Jamal Mardani, a 54-year-old prisoner from Miandoab, West Azerbaijan Province, was executed on 21 April for drug-related offences in Kerman Central Prison, Kerman Province.

The prisoner was transferred to solitary confinement for the execution on 19 April.

Mardani, a father of four from the village of Gug Jalu in Miandoab, was arrested about 4 years ago.

(source: kurdistanhumanrights.org)

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

Iranian Rapper's Death Sentence Changed To 5 Years In Prison

Iranian dissident rapper Saman Yasin, who was detained during nationwide protests in 2022, has been sentenced to 5 years in prison, according to a verdict obtained by RFE/RL’s Radio Farda.

In sentencing Yasin, Branch 15 of Tehran's Islamic Revolutionary Court said Yasin will serve the punishment at a prison in the city of Kerman, as dictated by a fatwa from the Islamic republic's leader that bars Yasin from associating with others. Yasin is from the northwestern Kurdish region of Iran, while Kerman is located near the southeastern part of the country.

Legal sources noted that Yasin, who was involved in the "Women, Life, Freedom" protests sparked by the death of a young woman in police custody for an alleged head-scarf violation, was initially sentenced to death, but that sentence was overturned by the Supreme Court.

Hossein Sartipi, Yasin’s lawyer, confirmed on social media platform X (formerly Twitter) that the sentence had been changed, remarking, "Saman Yasin was saved from execution."

Yasin has been in temporary detention for over 18 months. Sartipi said he plans to appeal the latest sentence.

The 25-year-old rapper recently made a plea from prison to the judiciary to "issue my death sentence" rather than continue holding him indefinitely without a trial after multiple court dates were set and then delayed.

Yasin described enduring a "mock execution" set up by prison officials before being moved to a prison in Karaj.

He has consistently maintained his innocence, releasing multiple audio recordings to publicize his claims. He has also reportedly launched at least one hunger strike in protest.

After the September 2022 death of Mahsa Amini in custody after she was detained for allegedly wearing her head scarf improperly, Iranians took to the streets across the country to protest a lack of rights, with women and schoolgirls making unprecedented shows of support in the biggest threat to the Islamic government since the 1979 revolution.

The judiciary, at the urging of lawmakers, has instituted harsh penalties, including the death sentence, for offenders.

(source: rferl.org)

APRIL 22, 2024:

FLORIDA:

Judge to look over jury’s recommendation of death

A Spencer hearing will be held Monday for Bessman Okafor, the man who was convicted in the 2012 murder of Alex Zaldivar.

A Spencer hearing allows attorneys for the defense to provide additional evidence to a judge before a sentence is entered.

The hearing is set to start at 9 a.m. at the Orange County Courthouse.

The judge will decide whether or not to take the jury’s recommendation of the death penalty.

Okafer will be sentenced on June 24.

(source: WFTV news)

ALABAMA:

Alabama Supreme Court authorizes 3rd execution this year

The Alabama Supreme Court has approved the execution of Keith Edmund Gavin, and one other execution is pending.

If the high court approves the pending execution and all go forward, that means at least 4 death row inmates would be put to death this year by the state.

Gavin, 63, was sentenced to capital murder for the March 1998 killing of William Clayton Jr., a driver for a courier company. Clayton had gotten off work and drove his van to a bank in Centre, in Cherokee County, to withdraw cash to take his wife to dinner, state and federal court records show. Cherokee County is in northeast Alabama. Gavin went up to the van and shot Clayton, at least two times, then drove off in the van.

An investigator with the district attorney’s office pulled the van over, and Gavin got out and fired shots at the investigator before running into the woods. He was captured a few hours later. Clayton died at the hospital, records show.

At the time, Gavin was on parole in Illinois after being released after serving 17 years on a 34-year sentence for a murder conviction.

Gavin was convicted in November of 1999 of capital murder in Claytons’s death and the jury recommended the death penalty by a 10-2 vote. The trial judge took the recommendation and sentenced Gavin to death.

He also sentenced Gavin to life in prison for the attempted murder charge.

In Alabama, the attorney general determines which inmate on death row will next be executed. The state Supreme Court then approves the execution, and the governor then sets the date and timeline. State law holds that the execution cannot occur within 30 days of the condemned being notified of the pending execution.

The executions, if they go forward, will be in the death chamber at William C. Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore.

The American flag is seen behind barbed wire at Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore, Ala.

Jamie Ray Mills Mills is set to be executed by lethal injection during the 30-hour period from midnight May 30 to 6 a.m. May 31.

“There is no doubt that Mills committed those offenses,” the AG’s motion to the Supreme Court states. “… Mills’ convictions and sentence are final because he has completed his direct appeal, state post-conviction review, and federal habeas review. Accordingly, it is time for this death sentence to be carried out.”

Mills and his wife, Joann, went to the home of Vera Hill, 72 and Floyd Hill, 87, in June of 2004 asking to make a phone call, court records and media accounts say. Mills was 30 at the time. Guin is in Marion County in northwest Alabama.

Afterward, the 4 of them went to a shed where the Hills kept items to sell as part of a yard sale, the Alabama Reflector reported.

The AG’s motion states that the women went back to the home, leaving Floyd Hill and Mills in the shed. Mills beat Hill, who fell to the ground. The women then returned to the shed and found Floyd on the ground. Mills then beat Vera on the back of the head with a hammer, as JoAnn stood in the corner.

Vera Mills died several months later from her injuries.

According to the motion, Jamie Mills then locked the shed and stole items valued at $140 from the home including a tackle box, medicines, wallet, purse and police scanner.

Mills was convicted of 3 counts of capital murder in August 2007 and the jury recommended the death penalty by a 11-1 vote. The trial judge took the jury’s recommendation and sentence Mills to death.

Joann Mills was convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison.

Miller's execution would be carried out using nitrogen hypoxia, the AG’s office says. The supreme court is yet to authorize his execution. Miller, now 59, was convicted of killing three people during a pair of 1999 workplace shootings in suburban Birmingham. He was living in Autauga County at the time.

"The State of Alabama is prepared to carry out the execution of Miller's sentence by means of nitrogen hypoxia," the attorney general's office wrote, adding that Miller has been on death row since 2000 and that it is time to carry out his sentence.

Miller was set to be executed by lethal injection in September of 2022, but staff could not gain access to his veins for the IV lines before his death warrant expired. 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 Lee Holdbrooks, Scott Yancy and Terry Jarvis. Prosecutors said Miller killed Holdbrooks and Yancy at one business and then drove to another location to shoot Jarvis. Each man was shot multiple times.

Testimony 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.

The state now plans to use its new nitrogen hypoxia method in its 2nd attempt to execute Miller. In that method, the condemned breathes pure nitrogen through a mask. The nitrogen displaces the oxygen in the lungs.

On Jan. 25, Kenneth Eugene Smith became the 1st person in the nation executed using the method. That execution was carried out in the death chamber at the William C. Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore. In the weeks before the execution, the attorney general’s office wrote in court documents that the inmate would lose consciousness in a matter of “seconds” and die in a matter of minutes.

Smith writhed and shook on the gurney for some 4 minutes before appearing to lose consciousness. His convulsions shook the gurney several times. He appeared to gasp for air and writhe for about 2 minutes more after he appeared to lose consciousness before he apparently stopped breathing.

The morning after Smith’s execution Attorney General Steve Marshall described the execution as “textbook” and said the state was ready to carry out more nitrogen hypoxia executions.

(source: Montgomery Advertiser)

KANSAS:

2 brothers condemned to die for the 'Wichita massacre' want a new sen­tencing hearing

Attorneys for 2 brothers who were sentenced to die in a quadruple killing known as the "Wichita massacre” will argue Monday for a formal resentencing hearing, the latest in a long series of appeals.

How the sentencing was handled has long been a point of contention because the 2 brothers — Jonathan and Reginald Carr — had a joint hearing when jurors considered their punishments. Prosecutors plan to oppose the latest effort.

The prosecution has long argued that the brothers broke into a home in December 2000 and forced the three men and two women there to have sex with one another and later to withdraw money from ATMs. Jonathan Carr was 20 and Reginald Carr was 23 when the murders occurred; they are now 44 and 46, and both are incarcerated at the state’s maximum-security prison in El Dorado, about 30 miles (48 kilometers) northeast of Wichita.

According to authorities, the women were raped repeatedly before all 5 victims were taken to a soccer field and shot. 4 of them died: Aaron Sander, 29; Brad Heyka, 27; Jason Befort, 26; and Heather Muller, 25. The woman who survived testified against the Carr brothers. They were also convicted of killing another person in a separate attack.

Each of the brothers accused the other of carrying out the crimes.

Kansas has 9 men on death row, but the state has not executed anyone since the murderous duo James Latham and George York were hanged on the same day in June 1965.

Attorneys for both brothers raised concerns in the latest round of court filings that the trial attorneys were ineffective — Reginald Carr's defense said they were “egregiously” so — and failed to aggressively push for a continuance to give themselves more time to prepare. They also agreed that prospective jurors weren’t properly questioned about racial biases. The brothers are Black, their victims white.

Reginald Carr’s attorney’s also brought up an investigation into members of the Wichita Police Department exchanging racist, sexist and homophobic texts and images. Several were ultimately disciplined, and Carr’s attorney wrote that one of them was involved in the investigation of the brothers.

From there, the attorneys for the brothers deviate in their court filings. Jonathan Carr's attorneys argued that the trial attorneys failed to investigate and present evidence that Reginald Carr, who is older, had a powerful influence over his younger brother and sexually abused him. A Kansas Department of Correction evaluation conducted just days after Jonathan Carr was sentenced to death said he “appears to idolize his brother,” his attorneys wrote.

Meanwhile, Reginald Carr's attorneys wrote the trial attorneys were unprepared to rebut Jonathan’s defense, which it described as “largely consisting of family members prepped to promote saving Jonathan Carr’s life over his older brother’s life.” And they further argued that DNA evidence and identification was actually stronger against Jonathan Carr.

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to request a formal resentencing hearing for each defendant. That action came a little less than a year after the Kansas Supreme Court ruled that the 2 brothers had received fair trials and upheld their death sentences.

The Kansas court upheld their convictions in 2014 but overturned their death sentences, concluding that not having separate hearings violated the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed that decision in 2016, returning the case to the Kansas Supreme Court.

When the Kansas Supreme Court took up the brothers’ cases again, their attorneys raised questions about how their cases weren’t conducted separately when jurors were considering whether the death penalty was warranted. Other issues they raised included the instructions that were given to jurors and how closing arguments were conducted.

The Kansas court’s majority concluded that while the lower-court judge and prosecutors made errors, those errors did not warrant overturning their death sentences again.

(source: Associated Press)

USA:

Black People Pay a High Price for this Country’s Illusory Pursuit of Humane Executions

Since the end of the 19th century, the United States has been on a quest to find a method of execution that would be safe, reliable, and humane. We have moved from hanging to the electric chair, from the electric chair to the gas chamber, from the gas chamber to lethal injection, and from lethal injection to nitrogen hypoxia. Along the way, this country has sometimes even used the firing squad.

As we moved from one execution method to the next, each new method’s proponents have said the same things. Political leaders and judges have proclaimed previous methods barbaric—or simply archaic—and touted the ability of the method that they were advocating to produce a humane death.

The statement made by federal district court Judge Henry Woods in a 1992 death penalty decision was typical. Writing about the constitutionality of lethal injection Woods said, “There is general agreement that lethal injection is at present the most humane type of execution available and is far preferable to the sometimes barbaric means employed in the past.”

7 years later, the Florida Supreme Court followed suit when it observed that “just as electrocution may have been originally evaluated in comparison with hanging, he noted that the overwhelming majority of death penalty jurisdictions have long since rejected use of the electric chair and have turned to lethal injection is a more humane punishment.”

But experience has taught a hard lesson. There is no foolproof method of execution.

Far from being an improvement over the electric chair’s dismal record, lethal injection has shown itself to be a very problematic way of putting people to death. In fact, lethal injection executions have been botched more frequently than any other method used in the last 150 years.

Until now, we haven’t known who has borne the brunt of those failures.

Last week, Reprieve, which describes itself as “a legal action non-governmental organization,” released a report that lifted the veil on that issue. It showed that nationwide, “Half of the botched lethal injection executions were of Black people, though only a third of the prisoners executed were Black.”

A National Public Radio story about the report explained that “The pattern was starkest in some Southern states. In Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Georgia, three-quarters or more of the botched lethal injection executions were of Black people, though they accounted only for a third or less of executions in those states.”

Reprieve used a very comprehensive definition of botched executions. They classified a lethal injection as botched if there was:

1. Evidence of consciousness after lethal drug(s) were administered (e.g., speaking; sitting up and moving); 2. Medical complications (e.g. an allergic reaction to the drug(s)); 3. Problems with drug(s) (e.g., the drug(s) solidifying and clogging the IV tube; the use of the wrong drug); 4. Intravenous (IV) access and administration issues (e.g., multiple IV insertion attempts; incorrect IV insertion); 5. Visible or audible expressions of pain after lethal drug(s) were administered (e.g., screams; groans; and reports of feeling pain); 6. Unanticipated reactions to the drug(s) or procedure (e.g., frothing at the mouth; vomiting; violent convulsions); 7. Executions that were halted while in progress due to one or more of the complications detailed above.

Using these criteria, Reprieve found that of the 1,407 lethal injection executions carried out or attempted from 1977 to December 2023, 73 of them were botched. 8% of the executions of Black people were botched (37 out of 465), compared to 4% of the executions of white people (28 out of 780).

These findings add to what we have long known, namely that race has played, and continues to play, a role at every stage of the death penalty system.

As Equal Justice USA notes, “Discrimination in capital punishment was explicitly written in many states’ laws during slavery. Black people – whether slaves or not – faced the death penalty for crimes that… (would not carry a death sentence) if committed by a white person.”

“A full 75% of those executed in the South from 1910 to 1950,” it says, “were black, even though black people were less than a quarter of the South’s population.”

Forty years ago, Professor David Baldus documented the persistence of racial discrimination in death sentencing. He showed that people who murder a white victim are much more likely to be sentenced to death than those who murder a person of color.

“Nationally,” Equal Justice USA says, “almost half (47%) of all murder victims since the 1970s are black. But for cases ending in an execution, only 17% of murder victims are black.”

A 2020 study by Scott Phillips and Justin Marceau of the University of Denver found that race played a large part in determining which death-sentenced inmates are actually executed. The execution rate, they wrote, “is roughly 17 times greater in white victim cases than black victim cases."

As the Reprieve report makes clear, race also shapes what happens in the execution chamber, only there it is the race of the defendant that is crucial. “The odds,” Reprive says, “of a botched execution increased by 220% for Black people compared to white people.”

While Reprieve offers no explanation for those disparities, what it found is consistent with what we know about the way Black bodies are regarded in this country.

In our schools, Black students often are the focus of suspicion when problems occur. Studies have found that “while about 15% of K-12 public school students are Black, they make up more than 30% of students who are suspended, expelled, or arrested.”

Such suspicion often shapes encounters between Black citizens and the police. A 2020 Pew Survey about race and policing in the United States states that “Black adults are about 5 times as likely as whites to say they’ve been unfairly stopped by police because of their race or ethnicity.”

In addition, “Nearly 2/3 of black adults (65%) say they’ve been in situations where people acted as if they were suspicious of them because of their race or ethnicity, while only 1/4 of white adults say that’s happened to them.”

Finally, the NPR story about the Reprieve report cites Ruqaiijah Yearby, a professor of health law at The Ohio State University who said that “racist tropes…limit Black people from accessing equitable medical care, like the false notion that Black people have a higher tolerance for pain….Yearby cited research that showed that nationwide, Black cancer patients received lower doses of pain medication than cancer patients who were white.”

One reason for this is, as the Association of American Medical Colleges reports, that “Half of white medical trainees believe such myths as black people have thicker skin or less sensitive nerve endings than white people.”

In the end, we need to do more to understand why the executions of Black people are so frequently botched. But given the stereotypes about the Black body that pervade our society, it is not surprising that Black inmates receive different and worse treatment than White inmates in the execution chamber and that they pay a high price for our illusory and failed quest for a humane execution method.

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

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

STUDY REVEALS RACIAL DISPARITIES AND BOTCHED EXECUTIONS OF BLACK PEOPLE, SPARKING CALLS FOR LETHAL INJECTION MORATORIUM----In Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Georgia, 75% of botched executions involved Black people, even though Black people only accounted for 33% of executions in those states

Reprieve, a non-profit organization, analyzed the more than 1,400 lethal injections carried out in the United States since 1977, and in their analysis discovered that botched executions are racially biased. According to the study, the research shows that the disparities present in the criminal justice system extend to the execution of incarcerated people.

As NPR reported, the pattern is worse in Southern states. In Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Georgia, 75% of botched executions involved Black people, even though Black people only accounted for 33% of executions in those states. Somewhat complicating things, there is no set standard for what makes an execution a botched execution. Reprieve designated executions that featured expressions of pain, an incarcerated person being conscious after a drug (or drugs in some cases) were administered, and whether execution workers struggled to find a person’s veins to administer the drugs as botched executions.

The analysis also found that it did not matter which drugs were used in a cocktail; the result, as far as a botched execution is concerned, remained the same. Reprieve’s Executive Director, Maya Foa, told NPR that tinkering with the formulas is not addressing the problem.

“There are botched executions, many of them, regardless of the drug, regardless of the cocktail. Continuing to tinker with the machinery of death is not making this better,” Foa said. “The analysis shows not only are we botching these executions and causing people torture more often than with many other methods.”

Foa continued, “But we are doing that to Black prisoners far, far more frequently than we are to white prisoners.”

Jeff Hood, a spiritual advisor who has been inside the death chambers of three white individuals and three Black individuals in Texas, Oklahoma, and Alabama, told NPR that he believes there are differences in how Black people are treated while they are strapped to the gurney. “I can definitely tell you that the restraints that I have seen on Black folk have been unquestionably tighter than the restraints that I have seen on white folk,” Hood noted.

Hood continued, “If your assumption is that the person who is condemned is going to resist, then you are going to take much more liberties with the body than if you believe that the person was going to be perfectly peaceful. And when you begin to take liberties with someone’s body, you leave protocol, and you leave best practices. When you leave protocol, and you leave best practices, of course, you are going to have a botched execution.”

As a result of its findings, the study recommends that an immediate moratorium be placed on lethal injections at both the state and federal levels. It also recommends that, like Virginia, Ohio, and Arizona, governors in states that carry out executions should commission independent investigations into lethal injections and the problems that arise from lethal injections. It also calls for the FDA and the DEA to enforce their existing rules against those who violate their regulations in secret and take action against those actors. As Foa told NPR, “The death penalty in its application in the United States is racist. And we cannot continue to do this.”

(source: blackenterprise.com)

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

15 Botched Executions of Black Death Row Inmates

Warning: These stories will make your stomach turn. Here’s 15 cases in which a Black person’s execution was halted or stalled by a botched procedure. Reprieve, an anti-death penalty organization, just released a horrifying report detailing the pattern of botched lethal injections which disproportionately affected a certain demographic of inmates: Want to take a guess who? It’s Black folks.

However, botched executions are not excluded to just the needle and a lethal cocktail. Ever since we had firing squads, gas chambers and whatnot, Black people have been subject to prolonged, painful deaths, leading to gruesome and graphic scenes.

Yes, people on death row were found guilty of egregious crimes. but one would assume the Eighth Amendment would protect them from being punctured with a needle for over 40 minutes.

(see: https://www.theroot.com/15-botched-executions-of-black-death-row-inmates-1851423350)

INDIA:

Operation Conviction: ‘operation Conviction’ In Up Ensures 16 Death Sentences In 3 Months

(see: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/operation-conviction-in-up-ensures-16-death-sentences-in-three-months/articleshow/109484691.cms)

TAIWAN:

Constitutional court set to debate death penalty

Taipei, April 22 (CNA) Taiwan's constitutional court will convene a highly anticipated debate on Tuesday about whether the current death penalty system is constitutional, addressing an issue that has been contentious in Taiwan for decades.

The debate, scheduled for Tuesday, will see attorneys Nigel Li and Jeffrey Li representing 37 prisoners currently on death row and challenging the constitutionality of capital punishment.

The 37 petitioners have argued that "the presence and implementation of capital punishment violate Article 15 of the Constitution of the Republic of China," which stipulates that "the right of existence...shall be guaranteed to the people."

Kuo Yung-fa, head of the the Ministry of Justice's (MOJ) Department of Prosecutorial Affairs, will lead a team of 3 to defend the current practice.

Other areas of contention include the availability of alternative sanctions if the death penalty is deemed unconstitutional and whether further limitations should be imposed on its application if the current system is upheld as constitutional.

The case, initiated by Wang Hsin-fu, a 71-year-old man sentenced to death for his involvement in the killings of 2 police officers in 1990, was brought to the constitutional court in 2022.

The court later decided to combine Wang's case and those of 36 other death row convicts.

Three grand justices have requested recusal, and therefore the remaining 12 are expected to review the case and make a judgement three months after the debate at the earliest.

Two have taken part in the reviews of cases in which two of the petitioners were sentenced to death, and one used to work for an NGO advocating for the abolition of the death penalty.

According to the Constitutional Court Procedure Act, a majority of the justices presiding over the case would have to rule in favor of the petitioners for the death penalty to be overturned.

The constitutional court has previously touched on the constitutionality of the death penalty on three occasions, in 1985, 1990 and 1999.

On those three occasions, it deemed constitutional court rulings sentencing to death individuals found guilty of drug dealing and kidnapping for the purpose of extorting ransom.

The petitioners are arguing, however, that those interpretations were "not keeping up with the times" because they were issued before Taiwan made the United Nations' International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which calls for restrictions on the death penalty, a matter of domestic law in 2009.

In addition to the petitioners' attorneys and the MOJ officials, a representative from the National Human Rights Commission under the Control Yuan, which has expressed support for the abolition of capital punishment, and several scholars will also take part in the debate and share their viewpoints.

Lin Hsin-yi, executive director of the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP), described the constitutional review as a "showdown" after a decades-long failure to take decisive action by the executive and legislative branches to address the issue and communicate effectively with the public.

Lin said she was keenly aware of public opinion on abolishing capital punishment as well the frequent manipulation of the issue by politicians who seek short-term gains in elections.

Surveys conducted by the Crime Research Center of the National Chung Cheng University over the past decade have consistently indicated that more than 75 percent of Taiwanese support the retention of the death penalty.

Acting as an amicus curiae (friend of the court) for the case, the main opposition Kuomintang's (KMT) legislative caucus has filed an opinion with the constitutional court to express a stance of opposition to the abolition of the death penalty.

In the document, the KMT caucus also argued that the abolition of the death penalty falls within the discretion of the Legislative Yuan and as such the constitutional court should not seek to determine the matter by passing a judgement.

Meanwhile, ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislative caucus whip Ker Chien-ming said last week that the abolition of the death penalty remained a "long-term goal" but noted that more dialogue is needed within society.

"Only when a consensus is reached in Taiwanese society can we move onto the next stage," he said on social media.

"Politicians have consistently prioritized political considerations over human rights values," Lin of the TAEDP told CNA, alluding to those who either trumpet the practice of capital punishment or sidestep the issue for fear of jeopardizing their political careers, without naming names.

Grand justices ought to swim against the tide of public opinion and political pressure and make a judgment "based on their principles and professionalism," Lin contending, arguing that they should serve "the role of human rights defenders."

Lawyer Lee Chen-pu said there was no longer "mandatory capital punishment" in Taiwan but there remained about 50 provisions allowing for the death penalty.

If the constitutional court rules the death penalty unconstitutional, Lee said, judges in the future may consider sentencing those guilty of the most serious offenses to life without the possibility of parole in order "not to go against public sentiment."

(source: focustaiwan.tw)

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

Premier: Respect for Judicial Yuan’s death penalty review

Premier Chen Chien-jen on Monday (April 22) emphasized the importance of the separation of powers in Taiwan's Constitution, stating that the Executive Yuan fully respects the Judicial Yuan's interpretation on whether the death penalty is unconstitutional.

"The decisions made by the Judicial Yuan should be given the highest respect," Chen said.

The Constitutional Court is set to debate the issue on Tuesday (April 23), with a ruling expected in July. The outcome will determine the future of the death penalty in Taiwan.

Chen reiterated that Taiwan is a mature, free, democratic, and rule-of-law country. He stressed that the separation of powers is the most important provision of the Constitution, and the Judicial Yuan has the authority to interpret whether a law is unconstitutional.

Under the constitutional system, the decisions of the Judicial Yuan should be given the utmost respect, Chen said. He expressed confidence that the Judicial Yuan will carefully consider all opinions to make the most appropriate interpretation.

(source: tvbs.com.tw)

ISRAEL:

Israeli minister proposes execution of Palestinian prisoners as a solution to prison overcrowding

Itamar Ben Gvir, Israel's controversial Minister of National Security and known for his extremist positions, has launched a proposal that has further inflamed the tense political and social landscape: the execution of Palestinian prisoners to alleviate overcrowding in Israeli prisons. This statement comes in a context of international criticism of detention conditions and the violation of human rights in Israeli prison facilities.

Space in Israeli prisons, a chronic and escalating problem

Ben Gvir, seizing on the Israeli military's recent decision to build 936 new spaces for "security prisoners," suggested that the death penalty for "terrorists" would be a "partial solution" until prison expansion was completed. This comment has not only exacerbated tensions with the Palestinian community but has also caused alarm among global human rights organizations.

Palestinian Prisoners' Day, commemorated on Wednesday, has seen more than 5,000 Palestinians detained since the start of the current war in Gaza on October 7. Reports from Israel's Public Defender's Office, updated in February, describe an "emergency" situation due to severe overcrowding. Prisons face precarious living conditions: spaces reduced to less than three square meters per person, insufficient ventilation, and critical sanitary deficiencies that increase stress and anxiety among inmates.

Organizations such as Addameer have reported that Israel is holding approximately 9,500 Palestinian political prisoners, not including the new detainees from Gaza. These prisoners, according to reports, suffer the "worst forms of torture." The reality for these detainees has changed dramatically since October 7, reflecting a radical transformation in policies and practices within Israeli prisons, amid what Addameer describes as an "ongoing genocide" against Palestinians in Gaza.

A proposal that has resonated negatively in the international community

Ben Gvir's statements have not only been seen as a setback in human rights by Israel, but also as a provocative act that could further deteriorate relations with the Palestinians and increase violence in an already troubled region. marked by constant conflict.

The international community, including several UN agencies and the International Criminal Court, has been urged to intervene and pressure Israel to improve detention conditions and reconsider its punitive approach, which now includes such extreme proposals as the execution of prisoners. Meanwhile, Palestinian families and activists continue to demand the release of their loved ones, marking Palestinian Prisoners' Day with protests and calls for justice.

The situation of the Palestinian prisoners and the Ben Gvir proposal raise serious questions about the direction of Israeli policies regarding human rights and the treatment of detainees. The international community watches with concern, hoping for responses and reforms that can alleviate the humanitarian crisis in Israel's prisons and, more broadly, in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

(source: bilbaohiria.com)

SAUDI ARABIA:

Indian man slated for execution in Saudi Arabia saved after expats raise $4m----Machilakath Abdul Rahim, who killed a Saudi teenager in a 2006 accident, now looks set to be freed after friends and celebrities back his release

facebook sharing buttontwitter sharing buttonwhatsapp sharing buttonmessenger sharing buttonemail sharing buttonsharethis sharing button An Indian national convicted of killing the Saudi teenager he was paid to drive has escaped execution in the kingdom after Indians around the globe raised nearly $4 million to save him.

Machilakath Abdul Rahim, 44, had long held that he was innocent in the death of 15-year-old Anas al-Shahri, who had a rare health condition that left him paralysed from the neck down.

Rahim has been held in a Riyadh jail since 2006, spending one-third of his life caught up in an opaque system that rights groups say regularly mishandles cases involving foreigners.

2 attempts to appeal his case, including at Saudi Arabia's supreme court, had both hit dead ends.

But after years of mediation and a crowdfunding campaign, largely supported by natives of Rahim’s home state of Kerala, including a celebrity jeweller and a software start-up team, it appears that he will soon be free.

'Kerala has created a noble example of love to save a life' - Pinarayi Vijayan, Kerala's chief minister

Observers have said the news is also a triumph for Kerala, a unique state in southern India where half of the population are Muslims and Christians, and which has resisted the Hindu right-wing trend sweeping many northern Indian states.

The state’s political culture, now under attack from the right-wing, has been shaped by minority parties and various Marxist factions, high literacy rates, and expatriate remittances.

“Kerala has created a noble example of love to save a life and wipe the tears of a family,” the state’s chief minister, Pinarayi Vijayan, said on Facebook last week.

"It is a declaration that Kerala is a fortress of brotherhood, which communalism cannot destroy."

Fluke accident

Rahim arrived in Riyadh in November 2006 to work as a driver for the Al-Shahri family. His main responsibility was looking after Anas al-Shahri, who required machines to breathe and eat as a result of his condition.

One month into the job, the two were on a shopping trip when the teenager repeatedly asked Rahim to jump traffic lights, according to Najim Kochukalunk, a Riyadh-based reporter for Indian newspaper Madhyamam who has reported on the case for years.

While Rahim tried to appease Anas, he slightly touched his face which caused Anas’ breathing device to come off.

Rahim only realised what had happened when he found the boy's lifeless body on the seat and the breathing device on the floor.

A panicked Rahim called a distant relative, Mohammed Naseer, who was also working in Riyadh. Together, they concocted a story that robbers had attacked Rahim for money.

To make it plausible, Naseer tied Rahim to the seat and then called the police who soon realised they were lying and locked them up.

Expats to the rescue

Kochukalunk, the reporter in Riyadh, only met Rahim out of chance when he was visiting another inmate in the Malaz Prison in 2007.

“Another prisoner introduced himself as [Mohammed] Naseer and told me about a case in which he and his relative Rahim were involved,” the reporter told Middle East Eye.

“I couldn't get enough time to speak, so I wrote my phone number on paper and threw it at him.”

The slip of paper made it through 2 layers of security grills to Naseer, who later called Kochukalunk with Rahim and told him their story. His newspaper published a detailed account.

Despite the press it received, Rahim's case dragged on in Riyadh’s criminal court.

"The boy's mother testified in the court that she strongly believed Rahim killed him," Kochukalunk said. "In Saudi courts, the version of the victim's blood relatives carry more weight than other evidence."

In 2011, after more than 3 years imprisonment, the court handed Rahim the death penalty.

Ashraf Venghat, an activist from Kerala who is based in Riyadh and associated with the Kerala Muslim Cultural Centre, an expat charity and volunteer organisation, had been following Rahim's situation.

After Rahim received the death sentence, Venghat convened other expatriate organisations to form a legal team which also explored diplomatic intervention and mediation.

The newly formed committee hired a defence lawyer for Rahim who filed an appeal on his behalf. The appeal court upheld the criminal court's death penalty, but extended the period before Rahim was set to be executed.

Meanwhile, the legal team secured Naseer’s parole in 2016.

In Saudi Arabia, someone convicted of murder that was not premeditated can be released if the victim’s family agrees to forgive them, sometimes alongside a financial settlement.

So Rahim’s legal team attempted to mediate with Anas’ family, but these efforts stalled when Anas’ father died.

For years, the committee attempted to find other family members to continue the mediation. Meanwhile, Rahim's lawyers appealed his case at the Supreme Court which upheld the death penalty.

Time was running out. In October 2022, mediation resumed with the family demanding nearly $4m.

Last October, in the presence of Indian embassy officials, a final settlement was reached, and it was agreed that the money would be handed over this past Tuesday.

Fundraising drive

Now the race was on to raise the money in time. A new committee made of people from Rahim's home town of Feroke started a fundraising drive.

They had raised around $600,000 by the start of this month when Boby Chemmanur, the owner of gold-retail chain Chemmanur Jewellers, got involved.

Chemmanur is a well-known character celebrated by fan clubs in various Kerala expat communities who often share videos of his dancing.

He drives a gold-plated Rolls-Royce, wears clothing that closely resembles the traditional outfits worn by Syrian Christian women in Kerala, and hosted the Argentinian football legend Diego Maradona multiple times in Kerala who, in turn, posed in Chemmanur's jewellery advertisements.

Known to love a publicity stunt, Chemmanur hopped on board in the final weeks of the campaign, committing over $100,000 and hit the streets of Kerala with a begging bowl to collect money.

'I'm happy that those efforts were not wasted' - Ashraf Venghat, Kerala activist

The campaign was also pushed forward by a 3-man software start-up team, Spinecodes, who created a 'Save Abdul Rahim' app for Android and Apple phones so that people worldwide could donate funds.

When the target was achieved on 12 April, the whole of Kerala rejoiced.

Venghat is now in India, coordinating the details and moving papers to release the funds from the bank to the Indian embassy account in Riyadh. It is the end to a years-long battle.

Once paper work is finalised and the cash transfer confirmed, an Indian embassy official in Riyadh told MEE that Rahim is expected to be released in two or 3 months.

"We submitted mercy petitions to two kings and met multiple governors in Riyadh and Asir provinces and negotiated with many family members and lawyers,” Venghat told MEE.

“I'm happy that those efforts were not wasted.”

(source: middleeasteye.net)

YEMEN:

Nimisha Priya’s mother rushes to Yemen for daughter’s rescue----At present India does not have any diplomatic relations with the Yemeni government.

In a desperate attempt to save her daughter, Premakumari, the mother of Indian nurse Nimisha Priya who is facing capital punishment has reached Yemen. Premakumari with human rights activist Samuel Jerome, has landed to visit Nimisha Priya, in Jail. Hailing from Kerala, the nurse is facing the death sentence in Yemen for the murder of Talal Abdo Mahdi, a Yemeni national.

Premakumari’s journey to Yemen is Nimisha’s last hope after her exhausting legal battle with the Yemeni Supreme Court which finally rejected her appeal on November 13. Nimisha Priya’s case has gained widespread attention, particularly in India, where her family has been tirelessly campaigning for her release. This visit is aimed at negotiating with tribal leaders and the family of the deceased Yemeni citizen to save Nimisha.

Her mother, with the support of Advocate K.R. Subhash Chandran, approached the Delhi High Court seeking permission to travel to Yemen. The court urged the Indian government to decide on the matter within a week, noting the urgency of the situation as at present India does not have any diplomatic relations with the Yemeni government.

In 2017 Nimisha was found guilty of murdering Talal Abdo Mahdi, a Yemen citizen with the help of her colleague. She was also accused of chopping his body and then dumping it into the water tank of her house. Later, she was arrested while attempting to escape and received the death penalty from the court. After her trial in 2018, the court gave her the death penalty.

Reports suggest that Mahdi, trying to prevent Priya from leaving Yemen, confiscated her passport after their partnership for a clinic venture soured. Despite filing complaints against Mahdi and his subsequent arrest, Priya continued to face harassment. In a desperate attempt to retrieve her passport, she administered sedatives to Mahdi, leading to his accidental death from an overdose.

After several attempts, the court rejected all her pleas, meanwhile suggesting if the victim’s family agrees to pardon her it may be in exchange for blood money which is the compensation paid to the victim’s family.

(source: newindian.in)

IRAN----executions

2 Inmates Executed in Ghezel Hesar Prison for Drug Offenses

On April 21, 2024, officials at Ghezel Hesar Prison executed 2 inmates who had been convicted of drug offenses. At the time of writing, no official sources or domestic media outlets within the country have covered these executions.

According to data gathered by the Department of Statistics and Publication of Human Rights Activists, Ghezel Hesar Prison in Karaj witnessed the highest number of executions in 2023, with Zahedan Prison following closely behind.

(source: en-hrana.org)

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

Death Penalty in Iran Sees Spike, 9 Executed in a Day

The Islamic Republic of Iran has executed 9 prisoners amid a significant rise in the death penalty, Haalvsh human rights news agency reported.

According to the report, on Sunday, 5 prisoners, identified as Ahmadreza Miri, Shamsuddin Keshani, Shovkat Shahbakhsh, and Jamal Mardani, were executed in Kerman prison.

The identity of the 5th prisoner has not yet been reported.

Simultaneously, the sentences of 2 prisoners in Ghezelhesar prison, near Tehran, and two others in Chabahar prison were carried out.

These prisoners were placed in solitary confinement on Friday and were allowed to meet with their families for the final time.

While all these prisoners were incarcerated on drug-related charges, they had separate cases.

The trial process for those arrested on charges of transporting and selling drugs has been deemed unfair.

At least 1 prisoner among them consistently denied the accusations throughout his detention and court proceedings, maintaining that he was only the driver of the vehicle in which the substances were found.

In the past ten days, Iran has witnessed a surge in the execution of prisoners. However, these coincided with the conflict with Israel, diverting international attention away from the executions.

According to a report by Amnesty International, Iran has reached its highest level of death sentence execution in the last 8 years, with the judiciary of the Islamic Republic executing 853 people in 2023 alone.

The report indicates that 481 executions, more than 1/2 of the total, were related to drug crimes.

This marks an 89 % increase in the death penalty compared to 2022, when 255 people were executed for drug-related offenses, and a staggering 264 % increase compared to 2021, when 132 individuals faced execution for similar charges.

(source: iranwire.com)

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

Valiollah Bakhtavar 8th Afghan National Executed in 2024

Valiollah Bakhtavar, an Afghan national on death row for murder, was executed in Tabriz Central Prison. "He worked at a fruit stall and had got into an altercation with his boss because they didn’t pay him and that’s what led to the murder."

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, an Afghan man was executed in Tabriz Central Prison on 17 April. His identity has been established Valiollah Bakhtavar, a 33-year-old man from Bagram in Afghanistan. He was sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder.

An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Valiollah Bakhtavar was arrested for murder 3 years ago and sentenced to qisas. He worked at a fruit stall and had got into an altercation with his boss because they didn’t pay him and that’s what led to the murder.”

At the time of writing, 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 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.

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. Valiollah Bakhtavar is the 8th Afghan national executed in 2024.

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

Fariborz Dadgar Hanged 16 Years After Father’s Execution

Fariborz Dadgar, a man on death row for drug-related charges, was executed in Ahvaz Sepidar Prison. His father was executed for the same charges at the prison 16 years ago.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a man was executed in Ahvaz Sepidar Prison on 18 April. His identity has been established as 36-year-old Fariborz Dadgar from Mahshahr who was sentenced to death for drug-related charges by the Revolutionary Court.

An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Fariborz Dadgar was arrested for carrying 1.8 kilograms of methamphetamine (shisheh). He was a tiler prior to arrest and had one child. Fariborz’s father was executed for drug charges at the prison in 2008.”

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

Ehsan Dehghanipour who was executed in Khorramabad on 29 August 2023, was also the second generation to be executed for drug-related charges. His father was executed for the charges 10 years prior to his son.

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.

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

6 Baluch and a Kurd Executed for Drug Charges

7 men including 6 Baluch and a Kurd were executed for drug-related charges. 5 were executed in Kerman Central Prison and 2 in Chaharbahar Prison.

According to Haalvsh, 5 men were executed for drug-related charges in Kerman Central Prison on 20 April. 4 of the men have been named as 34-year-old Ahmadreza Miri from Zabol, 53-year-old Shamseddin Kashani, Shokat Shehbakhsh (Darkzehi) from the village of Chah Ahmad in Zahedan and 48-year-old Jamal Mardani from Miandoab.

The 5th man’s identity has not been reported.

2 other men were also executed for drug-related charges in Chabahar Prison that day. Their identities have been reported as 30-year-old Saeed Jadgal and Mohammad Anjamrooz, a 33-year-old Kurd.

At the time of writing, none of their executions have been reported by domestic media or officials in Iran.

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. Baluch minorities who constitute 2-6% of Iran’s population, made up 30% of drug executions in 2023.

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.

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

Afghan National Abdolbari Pashtu and Alireza Pourshahbaz Executed in Karaj

At least 2 men including an Afghan national were executed for drug-related charges in Ghezelhesar Prison. At least two murder death row prisoners are at risk of execution.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, 2 men were executed in Ghezelhesar Prison in Karaj on 21 April. Their identities have been established as Abdolbari Pashtu from Afghanistan and 38-year-old Alireza Pourshahbaz. They were sentenced to death for drug-related charges by the Revolutionary Court.

The two men were transferred for execution with another man named Ali Jafar Taheri whose execution was postponed due to unknown reasons.

At the time of writing, none of their executions have been reported by domestic media or officials in Iran.

2 murder death row prisoners were also transferred to solitary confinement in preparation for their executions on 21 April. Their identities have been established as Mohammad Nohtani and Yadollah Ajami. Their executions will be carried out in the next days if they cannot obtain extensions from the plaintiffs in their respective cases.

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. Baluch minorities who constitute 2-6% of Iran’s population, made up 30% of drug executions in 2023.

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.

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. Abdolbari Pashtu is the 9th Afghan national executed in 2024.

(source for all: iranhr.net)

APRIL 21, 2024:

NEW YORK:

Commentary: Good riddance to New York’s death penalty, but there’s more to be done----It's been 20 years since New York's capital punishment law was invalidated. But since the law is still on the books, it could one day be revived.

20 years ago, the New York Court of Appeals ruled in People v. LaValle that the sentencing provisions of the state’s 1995 death penalty statute violated the state constitution, thereby invalidating New York’s capital punishment law. Although now a literal dead letter, the 1995 law survives on the pages of the statute books. And bills are currently pending in the state Legislature (A03096/S01271, A03481) that would both expand the reach of the now moribund death-penalty law and attempt to correct its constitutional infirmity.

While the bills have garnered little support, as long as the vestigial law lingers on the books, a future Legislature could be enticed to enact a quick fix of the flawed sentencing provision and return capital punishment to the state.

The defunct 1995 law reflects a decades-old legislative judgment that capital punishment is a justifiable response to murder. Along with the moral and ethical concerns that the death penalty raises comes a litany of well-known administrative problems – not least of which is the risk that innocents will be executed. Other flaws that accompany the use of the death penalty are racial discrimination, arbitrary application and exorbitant fiscal cost.

People v. LaValle dealt with the fact that jurors in first-degree murder cases had been given two sentencing options under the statute: death or life imprisonment without parole. But there was a catch: The jurors were instructed that if they failed to come to unanimous agreement on either of those choices, the judge would sentence the offender to 20 to 25 years to life in prison.

As the Court of Appeals observed in 2004, because of this dubious “deadlock provision,” jurors could be induced to “impose the death penalty on a defendant whom they believed did not deserve it simply because they fear that the defendant … may be paroled in 20 years.”

Delaware’s recent experience with capital punishment has resembled New York’s. In 2016, the Delaware Supreme Court ruled the state’s death penalty law unconstitutional because it gave judges fact-finding authority in sentencing decisions that properly belonged to jurors. The invalidated statute was not formally repealed, and some legislators have advocated rectifying the sentencing problem and resuscitating the statute. To forestall such efforts, other legislators have introduced bills, now pending, to explicitly repeal the unconstitutional legislation.

New York lawmakers should initiate measures modeled after those seeking legislative repeal in Delaware. They should remove the 1995 death penalty law from New York’s penal code. At least one such bill has been submitted (A02111/S04098), although it would also eliminate life imprisonment without parole.

Formally repealing the 1995 death-penalty statute would be decisive affirmation that punishment by death is inconsistent with New York law and its citizens’ values.

Still, even today, New York is not entirely free of the death penalty. The U.S. Department of Justice is seeking Payton Gendron’s execution after charging him under federal law with carrying out a racially motivated shooting spree in Buffalo that claimed the lives of 10 Black people. These horrific crimes unquestionably demand condemnation and harsh punishment. But Gendron already has been sentenced to spend the rest of his life in prison with no possibility of parole after pleading guilty to the murders in a New York state court.

What more will be gained if the federal government succeeds in punishing Gendron with death? His sentence under state law ensures that he will die in prison. There is no danger that he will be released to commit additional crimes. The threat of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole should suffice to deter other prospective murderers from committing similar crimes — some of whom might, in their delusional thinking, seek martyrdom by dying at the hands of the state.

The only remaining justification for Gendron’s capital punishment is retribution — that by taking the lives of innocent others, he has forfeited his own right to life and deserves to die. The retributive impulse is a powerful emotional force. But if Gendron is executed, he will die by operation of a legal system that by design is dispassionate, and pursuant to a law that is administered in all of our names.

Having renounced capital punishment, New York no longer puts murderers like Gendron to death in the name of the people of this state. Many New Yorkers — not all, certainly, but a great many — look forward to the day when no executions, even if sanctioned by federal law, are carried out in their name.

(source: James Acker is a distinguished teaching professor emeritus in the School of Criminal Justice at the University at Albany----timesunion.com)

ALABAMA:

Anti-Death Penalty Advocates Urge U.N. Probe Into Alabama's Nitrogen Gas Execution----The groups claim that the state of Alabama and its officials violated international human rights laws banning torture and other forms of inhumane and degrading treatment.

Anti-death penalty advocates sent letters to the United Nations and the International Criminal Court last week, calling for an investigation into Alabama’s execution of Kenneth Smith by asphyxiation from nitrogen gas.

The letters were penned by Smith’s spiritual adviser, Jeff Hood, along with Project Hope to Abolish the Death Penalty, a group run by people on death row. They claim that the nitrogen execution, the 1st of its kind in the U.S., was an “act of torture” and that Alabama violated international human rights laws.

Smith, 58, was pronounced dead on Jan. 25 at 8:25 p.m. local time. According to the Associated Press, he “appeared to shake and writhe on the gurney" as he died, ”sometimes pulling on the restraints” for at least 2 minutes, followed by several minutes of heavy breathing.” Hood and others who witnessed the execution recounted similar details in their letters.

The letters pointed out that the state officials responsible for authorizing this method of execution need to be held accountable, but so do the individuals who carried out the actions. The letters name 4 staffers of the state’s correctional department and facility who carried out the execution and call for them to be prosecuted.

“I think that it begins with the four folks in that room. But it goes beyond that. It goes so much further beyond that,” Hood told HuffPost.

“I don’t see these four people as any different than any other bad actors in history. They are perpetuating injustice, they’re perpetuating murder, and they are perpetuating crimes against humanity,” he continued.

In 2018, Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey (R) signed a law authorizing nitrogen executions following a shortage of lethal injection drugs, and as a lawsuit filed by death row individuals challenged the constitutionality of lethal injection in the state.

The law made Alabama the third state in the country to allow nitrogen gas as a method of execution, but lethal injection remained the primary method for capital punishment, the Montgomery Advertiser reported.

Last week, the U.N. secretary-general sent out a call for accounts and responses about the death penalty to use in a report on the controversial practice at the next U.N. general assembly. Hood and PHADP submitted letters to the secretary-general, but also sent separate letters to the International Criminal Court asking for a probe into the death penalty in Alabama.

Smith was sentenced to life without parole in 1996, but a judge overruled the jury’s decision to spare him — a practice that is no longer legal — and condemned Smith to death. In November, Smith survived a botched execution by lethal injection, as had happened to several other death row prisoners in the state before him.

According to court documents, Smith was strapped to a gurney for more than four hours. Execution officials then unsuccessfully attempted to inject him with the drugs required for lethal injection, causing severe pain and breathing difficulty, according to a complaint from Smith’s lawyers.

“They were just sticking me over and over, going in the same hole like a freaking sewing machine,” Smith told NPR in December. “I was absolutely alone in a room full of people, and not one of them tried to help me at all — and I was crying out for help.”

The execution was called off later that night and Smith was left unable to walk or stand and traumatized by the botched execution, the complaint said. The state later selected him to be the first person executed with nitrogen gas. Smith told NPR he was “terrified” by the prospect.

The White House said that it was “troubled” by Smith’s nitrogen gas execution, and affirmed President Joe Biden’s opposition to the death penalty and support for Attorney General Merrick Garland’s moratorium on the practice.

But Hood believes that it is unlikely that the U.S. government will hold anyone accountable for Smith’s death.

“This sort of investigation is not going to happen in the United States. Governments are not going to do this,” Hood said. “But we believe that the international community has loudly stated, it’s wrong to get people to kill people who are unarmed, it’s wrong to gas people to death, it’s wrong to create systemic apparatuses of killing civilians.”

Hood acknowledged that the letters to the U.N. and International Criminal Court serve as a form of documentation, so that one day “when executions are no more … the international community will lead the charge to punish the actors that perpetuated it.”

(source: Huffington Post)

CALIFORNIA:

Opinion: Local DA’s effort to dismantle death sentences is misguided----District Attorney Jeff Rosen is free to disagree with courts’ decisions but his responsibilities are defined by the law

About 2,000 homicides were committed in Santa Clara County since 1978, but only 15 killers — the worst of the worst — are under sentence of death for the murders they committed over that period. District Attorney Jeff Rosen wants to dismantle those sentences. His reasons are incoherent, contrived and legally baseless.

Earlier this month, Rosen realized, apparently for the first time, that the death penalty is irreversible. In his view, this causes capital punishment to violate due process. The Supreme Courts of both the United States and California, however, have found otherwise. While Rosen is free to disagree with those decisions, his responsibilities to the public are properly defined not by his personal opinions but by the law as enacted by the voters and interpreted by the courts.

Rosen thinks it is unfair to maintain death sentences imposed by Santa Clara juries between 1978 and 2020 because for the last four years he has refused to seek that penalty against anyone, no matter how heinous their crimes. He believes “it offends equality under the law to have people serving a capital sentence when they would not receive such a sentence for the same conduct today.” Therefore, he argues, all murderers must now be spared in order to treat people who have committed similar crimes similarly.

But the dissimilar treatment Rosen laments is entirely of his own making. Giving the back of his hand since 2020 to a law he doesn’t like was his 1st mistake. That’s the one he should correct going forward, not compound by extending it to earlier verdicts.

Justice can be slow

Rosen also insists that the ever-slowing pace of resolution of capital cases requires upending every death sentence. This makes no sense. Some delay in capital litigation is necessary to ensure fairness, but excessive delay is mostly engineered for its own sake by death-sentenced prisoners and their lawyers. Stalls along the path to justice are unfortunate, if sometimes required; canceling the entire journey on account of their occurrence is beyond absurd.

The district attorney has tried to assure the public that prisoners whose death sentences he hopes to reduce will remain incarcerated without any possibility of release. But since 2020, the governor has granted clemency to 15 prisoners serving life sentences — supposedly without the possibility of parole — in order that they be paroled or at least be given a chance for parole.

Rosen has no reason to believe any of the murderers sentenced to death by Santa Clara juries are innocent, and he concedes that each may well deserve the punishment. Yet he seeks to undo the juries’ penalty verdicts and decades of tireless review by scores of state and federal judges because he has lost confidence in the reliability and fairness of the death penalty.

Claiming to be uncertain that those verdicts weren’t “attained without racial bias,” Rosen assumes that they were, surmising “that implicit bias and structural racism played some role.” But suspicions like those floated by Rosen could be confirmed or dispelled by following the procedures spelled out for that exact purpose in California’s Racial Justice Act. Rosen has not explained why he feels prisoners should bypass that provision or why anyone should to jump to the conclusion that racism infected the sentences imposed on all 15 of his county’s capital murderers — more than half of whom happen to be white.

Something else is going on here, and during a recent interview Rosen gave it up: “I just began to feel like we don’t have the moral authority as a society to execute someone.”

California voters, however, feel differently. They said as much when they adopted the state’s current death penalty law in 1978, again when they rejected a ballot measure to abolish that law in 2012, and yet again in 2016 when they not only rejected a second repeal measure but approved a competing one designed to fast-track capital cases.

In our democracy, it is the voters’ views, not prosecutors’ personal policy preferences, that have controlling moral and legal force. District attorneys are allowed — indeed, required — to evaluate the circumstances of individual cases with a view toward achieving justice. But they hold no power to summarily cancel the broader policy judgments entrusted to the citizens they have sworn to serve. Rosen needs to show a little humility and begin acting as if he understands that.

(source: Now retired, Ron Matthias was senior assistant attorney general and capital litigation coordinator from 2007 to 2019. He served as lead counsel for the state in many capital appeals, including that of William Dennis, whose pending death sentence is among those Rosen is seeking to have reduced----mercurynews.com)

OREGON:

Cruel AND Unusual?

On Monday, the Supreme Court will hear argument in an Eighth Amendment case, City of Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson. One thing I will be watching for is whether the justices in their questions treat "cruel and unusual" as two separate requirements, or as one.

Here are a few paragraphs from "Necessary AND Proper" and "Cruel AND Unusual": Hendiadys in the Constitution:

Read as a hendiadys, "cruel and unusual" would mean "unusually cruel." If "unusual" is taken as a term of art meaning "contrary to long usage," then the hendiadys would mean "innovatively cruel."

If "cruel and unusual" means "innovatively cruel," then there are no sequenced inquiries into whether a punishment is "cruel" and then "unusual." There is a single inquiry into innovation in cruelty. It is true that one could break this single inquiry into 2 analytical steps. First, is this punishment innovative? Second, does this punishment's innovation increase cruelty? Yet that is very different from the 2 steps associated with a 2-requirements view. Those who see the phrase as containing 2 requirements typically ask first whether a punishment is cruel and then whether it is unusual, treating the 2 as distinct and unrelated inquiries. But if the phrase is taken as a hendiadys, as an essential unity, then these 2 inquiries—is the punishment innovative? and does the innovation increase cruelty?—are not really distinct at all. One tells the interpreter to look for innovation; the other tells the interpreter what type of innovation to look for.

In short, if the phrase is taken as a hendiadys, the prohibited punishments would not be ones that merely happen to be both cruel and unusual. Rather, the Clause would prohibit punishments that are new in their cruelty. A new, more painful form of capital punishment; a new, more damaging mode of incarceration (perhaps such as solitary confinement); a new, more demeaning restriction on the freedom of movement of released offenders—all would be "innovatively cruel."

. . .

The fears expressed by the Anti-Federalists were not without foundation. Indeed, the st Congress prescribed the death penalty for anyone convicted of murder in a place under exclusive federal jurisdiction— adding, for the benefit of science and for greater deterrence, that the court could require "that the body of [the] offender . . . be delivered to a surgeon for dissection."

In other words, the concern behind the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause was about progress. But it was not Herbert Spencer's view of social progress as much as it was William Hogarth's view of the rake's progress. Times change and things can go downhill, and when they do, there needs to be something in the Constitution to resist the devolving standards of decency.

A slide into severe punishments was not, however, thought to be inevitable. Although there was little discussion of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause at the time of its ratification, what discussion there was shows a more subtle, 2-sided view of innovation: Legislators should be constrained from innovations that increase cruelty, but they should be encouraged to adopt innovations that ameliorate it. The reading given here exactly fits that 2-sided view: "Cruel and unusual" is a hendiadys that prohibits not all innovation in punishment, but only innovation that brings new cruelty.

2nd, this reading can lead to an inquiry that is better suited to judicial decision making. What makes this 2nd advantage possible is that a hendiadic reading of the phrase allows a broad, non-evaluative reading of "cruel." If "cruel" is taken as an evaluative term, judges are forced to make absolute judgments about what is or is not cruel. That is a difficult question. Of course some punishments are more cruel than others, but the point of difficulty is the constitutional cut-off. If punishments are being judged on whether they are cruel in a sense like "unjustifiably cruel" or "malevolently cruel"—then the question is an inescapably moral one, a question on which individual judgments are likely to vary widely. If the question is shifted to an inquiry into the subjective intentions and knowledge of government officials, that inquiry too is one on which individual judgments will diverge. Nor is the question made easier by directing it towards a moment in history, as in, "What was considered cruel in 1791?" That is still an abstract moral question, yet with the added difficulty of being a question the present is asking of the past.

But the judicial task changes if the phrase is read as a hendiadys and "cruel" is understood in the sense of "harsh." If what sorts the constitutional punishments from the unconstitutional ones is not whether they are "unjustifiably cruel," but whether they are "innovatively harsh," then the judicial inquiry is a comparative one. Judges would not be determining the quantum of cruelty that is constitutionally permissible, but they would instead be asking whether a punishment shows innovation in its harshness. This task is comparative, and such a task tends to be more amenable to judicial competence.

(source: Samual Bray; reason.com)

RUSSIA:

Could Moscow attack suspects face execution in Belarus?

After the deadly terrorist attack at Moscow's Crocus City Hall, some Russian politicians are debating trying the suspects in Belarus, which still has death penalty. But it's not that simple.

The terror attack on Moscow's Crocus City Hall has ignited debate about the reintroduction of the death sentence in Russia. Given that 140 people died and more than 500 were wounded at the concert hall on March 22, 2024, emotions are running high.

Bringing back capital punishment would mean changing the current constitution, which as of 1993 defined the practice as "an extraordinary measure until it is abolished by a federal law."

Shortly after, in 1997, the death sentence was suspended by moratorium under then President Boris Yeltsin.

As a potential workaround, Russian propagandists and politicians are proposing that suspected terrorists be transferred to Belarus, where the perpetrators could be executed following a guilty verdict.

Belarus is the only country in Europe and the former Soviet Union that still applies the death penalty.

More than 10 people were arrested in the wake of the attack, with four of them described as direct perpetrators by investigators.

In Russia, they face a minimum sentence of 15 years but potentially lifelong imprisonment.

'Public expectations'

The 1st to speak out in favor of the resurrecting the death sentence was Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairperson of Russia's Security Council, and former president.

Vladimir Vasilyev, chair of the ruling United Russia party in the State Duma, said the matter would be examined in the lower house of parliament and a decision would be made "in line with public expectations."

Senator Andrey Klishas also weighed on the debate, saying that even if the monutorium were lifted, it would still not be possible to impose the death penalty as terrorism doesn't fall into the category of exceptional cases allowed before the monutorium.

Suspect in Crocus City Attack sits on the bench in a Court in Russia, their face pixelated.Suspect in Crocus City Attack sits on the bench in a Court in Russia, their face pixelated.

State Duma member Maria Butina suggested transferring the suspected perpetrators over to Belarus. Belarus and Russia are linked in a "union state", she pointed out, meaning that Belarus has "the same right" to judge the defendants as the Russian Federation, as Belarusian citizens were also killed in the attack.

"The defendants believe they can escape the death penalty because of the moratorium in Russia. But we will see because negotiations are underway," Butina told state television broadcaster Belarus1.

So far, however, neither Russian nor Belarusian authorities have confirmed such talks.

Loss of control makes transfer unlikely

For a case to be heard in a Belarusian court, the investigation must be conducted by local officials. Maria Kolesova-Gudilina, head of the Belarusian Association of Human Rights Lawyers, doesn't believe Russian authorities would ever entrust Belarusians with such an important case as doing so would mean relinquishing control of the proceedings.

Moreover, such a trial would call into question the sovereignty of both states. "One would wonder whether Russia, as an independent and autonomous state, wouldn't be able to solve security and justice problems within its own borders," she said.

The legal agreement binding Russia and Belarus in a union does foresee cooperation in fighting terrorism, but it doesn't spell out a mechanism for the transfer of criminal cases between the two states. Since Belarusian nationals also died in the Moscow attack, Belarus could request extradition of the suspects.

But after the extradition, it would no longer be possible to prosecute those individuals in Russia.

Kolesova-Gudilina thinks extradition is unlikely because the attack took place in Russian territory and most victims were Russian citizens, she said, adding that Russia has also ratified the Chisinau Convention, which prohibits transferring someone if they risk the death penalty.

A woman places flowers in memory of the victims of the attack in MoscowA woman places flowers in memory of the victims of the attack in Moscow With public feelings so strong, it seems unlikely Russia would relinquish control to BelarusImage: AP Photo/picture alliance As such, if Belarus were to request extradition, it would have to assure Moscow that the defendants would not be executed and would only receive at most receive a life sentence.

Such cases have already taken place. In 2022, for example, Russia extradited Sergei Derbenev, a gang member to Belarus, where he was sentenced to 15 years in prison for the murder of several people. This was the maximum sentence that the Belarusian court could impose. As Derbenev had been extradited from Russia, the Belarusian General Prosecutor's Office had guaranteed that it would not demand the death penalty.

Maria Kolesova-Gudilina also believes that an illegal transfer of the alleged terrorists to Belarus is unlikely.

"Even if one assumes that they would simply be dropped off at the border with Belarus, the proceedings against them in Russia would have to be dropped. Given the highly explosive nature of this case, it is unlikely that authorities would agree to this."

(source: Deutsche Welle)

BELARUS:

Belarus approves death penalty for officials convicted of high treason

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko signed a law on Thursday allowing for the use of the death penalty against officials and army servicemen convicted of high treason, his office said.

Belarus, a close ally of Russia, is the only country in Europe that still applies the death penalty. It already exists for crimes such as murder or for acts of terrorism.

Executions are carried out with a single shot to the back of the head.

The new law is part of changes to the criminal code aimed at strengthening Belarus' fight against "crimes of an extremist (terrorist) and anti-state orientation".

Under another change approved by Lukashenko on Thursday, anybody found guilty of "discrediting" the Belarusian armed forces will face a jail term. Russia passed a similar law after invading neighbouring Ukraine just over a year ago.

Belarus has not sent its own troops into Ukraine, but it allowed Russia to use its territory as a launchpad for its operation in February 2022 and has since let Russian warplanes and drones use its airspace for attacks on Ukraine.

(source: Reuters)

IRELAND:

70 years since Limerick man was hung in last ever State execution in Ireland

THIS weekend marks the 70th anniversary of the last person to be executed by the State – Limerick man Michael Manning.

Manning was 25 when he was executed by hanging at Mountjoy Prison in Dublin on Tuesday April 20, 1954.

The Johnsgate native was the last male to receive the death penalty in Ireland, after his convicted of raping and murdering of Barrington’s Hospital nurse, Sister Katie (Catherine) Cooper, a native of Killimer, West Clare, on November 19, 1953.

Ms Cooper (64) was walking towards Limerick City from Castletroy around 9.30pm on the night when she was set upon by Manning.

The nurse’s body was discovered in a quarry on the Dublin Road.

Manning, who worked at Limerick Docks, had stuffed tufts of grass into her mouth to prevent her screaming for help.

Ms Cooper also sustained crushed ribs, cuts, and bruises to her head and face and lost 5 teeth in the violent struggle.

Manning said he had been drinking heavily on the day and was making his way home to his pregnant wife when he set eye on Ms Cooper.

Sister Cooper with her nursing team at Kidderminster Hospital in London.

After his arrest he told Gardaí: “I suddenly lost my head and jumped on the woman and remember no more until the lights of a car shone on me.”

He fled the scene but was arrested a few hours later.

Gardaí tracked him after he left a distinctive cowboy hat he was well known for wearing at the scene.

Rather unusually, Ms Cooper’s family supported an impassioned plea by Manning for clemency and not to be executed in a letter he wrote to then Minister for Justice Gerald Boland.

English hangman Albert Pierrepoint, who passed away aged 87 in 1992, and who executed an estimated 600 people in a 25-year career, executed Manning.

On Sunday, April 18, 1954, 2 days before his execution, Manning reportedly went to Mass, received holy communion, and played a game of handball with friends who visited him from Limerick.

His body was buried in an unmarked grave in a yard in Mountjoy Prison.

Incidentally, the last woman hanged in Ireland was a County Limerick native, 31-year-old Annie Walshe who was tried for the murder of her husband, Edward “Ned” Walshe. Ned’s nephew, Michael Talbot, was also hanged for his alleged part in the killing.

Walshe and Talbot were both found guilty and hanged in Mountjoy Prison on August 5, 1925.

Talbot went to the gallows first, followed by Walshe 45 minutes later.

The death penalty was abolished in 1964 except for anyone convicted of the murder of Gardaí, diplomats, and prison officers. The tariff was later abolished altogether in 1990 and expunged from the Constitution by a referendum in 2001.

Catherine Cooper’s rape and murder and Michael Manning’s conviction and execution are reconstructed in the book ‘Beneath Cannock’s Clock’ which was penned by the late Limerick author and journalist Dermot Walsh and published by Mercier Press.

(source: limerickpost.ie)

INDIA:

Karnataka Minister MB Patil on Neha Hiremath murder: Culprit deserves capital punishment

The awarding of capital punishment will help to avoid the recurrence of such incidents, Patil claimed.

Describing the girl student's murder in Hubballi as a heinous act, Karnataka Industries Minister MB Patil on Saturday opined that the culprit deserves capital punishment. Neha Hiremath, daughter of Congress Corporator Niranjan Hiremath, succumbed to multiple stab wounds inflicted by Fayaz, a former friend and classmate.

Responding to queries by press persons about the incident, MB Patil urged that the legal proceedings of the incident should be carried out on a fast-track basis. The minister said that the miscreants in such cases should be harshly punished without delay. He emphasised that legal proceedings of such cases should be carried out in fast-track courts to avoid delay.

The awarding of capital punishment will help to avoid the recurrence of such incidents, Patil claimed. The heinous act of a girl student's murder is highly condemnable and cannot be justified at all, the Minister remarked. Assuring that the state government would work for the punishment of the guilty in the incident, he urged that the central government and state governments should work in coordination to frame laws allowing capital punishment for the guilty in heinous crimes.

He added that there also should be a provision to award capital punishment for those who are found guilty in rape cases related to minors. Following the incident, the Bharatiya Janata Party raised questions over the safety of women in the state.

Responding to the accusations made by BJP, Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah said that the Hubballi campus murder occurred due to personal reasons. The CM added that the law and order situation in Karnataka is good and that it is their duty to maintain it.

"This is not a case of love jihad. I condemn the incident. We have arrested the culprit, the investigation is going on seriously and we will punish the culprit. We have taken care of law and order seriously to maintain peace and harmony. BJP is using this issue for politics, it is condemnable that a political party (BJP) is using the murder of a girl for political purposes," Siddaramaiah said.

(source: mid-day.com)

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

Bommai: Give Death Sentence To Perpetrators

(see: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hubballi/bommai-give-death-sentence-to-perpetrators/articleshow/109468525.cms)

JAPAN:

The long fight of a death row inmate for his acquittal

A man, sentenced to death in 1968, fights to obtain his acquittal. The review of his trial has begun.

Iwao Hakamata is 88 years old, 46 of which have been spent on death row with the fear of being hanged every morning. This ex-professional boxer was sentenced to death in 1968 on suspicion of a quadruple murder committed in 1966. His sentence was confirmed in 1980, but he finally obtained last year, after a 57-year fight, the review of his trial.

This is what has been playing out since last October at the Shizuoka court, southwest of Tokyo. The debates took place without any witnesses or investigators at the time. The prosecutors, very young, maintain with disconcerting aplomb that Iwao is guilty and must be executed. His lawyers demand his acquittal.

If the trial review takes place, it is thanks to the unwavering perseverance of the sister of this death row inmate, Hideko Hakamata, 91 years old. “The prosecutors refute our arguments, but we feel that they do so with painshe says. We have already crossed one, two or three mountains. It is thanks to you that we are here, to your support in this long trial, thank you all.”

Hideko Hakamata doesn’t give up, has incredible optimism, and is sure to exonerate her little brother, whom she has already managed to get out of prison so that he can live with her.

This affair has been going on for more than half a century. The legal procedures to obtain a trial review are atrociously long, inhumanely long. In fact, poor Iwao, like most death row inmates locked up for years or decades, has lost his mind. He is not aware of what is happening to him.

But he has 25 lawyers at his side to extract his acquittal from the judges and fight against the death penalty. One of them, Hideyo Ogawa, who has defended him for almost 40 years, will not be satisfied with an acquittal if necessary. He wants more for his client : “This time I became certain that the court would pronounce an acquittal. I am also convinced that we must fight to the end to have the illegality of the investigation methods recognized and to bring to light the reasons for that this case is a miscarriage of justice.”

There are 2 court sessions remaining before the verdict, which will fall during the summer. But this will undoubtedly not be the end of this Hakamata affair, in a Japan where already 4 other death row inmates have been exonerated at the last minute.

(source: actualnewsmagazine.com)

VIETNAM:

Corruption still seen as a concern in Vietnam despite death sentence

While this month’s death sentence in a multibillion-dollar Vietnamese fraud case may show the power of Hanoi’s antigraft campaign, interviews in recent days showed continuing concerns over political impunity in Vietnam and vulnerability and corruption in the country’s poorly paid public sector.

Meanwhile, two of those interviewed expressed doubts the sentence would actually be carried out.

On April 11, Truong My Lan, the 68-year-old chairwoman of real-estate firm Van Thinh Phat Holdings Group was given the death sentence for embezzling $12.5 billion, leading to damages that have now reached $27 billion, as well as well as 20 years each for bribery and violating banking regulations. She was also ordered by the court to return $27 billion to Saigon Commercial Bank, or SCB, for taking out bad loans over 11 years.

In 2012, Lan merged three banks into SCB. Although Vietnamese law prohibits anyone from owning more than 5% of the shares of any bank, prosecutors said that through proxies and thousands of shell companies Lan indirectly owned 91.5% of SCB.

Nguyen Hong Hai, senior lecturer at VinUniversity in Hanoi, said Lan's sentence shows the government's effort to impart a public message.

"We have to put it in the context of the ongoing blazing furnace anticorruption campaign launched by the Party in 2016," Hai told VOA on April 16.

"They want to send a clear message to the public that they really want to clean up society and they are determined to combat corruption."

A 38-year-old bank clerk in Ho Chi Minh City struck a similar chord in an April 17 written message, telling VOA that the verdict helps to restore faith in financial institutions.

"Lan and her people have used the banking system to take the money for their own purposes," he wrote in Vietnamese. "A quick verdict helped to gain back people's trust."

Corruption said likely widespread

However, Zachary Abuza, Southeast Asia expert and professor at the National War College in Washington, said corruption is likely widespread in Vietnam's banking sector and despite the sentences meted out, high-level officials escaped implication.

The country’s Communist Party "definitely circled the wagons and made sure that some lower-level party officials and regulators were held responsible, but it didn't go any higher," he told VOA on April 12.

"It definitely should have gone higher," he added.

During the trial, 85 individuals were punished in addition to Lan, with sentences ranging from probation to life imprisonment. Do Thi Nhan, the head banking inspector of the State Bank of Vietnam, was given a life sentence for accepting a $5.2 million bribe to cover up SCB's wrongdoing.

Hai in Hanoi said authorities are likely implicated in Lan's corrupt business practices and more officials may be revealed.

"In any corruption case, they are somehow involved with authorities and government officials particularly when it comes to a very huge corruption case like this one that involves real estate and the banking sector," Hai said.

"Maybe more investigations will be conducted. … The authorities have not yet said that it's the end of the case," he said.

Systemic bribery

Part of the cycle of corruption that led to Lan's scam is the low pay of public sector workers, making them vulnerable to bribery, said Nguyen Khac Giang, visiting fellow at Singapore's ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.

Giang told VOA on April 17 that the monthly salary for the government's top role of general secretary is approximately $1,000, mid-level officials make about $400, and those entering the public sector out of college do not make enough to live without accepting bribes or taking on side jobs.

"People who just start working for the state, they get about $150 a month," Giang said. "If you get this kind of salary you cannot survive in Hanoi or Ho Chi Minh City."

The government is trying to address the issue by increasing public sector salaries by 30% starting July this year. Although the move shows a "strong political will," Giang said he worries it will not be enough to stop entrenched corruption with salaries starting at such a low level.

"We have 2.5 million bureaucrats," he said. "There's a lot of people on the state payroll and basically when you have too many people and a very small cake it is impossible to give everyone the share that they wish to have."

Sentence may not be carried out

Meanwhile, it may be that Lan’s death sentence will not actually be carried out, even though its imposition signals a serious government attitude toward corruption.

Ha Huy Son, the director of the Ha Son Law Company in Hanoi told VOA April 11 that he expected appellate courts would commute Lan’s death sentence.

Lan’s death sentence "conveys the message that authorities are not lenient on economic crimes incurring consequential losses," he said, adding that Vietnamese courts "have made it a norm" that if embezzlement case defendants compensate more than three-fourths of the losses incurred, their sentences will be commuted.

In addition, he said. It can take up to 20 years for a death sentence to be carried out, and Lan is almost 70.

Le Quoc Quan, a dissident and lawyer living in exile in the U.S. state of Virginia predicted to VOA April 11 that Lan would not be put to death, saying that while the death sentence is needed "to placate public sentiment, which is boiling over corruption," it can "also serve as a bargaining chip to force Lan to compensate."

"Truong My Lan being alive and well is good for recovering losses. Dead Truong My Lan serves nothing," Quan said.

(source: voanews.com)

TAIWAN:

Tackling death penalty abolition

Taiwan’s Constitutional Court (TCC) will hold a hearing on the constitutionality of the death penalty on Tuesday. This is the 1st time in Taiwan’s history since its democratic transition that the Constitutional Court will be presented with a case on the constitutionality of the death penalty.

Since Taiwan transitioned from an authoritarian government under the National Assembly, the Republic of China’s Constitution has not been replaced, but rather its merits have been reinterpreted under a democratic government.

There have been only 3 times in the past that the Constitutional Court has heard cases related to the use of the death penalty under the framework of the Constitution. The 1st case was heard before Taiwan transitioned from an authoritarian government. The following 2 were held during the transition.

None of these cases exclusively addressed the constitutionality of the death penalty.

Abolition for transitioning countries is common. Recognizing the systematic use of the death penalty to control and marginalize populations was what guided countries like South Africa and Lithuania to call on their newly formed governments and judicial systems to abolish death sentences. Taiwan did not make this change during transition, which has left a path for the reconciliation of authoritarian crimes untouched until now.

The court will hear three issues regarding the constitutionality of the death penalty. The 1st is whether a death sentence in a petitioners’ case is unconstitutional under the criminal provisions. Wang Xin-fu, 72, the oldest man on death row, is the main petitioner, with all 36 other death row inmates as consolidated petitioners.

Not only will the court rule whether current death row inmates received an unconstitutional sentencing, but if under the Criminal Code (Subparagraph 1, Article 33) the death penalty is unconstitutional. If the court rules that the Criminal Code’s stipulation of the death penalty as a principal punishment is unconstitutional, the decision will effectively abolish the death penalty in Taiwan.

Additionally, the court will rule if past interpretations confirming the constitutionality of the death penalty for certain crimes — Judicial Yuan Interpretation Nos. 194 (1985), 263 (1990) and 476 (1999) — should be altered.

Regarding the upcoming hearing, Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty executive director Lin Hsin-yi said: “In 2000, when Taiwan’s political parties changed and the Democratic Progressive Party came to power, the gradual abolition of the death penalty began.

From 2006 to 2009, there was a 4-year suspension of the implementation of the death penalty. In 2009, under the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) rule, the 2 covenants on human rights were adopted and implemented under domestic law.

According to Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Taiwan should move towards abolishing the death penalty. The Ministry of Justice in 2010 also established the Task Force to Research the Gradual Abolition of the Death Penalty. The international community and the human rights community expect Taiwan to become the next country to abolish the death penalty.”

When the Constitutional Court hearing was announced to the public, the media disputed whether the decision to abolish the death penalty should be left to the judicial branch, citing the public’s general support for the death penalty.

Lin specified that “Taiwan’s legislative and executive branches have long used public opinion as an excuse to cover up their failure to implement the policy of gradual abolition of the death penalty. As legislators are unable to deal with the issue of the death penalty in detail, it is only right that Taiwan adopts a judicial approach to determine whether the death penalty should be maintained or abolished.”

Lin added: “What we should do now is to give the justices space. If the public has opinions about supporting or opposing the death penalty, they should clearly explain their reasons and submit opinions through amicus curiae or even write letters for discussion.”

Although the role of the justices is not to rule only in favor of public opinion, the assertion by society and media outlets that most Taiwanese support the death penalty is often misleading.

Currently, most opinion polls estimate that Taiwanese are in favor of the death penalty, projecting between 70 and 80 % support depending on the year and recent well-known cases. This figure tends to neglect the importance of asking polling questions that are not binary. When framed with more than a yes or no answer, polling reveals that only about 32 % of the population is strongly in favor of the death penalty.

From that same polling data, indicators show that the public’s knowledge of the death penalty in Taiwan is limited, with only 0.2 % of respondents able to answer 4 basic, factual questions on the death penalty.

For the upcoming hearing, it is important to ask: If the public is not ready to abolish the death penalty, why is the Constitutional Court ready to hear this case?

The most evident answer is that the judicial branch cannot execute anyone on death row when constitutional cases are pending. If the Ministry of Justice signed off on an execution at this moment, it would be seen as a violation of Taiwan’s implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. In fact, during January’s presidential election, the Ministry of Justice issued a press release asserting that the lack of executions in the past 3 years was due to ongoing applications by prisoners for legal remedies.

Nonetheless, it is critical to remember how much has changed in Taiwan since the early 2000s. Taiwan was the 1st country to legalize same-sex marriage in Asia as a result of constitutional interpretation No. 748 decided by the Constitutional Court. Current judges and lawyers in Taiwan were educated during Taiwan’s ongoing democratic era, presenting a striking difference from the previous judges who came from the martial law era.

With a new generation of legal thinkers, values towards punishment and human rights have shifted to fit Taiwan’s democracy.

Despite public concerns about abolition, for all the time it has taken for Taiwan to grapple with its past authoritarian rule, this has allowed society to invest in its commitment to democracy. The court’s decision could potentially signify the leaps it is willing to go through presently to incorporate internationally recognized human rights into domestic law.

(source: Maria Wilkinson is pursuing a master’s degree in international studies with a focus on international law at National Chengchi University. She is a researcher on the death penalty and Taiwan and occasionally writes articles relating to these issues----taipeitimes.com)

IRAN----executions

9 prisoners executed in a single day in Iran----9 prisoners of drug charges executed in the central prisons of Kerman, Chabahar and GhezelHesar

According to the Iranian Human Rights Society website, on Sunday, April 21st, 2024, 9 prisoners including, Baloch and Kurdish drug suspects executed in the central prisons of Kerman, Chah bahar, and GhezelHesar. The new wave of executions started about 2 weeks ago, and within a few days, at least 29 prisoners executed in Iranian prisons, most of them are drug suspects.

Execution in the central prison of Kerman at dawn on Sunday, April 21st, 2024, 5 prisoners of drug charges named Ahmadreza Miri, Shamsuddin Keshani, Shaukat Shah Bakhsh (Darkzahi), Mardani (first name is unknown) and 1 prisoner with an unknown identity in the central prison of Kerman executed.

According to HaalVash website, Ahmadreza Miri, 34 years old, a resident of Zabul, was the father of two children. Shamsuddin Keshani, 53 years old, married and the father of 2 children. 7 years ago, he arrested and sentenced to death in connection with drugs in Kerman. Another prisoner, Shaukat Shah Bakhsh (Darkzahi), a native and resident of a village in Zahedan city, was arrested in 2021 in connection with drugs and sentenced to death.

There was also a 48-year-old Kurdish prisoner named Mardani. On Friday, April 19, 2024, these prisoners transferred to the quarantine cell of Kerman Central Prison to execute the death sentence.

Execution in Chabahar Prison

On the same day, 2 prisoners named Saeed Jadgal and Mohammad (Mamjan) Amjadrouz, both drug suspects, executed in Chabahar Prison. Saeed Jadgal, 30 years old, married, from Plan located in Dashtiari city, married and had 2 children. The other prisoner Mohammad (Mamjan) Amjadrouz, 33 years old, married, with a child, a resident of Plan located in Dashtiari city. These 2 prisoners arrested 6 years ago in connection with drugs in Chabahar city and sentenced to death. They also transferred on Friday, April 19, to execute the death sentence.

Execution in GhezelHesar prison

On the morning of Sunday, April 21st, 2024, 2 prisoners named Alireza Shahbaz and Ali Jafar Taheri executed in GhezelHesar prison on drug-related charges. Alireza Shahbaz, 38, from Tehran, and Ali Jafar Taheri, from Delfan. Both married and had children. These prisoners transferred on Saturday, April 20, to execute the death sentence.

Javaid Rahman’s concern about human rights violations in Iran

Mr. Javaid Rahman has called for international pressure to stop executions and the violation of human rights laws by government leaders, citing the unfairness of court proceedings and the systematic use of torture in interrogations.

In his report, Rahman referred to the increase in the number of arrests, executions, and arbitrary killings by security forces. He also mentioned the government’s actions in suppressing dissenters.

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

7 prisoners transfrred for execution the death sentence in Iran

On Friday and Saturday, 7 prisoners transferred to solitary cells in Kerman and GhezelHesar prisons to execute the death sentence.

According to the Iranian Human Rights Society website, on Sunday, April 21st, 2024, on Friday, April 19, 2024, 4 Baloch prisoners and one Kurdish prisoner were transferred to solitary cells in Kerman prison to execute the death sentence. These prisoners had previously been sentenced to death in connection with drugs. The characteristics of the mentioned prisoners are:

Shamsuddin Keshani, 53 years old, married with a child, Ahmadreza Miri, 34 years old, the son of Mohammad, married with 2 children, from Zabul and living in Zahedan. Shahbakhsh, a resident of Zahedan, a Kurdish prisoner named Mardani, 48 years old. There is no information about the identity of the fourth Baloch prisoner.

According to reports, on Saturday 20th of April 2024, 2 prisoners transferred to solitary cells in GhezelHesar prison to execute the death sentence. These 2 prisoners sentenced to death for drug-related crimes.

The economic policies and the looting of the country’s funds by the heads of the government, which has led to poverty and unemployment of many people, is the main reason for the increase in criminal acts. In this way, the looting of the country’s national capital is directly related to the increase in crimes.

According to the resolutions approved in the United Nations General Assembly, the government of Iran has the highest number of executions in proportion to the population. Most of the trials conducted in Iran are outside the international standards and are unfair.

Historically, execution is a tool of dictators’ power and rule to intimidate and subjugate people. The dictatorship that ruling Iran for 40 years using executions to suffocate Iranian people and stabilize its rule permanently. Stopping execution and repression means the destruction of the current oppressive government.

(source for both: en.iranhrs.org)

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

3 Men Including Afghan National Executed in Karaj

Sadegh Tajik, Etminan Rad and Faramorz Tayeb Bakhsheh were executed for murdrer and rape charges in Ghezelhesar Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, 3 men including an Afghan national were executed in Karaj’s Ghezelhesar Prison on 17 April. Two of the men’s identities have been established as Sadegh Tajik, an Afghan national, and Etminan Rad. They were sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder. The 3rd man who was sentenced to death for rape charges has been identified as 34-year-old Faramorz Tayeb Bakhsheh (picture).

On 17 April, Rokna reported the execution of a prisoner for murder charges in Tehran. According to the report, he was accused of killing 3 members of a family in Tehran’s Baghe Feiz neighbourhood on 15 June 2019. The exact location of the execution was not specified in the report but it appears to be Etminan Rad.

The other 2 men’s executions have not been reported by state media or officials at the time of writing.

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 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.

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

6 Baluch and a Kurd Executed for Drug Charges

7 men including 6 Baluch and a Kurd were executed for drug-related charges. 5 were executed in Kerman Central Prison and two in Chaharbahar Prison.

According to Haalvsh, 5 men were executed for drug-related charges in Kerman Central Prison on 20 April. Four of the men have been named as 34-year-old Ahmadreza Miri from Zabol, 53-year-old Shamseddin Kashani, Shokat Shehbakhsh (Darkzehi) from the village of Chah Ahmad in Zahedan and 48-year-old Jamal Mardani from Miandoab.

The 5th man’s identity has not been reported.

2 other men were also executed for drug-related charges in Chabahar Prison that day. Their identities have been reported as 30-year-old Saeed Jadgal and Mohammad Anjamrooz, a 33-year-old Kurd.

At the time of writing, none of their executions have been reported by domestic media or officials in Iran.

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. Baluch minorities who constitute 2-6% of Iran’s population, made up 30% of drug executions in 2023.

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.

(source for both: iranhr.net)

APRIL 20, 2024:

TEXAS:

Houston man convicted of murdering toddler in 2001 to be removed from death row over intellectual disability----Tomas Gallo, 49, was convicted of capital murder in the death of 3-year-old Destiny Flores, who was sexually assaulted, bitten, bruised and thrown against the side of a bathtub, according to court records. Gallo now faces a life sentence with the possibility of parole after a Wednesday ruling by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

Tomas Gallo, the Houston man who was convicted of killing his girlfriend's 3-year-old daughter in 2001, will be removed from death row after the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals narrowly agreed with a lower court's determination that he is intellectually disabled and therefore ineligible to be executed.

In a 5-4 ruling issued Wednesday, the appellate justices affirmed a decision made a year ago by the 182nd Criminal District Court in Harris County, which determined that Gallo should be granted habeas corpus relief based on the claim about his mental capacity and also because his death sentence was influenced by false testimony from a doctor during his 2004 trial. The appeals court determined the latter issue to be moot.

Gallo's California-based death penalty attorney and prosecutors for the Harris County District Attorney's Office had agreed in 2023 that he met the current legal standards for being considered intellectually disabled and that the condition was present years before the death of Destiny Flores – who turned 3 on the day she was sexually assaulted, bitten and bruised in multiple places and had her head thrown against the side of a bathtub, with the latter injury causing her death, court records show.

"We've overjoyed that he's going to be removed from death row," Gallo's attorney, Richard Ellis, said Friday. "We're also very thankful that the Harris County District Attorney's Office recognized this injustice."

The DA's office declined to comment Friday on the appeals court ruling in favor of the 49-year-old Gallo, whose death sentence will be converted to a life sentence. And he will be eligible for parole because the punishment of life imprisonment without parole did not exist at the time Gallo was convicted of capital murder.

Ellis said his ultimate goal is to have Gallo exonerated of the crime, adding, "There are very serious questions about his innocence, which I intend to pursue now that he's off death row."

In a dissenting opinion issued by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge Kevin Yeary wrote the court should have accepted the false-evidence claim and granted Gallo a new sentencing hearing. He also wrote that the court erred in its determination about Gallo's mental capacity, citing the history of the case and arguing the court did not take "adequate account of the continually evolving standards for diagnosing intellectual disability."

Gallo's defense attorneys during his 2004 trial argued that he had a mental disability, but the claim was rejected by a jury, court records show. It also was rejected during a subsequent appeal to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, and Yeary wrote that an intellectual disability claim was not cited as a substantive issue when Gallo first applied for habeas corpus relief in 2007.

"(Gallo) has alleged neither new facts nor new law that demonstrate the truth of his free-standing claim of (intellectual disability)," Yeary also wrote. "The court should not allow itself to simply gloss over the distinction between a showing that a witness might have testified falsely about an issue and a showing that the correct resolution of the issue has been definitively demonstrated, one way or the other."

Ellis filed a subsequent application for habeas corpus relief in 2017, which led to this week's decision. The attorney said he obtained school and employment records that showed Gallo was in remedial classes from an early age and in adulthood held jobs that "did not require any intellectual sophistication at all."

Leading up to the 2023 agreement with prosecutors, Ellis said medical experts enlisted by him and the DA's office both determined Gallo to be intellectually disabled.

"Hopefully (the case) will lead to some more people getting off of death row for improper standards for determining their intellectual disability," Ellis said.

(source: Houston Public Media)

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

Why prosecutors still seek plea deals in major cases

Several major felony cases in Wichita County have recently been resolved without ever going before a judge and jury after the defendant agreed to take a plea bargain.

While this leads to convictions of those accused of committing crimes in the community, many defendants who agreed to plead rather than go to trial have received lighter sentences than they were otherwise facing.

This has led many residents of Wichita County to wonder if justice was truly served for the victims and their families and question why a plea bargain was offered in the first place.

In light of recent plea bargains for major violent defendants, Wichita County’s lead prosecutor addressed resident’s concerns and explained the purpose behind plea bargains in felony cases.

What is a plea bargain?

According to the Legal Information Institute of the Cornell Law School, a plea bargain is an agreement between the prosecution and the defendant in which the defendant agrees to plead guilty to the charges pending against them.

In exchange for essentially convicting themselves, a defendant is usually offered lesser criminal charges or a more lenient punishment for those charges. For example, in exchange for a plea of guilty, a prosecutor may agree to reduce a charge of murder to a lesser charge of manslaughter.

A plea deal saves a defendant thousands of dollars that would’ve been spent on a legal defense and eliminates the risk of receiving a harsher punishment, while the prosecution saves time and money by agreeing to a plea bargain.

Recent cases that avoided trial

In Wichita County, 2 pending murder cases were off the dockets in a matter of days after plea agreements were reached with the two defendants. On April 11, 2024, Paul Chandler, 22, of Wichita Falls, pleaded guilty to 2 counts of felony murder for the death of his girlfriend, who was 32 weeks pregnant, and the resulting death of the unborn child.

The plea agreement reduced the original charge from capital murder of multiple persons, which would have resulted in a sentence of either life in prison without parole or the death penalty. Chandler instead received 2 life sentences for which he will be eligible for parole.

Then, on April 15, 2024, Adrian Vetter, 22, of Wichita Falls, pleaded guilty to one count of felony murder for causing serious injuries to 10-month-old SJ Mitchell while he was under her care at her in-home daycare. Those injuries eventually lead to the death of the child.

Vetter’s plea agreement didn’t reduce the murder charge against her but instead reduced the time she’ll spend behind bars. She was sentenced to 50 years in prison, with parole eligibility coming after 25 years of time served.

“It’s not a perfect sentence, but it’s a good, solid sentence,” John Gillespie, Wichita County District Attorney said. “All things considered, I’m comfortable with the resolution. These cases, they do impact me, and I know they impact our community. We don’t treat any of these things lightly.”

Gillespie said the Wichita County District Attorney’s office is always working to assess the cases at hand to determine the best course of action to take in prosecuting them.

“I’ve always said it’s not a question of whether we’re going to plea bargain,” Gillespie said. “We have to plea bargain. The system would break down if we didn’t. The question is, what is the plea going to be at?”

Gillespie said there are multiple factors that are considered and potential trial risks that he looks to avoid while considering a plea bargain, and although the plea deals may not always be perfect, they may indeed bring the best result.

Possible complications with jury

One of the factors Gillespie said he considers as a potential risk when determining whether or not to take a case to trial is problems that may arise from the jury of 12 men and women chosen to determine the outcome.

According to Gillespie, the jury can be one of the most unpredictable elements of trialing a case.

“I understand that most people don’t have the background of knowing what juries may do,” Gillespie said. “We could talk for 30 minutes on weird things I’ve seen juries do.”

No matter how strong of a case is presented by the prosecution, the outcome of a trial is ultimately decided by the 12 members of the jury, who are tasked with deliberating and coming to a verdict after all of the evidence is presented in a trial.

“You can wind up with a hung jury,” Gillespie said. “You have to have a unanimous verdict.”

Gillespie said that in some cases, a jury cannot come to a unanimous verdict, leading the presiding judge to declare a mistrial. In other cases, he said the jury will reach a verdict on a lesser offense instead.

“You can end up with a compromised sentence, where you get capped at something like manslaughter, and you’re capped at 20 years maximum,” Gillespie said.

The variability of a jury in trying a case is something Gillespie has seen first-hand in multiple major trials in Wichita County, and depending on the facts of the case, it may end up being a risk that the district attorney’s office opts to avoid.

Chance for defendant to appeal

Another factor that could jeopardize the integrity of a conviction is a defendant’s right to appeal the decision. Gillespie said in a plea agreement, the defendant surrenders that right, meaning the trial court’s decision will stand.

“We get an appellate waiver, so there’s no chance for an appeal,” Gillespie said. “The community, I think, has seen with the Staley case what can go into an appeal and the high-stakes nature of an appeal.”

The appeal process in criminal cases is a lengthy one, with both the prosecution and the defense arguing why they believe the trial court’s decision should be either upheld or overturned. The appellate court will at times hear oral arguments from each side as well.

Once the case is submitted to the justices of the appeals court, they decide whether they will uphold, modify, or overturn the trial court’s conviction. The process typically takes several months, and often, can last for more than a year.

Gillespie said that Wichita County knows all too well what can happen if a conviction is overturned on appeal.

“The case can get reversed,” Gillespie said. “Like in the case of Justin Love, it gets reversed and has to be re-tried. Taking that risk into account is something I always try to do.”

In the case of a retrial, all of the evidence and testimony presented in the original trial will be presented to a new jury of 12 men and women. It often requires victims to testify once again, which can be traumatic for victims of violent crimes. Additionally, there’s no guarantee that the new jury will reach the same verdict as the previous jury.

In the case of a plea bargain, the risk of an appeal may be worth a reduced sentence for the defendant to prosecutors.

Tax burden of jury trial

Another group of citizens benefit from a pending case reaching a plea deal before it reaches a judge and a jury, even if they have no direct connection to the case itself.

When a case goes to trial, the defendant is prosecuted by the county’s district attorney, an elected official who represents the State of Texas during trial proceedings. This ultimately means the burden of financing a trial falls on the taxpayers of the county.

According to a study published by RAND in 2016, taxpayers in the United States since 2007 have spent over $50 billion annually on courts, prosecution and public defenses in cases.

The financial burden of a jury trial on taxpayers is a factor Gillespie considers in the plea bargaining process, and when he’s able to avoid the added expense, he said it’s a win for the citizens of Wichita County.

“You look at the fact that we saved the taxpayers the cost of a trial,” Gillespie said. “When you consider the expense of a trial, we went ahead, and that was a big motivation.”

Wishes of the victim’s family

A major concern raised by community members when murder defendants, like Chandler and Vetter, agree to plead guilty in exchange for reduced sentences is whether or not justice was truly served for the victims.

According to Gillespie, this is also among his concerns when considering a plea bargain in these cases. For that very reason, he said he makes every effort to take the thoughts and feelings of the families of the victims into account.

“It’s such a solemn thing to be involved in this process,” Gillespie said. “It’s something that I take very seriously.”

Gillespie said in the case of Chandler’s plea to a lesser offense, the mother of the victim was happy with the deal that was made.

“She was very supportive of this,” Gillespie said. “She just wanted closure and to make sure there was justice, and so she was supportive of that.”

Likewise, Gillespie said family members of SJ Mitchell were on board with the plea deal offered to Vetter before she was sentenced to reduced time behind bars.

“Both the mother and the maternal grandfather said, ‘That’s what we want to do. We want the certainty; we don’t want to go through this process.’ They wanted a sense of closure for that, and so I always try to take their thoughts into account,” Gillespie said.

When a plea deal can’t be reached

In certain cases, reaching a plea bargain is the best-case scenario for all parties involved. Of course, a plea deal is not reached in every case. Sometimes, even after considering all the potential risks of a trial, prosecutors will elect to bring a case before a judge and jury.

Gillespie said if he’s not able to reach a plea bargain he’s comfortable with, he and his office aren’t strangers to the courtroom.

“We let the evidence drive us in the decisions we make,” Gillespie said. “This community knows we’re certainly willing to roll up our sleeves and get in there and try cases.”

Gillespie said his office’s recent successes in the courtroom are part of the reason why he was able to reach a plea agreement in the Chandler and Vetter murder cases.

“The defense bar knows we’re willing to take these cases to trial and that we get good results at trial,” Gillespie said. “That strengthens our hand and is why we’re able to get these pleas at the maximum end of the spectrum.”

Several factors weigh into Gillespie’s decisions regarding plea bargains in pending felony cases, but ultimately, he said he has to be certain the punishment is sufficient to ensure justice is still served.

“It’s a heavy weight that I carry with me in trying to assess these cases,” Gillespie said. “We assess the case accurately, we’re taking into account the feelings of the family, we’re working with law enforcement to where we’re comfortable with what that is.”

(source: KFDX news)

NORTH CAROLINA:

Convicted murderer Mario Bennett is sentenced to life imprisonment after a Forsyth County jury rejects the death penalty in his case

Convicted murderer Mario Kennard Bennett was sentenced to 2 consecutive terms of life imprisonment Thursday after a jury recommended that sentence rather than the death penalty in Forsyth Superior Court.

The jury determined that the mitigating factors in Bennett’s case outweighed the aggravating factors.

Bennett, 36, showed no emotion as he looked at the courtroom clerk when she read the jury’s sentencing recommendation.

The jury deliberated for 1½ hours before reaching its sentencing recommendation for Bennett.

The same jury convicted Bennett last Thursday of 1st-degree murder and other offenses in the death of Shantika Lashae Dunlap, 30, Dec. 12, 2018. She was a mother of 4.

Dunlap was reported missing Dec. 13, 2018, and her body was found 2 days later in a dumpster.

An autopsy report indicated that Dunlap was suffocated to death.

Judge Todd Burke sentenced Bennett to serve 2 consecutive terms of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Burke imposed that sentence after the jury also convicted Bennett of being a violent habitual offender.

Throughout the 30-day trial, Bennett never testified in his case.

After the trial ended, James Dornfried, an assistant district attorney, said he and fellow prosecutor Elisabeth Dresel appreciated the jury’s service and respected their verdicts and sentencing recommendation.

Dornfried and Dresel were seeking the death penalty against Bennett.

“They put their lives on hold for 5 weeks,” Dornfried said of the jurors.

Keith Hanson, one of Bennett’s attorneys, reacted to his client’s sentence and convictions by saying, “Capital punishment and the death penalty don’t have any place in civilized society.”

The death penalty is archaic and barbaric, Hanson said.

“This jury just reflected the changing feelings of the community,” Hanson said.

When the prosecutors and defense had entered the courtroom early Thursday morning, prosecutors told Burke that there was a security concern related to Bennett.

On Wednesday night, a detention officer found that Bennett had broken the window in his cell in the Forsyth County Jail, and that there was a rope made from tied bed sheets hanging out of the window, Dresel said.

Burke asked Bennett’s attorneys, Hanson and Dan Anthony, if they had known about the incident. Hanson replied that this was the first he heard of it.

Burke then asked Hanson and Anthony if they wanted to talk to Bennett about the matter privately and gave them time before the session began.

‘Inevitable’

Dornfried delivered his closing argument to the jury with attacks to the Bennett’s attorneys 16 listed mitigating factors and a recounting of Bennett’s violent crimes.

Dornfried repeatedly described Bennett’s violent behavior as “inevitable,” with rhetorical questions to the jury about whether or not it was inevitable that Bennett would commit such acts such as kidnapping, rape, sodomy and assault as described in witness testimony during the trial.

Before attacking the defense’s mitigating factors, Dornfried described the aggravating circumstances presented by the state.

Dornfried said one of the victims who was strangled and sexually assaulted by Bennett is still traumatized.

“She still can’t say his name a decade later,” Dornfried said. “This wasn’t about sex, it was about violence.”

Dornfried also referenced the testimony from the clerk of court about how Bennett was indicted for the anal rape of a 4-year-old boy.

“Imagine that,” Dornfried said. “A four-year-old child. You have to be five to be in kindergarten. It’s difficult to say and think about but you need to do so. There is healing of the body, but not of the mind.”

Later in his argument, Dornfried attacked Bennett’s psychological diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder and reactive attachment disorder as having had no effect on Bennett on the day that the murder of Dunlap occurred, referencing the testimony of a man who had worked a job with Bennett who said he seemed normal that day.

A substantial number of the defense’s mitigating factors were centered on Bennett’s upbringing, defining it as chaotic, abusive and neglectful. Dornfried said there was insufficient evidence to categorize Bennett’s parents as abusive and that his mother Pamela was just doing her best when raising him as a single mom.

Dornfried said that no one had testified about Bennett receiving physical abuse from his father, Warren Bennett, and that there was no specific testimony about verbal abuse either.

“Were we in the same courtroom?” Dornfried asked in response to one of the listed factors that Bennett’s childhood had been marked by chaos. “Pamela was doing what was best for [Bennett], looking for another job and an independent school district. [Bennett] changed schools? How does that mitigate a brutal murder?”

In response to other factors that described Bennett as being “institutionalized” and as being the product of a broken system, Dornfried said that Bennett had been diagnosed with psychopathic behavior and that incarceration “brought out what was already inside of him.”

It was doubtful that Bennett being institutionalized at age 17 had everything to do with destroying any opportunity to contribute to society, Dornfried said, because being a child rapist “kind of narrows your ability to get a job.”

“Look upon him,” Dornfried said, pointing at Bennett from across the courtroom. “This is the most dangerous person you will ever encounter. What he has made of his life is an abomination.”

Dornfried told the jurors to consider the weight of others’ lives and safety when assessing whether Bennett’s life had value, citing testimony that while in prison Bennett had threatened a detention officer who then locked himself in a cell to avoid Bennett potentially assaulting him.

At the conclusion of his closing argument, Dornfried held a picture of Dunlap in front of the jury.

“(Bennett) took this beautiful woman and he turned her into this,” Dornfried said, holding up a photograph of Dunlap’s dead body.

“Try holding your breath for two minutes,” Dornfried said. “For minutes, she’s being brutalized by someone she doesn’t know, with a bag over her head. Imagine coming up for air when you’re swimming, and you’re gasping for air.”

For the next 2 minutes, the courtroom was silent as Dornfried stared at the clock on the wall.

“Look into your heart and then look at him,” Dornfried said. “There’s somebody who has no empathy, no remorse, no guilt. He does deserve the death penalty.”

“Inevitable can be stopped,” Dornfried concluded. “It stops with the death sentence. There will be no more inevitables. There will be no more Shantikas.”

‘Broken system'

When Bennett’s attorney, Keith Hanson, stood for his closing argument, he faced Dunlap’s family and began with an apology.

“Mario deserves to be punished for what he’s done,” Hanson said of the jury’s guilty verdict for Bennett. “He will die as a prisoner. Not only is it life without parole, it’s life without hope.”

Hanson said that the mitigating factors weren’t an excuse and that his goal was to explain and not condone.

Most of Hanson’s closing argument focused on the circumstances of Bennett’s childhood and early adulthood, which was spent with parents who Hanson said didn’t love Bennett.

Hanson said that Bennett’s PTSD was because of complex trauma from Bennett’s experiences running drugs for his brother’s friends at a young age and being sexually abused by them.

“His brothers’ friends were there to fill that void, but they were sexually abusing him,” Hanson said. “How many times do you think they weren’t caught doing that?”

Hanson also reminded the jury of when Bennett’s mother, Pamela Bennett, had taken the stand and he asked her with his first question to tell him something good about Bennett.

“I’m drawing a blank,” Pamela Bennett had responded earlier in the trial.

Hanson said he had asked Pamela Bennett to help him save her son’s life and that she had given him that answer. Hanson also showed Bennett’s mother a photo of Bennett when he graduated kindergarten holding a stuffed teddy bear.

“I asked her to describe what you see,” Hanson said. “She said he looks devious. Why does she hate this kid so much?”

Hanson displayed a record of Bennett’s school attendance from 1993 to 2004 to the jury, which showed that he was in a different school every year. Hanson said that Pamela Bennett withdrew her son from Quality Education Academy (QEA), which his father chose for him, during the middle of the year and during the middle of a school day.

Hanson added that Pamela Bennett had repeatedly requested for her son to be removed from being provided helpful reevaluation services after exceptionally poor test grades.

“He didn’t have a chance to say goodbye to his friends,” Hanson said. “How do you make friends and develop normal relationships?”

Bennett was also witness to an extremely dysfunctional relationship between his parents, which was full of physical abuse, Hanson said.

When Bennett was sent to prison at age 17, Hanson recounted how his mother had “withdrawn” from him and did not visit him or attempt to contact him while he was incarcerated.

“He is on his own, and that’s how it should be,” she said.

Hanson said that he struggles to understand how Bennett ever learned to love his parents in the midst of neglect, abuse and rejection.

In the latter part of his closing argument, Hanson told the jury that Bennett had endured brutal experiences in prison as a young adult that stunted his development.

At the Western Youth Institution in Morganton and the Polk Youth Center in Raleigh, Bennett experienced racism for the first time and had to ask for the meaning of racial slurs such that were used by white correctional officers, Hanson said.

Hanson also referenced how Bennett had sustained injuries in a prison weight room that were so severe that he had to be transported out of the prison for treatment the day before he turned 18.

“You get injuries like that by getting hit in the face with weights,” Hanson said. “There was no rehabilitation in these places.”

Hanson said that Bennett had become institutionalized in a “broken system” while he aged from 17 to 22 around correctional officers and other inmates, not around coaches or role models.

“Remember you live what you learn,” Hanson said. “Maybe what he needed was some therapy. Maybe that would’ve stopped this snowball instead of 6 years in hellholes. Now it’s the same broken system asking you all to kill him.”

Hanson concluded his argument by reminding the jury that the decision they were about to make would resonate with them for the rest of their lives.

“I see before me 12 law abiding citizens,” Hanson said. “Today you are going to sit down in a room and rationally discuss how to kill a human being.”

Hanson then read what would have been the potential death sentence for Bennett.

“I’d rather think of a different quote,” Hanson said after finishing his reading of the sentence. “Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that. Show everyone in this community, and your children, that love beats hate. Otherwise, it’s just more death.”

(source: Winston-Salem Jornal)

FLORIDA:

‘He said he didn’t want to do it anymore;” ex-wife and son testify in McDowell death penalty case----Ex-wife of convicted killer testifies

Testimony continued in the death penalty case of a Jacksonville man who pleaded guilty to murdering a Nassau County Sheriff’s deputy.

Patrick McDowell took the stand in his own defense, on Thursday. He apologized to the family of the late Deputy Joshua Moyers’ family, and admitted to the murder, saying he was a coward and selfish.

On Friday, McDowell’s defense team continued to call witnesses to testify on his behalf.

His childhood friend, Ross Duncan, appeared via Zoom and said Patrick’s stepfather and his uncle served on the police force together. He said he didn’t know him to ever have issues with alcohol or drugs, and he said he never got into any trouble.

Following that testimony, the jury heard from Shauna McDowell, Patrick’s ex-wife.

“He was kind,” Shauna said, describing her first impression of Patrick McDowell. He was in the Marine Corp when they met and later married. She said he was a great husband, and later, became a great father.

Shauna testified that McDowell had a good relationship with his step-father, who was a deputy. She added that McDowell told her about his mother’s mental health issues, saying she would cut herself sometimes. She believed that behavior had an impact on Patrick.

She also detailed McDowell’s change in behavior after returning from Iraq.

“He said he didn’t want to do it anymore,” Shauna said. “He wanted to come home.”

Shauna said once during a road trip from California to Jacksonville, McDowell was hallucinating and seeing things

“He nudged me and woke me up, and he said babe wake up,” Shauna said. “[He said] I just need you to talk to me because I’m seeing things.”

She said he had night terrors and would sometimes chew on his tongue in his sleep.

“He would have blood all over his mouth when he woke up,” Shauna said.

McDowell went to the VA to get help for his PTSD, but Shauna said the medication made him feel sick.

In 2010, Shauna gave birth to their son. She said McDowell went to work for a military contractor, Triple Canopy, in Iraq. Shauna said she didn’t want him to go, but they needed the money.

Once he returned from this deployment, Shauna said their relationship got worse. She said he was staying out late and they were arguing a lot. The two ended up getting a divorce and she moved to California.

In 2019, Shauna said McDowell’s current girlfriend’s mother reached out to her about the couple doing drugs. Shortly after this, she started asking for supervised visits with her son.

“I think bad influences and drugs,” Shauna said, when asked about the change in McDowell’s behavior.

Weeks before Deputy Moyers’ murder, Shauna and McDowell’s mother spoke with him via Facebook video messenger. Shauna said McDowell appeared to be on drugs.

“He looked sick, like he had been up all night,” Shauna said. “He hadn’t eaten in days. He had marks on his face, like scabs.”

At the time, he had a warrant out for his arrest for failing to appear in court for drug charges. Shauna said she and his mother were urging McDowell to turn himself in to police, saying this wasn’t a life to live. She said he refused.

Shauna and Patrick McDowell’s son also took the witness stand. He is now thirteen years old. We are not naming him due to his age.

McDowell’s son said he was aware that his father was charged with some very serious crimes. He said he has been in constant communication with his father since his imprisonment, and he enjoys talking with his father. The defense attorney asked McDowell’s son, if his father were to serve a life sentence, would he continue to have a relationship with him. His son responded ‘yes,’ and said he would even visit him in person.

Prosecutors did not ask McDowell’s son any questions.

McDowell’s defense team brought in 2 more witnesses before the lunch break. In total, between Thursday and Friday morning, they had twelve witnesses with more on the way in the afternoon.

Kenneth Mayhall testified via Zoom on Friday. He was McDowell’s childhood friend and they attended high school together.

“He was a good-hearted person,” Mayhall said. “He was never in trouble. He paid attention in school.”

The jury also heard from a retired U.S. Colonel who McDowell worked under. In a 2009 employee evaluation, he described McDowell as a “confident leader” with a “rock solid character.” He also touched on the high-risk, traumatic environment they were in while in Iraq.

(source: WOKV news)

ALABAMA:

Alabama legislature rejects bill allowing for resentencing of death row inmates

The Alabama House of Representatives rejected a bill on Wednesday that would allow the resentencing of death row inmates who were sentenced by a trial judge. The bill was defeated in Alabama’s House Judicial Committee by a 9-4 vote.

In 2016, the US Supreme Court issued an opinion on Hursts v. Florida finding, “The Sixth Amendment requires a jury, not a judge, to find each fact necessary to impose a sentence of death.” In 2017, Alabama passed AL SB16, which forbade judges from overriding a jury sentencing verdict in capital cases. However, neither the court decision nor the bill required the opportunity for death row inmates to be resentenced if they were sentenced by judicial override before the decision or the bill.

Because of this shortcoming, Representative Chris England introduced AL HB27 to the House on December 1, 2023. The bill aimed to allow the retroactive effect of SB16 for death row inmates sentenced before June 1, 2024. According to England, HB27 would apply to 33 death row inmates.

England expressed during the House Judicial Committee’s debate over HB27 that the Alabama legislature, as a whole with bipartisan support, decided as a matter of policy that judicial override for the death penalty is unjust. He stated that the bill only secures what Alabama already established as justice for the death row inmates who were sentenced before HB27. The Committee’s Chairman Jim Hill expressed disagreement, stating:

I understand that an individual tried today would be … subject to a different set of laws … But the individuals subject prior to the time … we changed the law were subject to those laws that were in effect at that time, and the law that was in effect at the time allowed judicial override, and these judges in their discretion overrode. Consequently, it is very difficult for me to second-guess or … override what the judge overrode.

The bill was ultimately defeated in a vote before the House Judicial Committee.

(source: Aabshar Ghassi, U. Pittsburgh School of Law, US; jurist.org)

TENNESSEE:

Why is the death penalty still used? Let's look at the pros and cons and then the facts

On a cold, wet November morning in 1972, Roger Bontems was marched to the guillotine for complicity in two murders, neither of which he committed. He had requested a little extra time to comb his hair before meeting his fate.

The spectacle and crack of the blade so haunted his attorney and future French justice minister, Robert Badinter, that he became a staunch champion of abolition. When the French parliament overwhelmingly outlawed the death penalty in 1981, he put his hand on the plaque commemorating Victor Hugo’s seat, also a strident abolitionist, and said “It is done.”

I recently heard a law professor argue that lethal injection was tantamount to water boarding and fraught with administrative problems. I was compelled to point out the elephant in the room. Why do we still administer the death penalty?

Apologists argue that it is valuable as a deterrent and essential for maintaining public safety. They may see it as a cheap alternative to a lifetime of imprisonment or as justice for taking another’s life. But are these legitimate arguments?

The death penalty is sought in only a fraction of murder cases, and it is often doled out capriciously.

The National Academy of Sciences concludes that its role as a deterrent is ambiguous.

In Tennessee, federally prosecuted capital trials where the death penalty is sought cost about 50% more than those where it is not, and 29% of these sentences are overturned on appeal.

The cost of seeking capital punishment is higher at every point in the process and in some states can multiply the cost as much as eight times. In Maryland, for example, between 1978 and 2008, taxpayers paid more than $37 million per prisoner executed.

With most states spending half of their budgets on education and health care alone, the opportunity cost of that money is great.

There is virtually no difference for public safety between life sentences and execution. It usually takes many years or even decades to bring someone to an execution stage. Even if the convict is ultimately released, the rate of violent crime recidivism drops significantly in older age.

Brain science tells us that our decision making is mostly the product of competing brain centers that have been trained by our experiences, so it is misguided having a criminal justice system motivated primarily by retribution - itself an atavistic instinctual response.

If 80% of all homicides in the U.S. are committed with guns and most of these crimes are committed with the types of guns that are designed to kill people - 25% of all gun deaths are from 9 mm handguns - then why not tightly regulate these types of guns?

Unfortunately, there is a human tendency for someone to double down on bad policy instead of admitting to themselves or others that they are wrong.

More guns and state-sanctioned killings do not represent any form of moral high ground and will never make us safer.

(source: Guest Column; William Culbert is a retired physician. He lives in Oak Ridge----oakridger.com)

IDAHO:

Idaho Murders Suspect Bryan Kohberger's Startling Alibi: He Was Driving to 'See the Moon and Stars'

Bryan Kohberger — the man accused of killing 4 University of Idaho students in November 2022 — claims that he's innocent and has an alibi for the night the brutal stabbings occurred.

According to a new court filing reviewed by NBC News and CNN, Kohberger, 29, claims he was driving outside of Moscow, Idaho, on the night of the murders.

His defense attorney claims in the filing that he was driving late at night "as he often did to hike and run and/or see the moon and stars," CNN reports.

During trial — which a date has not yet been set for — Kohberger's defense attorneys also say they plan to call an expert witness to the stand to attempt to corroborate the alibi by using Kohberger's cell phone data from the night of the murders, NBC News reports.

Kohberger — a former Ph.D criminology student — is charged with murdering Madison Mogen, 21, Kaylee Goncalves, 21, Xana Kernodle, 20, and Ethan Chapin, 20, at an off-campus residence in Moscow, Idaho, around 4 a.m. on November 13. Goncalves, Mogen and Kernodle were roommates and Chapin was dating Kernodle. Two additional roommates were home during the attack but were unharmed and ruled out as suspects.

Kohberger was a student at Washington State University and lived in Pullman, Wash., roughly eight miles away from the scene of the crime, at the time of the slayings. He has pleaded not guilty.

Kohberger was arrested in connection with the killings nearly 7 weeks later while he was in Pennsylvania visiting family for the holidays. Investigators allege they tied him to the killings by using DNA evidence found on a knife sheath left at the scene in the bed where Mogen and Goncalves were found deceased, according to a probable cause affidavit previously reviewed by PEOPLE.

While investigating Kohberger's previous cellphone pings, authorities also learned that the cell phone associated with him pinged in the area of the 1122 King Road home where the killings took place on at least 12 occasions prior to November 13, 2022, the affidavit alleges.

A motive for the killings has not yet been released. Limited information is being shared about the case due to a sweeping gag order that hinders officials involved with the case or attorney's for the families of the victims from talking to the public or media.

If convicted, Kohberger faces the death penalty.

In December 2023, the 3-story house where the quadruple homicide took place was demolished.

"This is a healing step and removes the physical structure where the crime that shook our community was committed," a previous statement from the University of Idaho reads.

"Sometimes it is hard to see beyond this tragedy," University of Idaho President Scott later added in the statement. "But the selfless acts, the deep engagement and loving support of our entire Vandal Family reminds me that there is so much good in the world. We will never forget Xana, Ethan, Madison and Kaylee, and I will do everything in my power to protect their dignity and respect their memory."

(source: Yahoo News)

ARIZONA:

State asks Supreme Court to reject new trial for Arizona death row inmate

State officials told the U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday that a lower court gave too much weight to mitigating factors when it ordered a new sentencing for Danny Lee Jones in a pair of brutal 1992 murders in Bullhead City.

But Jones’ attorney argued just the opposite. While conceding that Jones was guilty of “brutal crimes,” including the strangulation of a 7-year-old girl, the defense attorney said a lower court judge “serially nit-picked” evidence of Jones’ brain damage and abusive childhood to support the death sentence for him.

“You know, brutal crimes here. We acknowledge that, but there’s a lot of mitigation,” said Jean-Claude Andre, pointing to “long-standing childhood trauma, a lot of head injuries” and more that were not introduced until after Jones was convicted and sentenced.

But Deputy Solicitor General Jason Lewis said lower courts correctly balanced those factors against the brutality of Jones’ crime.

“In our view, the aggravating evidence is so compelling and the mitigating evidence that was developed in the federal evidentiary hearing is … is so slight,” Lewis told the court.

The case began in March 1992 when Jones and Robert Weaver were involved in a violent fight, after consuming large amounts of drugs and alcohol. During the fight, Jones beat Weaver to death with a baseball bat, then turned on Weaver’s grandmother and daughter, 7.

The girl was dead at the scene and the grandmother died months later of her injuries. Jones stole Weaver’s guns and the grandmother’s car and fled, according to state documents.

Jones was convicted in September 1993 on theft, attempted murder and 2 counts of 1st-degree murder and sentenced to death in December 1993.

But Jones later argued that his defense was flawed by an ineffective trial attorney, a public defender with just 3 years in practice and no experience handling capital cases.

Among other problems, the attorney failed to fully investigate Jones’ troubled past until after his conviction. It was only on appeal, after his sentencing, that the attorney presented fuller evidence of “mitigating factors” – elements balanced against aggravating factors to determine if a convicted criminal should get the death penalty.

The attorney subsequently presented evidence that Jones had received treatment for mood disorders, had attempted suicide, spent time in a mental institution, and suffered multiple neurochemical deficiencies.

“Not only do you have, again, actual diagnoses that are finally coming in 2006, that the sentencer didn’t hear in 1993, you also have additional facts that give rise to those various diagnoses,” Andre told the justices Wednesday. “So you have additional head injuries and you have a dramatically more significant history and pattern of abuse.”

That new evidence “would have dramatically changed the sentencing calculus both in the trial court and before the Arizona Supreme Court on its independent review,” Andre said. But a federal district judge disagreed, saying the aggravating factors still outweighed the new mitigating factors.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that ruling in 2021, later affirming its own ruling in 2022. That sparked the state’s appeal. Lewis said Wednesday that the circuit court “erred by failing to meaningfully consider the aggravating evidence or its weight.”

Justices appeared to struggle with the question of how much fact-finding an appeals court should do or whether that should be left entirely to trial courts. Chief Justice John Roberts at one point asked Lewis, “What do you want us to say that we haven’t said already?” to help guide lower courts.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor also asked Lewis why the state was asking the court to reverse the circuit court rather than simply vacating the lower court’s ruling and sending the case back for the appellate court to reconsider. Lewis said that the case has dragged on long enough.

“The circuit court has had this case for so long and has spent so much time granting relief on certain issues, reserving other ones, and then having it sent back continuously, it has to end at some point,” he said.

(source: Tucson Sentinel)

SOUTH AFRICA:

An ACDP govt promises safety, respect and a return of the death penalty if elected

The African Christian Democracy Party (ACDP) is underscoring its commitment to a safer South Africa for citizens and investors, with an emphasis on respect for all and a promise to bring back the death penalty to deal with the country’s high levels of crime, if the party is elected to govern after the May election.

ACDP leader Kenneth Meshoe spoke exclusively with Polity on Friday, and unpacked the party’s policies laid out in its 2024 election manifesto, as well as his resistance to enter into a coalition with the African National Congress (ANC) or the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF).

Discussing employment opportunities, he said for the country to be able to create jobs, security needed to be addressed. He said investors had to be assured of their safety to create an environment that was conducive to job creation.

He said investors must also be assured that their assets would not be “burnt down” as Meshoe said “South Africa is notorious for torching things” if citizens are unhappy.

Added to that, he said government policy must be stable and assuring for investors.

“We want business to do their work, their businesses, without government interference. When the climate is conducive for investment and job creation and investments come, we will be able to deal with the problems of joblessness. Because people will get jobs when people start investing,” Meshoe laid out.

In dealing with crime in the country, the ACDP promises to double the number of police and Meshoe expressed the need to reintroduce the death penalty.

“We are not ashamed to say that. Crime is out of hand, we will introduce anything that will help to reduce crime. We will ensure that criminals do not have the same rights as law-abiding citizens, as their victims. You become a criminal, you are found and evidence is there you committed the crime, you definitely will suffer consequences,” he stated.

Criminals were currently not afraid of the law, Meshoe said, and the ACDP wanted to turn that around by closing the gap in the ratio of police to citizens, by not overloading detectives with cases and by properly training and equipping detectives.

“In South Africa, unfortunately, the arm of the law is weak. And the ACDP wants to strengthen the arm of the law so that we can bite, so that criminals can start fearing the law. Criminals don’t fear, they challenge. That’s why they even rob police stations,” he said.

WHISTLEBLOWERS AND COALITIONS

Another priority to deal with crime and corruption was the incentivisation of whistleblowers.

Meshoe said an ACDP government would pay people for exposing corruption, adding that communities should be assured of their protection if they speak up against crimes witnessed.

He also had a warning for police who were supposedly paid to expose whistleblowers.

“Anybody, any policeman who exposes a whistleblower, we will have rules and regulations and laws that will govern how to deal with corruption. That will include punishment for those that are involved in corruption. There are policemen, corrupt police, that sell dockets and that expose whistleblowers. If you expose a whistleblower, there will be a sentence for you,” he warned.

Added to this, Meshoe said the ACDP would not enter into coalitions with parties that were corrupt.

He said corruption within the ANC and among Cabinet members was known, referencing the Zondo Commission of Inquiry into State Capture, which revealed the names of some government officials involved in corrupt activities.

“…the ANC does not want to deal with them. Some are still on the 2024 election list. So they are not serious about eradicating corruption. So when it comes to the ANC, the ACDP has said they have shown their true colours, and therefore the ACDP will not form a coalition with them. Secondly, the EFF have shown a disrespect not only to authority, [they have] shown a lack of respect to elders. ACDP still believes strongly in respect,” Meshoe stated.

As part of the Multiparty Charter, which could possibly form a coalition government if the ANC falls well below 50% of support in the upcoming election, the ACDP is happy to work with parties that won’t steal from the poor.

When asked about how the ACDP would enforce its own policies in a coalition government, Meshoe said nobody in the Multiparty Charter would be forced to change their values or policies.

“So, the Multiparty Charter, we will tell them what we believe in. The first acknowledgement is that we have different political philosophies, values and that we are not going to force anybody to change their values or polices. Everybody who is part of the Multiparty Charter knows that they are not going to lose their identity. We will remain the ACDP that was ACDP in 1994. Our policies do not change. But working together to bring services – we are willing to work together with those we know will not steal from the mouths of the poor,” he said.

ISRAEL, IMMIGRANTS AND NHI

When asked about why the ACDP wants to re-establish full diplomatic relations with Israel and move the South African Embassy to Jerusalem, if the party comes into power, Meshoe said “every country has a right to exist.” He noted that no government or organisation – referring to Iran and Hamas – had the right to say a country did not have the right to exist.

“We are saying we should not allow hatred to blind us. If there are problems, solve those problems diplomatically, but allow everybody to exist. If a country has to be removed from the face of the earth because of their mistakes, South Africa should be one of them. South Africa has oppressive laws. They care more about people outside the country, from the continent, than their own people. When their own people cry for assistance, it doesn’t come. They are told there is no money and yet there is money to give service from people who come from outside,” the ACDP leader stated.

He stressed that he was not “anti-people from outside”. He said he agreed that people should enter South Africa legally. It was illegal immigrants he took issue with, noting that South Africa’s border were too porous.

He said government did not even know the exact number of illegal immigrants in the country at the moment.

He claimed that illegal immigration had exacerbated the crime problem in South Africa, as unregistered persons commited crimes and could not be identified or arrested.

Meshoe said the illegal immigration issue would also seep into the healthcare space, if government’s proposed National Health Insurance (NHI) was passed.

He called the NHI “political electioneering”, saying it was unimplementable.

“How is government going to ensure that people will not come from as high as Somali, to come to free South African hospitals. Because of NHI everyone is going to be given free access. It is impossible. It is unworkable. There are qualified workers who are not employed. Where will they [government] get money to make NHI workable?” he asked.

There has been public outcry from various sectors, against the proposed NHI, with Meshoe pointing out that doctors and medical companies have threatened to take government to court if the NHI came to fruition.

2024 ELECTIONS

With a proliferation of new political parties entering the electoral fray, and many of the established parties campaigning hard to be given the mandate to govern, Meshoe said if South Africans wanted to live in security and safety, they should vote for the ACDP.

He said when considering the ACDP, voters should ask themselves whether the party was reliable and trustworthy and whether it had been involved in corruption.

“People must look at the ACDP’s track record when it comes to trust. Are they respectful to people? What is their policy on service delivery, how are they planning to give services to people? Those who want to live in security and in safety must vote for the ACDP because that is one of our strong areas A. good life for all will not be possible when people are not living in safety and the ACDP promises the safety that the current government is failing to implement . . . and to assure citizens, they will find it in the ACDP,” he promised.

(source: polity.org.za)

NIGERIA:

Why 3,504 inmates on death row haven’t been executed, says NCos

The Nigeria Correctional Service has revealed that in 2023, there were no executions of inmates on death row across the custodial centres.

Disclosing this on Friday, NCoS spokesperson, Abubakar Umar, also said as of April 15, 2024, a total of 3,504 inmates were on death row, comprising 73 females and 3,431 males.

The former Minister of Interior, Rauf Aregbesola, had on July 24, 2021, urged state governors to sign death warrants of inmates as a means of decongesting correctional facilities nationwide.

Also in December 2023, the NCoS said it had 3,413 inmates on death row across their facilities in the country.<>P> But speaking on Friday, Umar said, “The last execution was in 2016 in Edo State by the former governor, Adam Oshiomole.”

He stressed that while there had not been any execution in the past year, the option remained in the criminal justice system, pending the signing of death warrants by the executive.

He said, “The issue of the execution of death sentences is an international issue that is generating a lot of brouhaha. Presently, due to the advocacies of human rights groups and other civil society organisations, there is a moratorium on the execution of death sentences in Nigeria. Human rights groups are campaigning for the abolishment of the execution of death sentences around the world, and Nigeria is not an exception.

“There has been no inmate on death row that has been executed in the last year. However, that does not mean that the execution of death sentences has been expunged from our criminal justice system. It is still there in our statutes and books, but the executive must sign their death warrants before we can carry out executions, and this is not forthcoming in recent times.

“As of April 15, 2024, we have a total of 3,504 individuals in our facilities nationwide, consisting of 73 females and 3,431 males,” he explained.

According to him, rehabilitation and reformatory programmes were extended to these inmates, including skill empowerment and academic opportunities.

He said, “Just last Saturday, a good number of them graduated from the National Open University of Nigeria as graduates and postgraduate degree holders. Some of them, in the long run, actually change from their old ways and become well-behaved and industrious. Some of them who fall into this category are recommended by us for clemency or pardon.”

(source: punchng.com)

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

Court Imposes Death Penalty On Businessman, Accomplice For Armed Robbery, Murder

The Osun State High Court in Osogbo on Thursday, sentenced 34-year-old businessman Kola Adeyemi and 36-year-old battery charger Wasiu Afolayan to death by hanging.

The sentence was pronounced in connection with their involvement in an armed robbery and murder case that shocked the local community.

The prosecution, led by Bewaji Adeniji from the Ministry of Justice, presented a case against the 2 defendants.

The charges included four counts of conspiracy, armed robbery, and unlawful possession of arms, all of which are punishable under section 3(1) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act, Cap R.11, Laws of Federation of Nigeria, 2004.

Despite pleading not guilty, Adeyemi and Afolayan faced overwhelming evidence linking them to the heinous crimes.

Adeniji’s compelling argument detailed how, on December 7th, 2018, near C.A.C No. 16, Oke-Onitea Area, Osogbo, the duo orchestrated a brazen robbery, terrorising the community and resulting in tragic loss of life.

(source: platformtimes.com.ng)

INDIA:

State Witness Protests: Seeking Death Penalty for Neha Hiremath's Murderer

(see: https://newskarnataka.com/karnataka/belagavi/state-witness-protests-seeking-death-penalty-for-neha-hiremaths-murderer/19042024)

SOUTH KOREA:

Prosecutors also demanded the death penalty for Chosun (34), who caused 4 casualties in a stabbing rampage

Prosecutors also demanded the death penalty for Chosun (34), who caused 4 casualties in a stabbing rampage in Sillim-dong, Seoul in July last year.

According to the legal community on the 19th, the prosecution asked the court to make the ruling in the 2nd trial of Joseon, which was held at the Seoul High Court's Criminal Chamber 8.

"In the first trial, he claimed that he had no intention of killing the victims and only tried to injure them, but when he was sentenced to a heavier-than-expected sentence, the appeals court confessed that he intended to kill," the prosecution said. "He seems to have confessed shallowly late when he was sentenced to a heavy sentence of life imprisonment while trying to evade responsibility with a cowardly excuse that he had no intention of killing."

In the meantime, "The defendant said in the letter of apology, 'Please reduce the sentence even a little. Please pay attention to the fact that he wrote, 'Please help me reduce my sentence once.'

In his final statement, Joseon said, "I think I'm the problem, and I sinned to die. As a human being, he has committed too much of a crime. "I'm sorry," he said, taking out the paper he had prepared with a calm voice and reading it.

He said, "I am so sorry for the pain that those who died would have suffered. He said, "I've done something so terrible," and added, "I'll apologize to the victims for the rest of my life how on earth I did this wrong."

The lawyer also asked the court to consider mental and physical disorders based on the results of mental evaluation that short-term psychotic disorders such as delusions occurred at the time of the crime, saying, "I hope you know that there was never a definite intention for murder."

Joseon is accused of stabbing and killing a man (then 22 years old) several times with a weapon near Exit 4 of Sillim Station on Subway Line 2 in Gwanak-gu, Seoul, on July 21 last year. At that time, he attacked A and tried to kill 3 men in their 30s by swinging a weapon one after another inside the alley, but was arrested and charged with attempted murder.

In January this year, the 1st trial sentenced him to life imprisonment, saying, "He committed the crime in an extremely cruel and vicious way, and caused a great social impact, such as fear among the people who watched the video or heard the news." The prosecution also demanded the death penalty from Joseon in the 1st trial.

(source: ml.co.kr)

SAUDI ARABIA----execution

Saudi Arabia executes murderer; punishment for murdering Otaibah tribe woman

(see: https://keralakaumudi.com/en/news/news.php?id=1290121&u=saudi-arabia-executes-murderer-punishment-for-murdering-otaibah%C2%A0tribe-woman-1290121)

IRAN----executions

4 Afghan Nationals Executed in Mashhad for Drug Convictions

On April 18, 2024, 4 Afghan nationals were executed in Vakilabad Prison in Mashhad for drug-related offenses, according to Haal Vsh.

The individuals, identified as Zaman Taheri, Salam Taheri, Gholam Ghader Samani, and Ebrahim Nour-Zahi, were sentenced to death 4 years ago.

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)

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

Detention of 3 Kurdish civilians extended amid fears of death penalty

The Public and Revolutionary Prosecutor’s Office in Bukan, West Azerbaijan Province, has extended the temporary detention of Kurdish civilians Rauf Sheikh-Maroufi, Mohammad Faraji and Kamran Soltani for s more months.

The trio, who were previously charged with “spreading corruption on earth” (efsad-e fel arz) for their alleged “involvement in the murder of a security officer” during the anti-government Women, Life, Freedom uprising in Bukan, have been in detention for over a year.

The extension of their temporary detention, in light of the charge against them of ‘spreading corruption on earth’, which carries the possibility of the death penalty in Iran, has raised concerns that they may be sentenced to death.

Sheikh-Maroufi, Faraji and Soltani were arrested by security forces in Bukan during the protests on 26 December 2022, 22 February 2023 and 27 February 2023 respectively, and taken to the Ministry of Intelligence detention centre in Orumiyeh, West Azerbaijan Province.

The Ministry of Intelligence subjected the three individuals to torture in solitary confinement and pressured them to make forced confessions in connection with the charge of “involvement in the murder of a security officer” in Bukan.

Despite being subjected to severe physical and psychological torture, all three have steadfastly denied the charges.

At the end of the interrogation period on 10 June 2023, the 3 men were transferred to Bukan Prison, where they remain in pretrial detention pending further developments in their case.

They have been denied the right to choose their own lawyer, with a state-appointed lawyer assigned to them.

According to Article 286 of the Islamic Penal Code, “Anyone who extensively commits crimes against the physical integrity of individuals, crimes against domestic or foreign security, dissemination of falsehoods, disruption of the country’s economic system, arson, and destruction, etc., is considered a corrupter on earth.”

(source: kurdistanhumanrights.org)

APRIL 19, 2024:

TEXAS:

Breaking The Silence: An Exclusive Update From Kerry Max Cook on his 47- year Pursuit for Justice

“I’ll go back to death row and be executed innocent before I’ll plead guilty to a crime I didn’t commit.”

Those were the words of Kerry Max Cook to Smith County prosecutors in 1999 before his 4th capital murder trial in the brutal 1977 rape and murder of Linda Edwards, a 21-year-old Texas Eastern University employee. Kerry stood by these words through nearly 4 capital murder trials. Today, Kerry’s case sits before the highest criminal court in Texas— the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (TCCA).

Despite years of well-documented Smith County horrific police and prosecutorial misconduct and DNA found on the victim’s underwear which matches her estranged, married, 45-year-old ex-boyfriend, James Mayfield, Smith County, Texas prosecutors continued to fight against Kerry’s exoneration with a win-at-all-costs mentality & vengeance. This summer Kerry enters his 8th year waiting for a decision on Actual Innocence from the TCCA. If he is denied, Smith County prosecutors will then be free to decide whether to try Kerry for a FIFTH time.

I asked Kerry a few questions about his 47-year journey to prove his innocence and clear his name.

1). Kerry, what does it mean to be you?

“On July 18, 1978 – – the day Smith County Sheriff’s Deputies chained me up to transport me to Texas death row – – as I hugged my mom, dad and brother Doyle Wayne for the last time, I promised I wouldn’t give up until I’d cleared my name and their name, too. 47 years later, I’ve lost my hearing, I’ve had life-threatening open-heart surgery, and I suffer from the symptoms of unimageable Complex PTSD associated with lies and fabrications and the humiliations they’ve brought me publicly from courtroom to death row and beyond, but I’m still standing to my last breath to hold Smith County accountable and keep that promise. I was raised in a Christian household. The last thing my dad said to me was, ‘Don’t give up, son – – no matter what. God won’t let this happen.’ I believed that with all my heart.”

2). What are some of your biggest fears?

“My biggest fear is that I won’t be able to fulfill my promise because the misconduct that originally convicted me has only grown worse due to Smith County cronyism and nepotism. My mom, dad and Doyle Wayne are gone now, but my commitment to the promise remains.”

3). When you think about your past, what are some of your regrets?

“Running away from home and getting in trouble as a teenager. I was kicked out of school in the 10th grade. I arrived on death row as a high school dropout. I could read, but barely write. One of my biggest regrets is squandering the free education offered to me as a kid. I learned the hard way truth hunger is just as real as food hunger, and on death row wrongly convicted of a rape & murder I didn’t commit, at 22 years old I was starved to understand how I ended up in prison facing the executioner. From my death row cell, I got my GED, got myself certified as a paralegal so I could fight for myself, and had a 4.0 in college correspondence courses. An education gave me the chance I never otherwise would have had.”

4). How do you feel about the U.S. justice system?

“I was born and raised on U.S. Army bases overseas. My father was a decorated soldier who was awarded the Purple Heart during the Korean War. I’m part of a unique family of ‘Army brats.’ My wife is a Navy veteran of the Persian Gulf War. Everything I’m made of has been put through the cauldron of my military upbringing and instilled those values. I still believe in what my dad fought and almost died for. I believe that justice will prevail in my case, and that God is in control.”

5). What are some current developments in your case?

“I am almost in my 8th year of awaiting a final decision from the TCCA on a 2016 Writ of Habeas Corpus based on my “Actual Innocence.” At stake is whether my ordeal can end with a much-deserved Actual Innocence finding, or with simply another new trial — my 5th — and I am once again forced to run a Smith County, Texas, gauntlet all over.”

6). How important is media exposure to your case?

“Our legal system is broken. Saks Fifth Avenue justice for the well to do and Walmart justice for the poor. The only thing that’s kept me alive and leveled the playing field so far has been media exposure. I would have been executed a long time ago had it not been for a Dallas Morning News Reporter by the name of David Hanners. His investigative stories saved me from certain execution.

“In a media story published in April of 2017 called ‘The Trouble with Innocence,’ Texas Monthly reporter Michael Hall asked a revered former TCCA judge named Cathy Cochran about firing my Innocence Project lawyer in 2016 for making a deal I did everything I could to stop because the finer points of his private arrangement with dirty Smith County prosecutors crippled my ability to pursue a claim of Actual Innocence and it allowed prosecutors and police off the hook for decades of their roles in suborning perjuries, fabrications, witness-tampering, evidence tampering – – a host of other misconduct – – responsible for framing me for a crime I didn’t commit. It was an underhanded arrangement in IPOT’s interest and against mine.

Judge Cochran replied,

“Is anyone surprised that an innocent man, left to rot in prison for years, told to plead no contest to get out, who wants to be exonerated and take the prosecutors who put him in prison to task, who then has lawyers who know better and who make a deal with the very people he wants to excoriate— is anyone surprised when he loses it?”

7). If you could speak to that TCCA, what would you say?

“To the Court today I would say, while you’ve not always believed in me (affirming my wrongful conviction in 1987), I still believe in you.”

Kerry is represented by lawyers Glenn Garber and Rebecca Freedman of the New York Exoneration Initiative and Texas lawyer Keith Hampton. They are pursuing the fight for Kerry’s Actual Innocence before the TCCA that is missing from the record of his last 2016 court appearance.

John Grisham said of Kerry’s story, “If it were fiction, no one would believe it.” Now John Grisham is writing about Kerry’s story in a new, non-fiction book written with Jim McCloskey, founder of Centurion, the first nonprofit organization in the world dedicated to freeing individuals who are wrongfully incarcerated. The book, ‘Framed: Astonishing True Stories of Wrongful Convictions’ will also feature the true stories of nine others who were wrongfully convicted. The book will be released on October 8, 2024, and is available for pre-order now through various retailers. https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/742610/framed-by-john-grisham-and-jim-mccloskey/

Meanwhile, you can read Kerry’s story in his own words. You can purchase a digital copy of Kerry’s book, ‘Chasing Justice: My Story of Freeing Myself After Two Decades on Death Row for a Crime I Didn’t Commit’ by sending $25.00 to http://PayPal.me/kerrymaxcook2016 (http://paypal.me/kerrymaxcook2016)

(source: limitless-magazine.com)

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

She Was Set to Be Executed in Daughter's Death. Now Prosecutors and Judge Say It Was Accident, Not Murder----Melissa Elizabeth Lucio has been on death row since 2008 after being convicted of murdering her 2-year-old daughter

A Texas judge reviewing a mother’s death penalty case says evidence was suppressed at her trial that suggests the convicted woman's toddler daughter died in a tragic accident and not by her own hand.

Melissa Elizabeth Lucio has been on death row for 15 years, but the judge who oversaw her trial, as well as prosecutors and her defense lawyers, now all agree: the mother of 12 children does not belong there.

Signing a 33-page court document — obtained by PEOPLE — listing agreed-upon findings between the parties, Senior Judge Arturo Nelson said Lucio's conviction and death sentence should be overturned and ordered the court filings sent to Texas’s Court of Criminal Appeals.

A spokesperson for the Innocence Project, which has taken on Lucio's case, tells PEOPLE there is no timeline for the appeals court to issue its decision.

On Feb. 17, 2007, paramedics arrived at the family’s Brownsville, Texas, home because Lucio's 2-year-old daughter, Mariah Alvarez, was “turning purple and unresponsive,” per the filing.

Prosecutors later claimed Mariah died from head trauma caused by child abuse.

In July 2008 Lucio was convicted of capital murder in her daughter’s death and placed on death row a month later, per court documents and her online death row information.

But the legal parties and judge agree that important evidence was suppressed at her trial, including a Child Protective Services report detailing interviews with 5 of Lucio's children, per the new court filing.

Shortly after Mariah’s death, the girl's brother, Bobby Alvarez, then 7, said he had seen Mariah fall “down some stairs” two days earlier, per that suppressed report quoted in the filing. The boy also said “he has never seen anyone hit Mariah.”

Such evidence was important when considering Mariah’s cause of death, per the new court filing.

“That suppressed evidence informs a medical diagnosis consistent with Applicant’s defense: that Mariah died as the result of accidental trauma,” the filing states.

Want to keep up with the latest crime coverage? Sign up for PEOPLE's free True Crime newsletter for breaking crime news, ongoing trial coverage and details of intriguing unsolved cases.

This week, Bobby Alvarez, now an adult, released a joint statement with family regarding the judge’s decision.

“Important evidence that our sister Mariah’s death was an accident, not a murder, was never presented to the jury,” the family said, adding they hope “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.”

Lucio was originally slated for execution April 27, 2022, but her case was stayed just days before she was put to death based on a set of claims including suppression of material evidence now at the center of the appeals case.

Prior to her planned execution, 5 jurors came forward asking to halt Lucio's execution or give her a new trial.

“I am now convinced that the jury got it wrong and I know that there is too much doubt to execute Lucio,” one of the jurors, Johnny Galvan Jr., wrote in an op-ed in the Houston Chronicle. “If I could take back my vote, I would.”

A new date for execution has not been set, the Innocence Project tells PEOPLE.

Lucio, who had worked as a janitor, did not have a prison record prior to her daughter’s death, per her online death row information.

She had a history of being a victim of sexual abuse, going back to age 6, the Innocence Project claims. The organization noted that Lucio's long history of sexual abuse made her more susceptible to what the Innocence Project alleged was police’s “coercive methods” during an intense interrogation, which began within 2 hours of her daughter’s death.

5 death row inmates have been executed in the U.S. so far this year, 1 of them in Texas, per the Death Penalty Information Center, which tracks every case.

Lucio is 1 of 7 women in Texas currently on death row, per the Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s online death row inmate roster.

(source: people.com)

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

Death row inmates in Texas no longer get a last meal because of one man's very specific request----The wild choice of one inmate ended the 87-year tradition in Texas prisons

One of the last things many people on death row have control over is the last meal they eat - but in Texas, they don't even have that.

The tradition to allow people scheduled for execution to choose their last meal is one held in a lot of places that still have the death penalty.

The stipulation has resulted in killers like Brian Dorsey indulging in meals like his two cheeseburgers, two large French fries, two orders of chicken strips and a sausage, pepperoni, onion, mushrooms and extra cheese pizza.

But in Texas, inmates facing their last days on Earth aren't able to push the boat out with their final meal, and it's all because of one man.

The state banned last meals in 2011 following the execution of Lawrence Russell Brewer, a white supremacist who was jailed along with three other men for murdering James Byrd Jr. in 1998.

Brewer and his accomplice, John King, were the first white men to receive the death penalty for killing a Black man in modern Texas; a case which caused the state to introduce new laws around hate crimes.

As was tradition at the time, prison guards asked Brewer what he'd like to eat for his last meal - and he didn't waste the opportunity.

According to a report from Jacksonville.com, Brewer asked for practically enough food to make a buffet, including two chicken fried steaks, a triple-meat bacon cheeseburger, fried okra, a pound of barbecue, three fajitas and a meat lover's pizza.

He didn't stop there, as the inmate also asked for some sweet treats to round off the meal, including a pint of ice cream and a slab of peanut butter fudge with crushed peanuts.

The prison delivered on his request - but then revealed that Brewer didn't eat any of it, instead claiming he wasn't hungry.

Brewer's refusal sparked frustration from Texas senator John Whitmire, who wrote a letter to the executive director of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice to say: "It is extremely inappropriate to give a person sentenced to death such a privilege."

The director agreed the senator's concerns were valid, and thus ended the 87-year tradition of allowing death row inmates in Texas to choose their last meal.

"Effective immediately, no such accommodations will be made," he said. "They will receive the same meal served to other offenders on the unit."

Whitmire told The Associated Press at the time the decision was 'long overdue'.

(source: unilad.com)

ALABAMA----impending execution

Stay of Execution Sought after Discovery of New Evidence that Prosecutors Falsified Case Against Jamie Mills

Lawsuits have been filed in state and federal court after the State of Alabama has scheduled the execution of Jamie Mills for May 30, 2024. New evidence has been discovered that State prosecutors obtained his conviction illegally by falsely telling the judge and jury that they had not made a deal to secure the testimony of its star witness.

In 2005, Jamie Mills, along with two other suspects—his wife JoAnn Mills and a known local drug dealer, Benjie Howe—were arrested and charged with capital murder in the deaths of Floyd and Vera Hill. Benjie Howe was in possession of one victim’s medicine and a large amount of cash when he was arrested. Jamie and JoAnn Mills were arrested after physical evidence from the crime, including the murder weapons, were found in the trunk of their car.

JoAnn Mills told police in two different statements that she suspected Benjie Howe had planted the weapons in their car, and that Mr. Howe had brought stolen items to their home in the past. Her statements were corroborated by police accounts that, in the weeks preceding the murder, officers saw Mr. Howe frequenting the Mills’ home where the murder weapons were found and evidence that the trunk of the Mills’ car had no lock and could easily be opened.

It was only after police threatened JoAnn’s children and falsely claimed that DNA evidence on the murder weapons matched Jamie Mills’ that she gave a third statement which was new and different, this time implicating Jamie Mills.

New evidence has emerged that the District Attorney had a secret deal with JoAnn Mills that if she testified against Jamie Mills, consistent with this third statement, the State would drop the pending capital murder charges against her and allow her to plead to a sentence with the possibility of parole, sparing her both the death penalty and life imprisonment.

Despite the fact that there was an agreement between JoAnn and the prosecutor, the jury was told the opposite at Jamie Mills’ trial. At the outset of JoAnn Mills’ testimony, the District Attorney affirmatively elicited a denial of any plea deal:

District Attorney: And are you doing this of your own free will?

JoAnn Mills: Yes, sir.

District Attorney: Have there been any deals or offers or anything like that made to you?

JoAnn Mills: No, sir.

Mr. Mills’ defense counsel also questioned the District Attorney “on the record” about the existence of a plea offer or any inducement. The District Attorney responded:

Prosecutor: There is not.

Defense: Not a promise, not a maybe, not a nudge, not a wink, because we think it stretches the bounds of credibility that her lawyer would let her testify as she did without such an Inducement.

Prosecutor: There is none.

Defense: None?

Prosecutor: Have not made her any promises, nothing.

Defense: Have you suggested that a promise might be made after she testifies truthfully?

Prosecutor: No.

Defense: No inducement whatsoever?

Prosecutor: No.

Instead, the District Attorney told the jury the case came down to Mr. Mills’ word against Mrs. Mills’, and that the jury could find JoAnn Mills more believable given she had nothing to gain while Jamie Mills had everything to lose.

Over the course of the last 17 years, Mr. Mills has asked the State to reveal evidence of their deal with JoAnn Mills on 15 separate occasions, and each time, the State has denied the existence of any such deal.

However, new evidence from JoAnn Mills’ lawyer, Tony Glenn, now establishes that the State falsely told the jury, trial judge, defense counsel, and every state and federal court that JoAnn Mills had nothing to gain from testifying against Mr. Mills.

Based on this new evidence, Mr. Mills filed a motion in federal court on April 5, 2024, requesting that the court reopen his appeal.

The State continues to deny the existence of a deal in their response and has urged the federal court to dismiss Mr. Mills’ motion and allow the State to move forward with his execution without reviewing this critical issue, and with no consequences for the State’s blatant misconduct.

When new evidence raises serious questions about whether a person has been wrongly convicted and illegally sentenced to death, courts have a responsibility to evaluate the evidence and give the legal arguments full consideration. Failing to do so undermines our system of justice.

More than half of wrongful convictions can be traced to witnesses who lied in court or made false accusations. False testimony by jailhouse informants is especially common in death penalty cases. The consequences of prosecutors’ failure to disclose prosecutorial misconduct like the misconduct that took place in Mr. Mills’ case are striking. Since 1988, data from the National Registry of Exonerations shows that, since 1988, 987 people were wrongly convicted because of official misconduct by prosecutors, including perjury or false reports by police and other witnesses. The exonerees in these cases spent an average of 12 years each in prison.

The consequences of misconduct in death penalty cases can be irrevocable. Alabama sentences more people to die than any other state and has one of the highest execution rates per capita in the country. With 73 executions and nine exonerations since 1976, Alabama has a shocking rate of error: for every eight people executed, one has been exonerated.

(source: Equal Justice Initiative)

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

Alabama court authorizes death penalty for killer of a delivery driver

The Alabama Supreme Court has authorized the execution of a man convicted of killing a delivery driver who stopped at an ATM. Justices granted the Alabama attorney general's request to authorize an execution date for Keith Edmund Gavin. Governor Kay Ivey will set the day of the execution, which will be carried out by lethal injection.

Gavin was convicted of capital murder for the 1998 shooting death of William Clinton Clayton, Jr. in Cherokee County. Prosecutors said Clayton, a delivery driver, stopped at an ATM in downtown Centre for money to take his wife to dinner. A jury voted 10-2 in favor of the death penalty for Gavin. The trial court accepted the jury's recommendation.

Gavin's attorney had asked the court not to authorize the execution, arguing the state was moving Gavin to the "front of the line" ahead of other inmates who had exhausted their appeals.

Gavin’s death sentence comes days after Jeremy Williams of Phenix City was given 4 death sentences for kidnapping, rape and murder of 5-year-old Georgia girl. Russell County Circuit Court Judge David Johnson reportedly handed down the sentence this week against Jeremy Williams who murdered, raped and brutalized Kamarie Holland in 2021.

Holland's mother told police that when she woke up at 5:50 a.m. on Dec. 13, 2021, her daughter was gone and the front door of their Columbus, Georgia, home was open, Russell County Sheriff Heath Taylor told reporters. The girl's body was found late that night at an abandoned home in nearby Phenix City, Alabama where Williams once lived.

A jury found him guilty Friday of 4 counts of capital murder, among other charges.

Living in Columbus at the time of the murder, Williams raped and strangled Holland after offering her mother $2,500 for Holland to perform oral sex on him, according to testimony given in his trial. Video evidence shown to jurors captured officers finding Holland's body and of him sexually assaulting the girl. Some jurors began to cry as videos of the assault were shown, the Columbus Ledger-Enquirer reported.

After his conviction, Holland's father, Corey Holland Sr., urged the judge to order the death penalty for his daughter's killer.

"His life compares nothing to Kamarie's," he told the newspaper.

Several other witnesses talked about the impact the case had on them and offered their opinion of Williams, WRBL-TV reported.

Williams' ex-wife called him "soulless" and a now-23-year-old woman who was four when Williams allegedly molested her described him as a "monster."

Taylor told the Ledger-Enquirer this was one of the hardest cases the sheriff's office has ever had to investigate.

"If there's ever been somebody that's deserving of the death penalty its Jeremy Williams," Taylor said after the sentencing. "He's another type of evil that we in society just don't need walking around."

In addition to the four death sentences, Johnson sentenced Williams to life in prison for production of obscene material of a child and human trafficking; 20 years for conspiracy of human trafficking; and 10 years for abuse of a corpse.

Though he now sits on death row at Holman State Prison in Atmore, authorities said Williams' execution could be decades away. Russell County District Attorney Rick Chancey speculated it will take a while for the sentence to be carried out.

"At its current pace, I'll die before he does," Chancey, who is 55, told the television station. "My life expectancy right now is probably shorter than his."

Chancey said he visited the little girl's grave recently and said, "There's no reason that baby should be in the ground."

"I want to remember her, not this joker," said Chancey. "Jeremy is not somebody I want to remember in life."

(source: apr.org)

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

Alabama high court OKs death penalty for man convicted of delivery driver's 1998 killing----Keith Edmund Gavin, 64, to die by lethal injection

The Alabama Supreme Court on Wednesday authorized the execution of a man convicted of killing a delivery driver who stopped at an ATM.

Justices granted the Alabama attorney general's request to authorize an execution date for Keith Edmund Gavin, 64. Gov. Kay Ivey will set the day of the execution, which will be carried out by lethal injection.

Gavin was convicted of capital murder for the 1998 shooting death of William Clinton Clayton, Jr. in Cherokee County. Prosecutors said Clayton, a delivery driver, stopped at an ATM in downtown Centre for money to take his wife to dinner. A jury voted 10-2 in favor of the death penalty for Gavin. The trial court accepted the jury’s recommendation.

Gavin's attorney had asked the court not to authorize the execution, arguing the state was moving Gavin to the "front of the line" ahead of other inmates who had exhausted their appeals.

(source: Associated Press)

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

Lawmakers vote down bill that would allow some Alabama death row inmates to be resentenced----Alabama lawmakers on Wednesday rejected a bill that would provide new sentences for about 30 inmates who were given the death penalty despite a jury’s recommendation of life imprisonment.

Alabama lawmakers on Wednesday rejected a bill that would provide new sentences for about 30 inmates who were given the death penalty despite a jury’s recommendation of life imprisonment.

The House Judiciary Committee voted 9-4 against the bill that would give life without parole sentences to the death row inmates who were placed there under a now-abolished system that allowed judges to override a jury’s recommendation in death penalty cases.

Alabama in 2017 became the last state to end the practice of allowing judges to override a jury’s sentence recommendation in death penalty case, but the change was not retroactive. There are about 33 people on Alabama’s death row who were sentenced by judicial override, England said.

“We all decided that judicial override was wrong, and we repealed that section. The only right thing to do, in my opinion, is to afford everybody who was sentenced by judicial override the opportunity to be resentenced,” state Rep. Chris England, the sponsor of the bill, told the committee.

The bill was rejected on a party-line vote, with nine Republicans voting against it, and the four Democrats voting for it.

Opponents argued that the inmates were sentenced under state law at the time of their trial and opposed a retroactive change.

“The law that was in effect at the time allowed judicial override. These judges, in their discretion, overrode. Consequently, it's very difficult for me to second guess or in effect override that,” Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Hill said.

Hill, a former judge, said he had a practice of following the jury’s recommendation in death penalty cases, but that the law at the time allowed judicial discretion.

England, who has introduced the bill since 2017, said he will try again in 2025. Activists held a rally last month outside the Alabama Statehouse in support of the legislation.

(source: Associated Press)

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

‘Wild, wild west.’ Families say organs of deceased Alabama inmates have been removed without their consent----Families allege bodies of inmates returned without organs

After inmate Jim Kennedy Jr. died last year at the Limestone Correctional Facility in Harvest, Alabama, his sister-in-law got an unusual call from the funeral home preparing the body for burial.

“Did y’all realize he came back without his organs?” Sara Kennedy recalled being told. “Liver, heart. All of your major organs. They were gone.”

“He had nothing,” said Kennedy’s brother, Marvin.

Another inmate suffered a similar fate. Arthur Stapler was 85 when he died five months after Kennedy Jr. at the Brookwood Baptist Medical Center in Birmingham. He had been housed at Hamilton Aged and Infirmed Center, which is also run by the Alabama Department of Corrections.

“It’s like a horror movie that I can’t wake up from,” said Stapler’s son, Billy, who learned about the missing organs after hiring a private pathologist to perform an autopsy on the body.

It was only after contacting the University of Alabama at Birmingham – which is among the providers that conducts autopsies for the prison system – that Stapler’s family received what they were told were his brain and heart in plastic viscera bags. The lungs and some other internal organs came back in pieces, but not all were returned.

With more than 26,000 inmates, Alabama’s severely overcrowded and understaffed prisons are the target of a US Justice Department lawsuit that alleges the state not only fails to prevent violence and sexual abuse behind bars but does not protect inmates from excessive force by prison staff or provide safe conditions.

Alabama’s men’s prisons are also the country’s deadliest, with a homicide rate in 2019 more than seven times higher than the national average, according to a report by the non-profit Equal Justice Initiative.

And the state’s mass incarceration nightmare does not appear to end with death.

The state Department of Corrections and the University of Alabama at Birmingham now face disturbing allegations from the families of 5 inmates whose organs were removed and reportedly kept without consent, according to lawsuits filed last week in Montgomery County Circuit Court. A lawyer for the families alleged the organs were retained for teaching purposes.

“It’s the wild, wild west. There’s no governance,” Lauren Brinkley-Rubinstein, an associate professor at the Duke University School of Medicine and an expert on prison standards, said of the allegations involving the handling of inmate organs in the prison system.

“It’s like, the provision of health care. No standards. What that health care should look like, who has bodily autonomy and who doesn’t, and who, when someone dies, acts as next of kin to people who are incarcerated – all those things are just undefined. There’s no standard and there’s no oversight.”

Prison warden empowered to give consent, lawsuits say

The Alabama Department of Corrections is the largest law enforcement agency in the state, with 28 facilities and nearly 2,000 officers.

The University of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine bills itself as one of the nation’s top academic medical centers for research, education and clinical care. It houses one of America’s largest academic hospitals.

Under an agreement between two state institutions with divergent missions, UAB said it conducts autopsies for the corrections department, which is “responsible for obtaining proper authorizations from the appropriate legal representative of the deceased.”

“The authorization forms not only provide permission for the autopsy, but also specifically include consent for the removal of organs or tissues for diagnostic or other testing including final disposition,” said UAB in a statement, adding that privacy laws prevented comment on specific autopsies.

A case of finger-pointing has broken out between the university and the corrections department on the issue of who ultimately authorizes autopsies.

UAB also said it doesn’t comment “on pending or threatened litigation,” but it complies with laws governing autopsies and is responding to “incorrect and misleading assertions” about the procedures it performs for the corrections department.

“UAB only conducts autopsies after obtaining consent or authorization from the appropriate state official,” the statement said.

The Alabama Department of Corrections also declined comment on pending litigation but said it does not authorize or perform autopsies. UAB has maintained that corrections authorizes inmate autopsies.

“Once an inmate dies, the body is transported to the Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences or (the University of Alabama at Birmingham) for autopsy, depending on several factors, including but not limited to region and whether the death is unlawful, suspicious, or unnatural,” the corrections department said in a statement.

Birmingham attorney Lauren Faraino said the families she represents in the 5 suits insisted to her that none of the inmates were organ donors, nor were their families asked for authorization to retain the organs. At least 2 other lawsuits were being prepared, she said.

Instead, the attorney said, UAB’s own autopsy authorization form – which CNN has obtained – empowers a prison warden to give consent “without limitations” for the autopsy as well as the final disposition of an inmate’s organs. She said that means UAB gets to keep and dispose of the organs as it sees fit unless told otherwise.

Under an autopsy agreement between corrections and the UAB Board of Trustees dating to around 2005, the warden signs off as the “legally designated representative and therefore am legally entitled to grant permission for the completion of an autopsy and the removal of organs or tissues for further study on said inmate.”

“l do, therefore, give my permission for the performance of an autopsy including the removal of organs or tissues from said inmate for diagnostic or other testing, including final disposition thereof,” reads the autopsy authorization form.

The lawsuits cite a 2017 UAB Division of Autopsy publication that said 23% of the division’s yearly income from 2006 to 2015 derived from corrections department autopsies. The corrections department pays UAB $2,200 per autopsy and $100 per toxicology test, according to the suits.

In 2023, Alabama prisons reported a record high 325 deaths, according to the Alabama Appleseed Center for Law & Justice, a non-profit criminal justice reform advocacy group.

The law center reported 1,045 deaths in state prisons from April 2019 – when the DOJ released a report on prison conditions – through the end of last year, citing Alabama Department of Corrections figures and Appleseed data.

“Defendants’ appalling misconduct is nothing short of grave robbery and mutilation,” the lawsuits said. The state institutions are accused of fraud, conspiracy, negligence, unauthorized donations of body parts, unjust enrichment, failing to notify next of kin when retaining organs and other counts.

An Alabama law passed in 2021 requires medical examiners to notify next-of-kin if they will retain a deceased person’s organs to determine identification or the cause or manner of death. They also need the approval of next-of-kin to keep organs for research or other purposes.

A bill now making its way through the state legislature would make a violation of that law a Class C felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

“If organs are being removed for donation for medical education, research or any other purpose without appropriate authorization that is both a legal failing and a moral failing,” said Brendan Parent, a lawyer and director of the transplant ethics and policy research program at NYU Langone.

“There’s no reason to believe that a warden of a prison has ownership or property rights to a body just because the person was incarcerated. And so the laws that exist protecting the family’s right to represent the donation wishes, and to represent the burial wishes or laying to rest wishes, those remain.”

In its statement, UAB insisted it “does not harvest organs from bodies of inmates for research.” Its pathology program is accredited by the College of American Pathologists and staffed by physicians certified by the American Board of Pathology, UAB said.

“The dead are voiceless. And so that creates both a major sort of gap in bringing these stories to light,” Parent said.

“It’s incredibly sad but makes sense that there isn’t nearly enough oversight or attention to this because of the vulnerability and lack of representation of the rights of these individuals.”

A 2019 report by the Justice Department and the Alabama US Attorney’s offices did not mention issues with missing organs but said the state corrections department did not have a reliable system of tracking in-custody deaths.

Federal investigators identified at least 30 deaths that were not disclosed to the Justice Department. The report also found Alabama Department of Corrections did not maintain a centralized repository for all autopsies and did not have a way to identify patterns in causes of death.

‘We felt ashamed’

A group of UAB medical students questioned the ethics of the school’s retention of some inmate organs without consent as far back as 2018, a year before the scathing federal report on overall prison conditions.

In a letter to the UAB hospital ethics committee and medical school administrators in July 2018, a group of medical students wrote to “express our concern regarding the consent process for use of organs from incarcerated individuals in our preclinical education.”

“Our concern is not with the practice of autopsy, but with the process of consent for the retention and use of tissue samples,” the medical students wrote in the letter.

“Wardens can limit the autopsy to a strict determination of cause of death, with no tissues retained for research or education. However, by the Division of Autopsy director’s assessment, wardens always sign ‘no limitations’ on the form that initiates the request for autopsy. If our understanding is correct, neither the patient, nor their family, has consented to or been directly informed of the retention of tissues for teaching, education, or research.”

Faraino called the letter and other records of meetings with school officials “concrete evidence that the students are using some of these organs for training in medical school.”

“We can all agree that we want doctors who are trained and who have access to these organs to perfect their craft,” Faraino said. “What we don’t want is for doctors and pathologists to be mining bodies without family permission.”

2 of those UAB medical students spoke with CNN, saying pathology lab instructors acknowledged that many teaching samples came from inmates, particularly because of the more dramatic pathology of the prisoners. The students asked not to be named for fear of repercussions to their careers.

“It’s plainly and obviously wrong,” one student said. “There is no understanding of medical ethics in which this is permissible.“

A disproportionate number of organ samples were from deceased prisoners, the students said. Those samples included brief bios indicating the person died in a correctional facility and some health history.

“We are benefiting from medical inequity,” one student said. “These people are dying sicker, dying with less care and they look sicker, their bodies look sicker and we get to learn from that. That’s supposed to be a win for us?”

The students said the university ethics committee ultimately dismissed their concerns.

A September 2018 response from the ethics committee said organs are “used for the secondary purposes of teaching future physicians and thereby benefits future patients. If such uses are disallowed, these specimens would only be disposed of, serving no useful purpose.” The committee concluded there is “no evidence that deceased prisoners are treated unfairly as compared with non-prisoners in the autopsy procedure.”

“It is hard to see any lack of ethicality in the retention and teaching uses of once-removed organs,” the response said.

UAB in their statement said the medical students’ concerns were “informed by inaccurate data and information.” A panel of medical ethicists reviewed and endorsed UAB’s protocols for autopsies on incarcerated persons, the university said.

UAB said its pathologists in “some cases” keep organs for further testing to determine an accurate cause of death. UAB said it does not use inmate organs to teach medical students.

“We felt ashamed,” one medical student said. “All of us carried it for years.”

Another added, “It has continued to follow me all these years, wondering if I should or could have done more.”

The families question why the organs were missing for most of the inmates, and what UAB did with those organs after the work was completed.

‘Well, we do it all the time’

On April 13, 2023, inmate Jim Kennedy Jr. died at the age of 67 in an Alabama prison, where he was serving a sentence of 300 years for rape, sodomy and kidnapping. A prison chaplain notified his family of the death about four days later, according to the lawsuit.

A funeral director told family members his internal organs were missing. Only the eyes remained.

Marvin Kennedy, who held power of attorney over his brother’s affairs, said the family had not authorized the retention of the organs.

“They made the decisions for you or represented you without your permission in different areas,” Marvin Kennedy said of UAB and prison officials. “And that’s really what really hurts.”

A funeral director told Jim Kennedy Jr.'s family members his internal organs were missing.

Sara Kennedy demanded answers from UAB and prison officials. “I had a lot of questions,” she said.

When she reached a UAB autopsy department on the phone to ask that her brother-in-law’s organs be returned, she secretly recorded the six-minute conversation.

“We’ve never had this request done before,” the supervisor told her in the recorded call.

“To have the organs back?” she asked.

“Yeah, we’ve never.”

“Who buries somebody without their organs?”

“Well, we do it all the time.”

“We don’t want to do it … We don’t want to do that.”

“Now, I will tell you this … UAB is a teaching institution and any teaching institution that does autopsies, keeps their organs.”

“Well, we did not. We did not and Junior did not want that … We have not agreed with the prison for his body to be turned over for no study. And we want those organs back,” Sara Kennedy told the supervisor.

Stapler died on September 23, 2023. He had been housed at Hamilton Aged and Infirmed Center, where he was doing 10 years for child sex abuse. The cause of death was listed on his autopsy report as congestive heart failure.

The private pathologist hired by his son discovered he had “an empty cavity” in place of his organs.

“There was nothing there,” Billy Stapler said.

Stapler also reached the UAB autopsy department supervisor by phone and arranged for some of his father’s organs to be returned.

“I’m asking where’s the rest of his organs? And he tells me that they possibly got thrown away,” Billy Stapler recalled. “And I’m like, how do you throw away organs? … Why did you even take them out of him?”

Anthony Perez Brackins, 36, who was serving a 21-year sentence for armed robbery, died at Limestone on June 28, 2023, according to his mother, Susie Duncan, and sister, Letesha Brackins. The cause of death was listed as an accidental drug overdose.

After an autopsy at UAB, Duncan and Brackins said, a funeral home informed the family that the body had been “emptied” of all organs. Duncan said her son was cremated without his organs. He was not an organ donor and UAB did not ask for her consent to keep the organs, according to Duncan.

When Brackin’s family contacted UAB to demand the return of his organs, a UAB employee told a relative it was “too late now,” according to the lawsuit.

Kelvin Moore was 42 when he died on July 21, 2023, at Limestone. His family said he was serving a sentence of life without parole for convictions for attempted murder and attempted burglary. A chaplain informed his mother of the death three days later, telling her the cause was a fentanyl overdose, the lawsuit said.

When his family received his body, the mortician discovered most of his internal organs were gone. Relatives later picked up a red viscera bag with what UAB said were his organs. Moore was laid to rest with the bag.

“I call it thievery. I call it barbarism,” said one of Moore’s brothers, Simone.

Simone Moore remembered the words of his 82-year-old mother, Agolia: “She said, ‘You can’t even die no more. Even in death, people robbing you and disrespecting you. Robbing you of your organs. Even in death.’ ”

(source: CNN)

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

“The Art of Resistance: Documenting Alabama’s Death Row” is a collaboration between emerging inside and outside artists that transforms the Alabama Death Row Archive at the University of North Alabama into a multi-media art installation. The exhibit will be installed at the Tennessee Valley Museum of Art in Tuscumbia, AL in May-June and at Lowe Mill in Huntsville, AL August-September.

July is open for a smaller, pop-up version of the exhibit to travel across the state. If your community center or church is interested in scheduling a pop-up event to facilitate a discussion about capital punishment in your area, please complete the following form:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1A-GEAjNpB-HQj6LGWTihp78eu_gfVbZo3nf8AhGdAwc/viewform?edit_requested=true

www.phadp.org

https://www.facebook.com/projecthopetoabolishthedeathpenalty

(source: Project Hope)

OHIO:

Ohio House holds 1st hearing for new nitrogen gas death penalty method----Ohio would join 4 other states that explicitly permit nitrogen hypoxia for executions if the bill passes

The following article was originally published in the Ohio Capital Journal and published on News5Cleveland.com under a content-sharing agreement.

House lawmakers have begun hearings on a controversial new execution method known as nitrogen hypoxia.

The protocol, used in Alabama for the 1st time recently, subjects a prisoner to a high concentration of nitrogen which causes them to eventually suffocate.

Right now, 4 states explicitly allow nitrogen hypoxia and 4 other allow for “lethal gas” generally. Outside of Ohio, Nebraska lawmakers are considering the approach as well.

In its initial hearing, Reps. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville, and Phil Plummer, R-Dayton, presented the proposal as procedural update rather than a wholesale change. Currently there are almost 200 people on death row in Ohio, but executions have been on hold since 2018.

“We have a situation today where for 6 years, we have refused to carry out capital punishment — in violation of the law,” Stewart argued. “It is the law. And until this body votes to do something different, then we need to give (the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections) the tools to carry out these sentences.”

“Plan B”

For the most part, Stewart sought to downplay the additional execution method. He cited an example of an inmate requesting nitrogen hypoxia, and defense attorneys arguing they believed the process is “humane” and “completely painless.”

The inclusion of nitrogen hypoxia, Stewart argued, is a way to break up the backlog. Assuming lethal injection is available, death row inmates could select the method of their choice, and in the event that lethal injection drugs are unavailable, nitrogen hypoxia would allow executions to continue.

“In our view nitrogen hypoxia is a plan B,” Stewart described. “It is a set of suspenders to go along with the belt. It would be preferable to continue using lethal injection, but we need to do something.”

Stewart and Plummer presented their idea as a value-neutral response to a stated lack of lethal injection drugs. “Despite his decision to delay the executions,” Plummer said, “Governor DeWine has indicated that the legislature could address this issue by authorizing an alternative method.”

Stewart dismissed criticism of Alabama’s “botched” nitrogen hypoxia execution as death penalty abolitionists speaking in sensational terms. An AP reporter who viewed the execution described Kenneth Smith thrashing and gasping as prison officials administered the gas. Stewart acknowledged their bill isn’t likely to change the minds of people who already oppose the death penalty.

“Respectfully, though, I think there’s another bill for that,” Stewart said, referring to measures in the Ohio House and Senate that would abolish the death penalty.

“This bill is saying we have the law that we have, and until we change it, we need to find a way to carry out what juries have already imposed,” he said.

While some inmates may have requested nitrogen hypoxia and some defense attorneys have looked favorably on the protocol, it’s acceptance isn’t universal. The American Veterinary Medical Association, for instance, OK’d the procedure under some circumstances for euthanasia of chickens, turkeys and pigs. For all other mammals, though, the panel warned it’s inappropriate and likely to cause distress.

“Now, if we’re going to use gas, which, frankly, our veterinarians will not use on our animals, why would we use that on human beings?” state Rep. Michele Grim, D-Toledo, asked.

Stewart argued it’s “vastly more humane” than the violence that put inmates on death row in the first place. He added that in countries where assisted suicide is legal, nitrogen hypoxia is one of the approaches people use.

State Rep. Bill Seitz, R-Cincinnati, meanwhile, said the problem with Ohio’s capital punishment system is the length of time it takes to pursue appeals. “That is the problem in a nutshell,” he said, “plus the unavailability of the 3-drug injection.” But he noted if the U.S. Supreme Court hasn’t explicitly blessed the protocol, the proposal might just lead to more appeals.

“To my knowledge,” he said, “the United States Supreme Court has only signed off on hanging, electric chair, firing squad, and lethal drug injection as being constitutional — don’t violate the Eighth Amendment.”

“I believe what you’re saying about nitrogen hypoxia,” Seitz added, “but it hasn’t yet been blessed, if you will.”

Stewart argued the likelihood of nitrogen hypoxia passing muster in the court is high, but added their preferred method remains lethal injection. Notably, nothing about the long and complex appeals process unique to death penalty cases will change under Stewart and Plummer’s measure.

(source: WEWS news)

INDIANA:

GOP gubernatorial hopefuls talk Indiana’s dormant death penalty

Indiana’s death penalty law exists in name only. What would Indiana’s GOP candidates for governor do differently?

In recent years some public defenders have suggested it’s time to repeal the law, which hasn’t been used to execute someone since 2009. That’s because Indiana — along with other states — has struggled to obtain the drugs necessary to carry out a lethal injection.

Alabama recently carried out the nation’s 1st execution by nitrogen hypoxia. An AP reporter who viewed the execution described Kenneth Smith thrashing and gasping as prison officials administered the gas. Ohio is considering adding the new method to its law.

None of the 6 candidates immediately backed changing methods. They spoke mostly in generalities.

“I don’t think it’s time to get rid of the death penalty. I believe in it. I support it in the sense that there are certain levels of crime in our code that they require, they call for the death penalty. I think it’s necessary in that sense,” said Curtis Hill, a former state attorney general.

But he said it has become “somewhat irrelevant” because procedural issues cause cases to linger too long.

“That’s a pretty good incentive, if you will, for staying away from major crimes of that nature. If you have a crime today and it takes 20 years to carry out the sentence — it definitely doesn’t become as important in our current justice system as it would have been had the sentence been carried out more quickly,” Hill said.

Indiana has 8 men on death row and at least 4 of them have exhausted all their appeals. One man has been waiting 31 years. But the Indiana Department of Correction (DOC) doesn’t have the 3 drugs it would use for the lethal injection cocktail: methohexital, pancuronium bromide and potassium chloride.

There also are fewer death penalty cases making it through the system, partly due to cost. 4 death penalty cases statewide are pending trial, according to the Indiana Public Defender Council. No one new has been added to death row since 2014.

Lt. Gov. Suzanne Crouch said she would direct the DOC to “redouble its efforts to find the required drugs or other appropriate drugs to carry out these sentences.”

And she said any change in execution method should be done in consultation with medical and public safety experts and the General Assembly.

“If they recommend a change in the execution method to me as governor, I would consider their proposal,” Crouch said.

U.S. Sen. Mike Braun said he would consider input from federal authorities and other states in addition to health experts but that “When used, the death penalty should be swift and painless.

“All life is precious, and the death sentence is a very serious penalty reserved for those guilty of the most heinous of crimes. I trust Hoosier jurors and judges to understand the gravity of the sentence and hand it down when appropriate,” he said.

Pro-life?

Both Crouch and Hill are staunch anti-abortion advocates but distinguished their beliefs on life.

“A human being growing and living in a mother’s womb is innocent life; a person convicted of a capital offense does not represent innocent life. I will always stand for the protection of innocent life,” Crouch said.

Hill said the death penalty involves a person who has forfeited their right to life based on an egregious act determined in a court of law.

“There’s no comparison between a convicted murderer who was found to have committed aggravated circumstances and an unborn child who requires some protection,” Hill said.

Eric Doden, a Fort Wayne businessman also seeking the governorship, said he “would continue to work with other states and stakeholders to enforce Indiana’s laws through whatever legal means or methods available.”

And he differentiated his pro-life views by saying “America is built on a bedrock commitment to law and order. Upholding that commitment and protecting our most vulnerable citizens means accountability through our justice system, including capital punishment in the most heinous cases.”

Candidate Brad Chambers was sent three questions on the death penalty but only responded with, “It’ll be my obligation as governor to enforce state law as written. If the state can carry out executions as the law provides, we’ll do so.”

The devout Jamie Reitenour shared the story of Jesus on the cross when asked about the death penalty, saying that when the two thieves next to him talked about getting down, he offered “eternal hope” after death to those willing, rather than releasing them.

“… a baby hasn’t done anything wrong, so I kind of put those two in separate categories,” she responded when asked about how her anti-abortion beliefs squared with her position on the death penalty.

“… I would just say that the death penalty is super, super rare — it should be. But in the cases where it needs to apply, the judges have weighed in on that and I would not be a person that would interfere with that,” she concluded.

(source: indianacapitalchronicle.com)

KENTUCKY:

Woodall death sentence affirmed by Ky. Supreme Court

A Kentucky death row inmate, who pleaded guilty in 1998 of murdering a teenage girl in Caldwell Circuit Court, has had his sentence affirmed in a unanimous decision by the Kentucky Supreme Court issued on Thursday.

Robert Keith Woodall is on death row for the rape and murder of a 16-year-old girl from Caldwell County in 1997. His sentence for death was upheld by the Kentucky Supreme Court.

Robert Keith Goodall, who is now 50, admitted killing 16-year-old Sarah Hansen in 1997. She had gone to a convenience store to rent a movie, but never returned. Her body was found in a nearby lake and Woodall was charged in her death with kidnapping, murder and rape.

The case has been heard in both the state and federal court systems, with the U.S. Supreme Court upholding the death sentence in 2014.

In the Kentucky Court system, Woodall’s attorneys filed a Motion to vacate the death sentence due to intellectual disability. They argued he is intellectually disabled and, therefore, the imposition of the death penalty would violate his constitutional rights, as the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits imposition of the death penalty on those who are intellectually disabled.

The Kentucky Supreme Court at that time ordered the trial court to conduct a hearing on Woodall’s potential intellectual disability, but after holding a hearing, the judge ruled against Woodall, so the matter came once again before the high court, who heard oral arguments in January.

In their opinion, written by Justice Michelle Keller, the justices held, “Given all of the evidence heard by the trial court, much of which was conflicting, or at least inconsistent, as to Woodall’s deficits, we conclude that the trial court’s factual finding that Woodall did not prove that he is intellectually disabled by a preponderance of the evidence is supported by substantial evidence.”

Woodall remains imprisoned at the Kentucky State Penitentiary in Eddyville, along with the other 25 male inmates on death row. The only woman on death row, Virginia Caudill, is lodged at the Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women, in Pewee Valley.

(source: Kentucky Today)

USA:

United States Provides Binding Assurances to the United Kingdom that Julian Assange Will Not Face the Death Penalty If Extradited

On April 16, 2024, the Biden Administration provided assurances to the United Kingdom that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who is facing extradition to the United States on espionage charges, would not face the death penalty. A hearing is now scheduled in London on May 20 to evaluate the assurances and decide whether Mr. Assange has any remaining legal recourse. A few weeks earlier, the High Court in London granted Mr. Assange a reprieve from extradition, agreeing to grant him an appeal if the United States was unable to provide assurances that it would not seek the death penalty by April 16.

Although none of the 18 charges Mr. Assange is currently facing are capital, the possibility that he could be charged with a capital crime in the future means that his extradition would be unlawful. In the United Kingdom, extradition of prisoners to countries where they could face the death penalty is barred unless “adequate written assurance that the death penalty will not be imposed or, if imposed, will not be carried out,” according to the UK’s Home Office guidance on extraditions. In her 66-page judgement published on March 26, the president of the king’s bench division, Victoria Sharp, noted the need for explicit assurances regarding the intentions of U.S authorities, noting calls from U.S. elected officials to capitally charge Mr. Assange. The assurances provided now confirm that “a sentence of death will neither be sought nor imposed on Assange,” assuring that he will not be “tried for a death-eligible offense.”

U.S. authorities also agree that Mr. Assange, an Australian citizen, can “raise and seek” a defense under the First Amendment, but cautioned that “a decision as to the applicability of the First Amendment is exclusively within the purview of the U.S. Courts.” The UK High Court had specifically requested assurances “that the applicant [Mr. Assange] is permitted to rely on the first amendment, that the applicant is not prejudiced at trial, including sentence, by reason of his nationality, that he is afforded the same first amendment [free speech] protections as a United States citizen.”

Stella Assange, Mr. Assange’s wife, issued a statement after the U.S. assurances were made public. “[T]he US has limited itself to blatant weasel words claiming that Julian can ‘seek to raise’ the first amendment if extradited,” she said. “The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family’s extreme distress about his future – his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in US prison for publishing award-winning journalism. The Biden administration must drop this dangerous prosecution before it is too late.”

For years, Australia has called upon the United States to drop the charges against Mr. Assange. On April 10, during an official visit with the Japanese prime minister, President Biden responded to a question about the request, stating, “We’re considering it.” Australian prime minister, Anthony Albanese told Sky News Australia the following day that, “I’m increasingly optimistic about an outcome, but one certainly has not been delivered yet. We’ll continue to argue the case at every opportunity that we have.” The Wall Street Journal had reported on March 20 that U.S. Justice Department was considering offering Mr. Assange a plea deal.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

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

Everything you didn’t know about lethal injections: they’re cruel, unusual and racist. 

America’s capital punishment system is broken. Lethal injection, the most popular execution method in the US, was touted as a more humane than previous methods.

This couldn’t be further from the truth.

Lethal injection executions go wrong more often than any other execution method. They often result in prolonged and painful deaths, commonly known as “botched” executions.

And now, our new groundbreaking investigation ‘Lethal Injections in the Modern Era: Cruel, Unusual and Racist’, reveals data showing that lethal injections aren’t just cruel, they’re racist.

Read on to find out everything you didn’t know about lethal injections and to find out more about our report.

How do lethal injections work?

States use a variety of drugs and drug combinations to carry out lethal injection executions. Most states either use 3 drugs or 1 drug.

This is how the 3-drug protocol works: 1st, an anaesthetic is used to make the person unconscious. 2nd comes a drug that paralyses them in order to conceal evidence of pain and 3rd, a drug stops their heart. This method is designed to conceal evidence of brutality when in reality, it’s just as cruel and torturous as any other execution method.

Lethal injection has no basis in medicine: it was invented in 1977 by a legislator and local coroner. The latter famously regretted inventing the method, calling botched executions “unconscionable.”

It was claimed that lethal injections would take around 5 minutes, with people painlessly falling asleep and dying less than two minutes after the final injection. Instead, botched executions are often lengthy and painful. More than a quarter lasted over an hour. The longest lethal injection, in 2022, took over three hours.

Lethal injections go wrong more often than any other method. They borrow the trappings of a medical procedure, but this is just a façade. Do lethal injections hurt?

Lethal injection can cause prolonged pain and extremely painful deaths – this is often obscured by elements of the process itself: for example, the 2nd drug (a paralytic agent), the tight straps preventing a prisoner from moving, the white sheet hiding the body from view, or a curtain being drawn between witnesses and the execution chamber.

Medical experts have found that lethal injection can cause pulmonary edema – “the feeling of choking, drowning in [one’s] own fluids, suffocating, being buried alive, and [a] burning sensation” while being “unable to speak or scream.”

A federal judge in Ohio compared lethal injection executions to “waterboarding.” Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor has called this method “the chemical equivalent of being burned at the stake.”

What is a botched lethal injection execution?

A botched execution is an execution gone wrong, often resulting in prolonged pain.

Our new report, ‘Lethal Injection in the Modern Era: Cruel, Unusual and Racist’ analysed lethal injections over the last 5 decades. We found that Black people had 220% higher odds of suffering a botched lethal injection execution than white people in the modern era of the death penalty.

It also finds that botched lethal injection executions occurred regardless of the drugs used, and irrespective of whether a 1-drug or a 3-drug protocol was used.

Beyond the significant racial disparities identified by the research, our new report also found that botched executions typically lasted an extremely long time: over a quarter (19) of botched lethal injection executions lasted over one hour, with over one-third (26) lasting more than 45 minutes. The longest lethal injection execution in 2022 took over 3 hours.

Can lethal injections fail?

Yes – lethal injections can fail.

Lethal injections are more likely to go wrong than any other execution method. And when an execution is ‘botched’ it results in tortuous pain. Judges have compared it to “waterboarding” and being “burned at the stake”.

In the modern era of executions, there have even been 6 lethal injection executions that have had to be abandoned because the process did not work, and these individuals survived the process. Their names are Romell Broom, Alva Campbell, Doyle Hamm, Alan Miller, Kenneth Smith and Thomas Creech. There was one additional individual – Clayton Lockett – whose execution was halted due to complications, but he died after 45 minutes in the execution chamber due to a massive heart attack.

There are several reasons why lethal injections can go wrong.

Lethal injection executions are frequently administered by prison officials with no medical training. The drugs are often sourced from illicit suppliers or illegally diverted from their designed and approved purpose. And lethal injection is entirely experimental, employing drugs in untested combinations and quantities.

What lethal injection cocktail is used for the death penalty?

Most drugs used to kill people by lethal injection are life-saving drugs that are intended to improve lives, not end them. All approved manufacturers of these drugs oppose the misuse of their medicines in executions.

The sedatives and barbiturates that are often used in executions are needed by hospitals across the US and many are in dangerously short supply.

Has anyone ever survived a lethal injection execution?

To date, 6 people have survived lethal injections, one as recently as February 2024.

3 of these executions took place in the state of Alabama.

One of them was Kenneth Smith. Kenneth Smith survived a traumatic hours-long lethal injection attempt in November 2022. After the failed attempt, he was simply returned to his cell on death row.

On 26th January 2024, Kenneth Smith was executed by the state of Alabama using nitrogen gas. Like lethal injection, the new method of nitrogen hypoxia has been dressed up as being more humane on without any evidence or testing. And like lethal injection executions, it proved to be anything but humane.

Reprieve’s new study into the lethal injection:

Reprieve’s new report, ‘Lethal Injection in the Modern Era: Cruel, Usual and Racist’ explores the trends and contributing factors that lead to an execution being botched.

Our findings show without doubt that this method is inhumane, and that Black people are suffering these torturous executions at a higher rate than while people.

The report is named: ‘Lethal Injection in the Modern Era: Cruel, Unusual and Racist’.

What’s race got to do with the lethal injection?

For decades, studies have documented that the death penalty discriminates against Black people, who face disproportionate rates of capital charging, death sentencing, execution, and exclusion from capital juries. But now, researchers at Reprieve uncover that racial disparities extend into the execution chamber too.

One of the most significant findings to emerge from our analysis is that black people had a 220% higher chance of suffering a botched execution than white people in the modern era of the death penalty in America. It also found that:

– In the state of Arkansas, 75% of botched lethal injection executions were of Black people, despite executions of Black people accounting for just 33% of all executions.

– In the state of Georgia, 86% of botched lethal injection executions were of Black people, despite executions of Black people accounting for just 30% of all executions.

– In the state of Oklahoma, 83% of botched lethal injection executions were of Black people, despite executions of Black people accounting for just 30% of all executions.

Secrecy and haste were found to be factors contributing to increased rates of botched and prolonged executions.

State secrecy and botched executions

Our new report also reveals regular state cover ups of issues that occur in executions. States have often reported executions going smoothly, when witness testimony clearly proves they did not.

This includes state cover ups about how they got the drugs, and secretly trialling new methods of executions and covering it up when executions go wrong. All to maintain the myth that lethal injections are humane.

Worse yet, executing states have passed secrecy laws prohibiting access to information on the drugs used. This includes critical information on the source and quality of the drugs.

This is worrying when the illicit and worrying procurement of restricted and unapproved drugs can contribute to lengthy and painful botched executions.

Our new research uncovers the explicit link between the 2.

(source: reprieve.org)

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

Black death row inmates suffer more botched lethal injections than white inmates: Report

A report says Black inmates sentenced to death by lethal injection suffered a botched procedure at higher rates than white prisoners.

In the analysis released this month, researchers at the anti-death penalty group Reprieve found that Black people had a 220 percent greater chance of suffering a botched lethal injection execution than white people, regardless of whether a 1-drug or a 3-drug protocol was used.

“It is well-established that the death penalty is infected with racial bias at every stage of the process,” the report states. “This report reveals that the racial disparities in capital punishment extend all the way into the execution chamber.”

In 1972, the Supreme Court ruled the death penalty in 3 cases was unconstitutional, and as a result halted executions until clarifying the ruling in 1976. Since then, at least 1,582 individuals have been executed.

Lethal injection was first introduced as a legal execution method in Oklahoma in 1977. Proponents argued it was a painless process that would take about five minutes, and the person would die less than 2minutes after the final injection.

But Reprieve’s study found that more than 1/3 botched lethal injection executions lasted more than 45 minutes, and more than a quarter lasted for more than an hour. In 2022, a Black man in Alabama suffered the longest botched execution, more than 3 hours.

“Proponents of lethal injection have long declared it to be quick, peaceful, and painless,” the report reads. “This new analysis of botched lethal injection executions in the modern era comprehensively debunks this claim, finding botched lethal injection executions to be both prolonged and painful. Many botched executions were found to have spanned hours, with people choking, vomiting and bleeding in the execution chamber.”

Reprieve’s report found that out of 465 executions of Black inmates, 37 — or about 8 % — were botched, compared to only 28 out of 780 executions of white inmates, or about 4 %.

The report highlights different case studies, including the 2014 botched execution of Clayton Lockett, a 38-year-old Black man in Oklahoma.

In Lockett’s case, the execution team worked for 51 minutes to insert IV lines, puncturing Lockett 16 times in his upper chest and jugular region, his upper arm, elbow pit, wrist, groin and foot.

Eventually, Lockett was injected with an untested drug cocktail of unknown origin. He started “breathing heavily, writhing, clenching his teeth and straining to lift his head off the pillow,” and the execution team found that Lockett’s vein had “exploded” or “collapsed.” As a result, the drugs were not getting into Lockett’s system and were instead bubbling under his skin, creating significant swelling.

Lockett died of a heart attack 43 minutes after the start of his execution. The paramedic who tried to establish IV access later claimed the failure was because “Black people have smaller veins.” There is no scientific evidence to substantiate such a claim.

Jamila Hodge, a former federal prosecutor and now the executive director of Equal Justice USA, said Reprieve’s findings are shocking but also unsurprising.

“Racial oppression relies on our willingness to dehumanize other people,” Hodge said in a statement. “And that same devaluing of human life is what makes painful, torturous executions something our nation has come to accept.”

The death penalty has long faced scrutiny for racial disparities.

In 2016, the Prison Policy Initiative found that though Black people make up about 13 percent of the U.S. population, they account for more than 41 percent of death row inmates.

In 2020, the Death Penalty Information Center found that killers of Black people are less likely to face the death penalty than people who kill white people. Since 1977, 295 Black defendants have been executed for killing a white victim, but only 21 white defendants were executed for killing a Black victim.

Despite advocates’ attempts to abolish the practice, the death penalty remains legal in 21 states.

Reprieve’s latest report found that racial disparities in botched executions varied by state.

In Arkansas, 75 % of botched executions were of Black people, despite executions of Black people accounting for just 33 % of all executions. In the state of Georgia, where executions of Black people made up only 30 % of all executions, 86 % of botched executions were of Black people. And in Oklahoma, 83 percent of botched executions were of Black people. There, Black people made up just 30 % of all executions.

The report attributes botched executions to a variety of factors, including secrecy, illicit drug procurement, poor quality drugs and haste.

“In their efforts to carry out executions at any cost, state officials have evaded oversight at every stage of the execution process and have engaged in illegal and underhanded practices which have contributed to botched executions,” the report states.

A host of Democrats issued a call to action after the report was released.

Rep. Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), lead sponsor of the Federal Death Penalty Prohibition Act, used the findings to shine a spotlight on her legislation.

“The death penalty is racist, cruel, and inhumane punishment that has no place in a just society, and this report is a damning reminder of that,” Pressley said in a statement. “For too long, the use of capital punishment has disproportionately killed Black people in America and the lethal injection method has caused unconscionable suffering. The in-depth findings of this report confirm that Black folks are more likely to suffer from a botched execution than their white counterparts, resulting in torturous pain that can last longer than an hour.”

Sen. Cory Booker (N.J.) said that though President Biden has issued a moratorium on federal executions, the study emphasizes that more must be done.

“We have long known about the disproportionate use of capital punishment against Black Americans, and now this report reveals disturbing evidence that they are also significantly more likely to suffer a botched execution,” Booker said. “The Department of Justice should zealously enforce laws governing drugs used to execute people across the country, and it should immediately rescind harmful Trump-era policies that wrongly suggest that states can ignore federal laws regulating drugs that states are using for executions.”

Reprieve is now calling for an immediate moratorium on all lethal injection executions at both the state and federal levels. The study also urges officials to be more transparent about the process, including recording the start time of an execution as the moment when officials begin to prepare the person for the lethal injection.

(source: Cheyane M. Daniels, The Hill)

RUSSIA:

Fast forward to the past: the noise around the revival of Russia’s death penalty

Following the Russian Volunteer Corps raid into Russia and ISIL’s terror attack on Crocus City Hall, the Russian establishment has called for the reinstatement of the death penalty. Putin addressed the issue of discrediting the Russian army in a speech delivered shortly after the presidential election and prior to the terror attack.

Following the attack, this mention gained traction in Russian political and propaganda circles, despite the fact that the topic of discussion concerned an entirely different scenario. The discussions lasted several weeks until the Russian Federation’s Constitutional Court ruled that the official position could only be expressed at the president’s request.

But what does this loud debate signify?

The moratorium on the death penalty in Russia was de facto introduced in 1996 when it became a condition for the country’s acceptance into the Council of Europe. Before 1996, Russia operated under the Criminal Code inherited from the USSR.

Under the Soviet Union, the death penalty could be imposed for 17 to 30 (depending on the republic) types of crimes during peacetime, including non-violent ones. According to scholars, during the post-Stalin period, the Soviet courts executed between 700 to 1000 people annually.

The Kremlin’s criminal policy during Soviet times was repressively directed. Under the guise of “death penalty convictions,” the Soviet authorities subjected politically “undesirable” individuals to physical elimination.

Modern Russia consistently proves its claim as a worthy successor to the USSR when it comes to totalitarian practices.

“It’s about time”

Both of the initial points of discussion about the death penalty—the Russian Volunteer Corps raid and the terrorist attack on Crocus City Hall—were framed by Russian propaganda as ideological confrontations with the Western world.

“Are we playing European democracy here, which told us that the death penalty is bad… We’re dealing with traitors and murderers, and they should know that they shouldn’t try to surrender to captivity,” lamented Vladimir Soloviev about the Russian Volunteer Corps (RVC).

Following the terrorist attack, propagandists claimed that Russia has left the Council of Europe and is no longer bound by any moratorium on executions.

The propaganda discussion imbued the political concept of lifting the moratorium with symbolism.

Alexander Khodakovskiy (Telegram channel, 540,000 subscribers) was able to incorporate the theme into several narratives: “The Tsars of Russia and Rus chopped heads with an axe of those who, in their opinion, deserved execution.”

It was not done for the sake of blood, but to demonstrate to the people that they are safe from external and internal enemies. Our country’s leader has the right to pardon, but he also has the right to take lives. And he should have the opportunity to do what the entire country expects of him: shed blood on the orders of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief.”

Here is the historical significance of the practice, the protection of the people by a strong president, and the collective thirst for revenge.

Xenophobia was not spared: several propaganda channels proclaimed that “lifting the moratorium only for terrorists and foreigners is a great initiative!”

The news that the Crocus Hall terrorists were Tatarstan citizens fueled Russian political circles’ chauvinistic tendencies once more. One of Telegram’s Z-channels conducted a survey of its audience (453,000 subscribers), with 174,000 users participating. According to the results, which were later sent to the headquarters of the “United Russia” party with the request to “respond to the will of the people,” 82% voted to lift the death penalty moratorium.

Is the death penalty not a subject for discussion?

Loud announcements and statements can reveal how society will react to a specific political decision.

The Kremlin is likely to view the lifting of the death penalty moratorium as an opportunity to strengthen the regime and counter opposition. Statements from Russian media outlets citing Kremlin sources confirmed this hypothesis. Some argue that discussions about the death penalty, including those by Russian propagandists, are a “testing of public opinion.”

Others claim that “there is demand in society.” The leader of the “United Russia” faction in the State Duma promised his constituents a debate and a decision “that will correspond to the sentiments and expectations of our society.”

So, on the one hand, propaganda influences public opinion on the issue, while politicians and officials promise to take it into account.

In modern Russia, the fabrication of charges is common practice. Therefore, there is no doubt that the Russian regime may use physical means to “eliminate” a politically inconvenient person.

In this case, legal and judicial procedures will provide cover for the death penalty.

This situation poses a direct threat to Ukraine, as it may have an impact on politically imprisoned individuals, particularly Crimean Tatars. Following the annexation of Crimea, members of the terrorist organization “Hizb ut-Tahrir,” which is banned in Russia but has legal status in Ukraine, were persecuted by Russian authorities.

Given Russia’s history of false accusations and legal manipulation, the reinstatement of the death penalty creates even more political pressure.

Second, it could present a new military challenge for Ukraine. The Kremlin exploits the concept of terrorism, and Russian propaganda characterizes everything related to Ukraine as “terrorist.”

Therefore, even a partial lifting of the moratorium on “the death penalty for terrorism” would allow Russia to use this measure against Ukrainian prisoners of war, and these calls have already been voiced in Russian propaganda circles.

(source: uacrisis.org)

ZIMBABWE:

ED grants relief to death row inmates

PRESIDENT Emmerson Mnangagwa has granted relief to some prisoners on death row after he commuted their sentences to life imprisonment.

Mnangagwa also announced amnesty for prisoners serving various sentences ahead of today’s independence celebrations.

Zimbabwe abolished the death penalty in February this year giving relief to 63 inmates who were destined for gallows for various crimes.

The country carried out its last execution in 2005, but the death sentence has continued to be imposed.

Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs secretary Vimbai Nyemba promulgated the Clemency Order in a General Notice published the Extraordinary Government Gazette early this week.

According to the notice, commutation of the death sentence to life imprisonment was granted to all inmates who have been on death row for 10 years and above.

Full remission of the remaining period was also granted to inmates who had served life imprisonment for at least 20 years.

“This includes — inmates sentenced to life imprisonment; inmates whose sentences were commuted from death to life imprisonment.

“In this case the period of 20 years will include the period when the inmate was serving as a prisoner under the sentence of death; inmates whose sentences were altered to life imprisonment on appeal or review,” the notice indicated.

It further announced remission of sentences for convicted female inmates, save for those convicted of specified offences.

“The inmate should have served one-third (1/3) of the sentence by 18th April, 2024. Full remission of the remaining period of imprisonment for all juveniles that is, those inmates under the age of eighteen (18) years.

“The inmate should have served one-third (1/3) of the sentence by 18th April, 2024. Age determination will be based on the birth certificate or dental age estimation of the concerned prisoner.”

The amnesty, however, excluded inmates charged under the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23].

The amnesty has also been extended to prisoners sentenced to 48 months and below and who would have served 1/3 of their sentence by April 18, 2024, provided they are not convicted for specified offences.

Remissions were granted on medical grounds, prisoners at open prisons, those aged 60 years and above and inmates with disabilities.

A quarter remissions were extended for inmates serving an effective sentence above 48 months and who would have served at least 1/3 of the sentence including those under specified offences.

Prisoners excluded from amnesty include former amnesty beneficiaries, those serving a sentence imposed by Court Martial and inmates who have records of escaping from lawful custody.

Inmates serving sentences of murder, treason, rape or any sexual offence, carjacking, robbery, public violence and human trafficking will not benefit from the amnesty.

Also excluded are prisoners jailed for unlawful possession of firearms, contravention of the Electricity Act, Postal and Telecommunications Act, Public Order and Security Act or Maintenance of Peace and Order Act and any conspiracy, incitement or attempt to commit any of the listed offences.

Zimbabwe Prisons and Correctional Services national spokesperson Assistant Commissioner Meya Khanyezi said the presidential amnesty served as a tangible demonstration of the government’s commitment to the rehabilitation of offenders.

“It is a significant step towards building a harmonious and inclusive society where every individual has the opportunity to contribute positively,” she said.

Khanyezi called on beneficiaries to seize the opportunity for personal growth and transformation.

“This release is not only a 2nd chance; it is a chance to rewrite the narrative of their lives and become productive members of society coming from bars to business,” she said.

(source: newsday.co.zw)

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

Zimbabwe frees prisoners, including those sentenced to death, in an independence day amnesty

Zimbabwe President Emmerson Mnangagwa granted clemency to more than 4,000 prisoners, including some who were on death row, in an independence day amnesty on Thursday.

Zimbabwe marked 44 years of independence from white minority rule, which ended in 1980 after a bloody bush war. The country’s name was changed from Rhodesia to Zimbabwe.

The presidential amnesty, the 2nd in less than a year, benefits female, older and juvenile inmates, the terminally ill and some who were originally sentenced to death.

Those once on death row but who had their sentences commuted to life terms in previous clemency orders or through court appeals are to be freed provided they have been in prison for at least 20 years, according to the clemency order, which was announced Wednesday and due to take effect on Thursday.

All female prisoners who had served at least 1/3 of their sentence by independence day are being freed, as are juvenile inmates who have served the same period.

Prisoners age 60 and older who have served 1/10 of their sentences will also be released. Mnangagwa also pardoned the blind and others with disabilities who have served 1/3 of their sentence.

The prisoners are being released in batches across the country.

However, those jailed for “specified” offences that include sexual offences, robbery, public violence, unlawful possession of firearms, human trafficking and theft or vandalism of electricity and telecommunications infrastructure won't benefit from the amnesty.

All death row prisoners who have been in jail for at least 10 years had their sentences commuted to life in prison under the amnesty.

Zimbabwe has more than 60 inmates on death row. It wasn't immediately clear how many of those had their sentences commuted to life under the amnesty.

Zimbabwe is one of more than a dozen countries in Africa and more than 50 across the world that have the death penalty, although the country's last hanging was in 2005. Mnangagwa says he supports abolishing the death penalty, a move which was backed by the Cabinet in February and is now awaiting approval from Parliament.

Mnangagwa freed more than 4,000 prisoners in another clemency order last May aimed at decongesting the southern African nation's overcrowded prisons, where conditions are usually harsh. At the time, Zimbabwe had about 22,000 prisoners crammed into prisons with a capacity of 17,000.

(source: Spectrum News)

KENYA:

Justice Lawrence Mugambi Issues Timelines for Jowie's Appeal on Death Penalty

Justice Lawrence Mugambi has issued timelines for a petition by Joseph Irungu alias Jowie, who filed a plea challenging his death sentence.

In a court order dated Thursday, April 18, the judge directed that Jowie's legal team serve the relevant parties within the next 14 days.

Jowie is suing the state with Attorney General Justin Muturi listed as a respondent.

On the other hand, he directed the AG to file his response to the petition within 14 days after he has been served.

"I have read the Petition filed herein and the attached annexures and direct as follows; if need be, the applicant/petitioner may file a rejoinder within 14 days from the date of receipt of responses," he stated.

Further, other directions are set to be issued on June 11, 2024.

Jowie filed a petition over his sentencing on Wednesday, April 17. The security expert was sentenced to suffer death having been found guilty of the murder of businesswoman Monica Kimani.

The sentence was delivered by Justice Grace Nzioka on March 13.

According to Jowie, the death sentence contravenes his constitutional rights hence the move to appeal the sentencing.

"The petitioner seeks a declaration that the death penalty by its nature, process and manner, in which it is or may be administered constitutes torture, cruel, inhuman and/or degrading form of punishment prohibited by Article 25 of the Constitution.

"The petitioner prays for a declaration that the death sentence imposed on him on 13 March 2024 violates the non-derogable right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment," Jowie noted in his petition.

Monica Kimani was found murdered on September 19, 2018. Her body was discovered in her bathtub.

(source: kenyans.co.ke)

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

Petition: Jowie challenges death sentence, says it's 'inhumane'----He is also seeking compensation on account of his rights being violated

Murder convict Jowie Irungu has petitioned the High Court seeking to have the death penalty against him declared a degrading form of punishment.

Jowie was on March 14 sent to the gallows by Justice Grace Nzioka after he was found guilty over the murder of businesswoman Monica Kimani.

He has since filed a notice of appeal at the Appellate Court over his conviction and sentencing.

In his application before the Milimani Law Courts, Jowie says the mode in which the death penalty should be enforced is torturous, cruel and inhumane.

He says it is prohibited under article 25 of the constitution which spells out the fundamental rights and freedoms that may not be limited.

These include freedom from torture or degrading punishment, freedom from slavery, and right to fair trial.

Jowie claims that his sentencing over the Monica Kimani murder was in violation of his non-derogable right to freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman punishment and wants the court to declare as so.

He has sued the Attorney General in his petition.

In 2017, the Supreme Court declared the mandatory death sentence unconstitutional but did not outlaw it.

The ruling gave judge’s discretion to decide whether to hand down the death sentence or life imprisonment.

In light of this, Jowie wants the court to declare that section 379 (4) of the criminal procedure code is unconstitutional as it denies persons sentenced to death the right to bail pending appeal.

Also sought is compensation on account of his rights being violated.

(source: the-star.co.ke)

NIGERIA:

IPOB: We can’t prepare Kanu’s defence against death penalty charges – Lawyer, EjimakorPublished on April 18, 2024By Seun Opejobi

Alloy Ejimakor, the Lead Counsel of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, has identified a major hindrance to properly preparing the agitator’s defence against charges with the death penalty.

Ejimakor said he and his team have not been granted enough access to confer with Kanu towards preparing a defence against charges that carry the death penalty.

Addressing journalists in Abuja, the lead counsel lamented that their conversations with the IPOB leader were extremely monitored and it’s hampering their defence preparation.

He said: “It’s not about having access to our client; we do have access but it is monitored and hampered to the point that we are unable to discuss with him to the point of confidentiality that is guaranteed between a lawyer and his client and enhances the defence we want to prepare to defend him against charges that carry the death penalty.

“Our position conforms with the law. Section 36 of the Nigerian constitution says unless a fair hearing can be guaranteed no Nigerian should be subjected to any trial.”

The IPOB leader is facing charges of terrorism before the Justice Binta Nyako-led Federal High Court.

During yesterday’s proceedings, Ejimakor had demanded “fair hearing safeguards” for his client before the actual trial of terrorism begins.

The trial judge had fixed May 20 to rule on Kanu’s bail application and his request to transfer him from the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS) to house arrest.

Kanu, who has been in detention since 2021, in a motion argued by Ejimakor, requested the court to restore the bail granted to him in 2017 by the same Judge.

He told the court that contrary to the claim of the Federal Government, he did not jump bail or breach any of the conditions of the bail but had to escape out of the country when the military allegedly invaded his house.

(source: dailypost.ng)

MALAYSIA:

54 prisoners escape death sentence, sentences commuted to 30-38 years jail

A total of 54 prisoners escaped death by hanging, after the Federal Court, sitting at the High Court here today, commuted their sentences to imprisonment between 30 and 38 years.

A 3-judge panel led by the Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, in a unanimous decision waived the death penalty for all the prisoners involved who were previously convicted of murder and drug cases. For the drug cases, each of them was sentenced to 30 years in prison, while the sentences for the murder cases ranged from 35 to 38 years. The decision was made after the court accepted the application of all the accused made in accordance with Section 3(1) of the Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Bill 2023 The sitting at the High Court here yesterday and today involved 6 murder cases under Section 302 of the Penal Code and 48 drug cases under Section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952.

Yesterday, there were 5 murder cases and 23 drug cases and 1 murder case and another 25 drug cases today.

The prosecution of the case was handled by Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohd Fuad Abdul Aziz and Deputy Public Prosecutor Norzilati Izhani Zainal@Zainol, while the accused was represented by a lawyers appointed by the court.

(source: nst.com.my)

SINGAPORE:

S'pore man, 45, arrested on suspicions of trafficking more than 2.6kg of heroin----Anyone found guilty of trafficking more than 15g of heroin may face the death penalty.

About 2.682kg of heroin was seized by the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) on Apr. 17, 2024, according to a press release.

A 45-year-old Singaporean man was arrested on suspicions of drug trafficking.

In addition, 20g of "Ecstasy", 10g of "Ice", 10g of cannabis and 2 Erimin-5, or Nimetazepam, tablets were seized.

The drugs were estimated to be worth about S$286,000 and were estimated to be able to feed the addiction of 1,280 abusers for a week, CNB said.

May face death penalty

CNB officers arrested the man in the vicinity of MacPherson Lane.

The man was carrying a black pouch, which was found to contain about 239g of heroin.

Officers proceeded to raid the man's hideout located in the vicinity of Jalan Chengkek, and recovered about 2.443kg of heroin and the rest of the drugs.

Investigations are currently ongoing.

Anyone found guilty of trafficking more than 15g of heroin may face the death penalty.

(source: mothership.sg)

TAIWAN:

Time for Taiwan to end death penalty

Asia is home to 60 % of the world’s population whilst being the site of 85 to 95 % of the world’s executions. Of the 11 nations in Southeast Asia, all but the Philippines, East Timor and Cambodia continue to retain the death penalty. Even Japan, which one would consider to be the closest example of a wealthy liberal democracy, still has more than 100 inmates languishing on death row.

At the extreme of that spectrum lies China, which is the single largest contributor to the number of executions in Asia, if not the world.

This puts Taiwan on the cusp. On Tuesday next week, the Constitutional Court is set to review the constitutionality of the death penalty.

This is a welcome move, as it has been more than a decade since Taiwan signed on to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights during the tenure of former president Ma Ying-jeou.

At the heart of the treaty is Article 6, which stipulates the right to life, serving as an important reminder that signatory states are obliged to work toward the abolition of the death penalty.

Taiwan has often touted itself as being a beacon not only of democracy, but also of human rights within the region. In addition, it has come to gain international renown through its oft quoted diplomatic tagline “Taiwan can help.”

This is where Taiwan could really live up to its ambitions of “helping out.”

It could stand out as a shining example to all its neighbors within the region and even the world that despite the geopolitical pressures it faces, its institutions — especially its courts — are free and strong enough to resist what some politicians have touted as being the public will when the issue of abolishing the death penalty is raised.

In the past few months, politicians have been quick to quote surveys which state that Taiwanese are overwhelmingly supportive of retaining capital punishment.

However, there has been very little attention paid to the 2021 survey published by UK-based Death Penalty Project, which showed that an overwhelming number of legislators interviewed were for the abolishment of the death penalty.

These legislators were unable to reveal their positions, as it would spell political suicide.

Another survey by the very same organization in 2019 revealed that Taiwanese were amenable to the abolition of the death penalty if presented with alternatives and that they were wary of the possibility of mistrials in capital cases.

The death penalty thus is kept alive in a feedback loop with misconceptions from the public as well as elected officials feeding into each other.

Therefore, the courts seem to be the only other available option to let this issue rest once and for all.

Countries in the region which have done away with the death penalty were for a very long time under the thumb of authoritarian governments. The death penalty in the Southeast Asian region cast a wide net, where not only murderers were executed, but dissidents and activists.

In that sense, the death penalty in Taiwan’s history, given its authoritarian past, was used not only to maintain social stability, but also as a weapon against those the regime deemed to be “bandits.”

It is time, given Taiwan’s democratic progress and its commitment to human rights, that it should be brave enough to let go of the past and walk into a future free of state-sanctioned killing.

(source: Editorial; Leong Kar Yen is an associate professor in the Department of Global Politics and Economics at Tamkang University. He does comparative research on the death penalty in Taiwan and Southeast Asia----Taipei Times)

INDIA:

Rarest Of Rare Case: Punjab Court Awards Death Penalty To Woman For Burying Neighbours 2-Yr-Old Daughter Alive

A Punjab Court has awarded the death penalty to a 32-year-old woman for burying her neighbour's 2-year-old daughter alive over jealousy and an inferiority complex with the child's family.

The convict Neelam stuffed sand in the mouth of the child and buried her alive in a pit already dug in a deserted place, without there being any fault of the child or any provocation from her side and this reveals her brutal and abnormal mindset, noted the Court.

While stating that the case comes under "rarest of the rare case", Sessions Judge Munish Singal said, "There cannot be more graver, heinous and barbaric crime than burying alive a girl of tender age of 2-3/4 years of age who must not have understood the acts of her next door neighbour."

Court stated that ordinarily, murder is grave by its nature, more so, when the perpetrator of the crime is a known person, it is graver and the rarest of rare, which warrants a strong deterrent judicial hand. In the case on hand, the convict took the victim from the street across from her house where she was playing and killed her brutally by burying her alive in a pit.

Indeed, such a criminal is a danger to society at large and is beyond reformation and rehabilitation. The manner in which crime has been committed is so intense that it has shocked the collective conscience of the society in extreme indignation of the community, added the Court.

The judge further opined that the accused had not acted on any spur-of-the-moment provocation and she had very meticulously, cleverly and deliberately planned the crime against an innocent and helpless child.

Adding that the convict is lacking in basic human values or psyche which can be amenable for any reformation, the judge said, "The entire act of committing murder of small girl child by burying her alive is a scar on the human values and the accused has broken the faith of neighbours and the faith in humanity."

In 2021, an FIR under section 364 (kidnapping with intent to kill) IPC was lodged in Ludhiana against Neelam after the girl had gone missing. Police later added sections 302 (punishment for murder) and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender) of the IPC after the child died.

Also Read - BJP MP Brij Bhushan Singh Seeks Further Probe In Sexual Harassment Case, Delhi Court Defers Order On Framing Of Charges According to the prosecution, after Dilroz couldn't be found anywhere, police officials were informed that the accused had taken the child in a vacant plot on her scooty. During the search, the police found some fresh sand in a pit. On suspicion, when the sand was removed from the pit it was found that Dilroz was lying in an unconscious position and her mouth and other parts of her body were covered with the sand. The child was taken to the Hospital, where the Doctor declared her brought dead.

Although there was no direct evidence against the accused, the prosecution has enumerated circumstantial evidence including, "last seen theory", CCTV footage, Various Tower Locations of the mobile which was carried by accused Neelam when she carried minor Dilroj, the motive of the crime, jealousy towards the family of minor Dilroz and extra-judicial confession of the accused.

After examining the evidence, the Court noted that "the prosecution has been able to prove the guilt of accused from very cogent and convincing evidence and other attending circumstances and the disclosure statement made by the accused has corroborated the said evidence."

The judge said that the vital link in the chain i.e. the confessional statement made by accused Neelam. "Her extra-judicial confessional statement is a major piece of evidence against her," court stated.

Neelum had confessed to her family friend Gurpreet Singh, that she had buried the deceased child alive in order to frighten her family because she did not like how her father used to brought gifts for his children.

"No doubt, extra judicial confession is a weak type of evidence, but nevertheless, it can be proved like any other fact in accordance with law", the Court said.

Reliance was placed upon Kulvinder Singh Vs. State of Haryana, [AIR 2011 Supreme Court 1777], in which extra-judicial confession was relied on by the prosecution in a case in which the accused had gone to the Ex-Sarpanch of the village disclosing that they had committed the murder of the deceased it was held by Supreme Court that deposition of Ex-Sarpanch in respect of extra-judicial confession made to him by accused was a trustworthy piece of evidence.

"The free and voluntary confession deserves due credit as it is presumed to flow from the highest sense of guilt. Accused Neelam confided in Gurpreet Singh in the hope that she would get help and protection. The confession has been made by her on the day of incident at about 9 p.m. and it is not alleged to have been procured under any undue influence, coercion or pressure and the statement of Gurpreet Singh was also recorded on the same day at about 10 p.m. outside the house of Neelam and the witness Gurpreet Singh has no reason to state falsely," the Court observed.

In light of the above, the Court held that the prosecution has successfully proved its charges against accused Neelam that she kidnapped minor Dilroz Kaur and committed her murder by causing her death and then causing the disappearance of her body and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 302, 364 and 201 of IPC.

Rarest Of The Rare Case

The Court observed that the convict took the victim from the street across from her house where she was playing and killed her brutally by burying her alive in a pit. Indeed, such a criminal is a danger to society at large and is beyond reformation and rehabilitation.

It said that the "manner in which crime has been committed is so intense that it has shocked the collective conscience of the society in extreme indignation of the community."

The accused has not acted on any spur-of-the-moment provocation and she has very meticulously, cleverly and deliberately planned the crime against an innocent and helpless child, added the judge.

The Court also took note of the report of the Superintendent, Women Jail stating that it "speaks volumes that the convict was beyond all possibility of reformation."

"The convict is lacking in basic human values or psyche which can be amenable for any reformation. The entire act of committing murder of a small girl child by burying her alive is a scar on human values and the accused has broken the faith of neighbours and the faith in humanity," it said.

In light of the above, the Court opined, the present case falls within the purview of "rarest of rare cases" and calls for the imposition of capital punishment upon the convict and any lesser sentence would do grave injustice not only to the victim and her family but to the collective conscience of the society as well. Accused Neelam is a menace to society and she continues to be so and cannot be reformed.

BD Gupta, Addl.PP for the State assisted by Parupkar Singh Ghumman, Advocate for complainant.

Convict Neelam in custody represented by Varinder Jit Singh Randhawa, Advocate and Seema Sangowal, Advocate.

(source: livelaw.in)

BANGLADESH:

2 get death penalty for killing trio in Ctg

A Chattogram court today awarded death penalty to 2 men for killing 3 members of a family in city's Biyazid Bostami Thana area 19 years ago.

The First Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge Kamal Hossain Sikdar delivered the verdict on Thursday in presence of the convicted persons.

The convicts are Abul Kashem alias Jamai Kashem and Yousuf alias Biatta Yousuf hailed from Baluchara area under Biyazid Bostami Thana in the city.

According to the prosecution, the convicted persons shot to kill their neighbor Manowara Begum and her 2 brothers Alamgir and Saiful Islam over previous enmity for land dispute at night of city's Baluchara area, under Bayazid Thana on June 29 in 2004.

On June 30 in 2004, victim Saiful's wife Aysha Akter Shilpi filed a murder case with Biyazid Thana against 4 persons.

Later, the accused Gittu Nasir and Foiz Munna were killed by cross fire.

Police submitted charge sheet on February 7 in 2005 against 2 persons while the court framed charges against them on July 5 in 2007.

The court pronounced the verdict today after examining 13 prosecution witnesses out of 22 in presence of the convicted persons.

The court also imposed penalty Taka 2 lakh as fine to them.

(source: bssnews.net)

AFGHANISTAN:

Taliban must halt all executions and abolish death penalty----Executions As a Violation

Responding to the double public executions by the Taliban yesterday, Livia Saccardi, Amnesty International’s interim Deputy Regional Director for South Asia, said:

“We oppose all executions as a violation of the right to life. The Taliban has been repeatedly carrying them out publicly which is a gross affront to human dignity as well as a violation of international laws and standards and cannot be tolerated.

“Amnesty International reiterates that the Taliban de-facto authorities must immediately halt all executions and abolish the death penalty and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishments. Carrying out executions in public adds to the inherent cruelty of the death penalty and can only have a dehumanizing effect on the victim and a brutalizing effect on those who witness the executions. Meanwhile, the protection of the right to a fair trial under the Taliban`s de facto authority remains seriously concerning.

“It’s high time that the international community and the UN up the pressure on the blatant human rights violations by the Taliban and help ensure that international safeguards are respected in Afghanistan.”

Background:

The Taliban carried out a double public execution at a stadium in Ghazni city in southeastern Afghanistan on 22 February, as thousands watched the shooting of two convicted men as their victims’ relatives fired the gunshot.

The two executed men were identified as Syed Jamal from central Wardak province and Gul Khan from Ghazni. They were allegedly responsible for the stabbing to death of two people in separate attacks. The department of culture and information of Ghazni province in a statement said that the decision was made on the basis of the Taliban leader Haibatullah Akhundzada’s decree and the rulings of 3 courts.

Amnesty International has previously condemned the resumption of public executions in Afghanistan after the Taliban’s takeover of power. Last year, in its annual Death Penalty report, Amnesty International documented the highest number of judicial executions recorded globally since 2017. As of today, 112 countries have fully abolished the death penalty and more than 2/3 are abolitionist in law or practice. The organization has been campaigning for complete abolition of the death penalty since 1977.

(source: rawa.org)

ISRAEL:

Israeli minister Ben Gvir calls for execution of Palestinian prisoners to ease overcrowding----The far-right national security minister says the death penalty is a 'partial solution' to prisons bursting with Palestinian captives

Itamar Ben Gvir, Israel's far-right national security minister, has called for the execution of Palestinian prisoners to ease overcrowding in the country's jails.

Writing on social media, he welcomed a decision by the Israeli army to build 936 additional prison places for "security prisoners".

"The additional construction will allow the prison service to take in more terrorists, and will bring a partial solution to the prison crisis that exists in the Shabak," he said, referring to the Israeli Prison Service.

"The death penalty for terrorists is the right solution to the incarceration problem, until then - glad that the government approved the proposal I brought."

In a statement on Wednesday marking Palestinian Prisoners' Day, the Gaza media office said over 5,000 Palestinians had been arrested by Israeli forces during their current war on Gaza, which started on 7 October.

The office also said that Palestinian prisoners were undergoing "the worst kinds of torture" in Israeli jails, and asked the international community to intervene.

'Intolerable overcrowding'

The Israeli Public Defender's Office in February published a report stating that some Israeli prisons have been declared to be in a state of emergency due to severe overcrowding.

During a visit by members of the Public Defender’s Office, squalid conditions were noted, including "intolerable overcrowding", with less than 3 square metres of space per person, poor sanitary conditions, pest issues, inadequate ventilation, and a lack of basic necessities for the incarcerated.

The report said that the overcrowding has caused people stress and anxiety, which can at times cause unnecessary friction in cells.

A statement from the Public Defender’s Office said that it had witnessed an “unprecedented prison crisis, in which detainees and prisoners were crowded into inhumane living spaces”.

It added that almost half of the incarcerated in Israel are held in harsh conditions that do not meet the High Court’s "first step" of living space, which states that they are to be held in an area of no less than three square metres.

Thousands have also been detained in the occupied West Bank since 7 October.

Palestinian rights group Addameer said on Wednesday that Israel was holding 9,500 Palestinian political prisoners, not including those taken from Gaza.

"The date of October 7 marked a significant turning point that imposed radical transformations on the reality of prisoners and detainees in Israeli occupation prisons," said the group in a statement.

"This was reflected across all dimensions related to this issue, in light of the comprehensive aggression against our people and their detainees, and the ongoing genocide against our people in Gaza for over six consecutive months."

Dozens gathered to protest in the West Bank city of Ramallah on Wednesday to mark Palestinian Prisoners' Day, with some demonstrators calling for the release of their imprisoned relatives.

(source: middleeasteye.net)

YEMEN:

Nimisha Priya’s mother to leave for Yemen on Saturday

(see: https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/kerala/nimisha-priya-premakumari-yemen-1.9494239_

IRAN----executions

2 Inmate Executed in Ghezel Hesar Prison

2 individuals convicted of murder met their fate through execution at Ghezel Hesar Prison on April 17, 2024.

HRANA has identified one of the executed inmates as Sadegh Tajik, an Afghan national hailing from Varamin. Tajik had been convicted of murder.

Additionally, while official media within Iran announced the execution of another inmate without specifying the location, HRANA’s investigations suggest that the execution took place at Ghezel Hesar Prison. These individuals had also been sentenced to death by the Criminal Court.

Furthermore, HRANA reported last Sunday that 5 inmates had been transferred to solitary confinement within the prison, signaling impending executions. Of these, 2 were executed, 2 received temporary reprieves, and 1 was spared from death after obtaining consent from the victim’s family.

According to data gathered by the Department of Statistics and Publication of Human Rights Activists, Ghezel Hesar Prison in Karaj witnessed the highest number of executions in 2023, with Zahedan Prison following closely behind.

(source: en-hrana.org)

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

Iran Executes 2 Amid Death Penalty Surge

2 people convicted of murder were executed at Ghezelhesar prison in Iran, as reported by a human rights organization.

HRANA, a human rights organization, has identified one of the executed inmates as Sadegh Tajik, an Afghan national, who had been convicted of murder.

Official Iranian media announced the execution of another inmate without specifying the location.

Additionally, 5 people convicted of drug-related offenses were executed at Vakilabad Prison in Mashhad on April 15, according to Haalvsh, a 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.

In recent weeks, the sharp rise in executions in the country has 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)

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

Arsalan Hashemi Executed in Hamedan

Arsalan Hashemi, a man on death row for drug-related charges, was executed in Hamedan Central Prison.

According to HRANA news agency, a man was executed in Hamedan Central Prison on 14 April. His identity has been reported as 31-year-old Arsalan Hashemi who was sentenced to death for drug-related charges by the Revolutionary Court.

Hengaw quoted an informed source in a separate report: “Arsalan Hashemi was from Kermanshah and arrested 4 years ago.”

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.

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

Afshin Bagh Shirin Executed in Urmia

Afshin Bagh Shirin, a man on death row for drug-related charges, was executed in Urmia Central Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a man was executed in Urmia Central Prison on 13 April. His identity has been established as 37-year-old Afshin Bagh Shirin who was sentenced to death for drug-related charges by the Revolutionary Court.

An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Afshin Bagh Shirin was arrested for drug-related charges 6 years ago. He was transferred to solitary confinement in preparation for his execution on 11 April.”

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

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.

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

Ways to Restrict the Death Penalty

This is an extract from the 2023 Annual Report on the Death Penalty in Iran. Sustained domestic campaigning and international pressure

The 2017 Amendments to the Anti-Narcotics Law, which was impelled by international pressure on the Islamic Republic to decrease drug-related executions, led to the most significant reduction in the number of implemented death sentences in the Islamic Republic’s history. From an average of about 403 annual executions between 2010-2017, the numbers dropped to less than 30 drug-related executions per year. At the time of the 2017 Amendment, Iran Human Rights warned that the Amendment would not lead to sustained reduction in the use of the death penalty as it did not address the issue of lack of due process and unfair trials. As feared, the impact of the Amendment only lasted for 3 years. In 2021, the number of drug-related executions increased by 5fold, a 10-fold increase in 2022, and 18 fold increase in 2023 compared to the 3 years after enforcement of the new Amendment (2018-2020). This trend is likely to continue as this hike has not been met with appropriate international condemnations. Between 2018-2020, when the number of drug-related executions were relatively low, qisas executions (death penalty as retribution-in-kind) accounted for the majority of all executions. These 2 charges together have accounted for more than 80% of all executions in the last 10 years. Reducing the use of the death penalty in Iran is therefore dependent on a change in qisas laws and practices, in addition to an abolition of the death penalty for drug offences.

While the number of drug-related executions decreased significantly after the peak in 2015, the number of qisas executions had small fluctuations in both directions. In 2023, at least 282 people were executed for murder, a slight decrease compared to 2022 but higher than 2015-2021. Drug-related executions increased 18 fold compared to the annual average of 2018 to 2020.

Experience over the past 2 decades have shown that the international community and Iranian civil society are the main driving forces behind any reform aimed at limiting the use of the death penalty in Iran. Halting the implementation of stoning punishments, which were carried out for adultery, and reducing the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences from 2018 to 2020 are two significant steps taken by the Iranian authorities to restrict the death penalty’s scope.

Both changes occurred as a result of simultaneous domestic campaigns and international pressure. The EU made the ban on stoning a condition for improved economic relations with Iran.[1] While the reduction in the number of drug-related executions was the result of a change of law and anticipated to be long-lasting, the recent rise in drug-related executions has demonstrated that the 2017 Amendment was not sustainable in restricting the use of the death penalty. Death sentences for drug offences can be issued by authorities through the Revolutionary Courts as long as capital punishment is sanctioned for drug offences and as long as the right to due process and fair trial are not guaranteed.

Likewise, the halt in implementing stoning punishments should be regarded as temporary, as it too is still written in law. A directive from the Head of Judiciary on the implementation of punishments published in June 2019 describes in detail how stoning sentences should be carried out. Stoning punishments can therefore be implemented again if international human rights mechanisms reduce scrutiny on the human rights situation in Iran.

Thus, sustained international pressure and domestic campaigns must call for a total abolition of these sentences in the law. A more detailed description of the events leading to changes in law and practice in the case of drug-related executions and stoning punishments can be found in the 2018 Annual Report on the Death Penalty.[2]

[1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2726009.stm

[2] https://iranhr.net/en/reports/21/

(source for all: iranhr.net)

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

10 Executions in Urmia, Qezelhessar, and Mashhad Prisons on Saturday, Monday, and Wednesday

On Wednesday, April 17, 2024, the Iranian regime’s executioners hanged Faramarz Tayyeb Bakhsheh, Sadegh Tajik, and another prisoner named Hossein in Qezelhessar Prison. On Monday, April 15, 5 prisoners named Behrouz Namdar, Mostafa Abdi, Javad Beigi, Ghasem Nasrollahzadeh, and Ali Ahmadi were hanged in Vakilabad Prison in Mashhad. On Saturday, April 13, Abolfazl Salem and Afshin Bagh Shirin were hanged in Urmia Central Prison.

On Tuesday, April 16, a Baluch compatriot named Ahmad Gorgij, who was sentenced to death, died in Zahedan Prison due to the prison guards’ refusal to provide him with medical treatment. Ahmad Gorgij, who had been in prison for 5 years, had been suffering from severe heart and kidney disease for the past year. Despite his deteriorating health since April 14, prison officials took no action to transfer him to the hospital.

The Iranian Resistance once again urges the United Nations, relevant organizations, the European Union, and its member states to take immediate action to stop the machinery of torture and execution in the warmongering mullahs’ dictatorship. The ringleaders of this regime, especially Ali Khamenei, Ebrahim Raisi, and Gholamhossein Eje’i, must be brought to justice for four decades of crimes against humanity and genocide.

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

APRIL 18, 2024:

TEXAS:

Texas criminal appeals court removes Tomas Gallo from death row because of his intellectual disability----The court re-sentenced Gallo to life in prison for the murder of his girlfriend’s 3-year-old daughter.

Texas’ highest criminal court re-sentenced death row inmate Tomas Gallo to life in prison Wednesday, ruling that he is too intellectually disabled to be executed.

A Harris County jury sentenced Gallo to death for murdering his girlfriend’s 3-year-old daughter. After Gallo babysat Destiny Flores, the young girl was found with a skull fracture and had been severely sexually assaulted.

During his 2004 trial, Gallo’s defense tried to convince jurors that he was intellectually disabled. The U.S. Supreme Court in 2002 banned the use of the death penalty on people with intellectual disabilities based on the Eighth Amendment’s restriction of cruel and unusual punishments.

But decades later, in a rare instance of cooperation between the defense and prosecutors, both parties filed a findings of fact and conclusion of law together claiming Gallo’s intellectual disability precludes him from the death chamber.

Richard Ellis, Gallo’s lawyer, told The Texas Tribune that the cooperation of the Harris County District Attorney’s office was crucial to Wednesday’s decision from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

“They recognized this was an injustice,” Ellis said. “They recognized the long and overwhelming documentation that was provided to show Mr. Gallo’s intellectual disability.”

The joint filing also cited false testimony by Dr. George Denkowski, a psychologist who examined the defendant, as evidence that Gallo should be removed from death row. Denkowski was barred from evaluating people on death row in 2011 after his testing methods were criticized as unscientific.

Wednesday’s decision was the 2nd time this year that the criminal appeals court removed a man from death row based on intellectual disability claims. In March, Randall Mays was re-sentenced to life in prison for the murder of 2 sheriff's deputies in Henderson County.

(source: Texas Tribune)

VIRGINIA:

End of a Bloody Era----Confident in Virginia’s rejection of the death penalty, an abolition group shuts down

The goal of any nonprofit is to achieve its objective and put itself out of business. That is what Virginians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty did in February.

According to Executive Director Michael Stone, VADP’s board of directors voted to shutter the organization after November’s state elections convinced them that a comfortable majority of Virginia legislators are in favor of abolition and that there was no chance of the death penalty returning for at least four years. One failed attempt, HB 394, was filed this year by Del. Tim Griffin, R-53rd.

Stone credits the abolition victory not just to VADP but also to the work of family members of murder victims, prosecutors, defense attorneys, conservatives, faith leaders and civil rights activists. “VADP and our allies were able to convince the General Assembly to end the racist scourge of capital punishment,” he says, adding that “Virginia has shown the way for other states across the South to abolish the death penalty.”

Virginia’s 1st execution was performed in 1608, and except for a moratorium between 1962 and 1982, the practice continued until 2017. While abolition efforts in Virginia began informally in the late 1970s, Virginians Against State Killing was formed in 1991. 2 years later, it became a 501(c)(4) and changed its name to VADP. In 2021, then-Gov. Ralph Northam ended Virginia’s 413-year death penalty history, following the executions of 1,390 men and women, more than any other state.

The organization has asked the Arlington nonprofit Justice Forward Virginia to monitor future legislation. VADP’s records and archives will be sent to the National Death Penalty Archive at the State University of New York at Albany.

“It has truly been an honor and a privilege to lead VADP over the past 9 years,” Stone says. “The relationships that I have forged in that time have enriched my life beyond measure.”

(source: Dale Brumfield served as VADP’s field director from 2017 to 2021 and as executive director from 2021 to 2022----richmondmagazine.com)

FLORIDA:

Nassau County cop killer's trial comes at a time when it's easier for juries to recommend death----A change in Florida law, which happened during the time McDowell was in jail, makes it so the state only requires eight jurors to recommend death.

This week, Nassau County jurors are hearing evidence in Patrick McDowell’s case to decide whether he lives or dies. McDowell pleaded guilty to shooting and killing Nassau County Sheriff’s Deputy Joshua Moyers in 2021.

“Patrick McDowell should be sentenced to death,” Chris Huband with the State Attorney’s Office 4th Judicial Circuit told the jury during the state's opening statements on Monday.

McDowell's trial comes at a time when it's easier to be sentenced to the death penalty in Florida than just a year ago.

Florida no longer needs a unanimous jury to recommend death in a death penalty trial and certain child sex offenders are now eligible for a death sentence. The first of these laws was changed 1 year ago on Saturday.

Since the law changed, juries have recommended death for 2 people in Duval County. But if those cases were tried before the new law, there would not have been enough jurors to recommend a death sentence.

Shannon Schott, past president of the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Northeast Chapter, said because fewer jurors are now needed to recommend death, it’s likely more attorneys and defendants are trying to negotiate in order to avoid getting to that point.

In the past year, juries have recommended that Markas Fishburne and Michael Jackson receive the death penalty.

Neither of their juries voted unanimously for death. Fishburne’s jury was an eight to four vote and Jackson’s was a 10 to two vote, according to the State Attorney’s Office. If either of them had been tried earlier, they would have been given life in prison, because they did not have a unanimous vote for death.

“What we are hearing from the attorneys who are representing these individuals is that the rules have changed in the middle of the game because the law was applied retroactively," Schott said. "It doesn’t matter what day the offense happened, it’s the day that they get sentenced.”

Schott said a judge still has the final say in sentencing.

McDowell’s defense begins its case on Thursday. They are expected to produce witnesses with insight into McDowell's past military experience and apparent addiction issues.

(source: First Coast News)

ALABAMA:

Lawmakers reject bill to retroactively apply ban on judges overriding juries to impose death sentence

The Alabama House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday rejected a bill that would have required courts to resentence people sentenced to death by judges over a jury’s recommendation of life in prison.

The bill was rejected on a party line vote, with nine Republicans voting against it, and four Democrats voting for it.

The Legislature passed a bill in 2017 to ban judicial override, giving juries the final say on whether to impose the death penalty. Alabama had been the only state that allowed a judge to override a jury’s recommendation when sentencing capital murder cases.

But that ban on judicial override applied only to people charged after April 11, 2017. So it did not affect the sentences of those already on death row because a judge overrode a jury’s recommendation.

HB27, by Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, would apply the 2017 ban on judicial override retroactively, so that those on death row because of an override would have to be resentenced to life without parole.

Life without parole and death are the only 2 sentences for capital crimes in Alabama.

About 33 people on death row would be resentenced under England’s bill, according to the ACLU of Alabama, which supports HB27.

England said at he thought that because the Legislature decided, in a bipartisan bill that passed in 2017, that judicial override should be repealed, that the only right thing to do was to resentence those on death row to life without parole.

But Republicans on the committee argued that judges made those decisions under the law on the books at the time.

Rep. David Faulkner, R-Mountain Brook, said he did not want to overturn the judges’ decisions because there was no way to know why the judges overrode the juries.

Former Alabama Govs. Don Siegelman and Robert Bentley have taken a public stance in support of England’s bill. Siegelman and Bentley took the same position last year in an op-ed article in The Washington Post, when they also spoke out against death sentences imposed by less than a unanimous decision by a jury. Alabama law allows juries to impose the death sentence by a vote of 10 of 12 jurors.

England sponsored the bill on judicial override last year, but it did not pass. In March, England spoke at a rally held by death penalty opponents and family members and advocates of people on death row.

“Justice demands us to afford those individuals who are still on death row, who are there for a judicial override, the opportunity to be resentenced,” England told the crowd at the rally. “It only makes sense, and that’s in its purest sense what justice means.”

(source: al.com)

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

Lawmakers vote down bill that would allow some Alabama death row inmates to be resentenced

Alabama lawmakers on Wednesday rejected a bill that would provide new sentences for about 30 inmates who were given the death penalty despite a jury’s recommendation of life imprisonment.

The House Judiciary Committee voted 9-4 against the bill that would give life without parole sentences to the death row inmates who were placed there under a now-abolished system that allowed judges to override a jury’s recommendation in death penalty cases.

Alabama in 2017 became the last state to end the practice of allowing judges to override a jury’s sentence recommendation in death penalty case, but the change was not retroactive. There are about 33 people on Alabama’s death row who were sentenced by judicial override, England said.

“We all decided that judicial override was wrong, and we repealed that section. The only right thing to do, in my opinion, is to afford everybody who was sentenced by judicial override the opportunity to be resentenced,” state Rep. Chris England, the sponsor of the bill, told the committee.

The bill was rejected on a party-line vote, with 9 Republicans voting against it, and the 4 Democrats voting for it.

(source: Associated Press)

TENNESSEE:

How lethal injection problems could end the death penalty

All but one of the 27 states that have the death penalty, which is opposed by 40% of Americans, are using lethal injection to execute convicted murderers on death row.

A review of the comments of the legislators who sponsored lethal injection bills in their states indicated that “the allure of lethal injection was a visually palatable execution that would be easier for the public to accept,” said Corinna Barrett Lain, the S.D. Roberts & Sandra Moore professor of law at the University of Richmond School of Law in Virginia, in a recent talk to the League of Women Voters of Oak Ridge.

“With lethal injection you don’t have to deal with the sizzling smell and burning flesh of electrocution,” she said. “Or people gasping for breath in the gas chamber. Or the sight of blood with the firing squad. When lethal injection is not botched, it looks like the person being executed is drifting off to sleep” like a dying pet being euthanized, or killed humanely, to stop its suffering.

But the public is gradually learning that lethal injection is not a humane punishment, said Lain, who argued that lethal injection litigation and other issues could ultimately end the death penalty nationwide.

She has written a book on lethal injection that she claimed she did not want to write, but felt compelled to complete for several reasons. The book “Secrets of the Killing State: The Untold Story of Lethal Injection” will be published next year.

What lethal injection does to the human body

In a study published in 2020 and reported by National Public Radio, she said, more than 200 execution autopsies nationwide showed that 84% of the executed prisoners’ lungs exhibited acute pulmonary edema. The reason is that the injected drugs chemically burn capillaries in the lungs, causing them to become leaky so fluid seeps into them.

“That meant they had been slowly drowning to death in their own fluids,” she said. “Experts said they must have felt like they had been waterboarded to death.”

One drug that also causes the injected prisoner to struggle to breathe is a paralytic, she said, explaining that this muscle relaxant is used by surgeons to minimize patients’ movements to optimize operating conditions. But patients given paralytics are put on breathing machines.

“The paralytic relaxes the muscles in the face of the person being executed and gives him a nice peaceful look even though he may be struggling to breathe and not dying peacefully,” she said. The problem is that the drug paralyzes the diaphragm muscles, which pushes air in and out, stopping the breathing.

Lain said one doctor told her that “not being able to breathe is one of the most powerful, excruciating feelings known to man. Panic and terror and the attempt to fight take over. Even human beings who are underwater will reach such a level of agony that they will be compelled to take a breath within about a minute, which is how people drown.”

Noting that Gov. Bill Lee put Tennessee’s executions on hold in 2022 because of problems with lethal injection, she surprised the LWVOR audience by stating that Tennessee’s 3-drug protocol requires 10 to 15 syringes and that the injections are done by prison guards, not doctors, nurses or other medically trained personnel.

“(And) corrections officers are among the lowest paid of state employees,” she said.

In the past 10 years, Lain noted, “lethal injection litigation has held up more executions than any other claim, such as racial inequality or evidence of a convict’s innocence. Lethal injection is bringing the death penalty to its knees. It's like throwing a fistful of sand into the machinery of death, grinding it to a halt.”

She gave several reasons why the death penalty in the United States may ultimately be abolished.

“Lethal injection litigation has made the death penalty salient again,” she said. “The point of using lethal injection was to minimize opposition to the death penalty by making people think very little about at all,” she said. “It was supposed to be a way for executions to go quietly into the night.”

Owing to lethal injection litigation and bad publicity produced by investigative journalism, unwanted attention has been brought to this type of capital punishment, Lain remarked.

She said the 1st chapter of her book tells about the famously botched execution of Clayton Lockett 10 years ago in Oklahoma. It was one of the top ten news stories of 2014.

Lain mentioned that investigative reporters revealed the man behind Harris Pharma from which Texas and Arizona had tried to purchase a lethal injection drug. Harris, who had a small office in India, was contracted to take a pharmaceutical company’s samples to African hospitals to help the firm gain a drug distribution deal. But instead, Harris “misappropriated the drugs and sold them to the states for use in lethal injections,” she said.

In another case, she added, “Missouri was caught buying drugs from a compounding pharmacy that in the last inspection had 1,800 safety regulatory violations. The place ended up closing because of all the bad publicity.”

She noted that the dyslexic doctor who measured, mixed and loaded drugs into the syringes used by prison guards for lethal injections had more than 20 malpractice lawsuits, and his hospital privileges at two medical centers were revoked.

A final reason why Lain thinks that lethal injection issues could help end the death penalty is that the bad publicity “has inadvertently brought new allies to the abolitionist cause.”

One ally is Europe, she said, since “it has been anti-death penalty for decades because the Holocaust during World War II revealed the dangers of the killing state, a state that has the ability to kill its own citizens. The abolitionist European Union has been working hard to get the United States to end the death penalty.”

In 2010, European companies realized they were exporting drugs to the U.S. that were being used for lethal injection. EU countries passed export control laws that prevented European drug companies from supplying ingredients to the United States that may be used in lethal injections.

A shortage of drugs needed by death penalty states ensued, contributing to a decline in executions. The shortage worsened because the U.S. drug companies also became allies to the abolitionist cause. Lain said they refused to sell drugs to the states for use in executions by lethal injection.

Lain gave examples of American drug companies’ mottos such as “Drugs for Life,” “Advancing Wellness” and “Live Longer Better.” She added, “Big Pharma recognized that selling drugs to the state to kill people was not good for their bottom line.

“Some of these companies had been sued when there was a botched execution for which their drugs were used,” she said. “Over 60 drug manufacturers now have end-user agreements on their sales to keep the drugs they market out of executioners' hands.”

She noted that drugs used for lethal injection are on the World Health Organization’s essential medicines list and on the drug shortage list of the Food and Drug Administration.

As a result, another ally opposing lethal injection for killing convicts is the medical community. Quoting from her forthcoming book, Lain said, “A 2017 study found that a stockpile of lethal injection drugs in just four states was enough to treat 11,257 patients. In 2020, the COVID crisis led a group of health care professionals to write an open letter to state corrections departments.”

Here is an excerpt from the letter: “As pharmacists, public health experts, and frontline intensive care unit doctors serving patients at bedside, we write to inform you that many of the medicines your states are currently holding for lethal injection are in short supply and desperately needed to treat patients suffering from COVID-19.”

When states stockpiling these drugs find out that certain medicines are running out, some of the states “are buying their drugs surreptitiously,” she noted.

In one of her concluding statements, Lain asserted, “Lethal injection has brought untold attention to the death penalty. It has exposed the ugly underbelly of the death penalty, and it has brought new allies into the anti-death penalty fight.”

(source: oakridger.com)

ARIZONA:

'It Has To End': Justices Mull Finality In 32-Year Murder Saga

In its 2nd review of drug-fueled, baseball bat killings during the presidency of George H.W. Bush, the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday pondered steering an Arizona man's capital punishment challenge toward conclusion, perhaps by handling evidentiary tasks normally left to lower courts.

The idea of attempting to bring about closure occurred during oral arguments regarding the death penalty sentence imposed against Danny Lee Jones, who was found guilty of murder in the 1992 attacks on a friend, Robert Weaver, and the friend's 7-year-old daughter, Tisha Weaver, after using alcohol and methamphetamine.

Jones & Justice

The criminal justice proceedings surrounding killings committed by Arizona resident Danny Lee Jones have spanned more than 3 decades.

1992

After using alcohol and methamphetamine, Jones attacked his friend Robert Weaver with a baseball bat, as well as Weaver's 7-year-old daughter, Tisha Weaver, and grandmother Katherine Gumina.

1993

A jury convicted Jones of murder in the deaths of the Weavers and attempted murder in his attack on Gumina. Gumina later died because of her injuries, but the indictment wasn't amended. A judge sentenced Jones to death.

1996

The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed Jones' conviction and sentence.

1999

Jones sought post-conviction relief in state court, with the sentencing judge presiding, and was ultimately unsuccessful.

2001

Jones initiated habeas corpus proceedings in federal court challenging his sentence.

2006

After a multiday hearing regarding Jones' claims of ineffective counsel at sentencing, an Arizona federal judge denied relief.

2009

The Ninth Circuit reversed, finding that Jones' lawyer "failed to discover all reasonably available evidence or conduct a reasonable investigation," and that the lawyer's "investigation and presentation of mitigating evidence was woefully inadequate."

2011

The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit and remanded for further consideration under Cullen v. Pinholster, where the justices held that federal habeas review is limited to the record in state court.

2018

On remand from the Ninth Circuit, the same Arizona federal judge again denied relief.

2022

Citing the state court record, the Ninth Circuit again reversed, holding that Jones' trial counsel was "constitutionally ineffective by failing to secure a defense mental health expert."

2023

The Arizona Office of the Attorney General petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court, which granted review after discussion at eight of its conferences — a sizable number for any petition.

Early in Wednesday's arguments, Arizona Deputy Solicitor General Jason D. Lewis defended the state's request that the high court reverse a ruling of the Ninth Circuit, which deemed Jones' trial counsel "constitutionally ineffective," and order an end to his efforts to escape execution.

If the Supreme Court disagrees with the Ninth Circuit, it would ordinarily vacate the ruling and remand for reconsideration. But the case's duration and roller-coaster route — including Jones' triumph in an earlier Ninth Circuit ruling that the high court vacated and remanded — now warrant a different outcome, Lewis said Wednesday.

"I think concepts of finality would dictate that the circuit court has had this case for so long, and has spent so much time granting relief on certain issues, reserving other ones, and then having it sent back continuously — it has to end at some point," the deputy solicitor general said.

That assertion came in response to questioning by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who skeptically replied, "That's nice, but we're not fact-finders, and we generally don't weigh evidence. There's thousands of pages in this record."

Later in the arguments, however, Justice Neil Gorsuch observed that "this case has been lingering for decades, and that we've already vacated and remanded this case once." He suggested it might be appropriate for the justices to weigh aggravating and mitigating factors in accordance with Strickland v. Washington , where the high court in 1984 detailed standards for death penalty challenges alleging ineffective counsel.

"Wouldn't there be some value to everybody to have some finality in this case, and just have us do the Strickland weighing in the first instance?" Justice Gorsuch asked Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP partner Jean-Claude André, counsel for Jones.

"I think that the typical procedure is to send it back to the lower court, but if this court wants to do that, you have the record, you have the law," André replied. "You could do that reweighing if you think the Ninth Circuit was insufficient."

In Jones' case, the weighing would determine if there's "a reasonable probability" that mitigating factors — such as the lasting trauma of extensive abuse and head injuries during his childhood — would overcome aggravating factors, such as the finding that he committed killings "in an especially heinous or depraved manner." When Jones carried out those killings, he also attacked Weaver's grandmother, Katherine Gumina; she died of her injuries after a 17-month coma, but the state didn't alter its indictment accordingly, and Jones was only convicted of attempted murder.

Jones isn't challenging any of his convictions. But he says poor lawyering led to sentencing prior to a proper accounting of mitigating mental health evidence, giving the sentencing judge an incomplete understanding of the emotional and physical agony pervading his formative years.

To varying degrees, the high court's three left-leaning justices on Wednesday sounded receptive to the idea that Jones' excruciating upbringing, plus the permanent harm to his mental health, might be enough to spare him from execution.

Justice Sotomayor, for instance, faulted the district judge who ruled against Jones — and whom the Ninth Circuit reversed — for seemingly demanding a crystal-clear "nexus between the injury and the crime." Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also dinged the district judge, saying on Wednesday that the judge was "screening the mitigating evidence" based on its perceived credibility, resulting in "a smaller corpus of mitigating evidence."

The high court's third liberal, Justice Elena Kagan, echoed those critiques, at one point saying, "The district court misunderstood its role." But Justice Kagan also knocked the Ninth Circuit's opinion, proclaiming that it "completely ignores all the aggravating evidence, which was substantial in this case."

André pushed back on that characterization, arguing that the appeals court's opinion used "brutal language" to describe aggravating factors and "didn't shy away from the underlying facts of these murders."

"I wish the Ninth Circuit had said more on this particular part of its analysis, because it is the thinnest," the BCLP attorney conceded. "But I think it's still enough."

Several of the court's 6 right-leaning justices, however, expressed doubt that post-conviction revelations about the extent and effects of Jones' youthful suffering would outweigh the brutality of his crimes.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., for one, used a hypothetical defendant who is "sort of like Hannibal Lecter" to challenge the contention — expressed during briefing by Jones and supportive amici — that mitigation can overcome "powerful aggravation evidence."

"You've got a defendant who has kidnapped and hideously tortured 25 children, and sent messages to the media saying, 'I love to kill, and I'll always kill if I have the chance.' You've got the most horrible aggravating evidence that you possibly can have," Justice Alito said as he outlined the hypothetical and sounded increasingly incredulous. "Then you say that all that's necessary in order to get resentenced is for the defendant to come up with evidence that a reasonable sentencer might deem relevant to the defendant's moral capability? That's your argument?"

Justice Brett Kavanaugh also voiced skepticism, noting that the original sentencing proceedings looked at a smaller set of similar "mitigators that dealt with the substance abuse, with the childhood, with the treatment, the abuse problem."

Among the other conservatives, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Clarence Thomas didn't say much, but their few words lacked any support for the Ninth Circuit's ruling. Justice Amy Coney Barrett also had little to say, but she did signal agreement with Justice Kagan's criticism of the Ninth Circuit, and she asked, "Why wouldn't a vacate and remand be appropriate?"

André responded with another defense of the appeals court, but he also seemed content to accept a remand rather than a definitive decision against Jones.

"If this court finds that the Ninth Circuit's weighing … is insufficient, I think that is the proper recourse, to send it back to the Ninth Circuit," André said.

A decision in the case is expected by late June.

The state is represented by the Arizona Office of the Attorney General.

Jones is represented by Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP and the Federal Public Defender's Office for the District of Arizona.

The case is Thornell v. Jones, case number 22-982, before the Supreme Court of the United States.

(source: law360.com)

USA:

Black Prisoners Face Higher Rate of Botched Executions, Study Finds----Lethal injections of Black people in the United States were botched more than twice as often as those of white people, according to a report from an anti-death-penalty group.

As Clayton Lockett lay on an execution table in Oklahoma in 2014 awaiting his death, medical officials struggled to gain access to a vein to administer a lethal injection. They inserted needles in his arms, his neck, his chest and eventually his groin, where they mistakenly struck an artery. The prison warden later described it as “a bloody mess.”

The execution was called off, but with most of the drugs having already been injected, Mr. Lockett was pronounced dead on the table about 20 minutes later. Mr. Lockett’s case spurred Oklahoma to overhaul its execution protocols and, months later, the state stopped carrying out the death penalty for several years.

But a new report released by an anti-death-penalty group on Thursday suggests that the botched execution is also part of a disturbing, nationwide pattern: Executioners have botched the lethal injections of Black people, like Mr. Lockett, more than twice as often as those of white prisoners, the report said.

That finding builds on a wealth of research into racial disparities in how the U.S. judicial system administers the death penalty. The proportion of Black people on death rows is far higher than their share of the population as a whole, and one study in Philadelphia found that the people most likely to receive death sentences were Black defendants convicted of killing victims who were not Black.

The new report, from Reprieve, a human rights group that opposes the death penalty, adds to that previous research with findings that the likelihood of a botched lethal injection is also higher for Black people on death row.

“We know that there’s racism in the criminal justice system,” said Maya Foa, an executive director of Reprieve. “We know it’s there in the capital punishment system, from who gets arrested, who gets sentenced, all of it. This is, though, the first time that it’s been looked at in the context of the execution itself.”

She said the extent of the disparity found by the researchers, Reprieve staff members, was “really alarming.”

The group was not able to explain why Black prisoners had suffered botched executions at a higher rate, saying that more research was needed. Reprieve also said that there appeared to be “no easy answers,” adding that “across the botched executions studied, similar issues arose whether the execution was of a Black person or a white person.”

Austin Sarat, a professor at Amherst College in Massachusetts who has long studied the death penalty, said the new research was “an enormous step forward in understanding the pervasiveness and influence of race” in how the death penalty is carried out. Professor Sarat, who saw the report but did not work on it, said it appeared that racial biases that harm Black people in other contexts, such as in medical care or policing, also do so in execution rooms.

“The finding doesn’t surprise me, in the context of what we know about the disparities throughout society,” he said. “Here is now another instance.”

Two other prominent experts in race and the death penalty, Stephen Bright at Yale Law School and Jennifer L. Eberhardt at Stanford University, said the findings were intriguing and that more research was needed to explain them.

Professor Eberhardt was the lead author of a landmark 2006 study that found that, in criminal cases with white victims, defendants perceived as looking more “stereotypically Black” were more likely to be sentenced to death. She said she could not immediately think of any previous research that could explain the disparity in botched executions.

Dr. Ervin Yen, an anesthesiologist and former Republican state senator in Oklahoma who has witnessed 11 executions for the state but does not actively participate, said several factors can make it more difficult to insert an intravenous line. They include the patient’s being overweight or having a history of injecting drugs, he said.

Dr. Yen, who said he has started “zillions of IVs” in medical settings, said that it can sometimes be harder to get access to veins on people with darker skin because the veins can be less visible. He said more research should be done to pursue an explanation for the report’s findings.

The report’s authors also encouraged more research, writing that it should “be considered in the context of extensively documented racism in the U.S. capital punishment system.”

Executions have declined since their modern peak, in 1999, and only five states carried out executions in 2023, but how exactly lethal injections are administered has come under increased scrutiny as states encounter problems getting reliable drugs from pharmaceutical companies and reports proliferate of executions gone awry.

Alabama and Oklahoma have in recent years imposed temporary moratoriums on executions after failed lethal injections, including Mr. Lockett’s. The Death Penalty Information Center said that more than 1/3 of execution attempts were mishandled in 2022, and researchers there described it as “the year of the botched execution.”

Problems with accessing drugs and carrying out executions with them were part of what led Alabama, this year, to carry out the 1st execution in the United States using nitrogen gas. Several witnesses described the execution as not going according to plan, though the state defended it as a “textbook” procedure.

In the new report, researchers studied 1,407 lethal injection attempts from 1977 through 2023 and looked for signs that the execution was botched, like if a person appeared to be conscious after the lethal drug or drugs were injected; if there was a problem inserting an intravenous line; or if a person reacted unexpectedly, such as by vomiting.

The executions that the report labeled “botched” ranged widely. In one case, it was merely delayed by “several minutes” as staff members tried to find a suitable vein for a backup needle. Others, like Mr. Lockett’s, were far more grisly.

The report concluded that 37 of 465 executions of Black people were botched — about 8 % — compared with 28 out of 780, or about 3.6 %, of those of white people. Even accounting for age and gender, the researchers said, executions of Black people were more than twice as likely to be botched than those of white people.

The researchers said they did not come to any statistically significant conclusions about the executions of Latino prisoners. Their analysis also showed that 1/5 of the 20 executions of American Indian or Alaska Native people were botched, but that the finding was not examined closely because of the small sample size.

In some states, the numbers were particularly stark. In Georgia, Black people made up 30% of those executed during the relevant time period and 86 % of the executions identified as botched. In Arkansas, about 30 % of Black prisoners had their executions botched, the report said, compared with 13 % for all prisoners.

In addition to the findings on race, older prisoners were markedly more likely to have problematic executions, the researchers said, with the chance of it rising by an average of 6 % for each year of someone’s life. This year, Idaho abandoned an execution after trying and failing to find a suitable vein in a 73-year-old prisoner, Thomas Creech, who had been sentenced to death more than 40 years earlier.

The group also noted a lack of transparency in capital punishment that hindered attempts to understand what is causing the problems. This includes the opaque way fatal drugs are often procured — such as states passing shield laws to hide details about where the drugs were sourced — as well as the regularity with which prison officials minimize problems that take place during executions.

The report also said that executions often went wrong when officials were trying to rush, for example when drugs were expiring soon or, as in Mr. Lockett’s case in Oklahoma, 2 executions were scheduled for the same day.

In that case, the second execution was postponed after Mr. Lockett’s execution was botched. 6 months later, the 2nd prisoner’s execution was botched, too, when officials used the wrong drug to stop his heart.

(source: New York Times)

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

States botched more executions of Black prisoners. Experts think they know why

Studies of the death penalty have long shown racial inequality in its application, but a new report has found the disparity extends inside the death chamber itself. In an analysis of the more than 1,400 lethal injection executions conducted in the U.S. since 1982, researchers for the nonprofit Reprieve reported that states made significantly more mistakes during the executions of Black people than they did with prisoners of other races.

Reprieve, which advocates against the death penalty, found that nationwide, half of the botched lethal injection executions were of Black people, though only 1/3 of the prisoners executed were Black. The pattern was starkest in some Southern states. In Arkansas, Oklahoma and Georgia, 3/4 or more of the botched lethal injection executions were of Black people, though they accounted only for 1/3 or less of executions in those states.

Lethal injection requires execution workers to administer drugs intravenously to the prisoner to stop their heart. It has become the most commonly used execution method across the country, though it is also the method with the most recorded "botches," or mistakes.

There is no standard definition of what constitutes a botched execution. For its analysis, Reprieve designated an execution as botched if it met certain criteria. Researchers checked documents and witness reports to confirm details like whether there was evidence that a prisoner made visible or audible expressions of pain, was still conscious after a drug was administered, or whether execution workers had struggled at length to find a prisoner's veins.

Joe Nathan James Jr. was executed on July 28, 2022, by lethal injection at an Alabama prison for the 1994 shooting death of his former girlfriend. His execution lasted for at least three hours, and was widely considered botched.

That happened in 2022, when execution workers in Alabama spent three hours attempting to insert an IV line into the veins of Joe Nathan James, Jr., a Black man. His autopsy showed puncture marks and cuts in his feet, hands, wrists and arms.. A few months later, Alabama left white prisoner Kenneth Smith alive on the gurney for hours after they struggled to find a vein to use for his lethal injection execution, prompting his lawyers to ask the state to use nitrogen gas to execute him in January.

Lengthy procedures like those were not uncommon, the Reprieve analysis found. Over one third of lethal injections lasted more than 45 minutes and over a quarter took an hour or more.

The executions typically involved a 3-drug regimen, though the protocol can vary. Some states have injected just one drug and others up to four. With the 3-drug method, the 1st drug used is an anesthetic, to numb the prisoner. The 2nd drug paralyzes the muscles, and the 3rd stops the heart. Most executions were conducted with sodium thiopental as the anesthetic. Other states used drugs like pentobarbital, midazolam, etomidate or fentanyl in their regimens. None of the drugs have been FDA-approved for this application, and pharmaceutical companies have widely opposed their use in executions.

Still, the Reprieve analysis found that no specific drug led states to make more mistakes.

"There are botched executions, many of them, regardless of the drug, regardless of the cocktail," said Maya Foa, the executive director of Reprieve. "Continuing to tinker with the machinery of death is not making this better."

Reprieve determined that 73 lethal injection executions were botched; just over 5% of those conducted since 1982. The total may be conservative. Previous research has identified that the percentage of botched lethal injection executions using the same criteria could be higher than 7%, though that study did not examine the race of the prisoners, as Reprieve's did.

"The analysis shows not only are we botching these executions and causing people torture more often than with many other methods," said Foa, "But we are doing that to Black prisoners far, far more frequently than we are to white prisoners."

Studies of the death penalty have previously shown racial discrimination is prevalent throughout many steps of administering capital punishment – from jury selection to the sentencing and appeals process. A 2020 report from the nonprofit Death Penalty Information Center showed that people of color have been overrepresented on death rows in the U.S., and that killers of Black people were less likely to face the death penalty than those who kill white people.

But the Reprieve analysis is one of the first times that empirical evidence has indicated that racism extends even to the final step of the death penalty: the execution itself. While the study does not explain how or why states make more mistakes when executing Black prisoners, Foa said she thinks that the fact that Black people suffer from higher mortality rates and receive poorer medical treatment in the U.S should provide clues.

Ruqaiijah Yearby, a professor of health law at The Ohio State University who studies racism in healthcare, agreed. She said that racist tropes that can limit Black people from accessing equitable medical care, like the false notion that Black people have a higher tolerance for pain, could also be involved in the administration of drugs in the death chamber. Yearby cited research that showed that nationwide, Black cancer patients received lower doses of pain medication than cancer patients who were white.

"Black people don't have thicker skin, we don't have bigger bones," Yearby said. "But if you believe that, then you're going to treat somebody differently than if you're going to do it to a white person."

Dr. Scott Bowman, a professor of criminal justice at Texas State University whose academic work has focused on race and law enforcement, said he would expect that sort of discrimination to show up in lethal injection executions in subtle ways.

"You can't find a vein and you think, well, it really is hard to find veins in Black people, so I'm just going to keep sticking," he said.

Researchers would find it difficult to identify those kinds of interactions in the death chamber, partly because they could be subtle, and because the criminal justice system lacks transparency when those in power make mistakes, he said. But insiders could know more.

NPR interviewed 4 workers, none of whom were Black, who collectively witnessed or helped carry out 26 executions across the country.

Craig Baxley, a former executioner from South Carolina who pushed lethal injection drugs into prisoners' veins, said he "never noticed anything as far as treatment, or how anybody reacted to whether they were white or Black."

Jeanne Woodford, a former warden of the state prison in San Quentin, Calif., who oversaw four executions during her tenure, said something similar.

"I didn't see any difference at all," she remembered.

Woodford was aware, though, of some execution workers who may have believed people of color might have been more difficult to inject with the lethal injection drugs, a common misconception.

"I heard some guys say, 'Oh these guys are really muscular, it's going to be harder," she said. An execution worker in Nevada suggested that "maybe the nervous system of the Black inmate works different."

But Jeff Hood, a spiritual advisor who has been inside the death chamber during three executions of Black people and 3 white prisoners in Oklahoma, Texas and Alabama, said he did witness differences in the treatment of Black prisoners while they were strapped to the gurney.

"I can definitely tell you that the restraints that I have seen on Black folk have been unquestionably tighter than the restraints that I have seen on white folk," Hood said.

He believes that was related to the correctional officers' fear and prejudice of Black people, something Hood says is common where he lives in Arkansas. The only times Hood said he heard execution workers discussing whether a prisoner would resist was when the person scheduled to be executed was a person of color. This may have had an impact on how Black prisoners were treated as they were put to death, he thinks.

"If your assumption is that the person who is condemned is going to resist, then you are going to take much more liberties with the body than if you believe that the person was going to be perfectly peaceful," the spiritual advisor said. "And when you begin to take liberties with someone's body, you leave protocol and you leave best practices. When you leave protocol and you leave best practices, of course you are going to have a botched execution."

The authors of the Reprieve report recommended imposing a moratorium on lethal injection executions conducted at the state and federal levels, noting that there were fundamental legal, constitutional and ethical issues with the method. They called on governors of states where executions are allowed to commission investigations to better understand the issues, as well as repeal secrecy laws that may have prevented previous oversight.

"The death penalty in its application in the United States is racist," said Foa, Reprieve's executive director. "And we cannot continue to do this."

(source: npr.org)

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

Justices Sotomayor and Jackson Issue Dissents Over Supreme Court’s Refusal to Review Two Capital Misconduct Cases

In Monday, April 15, Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor issued dissents over the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the petitions of two death-sentenced prisoners who alleged official misconduct in their cases. In the 1st case, Dillion Compton alleged that Texas prosecutors illegally used thirteen of their fifteen peremptory strikes to remove female prospective jurors because of their gender. In the 2nd case, Kurt Michaels argued that California police officers unlawfully continued to question him after he invoked his Miranda rights, leading Mr. Michaels to eventually confess, and his confession was wrongly admitted at trial. Supreme Court justices rarely issue more than one written statement at a time regarding a certiorari decision in a capital case, and this marks the 1st time in at least 5 years that the justices have issued 2 dissents from denial in capital cases on the same day.

Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justice Jackson, wrote in Mr. Compton’s case that she would have summarily reversed the lower court’s decision and ordered a proper analysis of his gender discrimination claim. For Mr. Compton’s 2018 trial, the initial jury pool was 55% female, but the final jury was 33% female after the strikes. The state’s only justification for striking the women was that they allegedly opposed the death penalty. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (TCCA) admitted that “the fact that only four women made it onto the jury despite the panel having more women than men does raise concerns,” but reasoned that “most” or “nearly all” of the women prosecutors struck expressed views less favorable toward the death penalty than the men who were seated on the jury. Justice Sotomayor argued that the TCCA erred by analyzing the strikes “in the aggregate” instead of the “side-by-side comparison” of struck and retained jurors that the law demands. “Striking even one prospective juror for a discriminatory reason violates the Constitution,” she wrote, and in Mr. Compton’s case, “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.” Therefore, the state’s explanation for its strikes of women rang false and the evidence suggested “invidious discrimination” based on gender.

“We are disappointed that the Supreme Court left in place a clearly flawed decision that failed to meaningfully scrutinize whether the State of Texas engaged in gender discrimination,” said Mr. Compton’s attorney, Jennae Swiergula of the Texas Defender Service. “As Justice Sotomayor’s dissent makes clear, the evidence strongly suggests several women were struck from Mr. Compton’s jury because of their gender.”

The Texas Defender Service released a statement saying that jury discrimination is a “widespread practice” that acts “to the detriment of our entire justice system.” The Death Penalty Information Center has identified at least 65 cases in which courts overturned a conviction or death sentence in a capital case based on prosecutorial misconduct in jury selection. Though her opinion focused on gender, Justice Sotomayor noted additional evidence of racial discrimination in Mr. Compton’s jury selection. Mr. Compton is Black, but the final jury had 11 white people and 1 Hispanic person. The state struck the only 2 Black potential jurors in the pool, as well as 1 Hispanic man—meaning that the state used every one of its 15 strikes on either a woman or a person of color. Jones County, where Mr. Compton’s trial occurred, is 10% Black and over one-quarter Hispanic, with less than 60% of the population identifying as non-Hispanic white. “In so many cases, prosecutors exclude able jurors from service because of the color of their skin or because they are women—without any intervention from the courts,” said the Texas Defender Service. “It means that the sentences our system produces do not reflect the view of our communities.”

In Mr. Michaels’ case, Justice Jackson wrote that she would have summarily reversed the Ninth Circuit’s decision finding that the admission of his confession did not prejudice him at the penalty phase of the trial. Mr. Michaels was accused of killing his girlfriend Christina’s mother. During the interrogation, Mr. Michaels invoked his right to remain silent, but officers unlawfully continued questioning him until he ultimately gave a detailed confession lasting over two hours. The confession was admitted in part at the guilt phase of the trial and then played in full and used heavily by the prosecutor during the penalty phase. The defense presented mitigating evidence showing Mr. Michaels’ serious history of mental illness, including a suicide attempt at age 11; childhood abuse from a violent alcoholic father who molested Mr. Michaels’ sister and tried to run both children over with a car; brain damage from physical trauma and meth use; his youth, age 22, and lack of violent criminal record; and his service in the Marines. Evidence also showed that Christina had asked Mr. Michaels to kill her mother because her mother sexually abused her. The jury deliberated for over 3 days before returning a verdict of death.

In the appeal below, the Ninth Circuit was so conflicted that it issued multiple opinions: a per curiam ruling on most of the issues, and a divided set of opinions on the use of the confession during the penalty phase. The panel majority agreed that the trial court unconstitutionally admitted the confession during the penalty phase but found the admission was harmless because the facts were corroborated by other evidence. However, Judge Marsha Berzon forcefully dissented, arguing that confessions are more than just a summary of facts: they have a singular sway with the jury that can overpower mitigating evidence. “Given the substantial evidence in mitigation and the fact that the jury deliberated on the penalty for more than 3 days, it is my firm view that there is a real probability a single juror might have spared Michaels’s life,” Judge Berzon wrote, “but for the improperly introduced evidence used at trial.”

Justice Jackson echoed Judge Berzon’s argument in lamenting the Supreme Court’s decision not to take the case. She wrote that the Supreme Court “has long held that courts must ‘exercise extreme caution’ when determining whether the admission at trial of an illegally obtained confession constitutes a harmless error,” but the Ninth Circuit majority failed to exercise that caution. The panel was “inattentive to the uniquely prejudicial nature of confession evidence” and treated the confession as “simply a collection of cumulative facts.” But the “Fifth Amendment protects everyone, guilty and innocent alike,” Justice Jackson argued—and “courts must be careful to safeguard the rights that our Constitution protects, even when (and perhaps especially when) evaluating errors made in cases stemming from a terrible crime.”

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

INDIA:

Dilroz murder case: Ludhiana court awards death penalty to woman for burying alive neighbour’s daughter----The Ludhiana woman had killed Dilroz Kaur after she had a spat with her parents.

A Ludhiana court on Thursday awarded the death penalty to a woman for killing the 2 1/2-year-old daughter of her neighbour by burying her alive in 2021 over a petty issue.

On April 12, Sessions Judge Munish Singal convicted Neelam, 35, of the Shimlapuri area of Ludhiana for brutally murdering Dilroz Kaur, the daughter of Harpreet Singh.

According to the police, Neelam buried Dilroz alive in a pit which she had dug up in the Salem Tabri area on November 28, 2021. They said Neelam had planned Dilroz’s murder because of an old rivalry she nursed against the toddler’s family.

A First Information Report under section 364 (kidnapping with intent to kill) of the Indian Penal Code was registered at the Shimlapuri police station, and after the death of the child, IPC sections 302 (punishment for murder) and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender) were added to the FIR.

After Dilroz went missing, the police searched the houses of her neighbours including that of Neelam. She denied having any knowledge about Dilroz and also behaved normally, they said. However, when the police scanned the CCTV footage, they spotted Neelam taking Dilroz away on her scooter.

Festive offer

During the questioning, she confessed to the crime and said she had buried the girl in a pit in Salem Tabri. The police managed to rescue the toddler and rushed her to Dayanand Medical College and Hospital (DMCH), where she died. “A few days before the incident, Neelam had a spat with Harpreet Singh and his wife over a petty issue. She nursed grudges against them,” said a police officer.

(source: The Indian Express)

MALAYSIA:

Man’s death sentence for murder commuted to 38 years in prison

A former excavator driver escaped the death penalty after the Federal Court commuted his sentence to 38 years in prison and 12 lashes for killing a woman 16 years ago.

The case was one of 28 cases reviewed during the Federal Court of Malaysia Conference at the Kota Bharu High Court today, which also involved cases in other east coast states.

In today’s proceedings, a 3-judge panel led by Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat granted the review application of Zulhisham Fadly Mohamad, 43, under Section 302 of the Penal Code, and Sections 2(4) and 3(1) of the Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023.

Tengku Maimun set aside the death sentence and replaced it with a 38-year jail sentence and 12 lashes.

She also ordered him to serve the sentence from April 21, 2008, the date of his arrest.

Deputy public prosecutor Fuad Abdul Aziz did not object to the review application.

The other judges on the panel were Court of Appeal president Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim and Federal Court judge Nordin Hassan.

Zulhisham, who has been imprisoned for almost 16 years, was represented by lawyer Mazlan Zain.

In 2011, Zulhisham was sentenced to death by hanging by the Kuala Terengganu High Court for killing and burying the body of Zaiton Muhamad, 55, in a dragon fruit orchard in Hulu Kemaman, in 2008.

Zulhisham had filed an appeal in 2014 to the Court of Appeal but it was rejected by the court on June 17, 2014, confirming his death sentence.

After that, he appealed to the Federal Court, which also rejected his appeal on Sept 7, 2015, and confirmed his conviction and death sentence.

(source: Free Malaysia Today)

VIETNAM:

More damage control than deterrence in death sentence for Vietnam’s $12 billion fraudster----Truong My Lan’s huge fraud scheme reached its peak during Hanoi’s vaunted ‘blazing furnace’ anti-corruption drive.

After Truong My Lan was sentenced to death last week over her role in a US$12.5 billion financial fraud case, the consensus appears to be that the Communist Party of Vietnam is offering up a human sacrifice to show that its “blazing furnace” anti-corruption campaign is for real.

It could be a ruse; the authorities may have announced this punishment before the end of the trial as a way of terrifying Lan into revealing where more of the stolen assets are located and to name more names of accomplices.

If she plays along, maybe she'll be spared death. The courts have done this before.

Yet many of her 84 co-conspirators also had their sentences announced early, and none of them was sentenced to death. The authorities have made Lan a hate figure as part of their anti-corruption campaign, unmuzzling the state-run media so they can vilify and demonize her.

Deciding to execute the chairwoman of Vietnamese developer Van Thinh Phat is an “exemplar of Vietnam’s effort to crack down on corruption not only in the state sector but also in private spaces,” commented Nguyen Khác Giang in a Time magazine piece that stated: “That Vietnam sought to make an example of Lan was clear."

But there’s a problem with this logic.

Set aside the moral dimension of whether a state should kill one of its own citizens – Vietnam is among the world’s most prolific executioners of prisoners and metes out capital punishment for vaguely-defined crimes – and focus on the consequentialist intent.

The ruling Communist Party of Vietnam’s anti-corruption campaign started in 2016. The following year, the 1st Politburo member was taken down and Trinh Xuan Thanh, a fugitive state company official, was kidnapped by the Vietnamese secret service in Berlin.

In 2018, the Communist Party purged its junior ranks. It set its sights on provincial figures in 2019. Nguyen Xuan Phuc “resigned” as state president in early 2023 over corruption.

Phuc's successor, Vo Van Thuong, “quit” last month for the same reasons. Hundreds of officials and businesspeople have been jailed. Tens of thousands have probably lost their jobs.

‘Blazing furnace’

Anyone with the most basic understanding of Vietnam knows there is a much-vaunted anti-graft campaign underway. Yet, despite all those dismissals and jailings and kidnappings and resignations, Lan and her accomplices still thought they could get away with stealing US$12.5 billion. Her actions over several years led Saigon Commercial Bank to lose the equivalent of US$27 billion, state media said.

Their fraud began in 2012, but the prosecution says most of Lan’s bribery, embezzlement and banking law violations took place between early 2018 and October 2022, when she was finally arrested – and when the “blazing furnace” had been roaring for almost 6 years.

Some observers might argue that if Lan was not deterred by seeing other people be jailed, kidnapped or publicly shamed, maybe she would have been deterred had the Communist Party started killing the corrupt back in 2016. So her death, accordingly, will be an example to others to come.

But this assertion requires proponents to argue that the Communist Party needs to start killing people en masse. After all, why would someone be deterred by the murder of one person, by a one-off sacrifice?

The exact problem with Lan’s death sentence is that it’s unique and exceptional – suggesting that the message from the Communist Party is that it will only execute those who commit fraud on that monumental scale, which amounts to 3% of Vietnam's GDP.

Where’s the deterrence factor when, in all probability, there aren't many cases involving someone stealing US$12.5 billion?

At the same, though, had the court sentenced Lan to life in prison, rather than to death, the story wouldn’t have reverberated around the world as it has, published in almost every newspaper of repute.

Hanoi wouldn’t have been able to run with its narrative: ‘Look at how serious we are against corruption; we kill people for it!’

Perhaps the Vietnamese people would have felt short-changed. Maybe the fears of foreign investors wouldn’t have been assuaged, and Vietnam’s transparency scores might improve again thanks to a blood sacrifice.

Damage control

However, killing Lan serves no purpose of deterrence unless the Communist Party is about to start killing a lot more people for stealing a lot less. Given the monumental scale of corruption in Vietnam, including what has yet to be revealed, that will be quite a bit of state-sanctioned killing.

Instead, Lan’s death sentence was retribution, reputational damage control by a Communist Party that has been greatly embarrassed by this whole affair. In handing down the sentence, the court argued that she was guilty of “eroding people’s trust in the leadership of the party and state."

The prosecutors went into the trial last month arguing that the death penalty was needed so Lan could be “ostracized from society forever.”

While some observers may argue that the Communist Party’s decision to put Lan to death shows the power and competency of Hanoi’s anti-graft campaign, it actually reveals the opposite.

Truong Hue Van and her associates’ crimes made a mockery of the “blazing furnace” campaign: The biggest fraud case ever in Vietnam was carried out at the same time as Vietnam’s most serious anti-graft campaign.

Now, the Communist Party is trying to turn a negative into a positive by saying the crime was uncovered and severely punished. It's trying to hide the obvious truth that an unaccountable Leninist system permits the crime in the first place.

The “Blazing Furnace” may burn on, but it will not truly torch corruption so long as the Communist Party of Vietnam is both the arsonist and the firefighter.

(source: Commentary; David Hutt is a research fellow at the Central European Institute of Asian Studies (CEIAS) and the Southeast Asia Columnist at the Diplomat----rfa.org)

IRAN----executions

Amid Spotlight On Israel-Iran Tensions, 9 Prisoners Executed In Iran

As global attention is focused on the Iranian military's attack on Israel, authorities in Iran have executed at least 9 prisoners in less than a week.

Iran, one of the leading executioners globally, has already executed nearly 1000 prisoners since 2023 – with this latest news sparking renewed concerns about the regime’s human rights record.

According to human rights organizations, between April 11 and April 15, prisoners from jails in Hamedan, Esfahan, Zanjan, and Mashhad were executed.

On Monday, 5 prisoners in Vakilabad prison in the city of Mashhad were executed on drug-related charges, according to human rights organization Haalvsh.

Prisoners Javad Beigi, Behrouz Namdar, Mostafa Abdi, and two other unnamed prisoners had been transferred to solitary confinement on Saturday ahead of their execution yesterday. 2 days ago, Arsalan Hashemi was executed in a Hamedan prison in western Iran.

According to reports by human rights organization HRNA, Hameshi was arrested and sentenced to death for drug-related offenses three years ago. His death sentence was carried out on Sunday.

Earlier this month, 82 Iranian and international human rights organizations called for joint action to stop drug-related executions, urging the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) to halt its cooperation with the Iranian authorities.

HRNA also reported that a couple was executed on Sunday in the northwest of Iran, in Zanjan. Their sentences had been issued 3 years ago. Esmaeil Hosniani, 29, and his wife, Marjan Hajizadeh, aged 19, were executed in Zanjan Central Prison, as further confirmed by another human rights organization, Hengaw.

HRNA further reported that Hajizadeh was a victim of child marriage and was only 16 years and 4 months old at the time of her arrest.

On Saturday, Abu Dhar Salem, of Afghan origin, was executed in Dastgerd prison in Isfahan, Iran. Salem was 30 years old and from Pol-e-Khomri, a city in northern Afghanistan. He was arrested and sentenced to death about 3 years ago on murder charges.

In addition, 5 prisoners in Ghezel Hesar prison in the city of Karaj, and another prisoner in Rasht prison were transferred to solitary confinement cells over the last 2 days.

The transfer of prisoners with death sentences to solitary confinement aligns with the standard procedures that Iranian authorities follow before executing sentences.

According to HRNA, yesterday Nasir Jabari, a 40-year-old prisoner from Sari at Rasht Central Prison in northern Iran, was transferred to a solitary cell. Jabari was arrested three years ago on murder charges.

Yesterday, 5 unidentified prisoners arrested on murder charges were also transferred to solitary cells in preparation for executions at Ghezel Hesar prison in Karaj, Iran, according to HRNA.

The latest research by Amnesty International this month, shows a spike in executions in Iran, with at least 853 people executed in 2023 alone.

"The death penalty is abhorrent in all circumstances, but deploying it on a mass scale for drug-related offenses after grossly unfair trials before Revolutionary Courts is a grotesque abuse of power," the report said.

(source: iranintl.com)

APRIL 17, 2024:

TEXAS:

As death penalty decision looms, Tarrant trial opens in strangulation of girlfriend, child

Inside the 2-story apartment building constructed of tan and black bricks and stucco exterior walls, O’Tishae Womack’s body was on her kitchen floor. A white Albertsons grocery bag covered her head. A black and white floral comforter was on top of her legs.

Upstairs on a bed in the east Fort Worth apartment lay her daughter, Ka’Mayria, covered by a blanket. The 10-year-old wore shorts and a T-shirt. She looked as though she was asleep.

But Ka’Mayria, too, was gone. The little girl’s body was cold.

Both had been strangled with the hands of a man who applied pressure to their necks until they stopped breathing, according to the Tarrant County Criminal District Attorney’s Office account.

Prosecutors allege that their killer was Paige Terrell Lawyer, Womack’s 38-year-old boyfriend. Lawyer had a history of arrests on domestic violence assault in which Womack was also the victim before the killings on April 6, 2018, in the 200 block of Shady Lane Drive.

Putting his hands around Womack’s neck was his modus operandi, his standard method for injuring his girlfriend, according to the district attorney’s office.

Lawyer was motivated in part by his fear Womack would participate in his prosecution on the previous domestic violence assault cases, the state alleges.

“So he killed her,” prosecutor Dale Smith told the jury in his opening statement in the capital murder trial that began on Monday in Criminal District Court No. 1 in Tarrant County.

The District Attorney’s Office is seeking the death penalty. Jurors are first hearing evidence and argument to consider whether Lawyer is guilty or not guilty before moving, if the panel convicts him, to a phase to determine punishment.

Lawyer was indicted in February 2020, and the decision to seek the death penalty in the case was made when District Attorney Phil Sorrells’ predecessor, Sharen Wilson, held the office.

The last time a Tarrant County jury sent a defendant to death row was in November 2019 when it convicted Hector Acosta of capital murder. The Mexican drug cartel hit man was found guilty of killing 2 people in Arlington in 2017, beheading 1 of the victims, and mutilating their bodies with a machete and a 2-by-4.

Tarrant County Assistant District Attorney Loyd Whelchel is, with Smith, prosecuting Lawyer.

The jury will hear evidence showing the defendant’s bloody fingerprint was found on a mop near O’Tishae Womack’s body and his DNA was found under her fingernails, Smith told the jury.

Defense attorney Steve Gordon forecast that the evidence would be insufficient to convict Lawyer of capital murder.

He encouraged the jury to pay close attention and dissect the evidence.

With Gordon, defense attorneys Brian Poe and William Biggs were appointed to represent Lawyer.

Judge Elizabeth Beach is presiding at the trial. The jury resumed hearing the state’s case at 8:30 a.m. today.

(source: Fort Worth Star-Telegram)

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

Texas judge recommends Melissa Lucio’s conviction and death sentence be overturned

A Texas judge last week recommended the conviction and sentence of a mother on death row be overturned, finding prosecutors withheld key evidence that could have prevented her from being found guilty in the 2007 death of her 2-year-old daughter.

The evidence – namely a Child Protective Services report and interviews with inmate Melissa Lucio’s surviving children – would have corroborated the defense’s theory at trial, according to a filing submitted by her attorneys and prosecutors and signed by the judge on Friday: Lucio’s toddler, Mariah Alvarez, died because of injuries sustained in an accidental fall down stairs and not from abuse at the hands of her mother, as the state claimed.

The case now returns to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which 2 years ago halted Lucio’s execution two days before it was set to be carried out, sending her claims back to the trial court in Cameron County for review. The appeals court has the authority to overturn Lucio’s conviction, and it’s unclear when it might make a decision. 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.

Lucio’s case garnered widespread support in recent years, particularly ahead of her scheduled execution. Kim Kardashian – the celebrity and entrepreneur who has championed a number of death row inmates’ cases – as well as a bipartisan group of Texas lawmakers called for mercy on Lucio’s behalf, as did 5 members of her jury.

At least 197 people sentenced to death in the United States since 1973 have been exonerated, 16 of them in Texas, according to the non-profit Death Penalty Information Center.

The recommendation in Lucio’s case by Judge Arturo Nelson – who presided over her capital murder trial – comes more than a year after Lucio’s attorneys and the Cameron County District Attorney’s Office submitted a filing of agreed-upon facts and conclusions in the case, including an acknowledgement the state withheld evidence favorable to Lucio. Both sides agreed she was entitled to relief, they said this month in a joint statement.

On Friday, Nelson signed that filing, indicating his agreement with its conclusions and finding Lucio had “met her burden of proof, by a preponderance of the evidence, that she would not have been convicted in light of the suppressed evidence.”

“We are grateful to our mother’s legal team for their hard work to bring the truth to light and to D.A. (Luis) 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,” 2 of Lucio’s sons, Bobby Alvarez and John Lucio, and her daughter-in-law Michelle Lucio said in a statement provided by Melissa Lucio’s attorneys.

“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,” their statement said. “It’s been 17 years that we have been without her. We love her and miss her and can’t wait to hug her.”

‘Reasonable probability’ trial outcome would be different

Then a toddler, Mariah died February 17, 2007, 2 days after, Lucio contends, she fell down a set of steep stairs outside the family’s apartment, potentially causing a traumatic head injury that caused her death. Prosecutors, meanwhile, argued Lucio was an abusive mother responsible for her daughter’s injuries, in part citing a purported “confession” she gave authorities the night of Mariah’s death. Lucio’s attorneys have denied she ever confessed, arguing her statement was coerced during an “aggressive” interrogation and Lucio was susceptible to coercion because of her history as a lifelong survivor of sexual abuse and domestic violence.

‘That’s my mother. I know she’s innocent.’ Calls for mercy grow days before Melissa Lucio is set to be executed

The key evidence now at issue stems from Child Protective Services interviews with 5 of Lucio’s other children in the hours after Mariah died and ?statements 2 of the older children – one a teenager, the other 20 – gave police.

According to the filing of agreed-upon facts and conclusions by defense attorneys and the district attorney’s office, several of Lucio’s children denied to Child Protective Services that their mother was abusive and said she had never hit them or Mariah. At least one of them witnessed Mariah’s fall down the stairs.

Additionally, 2 of Lucio’s oldest daughters provided sworn statements to police, corroborating details about Mariah’s declining health and their mother’s mounting concern in the days before she died.

Both Lucio’s attorneys and prosecutors agreed, however, that this evidence, was not disclosed to her trial lawyers – a so-called Brady violation. If the evidence had been shared, the filing notes, Lucio’s attorneys would have been able to present it as evidence that Mariah had fallen and challenge testimony that suggested Lucio was lying. The withholding of evidence also prevented Lucio’s attorneys from being able to fully investigate the true cause of Mariah’s death, the filing says.

Ultimately, if the evidence had been disclosed to Lucio’s lawyers and presented to the jury, “there is a reasonable probability that the outcome of the trial would have been different,” the filing signed by the judge concludes.

(source: CNN)

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

Trial Judge Signs Agreed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Recommending Melissa Lucio’s Conviction and Death Sentence Be Overturned

PROSECUTORIAL ACCOUNTABILITY WOMEN TEXAS

On April 12, 2024, Judge Arturo Nelson signed an Agreed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law submitted by the prosecution and defense stating that Melissa Lucio (pictured) was not given access to favorable information in the prosecution’s possession at the time of trial. The acknowledgement of this constitutional error resulted in Judge Nelson’s recommendation to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (TCCA) that Ms. Lucio’s conviction and death sentence be overturned. The ruling marks the latest chapter in a saga that saw Ms. Lucio narrowly avoid an execution date in 2022 following a highly publicized clemency campaign over concerns she had been wrongfully convicted.

Ms. Lucio was convicted and sentenced to death for the death of her 2-year-old daughter in 2008 but has always maintained her daughter died of complications relating to fall. Ms. Lucio says she falsely confessed after 5 hours of intense police interrogation on the evening her daughter died. Attorneys for Ms. Lucio recently presented expert opinion that her daughter was not murdered, but rather succumbed to head trauma from the accidental fall 2 days prior to her death. Judge Nelson ultimately determined that Ms. 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 TCCA will now have the final say about whether Ms. Lucio’s conviction will be set aside.

A week before Judge Nelson’s findings were entered, Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz and Innocence Project attorney Vanessa Potkin released a joint statement about the Agreed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law they submitted in January 2023. “Under Texas procedure the trial court must make a recommendation to the CCA which is the only court that can vacate a conviction,” the statement explained. “We are hopeful Melissa’s case will be resolved,” the statement added. Jordan Steiker, the Director of University of Texas Law School’s Capital Punishment Center called this agreement “exceptionally rare,” as both the prosecution and defense concurred that prosecutorial misconduct occurred during Ms. Lucio’s trial.

Just two days before her scheduled execution in April 2022, the TCCA ruled that four claims filed by Ms. Lucio’s attorneys met the requirements to grant a stay of execution. In its opinion, the TCCA asked the Cameron County court to review these four issues, including whether prosecutors failed to turn over favorable evidence that was material to the outcome of her trial. The Agreed Findings focused on the question about material evidence, particularly evidence indicating that one of Ms. Lucio’s other children saw the child fall and that reports from Child Protective Services indicate her children told officials she was not abusive to any of them. Additional evidence indicates that Ms. Lucio’s children told CPS that she was worried about her daughter after the fall and cared greatly for her before she died. At the time of Ms. Lucio’s trial, her attorneys did not have full copies of these reports, only summaries that did not include this favorable evidence.

In a statement from Ms. Lucio’s sons and daughter-in-law, her family thanked her “legal team for their hard work to bring the truth to light and to D.A. Saenz for taking another look at [their] mother’s case and recognizing that she did not receive a fair trial and her conviction should be overturned.” Acknowledging that evidence was withheld in their mother’s case, her family “hope[s] and pray[s] 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.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

ALABAMA:

It’s time to end outdated death penalty practices in Alabama

Alabama is the only state where a capital defendant can be sentenced to death by a non-unanimous jury vote. SB 182 would end this outdated, unjust policy and help bring Alabama’s capital punishment system in line with national standards and federal court rulings.

Urge your senator to end Alabama’s outdated death penalty practices.

SB 182, sponsored by Sen. Kirk Hatcher, D-Montgomery, would be an important step toward reforming Alabama’s death penalty system to align with the rest of the United States. Right now, Alabama allows a jury to sentence someone convicted of capital murder to death if 10 of 12 jurors agree. This bill would require a unanimous jury sentencing vote to impose the death penalty.

SB 182 will be up for consideration on Wednesday at 8:30 a.m. in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Your senator serves on that committee and needs to hear from you about this legislation. Email your senator today and say you support SB 182.

Alabama consistently has one of the nation’s highest per capita execution rates. Our state has an even higher error rate: For every 8 people executed, 1 has been exonerated. Additionally, Alabama is the only state to continue imposing the death penalty without requiring a unanimous jury vote. Of the people now on Alabama’s death row, 80% did not receive unanimous jury verdicts for death, according to the Equal Justice Initiative.

We are excited about this opportunity for meaningful reform. Your senator needs to hear from you that they should support this bill. Please contact your senator TODAY and urge them to pass SB 182!

(source: votervoice.net)

LOUISIANA:

Louisiana approved gas for lethal injection. Legislators just took a 1st vote to remove it.----The bill would undo a recent law backed by Gov. Jeff Landry that adds nitrogen gas to the tools state uses to execute death row prisoners.

A Louisiana Senate Committee voted Tuesday to strike nitrogen gas suffocation from the state's list of approved execution methods, reversing one of Republican Gov. Jeff Landry's tough-on-crime priorities.

The Senate Judiciary B Committee voted with no objections to advance a bill by Sen. Katrina Jackson-Andrews, D-Monroe, that would remove gas from the list of execution methods. The measure is Senate Bill 430.

A bill pushed by Landry in January had added nitrogen and electrocution, along with lethal injection, as tools the state can use to execute death row prisoners.

(source: James Finn covers state politics in Baton Rouge for The Advocate----nola.com)

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

Louisiana might remove nitrogen gas as an execution option

A Louisiana Senate committee unanimously advanced a bill that would remove nitrogen gas asphyxiation from the approved list of execution methods.

The controversial method, which has only been used once, was added as an approved method during a special session on crime earlier this year. Louisiana law also allows for lethal injection and electrocution to be used in executions.

The bill, Senate Bill 430 by Sen. Katrina Jackson-Andrews, D-Monroe, advanced without objection from the Senate Committee on Judiciary B . Three committee members, Sens. Chair Mike Reese, R-Leesville, Kirk Talbot, R-River Ridge, and Jean-Paul Coussan, R-Lafayette, had voted for the bill to add nitrogen gas earlier this year.

Alabama became the first state to execute someone via nitrogen hypoxia in January. Kenneth Eugene Smith faced the death penalty for a 1988 murder. Since he was executed, multiple states have looked to add the method.

Through nitrogen hypoxia, a mask is affixed to the condemned person’s face. Pure nitrogen gas is pumped through, causing the individual to die from a lack of oxygen.

Jackson-Andrews bill is supported by the Jews Against Gassing Coalition, an organization of Jewish Louisiana residents who oppose the use of gas for state-sanctioned deaths.

Several members of the group testified in favor of the proposal, noting the similarity between nitrogen gas asphyxiation and the gassing of Jews during the Holocaust.

“We do not suggest comparisons to the atrocities of Nazi Germany under which millions of our relatives were murdered,” Aaron Bloch, a representative of the Jewish Federation of Greater New Orleans, said. “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.”

Jackson-Andrews bill will next be considered by the Senate.

(source: lailluminator.com)

OHIO:

Catholics at the Capitol day: Abolish death penalty, support moms, families

State Sen. Steve Huffman speaks during the Catholics at the Capitol gathering on April 9 at the Catholic Conference of Ohio office in Columbus. Photo courtesy Abigail Pitones

Catholics from across Ohio gathered in Columbus on Tuesday, April 9 for “Catholics at the Capitol” 2024.

The day, organized by the Catholic Conference of Ohio, which serves as the official voice of the Church in Ohio on matters of public policy, was an opportunity to advocate for policies that support Ohio families and promote the common good.

State legislators were urged to support pregnant women and families, abolish the state’s death penalty and assist incarcerated Ohio citizens returning to society.

The day began at the Catholic Conference of Ohio’s office with prayer and remarks from Bishop Earl Fernandes.

State Sen. Stephen Huffman (R-Tipp City), who represents Ohio’s 5th Senate District in southwestern Ohio outside of Dayton, addressed the group and spoke about his Catholic faith and legislative priorities.

Huffman was raised Catholic and his father was a deacon. He said he often attends morning Mass at St. Christopher Church in Vandalia, located in the Archdiocese of Cincinnati.

Huffman, also a practicing physician who works in emergency rooms throughout western Ohio, has introduced Senate Bill 101 to abolish the death penalty.

He also introduced Senate Bill 220 to designate Jan. 22, the day the U.S. Supreme Court held that the right of privacy protects a woman’s right to abortion in all 50 states in the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, as the “Day of Tears,” which, he said, would be a day of prayer with flags flown at half-staff.

Throughout the day, groups of Catholics from various parts of the state sat down with local state representatives and senators in the Ohio Statehouse and Vern Riffe Center for Government and the Arts, located across the street from the Statehouse, to ask for their support.

Some of the Columbus participants met with an aide for state Sen. Stephanie Kunze (R-Dublin), who represents the 16th Senate District. Located west of Columbus, the district comprises all of Madison and Pickaway counties as well as a portion of Franklin County northwest of Columbus.

The group advocated for abolition of Ohio’s death penalty, urging Kunze to help pass Senate Bill 101 and House Bill 259.

“We’re here to really advocate for support of two bills that are out there: the Senate bill and the House bill that would abolish the death penalty,” said Mark Huddy, Episcopal Moderator for Catholic Charities and Social Concerns in the Diocese of Columbus. “We believe that abolishing the death penalty is more in accord with the sacredness and dignity of every human life.

“Human dignity comes from our being created in God’s image, and it can’t be lost or traded away. As (Pope St.) John Paul (II) says in Evangelium Vitae (his papal encyclical “The Gospel of Life”), not even a murderer loses that personal dignity that comes from being created by God.”

Huddy acknowledged that while crimes deserve punishment the offender deserves an opportunity to repent, and perhaps, reenter society.

“The death penalty really cuts off the opportunity for someone to come to grips with what they’ve done and be sorry for it,” he said.

(source: The Catholic Times)

MINNESOTA:

UMD Senior Art Exhibit Focuses on the Falsely Incarcerated

A new exhibit has opened at UMD’s Tweed Museum of Art, focusing on wrongful convictions and the death penalty.

Senior Holly Brown created the exhibit, “Exonerated,” to show the impact of wrongful convictions on people’s lives around the country. Brown is a non-traditional student at UMD, returning years later to finish her degree. She says one of the things that stuck with from starting college was a speech she wrote on the death penalty. For her, this exhibit is a way to bring her college experience full circle.

“Keeping the exonerees and their stories in mind was something that was extremely important for me,” Brown said. “With the portraits that I have on the wall, I fully realized each person’s face in my illustrative style and then I masked out the portion of their life that they were wrongfully incarcerated.

“You can see with Sabrina Butler, she started on death row when she was nineteen. So you can see how far into the beginning of her life those lines were.”

Following the debut of Brown’s exhibit, a man who spent three years on death row spoke. Herman Lindsey was wrongfully convicted of robbery and murder in Florida. After being exonerated in 2009, Lindsey has worked as an advocate for others wrongfully convicted and end the death penalty.

“This fight is about the fight of the people,” Lindsey said. “When I was sentenced to die, the court said, ‘we the people of the state of Florida hereby sentence you to die by lethal injection.’ And every court says that when they sentence someone, ‘we the people,’ and I want the people to understand that we have the power to stand up and say ‘no, not in our name.'”

Through Brown’s artwork and Lindsey’s organization, Witness to Innocence, they hope to spark conversations and change. While the death penalty is not legal in Minnesota, it is still legal at the federal level.

(source: Fox News)

USA:

US tells UK court Assange would not face death penalty

The United States government has provided assurances requested by the High Court in London which could finally pave the way for WikiLeaks' founder Julian Assange to be extradited from the United Kingdom.

Last month, the High Court ruled that, without certain US guarantees, Assange, 52, would be allowed to launch a new appeal against being extradited to face 18 charges, all bar one under the Espionage Act, over WikiLeaks' release of confidential US military records and diplomatic cables.

Those assurances - that in a US trial he could rely on the first amendment right to free speech, that he is not "prejudiced at trial" due to his Australian citizenship and that there was no prospect of new charges which could result in the death penalty being imposed - have now been submitted by a deadline which fell on Tuesday.

The document, seen by Reuters, stated that Assange would be able to rely on US first amendment protections and says "a sentence of death will neither be sought nor imposed".

"These assurances are binding on any and all present or subsequent individuals to whom authority has been delegated to decide the matters," it said.

Judges in the UK are expected to consider the submission from the US authorities as well as any response from Assange's lawyers.

There will be a further court hearing in London on May 20 but his lawyers have previously described US assurances given in other cases as not "worth the paper they're written on," echoing similar criticism from human rights group Amnesty International.

Assange's wife Stella, whom he married while in prison in London, said the guarantees did not satisfy their concerns, describing them as "blatant weasel words".

"The United States has issued a non-assurance in relation to the First Amendment, and a standard assurance in relation to the death penalty," she said in a statement.

"The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family's extreme distress about his future - his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in US prison for publishing award-winning journalism."

There was no immediate comment from the US Department of Justice or a High Court spokesperson.

Last week, US President Joe Biden told reporters at the White House on April 11 "we're considering it" when asked about a request from the Australian government to drop the prosecution.

It was not clear what influence, if any, Biden could exert on a criminal case but the Wall Street Journal has also reported that discussions are underway about a potential plea bargaining deal.

Assange has spent more than 13 years in various legal battles in the English courts since he was first arrested in November 2010.

To his many supporters, he is an anti-establishment hero who is being persecuted for exposing US wrongdoing and details of alleged war crimes in secret classified files.

The US authorities argue he is not being prosecuted for the publication of the leaked materials but for the criminal act of conspiring with former US army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to unlawfully obtain them.

"The Biden administration must drop this dangerous prosecution before it is too late," Stella Assange said.

(source: illawarramercury.com.au)

AFRICA:

Will Africa be the next continent to abolish the death penalty?----Zimbabwe becomes the latest country to eye abolition for a form of punishment many on the continent see as a colonial era legacy

When a young independence fighter called Emmerson Mnangagwa was caught and tried in 1965 in what was then Rhodesia, the judge made it clear his youth alone would not save him from the hangman.

He might have said he was only 18 when his gang of saboteurs bombed a train in Fort Victoria, now Masvingo, but the court still had the discretion to execute him.

However, opting to spare him, the judge instead sentenced Mnangagwa to 10 years in jail and it was there he befriended the man who became his political patron: Zimbabwe’s future leader Robert Mugabe.

Some 6 decades later, with Mr Mnanagagwa now himself Zimbabwe’s president, his cabinet in February agreed to abolish the death penalty which had once threatened his young life.

Mr Mnanagagwa, who is thought to have actually been aged 23 at the time of the attack, has long opposed what he has called a cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. Political commentators believe his views have been strongly shaped by his experience all those years ago.

Zimbabwe’s parliament must still approve the abolition, but the measure has widespread support and is expected to pass easily in the coming months.

Such a move would see the nation join a string of African countries in ending capital punishment in recent years.

Ghana abolished the death penalty for everything except high treason last year. Sierra Leone and the Central African Republic both totally removed the punishment the year before. They are among a total of 8 African countries who have abolished it completely since 2014.

Many of those which do retain it have not carried out any executions for years, or even decades. Kenya still sentences people to death, but has not held an execution since 1987. Tanzania has not held one since 1995. Others, such as Burkina Faso, Zambia and Equatorial Guinea, now only keep it for extreme circumstances, such as martial law.

‘A beacon of abolitionist hope’

Campaigners across the continent and their international supporters now believe there is momentum for perhaps the whole continent, or at least sub-Saharan Africa, to scrap the punishment eventually.

Bronwyn Dudley, of the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty, said 26 African countries are considered abolitionist in law with at least 14 currently observing a moratorium on executions.

“This demonstrates and confirms an on-going trend that could make Africa the next abolitionist continent,” she said.

As well as the ban currently before Zimbabwe’s parliament, Liberia, Malawi and Kenya all have bills at varying stages that would abolish the death penalty.

Oluwatosin Popoola, of Amnesty International, said: “In the abolitionist movement, we have always seen Africa, particularly sub-Saharan Africa, as a beacon of hope.

“In fact lots of countries in Africa have abolished the death penalty in the past decade.”

He went on: “I’m optimistic that many countries, the majority, will abolish the death penalty very soon.

“I think in the next 5 to 10 years, we will cross the half-way mark.”

The drivers behind the wave of abolition vary, but many countries see the punishment as a colonial era legacy imposed on them by foreign governments.

Mr Popoola said: “The death penalty was used by a lot of colonial powers in Africa to oppress the local population and nationalist leaders and agitation for independence.

“In countries in Africa that still have a lot of anti-colonial sentiment that is used as grounds to abolish the death penalty.”

African leaders who for decades did not believe abolition was a political priority have also been emboldened by opinion polling showing either popular support, or at least indifference to scrapping the punishment.

Others have come to see abolition as a way to improve relations with international institutions.

Campaigners have also been successful in highlighting the vulnerability of those who end up on death row, particularly the poor who cannot afford decent lawyers, and the resulting scope for appalling miscarriages of justice.

Wrongful convictions

Ishmail Gome spent 12 years on death row in Malawi after being fitted up for murder.

When Foliasi Chibwazi was found dead, police discovered a single set of footprints from the scene of the crime to the home of Pitilizani Chabuka, Mr Gome’s nephew.

But after Mr Chabuka was arrested, he falsely implicated Mr Gome as an accomplice and his uncle was beaten and coerced into signing a confession he could not even read.

“When I heard the sentence, it hurt,” Mr Gome said earlier this year recalling his death sentence.

“All your plans are ruined. You are not doing anything. I just worried every day. It made my blood pressure go up. I asked myself ‘Is this what God wanted me to do? What future do I have now?’”

The miscarriage was only corrected after his case was reviewed by human rights lawyers and his nephew admitted to falsely accusing him.

Executions and death sentences on the continent are increasingly concentrated in just a handful of countries.

The latest figures from Amnesty show Egypt executed 24 people in 2022 and handed down 538 death sentences.

Somalia executed at least 6 people that year and South Sudan executed at least 5. No other African countries held any executions in 2022.

Worldwide, the use of the death penalty is dominated by China, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Its use in America has declined significantly.

China closely guards the scale of its executions and death sentences, but Amnesty estimates they are annually in the thousands.

Iran executed at least 576 people in 2022 and Saudi Arabia executed 196.

As well as the current political and popular momentum behind abolition in Africa, campaigners have also successfully used legal challenges to limit use of the penalty.

Campaigners in Africa have learned from legal challenges elsewhere, often other Commonwealth countries, to press their cases.

Death penalty abolitionists in some Caribbean countries have successfully challenged its use at the UK’s Privy Council, which remains their final court of appeal.

African Commonwealth countries, who have full independence and different constitutional arrangements, have gone on to successfully use similar arguments, said Saul Lehrfreund, founder of the Death Penalty Project, which has been helping death row prisoners for more than 30 years.

In one 2005 case, the project and a young Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, helped Ugandan lawyers persuade the country’s constitutional court to overturn the death sentence for 417 people.

As more countries abolish capital punishment, pressure grows on the remainder, Mr Lehrfreund believes.

He said: “Which side of history do you want to be on? If you were to ask that question 25 years ago, it wasn’t really a question. But now it does matter, because the vast majority of the continent have moved away from the death penalty.”

(source: telegraph.co.uk)

KENYA:

Court overturns death sentence for man who slapped woman and robbed her of Sh5,000

(source: nation.africa)

NIGERIA:

The constitutionality of death penalty: Need to amend the law

THE death penalty is as old as mankind itself. For thousands of years, it has been applied, as confirmed by the major religious texts, as the ultimate penalty or punishment for crimes as varied as adultery, stealing, murder and treason. Historically and politically, the death penalty and its implementation have helped to shape many events of great significance to the development of mankind.

The story of the French Revolution cannot be told without mention of Guillotine which became synonymous with the reign of terror introduced by the revolutionaries. In the last century, the hanging after the end of World War Two of major war criminals in Nuremberg Germany, marked a major turning point in the manner war crimes were investigated, prosecuted and punished.

In Africa, the death penalty, prior to the advent of colonial rule was common to virtually all native societies existing across the continent. In several societies, it was applied along with banishment to signify the society’s disapproval of certain behaviour or conduct. The great Zulu King, Shaka Zulu, is recorded as having applied the penalty for mostly political reasons. In Nigeria, the death penalty was formally introduced into the statute books upon the enactment of the Criminal Code in Southern Nigeria, and the Penal Code in Northern Nigeria. All states in Nigeria have since domesticated the said codes in their laws such that the extant criminal enactment in most states is to be found in the statutes of the said states.

Quite naturally, the debate as to the appropriateness or legality of the death penalty has been on for as long as it has been adopted as a means of criminal punishment. This debate resurfaced in Nigeria following comments credited to then President, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, admonishing Governors who by law, are required to sign execution warrants before sentences of death are carried out, to live up to their responsibilities.

Some weeks after this, the Government of Edo State announced the execution of some convicts who had been sentenced to death for various crimes and who had exhausted the appeal process put in place by law. The comments of President Jonathan and the executions that followed, attracted criticism and praise from diverse quarters. Whilst some commended the President and the then Governor of Edo State for living up to their oaths of office, some utilized the opportunity to address what has been termed the abuses to which the death penalty has been subjected worldwide.

Death penalty is constitutional in Nigeria

I must state without mincing words that the death penalty is legal in Nigeria as the criminal laws of virtually all the states provide the death penalty for certain offences such as murder as it is known in the Southern states and culpable homicide as it is described in the Northern states. Furthermore, Section 30(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which guarantees to every individual the right to life makes the right subject to the execution of the sentence of a court recognised by law. The Section provides that:

“Every person has a right to life and no one shall be deprived intentionally of his life, save in execution of the sentence of a court in respect of a criminal offence of which he has been found guilty in Nigeria”.

Indeed, the Supreme Court of Nigeria in Kalu v. State (1998) 13 NWLR Pt 583 531 upheld the legality of the death penalty. In the said case, the Court was asked to consider whether the death penalty was not a violation of the rights of the individual to life and protection from cruel and inhuman treatment as guaranteed by the Constitution. The Court in a judgement delivered by the full complement of the Court held as follows:

“…The position of Nigeria is very clear. Death sentence is a reality. It is provided for by our criminal laws, including section 319 subsection 1 of the Criminal Code of Lagos State. Our Constitution also recognises the death sentence – see in particular sections 31(1) 213(1)(d) and 220(1)(2) thereof. Therefore, the sentence of death in itself cannot be degrading and inhuman as envisaged by section 31 subsection (1)(a) of the Constitution. The Constitution is not intended to approbate and reprobate”.

The most common argument for the continued retention of the penalty is that it deters those who otherwise would have engaged in criminal activity. In response, critics have been quick to point to the ever-rising crime wave as a sign that the death penalty does not deter anyone. The argument, particularly in Nigeria, is that the death penalty has not succeeded in stopping the menace of armed robbers and that if anything, the certainty of death, if arrested, tried and convicted, often makes armed robbers more deadly and desperate in the execution of robbery operations.

In England, in the early part of the last century, the death penalty was applicable to most crimes, including stealing. Yet, crime was on the increase. This led many, as is the case now in Nigeria, to question the effect of the death penalty as a real deterrence factor. There is also the argument that some incidents of murder, particularly in the case of non-career criminals, are not premeditated and often occur as a result of light or minor scuffle between friends, couples, neighbours or other persons with close affinity. Therefore, it is considered that the death penalty could be seen as a means of deterring someone from committing a crime which is not premeditated.

However, the fact that the number of those who are so deterred by the fear of the penalty is not known or cannot be easily ascertained does not in my estimation detract from the efficacy of the punishment as a real deterrence factor. Surely, a person otherwise given to criminal inclination might well be persuaded to drop his plans when he considers the real risk of losing his life against whatever gain he would achieve from his undertaking.

To be continued

(source: Afe Babalola, vanguardngr.com)

MOROCCO:

Badr Case: Main Perpetrator in Hit-and-Run Murder Receives Death Penalty----The family of the deceased expressed their gratitude to the court for delivering what they deemed a fair verdict.

The Criminal Chamber of the Court of Appeal in Casablanca delivered its verdict on Tuesday in the case of the hit-and-run murder of university student Badr. The primary suspect received the death penalty, while his accomplices were sentenced to life imprisonment and varying terms.

The court sentenced the main defendant, Ashraf S., to death for his primary involvement in the fatal hit-and-run of Badr.

He was charged with intentional murder, premeditated attempted murder, participation in robbery under aggravated circumstances, including multiple perpetrators, nighttime, and the use of violence.

Meanwhile, the court handed down life imprisonment to the 2nd culprit, Ahmed R., who confessed to being the driver of the vehicle that struck Badr.

In addition, a 20-year prison sentence was handed to a third accomplice, who is a former soldier, along with a 25-year sentence to another individual involved.

A 5-year sentence was also handed to the main suspect’s son-in-law, who is believed to have aided in his escape by transporting him to Laayoune following the killing of Badr in Casablanca.

Compensation was also awarded to the victim’s family and others affected by the crime. This included MAD 500,000 ($49.1k) for the victim’s parents, MAD 100,000 ($9.8k) for his sisters, and MAD 30,000 ($2.9k) for other parties who sought civil damages.

The grief-stricken family of Badr expressed a sense of relief following the verdict. The mother, in particular, was visibly emotional and struggled to contain her tears as she spoke to the media outside the courtroom.

Despite the immense pain of losing her son, she said the verdict brought closure and reassurance that justice was being served for Badr.

Meanwhile, Badr’s sister thanked the court for its “fairness,” saying: “I was confident that the verdict would be just, and this brings us some relief from the pain of losing him [Badr].”

The tragic incident took place on the night of July 30, 2023, when Badr and his friends were involved in a confrontation with five suspects in the parking lot of a fast-food restaurant in Casablanca.

One of the suspects assaulted Badr during the altercation, rendering him unconscious. While Badr’s friends tried to help him, the suspects deliberately ran over them with their car, resulting in the victim’s death and injuries to his companions.

The tragic death of Badr was captured on video and circulated online, sparking widespread outrage across Morocco.

(source: moroccoworldnews.com)

PAKISTAN:

Pakistanis divided on death penalty: Gallup survey----More than 1,000 people participated in the survey from across the country, which was conducted between February 29 and March 15, 2024

Pakistani public opinion is divided on the death penalty, with 5 out of 10 Pakistanis supporting it but 4 opposing it, according to a Gallup Pakistan poll.

More than 1,000 people participated in the survey from across the country, which was conducted between February 29 and March 15, 2024.

According to Gallup Pakistan, 45 percent of Pakistanis fully support the death penalty law, and say it is right to impose the penalty on criminals involved in serious crimes, but 39 percent are strongly opposed to it and are not ready to support it in any case.

In the survey, 11 % Pakistanis have a neutral stance and neither support it nor oppose it openly, while 5 % refrained from expressing an opinion and remained silent.

(source: thenews.com.pk)

CHINA:

Man sentenced to death for homicide

A man has been sentenced to death for poisoning his co-workers' food and drinks, leaving 1 dead and 4 others injured.

This was reported by The Xinhua News Agency.

The man, named Xu Yao, was given capital punishment and a 6-year sentence after being convicted of homicide and releasing hazardous substances, according to the Shanghai First Intermediate People's Court.

Between Dec. 14 and 15, 2020, Xu poisoned the food of a co-worker surnamed Lin after they had a conflict over company operation and management, resulting in Lin's death.

Besides, between September and December 2020, Xu poisoned drinks and other items in an office, leaving 4 co-workers poisoned.

The defendant Xu Yao deliberately killed people by poisoning and endangered public safety. His criminal motive is extremely despicable and should be severely punished according to law, said the court.

(source: ukranews.com)

MALAYSIA:

Boy Tiger’s death sentence for murdering stepson commuted to 35 years imprisonment

A former contractor escaped the death penalty when the Court of Appeal today commuted his sentence to 35 years in prison for the murder of his 6-year-old stepson almost 6 years ago.

Khairul Izani Khairuddin, 36, also known as “Boy Tiger”, was also ordered to be given 12 strokes of the cane.

He was ordered to serve the prison sentence from the date of his arrest which was Nov 12, 2018.

A 3-judge panel consisting of judges Datuk Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera (now a Federal Court judge), Datuk Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim and Datuk Azmi Ariffin dismissed Khairul Izani’s appeal to set aside the conviction for murdering Muhammad Qairil Aqmal Abdul Hakim.

However, the panel allowed Khairul Izani’s appeal to set aside the death sentence and replace it with a prison sentence.

On Aug 26, 2022, the Klang High Court found Khairul Izani guilty of killing the child and sentenced him to death by hanging.

The offence was committed at a house at Jalan Bukit Indah 5, Taman Bukit Indah, Ampang, Selangor at 11 am on Nov 8, 2018.

Ahmad Zaidi, when delivering the court’s decision, said Khairul Izani failed to show that the High Court judge had erred in his finding when dismissing Khairul Izani’s defence of mental insanity.

On the contrary, he said, there was evidence proving that Khairul Izani was sane during the incident as testified by his wife that her husband stopped beating the child after seeing the boy’s head bleeding and immediately took the deceased to a clinic for treatment.

Ahmad Zaidi said the act of Khairul Izani lying to the doctor that the boy was injured due to a fall in the bathroom was consistent with the behaviour of a sane person.

“We found that the trial judge cannot be said to be wrong in his finding that the accused’s actions in beating the deceased happened because of his hot temper and not because he was mentally unsound,“ he said.

He said that based on the facts of the case, Khairul Izani’s wife saw her husband beating the child repeatedly, stepping on him, strangling the neck and banging his head against the wall until the boy’s head bled.

The woman did not succeed in stopping her husband from beating the child because she was heavily pregnant and also because Khairul Izani was a hot-tempered person, he said.

Khairul Izani was represented by lawyer Arik Zakri Abdul Kadir, while deputy public prosecutor Ng Siew Wee appeared for the prosecution.

(source: thesun.my)

VIETNAM:

Truong My Lan: Is Vietnam's corruption fight going too far?----Billionaire Truong My Lan was sentenced to death for embezzling the equivalent of 3% of Vietnam's GDP. Authorities say they're setting an example, but the sentence is seen as an extreme step by Vietnam's EU partners.

The alleged mastermind of arguably the largest corruption scandal in Southeast Asian history was sentenced to death in Vietnam last week as the country's communist government ratchets up its anti-corruption campaign.

Truong My Lan, 67, was charged with the embezzlement of around $12.5 billion (€11.7 billion), the equivalent of around 3% of Vietnam's 2022 GDP, from the Saigon Joint Commercial Bank (SCB).

She also illegally owed a majority share of the bank, and was found guilty for allowing loans that resulted in losses of €25.2 billion.

The Ho Chi Minh City court said that her actions "not only violate the property management rights of individuals but also pushed [the bank] into a state of special control, eroding people's trust in the leadership of the [ruling Communist] party and state."

Prosecutors had demanded the death sentence, arguing that Lan should be "ostracized from society forever," according to local media.

Tuong Vu, professor and director of the US-Vietnam Research Center at the University of Oregon, said the Communist Party wanted to send a message to Vietnamese society that it "is serious about fighting corruption" and to remind the business community not to be "too greedy" and under the illusion that it can escape investigations from the authorities.

Death sentence a 'double-edged sword'

However, the sentencing of Truong My Lan to death is a "double-edged sword," said a senior member of the European business community in Vietnam, who requested anonymity.

"On the one hand, it shows that Vietnam is serious about tackling corruption and that is to be welcomed," they said. "But, from a European sentiment point of view, the death penalty is not something that could be condoned."

Brussels "strongly opposes the death penalty at all times and in all circumstances," EU spokesperson Peter Stano told DW.

Vietnam ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1982, which strictly limits the application of the death penalty to "the most serious crimes," Stano said.

He added that the EU has called on Vietnam "to introduce a moratorium on any imposition of capital punishment, with a view to its abolition."

It's possible that an appeal court will overturn the death sentence, said Le Hong Hiep, a senior fellow at the ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute's Vietnam Studies Program in Singapore.

In the past, he noted, courts have meted out death sentences to pressure defendants into revealing more information about their crimes, helping the state to recover the losses.

"If Lan becomes more cooperative, it is possible that her sentence may be reduced to life imprisonment," Hiep said.

However, analysts reckon that the Communist Party has to balance offering clemency in return for more information on the whereabouts of stolen assets with the apparent deterrence factor of Lan's death sentence.

"The prevalence of cross-holdings between banks and private enterprises, as well as the practice of related-party lending by private banks, poses significant risks to the banking system and the economy as a whole," said Hiep.

"The government appears determined to prevent another banking scandal like SCB from occurring, and Lan's death sentence serves as a strong message to bank owners that they must cease illegal business practices or face severe consequences," he added.

Vietnam extends anti-corruption net

In 2016, Nguyen Phu Trong, the Communist Party general secretary, unleashed a large-scale anti-corruption campaign that has now resulted in the dismissal or imprisonment of thousands of party officials and business leaders.

2 state presidents, including President Vo Van Thuong last month, have resigned for allegedly failing to curb corruption.

Lan and her family made a small fortune in the hotel and restaurant sector during the heady days of unchecked capitalism in the 1990s, after the Vietnamese Communist Party adopted a market economy in 1986.

In 2001, she headed up a merger between the beleaguered Saigon Joint Commercial Bank (SCB) and 2 other lenders. State prosecutors, who reportedly provided literal tons of printed documents as evidence, claim that Lan used the bank as her own personal cash dispenser.

According to the prosecution, Lan acquired around 90% of a stake in SCB through shell companies and proxies despite Vietnamese law prohibiting individuals from holding more than 5% of the shares in any bank.

She then appointed compliant officers at the bank who approved dodgy loans to fictitious companies run by Lan and her associates, with reports that she was the recipient of 93% of all the bank's lending.

State inspectors were bribed not to question the legality of these payments. A former chief inspector at the central bank was handed a life sentence for accepting a $5 million bribe.

Starting in early 2019, she allegedly withdrew more than $4 billion in cash from the bank and stored it in her home.

Rumors of Lan's corruption have swirled for years, not least because she and her close associates have purchased vast swathes of prime real estate in Ho Chi Minh City.

Her husband, Eric Chu Nap-kee, a Hong Kong national, was sentenced to 9 years in prison for his role in the scandal, while her niece was given a 17-year prison term. Four executives, including central bank regulators, were handed life sentences.

Concerns over Vietnam's banking sector

In recent years, Vietnam's so-called "blazing furnace" anti-graft campaign has increasingly targeted private companies, especially those in the financial sector.

The campaign has created an image of Vietnam as a country that is cleaning up the sort of endemic corruption rife in many Southeast Asian states.

At the same time, however, Vietnam's rating in Transparency International's 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index dipped from 42 to 41 on a 0-100 scale where 0 means highly corrupt.

What causes corruption?

Moreover, the scale of the corruption uncovered in recent years has raised questions about how much of the rot remains within Vietnam's economic system.

There are now concerns about the caliber of Vietnam's banking sector, especially given how easy it seemingly was for Lan and her associates to pilfer €11 billion from a private bank.

The trial of involving another vast fraud case in the stock market involving Trinh Van Quyet, former chairman of real estate developer FLC Group, is likely to start this year.

Prosecutors are seeking the conviction of at least 51 people involved in this scandal after investigations were wrapped up in February.

Anti-graft efforts can also affect decision making at the local level. State officials have reportedly grown so fearful of being accused of wrongdoing that they are now hesitant to make risky decisions, especially over much-needed infrastructure projects. A wrong decision could prompt extra spending, which could lead to them being charged with the loss of state money.

(source: Deutsche Welle)

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