News and Updates (as of 12/22/96)
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.
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)
SAUDI ARABIA:
How an App and Crowdfunding Saved Abdul Rahim, a Keralite on Death Row in Saudi----Abdul Rahim from Kozhikode was sentenced to death for the accidental death of a 16-year-old Saudi boy.
Through a remarkable confluence of technology and human compassion, both online and offline, Kerala has secured the release of Abdul Rahim from a death sentence in Saudi Arabia.
In a show of incredible solidarity, a massive fundraising effort collected Rs 34 crore (approximately $4 million) within days.
This feat, now dubbed The Real Kerala Story has earned widespread praise, including from national leaders like Rahul Gandhi and Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan.
Rahul pointed to the Save Abdul Rahim crowdfunding efforts as a response to the politics of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. Vijayan highlighted the indomitable spirit of Malayalis, who come together to uphold Kerala's resilience and compassion. The latter added in the X post that this effort shatters divisive lies.
Who is Abdul Rahim?
Abdul Rahim, from Kozhikode, Kerala, arrived in Saudi Arabia in 2006 to work as a driver.
However, his duties soon changed, and he was assigned to care for a 16-year-old Saudi boy with physical disabilities who relied on a life support system. Just 26 days after arriving, while travelling by car with the boy, they came to a red light.
The boy reportedly pressured Abdul to run the red light, but Abdul refused. The situation escalated into a struggle, and during the commotion, Abdul's actions unintentionally disconnected the boy's life support. The boy lost consciousness, causing Abdul to panic.
"In a panicked state, Abdul failed to get medical attention for the boy, who then passed away. Abdul did not have a driver's license. Additionally, Abdul provided inconsistent accounts of the tragedy to the police during questioning, which raised suspicion. This led to his imprisonment and subsequent death sentence," Majid Ambalakandi, a member of the Abdul Rahim Legal Aid Trust, told The Quint over the phone from Kozhilkode.
Following his imprisonment, a legal battle ensued in the Saudi courts. The Abdul Rahim Legal Aid Forum, established in Saudi Arabia, took up Abdul's case and pursued a pardon. In October 2023, the Forum secured a pardon from the victim's family, but it was conditional upon the payment of Diya (blood money) amounting to approximately 15 million Saudi Riyals.
The deadline for this payment was April 16.
The Legal Aid Forum then approached us to start crowdfunding efforts. We secured the support of prominent figures, including Panakkad Sadiq Ali Shihab Thangal (state president of the Indian Union Muslim League), Indian Minister of State for External Affairs V Muraleedharan, parliamentarians, legislative assembly members, community leaders, and many others. Together, we formed the Save Abdul Rahim Trust to launch the crowdfunding campaign," Majid said.
Before launching the crowdfunding campaign, the Trust meticulously obtained all necessary legal approvals from the Indian government's Finance Ministry, Reserve Bank of India, and the Income Tax department. "Transparency was paramount," explained Majid.
"We ensured compliance with all regulations, and this focus on transparency led us to consider purchasing an online fundraising app," he added.
SpineCodes, a Kerala-based software company experienced in developing crowdfunding apps, made the Save Andul Rahim App in a couple of days.
"Our experience in developing socially-driven crowdfunding apps made it easy for us to understand the Trust's needs and develop a solution," Mohammed Hashim, co-founder of SpineCodes, told The Quint.
"Over 80 % of the targeted Rs 34 crore was raised through the app. Donors can easily track their donation amount, submitted information, and the campaign's progress. Additionally, the app provides immediate donation receipts," Hashim added.
According to him, this app and the previous ones they developed have ensured transparency, which builds trust among the donors.
"These days, even QR codes and bank account details can be manipulated or forged, making them vulnerable to cyber fraud. Donors' money could be diverted or stolen. An app provides a secure platform that eliminates these pitfalls," he added.
The Trust and the company have closed the app as they have secured the Rs 34 crore needed for the blood money payment. Currently, the app has 5,00,000 plus downloads.
Meanwhile, Boby Chemmanur, a Kerala-born businessman with companies spanning the globe, including jewellery ventures, spearheaded the crowdfunding effort by donating Rs 1 crore to the Save Abdul Rahim campaign. As an influential figure, his involvement ignited a social media frenzy worldwide among Keralites, resulting in the collection of Rs 34 crore within a couple of days.
On a positive note, Asianet News has reported that the Saudi court has accepted the appeal for the remission of Abdul Rahim’s death sentence, as presented by his lawyers, due to the raised blood money. However, they are awaiting a response from the Saudi government.
9,521 Indians in Foreign Jails
In light of the public support for Abdul Rahim's case, calls are now growing for a similar fundraising efforts to aid Nimisha Priya.
Nimisha, a nurse from Kerala, is facing the death penalty in a Yemeni jail after being accused of killing her Yemeni partner. Nimisha was sentenced to death in 2020 and her final plea in the country's top court was dismissed in November 2023.
Shockingly, Indian parliamentary documents from December 2023 reveal that 9,521 Indians are languishing in foreign jails on various charges. Saudi Arabia has the highest number of Indian inmates at 2,200, and the United Arab Emirates is in the second position with 2,143 Indians jailed in different Emirates.
Meanwhile, according to the same parliamentary document (as per December 2023), India has signed extradition treaties with 50 countries and has extradition arrangements with 12 countries. Saudi Arabia, which has the largest number of Indians jailed, is one among the 50 countries with which India has signed extradition treaties. However, murder charges are included under the list of grounds for refusal within the treaty.
Another parliamentary document released in 2019 indicates that 44 Indians are currently on death row.
(source: Rejimon Kuttappan, thequint.com)
IRAN----execution
Iranian Prisoners Announce Hunger Strike Over Death Penalty Surge
A large number of political and non-political prisoners in Iranian jails, including those in Ghezelhesar, Evin, and Karaj, have initiated a hunger strike to protest the recent surge in the use of the death penalty.
This action marks the 12th week of their "No to Execution Tuesdays Campaign."
Their primary concern is the increased use of the death penalty by the Iranian judicial system.
Recent weeks have seen a rise in the silent executions of non-political prisoners.
Additionally, several inmates have been transferred to solitary confinement in Ghezelhesar and other facilities, seemingly slated for imminent execution.
News reports suggest a new wave of repression through harsh death sentences implemented by the judicial and security forces.
Over the past few days, eight prisoners have been executed.
According to a report by the Iran Human Rights Organization, the Islamic Republic executed approximately 834 individuals last year.
(source: iranwire.com)
*******************
Execution Carried Out in Urmia Prison for Drug Conviction
On April 16, 2024, authorities at Urmia Prison executed an inmate convicted of drug-related offenses.
The individual put to death has been identified by HRANA as Afshin Bagh-Shirin, hailing from Kermanshah. He had been sentenced to death six years prior.
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.
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)
APRIL 16, 2024:
TEXAS----new execution date
After Losing Key Appeal, Execution Date Set For Brownsville Death Row Inmate
For a fourth time, Brownsville death row inmate Ruben Gutierrez has been scheduled to die. MyRGV.com reports a judge has set July 16th as Gutierrez’s new execution date for his role in the 1998 murder of Escolastica Harrison.
The 85-year-old Harrison had been robbed and stabbed to death in her Brownsville trailer home. The latest death date for the 46-year-old Gutierrez comes about 2 months after he lost a key appeal. The Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied his request for DNA testing of crime scene evidence his attorneys insisted would show Gutierrez was not in the home when Harrison was killed.
Gutierrez was initially to be given a lethal injection in October 2019.
The execution was stayed due to a technical issue related to the death warrant. Two other execution dates, in June 2020 and October 2021, were stayed over religious freedom arguments as Texas grappled with whether to allow a spiritual advisor to be with an inmate in the death chamber.
(source: KURV vewws)
******************
State district judge recommends overturning Melissa Lucio’s death sentence----In a rare joint statement, the district attorney and the defense agreed that prosecutors withheld evidence that could point to a Rio Grande Valley woman’s innocence in the death of her toddler.
A district judge who previously presided over a woman’s capital murder case recommended last week that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overturn Melissa Lucio's 2008 conviction after a district attorney’s office admitted that prosecutors withheld evidence from her defense.
Decades after a jury sentenced Lucio to death for the murder of her 2-year-old daughter, the Cameron County district attorney and Lucio’s legal team cosigned court filings that found key evidence, which included interviews with Lucio’s other children, was suppressed by prosecutors at the time of the case.
For more than 15 years Lucio has lived in the Patrick O'Daniel Unit, where women on death row are housed, since she was charged in the death of her daughter, Mariah Alvarez, who died in the hospital after she was found unresponsive in the bedroom where she had been sleeping. Bruises, scratches and what seemed to be a bite mark on her body led police investigators to believe Mariah was killed. Her death was later determined to be caused by blunt-force head injury.
The prosecutors’ case centered around an ambiguous “confession,” in which police obtained after hours of interrogation, that Lucio had abused her daughter. Lucio has since recanted that admission.
5 of Lucio’s children who were interviewed immediately after the young girl’s death told a Child Protective Services investigator that their mother was not abusive toward them or Mariah, according to court filings. One of her children told the investigator that they witnessed Mariah fall down the flight of stairs in their Harlingen apartment and corroborated Lucio’s account of her daughter’s injuries and declining health in the days after the incident.
But prosecutors did not share those interviews in full with the defense during the trial, which Lucio’s lawyers and the Cameron County district attorney now say was a violation of her constitutional due process rights. The 2 parties said in a statement earlier this month that the withholding of evidence entitles Lucio to relief from her death sentence.
Two years ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers pushed Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz to halt Lucio’s execution during a legislative hearing. Saenz, who was not in office when Lucio was convicted, initially stated he would not intervene, but eventually said he would withdraw a request for an execution date if the criminal appeals court did not act.
“I'm so glad that we did what we did two years ago to step up and — let's not mince words — to stop the state from murdering Melissa Lucio,” Rep. Jeff Leach, a Plano Republican who has advocated for Lucio, told The Texas Tribune.
More than 1/2 of the Texas House asked the state’s parole board to stop the execution in 2022 due to the substantive doubts surrounding her case.
Weeks after the 2022 hearing, the Court of Criminal Appeals halted the execution 2 days before it was scheduled. The court sent Lucio's case back to the Cameron County court to consider several questions.
The following year, Saenz and Vanessa Potkin, Lucio’s lawyer, together submitted findings of fact and conclusions of law to the trial court, providing proof prosecutors withheld evidence from the defense.
On Friday, State District Judge Arturo Nelson signed the court filings, recommending the Court of Criminal Appeals overturn Lucio’s conviction and death sentence.
Nelson had previously presided over Lucio’s case. During the 2008 trial, Nelson refused to allow a social worker and psychologist to testify for Lucio’s innocence defense at trial. Her advocates argued that the absence of this crucial testimony could explain why Lucio might falsely confess as a longtime victim of sexual abuse and domestic violence.
Leach said the criminal justice system failed Lucio, from the initial interrogation to the prosecution. He added there is still work that needs to be done to make this right as long as Lucio is on death row.
Jordan Steiker, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin, said it's “exceptionally rare” for the prosecution and defense to agree on findings of fact that prosecutorial misconduct occurred during a trial.
Lucio’s case, which Steiker described as a combination of bad forensic evidence and the withholding of exculpatory evidence, is one of those rare examples of a district attorney’s office acknowledging an error in court.
When the defense doesn’t have access to the same evidence as prosecutors, there isn’t a level playing field, Steiker said. This is known as a “Brady violation.”
It’s not clear when the Court of Criminal Appeals will consider the state district judge’s recommendation. Lucio does not have a scheduled execution date, but remains incarcerated. Texas has executed one person in 2024.
“We hope and pray the Court of Criminal Appeals will agree with the District Attorney, the defense, and Judge Nelson and our mother can come home to her family,” several of Lucio’s children said in the statement on Monday. “It’s been 17 years that we have been without her. We love her and miss her and can’t wait to hug her.”
(source: The Texas Tribune)
******************
Melissa Lucio death penalty case headed back to Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Ajudge on Friday signed off on an agreed order between the Cameron County District Attorney’s Office and appellate attorneys for Melissa Lucio that she did not have access to evidence that would have corroborated her story that her 2-year-old daughter died from a fall, not child abuse.
Arturo Nelson, the county’s senior judge who sits on the bench in the 138th state District Court, ordered that the court’s clerk will prepare a transcript and and transmit the order, “including the Judgment, Sentence, Indictment, docket sheets, and other exhibits and evidentiary matter filed in the trial records of this cause, to the Court of Criminal Appeals,” or CCA.
He was appointed to the case by Missy Medary, presiding judge of the Fifth Administrative Judicial Region, on April 10, court records show.
Lucio, 55, is the 1st Mexican-American woman to be condemned to death in Texas.
She was convicted in July 2008 of the murder of her daughter, Mariah Alvarez, and was sentenced to death.
She has long maintained her innocence, saying her daughter fell down a staircase at their Harlingen apartment, and that she falsely confessed after about five hours of interrogation at the Harlingen Police Department.
She narrowly avoided an April 27, 2022 execution by just 2 days when on April 25, 2022, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that four claims in a writ of habeas corpus filed on April 18, 2022 met the requirements to stay her execution.
One of those claims that is at issue in the agreed order is that prosecutors at the time suppressed favorable, material evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, which stipulates that prosecutors must turn over exculpatory evidence to defense attorneys.
That evidence included that one of her children actually saw Mariah fall down the stairs, and that her children told Child Protective Services and police that she was not physically abusive to Mariah or the other children. The evidence also included a CPS report where Lucio’s children told an investigator that their mother was worried about Mariah following the fall and was caring for her before the child died.
At the time of her trial, Lucio’s attorneys only had summaries of these reports that left out the exculpatory evidence, according to the order.
In a rare move, Lucio’s appellate attorney, Vanessa Potkin, of the Innocence Project, and Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz released a joint statement in early April to MyRGV.com regarding the agreed order.
“Following CCA’s remand and in response to the Court’s directive, the Cameron County District Attorney’s Office undertook further review of Melissa’s case,” the statement reads.
The agreed statement says the joint filing acknowledges that evidence was withheld.
“This joint filing acknowledges that Melissa’s legal team did not have access to information favorable to her defense at the time of trial, thereby entitling her to habeas corpus relief from her conviction and sentence,” the statement reads. “The Agreed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are under review by the trial court.
On Monday, Lucio’s son, Bobby Alvarez, and his son and daughter-in-law, John and Michelle Lucio, released a joint statement on behalf of the family.
“We are grateful to our mother’s legal team for their hard work to bring the truth to light and to D.A. Saenz for taking another look at our mother’s case and recognizing that she did not receive a fair trial and her conviction should be overturned,” the statement read.
It goes on to say that important evidence was never presented to the jury.
“We hope and pray the Court of Criminal Appeals will agree with the District Attorney, the defense, and Judge Nelson and our mother can come home to her family,” the statement read. “It’s been 17 years that we have been without her. We love and miss her and can’t wait to hug her.”
Potkin, Richard Ellis and Sandra Babcock, Lucio’s appellate team, also released a statement about Nelson’s findings.
“Judge Nelson, who presided over Melissa’s trial, found that critical information was withheld from the defense at the time of trial,” the statement read.
It goes on further to reference Lucio’s stay of execution and the Cameron County District Attorney’s Office further review after remand.
“After that review, the DA’s office concluded that the undisputed facts show that favorable evidence was withheld from Melissa’s defense team at the time of trial,” the statement read. “Judge Nelson found that critical information was withheld from the defense at the time of trial and that Lucio ‘met her burden of proof, by a preponderance of evidence, that she would not have been convicted in light of the suppressed evidence.’
“The case now moves to the CCA, which has the ultimate power to decide whether the conviction should be set aside.”
Lucio is incarcerated at the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Patrick L. O’ Daniel facility in Gatesville, Texas.
(source: myrgv.com)
*******************
Congratulations are in order to Melissa Lucio and her attorneys. News broke Monday that on Friday, the judge in Cameron County, TX signed the order as proposed jointly by Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz and Melissa's legal team. THIS IS NOT OVER. The order still must be upheld by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Death Penalty Action and the Free Melissa Lucio Campaign are not calling for further action at this time.
Statement of the Family of Melissa Lucio
“We are grateful to our mother’s legal team for their hard work to bring the truth to light and to D.A. Saenz for taking another look at our mother’s case and recognizing that she did not receive a fair trial and her conviction should be overturned. Important evidence that our sister Mariah’s death was an accident, not a murder, was never presented to the jury. We hope and pray the Court of Criminal Appeals will agree with the District Attorney, the defense, and Judge Nelson and our mother can come home to her family. It’s been 17 years that we have been without her. We love her and miss her and can’t wait to hug her.”
-- Bobby Alvarez, Melissa Lucio’s son
-- John and Michelle Lucio, Melissa’s Son and Daughter-in-Law
Statement of Melissa Lucio’s Attorneys
“On April 12, 2024, the Honorable Judge Arturo Nelson entered findings of fact and conclusions of law recommending that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) overturn Melissa Lucio’s conviction and death sentence. Judge Nelson, who presided over Melissa’s trial, found that critical information was withheld from the defense at the time of trial. On April 25, 2022, the CCA issued a stay of execution for Melissa and ordered the 138th Judicial District Court of Cameron Country to consider new evidence of her innocence in the death of her daughter, Mariah Alvarez, along with other claims challenging the fairness and reliability of her conviction. Following the remand and in response to the CCA’s directive, the Cameron County District Attorney’s Office undertook further review of Melissa’s case. After that review, the DA’s office concluded that the undisputed facts show that favorable evidence was withheld from Melissa’s defense team at the time of trial. Judge Nelson found that critical information was withheld from the defense at the time of trial and that Lucio ‘met her burden of proof, by a preponderance of the evidence, that she would not have been convicted in light of the suppressed evidence.’ The case now moves to the CCA, which has the ultimate power to decide whether the conviction should be set aside.”
-- Vanessa Potkin, Director of Special Litigation at the Innocence Project; Richard Ellis, attorney at law; Tivon Schardl, Chief of the Capital Habeas Unit for the Federal Public Defender in the Western District of Texas; and Professor Sandra Babcock, Director of the Cornell Center on the Death Penalty Worldwide, Melissa Lucio’s Attorneys
(source: Death Penalty Action)
*****************
Death row inmate claiming gender discrimination on jury rejected by Supreme Court----The death row inmate claims prosecutors unfairly excluded women from his jury because they tended to be less in favor of the death penalty than white men.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to take up a case brought by a death row inmate who claims Texas prosecutors unfairly kept female jurors off his capital murder jury because of their views on the death penalty, prompting a dissent from Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
In a 7-page dissent in which she was joined by Joe Biden appointee Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sotomayor wrote that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals failed to conduct an “important side-by-side comparison of struck female jurors against male jurors permitted to serve” in Dillion Gage Compton’s trial for the 2016 killing of correctional officer Mari Ann Johnson.
The Barack Obama appointee said the state gave only 1 reason for striking all but 4 women jurors from the 12-person jury: prospective women jurors’ general hesitations about imposing the death penalty.
"A prosecutor may claim that he is striking a woman based on her hesitation to impose the death penalty. When the prosecutor fails to strike a man who has expressed even greater hesitancy, however, it indicates that the woman was struck based on unconstitutional stereotypes about women rather than objective facts," Sotomayor wrote.
The Texas appellate court examined the women’s views on capital punishment “as a group instead of individually," Sotomayor wrote.
“That legal error hid the best indication of discriminatory purpose. Under a side-by-side comparison, it is clear that at least one woman struck by the state had more favorable views on the death penalty than at least one man the state did not strike,” Sotomayor wrote.
In 2023, the Texas appellate court upheld Compton’s conviction and death sentence for strangling and killing Johnson during a lockdown at the French Robertson Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, where Compton was already serving a 25-year sentence for aggravated sexual assault of a child.
The lower court rejected Compton’s claims that prosecutors unfairly used peremptory strikes against women and minorities during jury selection to ensure a majority white male jury. Compton claimed the prosecution’s use of peremptory strikes based on race, ethnicity and gender violated his Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection.
Prosecutors used 13 of their 15 peremptory strikes on women.
The Texas court ruled that the state provided a gender-neutral reason for the strikes, finding that each person struck from the jury “expressed more concern, hesitation or opposition to imposing the death penalty than those venirepersons the state chose not to strike.”
In a petition seeking Supreme Court review of the case, attorneys for Compton argued that the state accepted white male jurors whose views on the death penalty were less supportive than the women kept off the jury – at least 4 of whom Compton said had favorable views on the death penalty.
Sotomayor pointed out that 1 woman juror who voiced strong support for the death penalty — saying capital punishment was “absolutely justified” and “just and necessary” — was struck from the jury while a male prospective juror was not struck despite saying he thought Texas used the death penalty too often.
“The state defended its views-on-the-death-penalty rationale for each struck woman but never compared their views with those of the men it did not strike. Thus, it did not respond to Compton’s comparative argument that the State had retained men with similar views on the death penalty to the struck women,” Sotomayor wrote.
Attorneys for the Texas Special Prosecution Unit argued in a brief to the high court that the appellate court “meaningfully compare[d] the struck women with the men.”
The justice said she would have tossed out the Texas court’s ruling and sent the case back for another analysis.
“This case illustrates the hazards of analysis by aggregate,” Sotomayor wrote. “The [Texas Court of Criminal Appeals] may have been right that most of the struck women expressed less favorable views on the death penalty than most of the men permitted to serve. When the state, however, extends a reason true of many female potential jurors to another female potential juror not based on what she says, but based on the fact that she is a woman, it crosses the line into invidious discrimination.”
Compton, a Black man, also claimed the state unfairly struck the only 2 qualified Black prospective jurors as well as a Hispanic man. The jury was made up of 10 white jurors, 1 Hispanic juror and 1 juror whose race is unknown.
Jennae Swiergula, a Texas Defender Service attorney representing Compton, did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday, nor did 2 members of the Texas Special Prosecution Unit.
(source: Courthouse News)
ALABAMA:
• HB 27 by Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, would allow capital defendants to seek resentencing if their death sentence resulted from judicial override of a jury's sentencing recommendation. The House Judiciary Committee will consider HB 27 on Wednesday, April 17, at 1:30 p.m. Alabama Arise supports HB 27.
(source: Project Hope)
****************
Man who raped, murdered Georgia 5-year-old gets death penalty, judge says
WARNING: The following report contains details that some may find graphic or disturbing.
A man found guilty of raping and murdering a Georgia 5-year-old girl has received the death penalty.
On Monday morning, an Alabama judge sentenced 40 year-old Jeremy Williams to death for 4 counts of capital murder, WTVM reports.
Williams was accused of killing Kamarie Holland in Dec. 2021. Police said Hollard’s mother, Kristy Siple, trafficked her daughter to Williams in exchange for money. Prosecutors said Williams forced the 5-year-old to perform sexual acts on him before he strangled her.
In March, Williams pleaded guilty to 4 counts of capital murder, obstruction of a corpse, knowingly recording the acts, rape, and sodomy. Siple pleaded guilty to human sex trafficking and will be sentenced at a later date.
While he pleaded guilty, Alabama law requires a 12-person jury to determine if a suspect in a death penalty case is guilty or innocent. Over the course of 3 days, the jury heard graphic testimony from forensic pathologist and another sexual assault victim, WTVM reports.
On Friday, the jurors deliberated for 90 minutes before returning a guilty verdict on all counts. The judge said Monday that Williams’ execution date will be decided at a future date.
(source: WSB TV news)
***************
Man sentenced to death for rape, murder of 5-year-old Georgia girl in 2021
The man convicted of killing a 5-year-old girl from Columbus named Kamarie Holland and hiding her body in a vacant home in east Alabama in December 2021 has received the death penalty, according to Columbus Ledger-Examiner.
Jeremy Tremaine Williams, 40, was sentenced to death for capital murder of a child less than 14 years old, kidnapping, rape and sodomy. The date of execution will be determined at a later time.
He was also sentenced to life for knowingly recording the acts of rape and sodomy, and he received 10 years for obstruction of a corpse.
Williams was involved in a sexual relationship with the little girl's mother, according to AL.com. When he tired of her, he asked for Kamarie. The girl's mother, Kristy Marie Siple, asked for $2,500 and Williams countered with $1,300. However, he never paid Siple the money.
Williams recorded the abuse of the child, including forcing her to perform oral sex and smoke methamphetamine with him. Williams reportedly had sex with the girl before and after her death.
Williams confessed to killing Holland as well as his 1-month-old daughter in Alaska in 2005 during a 5-hour interview with the Russell County Sheriff's Office.
He pled guilty to capital murder charges on March 13, 2024. A jury returned a guilty verdict on all counts on Friday.
Kristy Stipe also pled guilty for selling her child to Williams, according to WRBL.com.
In a separate sexual assault case involving a 6-year-old child, Williams was sentenced to life in prison without parole and 20 years in prison on two other charges. He will also have to pay $90,000 to the state.
(source: foxatlanta.com)
LOUISIANA:
Wilbert Rideau, former Louisiana Death-Sentenced Prisoner, is Honored for Extraordinary Journalism During 44 Years at Angola Prison
RACE LOUISIANA
On April 12, 2024, Long Island University celebrated the 2023 George Polk Awards in Journalism, honoring investigative journalists and recognizing 16 former winners, including formerly death-sentenced prisoner Wilbert Rideau. Mr. Rideau spent 44 years incarcerated in Louisiana’s Angola State Penitentiary where he created The Lifer, one of the first Black prison periodicals. Sentenced to death in 1961 at age nineteen, Mr. Rideau spent 12 years on death row before the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Furman v. Georgia (1972), which struck down Louisiana’s capital punishment scheme. Mr. Rideau was resentenced to life in prison and moved to general population. Once there, Mr. Rideau tried and failed to get a job at The Angolite, an all-white prison magazine, and instead created The Lifer. Mr. Rideau also wrote as a freelance journalist for local newspapers and magazines. In 1976, “reformist” official C. Paul Phelps took over as Angola Prison’s new warden and named Mr. Rideau as The Angolite’s new editor. “[Mr.] Phelps felt there was a role for freedom of expression and journalism in prison,” said Mr. Rideau. “Censorship, and keeping everything a secret, was counterproductive to changings things.”
As the editor of The Angolite, Mr. Rideau produced a rich body of writing from behind prison walls and proved a vibrant uncensored magazine was a positive force in the prison setting. Mr. Rideau was given unrestricted access to phone lines, cameras, and tape recorders, and was given the opportunity to leave prison with unarmed escorts to interview individuals around the state and visit newspaper conventions. The Angolite gained national recognition for its reporting, particularly after publishing “Prison: The Sexual Jungle,” which described the sexual violence experienced by prisoners at the hands of other prisoners in Angola. In this piece, Mr. Rideau wrote that “the act of rape in the ultramasculine world of prison constitutes the ultimate humiliation visited upon the male.” In a recent interview, Mr. Rideau told The New Yorker that his goal was partly “to humanize everybody in prison, whether it’s ourselves or the guards. Because that is part of the bigger problem: people in the streets did not see us as normal, breathing human beings, like themselves.”
Sentenced to death just 8 weeks after the crime in question, Mr. Rideau would ultimately have 3 trials — all with juries consisting of 12 white men — all of which ended in death sentences. At his 1st trial, the jury returned a death verdict in an hour, but the Supreme Court overturned his sentence, calling the proceedings a “kangaroo court.” In 1964, another all-white male jury returned a guilty verdict after 15 minutes of deliberation, once again sentencing Mr. Rideau to death. 6 years later, a federal court threw out this death sentence, but another jury of 12 white men found Mr. Rideau guilty after just 8 minutes of deliberation. “3 juries with all white men, in a state where half the people are women, and 1/3 of the population was Black. That was justice back then.”
With the support and legal advocacy of Linda LaBranche, the woman who eventually became his wife, Mr. Rideau received a new trial after a federal court ruled the original indictment was flawed. In 2005, at his fourth and final trial, a jury consisting of 1 white man, 1 Black man, and 10 white women, determined Mr. Rideau’s case did not constitute murder. The jury found Mr. Rideau guilty of manslaughter and sentenced him to 21 years in prison. Having been incarcerated since the 60s, Mr. Rideau was immediately released. Reflecting on his release and incarceration, Mr. Rideau reiterated to The New Yorker the importance of his relationship with former warden Phelps. “Of all the people in my life, except my mother, I cannot imagine anyone who had a greater impact on the course of my life and the person I became than him,” Mr. Rideau said. In closing, he also emphasized the importance of prison authorities in creating change. “Sell them on this idea, man! I mean, you can write this story about me and the award, but give credit to this thing that happened, that has never happened since. Sell it to these wardens who are going to be reading this. If it doesn’t benefit you, maybe it’ll benefit somebody else. Maybe one of these wardens will say, ‘Maybe I ought to try this.’”
(source: Death Penalty Information Center)
OHIO:
Ohio House bill proposes alternate method for executions in the state----HB-392 would allow inmates to choose between lethal injection and nitrogen hypoxia. In January, Alabama was the first state to use nitrogen gas for an execution.
Ohio legislators held the 1st hearing last week for a bill that would change Ohio's options for the death penalty.
Ohio has not executed anyone since 2018. In 2020, Governor Mike DeWine declared lethal injection "no longer an option." There are currently 118 inmates on death row, according to the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction's website.
House Bill 392, sponsored by State Representatives Brian Stewart (R-Ashville) and Phil Plummer (R-Dayton) would give inmates on death row a choice between lethal injection and nitrogen hypoxia. If lethal drugs are not available, nitrogen gas would be required to be used.
"This would provide a legal means for us to continue to carry out these sentences that unanimous juries have imposed in Ohio," Stewart said.
In January, Alabama was the first state to carry out an execution using nitrogen hypoxia.
"I think from a lot of people's standpoint, it was an experimental method that went horribly wrong," State Representative Michele Grim (D-Toledo) said. "It left the inmate convulsing for at least two minutes and he was straining against his restraints."
Grim is part of the Government Oversight Committee and has spoken out against the bill.
"Veterinarians don't use this method to euthanize our pets when they need to be euthanized," Grim said. "There's a lot of distress they've seen in that method. So if veterinarians are not using this method to humanely euthanize pets, why would we be using that on human beings?"
"The negative feedback came from death penalty abolitionists who have negative feedback to every execution that's been carried out," Stewart said.
The bill had its first hearing last week.
"We've had sponsor testimony that we thought went very well," Stewart said. "This bill has the support of Attorney General Dave Yost. It has support of the Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association."
Stewart said he believes capital punishment should be rare, but available as an option.
"There is another bill in the Ohio Legislature which would abolish the death penalty," Stewart said. "I would encourage people who are against the death penalty to go work on that bill."
House Bill 259 is a bipartisan bill, sponsored by Jean Schmidt (R-Loveland) and Adam Miller (D-Columbus) to abolish the death penalty. The bill is currently in the Finance Committee and has had two hearings so far.
The next step for HB-392 is — if the committee chair Bob Peterson (R-Washington Court House) gives the bill the go-ahead — proponent and opponent testimony to start.
(source: WTOL news)
***************
Hamilton County Prosecutor Joseph T. Deters announces death penalty indictment against Tianna Robinson for the murder of Nahla Miller
Today, Hamilton County Prosecutor Joseph T. Deters announced the death penalty indictment against Tianna Robinson (DOB 1/17/96) for the murder of her 4-year-old daughter, Nahla Miller. Robinson is now charged with 1 count of Aggravated Murder with death penalty specification, 2 counts of Murder, 1 count of Felonious Assault, and 1 count of Endangering Children.
Robinson was previously indicted for 1 count of Attempt Murder (F1), 2 counts of Felonious Assault (F2), and 1 count of Child Endangering (F2), relating to an incident in her Springfield Township home that occurred on April 13, 2021. Robinson beat and strangled her daughter, Nahla, until her heart stopped. Nahla was transported to Children’s Hospital where she remained until she was removed from life support on April 21, 2021. Investigators believe Nahla had been abused for months.
The Coroner’s Office has ruled Nahla’s death a homicide. The cause of death was determined to be strangulation and blunt force trauma, resulting in significant internal injuries.
Hamilton County Prosecutor Joseph T. Deters commented, “I have never understood how anyone could hurt a little kid so badly, especially the child’s own mother. Violence like this goes against every instinct we are born with as humans and as parents. These cases are exactly why I worked so hard in 1997 to help pass legislation making the purposeful murder of a child under the age of 13 a death penalty eligible offense.
This year has been especially difficult – with what seems like case after case of horrific acts perpetrated against children. But rest assured we will not stop until justice has been served for Nahla Miller and her family.”
(source: hcpros.org)
*******************
Financing of Ashland County’s death-penalty case still unknown
Who will pay for Ashland County’s pending capital case?
There are only 2 options — Howard Walters or Ashland County. But the answer to that question remains a mystery and court records indicate it could be May before it’s answered.
Walters, 59, is accused of the 2023 slaying of his son-in-law, Kurtis Harstine, 41. He faces a number of charges related to Harstine’s death, including aggravated murder.
The case is being tried as a capital case, meaning Walters faces the death penalty. It also means Walters, under state law, is afforded rights such as having an extra attorney and experts.
‘New ground’
But capital cases are also expensive. The last one cost the county $115,734.30 because the defendant, Shawn Grate, was determined to be indigent.
Walters, on paper, is not indigent, Ashland County Prosecutor Chris Tunnell has said. But the question came up when Walters’ wife filed for divorce in November, which froze the couple’s assets and bank accounts.
“Frankly, this is sorta new ground for everybody. It’s rare that you have someone in this status,” Tunnell has said of Walters.
That divorce wrapped up last month, court records show, which should bring the answer to the question at the forefront of this story into focus.
The wife, her divorce attorney argued, is a “stay-at-home grandmother” who hasn’t worked for six years and who has relied on the couple’s rental property income and her former husband’s job.
She started college but never finished “because she worked to help (Walters) through college.”
The separation agreement states Walters earned approximately $100,000 per year for the last 3 years “from his employment and consulting work, but he is no longer employed due to being incarcerated for his pending criminal charges.”
Walters worked as a professor of adult education at Ashland University from 2003-2021, according to his LinkedIn account.
Most recently, he worked for North Central State College as an academic administrator from June 2021 to May 2023 and his account lists him as a freelance “research and evaluation scholar” currently.
Court records show an LLC with 8 rental properties with a total assessed value of just under $710,000.
According to the separation agreement, the wife will receive the marital residence, all 8 rental properties, the LLC bank account and an equal share of Walters’ retirement assets.
A pre-trial hearing for the capital case was scheduled for Tuesday — but Walters’ attorney, Jim Mayer III, asked for a continuance.
The reason? Mayer said it will take time to disperse funds according to the separation agreement for an equal division of retirement assets.
“That process is underway but funds will not be dispersed until the end of April, beginning of May 2024. As a result, (Walters) is unable to accurately attest via affidavit to the account balance until it has been divided and taxes and penalties assessed,” reads Mayer’s motion.
Mayer asked the court to schedule the pre-trial hearing for the 1st or 2nd week of May.
The court has yet to reschedule the hearing, according to court records.
Ready, if necessary
Meanwhile, the Ashland County Court of Common Pleas has planned for the money should it ever be needed for the case. The budget reflects $125,000 earmarked for “capital case fees.”
The hourly rate for a public defender in a capital case is $140 and applies to all stages, including trial, appeal and post conviction proceedings.
According to reporting from Court News Ohio, the Ohio Public Defender Commission used to cover 100% of the costs for these cases.
“Now, counties pay a portion of the costs through their legal defense funds,” reads the article from July 2023.
(source: ashlandsource.com)
ARKANSAS:
Murder trial set for Fayetteville man after plea deal falls through, officials confirm----According to court documents, the state is pursuing the death penalty in this case.
A man charged with killing a woman in Fayetteville and disposing of her body has pled not guilty to capital murder— his trial date has been set for August 26, 2024.
Kacey Jennings, 30, is accused of capital murder, abuse of a corpse, tampering with evidence, and theft after the Fayetteville Police Department (FPD) investigated the disappearance of Allison Maria Castro and concluded that Jennings had killed and disposed of her body.
Washington County Prosecutor Matt Durrett confirms that in a hearing on April 15, his office was expecting a guilty plea, but the trial is moving forward after Jennings changed his mind.
Durrett also said that Castro's family was in the courtroom, having traveled from Hawaii for the hearing.
According to the FPD, on Sept. 19, 2022, officers responded to a home where they reportedly found Jennings overdosing on drugs.
While investigating, officers reportedly heard concerns from family members about the welfare of Jenning's ex-girlfriend, Castro.
The FPD said that after not hearing from Castro, officers reported her missing the same day and started looking into "exactly what occurred."
Evidence led officers to believe that Jennings killed Castro and disposed of her body, and a week later, Jennings was arrested for 1st-degree murder and disposing of a body.
Since his initial arrest, Jennings' charges have been amended to capital murder, disposing of a body, tampering with evidence, and theft.
According to court documents, the state is pursuing the death penalty in this case.
If you have any information concerning this investigation, you're asked to contact the FPD at (479) 587-3555.
(source: 5newsonline.com)
NIGERIA:
Falana rejects capital punishment, calls for focus on root causes
Human rights lawyer Femi Falana has weighed in on the debate surrounding capital punishment, calling it an ineffective solution that ignores the root of societal problems.
Falana, a prominent figure in Nigerian law, rejected the notion that capital punishment acts as a deterrent, arguing it fails to address the underlying issues that lead to crime.
The activist spoke on Monday during a virtual programme to mark the 10th anniversary of the Chibok schoolgirls’ abduction organised by Women Radio 91.7fm.
On April 14, 2014, Boko Haram terrorists attacked the Government Girls Secondary School, Chibok in Borno state and abducted about 276 students.
Commenting on adopting capital punishment for kidnappers as recommended by the First Lady, Oluremi Tinubu, Falana said the suggestion is “diversionary”
“We do not subscribe to any form of capital punishment because it has never addressed the root cause of the problems it is meant to address,” he stated.
The statement comes amidst discussions on how to tackle rising crime rates in Nigeria. Some have advocated for harsher penalties, including the death penalty, particularly for crimes like kidnapping.
Falana, however, offered a different perspective. He suggests that focusing on corruption, a major issue in Nigeria, might be a more productive approach. “While I think it is a diversionary suggestion,” he said, referring to calls for capital punishment for kidnappers, “other Nigerians would prefer that we recommend capital punishment for the criminality that leads to corruption.”
Falana further highlighted the hypocrisy of advocating for harsher punishments for some crimes while ignoring others.
“Those who are making suggestions that kidnappers be shot at would also not want to extend that to those who loot the treasury, sometimes to the tune of over N100 billion,” he pointed out, referencing the vast sums embezzled through corruption.
(source: ripplesnigeria.com)
SINGAPORE:
Essay on MHA’s survey findings highlights need for rigorous debate on necessity of Singapore’s death penalty policy----Simone Galimberti highlights Professor Mai Sato’s critique of Singapore’s reliance on the death penalty, particularly questioning the validity of MHA-conducted surveys that allegedly show public support. He advocates for more thorough and unbiased research to inform policy, urging the MHA to openly address the shortcomings identified in Prof. Sato’s analysis.
There is one key way to press against the death penalty in Singapore, and this is about rationally and scientifically bringing forward evidence that supports alternative forms of punishment.
It is about critically analysing and dismantling the rationale that has been used by the People’s Power Party (PAP), the party in power in the city State, for decades, to justify capital punishment.
This is exactly what Professor Mai Sato, an expert on the death capital and an academician at Monash University, did with an essay published on Academia SG, an independent, academician-led platform for bold discussions on sensitive issues related to Singapore’s affairs.
At Monash, Prof Sato leads the Eleos Justice, a research centre whose mission is “to restrict and abolish the death penalty in the Asian region”.
The essay, Singapore’s death penalty for drug trafficking: What the research says and doesn’t, is a comprehensive analysis of the two major ways the Singapore’s government justifies the death penalty: strong citizens’ support for it and its deterrent effect.
The essay does something that is long due: it analyzes all the major reports and researches that have beenå commissioned by Singaporean Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA).
In doing so, the paper at the same time rebuts some of the key positions that Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam had made in a public conversation with youths on the death penalty last October.
The fact that Mr Shanmugam felt the need to engage with representatives of the youths on the issue was itself unusual, a sort of milestone.
It was an indicator that the PAP was forecasting that something in public opinion could slowly and gradually shift in relation to people’s perceptions towards the death punishment.
Therefore, the issue had to be tackled head-on openly and transparently, something that should be commended even if Mr Shanmugam, as expected, used the platform to reiterate the official party policies.
What Prof Sato does was academically rigorous because she highlighted incongruences and weaknesses in the ways these official studies where conducted.
While she is unable to disprove the fact that a good majority of citizens of Singapore accept capital punishment as the best way to tackle illicit drugs, Prof Sato ably proves that the Government’s rationale is not unassailable.
I would invite the readers to go through the essay as it is relatively readable even for a lay person especially thanks to some summaries included and her closing remarks.
The essay also aims to be seen as unbiased and based on facts and analysis, and I might believe that even Mr Shanmugam would credit Prof Sato for that.
One of the major points made is to demonstrate, in a quite convincible manner, that Singaporeans are not clamouring for the death penalty.
For example, the surveys conducted by the Ministry, she explained, are unable to prove how important is the death penalty for the public, and she elaborates that there has never been a major discussion on the issue beyond the usual talking points presented by the government.
I can guarantee the readers that the time spent going through the report is well spent because Prof Sato manages to capture the flaws of the official policies that are at the foundation of the rationale pushed by the PAP to justify capital punishment.
The end of the essay could not be more powerful.
“Whom and what purpose the death penalty serves in Singapore remains unanswered”.
And, once again, it is not just an activist who admirably and emotionally put her case or an opinion writer stating this but someone who should be considered as the most renowned academician on the death penalty in Asia.
Let’s forget that the country Prof Sato is originally from, Japan, is like Singapore, a retentionist.
Not only as academician but also as civil society organizer, she has developed, along the years, not only tons of expertise but also a lot of complex nuances on how to deal with the issue there.
While the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has not directly responded to the essay by Prof Sato, it did issue a statement in response to a petition submitted to the Minister for Home Affairs and Law, K. Shanmugam, calling for a moratorium on the death penalty.
Just a couple of days after Prof Sato’s publication, MHA asserted that its stringent approach to drug trafficking has saved more lives.
The statement highlighted that individuals who engage in drug trafficking do so for profit, fully aware of the consequences. It emphasized that those caught trafficking drugs beyond the capital threshold and sentenced to death were afforded full and due process in court, where they could present their defences.
MHA further noted that capital punishment has been extensively discussed in Singapore, including in Parliament, where it has been upheld. Additionally, MHA mentioned studies indicating strong domestic support for the death penalty, including for drug trafficking—a point contested by Prof Sato.
As clearly explained in Prof Sato’s essay, Singapore needs a real conversation on the issue.
Hopefully, Mr Shanmugam’s public engagement on the issue was not just a one-off event, and, albeit reluctantly, the PAP will feel the need not to bury its head under the sand but instead proactively engage the public, especially the new generations.
The party knows that youths might develop different views on the death penalty, and one of the two pillars that justify the death penalty support in Singapore, the strong public opinion for it, might crack and crumble.
It would be very welcome if Mr Shanmugam would issue a directive for more comprehensive and stronger studies that would address the flaws identified by Prof Sato.
Can the Law School at the National University of Singapore become a centre of expertise on capital punishment?
I do understand that this question looks like a provocation, but if the death penalty is so important for the government of Singapore and if the Ministry of Home Affairs wants to back its policy through evidence, then what you need is more impartial research on the issue.
Prof Sato’s essay might have opened a new era in the fight against capital punishment in Singapore.
It is not that the day the city-state will get rid of it will become closer because of it, but at least, from now onwards, the PAP and the government will be forced to play a much better role in explaining why the death penalty is so indispensable for Singapore.
It is going to be a battle of evidence vs evidence.
All those activists on the ground who so boldly and audaciously are fighting capital punishment despite a hostile environment should continue their work, and hopefully, their propositions and work on the ground won’t be dismissed or downplayed so easily as it often happens now.
An editor’s note at the beginning of Prof Sato’s essay reminds us what the death penalty should be about.
“Like all policy tools, capital punishment is only a means to an end and not an end itself”.
Will Mr Shanmugam, his party and his officials at the Ministry agree on this statement?
Will they foster a genuine debate about the pros and cons of the death penalty?
Will they be able to garner the courage to admit that their positions and justifications might not be so rainproof?
Finally, will the parties in the opposition also rise to the occasion and contribute to a genuine, unbiased conversation on the death penalty?
(source: Opinion; Simone Galimberti writes on democracy, social inclusion, youth development, regional integration, SDGs and human rights in the context of Asia Pacific----gutzy.asia)
IRAQ:
Iraqi court sentences 6 drug dealers to death
An Iraqi court on Sunday issued death sentences to 6 drug dealers, including 3 foreigners.
"The Central Criminal Court issued a verdict to execute 6 drug dealers who were convicted of trafficking narcotic substances," a statement by the media office of the Supreme Judicial Council said, without specifying the nationalities of the t3 foreigners.
The statement said that 4 of the convicts, including a foreigner, worked within an international network to promote marijuana and were found in possession of 2.8 kg.
The other 2 convicted foreigners were found in possession of 10 kg of opium and various narcotic substances, the statement added.
The chaos and conflicts that have engulfed Iraq since the U.S. invasion in 2003 impeded successive Iraqi governments from effectively addressing the threat of drugs.
In May 2023, Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia' al-Sudani underlined the importance of waging "a war on drugs," saying that drug dealing remains one of the main ways of financing terrorism, and the circulation of drugs flourishes in the shadow of terrorism.
(source: english.news.cn)
******************
Iraq postpones vote on bill including death penalty for same-sex acts
Iraqi lawmakers have postponed voting on a bill that includes the death penalty or life in prison for same-sex relations – a measure that diplomats from Western countries said could have serious consequences for Iraq’s political and economic ties if it goes through.
Parliament was in session today, with the bill – an amendment to an anti-prostitution law – 2nd on its agenda.
It imposes life imprisonment or the death penalty for anyone engaging in same-sex relations or anyone who swaps their wife with someone else’s for sexual purposes.
It also bans promotion of homosexuality and violations are punishable by at least 7 years in prison.
2 lawmakers in the session say the vote was postponed over time constraints and that some disagreements remained over proposed amendments.
Currently, mainly Muslim Iraq does not explicitly criminalize gay sex, but loosely defined morality clauses in its penal code have been used to target LGBT people.
Parliament was in session to vote on the bill just hours before Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani was scheduled to meet US President Joe Biden in Washington on a trip focused on pushing for more US investment.
More than 60 countries criminalize gay sex, while same-sex sexual acts are legal in more than 130 countries, according to Our World in Data.
When Uganda in May 2023 enacted a law that includes the death penalty for certain same-sex acts, the World Bank halted new lending to the East African nation and the US announced visa and travel restrictions against Ugandan officials.
(source: timesofisrael.com)
IRAN----executions
Marjan Hajizadeh, 19, hanged in the Central Prison of Zanjan, Iran
A 19-year-old woman named Marjan Hajizadeh was executed on Thursday, April 11, 2024, in the Central Prison of Zanjan, Iran.
Marjan Hajizadeh and her husband, Esmail Hassaniani, 29, had been sentenced to death on drug related charges. They were arrested and imprisoned 3 years ago.
Marjan Hajizadeh was only 16 years and 4 months old at the time of arrest and detention.
Marjan and Esmail were arrested on a motorway in Zanjan. Marjan didn’t know her husband was carrying drugs, and she was innocent.
The execution of this young couple has not yet been announced by the official authorities at the time of publishing this news.
Marjan Hajizadeh is the 233rd woman to be executed in Iran since 2007, according to the data gathered by the NCRI Women’s Committee. She is the 4th woman executed in Iran in 2024.
Record holder of executions of women
The Iranian regime is the world’s top record holder of executions of women.
No government in the world has executed so many women. The list does not account for the tens of thousands of women executed in Iran on political grounds.
The NCRI Women’s Committee previously mentioned that many of the women executed by the mullahs’ regime are themselves victims of domestic violence against women and have acted in self-defense.
An average of 15 women were executed every year under the former government in Iran.
However, 26 women were executed under Raisi government in 2023, which is 11 more than the previous average.
The NCRI Women’s Committee calls on the United Nations, the European Union, and other relevant international organizations to take urgent action to save the lives of those on death row and stop the use of death penalty in Iran.
(source: women.ncr-iran.org)
***********************
Zanjan Central Prison, execution of a young couple In Iran
Esmaeil Hosniani and Marjan Hajizadeh arrested 3 years ago in a joint case on charges of drug trafficking. And sentenced to death in zanjan centeral prison.
According to the Iranian Human Rights Society Website of Iran, on Monday, 15 of April 2024. A young couple executed in Zanjan Central Prison on charges related to drugs. The female prisoner who executed had only 19 years old. The death sentence for this couple carried out on Thursday, 11th of April 2024, in Zanjan Central Prison.
Esmaeil Hosniani and Marjan Hajizadeh arrested 3 years ago in a joint case on charges of drug trafficking and sentenced to death. It said that Marjan Hajizadeh is the child of a poor family and unaware that her husband involved in drug trafficking during their arrest.
Marjan Hajizadeh was 16 years and 3 months old at the time of her arrest. Consequently, Marjan is the 1st juvenile offender executed in recent years on drug-related charges.
Execution is a tool of repression and intimidation of the society
The leaders of the government use execution as the most important tool for suppressing and intimidating society. They try to prevent the resurgence of uprisings by increasing the number of executions. Government leaders strongly suppress any gathering related to condemning executions. And even prevent the gathering of the families of the condemned prisoners.
Revelation of executions, the scene of confrontation between the people and the government
The concealment of the government’s leaders in relation to executions can be understood by not officially announcing them. They want to convey to the people that they can execute anyone they want without mentioning their names. This has turned the discovery or announcement of the names of the executed into a scene of confrontation between the people and the oppressive government. The revelation of these executions has so far led to the recognition and registration of the oppressive regime as a violator of human rights in international forums.
(source: en.iranhrs.org)
********************
5 Executed for Drug Offenses in Mashhad
In a recent development, 5 individuals convicted of drug-related offenses faced execution in Vakilabad Prison, Mashhad, on April 15, 2024, according to Haal Vsh.
The identities of the executed individuals were withheld from the report. However, it was noted that 4 of them hailed from Mashhad, while one was identified as an Afghan national.
No official sources or domestic media outlets within the country have provided coverage of these executions at the time of writing. In 2023, 66% of HRANA’s reports on executions lacked official announcements by judicial authorities and went unreported by media inside Iran, highlighting a troubling lack of transparency in due process.
The reports from the Department of Statistics and Publication of Human Rights Activists for the year 2023 reveal a concerning prevalence of executions for drug offenses in Iran, constituting 56.4% of the total executions.
(source: en.hrana.org)
*******************
Urgent Action Needed: Iranian Regime Executes Seven, Including Young Woman Arrested at 16
On Thursday, April 11, Ali Khamenei’s henchmen, in a heinous crime, executed a 19-year-old woman who was barely over 16 at the time of her arrest, along with her husband. This young couple, named Marjan Hajizadeh and Esmail Hassaniani, were hanged in Zanjan Central Prison after 3 years of imprisonment, coinciding with the Eid al-Fitr celebrations.
On Sunday, April 14, a prisoner named Arsalan Hashemi in Hamedan Central Prison, on Saturday, April 13, a prisoner named Abuzar Salem in Isfahan Central Prison, on April 7, Alireza Marzban in Shiraz Central Prison, on April 5, Hassan Ali Mirza Nia in Khorramabad Central Prison, and on March 25, Abbas Aghaei in Tabriz Central Prison were executed by Khamenei’s henchmen.
On the other hand, on Sunday, April 14, five prisoners in Qezelhessar Prison in Karaj were transferred to solitary confinement for the execution of their death sentences.
On Saturday night, April 13, Mehrdad Abdollahzadeh, a 20-year-old from Sardasht who was making a living through the exhausting job of Kolbari in the Beitush border heights, fell from the mountain and died instantly due to the shooting of the criminal officials of the mullahs’ regime.
The Iranian Resistance once again calls on the United Nations, relevant organizations, the European Union, and member countries to strongly condemn these criminal executions and to take immediate action to save the lives of prisoners sentenced to death. It also re-emphasizes the necessity of an international investigation delegation to visit Iranian prisons.
(source: Secretariat of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) )
****************
Asghar Tabarzin Executed in Tabriz in March
A man named Asghar Tabarzin was executed for murder charges in Tabriz Central Prison in March.
According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a man was executed in Tabriz Central Prison on 17 March. His identity has been established as 34-year-old Asghar Tabarzin from Hashtroud. He was sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder by the Criminal Court.
An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Asghar Tabarzin was arrested for murder 3 years ago. He worked for a company where he gets into a fight with the site manager that ended with the murder.”
Despite a month passing, his execution has not been reported by domestic media or officials in Iran.
Those charged with the umbrella term of “intentional murder” are sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) regardless of intent or circumstances due to a lack of grading in law. Once a defendant has been convicted, the victim’s family are required to choose between death as retribution, diya (blood money) or forgiveness.
In 2023, at least 282 people including two juvenile offenders and 15 women, were executed for murder charges, the second highest number of qisas executions since 2010. Only 20% of the recorded qisas executions were announced by official sources. In 2023, Iran Human Rights also recorded 857 cases of families choosing diya or forgiveness instead of qisas executions.
********************
Alireza Marzban Secretly Executed in Shiraz----He wasn’t able to come up with the diya demanded by the plaintiffs in time.
Alireza Marzban, a man on death row for a murder he was alleged to have committed during a group fight, was secretly executed in Shiraz Central Prison after he failed to come up with the set diya (blood money).
According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a man was executed in Shiraz Central Prison (Adel Abad) on 7 April. His identity has been established as 27-year-old Alireza Marzban from Shiraz. He was sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder by the Criminal Court.
An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Alireza Marzban was arrested for charges of murder during a group fight. He maintained his innocence throughout the interrogation phase and trial. He said he’d participated in the fight but didn’t kill anyone and is completely innocent. Alireza was executed without a last family visit. He’d been transferred for execution once before but had managed to obtained an extension. But he wasn’t able to come up with the diya demanded by the plaintiffs in time.”
At the time of writing, his execution has not been reported by domestic media or officials in Iran.
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.
*******************
Afghan Abuzar Salem Executed in Isfahan
Abuzar Salem, an Afghan national on death row for murder, was executed in Isfahan Central Prison.
According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, an Afghan man was executed in Isfahan Central Prison (Dastgerd) on 13 April. His identity has been established Abuzar Salem, a 30-year-old man from Pol Khomri in Afghanistan.
Abuzar was arrested for murder around 3 years ago and sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder.
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.
It is important to note that Afghan nationals constitute the largest group of non-Iranian executions and death row cases in Iranian prisons. The number of their executions have been steadily rising since the Taliban takeover in 2021. At least 5 Afghan nationals were executed in 2021 which more than tripled in 2022, with 16 Afghan nationals including a juvenile offender and a woman executed. In 2023, at least 25 Afghans were executed, a 56% rise compared to the previous year. Abuzar Salem is the 6th Afghan national executed in 2024.
**********************
Probable Child Offender and Child Bride Marjan Hajizadeh and Esmail Hassaniani Executed for Drug Charges
Marjan Hajizadeh and Esmail Hassaniani, a couple sentenced to death for drug-related charges in a joint case, were executed in Zanjan Central Prison. Marjan is reported to have been 16 at the time of arrest which IHRNGO is working to confirm. If verified, she will be the 1st child offender executed for drug charges since 2014. She was also a child bride forced into the marriage.
According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a husband and wife were were executed in Zanjan Central Prison on 11 April. Their identities have been established 29-year-old Esmail Hassaniani and 19-year-old Marjan Hajizadeh who were sentenced to death for drug-related charges in a joint case.
An informed source told Iran Human Rights: “Esmail Hassaniani and Marjan Hajizadeh were arrested for drug charges around three years ago and sentenced to death. Marjan was only 16 years and 4 months old when she was arrested and had been forced to marry Esmail.”
At the time of writing, Iran Human Rights is working to verify her age through document evidence.
“Marjan’s father was a labourer and they were extremely poor. Marjan and Esmail were arrested on a motorway in Zanjan. Marjan didn’t know her husband was carrying drugs and was innocent. But they executed both of them,” the source added.
Articles 88 and 89 of the 2013 Islamic Penal Code removed the death penalty for ta’zir* crimes committed by offenders under the age of 18. As drug-related offences are considered ta’zir crimes, it is unlawful to carry out drug execution of child offenders per the Islamic Republic’s own laws. If Marjan’s age is confirmed, she will be the first child offender to be executed for drug offences since 2014. She is also the 4th woman executed in 2024.
At the time of writing, their executions have not been reported by domestic media or officials in Iran.
Iran is one of the few countries in the world that still carries out the death penalty for juvenile offenders. According to Iran Human Rights' reports, at least 70 juvenile offenders were executed between 2010 and 2023 in Iran.
The Convention on the Rights of the Child, which the Islamic Republic is a signatory to, explicitly states that “Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age.”
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which the Islamic Republic of Iran is also a signatory to, prohibits the issuance and implementation of the death penalty for crimes committed by an individual below 18 years of age.
Drug-related executions have continuously risen every year since 2021. According to IHRNGO’s 2023 Annual Report on the Death Penalty, at least 471 people were executed for drug-related charges, an 84% increase compared to 2022 (256) and about 18 times the average of drug-related executions in 2018-2020.
On 10 April 2024, 80+ Iranian and international organisations and groups called for joint action to stop drug-related executions, urging UNODC to make “any cooperation with the Islamic Republic contingent on a complete halt on drug-related executions.
* Ta'zir: punishment for offences at the discretion of the judge.
*******************
Nasir Jabari at Risk of Execution in Rasht----He will be executed in the next 2 days if he cannot obtain an extension from the plaintiffs in the case.
Nasir Jabari, a man sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder, was transferred to solitary confinement in preparation for his execution in Rasht Central Prison.
According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, a death row prisoner was transferred to solitary confinement in Rasht Central Prison on 15 April. His identity has been established as 40-year-old Nasir Jabari from Sari who was sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder.
An informed source told IHRNGO: “Nasir Jabari was arrested for the murder of his friend during a financial dispute around 3 years ago. He will be executed in the next 2 days if he cannot obtain an extension from the plaintiffs in the case.”
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)
****************
Iran Executes 8 for Drug Offenses as Death Penalties Rise
The Islamic Republic has executed 8 more prisoners over the past few days amid a significant spike in death penalties.
On April 14, 2024, Hamedan Prison executed Arsalan Hashemi, a man convicted of drug offenses, according to human rights group HRANA.
Hashemi had been sentenced to death in 2021.
There have been no reports on the execution by Iranian authorities or domestic media outlets.
5 people convicted of drug-related offenses were also executed at Vakilabad Prison in Mashhad on April 15, according to Haalvsh human rights news agency.
On April 11, Zanjan Prison in Iran executed Esmaeil Hosniani, 29, and his wife, Marjan Hajizadeh, 19, according to the Iran Human Rights Organization.
The couple was sentenced to death three years ago for drug-related offenses.
In recent weeks, the sharp rise in executions in the country sparked passionate calls from Iranian civil society to abolish the death penalty, with the hashtag #NoToExecution becoming increasingly popular among social media users.
According to the Iran Human Rights Organization's report, the Islamic Republic executed approximately 834 individuals last year.
(source: iranwire.com)
****************
Disturbing Executions in Iran Demand Global Condemnation
Iran’s regime has carried out a horrifying wave of executions in recent days, including the brutal killing of a young woman who was just 16 years old at the time of her arrest. These heinous acts demand immediate global condemnation and action to halt the unjust executions.
Executions of Minors and Innocents
On April 11th, the regime’s henchmen executed 19-year-old Marjan Hajizadeh and her husband Esmail Hassaniani in Zanjan Central Prison. Marjan was only 16 when initially arrested, making her execution a grave violation of international laws prohibiting the death penalty for minors. Their executions cruelly coincided with Eid al-Fitr celebrations.
In a separate tragic incident on April 13th, 20-year-old Mehrdad Abdollahzadeh from Sardasht was killed by regime officials while working as a kolbari (cross-border porter) near the Beitush border heights. He fell to his death after being shot at by the criminal authorities.
Recent Wave of Executions
Over the past 2 weeks, the Iranian regime has executed at least 6 other prisoners across various prisons:
April 14: Arsalan Hashemi in Hamedan Central Prison
April 13: Abuzar Salem in Isfahan Central Prison
April 7: Alireza Marzban in Shiraz Central Prison
April 5: Hassan Ali Mirza Nia in Khorramabad Central Prison
March 25: Abbas Aghaei in Tabriz Central Prison
Additionally, 5 prisoners in Qezelhessar Prison in Karaj were recently transferred to solitary confinement, likely facing imminent execution.
Global Action Needed
The Iranian Resistance strongly condemns these brutal executions and calls on the United Nations, relevant human rights organizations, the European Union, and member countries to take immediate action. Concrete steps must be taken to save the lives of prisoners on death row and establish an international investigation into the dire human rights situation in Iranian prisons.
The world cannot stand idly by as the Iranian regime perpetrates such egregious violations of human rights and human dignity. Global pressure and accountability measures are urgently needed to halt these disturbing atrocities.
(source: irannewsupdate.com)
APRIL 15, 2024:
FLORIDA:
Prosecutors to seek death penalty case of Palm Bay man accused of killing 3, wounding 2
The state attorney’s office is moving forward with seeking the death penalty for a 26-year-old Palm Bay man who police said fatally shot his mother, sister and grandfather and wounded 2 others, including his 15-year-old nephew, in January.
The notice to pursue the death penalty for the killings, which prosecutors stated were “committed in a cold, calculated and premeditated manner without any pretense of moral or legal justification," was filed last week. The Brevard County judge presiding over the case had already ordered Ta’Shawn Taylor to have a mental evaluation, court records show.
Taylor, who family members said had a history of mental health issues, was indicted by a grand jury in February on 3 counts of 1st-degree premeditated murder in the Jan. 20 shooting deaths of Lisa Suglam, 31, Angella Suglam, 60, and Stephen Suglam, 79, in the family's Palm Bay home.
Palm Bay Police on Sunday at Woodlake Village, at the scene where three people were shot dead and two wounded in an apartment complex.
He was also charged with two counts of attempted murder in the shootings of Kamauri Curry, 15, and Gary Taylor, 59, and was scheduled to go before a Brevard County Court judge Wednesday for a first appearance on the formal charge. He has been assigned a public defender. The case, depending on the findings of the evaluation, could take years before going to trial.
Kamauri, who police said was wounded by his uncle, continues to recover and is expected to undergo extensive physical therapy during the course of his recovery, family members and friends reported.
The deadly shooting happened about 9:30 p.m. Jan. 20 at Woodlake Village Apartments on Palm Bay Road. Police said Taylor, armed with a laser-scoped handgun, walked into a bedroom where his mother, Angella Suglam, was lying on the bed with 2 grandchildren, including Kamauri. Taylor fired several rounds, killing his mother and then critically injuring Kamauri, who was shot in the head, police reported.
Police said Taylor then shot his grandfather, Stephen Suglam, and Lisa Suglam, Taylor's sister, to death.
Taylor remains held at the Brevard County Jail on a no bond status. His next court hearing will be before Brevard Circuit Court Judge Tesha Scolaro Ballou on May 3 at the Titusville Courthouse.
(source: floridatoday.com)
*****************
Penalty phase beginning in trial of man who killed Nassau County deputy
The penalty phase in the trial of the man who pleaded guilty to shooting and killing a Nassau County sheriff's deputy during a traffic stop in 2021 is set to begin Monday morning.
Patrick McDowell pleaded guilty in 2023 to murdering Nassau County Deputy Josh Moyers during a 2021 traffic stop.
McDowell is charged with 1st-degree murder, 8 counts of aggravated battery on an officer and 1 count of using a deadly weapon on a police K-9.
McDowell shot 29-year-old Moyers during a traffic stop just before midnight on Sept. 23, 2021. Moyers died from his injuries at a local hospital three days later.
McDowell fled the scene of the shooting, prompting a 5-day manhunt during which McDowell exchanged gunfire with officers, injuring a Jacksonville Sheriff's Office K-9 attempting to apprehend him.
Ultimately, McDowell was captured on Sept. 28, 2021, after he was found hiding in a concession area of a school's athletic field.
McDowell faces the death penalty for Moyer's killing.
First Coast News will be in the courtroom throughout McDowell's sentencing.
Facing the death penalty: McDowell penalty phase begins
Opening statements in the penalty phase of Patrick McDowell’s case begin Monday morning at the Nassau County Courthouse in Yulee.
McDowell shot and killed Deputy Joshua Moyers during a traffic stop in Callahan in 2021.
He pleaded guilty to the charges, and now, a jury will hear arguments about how McDowell should pay for his crime.
The jury can recommend the death penalty or life in prison.
The penalty phase is expected to take about a week.
(source: WOKV news)
MISSISSIPPI:
Mississippi man charged with 4 counts of Capital Murder
Quadruple Homicide:
Tunica County Sheriff’s Office has issued an arrest warrant for 20-year-old Anthony Carter Jr. a.k.a. “A.J.” of Tunica, MS.
Anthony Carter Jr. has been charged with the shooting death of Steven Burts, 23 of Dundee; Tednequa Moore, 25 of Robinsonville; Moore’s unborn child; and the death of Deshun Isabell, 24 of Tunica, who died with injuries sustained from the car crash that occurred on Friday, November 10, 2023, on Casino Center Boulevard located in Robinsonville, MS.
Anthony Carter Jr. (A.J.) has been charged with:
• 4 counts of Capital Murder
• 4 counts of Conspiracy to Commit a Crime
• 1 count of Drive by Shooting
• 1 count Shooting into a Motor Vehicle
Anthony Carter Jr. is also being charged with the October 26, 2023, Drive by Shooting and Attempted Murder on Steven Burts that occurred in the White Oak Community.
Additionally, Anthony Carter Jr. is being charged in the November 1, 2023, Drive by Shooting and Attempted Murder of Deshun Isabell that occurred in the White Oak Community.
Anthony Carter Jr. is being held at the Tunica County Jail for the Attempted Murder of Thako Jackson and Denzel Jackson that occurred April 4, 2023.
Carter is also being held for his recent arrest on Possession of Controlled Substance, Possession of Firearms, and Contributing to the Delinquency of Minor(s) following a search warrant that was served on April 1, 2024. During this search warrant served on Carter’s vehicle, a number of firearms were recovered.
Deonte Taylor remains in custody at the Tunica County Jail for charges related to the Quadruple Homicide that occurred November 10, 2023, in Robinsonville. Taylor is charged with:
• 3 counts of Capital Murder
• 4 counts of Shooting into a Motor Vehicle
• 4 counts of Conspiracy to Commit a Crime
Capital Murder [Miss. Code Section 97-3-19(1) & (2) (j)] is punishable by life in prison or the death penalty.
There will be additional charges forthcoming, and more arrests made for the investigation related to the November 10, 2023, quadruple homicide. This investigation is active and ongoing. If you have any information regarding this incident, please contact TCSO at 662-363-1411. If you wish to remain anonymous, contact CrimeStoppers at 662-910-0400. Any information leading to an arrest can pay up to $1,000.00.
Tunica County Sheriff’s Office would like to thank the following agencies for their assistance in this investigation: Mississippi Bureau of Investigation, ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives), Mississippi Highway Patrol Crime Scene Unit, and the Mississippi Highway Patrol Reconstruction Team.
(source: visksburgnews.com)
MISSOURI:
The Cruelty of Punishment Without Purpose
Last Tuesday, Brian Dorsey was put to death by the state of Missouri. His execution served no legitimate penological purpose.
Dorsey had been sentenced to death for a crime he committed in 2006. From the moment he was arrested and charged, he accepted responsibility.
Had he received adequate legal representation there’s a good chance he would not have gotten the death penalty. But that was not the case.
During his time in prison, Dorsey compiled an enviable record. He never violated a prison rule and never caused trouble.
Correction officials gave him privileges and responsibilities reserved for only a few of those under a death sentence. And, in the run-up to his execution, 72 of them, the people who worked most closely with him, asked Missouri’s Republican governor, Mike Parson, to spare Dorsey’s life.
They offered compelling evidence that Dorsey was a changed person and had been successfully rehabilitated. Their testimony on his behalf was genuinely unprecedented and received nationwide attention.
What received less notice was a petition that Dorsey’s lawyers filed with United States Supreme Court that asked them to consider whether the Eighth Amendment prohibits the execution of a death sentence against a person who has demonstrated that he has been rehabilitated. The Court refused to issue a stay of execution and take up the question his petition had posed.
Still the question remains: why execute someone like Brian Dorsey?
Someone might answer that question by referring to the seriousness of the crime that landed Dorsey among Missouri’s death sentence population. He was convicted of killing Sarah and Ben Bonnie with a shotgun and, during the penalty phase, the state contended that Dorsey had raped Sarah Bonnie.
For those who support the death penalty and believe it should be used to punish the “worst of the worst,” the brutal facts of what Dorsey did would be sufficient to justify his execution. They tether their retributivist commitments to that moment in time when a crime is committed. Nothing else seems to matter.
For those who support the death penalty and believe it should be used to deter murder, the Dorsey case might seem easy. But, at the time Dorsey committed his crime, he was not the kind of rational utility maximizer that deterrence theorists imagine.
As his cert. petition explained, “Dorsey, who had a lifelong history of suffering from major depression, and had been on a crack cocaine binge and not slept in about 72 hours. As he was crashing from his binge, he experienced drug induced psychosis. As he drank more beer and vodka, he became suicidal and also experienced hallucinations and paranoid delusions.”
And even if Dorsey fit the profile of someone who could be deterred by the threat of a death sentence, by the time the state of Missouri got around to executing him he was no longer that person.
His petition for a stay of execution and a review of his constitutional claim noted that Dorsey was a member of “a unique class of person sentenced to death who have achieved remarkable redemption and rehabilitation while under sentence of death. He has spent more than 17 years on death row without a single rules infraction. No death-sentenced person has ever had a better prison record.”
“Dorsey lives in the prison’s honor dorm,” the petition continued, “and he has been entrusted as the prison barber to handle potentially dangerous tools and cut the hair of fellow inmates, prison staff, and even wardens….”
The letter from the correctional staff members at Missouri’s Potosi Correctional Center, where Dorsey was incarcerated, said that while they were supporters of capital punishment, they nevertheless believed that “the death penalty is not the appropriate punishment for Brian Dorsey.” Their letter offered testimony that the man that they had come to know was “a good guy, someone who stayed out of trouble, never gotten himself into any situations, and been respectful of us and his fellow inmates.”
It said that “if all of the inmates were like Brian, they would never be a problem in the institution,” and concluded that while Dorsey had been convicted of murder “that is not the Brian Dorsey that we know.”
A few of the correctional officers also wrote individual letters to the governor. One noted “when you spend time around Brian like I have, you can just tell he has changed.” Another said, “I know that he is very sorry for his crime. Brian demonstrates spirit of remorse and regret…. Brian’s remorse is genuine and always present.”
A 3rd correctional officer stated “I have known many offenders who should be executed. Mr. Dorsey simply is not one of them. He stands out from other inmates. It would be a loss for the state if he were executed.”
Dorsey’s cert. petition argued that in his case and those of others who are rehabilitated after being sentenced, carrying out the death penalty would serve no purpose. It noted, quoting Justice Byron White’s concurring opinion in Furman v. Georgia, that an execution “can be barred by the Constitution…when it ‘ceases realistically to further the purposes’ of capital punishment.”
The petition called on the Court to recognize that when “the penological goal of rehabilitation has been satisfied…, the capital punishment goals of retribution and deterrence are not met by an execution.” Again citing Furman, Dorsey told the Court that “[a] penalty with such negligible returns to the state would be patently excessive and cruel and unusual punishment violative of the eighth amendment.”
Generally speaking, a punishment might be considered cruel if it imposes very severe suffering. It might also be considered cruel if it violates human dignity or contemporary standards of decency.
Dorsey’s contention directs our attention to another meaning of cruelty. A punishment is cruel if it imposes more pain than is necessary to achieve a legitimate penological purpose.
Put simply, the Eighth Amendment does not condone or tolerate punishment without purpose.
Dorsey’s cert. petition reminded the Court that executing someone who has been rehabilitated would amount to “the pointless and needless extinction of life.” It reviewed cases in which the Court has recognized “situations where executing a person would not support the goals of retribution and deterrence,” including its “categorical exemptions of classes of people who cannot be executed because the goal supporting capital punishment would not be furthered.”
It boldly and correctly claimed that the small number of people who are rehabilitated while on death row should be subject to such a categorical exemption. It argued that it makes no sense and serves no purpose to execute someone who is “for all moral purposes…not the same person who committed the crime.”
Dorsey sought to persuade the Court that he had lived what amounted to a “second lifetime” on death row and that he was “a very different person than the one who was originally sentenced to death.” And he called on the Court to consider whether the execution of such a person would amount to punishment without a purpose.
Unfortunately for Dorsey and for the rest of us, the Supreme Court refused his request to consider what it means to end the life of someone who had his life changed, and been successfully rehabilitated, after committing a horrible crime. We can only hope that one day the Court will change its mind and say definitively that executing such a person violates the Eighth Amendment.
(source: Opinion; Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College----verdict.justia.com)
CALIFORNIA:
San Diego child killer transferred out of San Quentin's death row----David Westerfield's move comes as the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation continues phasing out segregated death row units at San Quentin in part to comply with Proposition 66.
David Westerfield, the man sentenced to death in the 2002 kidnapping and killing of 7-year-old Sabre Springs resident Danielle van Dam, was transferred out of San Quentin to another state prison last month, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation confirmed to NBC 7 on Friday.
Westerfield, 72, was moved to High Desert State Prison, located in the northeastern area of California near Susanville, on March 12 as part of the Condemned Inmate Transfer Program, according to CDCR spokesperson Terri Hardy. He is expected to serve the rest of his sentence there.
Hardy clarified that transfers under this program do not alter an inmate's condemned sentence.
Westerfield's move comes as the CDCR continues phasing out segregated death row units at San Quentin in part to comply with voter-approved Proposition 66, which requires death-sentenced inmates to work to pay restitution to their victims.
The program, which was approved on Jan. 31, plans to move those with death sentences to general population prisons across California by this summer. The inmates will be rehoused in institutions with an electrified secured perimeter, according to the CDCR's website.
Van Dam's disappearance in February 2002 prompted a massive county-wide search conducted by volunteers. Nearly a month later, her badly decomposed body was found in the underbrush off Dehesa Road in El Cajon.
6 months later, a jury convicted Westerfield, who lived across the street from the van Dam family, of kidnapping and 1st-degree murder. He was also found guilty of possession of child pornography.
In February 2019, the Supreme Court of California upheld a death penalty sentence for Westerfield.
The latest numbers from April 12 show that 641 people in CDCR have condemned sentences. Since Feb. 26, San Quentin has seen 189 transfers, while Central California Women's Facility in Chowchilla has seen 20, according to the state agency's data.
(source: nbcsandiego.com)
******************
Misconduct allegations in OC murder prosecution center stage in San Diego courtroom----'The refusal to investigate obvious wrongdoing undermines any reasonable faith that all favorable evidence will be disclosed in this case,' says a defense attorney
In a San Diego courtroom, the Orange County district attorney’s office and a defense lawyer are set to clash this month over sweeping allegations that top prosecutors have for more than a decade hid evidence of law enforcement misconduct.
Orange County Assistant Public Defender Scott Sanders will be asking a San Diego County Superior Court judge to order a special hearing on whether a former high-level Orange County prosecutor — now a judge — withheld evidence in a murder case and covered up the county’s illegal use of jailhouse informants.
Orange County Senior Deputy District Attorney Seton Hunt opposes Sanders’ request for a hearing, saying the allegations are part of a personal vendetta by the defense attorney against the former prosecutor and have no bearing on the real issue, which is the retrial of Paul Gentile Smith. Smith is accused of killing his boyhood friend and marijuana dealer in Sunset Beach.
Smith’s conviction was thrown out after revelations that ex-prosecutor Ebrahim Baytieh failed to turn over evidence that might have been beneficial to the defense. Sanders now wants the charges dismissed entirely based on the argument that the actions of Baytieh and others constitute “outrageous government conduct.”
Sanders and Hunt are scheduled to argue before Judge Daniel Goldstein on April 19 on whether the special hearing should be held. The Smith case was transferred to San Diego because Baytieh is a sitting judge in Orange County.
In his latest motion, Sanders accused Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer of failing to fully investigate accusations against Baytieh and failing to inform defense attorneys under the Brady notification system about law enforcement officers engaged in the illegal use of jailhouse informants.
Because of Spitzer’s alleged inaction, Sanders contends, Smith cannot get a fair trial.
“The refusal to investigate obvious wrongdoing undermines any reasonable faith that all favorable evidence will be disclosed in this case,” Sanders wrote in his motion.
Spitzer responded that he commissioned an independent probe on Baytieh’s conduct and terminated him as a result.
“It defies logic that I’m trying to protect Brahim when I fired him,” Spitzer said. “I’m happy to litigate any issues Mr. Sanders wants to raise in court.”
Spitzer added that he now must personally approve the use of jailhouse informants by his prosecutors, and no request has been made under his administration.
Spitzer took office in 2019 pledging to reform the agency after revelations that prosecutors and Orange County sheriff’s deputies were violating jail inmates’ civil rights by using a secret network of in-custody informants. Sanders launched a crusade to unmask the network, leading to a federal investigation that confirmed the illegal use of the informants.
Sanders now contends Spitzer is not following through with his promise of reform and is instead behaving like former District Attorney Tony Rackauckas in trying to protect Baytieh to save the murder case.
Sanders wrote that the D.A.’s office is now engaged in an office-wide effort to do “damage control” in the Smith prosecution.
Baytieh was fired from his top job in the district attorney’s office in February 2022 for not turning over the evidence. Baytieh’s supporters contend he was actually fired for whistleblowing on racially charged statements made by Spitzer in an unrelated double-murder case.
Sanders alleges Baytieh failed to disclose evidence that multiple informants were used in getting incriminating statements from Smith instead of the single informant disclosed to the defense. He added that more than a dozen other pieces of evidence that might have been helpful to Smith’s defense also were withheld.
Sanders has claimed that Baytieh, in his top position at the D.A.’s office, denied the existence of the informant network for years to keep anyone from finding out about his own misuse of the snitches.
He also alleged Baytieh did not include in the required Brady notifications the deputies who aided him in the illegal use of informants. Those deputies went on to participate in nearly 100 other cases in which defense attorneys were unaware of their alleged exploits and unable to use that information to question their credibility, Sanders said. Almost all of those cases ended in convictions.
After his firing, Baytieh was elected to the Orange County bench with substantial backing from other judges.
If granted the special hearing, Sanders could subpoena Baytieh to testify.
In the past, Sanders has used the evidentiary hearing process to unmask the surreptitious use of jailhouse informants, leading to one of the largest criminal justice scandals in the nation. By the time the dust settled, Sanders had gotten the district attorney’s office removed from the case against mass killer Scott Dekraai, who fatally shot eight people at a beauty salon in Seal Beach.
Because of the misconduct, Dekraai was given multiple life terms in prison instead of the death sentence.
Sanders now represents Smith, who was convicted in 2010 of stabbing Robert Haugen 18 times and torching his body in Sunset Beach. That conviction was dismissed because sheriff’s deputies indicated they would refuse to testify about allegations they had illegally used the informants.
In previous motions, Sanders said three informants were used by the prosecution and sheriff’s officials to engage Smith in a day room at the Orange County jail. Only one of the informants was disclosed to the defense, with no hint that it was an organized operation with two other informants.
In a recorded interview, one of the informants laid out the illegal plan to get Smith to incriminate himself. Although Sheriff Don Barnes has said the CD recording was properly booked into evidence by deputies, Baytieh did not turn it over to the defense.
Baytieh did not return a telephone message seeking comment Friday. A spokesman for the court has said judges are not allowed to speak to reporters on cases.
(source: The Orange County Register)
USA:
Lawyers for Boston Marathon bomber to argue for new trial
Lawyers for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev are due in court on Tuesday to seek a new trial for their client, who was sentenced to death in June for the 2013 bomb attack that killed three people and injured more than 260.
U.S. District Judge George O'Toole agreed last month to hear defense attorneys' arguments about a federal sentencing law that applied additional prison time for crimes committed while in possession of a firearm. The Supreme Court found it overly broad 2 days after Tsarnaev was sentenced to death by lethal injection.
Defense lawyers are also asking that rules put in place ahead of the trial providing them with privacy to communicate with their client be left intact as they prepare for appeal.
The defense in August asked that Tsarnaev be re-tried outside Boston, saying the intense publicity surrounding the attack and the trial unfairly influenced the 12 jurors who found their client guilty and sentenced him to death.
Tsarnaev, 22, is being held at the "Supermax" high security prison in Florence, Colorado, while his attorneys appeal his death sentence. He is not expected to be present in court, according to a spokeswoman for federal prosecutors.
He was last seen in public on June 24, when he said he was "sorry for the lives I have taken." His older brother, Tamerlan, who participated in the April 15, 2013 attack, died following a gun battle with police 3 days after the bombing.
In addition to killing 3 people with homemade pressure-cooker bombs that the brothers learned to make from an al Qaeda publication, the two shot dead a university police officer as they tried to flee the city.
Martin Richard, 8, Chinese exchange student Lingzi Lu, 26, and restaurant manager Krystle Campbell, 29, died in the bombing. Three days later the Tsarnaevs shot dead Massachusetts Institute of Technology police officer Sean Collier, 26.
The legal wrangling over Tsarnaev's fate could play out for years, if not decades. Just 3 of the 74 people sentenced to death in the United States for federal crimes since 1998 have been executed.
(source: Reuters)
JAPAN:
Court rejects inmates’ suit on same-day notice for death penalty
The Osaka District Court on April 15 dismissed a lawsuit claiming that notifying a death-row inmate hours before carrying out an execution is unconstitutional.
In the lawsuit, two death-row inmates said they should not be obligated to accept the judicial practice of the same-day notification of executions and sought compensation for mental suffering from the government.
The district court denied both requests.
Currently, a person on death row is sent to the gallows 1 to 2 hours after a notice is given.
The plaintiffs said the system denies those on death row sufficient time to meet family members or file a legal complaint.
They said the same-day notice of executions therefore violates Article 31 of the Constitution, which says, “No person shall be deprived of life or liberty, nor shall any other criminal penalty be imposed, except according to procedure established by law.”
The plaintiffs’ lawyers said such notices used to be given a few days before the execution, and presented a tape recording from 1955 as evidence.
The tape contained conversations between a death-row inmate and his sister after he received a notice 2 days before the execution.
The plaintiffs’ lawyers also said prior notice is the norm for countries that retain the death penalty. They cited a United Nations human rights organization’s statement that said failure to notify the date of execution at an appropriate time to a death-row inmate is mistreatment.
The lawyers also said the same-day execution notice violates human dignity guaranteed by Article 13 of the Constitution because the condemned prisoners are given no time to prepare for death.
The government cited the absence of laws or regulations governing notices and said the Constitution does not guarantee death-row convicts the right to seek prior notice.
It said the same-day execution notice was adopted because a person on death row committed suicide after a notice was given a day before the execution.
The government said the current practice is a reasonable way to smoothly carry out the death penalty and avoid the risk of prisoners killing themselves.
It had asked the court to dismiss the plaintiffs’ requests.
2 other lawsuits related to the capital punishment system are still pending at the Osaka District Court.
One centers around the cruelty of hanging, while the other questions the appropriateness of execution while a retrial is being sought.
(source: asahishimbun.com)
***************
Death-row inmates' lawsuit targeting same-day notifications of executions dismissed
The Osaka District Court on Monday dismissed a lawsuit by death row inmates that claimed same-day notifications of executions violate the Constitution — the first ruling of its kind.
The plaintiffs filed the lawsuit against the government in hopes of sparking a wider discussion on the rights of death row prisoners. They also sought ¥22 million in compensation and plan to appeal to a higher court.
Presiding Judge Noriko Yokota said the social standing of the 2 plaintiffs — being death row inmates — doesn't allow them to avoid execution when they are notified.
Yokota also said the plaintiffs “are in a position to accept the execution according to the current legislation on death penalty.” She rejected their claim for compensation, saying it would practically nullify their death sentences.
The ruling did not state whether same-day notifications are constitutional or not.
The plaintiffs argued that notifying death row inmates an hour or 2 before their execution leaves them with no time to file a complaint and violates the right to due process guaranteed in Article 13 of the Constitution.
They said they are “living in hell” because they spend every day not knowing when they will be executed.
Yuko Shiota, an official at the Center for Prisoners’ Rights, said that in the past, death row inmates were given a few days prior notice of the execution. However, this was changed to same-day notifications because some inmates took their own lives after being told of the schedule, she said.
A key problem with the current policy, Shiota said, is cases in which individuals are wrongly sentenced to death and are in the process of seeking a retrial — which can be a lengthy process.
“If the person is notified several days in advance, the lawyer can go to see the inmate ... and they can file an appeal on grounds for human rights,” she said. “They would also have time to say goodbye to their family and friends.”
In one high-profile example, Iwao Hakamata had been on death row for more than 30 years over a 1966 murder case until the Tokyo High Court sent the case back to the district court for a retrial last year, raising the possibility that he will be exonerated. Hakamata was freed and the trial is currently underway at the Shizuoka District Court.
In Japan, there were 109 death row inmates as of the end of March. The most recent death row inmate to be executed, in July 2022, was Tomohiro Kato, who was convicted over a mass killing in Tokyo’s Akihabara district in 2008.
As of December 2022, Japan is one of 55 countries that has capital punishment, according to Amnesty International.
(source: japantimes.co.jp)
VIETNAM:
Rights groups slam Vietnamese tycoon's death sentence----Human Rights Watch calls Truong My Lan’s punishment 'cruel and unusual'
Human rights groups have come out in defense of a Vietnamese real estate tycoon who was sentenced to death by a court in Ho Chi Minh City for her role in a US$12.5 billion corruption scandal that outraged the public and resulted in the prosecution of 84 people.
Truong My Lan, chairwoman of Van Thinh Phat Holdings Group, was the only defendant sentenced to death and the only one who maintained her innocence, and instead blamed her subordinates.
Phil Robertson, deputy director of Human Rights Watch's Asia division, noted that Vietnam did not usually publicize death sentences but was likely the second largest user of the penalty in Asia after China, with hundreds executed every year.
“This woman has now been found guilty of massive fraud,” he said. “But the bottom line is that even if she goes to prison for the rest of her life, she shouldn't face the death penalty.
“That's cruel and unusual punishment that is outrageous and unacceptable, and Vietnam should commute that sentence to life in prison, or whatever the prosecutors deem appropriate, but certainly not sentenced to death,” he said.
Death sentences, carried out by lethal injection, for financial crimes are rare in Vietnam and typically reserved for crimes like murder and terrorism.
Amnesty International also says Vietnam’s use of the death penalty ranks among the highest in the world.
The 1-party communist state launched its Blazing Furnace campaign more than four years ago to counter mounting anger over a series of banking and financial scandals.
Lan was sentenced to an additional 40 years behind bars after the court found she had amassed a fortune equivalent to 3 percent of Vietnam’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
However, some analysts have said the Blazing Furnace crackdown was also being used by Communist Party Secretary General Nguyen Phu Trong to purge his political enemies.
Vietnamese president Vo Van Thuong was forced to resign last month amid an embarrassing scandal and efforts by the communist leadership to open the country’s doors to foreign trade and diplomacy.
A papal tour is expected later this year, a first since 1975.
Carl Thayer, emeritus professor at Australia's University of New South Wales, said Vietnam’s largest-ever embezzlement case also raised questions about accountability among senior members of the Communist Party and the State Bank of Vietnam.
“Vietnam paints the billionaire’s death sentence as a victory for clean governance. It’s not,” Thayer said, adding, “Only small fry appear to have been charged with receiving bribes in the current court proceedings.… Perhaps it’s a case of let sleeping dogs lie.”
The court also found that Lan, 68, had used proxies to take illegal control of the Saigon Joint Stock Commercial Bank which was then used to provide loans for her real estate acquisitions.
“There is no reason for Lan to be executed,” said one analyst who declined to give his name because he lives in Vietnam.
“There is no place for the death penalty but more so for crimes that do not involve violence. Lan’s crimes are serious but don’t warrant her execution.”
Robertson said despite Vietnam's pledges, there had been no reforms or backing away from the death penalty and the international community needed to do more by pressuring Vietnam into abandoning capital punishment.
“What is shocking in this case is this person is one of the most high-profile real estate business persons in the country,” he said. “She was hobnobbing with the elites. She was someone who was a daily fixture in the news.”
“This is a person who owns some of the most important, luxurious developments in Vietnam. And now she's facing the death penalty.”
“What it shows is that Vietnam, unfortunately, applies this ultimate sanction not just for violent crimes, but for crimes across the board.”
(source: ucanews.com)
APRIL 14, 2024:
TEXAS:
Jury selection for Crockett man facing death penalty for aunt’s death set for May
Jury selection has been set for May in the case of a Crockett man facing the death penalty for allegedly murdering his aunt.
David Denson, 29, of Crockett is accused of killing his aunt, Faye Lynn Paul, in February of 2020.
Friday, Denson’s lawyers and the prosecution discussed upcoming dates with Judge Mark Calhoon.
The 1st call for jurors will happen on April 30 and the interview process for jurors will begin on May 16.
Denson was the last one seen with Paul before her disappearance.
Authorities have not recovered Paul’s body, but investigators have said that evidence not only indicated her death but that it was a result of homicide.
(source: KTRE news)
FLORIDA:
Opening statements to begin Monday in sentencing trial for man who killed Nassau County deputy
The sentencing trial for the man who killed a Nassau County deputy will move forward on Monday after the jury was seated on Friday.
Opening statements will begin on April 15 for Patrick McDowell’s sentencing trial. McDowell pleaded guilty to shooting Moyers during a traffic stop in September 2021.
Friday was the sixth day of jury selection. The court screened roughly 1,200 Nassau County residents.
They were questioned in groups of 50 to find out if they could fairly listen to and consider all testimony. A portion of the screening involved asking the potential jurors what they’d seen and heard from local news coverage.
Prosecutors only need eight jurors to agree to send McDowell to Florida’s death row.
His mental health and documented Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder are expected to be front and center during this sentencing trial.
(source: news4jax.com)
LOUISIANA:
How to Publish a Magazine in a Maximum-Security Prison----For decades, Wilbert Rideau investigated America’s prison system—from the inside.
In 1961, Wilbert Rideau, a 19-year-old with an 8th-grade education, robbed a bank in Lake Charles, the small Louisiana town where he lived. During a botched getaway, he killed a teller named Julia Ferguson. Rideau spent 12 years on death row at the Louisiana State Penitentiary, or Angola, a former plantation that occupies as much land as Manhattan. Then in 1972, the Supreme Court struck down Louisiana’s death-penalty law; Rideau soon joined the prison’s general population. After trying and failing to get a job at The Angolite, an all-white prison magazine, Rideau created The Lifer, which may have been the first African American prison periodical.
The Lifer was shut down after only 2 issues. Rideau, however, started to freelance for regional newspapers, and even wrote a story for Penthouse about Angola’s Vietnam veterans. In 1976, when a reformist official named C. Paul Phelps became Angola’s warden, he named Rideau the new editor of The Angolite. “Phelps felt there was a role for freedom of expression and journalism in prison,” Rideau told me. “Censorship, and keeping everything a secret, was counterproductive to changing things.” The magazine had its own unrestricted phone lines, cameras, and tape recorders; Rideau often reported outside the prison with unarmed escorts, and, on 2 occasions, attended a convention of newspaper editors in Washington, D.C. He said at the convention that, even in an institution rife with violence and conflict, The Angolite “had proven valuable at easing tensions”—not only because it countered rumors with reporting but also because it helped “keeper and kept understand each other.”
Under Rideau’s leadership, The Angolite was nominated for seven National Magazine Awards. One of his stories, “Prison: The Sexual Jungle,” about men who raped and subjugated other men in Angola, won the George Polk Award. “The act of rape in the ultramasculine world of prison constitutes the ultimate humiliation visited upon the male,” Rideau wrote. In the seventies, American prisons still tended to aim for rehabilitation rather than punishment, and the story led directly to policy reforms. But, at a time when Louisiana’s governor commuted many serious sentences, Rideau was repeatedly denied release, seemingly because of his high profile. Only in 2005, after his murder conviction was overturned and he was convicted of the lesser charge of manslaughter, did he win his release. Now eighty-two, Rideau has spent the past 19 years with Linda LaBranche, who fought for his release and then married him, and several cats. He still works as a criminal-defense consultant.
On April 12th, the George Polk Awards, which honor a CBS journalist who was murdered during the Greek Civil War, named Rideau one of its career laureates. In advance of the occasion, I called him from the often stormy recreation yard at Sullivan Correctional Facility, in New York’s Catskill Mountains often exposed to the snow and rain. I found his story relatable: in my 20s, with a 9th-grade education, I was convicted of murder and given a sentence of 28 years to life; I started to report stories after taking a creative-writing workshop in prison. Rideau and I spoke in the course of several weeks, during half-hour calls for which a prison contractor, Securus, charges $1.25. I asked him about his Southern childhood, the power of reading and writing, and his provocative case for professional relationships between prison officials and prisoners. Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
What was the 1st book you read on death row?
“Fairoaks,” by Frank Yerby—a plantation novel. I was totally shocked that something like this existed, because, you have to understand, the world I came from didn’t teach slavery to the students.
The 1st time you learned about slavery was reading Frank Yerby on death row?
On death row!
In your memoir, you wrote that reading allowed you “to emerge from my cocoon of self-centeredness and appreciate the humanness of others—to see that they, too, have dreams, aspirations, frustrations, and pain. It enabled me finally to appreciate the enormity of what I had done, the depth of the damage I had caused others.”
It’s why I’m such a pro-book person. It’s exposure to other perspectives, to other lives, to other beings, to other worlds.
You grew up in Lake Charles, Louisiana.
It was the Deep South—a totalitarian regime that was all about white men. As far as criminal justice goes, let me hip you to something. You’re a prisoner, and you’ve been through the system. But I come from a world before Gideon v. Wainwright. You didn’t have a right to an attorney. You didn’t have a right to anything except to complain, to pray, and maybe to die. At a certain point, because of Emmett Till and sensational stuff that was disturbing the country, they decided that lynching Black folks was bad for their public image. So they transferred what they were doing from the tree and the rope to the courtroom. In 1961, I was a product of that world. I was frustrated. I was angry.
At 19, you probably couldn’t wrap your head around all this.
I was really, really ignorant. I didn’t even know who the hell the governor was. And the crime, even in my own opinion, was really stupid. I tried to rob a bank, it got out of hand, and I panicked. I was scared. One of the tellers ended up dead. I killed her. I’m responsible for that.
Eight weeks later, I was tried by a jury of all white men, and in an hour they came back with a verdict of death. The United States Supreme Court threw out the death sentence, called it a kangaroo-court proceeding. In 1964, 12 white men again found me guilty and gave me the death penalty, in 15 minutes. In 1970, a federal court threw that conviction out, too. And again, 12 white men found me guilty, this time in 8 minutes. 3 juries with all white men, in a state where 1/2 the people are women, and a third of the population was Black. That was justice back then. That’s why they called it “lynch law.”
I mean, we’re all so ignorant when we come to prison.
And a lot of us grow up like a weed in the crack in the sidewalk someplace—untended, unguided. Just on its own. That’s asking for trouble. I mean, the fact that some of us turn out to be a beautiful flower, that’s a miracle.
After the Supreme Court decision in 1972, when you got off death row and moved into the Louisiana State Penitentiary’s general population, you had to get a weapon, right?
Everybody did. The guys who were creative, we hung together to kind of protect ourselves. I try to explain to people that, in a lot of ways, sentencing me to death saved my life. Putting me on death row [initially] protected me from the violence in the prison.
You started pursuing writing ventures. You couldn’t get a job with The Angolite, so you started The Lifer. What did that look like?
We put together the paper at night. I was a commissary clerk. I’d hook up the electric typewriter, and other guys in different offices would type up articles. I had this contact; he was a gangster, and he would let us use the copy machines. They wanted a little money, and we took care of that. They’d print it out, and we’d take the sheets to an empty place, usually the education department. We’d have different lifers pulling them together, stapling them, and binding them into magazines. After that, we had people who took them over to the different prison camps.
Angola is 18 thousand acres big. Guys live miles away from each other. It’s like any other world, with its own economy, with thousands of inmates. And, despite the divisions between one another, people worked together and did business. It was organized. The hardest thing was to stay in business. A couple of paragraphs in a little news report pointed out a shortage in toilet paper. That caused them quite a bit of embarrassment, because they had ladies bringing toilet paper to the prison.
How did ladies read The Lifer?
We had supporters outside, and I made it a point to get the magazine to churches. For the second issue, we were selling issues and even obtained legal counsel, the A.C.L.U. of New Orleans. That’s what got me put out of business. But it’s also what made me a leader.
So then you started freelancing. And, at one point, they put you in the hole for writing about the rodeo?
That’s when I ended up on the front page of the Black newspapers.
You’re building a name for yourself. They gotta contain this Rideau guy.
Well, they did. They had to do something. The question is: what?
[Recorded message: “Thank you for using Securus. Goodbye.” I call Rideau back.]
By the end of 1975, the warden offers you The Angolite, but you don’t want to take it because that will cause a beef. You’re trying to be shrewd?
No, I was trying to make the right decisions. Once you become a leader, you kind of get locked into leadership. Thing is, they hadn’t cleaned up the prison yet. Everybody had weapons. Some guys even had guns. The world of prison was divided by race: Black and white. And everybody is playing for keeps, man. You can’t just make crazy decisions. I was seen as the Black leader of the Black paper. And then you got the whites that look at The Angolite as theirs. I didn’t want a war; I wanted to create a peaceful transition. I knew The Angolite editor, Bill Brown, was eligible for parole, and he had this woman he wanted to marry. And I told him, “Hey, man, if we don’t coöperate on this, you ain’t gonna make parole.” We made it work.
So you give up your weekly column, which is making you money.
I’d write one column a week for 20 dollars. The local white papers paid a couple hundred.
What’s The Angolite paying?
2 cents an hour. The same as the guys in the fields.
It’s like a plantation down there. But it seems to promote relationships—even though it’s this eerie paternalistic and racist thing, right?
If you went to a party at the governor’s mansion, people in a tuxedo waiting on you—they’re serving life for murder. When the governor left, they were freed. This is the way it was in Louisiana. Things started changing when we had people who wanted to reform prison, and started saying that they’re taking advantage of those poor prisoners. I’m telling you, most of the prisoners who were beneficiaries of the system, they didn’t want to lose that.
Shit, I wouldn’t want to lose it, either. Here in New York, we don’t talk to administrators at all. They walk right by your cell. There’s never a conversation.
I spent 44 years in Angola, which was supposed to be the worst system in the country, but I can’t even imagine that. The problem you are running into is a system-wide culture that promotes, “Do not talk to these assholes, do not fraternize with them, don’t be friendly with them. They’re here to be punished.” Even in all its brutality, in the past—and that’s all I can speak to—it was more humane than a lot of what they do today.
__Just recently, when a new acting commissioner of the prison system, Daniel Martuscello III, came in, I started writing to him. In one of my correspondences, I mentioned that I have these writing mentees I’m working with, and I asked him for a classroom to have a workshop. And, apparently, he called the superintendent down here and she gave me a workshop. I was just gonna ask your take on that. How do I pursue this without pissing off the leadership in my prison?
It doesn’t matter whether they’re a warden, a lowly security guard, or your fellow-prisoners. Basically, they all want the same thing: to be judged in their own right. That’s the way you approach relationships with anybody. That’s the way it was with Phelps.
When you started at The Angolite, it had to be a step up from The Lifer magazine.
The Angolite was a step up. It was printed at a press that was operated by prisoners. And, once we started winning awards, they were all proud of it, you know? Forget who wrote it, or who took the photograph! [Rideau laughs.] Everybody had a piece of the action. It was a great thing.
There’s a real solitary aspect to being a freelancer. I report in the yard, go back to my cell, transcribe notes, figure out the story. What you describe has more human interaction, a collegial atmosphere. How’d you spot stories?
I mean, you talk with these guys, you live with them, you hear their stories. Hell, I’m in a laboratory with them.
So the year is 1979, and you’re working on an exposé about prison rape. Tell me about James Dunn.
Stinky Dunn! He deliberately let himself go dirty and filthy to keep potential rapists off of him. A lot of young guys did that. That’s why his nickname was Stinky Dunn. Thing is, these were all very real people, very real stories.
Yeah, I felt for Dunn. What was the prison population’s reaction when “The Sexual Jungle” came out?
What you really want to get at is why I even did the piece to begin with. Back then, there was mass censorship in the nation on prison matters. I mean, when I got off death row, nothing prepared me. I read hundreds of books, criminal justice and everything, but they never talked about sexual violence and enslavement of prisoners by other prisoners. I wanted to explain this whole world. Back then, the federal court had instructed Louisiana to end the violence. Angola was the bloodiest prison in the country. They thought gay men caused the sexual violence, so they started removing all of them from the general population to solve the problem.
But, clearly, that’s not the case.
It was the heterosexuals doing it. Somebody needed to explain this. You’ve got guys walking around going to the movies with their “old lady”—or slaves—on their arm. Nobody thought it was a big deal. That’s what happens in those small subcultures. Your sense of right and wrong becomes distant from reality. I figured I could get them to talk about it.
I had to start by talking to the officials, who acknowledged what was going on. Imagine them telling that to the New York Times! A lot of people talked to us because they felt we understood. Part of my whole objective was to humanize everybody in prison, whether it’s ourselves or the guards. Because that is part of the bigger problem: people in the streets did not see us as normal, breathing human beings, like themselves.
So you do interviews and take pictures. Folks are in the yard, braiding each other’s hair. It’s a whole culture. When “The Sexual Jungle” comes out, what’s the reception?
Well, the people who were featured in the magazine had no problem with it. But a lot of guys—not the majority—did have a problem. Those who got visitors were concerned that their family and friends and girlfriends might read it. They didn’t want them thinking that they were engaged in homosexual relationships with slaves. All I could do was explain it to them. “Look, they’re gonna see you as they’re gonna see you. If you tell your people, ‘Hey, I don’t do that,’ then they’re going to accept that.” Some of them were quite hostile.
What does that look like?
I had some show up at the office. We can’t escape the ramifications of what we do in prison. We all lived together, we ate together, we slept together. I think it was 60 people to a dorm, and only one guard. So, at night, if anyone wanted to take you out, they’d take you out. Everything rested upon your own reputation, and how the rest of the prison world saw you.
“The Sexual Jungle” became required reading.
In the training academy, all over the state. They practiced zero tolerance and changed a whole bunch of things after that. I know it’s going to sound like bragging, but a lot of big issues in criminal-justice debates—if you go back 40 years, to The Angolite, you’ll see we were dealing with it then. The latest big issue has been solitary confinement. The 1st time anybody did a big feature on solitary confinement, it was The Angolite! What happened is, we got a note from one of the guys in C.C.R.O., the solitary unit. He said, “Man, you writing about everything in prison but y’all don’t write about us. Y’all act like we dead up in here.” It struck a nerve. He was right. I put in an official request to the warden, asking how many people in Louisiana had been in cells twenty years or more. I got a response back with five names. One was a woman.
What’s the name of this solitary piece?
It was “The Plant.” I didn’t write this. I had a staff by then, and I assigned it to one of our staff writers, Lane Nelson, who came off death row as well. Just about all my people were lifers. When Phelps said I could pick my people, I told him I didn’t want anybody who hadn’t been in prison long enough to understand prison.
Can you describe the process of assigning stories?
If I assigned you the story, I already had a basic idea for it in mind. I’m sure all editors do the same thing. You bring the guy in and you talk about it. Maybe a week later, he’ll come back and say he’s having a little problem on something, and you flesh it out. That’s the way great pieces are done. It’s not by yourself.
In “Edge of Madness,” you write about this guy, Alvin Anderson.
By that time, in 1986, The Angolite had become an institution. I mean, if I could travel to interview Harry Connick—the district attorney of New Orleans—and go all over the state, it’s an institution, you know? I got phones on my desk, I can call anybody, anywhere in the country. I talk shop with other reporters and editors from other newspapers. And, by that time, I’ve learned what The Angolite can do.
I wasn’t looking at Alvin Anderson as a story. My friend, the director of mental health—she was the wife of a state senator and pulling for me to get out. She knew I was down in the dumps after the governor had turned me down for clemency. She came up to the prison and took me to the hospital wing. She’s talking to Alvin [a long-term patient in the chronic-care wing], and it dawned on me: I’ll be damned. This guy’s blind! I was just shocked. I got pissed off. And I told him, “That sonofabitch governor might keep me in, but I’m gonna make him let you out!”
Anderson got out?
Yes, he did.
Let me ask you this, Wilbert. How did you learn structure? There are character-driven story arcs, there’s explanatory structure—you know, scene, digression, scene, digression. The long-form magazine writer needs to have those narrative skills.
That’s easy. I sat in a cell for twelve years, reading. There was no school for me to go to.
Yeah, I reverse-engineered magazine articles in Attica. I might interview a guy in the yard or the cellblock, then later, in my cell, type up my notes, add a bit of atmospheric stuff. [Automated recording: “You have 1 minute left.”] Right now, as I’m talking to you, it’s snowing and a guy is shuffling around, still trying to pick up cigarette butts on the wet ground.
We always had offices to work in.
Right.
And I had a telephone on my desk.
Well, now you’re just rubbing it in.
[Automated recording: “Thank you for using Securus. Goodbye.” I call him back.]
So, in 2005, they acquit you of murder, and you’re found guilty of manslaughter.
This was the fourth trial, which was the result of a woman—a Shakespeare scholar at Northwestern University named Linda LaBranche—seeing me on Ted Koppel one night in 1986. She went to a corrections convention and introduced herself to Phelps, who was then the Louisiana director of corrections, and asked him about me. He invited her to come down and meet me. And she did.
Linda was the first person to ever go and read through all the trial transcripts. She found the key to getting the third conviction overturned. Every time I won an award, journalists would say I’d cut a woman’s throat. I’d always ask them, “Why don’t you investigate the case?” My lawyers got the autopsy photos, and it was explained that this was from a tracheotomy done in the emergency room.
When I finally got to that last trial, there was only 1 white man and 1 Black man on my jury, and the rest were white women. They looked at all the evidence—especially new evidence—and their conclusion was that it was not murder. It was manslaughter, which carried 21 years in prison.
So they have to process you out of the Lake Charles jail. After serving forty-four years, you walk out [with Linda and your lawyers]. And this is on Martin Luther King, Jr.,’s birthday, right?
Yes. We walk out into the night, and, you know, it was applause, people blowing their horns. Primarily the Black community. Over at Ball’s Auditorium, they were having a concert, and I was told they stopped in the middle of the thing, told everybody I was free, and everyone applauded. Then, in Baton Rouge, they asked the governor about it on TV. Her name was Kathleen Blanco. And she looked thoughtful and said, “Well, I guess justice has spoken.”
I often think about what would’ve become of me if I hadn’t gone to prison. Did I have to take a life to find my way in life?
I hate to look at it this way, but the fact is, if I had not gone to prison, I would have been dead a long, long time ago. I didn’t care what happened to me. I didn’t have the kind of knowledge and education I have today, where we can discuss this. Back then, I was angry. I just had emotions and feelings. They drive you. You’re too stupid to know anything else.
That’s why I latched on to that T. S. Eliot quote in the opening of your memoir: “Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we made of things.”
I wish I had said it. It’s brilliant. It captures my life.
It’s so fascinating. It’s white men who convict you, but then it’s white men like Eliot and Phelps whom you look up to, and who help you.
Back up, back up. Don’t give too much credit to white men. There’s some white men who I really respect and admire. Men who should be Presidents, you know? But the people who really saved me were women. For the most part, they were white women. When I was a teen-ager working in a fabric shop, my boss was a white woman. I had dropped out of school, and she kept after me to try to teach me everything she could. All the way through the first pro-bono lawyer I ever had, Ginger Berrigan.
It’s almost like you and Linda, now your wife, are living happily ever after. Was she still teaching English and Shakespeare when you got out?
No, she stopped everything when she coördinated my defense.
How has it been for you guys?
We’ve been good. I mean, we worked for this. We earned it. We travel a lot. England a couple of times, Italy several times. Now she wants to go on a cruise. She’s the best thing that ever happened to me.
You dedicated your book, which came out in 2010, “to the late C. Paul Phelps, my mentor and friend.” You don’t see too many prison memoirs dedicated to a prison official.
Well, I can’t be nobody else but me. Of all the people in my life, except my mother, I cannot imagine anyone who had a greater impact on the course of my life and the person I became than him. It’s really ironic. It’s perverse when you think about it. This is the guy whose job was to keep me in prison. I’d love to be able to have the credit: “I was brilliant. I was a genius.” But I couldn’t create that window in time and that opportunity. Only prison authorities can do that. Sell them on this idea, man! I mean, you can write this story about me and the award, but give credit to this thing that happened, that has never happened since. Sell it to these wardens who are going to be reading this. If it doesn’t benefit you, maybe it’ll benefit somebody else. Maybe one of these wardens will say, “Maybe I ought to try this.”
(source: The New Yorker)
OHIO:
Death penalty affirmed for Ohio man convicted of stabbing housemates to death
The Supreme Court of Ohio has affirmed the death penalty for a man who was convicted of stabbing his two Parma Heights housemates to death and concealing their bodies for weeks in trash bags hidden in the home.
The Supreme Court rejected the 24 legal arguments raised by Thomas E. Knuff Jr., including his claim that he only killed 1 of the 2 victims, and that killing was in self-defense. Knuff was convicted of the May 2017 murders of John Mann and Regina Capobianco.
Writing for the Court majority, Justice Joseph T. Deters stated that Knuff claimed he was innocent and the only remorse he expressed was that the victims were unable to receive proper burials.
“To the contrary, the evidence (other than Knuff’s self-serving account) strongly supports the jury's rejection of Knuff’s self-defense claim and its finding that he killed both Mann and Capobianco,” Justice Deters wrote.
Knuff received the death sentence based on 2 counts of aggravated murder. Each count carried a death penalty specification for acting in the course of conduct “for the purposeful killing of 2 or more persons.” He also received death specifications for committing the felonies of aggravated burglary and kidnapping.
Chief Justice Sharon L. Kennedy and Justices Patrick F. Fischer, R. Patrick DeWine and Melody Stewart joined Justice Deters in the majority opinion.
In a concurring opinion, Justice Michael P. Donnelly agreed that the death penalty should be imposed based on Knuff’s murder convictions. However, he disagreed with the use of the felony murder specifications, stating that the Supreme Court is relying on past decisions that stretch the limits of the definitions of burglary and kidnapping. Those definitions allow “a burglary charge with almost any murder within four walls and kidnapping with almost any death that was not instantaneous,” he stated.
Justice Jennifer Brunner joined Justice Donnelly’s concurrence.
Knuff, who was serving a 15 1/2-year prison term on a previous conviction, was scheduled to be released from prison in early April 2017. While in prison, he developed a romantic relationship with Alicia Stoner, an employee at the prison. Their relationship ended before his release, but she offered to pick him up when he got out. He declined, saying he arranged a ride with “John and his old lady.”
“John” was John Mann, a friend of Knuff’s who was living in Parma Heights. John’s “old lady” was Regina Capobianco. Knuff and Capobianco had a prior relationship.
Upon his release, Knuff moved into a Strongsville hotel room paid for by Stoner. On May 10, 2017, Marc Fisher, Knuff’s parole officer, learned Knuff was living at the hotel. But when Fisher discovered that the hotel manager had not seen Knuff for 5 days, Fisher confronted Knuff.
Knuff told Fisher he was living with Mann. That same day, Fisher spoke with Mann. Mann said he lived alone and had agreed to any unannounced home visits or warrantless searches. Fisher permitted Knuff to stay with Mann pending a home visit. He also sanctioned Knuff for lying about living at the hotel.
Mann was not living alone. Capobianco had been living with Mann for about a year. When Knuff moved in, Capobianco was engaging in prostitution, sometimes at Mann’s home. Because living with someone who is committing crimes could result in additional parole violation sanctions for Knuff, a conflict arose between Knuff and Capobianco.
On May 11, the day after being granted permission to live with Mann, Knuff asked Stoner for $80 to get Capobianco out of the house. Stoner sent the money around 8 p.m. and then tried to call and text Knuff repeatedly that night and through the following afternoon of May 12. But he did not respond. Knuff then called Stoner and told her she needed to get him, but he did not explain why. She picked him up at a bar.
Stoner saw that one of Knuff’s fingers was bandaged. He told her that drug dealers had visited Mann’s house because Capobianco owed them money. He said the dealers beat up Mann and took Mann’s car. Then a conversation between Mann and Capobianco escalated into a fight, and she stabbed Mann, Knuff said. Knuff claimed he injured his finger when Capobianco tried to stab him. He said he remembered stabbing Capobianco and then “blacking out.” Stoner urged Knuff to call an ambulance for his friends, but he responded, “No, they’re dead.”
Knuff told others different stories about how his hand got injured. On May 13, Knuff told his son, Tommy, there were two dead people at the house who had supposedly attacked Mann. When asked if he was responsible for those deaths, Knuff said he was.
Two days later, Tommy drove his father to a store to buy super-strength glue for his finger and large plastic garbage bags. A few days later, Knuff took his son’s vehicle without permission and broke into two Parma Heights businesses, where he took a cash register from one and cash from another.
The next day, an Ohio State Highway Patrol officer responded to a call and found Knuff walking back and forth along a highway, saying, “Just kill me, I don’t want to live anymore.”
Knuff told the officer he crashed his son’s vehicle and abandoned it. When the officer saw Knuff’s severely injured finger, he called for emergency medical transport. Because Knuff threatened self-harm, he was sent to a hospital for a psychiatric evaluation and to care for his injured finger. At the hospital, he told a nurse yet another version of how he injured his hand. This time, he said that a prostitute attacked and killed his roommate with a knife, and he cut his finger when the prostitute attacked him. He said he killed the prostitute in self-defense.
Meanwhile, Capobianco’s sister became worried after not hearing from her. She called Parma Heights police and told them that Capobianco had communicated with Knuff, a recently released prisoner. Capobianco was described as 4 feet, 11 inches tall and weighing about 125 pounds. Knuff and Mann were described as 5 feet, 11 inches tall.
Police searched Mann’s home after hearing complaints from the neighbors. Officers detected a strong odor and a large presence of flies but found no one inside the home.
Knuff was eventually arrested in late May 2017, and in mid-June, police returned to the home. One officer who read Capobianco’s height realized they might have missed finding her in the heavily cluttered home. A search of the bedrooms uncovered several garbage bags piled around a bed. Police found the decomposing bodies of Mann and Capobianco. Autopsies revealed that Mann had been stabbed 15 times and Capobianco stabbed 6 times.
Also, around that time, Stoner gave Parma Heights police a letter from Knuff to a friend, Robert Dlugo. Knuff offered to pay Dlugo to burn down Mann’s house. In the letter, he told Dlugo he had trash bags with clothes and paper in the back bedroom and that when those were discovered, his life would be over.
During several interviews with police, Knuff consistently claimed Capobianco stabbed Mann, and Knuff killed her in self-defense. Knuff said he was trying to get Capobianco to move out because he feared he would be returned to prison for violating his parole. Knuff also told the officers he cleaned up the crime scene out of fear that he might go to prison if found living in a home where two people were murdered.
Knuff was indicted on 21 counts, including 4 aggravated murder charges. He was also charged with aggravated robbery, aggravated burglary, kidnapping, and several other crimes. The jury found him guilty of all charges except the aggravated robbery of Mann and the 4 felony murder specifications based on aggravated robbery.
The jury recommended death sentences for both murders. In keeping with this recommendation, the trial judge sentenced Knuff to death on each count. The trial judge also sentenced Knuff to 37 years in prison for all the other crimes. Because the death penalty was imposed on Knuff, he was permitted to appeal directly to the Supreme Court, which considered Knuff’s 24 legal arguments against his convictions and sentences.
Among his objections, Knuff claims the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office did not produce sufficient evidence to convict him of the murders and that the weight of the evidence did not support his convictions.
Justice Deters explained that a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence fails if “after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Knuff argued the prosecutor failed to prove the underlying offenses of aggravated burglary and kidnapping that were used to impose a felony murder death specification. Under R.C. 2911.11(A)(1), burglary includes trespassing into an occupied structure with the intent to commit a crime. Knuff argued that since he had permission to live in Mann’s home, he could not have committed burglary.
The majority opinion stated while one might initially have the owner’s consent to be on the premises, that person can become a trespasser when consent is withdrawn. Citing prior Court decisions, the opinion stated a jury can “infer from the facts that a victim terminated the accused’s privilege to remain after commencement of an assault.” The Court found the evidence was sufficient to convict Knuff of aggravated burglary.
Regarding kidnapping, Knuff argued that prosecutors failed to prove he restrained Mann and Capobianco. The Court noted that Knuff admitted he held Capobianco down while stabbing her. As to Mann, the prosecutor maintained that to “stab somebody 15 times, you have to restrain their liberty.”
A challenge to the weight of the evidence requires the reviewing court to find that “the jury clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed, and a new trial ordered.”
Rejecting Mann’s manifest weight challenge, the Court pointed to the autopsies as substantial support for the jury’s rejection of Knuff’s story that he killed Capobianco in self-defense after she killed Mann. The autopsies establish that Mann had downward stab wounds in his neck and score marks on the top of his skull along with other head wounds. The injuries support a claim that Mann and his killer were similar in stature. Capobianco was a foot shorter than Mann, but Knuff and Mann were relatively the same height. The jury could reasonably infer from this that Knuff — not Capobianco — stabbed Mann, the opinion stated. The autopsy also shows that Capobianco had two stab wounds to her back, which, the Court stated, tends to disprove Knuff’s claim that he acted in self-defense.
In addition to the autopsy evidence, the opinion noted that Knuff’s actions after the killing strongly suggested he was conscious of his guilt. He cut the bloodstained carpet into numerous pieces and put them in a garbage bag. Bloodstained mops were found in the kitchen. He admitted he tried to clean bloodstains off the wall, and he dragged the bodies into the bedroom and covered them. For the stated purpose of cutting up the bodies, he bought hacksaws. He also wrote to Dlugo, urging him to burn down the house.
In view of this evidence, “[t]his is not the rare case in which the jury lost its way and returned a verdict against the manifest weight of the evidence,” the Court stated.
After an independent review of the aggravating circumstances and the mitigating factors, the Court affirmed the death sentences and all the convictions.
In his concurrence, Justice Donnelly wrote that the state could pursue a death penalty specification for felony murder based on burglary or kidnapping when appropriate, but the “timing and circumstances” in Knuff’s case did not support it. Justice Donnelly noted that for one to commit burglary where the person resides, “then we have stretched the concept of burglary to its outermost limit, or maybe beyond.”
The concurrence stated it was inappropriate to use burglary as a basis for the death penalty for Knuff. The state only “technically satisfied” the legal definition of kidnapping, which prohibits moving a person or restraining a person’s liberty. Knuff did not restrain the victims apart from fatally attacking them, the concurrence concluded.
The concurrence otherwise agreed with the majority that the death penalty was appropriate for Knuff’s murder of Mann and Capobianco.
(source: The Highland County Press)
WYOMING:
History: Tom Horn’s Trial and Hanging
In this last history column about Tom Horn, we will go into his sentencing, and the book he wrote while he was being held in the Laramie County Jail. Horn had his defenders as well as those who felt he was guilty.
In this column we will look at both sides of his trial.
Cheyenne Daily Leader, November 12, 1902 –Death Sentence Imposed Upon Convicted Murderer This Afternoon
“It is ordered, adjudged and decreed that you, Tom Horn, be taken from hence to the jail of Laramie county; there confined until the 3th day of January, 1903, on which day between 9 o’clock in the forenoon and 3 o’clock in the afternoon, you will be taken by the sheriff of Laramie county to a place prepared by him, and there hanged by the neck until you are dead.”
This afternoon at 2 o’clock Judge Scott overruled the motion for a new trial in the Tom Horn case and imposed the death penalty upon the prisoner. When the fatal words were being said which pronounced his doom Tom Horn, the stoic, the man convicted by 12 men of assassinating in cold blood 14-year-old Willie Nickell, at Iron Mountain, on, July 18 1901.
Horn stood without a muscle of his face moving, absolutely impassive without the least outward indication of emotion, unless it be that the pallor of his cheeks caused by his long months of confinement grew slightly deeper.
Tom Horn must Hang. So said the twelve good and true men of Laramie county, and so has said the Distinct judge who tried the case. There is but hope left, but one loop hole through which the condemned murderer, rapidly approaching his doom, can crawl, and that is the state supreme court. At the conclusion of the sentence today the attorneys for Horn gave notice of an appeal to the state supreme court.
However, the appeal was not successful and Tom Horn’s life ended at the gallows on Nov. 20, 1903.
Wyoming Tribune (Cheyenne), November 20, 1903 – Tom Horn Is Dead! He Died As Might Be Expected, With Courage, Coolness and No Sign of Faltering.
The drop fell at exactly four minutes after eleven o’clock The visitors were admitted to the jail room at about a quarter to eleven o’clock, the newspaper men being admitted to the upper corridor and the other visitors to the lower corridor. After a wait of about five minims Horn appeared in the door of his cell. A moment later Deputy Proctor said “All right.” and Horn started out, turning as though to see if he had left anything behind.
As he stepped out of the corridor, Deputy Proctor said to him. “Tom. the Irwin boys are here and want to sing to you.” “All right, I’ll be glad to hear them.” The two brothers, who were standing almost immediately beneath Horn, then sang the old song with which Horn was perfectly familiar. “Keep Your Hand Upon the Throttle and Your Eye Upon the Rail.” Horn listened intently, his hand resting upon the corridor rail.
He was dressed in a red and white striped negligee shirt, open at the neck a corduroy vest, dark trousers and low slippers. At the close at the singing the two boys mounted to the upper corridor and bade their old friend good-bye. Horn and Charlie Irwin spoke a few words in regard to the delivery of letters which Horn had spent the morning in writing.
Made No Confession. Irwin then said to Horn. “The only thing I want to ask you is, did you make a confession to the preacher?” “No,” was the answer. Both men then said, good-bye. Irwin adding, “It’s coming to all of us.”
While in prison, Horn wrote the story of his life, “Life of Tom Horn, Government Scout and Interpreter, Written by Himself, Together with His Letters and Statements by his Friends.” Published by The Louthan Book Company, Denver, in 1904. Reprints can still be purchased today.
Cheyenne Daily Leader, April 6, 1904 – Cheyennese generally have been of the opinion that the final chapter of the Tom Horn case had been written, discussed and relegated to the past but such Is not the case. Within a few days the Louthan Publishing company of Denver will issue Horn’s story of his own life, together with letters by his friends and chapters by John C. Coble and Gwendolene Myrtle Kimmell. The advance sheets’ of this book have been issued and abound with hot passages, exciting scenes, charges, accusations etc. The letters that Horn wrote just before going to the scaffold and his letter to C. .T. Ohnhaus are included.
An unpublished letter is one written by Horn to Coble, asking him to go to Denver and see Frank Muloch, who Horn says, was paid to come with two other men to Cheyenne to his trial and swear to a lie, and Horn says he wants Coble to find out who gave them the money to swear his life away. Gwendolene Kimmell, the schoolteacher who was friendly to Horn and who figured so sensationally in his trial, has a chapter covering “Horn as I Know Him,” and charging directly that Victor Miller killed Willie Nickell, the crime for which Horn died, and that the Miller boy told her he killed the Nickell boy.
Her chapter is, in the main, an expansion of her affidavit, but it has some warm statements and direct charges and a fierce castigation of Governor Chatterton who refused to pardon Horn.
The publication of the book has been given to the Louthan company by John C. Coble, the Wyoming cattleman and Horn’s life-long friend Coble wrote the preface, published Horn’s letters to him and adds a “closing word.” In his preface Coble, after severely attacking the newspapers, which, he says, seized like greedy newsmongers on every scrap of sensationalism to point a lurid picture of Horn as a fiend, continues: “I wish to repeat, Tom Horn was seldom profane. “This assertion can be sustained by those who really knew him, a fact which alone serves to disprove that the so-called ‘famous confession,’ the language of which smacks so very much more of those who edited the notes that were taken on the spot.”
In closing he says: “In your hands is the book. For it is asked a dealing without prejudice; for its writer is asked that which during his closing years was denied him.” Horn’s direct contribution to the book, aside from his numerous letters, consists of full account of his life up to the time of his Wyoming difficulty, The account of the trial, of his stay in jail and his letters cover this portion.
This story is of his earlier days, his scouting service with the United States army in Arizona, his bringing Geronimo to General Miles and the subsequent surrender of the Apache chief. He tells also of several of his daring exploits, his fights with Indians, his part in the war with Spain, and Charles Horn, a brother, tells of his funeral.
Al Sieber, a scout friend, tells of Horn during the Indian wars. J.C. Coble’s “closing word” contains some matter very abusive of prominent Wyoming citizens. He says: “And it has not been the press alone, but there have been men in positions of trust, pulled up with their little brief authority, who have besmirched their trust and stooped to odious means for selfish ends. If it be true that kings play at chess with nations for pawns, then it is as true that Wyoming politicians play the game of justice with human souls for pawns, and, I may add, with cowardice as referee.”
“I am convinced and I reassert it to be true that Tom Horn was guiltless of the crime tor which he died, nor am I alone in this behalf. He suffered the death, but thereis a great and final referee in all matters of justice.
Miss Kimmell’s chapter describes Horn’s drunken condition at the time of the confession to LeFors, saying he had been drinking for four days and was practically in a stupor when his confession was taken. Speaking of Horn’s reputation, she says: “His main weapon was his reputation as a killer. He himself carefully fostered his reputation, for, as he said: “That is my stock in trade.” Dropping in on a family for the night, he would relate bloody tales of his deeds, killing Indians, and his daring and for days after his departure not a calf would be stolen in the neighborhood.”
Speaking of who really killed Willie Nickell, she says; “After the 2nd session of the coroner’s, inquest I heard three conversations between Jim and Victor Miller, in each of which conversations statements by both incriminating Victor Miller as the murderer of Willie Nickell were made. Twice afterward Jim Miller acknowledged to me that Victor had confessed to him the killing of the Nickell boy, and on October 10, 1901, Victor Millerhimself confessed to me that he was the murderer. I agreed to say nothing about Victor’s criminality, provided they would make no attempt to sidetrack the crime on Horn or any other innocent person.”
One of the hitherto unpublished letters of Horn is that to Coble, relative to securing testimony in Denver. Horn said: “I think it you would go to Denver and see Billy Loomis that he could get an affidavit from F. Frank and W. Muloch showing that Muloch was hired to swear to anything that was put into his mouth and that Stoll and I hired him to do so.”
Writing to Charles J. Ohnhaus, the stenographer who took the notes on Horn’s confession, Horn said “You and I and Snow and La Fors and Stoll all know that you changed your stenographic notes at the instigation of some one, from what was actually said to what you wanted me to say.
“There are too many men mixed up in this business that know the truth, and it will sooner or later come out.” Horn’s last letter to Coble tells all he knows of the killing of the Nickell boy, in which Horn says that Bllly McDonald and Miller asked him to go in on the job, saying they were going to “kill all the Nickel outfit,” and that he refused to have anything to do with it. Later he refused to talk to them, knowing that they would tell him of the murder. He closes by saying; “This is the truth, as I am going to die in 10 minutes.”
The book is called a “vindication” of Tom Horn and the manuscript is to be used in this form by Coble for that purpose. The pictures include those of Horn and some of his immediate relatives, but nothing of a gruesome nature. It is not expected that the “vindication” will create much of a sensation In Wyoming.
Like the old-time outlaws, including the Dalton Gang members, who were displayed and photographed after they were killed, newspaper and curiosity seekers were anxious to view Tom Horn’s remains.
Was Horn guilty or innocent of the Nickells murder? After 121 years, we will probably never know.
(source: sheridanmedia.com)
CALIFORNIA:
Man facing death penalty saved by sitcom footage that proved his innocence----The gobsmacking story has since become the subject of a Netflix documentary.
An innocent man accused of murder was saved from facing the death penalty after unused sitcom footage was unearthed, proving his innocence.
In May 2003, 16-year-old Martha Puebla was shot dead on her doorstep at her home in Los Angeles.
Weeks before, Puebla had testified against a man named Mario Catalan - a gang member - and shortly after her death, Mario's brother, Juan Catalan, was arrested and charged with Puebla's murder.
At the time, police believed Catalan was responsible for carrying out a hit on the teen, which had been arranged by her ex-boyfriend Jose Ledesma and Mario.
"Witnesses described the suspect who fled the scene as a medium build male Hispanic, 19-25 years of age, 5’8" to 5’10". He had very short hair and a mustache and appeared to be a gang member," according to an LAPD police report from the time.
Despite providing an alibi and insisting he'd been at a baseball game with his 6-year-old daughter at the time of the murder, Juan's legal team couldn't find any actual proof he'd been at the game.
He was subsequently arrested and charged before he spent 5 months remanded in custody while awaiting his trial.
If convicted, Catalan could've potentially faced the death penalty, but new evidence was found which corroborated his alibi.
Somewhat incredibly, an episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm (season 4’s 'The Car Pool Lane' where Larry David hires a prostitute who then gets his father high on pot) was filmed in the stadium that night.
And unaired footage filmed for the episode showed Catalan at the game, which, of course, corroborated his alibi.
The DA was forced to drop the murder charges and award him a settlement of $320,000.
The incredible case was covered in Netflix’s 2017 true-crime documentary The Long Shot.
Filmmaker Jacob LaMendola said it took five years to get the documentary made, but added: “I knew that it was worth taking the time to tell it correctly.”
During an interview with the Indiewire in 2017, LaMendola said it took him a ‘long time’ to earn Catalan’s trust to feature in the documentary.
And that was just half the battle - he then had to get Larry David on board.
He revealed: "The very first thing he said when he got on the phone was, ‘There’s no way that I would ever be a part of this’.
"I think I just went into shock… We had gone so far, we had every piece, and I just didn’t want it to end."
When LaMendola started to explain how much effort he had invested into getting the film off the ground, David asked: "So wait, you just want to interview me?” to which LaMendola said yes, and David replied: "'OK, I’ll do it'."
(source: unilad.com)
SOUTH AFRICA:
Reintroducing death penalty will be ‘misplaced, dangerous’
Recent calls to bring back the death penalty are misplaced and dangerous. There is no credible evidence that it reduces crime, but there are countless examples of its selective use, and its leading to the deaths of innocent people.
Pro-death penalty sentiments reflect a lack of understanding about why we have abnormally high levels of violent crime, which is a product of a near-broken criminal justice system and our failure to address our violent legacy and improve the quality of life significantly.
We have become a criminalised state in which personal enrichment, not service, dominates governance, and politicians may participate in criminal syndicates themselves, with impunity.
In abolishing the death penalty, South Africa joined the growing ranks of democracies that had made the transition. The right to life and dignity are core constitutional principles, and must remain so, despite the government itself routinely flouting them.
Repressive countries with the worst human rights records implement most death sentences. It is known that its selective application often results from political misuse of power, and prejudices linked to race and even sexual orientation. In apartheid South Africa, black men would hang for raping white women, but white men raped black women with impunity. Even in established democracies, the poor are more likely to be executed, if only because they generally lack quality legal services.
From the handling of crime scenes to court proceedings, human error leads to innocent people being found guilty, as was the case with James Hanratty, hanged in the UK for a 1961 murder and rape he did not commit.
While DNA evidence has saved people, it has also led to false guilty verdicts for serious crimes. In the early 2000s, independent DNA analysis showed serious errors in the Houston (Texas) police forensic laboratory testing, which led to reforms, including far better oversight (which South Africa lacks)
Were South Africa to reintroduce the death penalty, there is little doubt that it would be poor people – not criminal politicians – who would face the gallows, as they are the visible face of crime, deployed by the invisible multiracial syndicates using them as hitmen and hijackers; they are seldom charged and, if they are, can afford the best lawyers.
Violent crime has a long history in South Africa, and it was allowed to fester in deprived areas. Cape Flat gangs date from forced removals from District Six, and complicity between police, prisons and drug dealers. In the 1980s, violence intensified as guns flooded into black areas as part of the government’s strategy against liberation movements. The damage done was greater than the many thousands of deaths, as children who witnessed the carnage grew up traumatised for life. Not nearly enough has been done to address the psychological damage done to the victims whose socialisation has facilitated their recruitment as killers in gangs and syndicates.
The apartheid state was an organised crime syndicate, and the democratic government introduced its own beneficiaries, allowing it to flourish with impunity and fuel general crime, as drug dependants steal to feed their addiction. For most historically disadvantaged people, little has changed in terms of quality of life in 30 years, including in crucial areas such as education (some are worse than apartheid) and general community development, including support for families and youth (the state of apartheid-era hostels is a prime example).
Poverty does not necessarily lead to crime, but it facilitates recruitment by syndicates. However, it is the appalling failure of our criminal justice system that fuels violent crime, starting with the police whose ranks are ridden with gross corruption and in which promotion is based on nepotism and not competence. Bribery buys recruitment. Good police suffer at the hands of corrupt management, which may endanger their lives.
Policing, starting with crime intelligence, is used for political ends – including to cover up for murderous politicians – not to address crime.
Guns disappear from police hands, and no one is held accountable. The private security industry is awash with guns and unregistered or non-compliant companies – some of them linked to politicians and taxi bosses – and badly regulated. There are serious problems in the prosecution services, including corruption and failure to exercise proper oversight of investigations. Police members kill and torture with impunity, as the Independent Police Investigative Directorate fails its mandate. With credible reports that some staff endanger the lives of police members by colluding with criminals, it should immediately be placed under judicial oversight.
Surely, it is obvious that dealing with violent crime starts with fixing our near broken criminal justice system? This must be the priority of our new government, for if it does not happen, there is little hope for a safer and more peaceful South Africa.
(source: Opinion; * Mary De Haas is a violence monitor in KZN, an honorary Research Fellow at the University of KZN’s School of Law and a member of the Navi Pillay Research Group on justice and human rights----iol.co.za)
GHANA:
Let’s introduce death penalty as punishment for corrupt officials, says presidential candidate----The presidential candidate of Begin Ghana Party wants a referendum organised for the introduction of the death penalty for corrupt officials
The presidential candidate of the Begin Ghana Party (BGP), Edward Ohene Kye, is proposing the use of the death sentence as a punishment for individuals who engage in certain corrupt practices in Ghana.
Kye believes such measures could deter others from engaging in corrupt practices thereby eradicating the canker in the country.
The presidential candidate of Begin Ghana Party wants a referendum organised to vote in favour of the death penalty for corrupt officials.
Speaking to Caleb Ahinakwah on TownHall Talk on Asaase 99.5 Friday ( 12 April) Kye said “We are proposing a sort of referendum to peg the death penalty to corruption so that we will eradicate it.”
Kye added, “… Instead of doing the right thing, our elders are amassing wealth for themselves, we cannot continue this way, we need to save our motherland.”
(source: asaaseradio.com)
***************
Sobering reason why judges break their pens after sentencing someone to death----Indian judges took up the tradition hundreds of years ago
There's an important reason why some judges break the nib of their pens when sentencing someone to death.
Adopted by numerous judges across the world, the practice of breaking pens after giving out a death sentence is more symbolic than anything else, as it isn't a legally enforced requirement in any country.
It's purely up to the individual, by breaking the pen has become a tradition in certain countries, for example, India has been carrying this tradition out ever since the early 16th century.
Back then, it was the breaking of the quill, but as time has gone on, it has become the breaking of the nib on the pen.
It's done to symbolise the weight and seriousness of the decision that they have just made, but there are certain things that it highlights.
Firstly, the act of breaking the pen highlights finality or solemnity - essentially the irreversible nature of imposing a death sentence on someone that no money can get you out of.
It serves up a moment of reflection for those involved, and really lets the impact sink in for all parties, including friends and loved ones, shortly after passing the sentence.
It is also widely believed that breaking the nib of a pen actually emphasises the fact that a pen being used to sign a death sentence should not be used for anything else, again showing just how serious it is.
Indian lawyer Subhash Ahlawat explained: "The tradition of breaking the nib after passing a death sentence can be traced back to the Mughal era in India.
"It was during this period that the Mughal Emperor would break the quill used to sign off on death sentences."
He said that this tradition was eventually adopted by British judges in colonial India, later continuing after India gained independence.
Ahlawat also stated that it represents the 'judge's heavy heart' as they have no choice but to give such a serious sentence, as they have the emotional burden of deciding someone's fate.
Of course, several western countries have banned the death penalty in recent years, including the UK.
Poorvi Sirothia, another Indian lawyer, wrote about the topic in a piece for indianlegalsolution.com, saying: "After the authority passes capital punishment, he has no authority to audit or renounce his request.
"So once the sentence has been granted and the adjudicator's mark inked, the nib is additionally broken, emblematic of the way that the appointed authority can't drop or revamp the judgement in the event that he/she has a difference in heart of psyche."
Basically, it's the most extreme version of no take backs.
(source: ladbible.com)
APRIL 13, 2024:
TEXAS:
A man convicted of a 1991 El Paso murder is still on death row. The judge says he’ll decide on an execution date in the coming weeks.
Will an El Paso man who has been on death row for more than 30 years soon fulfill his sentence?
That was the question today at the center of a hearing in the County Courthouse downtown.
In court today
Ford was not in the 34th District Court today, but his attorney Richard Burr was.
Burr argued that Judge Bill Moody should dismiss the District Attorney's motion to place Ford's execution on the calendar.
The DA's office asked Judge Moody to allow the state to schedule Ford's lethal injection for November 14, 2024.
The victim's family speaks
The father of Ford's victim, Armando Murillo Senior, delivered a passionate and emotional plea to the judge to schedule the execution so he and his adult daughters can, in his words, "get closure and be allowed to truly heal."
Ford was 18 when he was arrested, accused of a home invasion and murder at a home in East El Paso.
Myra Murillo was shot and left paralyzed. Her daughters were wounded, and her son, Armando Junior, was killed.
Ford maintained that he was not the shooter, and that he was instead the lookout for his accomplices. He also argues that he did not know anyone was going to be killed during the home invasion.
Ford's attorney today argued that the conviction was based on eyewitness testimony, which can be unreliable.
Murillo Senior told me that he believes his daughters, who survived the shooting and identified Ford as the one who pulled the trigger.
"This is too long. My case, my two daughters, even my ex, saw Tony Ford. They were this close together, not even two feet apart. And when he shot, he didn't shoot at long-distance. He put the gun right up on her head. You see, it's a tough situation. It's tough for my daughters. It's tough for my ex, too."
Murillo said he and his daughters and ex-wife have been filing letters with the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.
Ford's accomplice
The Murillo family is urging the parole board to deny early release to Ford's accomplice, Vanjarmar Belton.
Belton was sentenced to prison until 2066 on aggravated assault and has been eligible for parole since 2006, according to the TDCJ. Belton will go before the review board in September.
Judge Moody said he will make a decision on the state's request to schedule Ford's execution no more than 6 weeks from today.
(source: KVIA news)
***********
Convicted murderer charged in 2 new Texas killings offers to return to prison in plea
A convicted murderer who was released early from a Texas prison in 1993 and now faces 2 new murder charges offered Thursday to enter a plea and return to prison for 50 years in exchange for avoiding going to trial and facing a possible death sentence — an offer that victims’ families urged prosecutors to reject.
Raul Meza Jr., 63, served about a decade in prison for killing an 8-year-old girl before he was released. He was charged last year with two other killings that happened in 2019 and 2023, and investigators have said they are looking into as many as a 10 other unsolved cases that they think might be connected to Meza.
During a pretrial hearing Thursday, Travis County prosecutors said they had just received the plea offer from Meza’s attorney and hadn’t had time yet to evaluate it. Meza’s lawyer, Russ Hunt, said the number of years in prison was the only term offered, and that there had been no discussion yet whether a deal would require Meza to plead guilty or no contest to the murder charges.
After the hearing, victims’ family members speaking to reporters urged prosecutors to reject the offer.
Meza’s original 1982 conviction and 30-year prison sentence were the result of a plea deal. He was released early after receiving credit for good time.
“It just brought me back to what my parents had to go through when we were children,” said Tracy Page, whose sister Kendra Page was strangled and sexually assaulted by Meza in 1982. “It’s like he’s dictating what he wants. … To me, in my heart, I want (him) to go to the death penalty.”
Hunt said the offer of 50 years on each murder charge, to be served concurrently, would effectively mean he’d be in prison for life. By law, Meza would be eligible for parole in 30 years, at age 93.
“Mr. Meza would like to avoid a trial and all the trouble and emotional turmoil it brings to everyone involved in the case, including the families of the victims,” Hunt said.
Meza’s early release from prison in 1993 caused an uproar throughout Texas and he was met by protesters at nearly every turn. Picketers drove him out of six cities, sometimes with threats of violence.
“In my heart, I know that I will not willfully bring harm to anyone," Meza said during an August 1993 news conference after he had been driven out of communities.
Austin police said Meza called them last May and confessed to killing his 80-year-old roommate, Jesse Fraga, days earlier, and implicated himself in the 2019 sexual assault and killing of Gloria Lofton. Meza was carrying a backpack containing zip ties, a flashlight, duct tape and a .22 caliber pistol with extra rounds when he was arrested, police said.
Meza has been charged with capital murder in Lofton’s killing, which could result in him being sentenced to death or life without the possibility of parole if he’s convicted. He was indicted on a murder charge in Fraga’s death, which could result in a life term.
(source: Associated Press)
NEW YORK:
Inside infamous US 'Sing Sing' prison where 614 inmates fried to death on 'Old Sparky'----Since 1825 - when the prison's first inmates were forced to horrifically build their own confinement - 'Sing Sing' has seen over 600 lags fried to death by the electric chair, dubbed 'Old Sparky'
The phrase "being sent up the river" refers originally to getting sentenced to a spell at the infamous "Sing-Sing" slammer.
Located on the banks of the Hudson River, about 30 miles north of New York City, the prison is one of the oldest in the US to still be operative. Up until the state’s death penalty was abolished in 1972 614 men and women have been put to death via Sing Sing’s electric chair, a piece of deadly equipment bearing the alarmingly affectionate nickname "Old Sparky".
Sing Sing was constructed in 1825 after the State of New York purchased an 130-acre site on the Hudson River. Its first residents were 100 incarcerated men who were transported from New York’s Auburn Prison to the new site, at the time named Mount Pleasant.
However when the lags arrived there were no cells to hold them, meaning the hapless blokes were forced to build their own prison walls. Under the supervision of law enforcement officials, marble was excavated from a nearby quarry and the prisoners got to work on their home-to-be.
Each of the 800 cells were reportedly 7ft deep, 3 feet 3 inches wide and 6 feet 7 inches high.
Early inmates at Sing Sing were forced to spend their incarceration in total silence (dubbed ‘the Auburn method’), which was enforced by guards brandishing whips. During the day, labour groups made up of ‘lockstepped’ lags would spend hours in the baking heat working on the site.
Although the prison is still very much in use today, the 1825 cell block is defunct with plans to turn it into a museum.
Over the first hundred years of the prison, several inmates on death row managed to forge daring escapes from Sing Sing’s ‘Death House’, leading to a new one being built in 1920.
High-profile executions at the hand of Sing Sing’s ‘Old Sparky’ electric chair include Julius and Ethel Rosenberg in 1953 for being involved in espionage for the Soviet Union on nuclear weapon research. In 1954 Gerhard Puff was executed for the murder of an FBI agent, while the last person executed in the state was the murderer Eddie Lee Mays.
Following the abolition of the death penalty in 1972, ‘Old Sparky’ was moved to Green Haven Correctional Facility in working condition, but never used again. Finally put out to pasture, the electric chair was transferred to a museum in Albany, where it was displayed as an artefact.
In the current era, Sing Sing appears to be a far-removed place from the site which saw over 600 people fried to death over its history. In November 2023, a USA Today visit to the penitentiary included meeting with a peer-support group made up of inmates who called themselves "Voices from Within".
The group is reportedly attempting to change the culture in prisons by shedding light on the mistakes they’ve made and “keeping young people from heading down the same path”.
"I don't want life to end the day we are sentenced," said one Sing Sing inmate. "That's not the end of us as humans and as men. We have so much we can share with everyone, if we are given that chance."
(source: dailystar.co.uk)
ALABAMA:
VERDICT: Jury finds Jeremy Williams guilty in capital murder case, facing death penalty
After nearly an hour and a half of deliberations, the jury decided on a verdict.
On April 12, Jeremy Williams was found guilty in all four counts in the capital murder case of Kamarie Holland.
After 3 gut-wrenching days of tearful and explicit testimony, the jury deliberated for an hour and a half and found Jeremy Williams guilty.
Kamarie Holland’s father, Corey, was present in the courtroom as the jury read their verdict. A look of relief was on his face as the jury read the verdict.
RECAP:
Day 1 of trial featured opening statements from both the State and the Defense, as well as testimony from five law enforcement authorities on what they witnessed and experienced on December 13, 2021. The following information contains graphic, vulgar and violent accounts by attorneys and witnesses. Viewer discretion is advised. The full details are below.
Day 1: Trial begins for murder suspect in Kamarie Holland case
Day 2 of trial, the State had 3 more witnesses testify against Jeremy Williams. This day, the forensic pathologist that conducted the autopsy on Kamarie Holland gave gruesome descriptions on what he saw on December 14, 2021 as he examined Holland.
Day 2: 3 additional witness testify against Jeremy Williams in capital murder case
Day three of trial, the State had one final witness - a sexual assault victim of Jeremy Williams - testify against him. She was just 5-years-old at the time of the assaults. The victim made it through her tearful testimony with her service dog by her side. She stayed in the courtroom during closing arguments.
Day 3: Sexual assault victim testifies against Jeremy Williams; State and Defense present closing arguments
Sentencing will take place on Monday, April 15 at 9 a.m.
(source: WTVM news)
OHIO:
Lawmakers discuss reviving death penalty
Lawmakers in Columbus are discussing whether to revive the death penalty in Ohio by gassing prison inmates with nitrogen as a means of execution.
House Bill 392, which would use nitrogen hypoxia to carry out the death penalty, is sponsored by state representatives Brian Stewart, R-Asheville, and Phil Plummer, R-Dayton.
State Rep. Gary Click, R-Vickery, is a co-sponsor of the bill. State Rep. D.J. Swearingen, R-Huron, has not taken a position but is a member of the Ohio House Government Oversight Committee, which is considering the bill.
Ohio’s last execution was on July 18, 2018, when Robert Van Hook was executed for murdering a Cincinnati man he met in a bar.
When he met with journalists from Ogden News newspapers in January, including from The Courier, Gov. Mike DeWine said he doubts any executions will be carried out during the last three years of his term.
The governor explained that under Ohio law, lethal injection is the only approved method of capital punishment. Drug companies have warned the state not to use any of their products for executions, DeWine said.
Stewart and his allies are trying to get around that situation with a new method of execution, nitrogen hypoxia, which would kill inmates by depriving them of oxygen. On Jan. 25, Alabama used nitrogen to execute convicted murderer Kenneth Eugene Smith. It was the first execution in the U.S. to use the method.
“Nitrogen hypoxia is an alternative method for carrying out capital punishments that has been made available by legislatures in other states,” Stewart said. “In federal court pleadings, even defense counsels have conceded that an offender executed by nitrogen hypoxia would ‘be quickly, painlessly, and humanely rendered unconscious, followed rapidly by death.’”
Ohio currently has 118 inmates on death row awaiting execution.
The 118 include Curtis L. Clinton, 52, convicted of the aggravated murder in 2012 of Heather Jackson, 23, Sandusky, and her two children, ages 1 and 3. He was sentenced to death in 2013.
In addition to his trio of murders, Clinton choked and raped a 17-year-old girl a week before the killings. He had previously served 13 years in prison for the strangling death of 18-year-old Misty Keckler in 1997.
Ogden Newspapers asked Click why he signed on to co-sponsor the bill.
“Justice is delayed when the justice system is handicapped by extraneous and unnecessary obstacles. Victims and their families often suffer extended grief and the lack of closure when heinous crimes meriting capital punishment face delay after delay. Survivors should not be suspended in a perpetual state of grief absent closure due to bureaucratic obstruction,” Click said.
“If the state desires to eliminate capital punishment, there is a mechanism to do so. Artificial workarounds are unfair to Ohio's citizens. So long as it remains the law, the law should be enforced effectively and efficiently,” he said.
The Ohio House Government Oversight Committee held a hearing on the bill on Tuesday.
Swearingen is a member of the committee, so he’ll be asked to vote on the measure if it comes up for a vote.
“I’m still reviewing the bill at this time,” Swearingen said Wednesday.
Swearingen said he doesn’t know when the committee might vote on the bill.
“I haven't been given a timeline on that,” he said.
House Bill 392’s backers include Ohio’s attorney general, Dave Yost.
“No criminal penalty — capital or otherwise — should carry an empty promise of justice,” Yost said earlier this month. “Ohioans on both sides of the death-penalty debate can agree that our current system of capital punishment is unworkable, and something needs to change.”
Quick and painless?
A letter opposing the proposal has been sent to Swearingen and other committee members. The letter is signed by dozens of Ohio rabbis and other Ohio Jews.
L'chaim! Jews Against the Death Penalty, the group that organized the opposition campaign, argues that the proposed method of execution revives memories of the Holocaust.
"Proponents of this bill suggest that replacing oxygen with nitrogen is a peaceful way to kill a prisoner, but what witnesses to the only such execution to have taken place describe is minutes of torturous terror," said Abraham Bonowitz, co-founder of the group.
"The signers of this letter don't necessarily oppose the death penalty, however we cannot stand by while Ohio considers implementing a manner of execution that awakens the Nazi legacy of the Holocaust every time it is mentioned,” Bonowitz said.
First-hand accounts of the nation's only nitrogen execution also appear to challenge the notion that such executions cause no pain or suffering.
According to journalists and witnesses of Alabama death row inmate Smith's execution in January, the inmate "shook in thrashing spasms and seizure-like movements for several minutes at the start of the execution."
"The force of his movements caused the gurney to visibly move at least once," the Associated Press reported.
Those accounts led another Alabama death row inmate to file a lawsuit seeking to block the state from using the nitrogen execution method on him. Alabama's attorney general, Steve Marshall, maintains that Smith's execution was "textbook."
(source: thecourier.com)
CALIFORNIA:
Civil rights groups fight ‘racially discriminatory’ death penalty in Calif. Supreme Court----The lawsuit says California’s death penalty violates the state constitution’s equal protection guarantees because courts and prosecutors apply it in a racially biased way
California criminal justice reform organizations are challenging the state’s use of the death penalty, saying it disproportionately affects Black and brown people and is unconstitutional.
The ACLU, the Office of the State Public Defender and other legal groups on Tuesday filed a petition with the Supreme Court of California on behalf of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, Witness to Innocence and a handful of civil rights organizations.
The lawsuit says California’s death penalty violates the state constitution’s equal protection guarantees because courts and prosecutors apply it in a racially-biased way, according to a news release from the groups.
Lisa Romo of the Office of the State Public Defender said her organization is filing the suit now due to an “accumulation of data” and new studies showing the death penalty is applied disproportionately to victims of color and is used more frequently in cases involving white victims.
“We’re in a position where, because of the dysfunction of the death penalty, there’s just no way to get this in front of the California Supreme Court in an individual case,” Romo said.
Her group and the others involved in the lawsuit hope to convince the justices that California’s death penalty “ends up in these extreme racial disparities and the court should therefore declare the statutes that we have on the books right now to be unconstitutional.”
This would mean convictions resulting in death sentences under the state’s current capital punishment scheme could be vacated, Romo said. The court could also choose not to allow future death sentences “under this particular statutory system,” she said.
Voters or lawmakers could then change California’s capital punishment system to bring it in line with the court’s ruling, Romo said.
California capital punishment
Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2019 signed an executive order placing a moratorium on state executions, saying the death penalty is “ineffective, irreversible and immoral.” Even before Newsom’s order, California had not executed any condemned inmates since 2006, due to legal challenges over the state’s mode of execution.
About 34% of California’s more than 600 condemned inmates are Black, about 32% are white and about 26% are Mexican or Hispanic, according to March 8 data from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Only about 5% of all Californians are Black, according to 2022 U.S. Census Bureau data.
California is 1 of 27 states that still have a death penalty, according to 2023 data from the Death Penalty Information Center. Twenty-three states do not use capital punishment.
Californians in 2016 voted down a ballot measure that would have ended the state’s death penalty, with 53% against repealing it and nearly 47% in favor.
In spite of the execution moratorium, courts have continued to sentence California prisoners to death. From 2019 to 2024, CDCR added 16 condemned inmates. When Newsom leaves office, executions could resume unless a future governor pauses them again.
The legal challenge comes as the state begins to dismantle its death rows for men at San Quentin State Prison and for women at the Central California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla.
A different 2016 state ballot measure, Proposition 66, allows condemned inmates to be housed at any state prison and requires them to work and pay restitution money to victims, among other provisions.
By summer 2024, CDCR plans to rehouse all male death row inmates in general population housing at other prisons, as San Quentin does not have the required electrified fence.
This plan also fits with Newsom’s proposal to refashion San Quentin from a death row hub into a model rehabilitation center by 2025.
Women on death row at Chowchilla have been transferred to general population housing.
(source: Sacramento Bee)
******************
California bishop praises district attorney for seeking to change death sentences
Bishop Oscar Cantú of San Jose recently praised a California district attorney for seeking to convert the death sentences of more than a dozen prisoners to life in prison without possibility of parole.
Jeff Rosen, the district attorney for Santa Clara County, announced last week that he had made a filing in state superior court to resentence 15 condemned men, saying he has “lost faith in capital punishment as a fair and effective crime deterrent.”
The prosecutor added that he views capital punishment as an “antiquated, racially biased, error-prone system that deters nothing and costs us millions of public dollars and our integrity as a community that cherishes justice.”
Rosen pointed to the California law that took effect at the beginning of 2019 and allows district attorneys to resentence a person if they determine the sentence no longer serves justice.
“Judges and juries of the people should decide where an inmate dies. God should decide when,” Rosen said, while acknowledging the “horrible” crimes committed by the inmates.
In an April 4 statement, Cantú, whose diocese includes Santa Clara County, praised Rosen’s “prophetic and principled decision.”
“Catholic social teaching urges us to recognize the dignity of every human being, especially the most vulnerable,” Cantú said.
“In alignment with these teachings, the Church advocates for a consistent ethic of life, encompassing the unborn, the poor, the migrant, the sick, and those in the criminal justice system.”
“DA Rosen’s decision aligns with these values, challenging us to seek alternatives to the death penalty that respect human life and dignity, promote rehabilitation, and foster a safer and more compassionate society,” the bishop said. “It is a call to move away from punitive justice towards restorative justice that heals and rebuilds lives.”
California technically has more prisoners on death row than any other state, but the state’s death penalty has been under moratorium since 2019 and has not been applied since 2006.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, reflecting an update promulgated by Pope Francis in 2018, describes the death penalty as “inadmissible” and an “attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person” (No. 2267).
The change reflects a development of Catholic doctrine in recent years. St. John Paul II, calling the death penalty “cruel and unnecessary,” encouraged Christians to be “unconditionally pro-life” and said that “the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil.
The Vatican’s top doctrinal office’s new declaration on the theme of human dignity, released Monday, reiterated that the death penalty “violates the inalienable dignity of every person, regardless of the circumstances.”
(source: catholicworldreport.com)
USA:
Rise in US executions masks deep divide between states on use of death penalty----Some of the 27 states that have the death penalty have not executed anyone in years but others still do – and the divide is rooted in history
The execution of Brian Dorsey in Missouri on Tuesday, despite an extraordinary campaign asking for his sentence to be commuted, brought into focus the issue of the death penalty in the US – one of the few countries in the western world that still uses corporal punishment.
Dorsey, 52, was executed for the 2006 murders of his cousin and her husband, after the number of people executed in the US rose to 24 in 2023, from 18 in 2022.
The numbers do little, however, to illustrate how unevenly the death penalty is applied in the country: and the growing opposition to capital punishment among Americans.
“It is an act of state violence that we’re using as a punishment,” said Elyse Max, co-director of Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty.
“We learn in kindergarten that if you get hit, you don’t hit back. You tell someone. And it’s kind of that basic philosophy of you cannot solve violence with more violence.”
20 people were executed in 5 states in 2023: Missouri, Oklahoma, Florida, Texas and Alabama. 7 states sentenced people to death: Alabama, Arizona, California, Florida, Louisiana, North Carolina and Texas.
But states are deeply divided over whether they execute people convicted of crimes. The death penalty has been abolished in 23 states, and in the District of Colombia and Puerto Rico. Some of the 27 states that still have the death penalty have not executed anyone for years.
Others, like Texas and Florida, where the rightwing governor, Ron DeSantis, signed a law last year which made it easier for juries to recommend a death sentence, have been responsible for a disproportionate amount of executions in recent years.
Max said the divide has a base in history.
“Missouri is considered the state outside of the south that had the most racial terror lynchings. We can even look and drill down into specific counties in Missouri that are high use death penalty counties, those are counties that had the most racial terror lynchings,” she said.
“And so you see this culture of fear, this culture of hate that’s embedded in certain parts and areas. And that’s how you end up with these types of sentencing.
“Kansas [which neighbors Missouri] was not a slave state: they haven’t executed in 10 years. Missouri was a slave state, and I think some of that is still lingering in our criminal justice system, certainly in our policing and in other systems that were spawned from that time period.”
It is an act of state violence that we’re using as a punishment
Even within the 27 states that still have capital punishment, “the death penalty is really local in its application”, said Robin Maher, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a non-profit organization which researches the death penalty but does not take a position on capital punishment itself.
“Where the death penalty is being used is just in a small number of jurisdictions, where it has been culturally used for a good many years, and where we have elected officials who are making those decisions, not the American public,” Maher said.
There is evidence that Americans’ opinions on the death penalty are changing. A Gallup poll in late 2023 found that 53% of Americans favor the death penalty for a person convicted of murder compared to more than 70% in the 1990s. (In the 2023 Gallup poll 44% were opposed to the death penalty for murder, and 2% had no opinion.)
Prosecutors – who have the ability to push for the death penalty – are elected to their positions, so in some counties may see a benefit in saying they will pursue execution in certain cases.
The same can happen higher up the chain. State governors have the ability to commute death sentences or award clemency, but in Missouri, Mike Parson, the state’s governor, has shown a particular zeal for the death penalty: the state has executed 10 people during his tenure.
Dorsey’s current lawyers have said he was poorly represented in his original case, owing to the public defender system which was in place at Missouri at the time. That system paid Dorsey’s attorneys a flat fee for his representation, which advocates said meant less time was spent on his case.
Dorsey shot his cousin Sarah Bonnie, and her husband to death in 2006 – lawyers later argued that he lacked the intent necessary to be guilty of first-degree murder, which is punishable by death, as he was under a drug-induced psychosis at the time. Parson declined to commute Dorsey’s sentence, despite a petition for clemency from more than 70 correctional officers.
“It should be really very disturbing that we nonetheless executed this, despite understanding fully that he did not get adequate or competent, legal representation at trial,” Maher said.
Despite some improvements in recent years, the amount of money state counties provide for public defense lawyers has been historically underfunded, Maher said.
“We’ve had flat fees, we have had some counties put out contracts for the lowest bid and award all of their defense work to the lowest bidder, [which means] you will almost be guaranteed to get terrible representation with that sort of contract.”
There is also huge racial disparity among those sentenced to death. Since 1976, 34% of the people executed in the US have been Black, despite Black people making up 13.4% of the US population, according to DPIC figures.
As of January 2023, there were 2331 people on death row in the US, according to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. About 41.9% of those were White, and 41.2% were Black.
Committing a crime against a white person is far more likely to draw a death sentence compared to crimes where the victim is a person of color. In 2023, 79% of the people executed had been found guilty of crimes involving white victims.
Between 1976 and 2022, DPIC reported, there have been 2104 victims in cases which led to the death penalty. About 82% of the victims in those cases were white, 9% were Black, and 7.5% were Latino (2% were identified as other races, according to DPIC).
“So many of these decisions are made by prosecutors who may consciously or unconsciously bring their own biases,” Maher said.
“It’s pervasive, it’s through the entire system. We also know that, you know, because of the way the juries are selected in death penalty cases, many people of color are excluded from juries. And we know that that has an effect on how juries deliberate and how they view defendants of color.”
Over the past decades, states that do practice the death penalty have encountered increasing difficulty in acquiring drugs used in the lethal injection process, amid a boycott by pharmaceutical companies. It has led to experimentation with novel execution methods, with three states authorizing the use of nitrogen gas to execute people.
Alabama was the first to use nitrogen gas, when the state killed Kenneth Smith in January. Despite Alabama claiming the method was “perhaps the most humane method of execution ever devised”, the Montgomery Advertiser reported that after the nitrogen was administered “Smith writhed and convulsed on the gurney. He took deep breaths, his body shaking violently with his eyes rolling in the back of his head.”
Since Smith was executed, 3 of the largest manufacturers of medical-grade nitrogen gas in the US have barred their products from being used in executions.
The death penalty has not been used in the UK since 1964, while France last used it in 1977, and formally abolished it in 1981. It has been abolished within the European Union, and in all European countries apart from Russia – which has a moratorium in place and has not killed anyone since 1999 – and Belarus.
The decline in support for the death penalty, has given hope to advocates who believe the US should follow the more than 140 countries that have abolished the practice.
“I think if the current trends are any indication, and the historical data are any indication, the use of the death penalty will continue to decline,” Maher said.
“The public understands that the death penalty is enormously expensive, that it doesn’t provide any deterrent value, and that it doesn’t keep them any safer.”
(source: The Guardian)
****************
John Oliver’s “Last Week Tonight” Criticizes Execution Secrecy Laws and “Sketchy” Procurement of Pentobarbital by Federal Government
SECRECY LETHAL INJECTION U.S. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
During the April 7, 2024, episode of “Last Week Tonight,” host John Oliver focused on “grim developments” in the death penalty since his last segment covering lethal injection in 2019. Since then, 91 people have been executed, including 13 federal prisoners during former President Donald Trump’s administration. “Our federal and state governments have continued to pursue questionably legal and definitely horrifying ways, that, again, I would argue they shouldn’t be doing at all,” Mr. Oliver asserted. He explained that the increased difficulty in obtaining drugs required for lethal injection has pushed lawmakers to enact secrecy statutes that protect the identities of businesses and individuals involved in drug development and procurement. “At every level, those who carry out executions crave secrecy,” said Mr. Oliver. Because of these practices, several states have tried to “source drugs from some pretty sketchy suppliers,” which Mr. Oliver claims “is a problem because when drugs are tainted or not formulated at the proper dosage, executions become a protracted nightmare of suffering, which is both horrifying, and also, unconstitutional.”
While President Trump’s administration offered “sanitized accounts” of all 13 federal executions, Mr. Oliver says that autopsies of two executed individuals revealed that the prisoners’ lungs were “twice as heavy as they should be, indicating ‘pulmonary edema,’ where fluid rushes into the lungs and airways,” causing a drowning or suffocating sensation without adequate anesthetization.
In light of these problematic findings, Mr. Oliver questioned where the Trump administration obtained the pentobarbital it used. Through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests submitted by journalists on Mr. Oliver’s team, Last Week Tonight revealed that it believes that Absolute Standards, a Hamden, Connecticut based company, provided the federal government with the pentobarbital used in the federal executions. The problem, Mr. Oliver alleges, is that while Absolute Standards has been registered with the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) since August 2018 to produce pentobarbital, the drugs are not authorized for human consumption. According to Mr. Oliver, “under the law, companies that make drugs need to be registered with the FDA, and the Trump administration claimed, before the executions, that its supplier was ‘properly registered.’” An additional FOIA request submitted to the Food and Drug Administration revealed that the organization was “unable to locate any records responsive” to the request, and Absolute Standards “has not been inspected by the FDA.” In 2020, Reuters also reported that Absolute Standards may have been the source of executions drugs, but the company’s director, Stephen Arpie, did not confirm and said the company does not always know what is done with their product.
“All this secrecy is also meant to protect us — the people in whose name [executions are] done — from confronting the horror of what the death penalty truly is,” Mr. Oliver said. “Because whether it’s nitrogen gas, or an IV injection of drugs, or a firing squad, or an electric chair, or being pressed with weights, it’s all brutal.” Mr. Oliver called on President Biden to commute the death sentences of all 42 individuals on federal death row to sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole. “But beyond commuting sentences, [President] Biden’s administration could do much more. It could investigate the legality of the federal government’s drug purchases from Absolute Standards…” added Mr. Oliver, who also said state legislatures should eliminate secrecy laws and promote transparency. In closing, Mr. Oliver states that “if the government is going to give itself the power to execute its own citizens — which, for the final time, I strongly believe that it should not — then I want to see where the drugs come from, who’s making them, and relentless scrutiny of every part of this process. Because all this is being done in our name, and far too often, in secret. And we should get a voice to express how we feel about that.”
(source: Death Penalty Information Center)
COUNCIL OF EUROPE:
Exchange of views of the Committee of Ministers with civil society on the Abolition of the death penalty
The Ministers’ Deputies held a thematic discussion on the Abolition of the death penalty on April 10, 2024, with the participation of representatives from civil society.
The Presidency of Liechtenstein underlined its long-standing commitment on the abolition, and shared a video message of Ms Renate Wohlwend, former parliamentarian from Liechtenstein and former Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe General Rapporteur on the abolition of the death penalty:
The Committee of Ministers then listened to the testimony of Mr Firmin Yangambi, former death-row prisoner in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in the context of the recent lifting of the moratorium on executions in this country. Mr Yangambi is currently a lawyer at the International Criminal Court and President of the NGO “Paix sur terre”.
Then, Mr Matthew Goldberg, President of the World Coalition against the Death penalty, and Ms Aminata Niakaté, President of Ensemble contre la peine de mort (ECPM) had the opportunity to take the floor.
The discussions with Permanent Representatives touched upon the promotion of the Abolition of the death penalty, and in particular the Council of Europe’s contribution to universal abolition.
After this exchange of views, the Ministers’ Deputies adopted a new decision on the abolition of the death penalty.
(source: coe.int)
TAIWAN:
Taiwan at crossroads on death penalty
Taiwan values hard work and is an exciting, young democracy. This month, it has an opportunity to keep moving forward in its progressive political journey.
Taiwan ranks higher on The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index than any other country in Asia and is second in Asia on Freedom House’s list of free countries. Its rankings on both indices are higher than those of my country, the US, which is often seen as a model.
I have been inspired by my friends in the Taiwanese human rights community who take full advantage of the open civic space to champion national human rights causes, and provide needed solidarity and support to activists struggling in less open societies in the region.
Taiwan is becoming internationally known for making sensible public policy. My friends and family were deeply worried for my safety when they saw news of the earthquake last week. It registered at 7.2 on the Richter scale, which would have left a greater trail of destruction and a higher death toll in many other countries. However, Taiwan’s policies, implemented since the devastating 921 Earthquake, made it well-prepared.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, Taiwan showed the world what sound public health policy could look like. My own country saw more than 1 million deaths, with a 5.7 % mortality rate compared with Taiwan’s 0.186 percent. Decisions in the US were clouded by a highly chaotic and politically charged debate about basic public health measures that no one questioned in Taiwan.
This month, Taiwan has a significant opportunity regarding sensible public policy and international human rights norms. The Constitutional Court is evaluating the constitutionality of the death penalty. Only 27 % of the world’s countries have retained this punishment for ordinary crimes. Most of these have authoritarian regimes, with the US being a major outlier.
In my 15 years working for Amnesty International in the US, I have witnessed how the death penalty is a blight on any country that aligns itself with human rights. Its staying power primarily comes from politicians’ ability to manipulate the public’s fears, rather than from any proven impact on deterring violent crime or delivering justice without deadly errors and bias. After a few decades of discovering an incredible number of innocence cases, the clamor to execute prisoners has become less loud.
High-profile murder cases in Taiwan predictably result in cries for the death penalty, amplified by a media that provokes drama. With 0.8 murders in 100,000 compared with 7 in 100,000 in the US, I would argue that Taiwan does not have a serious violent crime problem, despite the tragedy it is to the loved ones of the victims.
Regardless of how you view violent crime in Taiwan, the US has proven that capital punishment does not lower murder rates and is a distraction from tangible services that could better help devastated victims’ families. The international community has increasingly been turning its back on the death penalty given its contradiction of the right to life, to be free from cruel and inhumane punishment and to be treated equally under the law.
Taiwan is at a crossroads. It has chosen to let the judicial system evaluate the death penalty. Now, it can rationally and objectively look at the system without inflammatory cries for vengeance or factually inaccurate claims about its utility.
The court has a momentous opportunity to evaluate whether a democracy with a Constitution that enshrines human rights can accommodate a practice that no longer aligns with international human rights norms. Should it decide that the death penalty is incompatible with the values of a liberal democracy, perhaps my country would take notice of yet another example of Taiwan leading in sound public policy.
(source: Laura Moye is a human rights activist and teacher living in Taichung----Taipei Times)
VIETNAM:
Real estate tycoon's death sentence is a turning point in Vietnam's anti-corruption campaign
The unusually harsh death sentence given to a real estate tycoon in Vietnam was a pivotal moment in the decadelong “Blazing Furnace” anti-corruption campaign as the Vietnamese business community wrestled with an uncertain future Friday.
Real estate tycoon Truong My Lan, who was sentenced to death Thursday by a court in Ho Chi Minh city for orchestrating the country’s largest ever financial fraud case, was one of Vietnam's most important businesspeople for years. She has been convicted for fraud amounting to $12.5 billion — nearly 3% of the country’s 2022 GDP — and for illegally controlling a major bank and allowing loans that resulted in losses of $27 billion, state media outlets reported.
Vietnam typically gives death penalties crimes like terrorism or murder and, according to Amnesty International, has among the highest rates of capital punishment worldwide. But a death sentence for a financial crime is rare in the country.
Thursday's sentencing marked a “big turning point” in the ongoing anti-corruption drive in Vietnam, said Nguyen Khac Giang, an analyst at Singapore’s ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.
“It signals that the party's commitment to a crackdown on corruption has … expanded," he said.
The Communist Party's so-called Blazing Furnace campaign began in 2013, but it wasn’t until 2018 that authorities began scanning the private sector. Since then, several owners of Vietnam's fast-growing businesses have been arrested. The trial for Trinh Van Quyet — the former chair of the real estate company FLC, which also owns Vietnam's 3rd-largest airline, Bamboo Airways — will likely be heard next. He was arrested in 2022. Giang said Lan’s trial was “an example” for upcoming cases.
The anti-corruption campaign is a hallmark of Communist Party General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong, Vietnam’s top politician. The 79-year-old ideologue views corruption as a grave threat facing the party and has vowed that the campaign will be a “blazing furnace” where no one is untouchable.
It's making foreign investors jittery while dampening Vietnam’s economic outlook at a time when the country has been positioning itself as the ideal home for businesses looking to shift their supply chains away from China. Vietnam already lost two presidents in a little over a year and the country’s bureaucracy has ground to a halt with terrified officials choosing to do nothing lest they be in the crosshairs.
Lan's death sentence sent “shockwaves” across the Vietnamese business community, creating a “sense of uncertainty” about the future, said Giang.
The real estate sector in particular is floundering. An estimated 1,300 property firms withdrew from the market in 2023 and high-rises lie empty in major cities like Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh. Add to this poor global demand and reduced public investment slowing Vietnam’s economic growth down to 5.05% last year, compared to 8.02% in 2022, according to government data.
Meanwhile, despite the long campaign against graft, public opinion about corruption in Vietnam remains mixed, according to an annual survey built on interviews with nearly 20,000 people known as the Vietnam Provincial Governance and Public Administration Performance Index. It found that, while fewer people were asked for bribes, the number of people who felt the government was serious about fighting corruption had actually dipped in 2023 from the previous year.
Giang said that these were now “uncharted waters” for Vietnam, making it impossible to predict what lay next.
"We haven’t really seen anything like this before,” he said.
(source: Huron Daily Tribune)
INDIA/SAUDI ARABIA:
Kerala man on death row in Saudi Arabia, ?35 crore raised for release. Who is he?
Hundreds of people in Kerala have collected ?35.45 crore through a crowd-funding campaign to secure the release of Kozhikode native Abdul Rahim, convicted in Saudi Arabia for causing the death of a 15- year-old disabled boy, reported news agency ANI. Kerala CM Pinarayi Vijayan has hailed the initiative to help free Rahim.
Hundreds of people in Kerala have collected ?35.45 crore through a crowd-funding campaign to secure the release of Kozhikode native Abdul Rahim, convicted in Saudi Arabia for causing the death of a 15- year-old disabled boy(ANI)
"When the propagandists of hatred spread lies against the state, the Malayalees are raising their defence through stories of humanity and philanthropy. For the release of Abdul Rahim, a native of Kozhikode who was sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia, Malayalees all over the world have joined hands and collected 34 crore rupees," said Kerala CM on social media.
Why Abdul Rahim is facing death penalty in Saudi Arabia
As per news agency ANI, Abdul Rahim was employed as a house driver of a Saudi citizen and as the caretaker of a 15- year-old disabled boy. As per Rahim's version, while travelling with the boy one day, he stopped the vehicle at a red light. When the boy asked Rahim to violate the red signal, he accidentally hit and dislodged the tube of a life-support device attached to the boy's body. As a result, the boy fell unconscious and died.
Rahim was sentenced to death in 2018 under Saudi law for murder. The victim boy's family was adamant about the death penalty. But they eventually agreed to pardon him if he paid 'blood money' of 15 million Saudi riyals.
How people have arranged money for Rahim's release
A legal action committee was formed to organise the crowdfunding to save Abdur Rahim. The committee set up an app called 'SAVEABDULRAHIM' to collect the amount. More than ?30 crore were collected through the app. The fundraising target was achieved by adding the amount received offline.
A social media campaign was also launched to aid the release of Rahim.
The committee has said that it will contact the Indian Embassy in Riyadh to help secure Rahim's release before the April 15 deadline.
(source: hindustantimes.com)
IRAN:
The life of political prisoner Mahmoud Mehrabi is in danger
Mahmoud Mehrabi, a resident of Mobarakeh, Isfahan, who has been imprisoned in Dastgerd Central Prison in Isfahan since February 1, 2023, and whose physical condition is inappropriate, was assaulted and injured by inmates of the dangerous crimes ward on Wednesday, April 10, 2024.
According to reports received by Iran Human Rights Monitor (Iran HRM), the situation of Mr. Mehrabi is extremely alarming due to his transfer to the violent crimes ward and the death threats he has received from the Intelligence Department and the judiciary in Isfahan province.
Before this, the 2nd investigation branch of the Public and Revolutionary Prosecutor’s Office of Mobarakeh in Isfahan province has issued an indictment against Mr. Mahmoud Mehrabi with 187 charges, including, “corruption on earth through widespread publication of lies on Instagram, propaganda against the state, inciting the military and law enforcement forces to refuse to carry out their duties, inciting people to war and killing, and insulting Khomeini.
The charge of corruption on earth has been issued against Mahmoud Mehrabi without sufficient reasons. The IRGC Intelligence has embarked on wide-scale efforts to fabricate a case against Mahmoud Mehrabi. Some 50 private plaintiffs from among the city’s government officials have been included in the file!!Although Mahmoud Mehrabi is just a protester in cyberspace, the intelligence services are planning to file a serious case against this political prisoner.
During his detention, Mr. Mehrabi suffered from inguinal hernia as a result of torture, harassment, and mistreatment in the Information Detention Center of the Revolutionary Guards. He has also been deprived of access to legal representation.
(source: iran-hrm.com)
APRIL 12, 2024:
TEXAS:
Rare Agreement Between District Attorney and Defense Counsel Acknowledge Prosecutorial Misconduct and Need for New Trial for Melissa Lucio
PROSECUTORIAL ACCOUNTABILITY WOMEN TEXAS
On April 5, 2024, Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz and Innocence Project attorney Vanessa Potkin released a joint statement regarding Melissa Lucio’s case, which has been pending additional review for almost two years. On January 11, 2023, the parties submitted an Agreed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stating that the defense was not given access to favorable information in the prosecution’s possession at trial, an error that they agree should entitle Ms. Lucio to a new trial. “Under Texas procedure the trial court must make a recommendation to the CCA which is the only court that can vacate a conviction,” explained the statement. “We are hopeful that Melissa’s case will be resolved.”
Ms. Lucio’s son John and his wife Michelle also issued a statement. “We are grateful to District Attorney Saenz for recognizing that evidence that our baby sister Mariah’s death was an accident, not a murder, was never presented to the jury. We are also thankful to Melissa’s legal team. We hope and pray that our mother can soon come home to her family.”
Ms. Lucio was sentenced to death in 2008 after prosecutors alleged that she beat her 2-year-old daughter to death. Ms. Lucio’s lawyers recently presented expert opinion that her daughter Mariah was not murdered at all, but likely died from head trauma following an accidental fall two days prior to her death. Ms. Lucio, who was physically, emotionally, and sexually abused from a young age, has been diagnosed with PTSD, “battered woman syndrome” (intimate partner violence), and depression. She also has intellectual impairments, all of which, forensic and domestic abuse experts agree, made her more vulnerable to coercive interrogation techniques. After 5 hours of aggressive questioning by police on the night of Mariah’s death, Ms. Lucio acquiesced to police pressure, saying, “I guess I did it.”
Ms. Lucio’s case has garnered widespread attention and support. In February 2022, the Inter-American Court on Human Rights (IACHR) issued precautionary measures asking the state to refrain from execution until her case is reviewed and to ensure detention conditions align with international human rights standards. In March 2022, 81 members of the Texas House of Representatives, led by Republican Representative Jeff Leach, signed a letter calling on Governor Greg Abbott and the pardons board to grant her clemency. Before the Texas Board of Pardons and Parole could vote on the matter, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (TCCA) granted Ms. Lucio a stay of execution just days prior to her April 27, 2022 execution date. The TCCA highlighted four issues for the trial court to review: whether prosecutors obtained her conviction using false testimony, whether the jury’s exposure to previously unavailable scientific evidence would have resulted in her acquittal, whether she is actually innocent, and whether prosecutors suppressed favorable evidence that was material to the outcome of her trial. The fourth question, answered in the affirmative, was the subject of the January 2023 joint filing.
(source: Death Penalty Information Center)
***************
Death row inmate and mother-of-14 could be saved after 'new evidence' emerges----Melissa Lucio was convicted in 2008, but statements from her children were never presented
Prosecutors working on the case of death row inmate Melissa Lucio have said evidence which was suppressed at her murder trial could have prevented her conviction.
Lucio, a mom-of-14, was convicted in 2008 for the death of her 2-year-old daughter, Mariah, in Texas in 2007.
Prosecutors long maintained Mariah had been a victim of abuse and noted that her body had been covered in bruises, but Lucio's defense argued Mariah had died following an accidental fall down a steep staircase.
Lucio was originally set to die by lethal injection in April 2022, but 2 days before her scheduled execution, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals delayed the injection so state District Judge Gabriela Garcia could review Lucio's claims that new evidence would exonerate her.
Cameron County District Attorney Luis Saenz initially said he disagreed with her claims, but this month he acknowledged her legal team 'did not have access to information favorable to her defense at the time of trial'.
The suppressed evidence includes witness statements and a report by Child Protective Services which would have corroborated Lucio's defense, Associated Press reports.
The CPS report indicated one of Lucio’s children had told a CPS worker he was present when Mariah 'fell down some stairs', and that their mother had not been abusive to them or Mariah.
Lucio's attorneys were also reportedly not provided with statements made by two of her other children, who had told police that Mariah had been injured in a fall.
The children also said Lucio had grown worried about Mariah's declining health before her death.
Together with Lucio’s attorneys, the office of Saenz has produced a 33-page agreement laying out the facts and conclusions in the case, which stated: “She would not have been convicted in light of the suppressed evidence."
It is unclear why the evidence was suppressed, but the agreement has recommended that Lucio's conviction and death sentence be overturned; a decision which now lies with Texas judge Garcia.
Garcia received the findings on 20 December, 2022, but she is yet to issue a ruling and forward her decision to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
The court of appeals will then be responsible for making the final decision.
Lucio’s son, John Lucio, and his wife, Michelle, stood by Lucio as they shared their appreciation for the agreement.
“We are grateful to District Attorney Saenz for recognizing that evidence that our baby sister Mariah’s death was an accident, not a murder, was never presented to the jury," they said in a statement.
"We are also thankful to Melissa’s legal team. We hope and pray that our mother can soon come home to her family."
(source: unilad.com)
PENNSYVANIA:
DA files for death penalty against man accused of kidnapping 2 co-workers, torturing and killing them
It is now official. The death penalty will be sought if the accused shooter in the January double homicide in Williamsport is found guilty of 1st-degree murder.
That step was taken when Lycoming County First Assistant District Attorney Martin L. Wade filed in county court the aggravating circumstances required in capital cases.
(source: pennlive.com)
ALABAMA----death row inmate drops appeals
Alabama man convicted of killing 5 people asks to be executed: ‘It’s the right thing to do’----Derrick Dearman, convicted killer of 5 on Alabama death row, dropped his appeals and asked the state to be executed.
Derrick Dearman says he wants to live.
The 35-year-old inmate on Alabama’s death row has spent almost 6 years fighting his sentence after being convicted of killing five people, including a woman who was pregnant. But now, he says he’s asked the state to execute him. It’s time, he says, for “justice to be delivered,” and “it’s the right thing to do.”
“I don’t want to die,” Dearman told CNN in a phone interview Friday from a prison in Atmore, Alabama. “But I feel it in my heart that this is the only option that would help the victims’ families get the closure they need to move forward.”
“I made peace with my decision.”
In the early morning hours on August 20, 2016, Dearman broke into a home in small-town Citronelle, Alabama, according to a sentencing order filed in the case. He made his way through the house, attacking 5 of the occupants one by one, using an ax, a .45 pistol and a shotgun.
Shannon Melissa Randall, Robert Lee Brown, Justin Kaleb Reed, Joseph Adam Turner and Chelsea Marie Reed, who was 5 months pregnant, were left dead. Dearman fled the scene, taking his sometime girlfriend and the infant son of 2 victims with him.
Dearman, who was born in Greene County, Mississippi, later turned himself in to authorities there.
He pleaded guilty to capital murder charges on August 31, 2018; a jury recommended the death penalty. Dearman’s parents both testified his “long-term drug abuse was the central problem in their son’s life,” according to his sentencing order.
Dearborn said he tried to appeal the sentence – but only for the sake of his family, who he said wanted him to fight for his life. “They have a right as my family, to try to be presented with opportunity to seek relief from the sentence that I was cast, because no father wants their son to die,” he told CNN.
“What they’ve seen was a drug addict, what they’ve seen was a man who literally wasn’t in his own mind, he was in a mental fetal position,” Dearman said. His first appeal was filed in October 2018, and he told his family he’d allow a few years of appeal attempts. In February, the Alabama Supreme Court denied a motion to appeal his sentence, upholding his convictions.
And now, about 5.5 years after his sentence, Dearman says the fight is over.
“It’s just time to do what I know is right and what I know I gotta do,” he said. “My family’s right was secured; now it’s time for the victims and their families to get what’s right to them and what they deserve and that’s for justice to be delivered.”
On April 4, Dearman said, he fired his attorneys with the Equal Justice Initiative who were representing him during the appeals process. Dearman told CNN he wrote letters to Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey and the state’s attorney general, asking them to carry out his death sentence.
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall’s office received the letter, spokesperson Amanda Priest told CNN. CNN also contacted Angela Setzer, Dearman’s former attorney with the Equal Justice Initiative, for comment but did not receive a response.
It’s unknown whether or when Dearborn’s request might be fulfilled.
A ‘heinous’ attack awakened most victims
Dearman had been at the home on August 17 – 3 days before the murders – helping scrap a metal trailer but his behavior started to make at least 1 person at the home in Citronelle, about 30 miles north of the Gulf Coast city of Mobile, “uncomfortable,” according to the sentencing order.
Shannon Randall, who had a 3-month-old son, ultimately said she didn’t want Dearman staying “in the same home as her infant” but he could still work there.
He left and returned to a home he shared with his girlfriend in George County, Mississippi, about 15-minutes over the state line. Court records show he injected methamphetamine that evening and became abusive toward his girlfriend.
The next day, she fled.
Dearman returned to the home in Citronelle, hoping to speak to his girlfriend, and was told to leave. He came back three more times that evening, prompting Randall’s husband, Joseph Adam Turner, to call authorities.
Police patrolled outside the home but left around 3 a.m. when there was a shift change, the sentencing document notes.
Sometime in the early morning hours, Dearman returned a final time on foot. He later told investigators that he had used methamphetamine at some point before he entered the house.
He broke into the home, woke up his sleeping girlfriend and talked with her outside. Dearman, increasingly frustrated, refused to leave and “demanded she stay and talk to him,” the sentencing order says.
He left the home and returned later with an ax, which he’d pulled from a nearby tree.
Dearman made his way through the home, swinging the weapon on multiple sleeping occupants who were staying there. He used it on Turner and Randall, who had been sleeping in bed with their son. Dearman then managed to pry a .45 pistol from one of the victims and shot him. He also used a shotgun in the attack, the sentencing order says.
Court records note “after the initial attack was completed, the Defendant meticulously shot each victim to ensure death.”
He then left and ordered his girlfriend to go with him, taking the infant with them, the sentencing order says.
The order called the attack “especially heinous” and “atrocious,” noting each victim was conscious for a period of time after being brutally attacked.
Later that day, Dearman told his father what happened, and his father persuaded him to turn himself in to authorities.
The reality of the crimes Dearman committed began to settle in once he was behind bars and able to sleep, eat and get the drugs out of his system, he told CNN on Friday. From that point forward, he said he started “talking to God” and knew his life was the price he had to pay.
Dearman stressed his decision is “not for my own gain” and said he’s grappled with the idea of reaching out to the families of the victims but says he didn’t want to cause more pain. CNN attempted to reach the families of each of the victims.
“From my point of view, there’s nothing that I could ever say or do that will make this right. I feel like I personally have a debt for the crimes that I committed,” Dearman told CNN. “That’s the only way that I could ever show that I’m truly remorseful, that I truly do have a conscience.”
‘Who wants to look at death and say, “Come here”?’
Alabama has faced scrutiny over its executions of death row inmates after multiple failed lethal injections prompted an internal review of the state’s capital punishment system in 2022.
Gov. Ivey asked the state Department of Corrections to conduct a “top-to-bottom review of the state’s execution process” after problems with multiple lethal injections came into the national spotlight, CNN previously reported. The state resumed executions last spring after the review was completed.
Dearman acknowledged some people might question whether he’s fully competent to make the decision to be executed, saying: “Yes, I’m confident I’m in my right mind. If I wasn’t, I wouldn’t be trying to think about the victims’ families and their feelings, my family and their feelings. I wouldn’t be trying to think about how people might view the death penalty.”
The Rev. Dr. Jeff Hood, Dearman’s spiritual adviser, told CNN he was skeptical when Dearman first informed him of his decision and said he had “conflicting emotions” about getting involved in his case.
“Derrick has consistently expressed this is a spiritual decision for him and not a political decision or an activist decision,” Hood said. “In our conversations, that’s been an interesting dynamic. This is incredibly spiritual for him.”
The convicted killer said he’s against the death penalty “in nine out of 10 cases” and believes it’s widely misused – but he says it’s warranted in his case.
“Does it scare me? Of course,” Dearman told CNN. “I mean, who wants to look at death and say, ‘Come here’?”
“But I feel it in my heart that this is the only option that would help the victims’ families get the closure they need to move forward.”
(source: CNN)
OHIO:
Man to face 2nd death penalty trial in woman’s 2019 death----In his 1st trial, the jury only convicted him on a kidnapping charge.
A man will face the death penalty once again after his previous death penalty case ended in a hung jury.
In March, Jabar Ishmail was facing murder, aggravated murder and kidnapping in connection with the 2019 death of Kailin Jones.
The jury only convicted Ishmail on the kidnapping charge, which he will be sentenced for on June 6.
On Thursday, the state said they are ready to proceed with another capital punishment trial.
“We did attempt to engage in additional plea discussions, but that has been rejected by the defendant [Ishmail], so at this time, the state is prepared to proceed on another capital trial,” the state prosecutor announced in court.
Clyde Bennett, Ishmail’s defense attorney in his previous trial, said prosecutors claimed his client had tortured and terrorized Jones by stabbing her more than 50 times in 5 hours.
The new capital trial is not expected to begin until 2025.
Jones’s mother, Kinjana Williams, hopes to be there as she lives with stage 5 kidney disease.
“Our family is trying to move on with our lives,” Williams explained. “We should not have to come back to this city where she was brutally murdered.”
Williams said she is upset about what happened during the 1st trial and prays for a better outcome for the next one.
“I hope justice is done next time around,” Williams stated.
Bennett said he will not be representing Ishmail after he is sentenced for the kidnapping charge on June 6.
The defense lawyer said that his contract for services expires once all matters involving the 1st trial are concluded.
Ishmail is expected to remain behind bars until then.
(source: WXIX news)
TENNESSEE:
Looking back: Blount County man one of several East Tennesseans on death row----State prosecutors have until Oct. 11 to determine if they'll pursue the death penalty against another man charged with killing a deputy.
Tennessee prosecutors have a deadline of Oct. 11 to announce if they'll pursue the death penalty against an Alcoa man accused of shooting and killing a Blount County deputy.
Kenneth Wayne DeHart Jr. was indicted on 21 charges earlier this month, including a premeditated first-degree murder charge and an attempted first-degree murder charge.
Prosecutors haven't announced whether they'll pursue the death penalty at this point.
The death penalty is rarely used, and Tennessee records show there's currently one man on death row from Blount County.
According to Tennessee's death penalty laws, prosecutors can pursue the death penalty in murder cases with certain extenuating circumstances, including a killing committed against a law enforcement officer.
Only 1 Blount County man on death row
Gary Sutton, convicted of 1st-degree murder in 1996, is the only person from Blount County who's currently on death row.
Sutton, and his uncle James Dellinger, were convicted in the murders of Tommy Griffin and Connie Branham in the early 1990s.
Both Griffin and Branham were siblings, whose bodies were found about a week apart in February 1992.
Police said Griffin's body was found in Walland and Branham's body was found in a burnt-out car in Sevier County. Griffin's mobile home in Sevier County also burned around the time of his killing.
Both Sutton and Dellinger were sentenced to death in connection after being convicted of Griffin's murder.
Dellinger died last year from cancer after spending more than two decades on death row.
He lost an appeal in 2014 in Blount County. In that hearing, his attorneys said he wanted to submit new evidence that would overturn an earlier decision that said his IQ was over 70.
Tennessee law says anyone with an IQ lower than 70 can't be sentenced to death, but a judge refused to re-open the issue.
Sutton was set to be executed in 2022, but that was canceled because of concerns about Tennessee's execution methods.
Some of Sutton's family members have maintained his innocence in this case and are petitioning Governor Bill Lee for a pardon in his case.
Other East Tennesseans on death row
Other East Tennesseans on death row include people from Knox and Cocke counties.
Lemaricus Davidson was sentenced to death for the 2007 killings of Chris Newsom and Channon Christian.
Terry King was sentenced to death for the 1983 killing of Diana Kay Smith.
Christa Pike, the only woman on death row in Tennessee, was sentenced to death for the 1995 murder of Colleen Slemmer.
Dennis Suttles was convicted in 1996 of killing Patricia Gail Rhodes, in the parking lot of a South Knoxville Taco Bell.
Jonathan Stephenson was convicted of hiring a hitman to kill his wife, Lisa, who was shot in the head with a high-powered rifle in Cocke County in 1989.
Oscar Smith was convicted in 1989 in the triple slayings of his estranged wife, Judy Lynn Smith, and her two sons, Chad and Jason Burnett, from a previous marriage in Nashville. He was just hours away from having his death sentence carried out two years ago before Gov. Bill Lee abruptly intervened.
The Status of Executions
In April 2022, Gov. Bill Lee halted all executions in Tennessee after launching an independent review of the state's lethal injection preparation process following an unspecified "oversight" discovered just before Oscar Smith's scheduled execution. The review finished in December 2022, and the Associated Press reported the Tennessee Department of Correction then fired its top attorney and inspector general for "incorrectly testifying" under oath that they were testing the lethal injection chemicals for bacterial contamination.
The independent report found Tennessee had never fully tested drugs for its executions since rewriting the state's lethal injection protocol in 2018, according to the Associated Press.
Executions have not resumed in Tennessee since the investigation, however, Lee noted he did not wish to stop the administration of the death penalty altogether.
Tennessee has a secondary method of carrying out executions -- the electric chair -- and several death row inmates were put to death by that method between 2018 and 2020. However, the electric chair can't be used as a primary means of execution and can only be used if inmates waive the right to lethal injection.
With the status of lethal injections left in limbo, the state would have to change the law in order to resume executions through a different method, such as a firing squad. A few attempts to do so in the state legislature in 2023 stalled.
(source: WBIR news)
USA:
The death penalty says more about us than the condemned----I should know. I’ve been a death row pastor for 45 years.
I have worked with the condemned in the South since 1975. The death penalty is a barbaric practice no matter how you package it. Although Alabama officials hailed the use of nitrogen gas as the wave of the future with their recent execution of Kenneth Smith, witnesses gave a different account of the proceedings.
Despite efforts to modernize execution methods, the underlying brutality of the death penalty remains unchanged.
When a state kills a human being with a drug that some state veterinary associations have outlawed for the euthanasia of animals, that is really all you need to know about the process. Such is the case in Alabama with the use of nitrogen gas and in Tennessee with vecuronium bromide. These drugs are avoided for killing animals, but permitted for the state in killing protocols of human beings.
These ethical inconsistencies inherent in the selection of execution drugs, along with gross injustices throughout the system, underscore the moral bankruptcy of what I have come to refer to as the “killing machine.”
The United States’ first execution of a prisoner by lethal injection happened on Dec. 7, 1982, in Huntsville, Texas. The prisoner’s name was Charlie Brooks. I remember because I was there.
As a death row minister, I had flown out to Texas to meet with then-Gov. Bill Clements prior to the execution; I then joined a protest organized by my colleagues outside the penitentiary where the state killing would take place at midnight.
The proponents of this new “medical model” envisioned lethal injection as providing a painless, cosmetically pleasing viewing for witnesses and prison personnel. In reality, though, it was what a Florida state senator later described thusly: “It makes it easier to execute them because they are not jerking and writhing like they do in the electric chair.”
Ah, yes, an inoffensive viewing makes for a better press report.
Before the vigil was scheduled to begin, I stopped in at a local café, where I overheard two white men sitting at a table nearby discussing the upcoming execution: “He’s gittin’ off easy. This needle business is just gittin’ off easy.”
“Yup,” his companion responded. “They oughta fry” Brooks, he said, using a racial slur.
At the nearby penitentiary, my colleagues and I kept a candlelight vigil but we were not alone. The crowd, really more of a mob of several hundred, assembled and began yelling and screaming for the killing of Brooks. To this Southerner, who knows his history, this group was reminiscent of the mobs that had historically made Texas, especially eastern Texas, a leader in lynching. This section of the state also led in sentencing people to death row.
The mob carried on for several hours and then suddenly became quiet. I looked up from my candle and saw Brooks’ family slowly, painfully climbing those steps of the penitentiary for a last goodbye with a son and brother.
Although the trial court had found Brooks guilty of murder, the prosecutor subsequently requested that his death sentence be commuted over doubt as to who pulled the trigger and said he had “pangs of conscience” over the disparity between the sentences given to Brooks and his partner, who was serving 40 years with the possibility of parole. “It may well be, as horrible as it is to contemplate, that the State of Texas executed the wrong man,” the prosecutor later said.
However, it was not enough to stop the killing machine. And on the day of his execution, witnesses have said Brooks indicated he was in tremendous suffering in the seven minutes after the injection began. An injection did not go as smoothly as expected, and was reported to have had “a problem with the line,” leading to the solution being more diluted for the next execution. As Charles Colson wrote for The Washington Post at the time, “That execution wasn’t painless.”
On Feb. 28 of this year, 2 executions were scheduled in the United States, of Ivan Cantu in Texas and Thomas Creech in Idaho. Cantu maintained his innocence and it was later found that two key witnesses lied in their testimony, leading some jurors on the case to express concerns over the sentence, including the jury foreman, who wrote an opinion column titled “I helped put Ivan Cantu on death row. Now I feel like I was fooled.” None of it mattered. Yet again, Texas made sure Cantu, despite significant doubt as to his guilt, died a horrific death with the “medical model.”
An NPR investigation of over 200 autopsies of the lethally injected has revealed 84% experienced pulmonary edema or drowning. Additionally, doctors “raised serious concerns that many inmates are not being properly anesthetized and are therefore feeling the suffocating and drowning sensation brought on by pulmonary edema,” NPR said.
The 2nd lethal injection execution attempt on Feb. 28 — that of Creech in Idaho — was halted after eight failed attempts to find a vein while he was strapped to the gurney. Defense lawyers stated, “The badly botched execution proves the state cannot carry out an execution that is humane and constitutional.”
Consistent instances of botched executions expose the inherent flaws and inhumanity of the death penalty system, undermining its legitimacy and moral standing.
On April 4, Michael Smith was executed by lethal injection in Oklahoma. He was convicted of murdering two people while on PCP, and under the shattering effect of that drug, gave a confession to police. He was intellectually disabled and said he had no recollection of the killing. What is accomplished by executing a man from such a context?
Brian Dorsey was convicted of murder and was executed in Missouri this week, on Tuesday (April 9). He was known for being a model prisoner. He was even the barber for the warden, and some 60 correctional officers asked for his clemency.
I worked with two men in Tennessee, Ed Zagorski and Nick Sutton, who had the qualities of Dorsey. Zagorski spent 35 years in prison without a disciplinary write-up. In 50 years of prison ministry in the South, I had never seen that for an individual on death row. Sutton hit the trifecta: Post trial, jurors stated that if they had known all of the facts they would have given him life. And correctional officers asked for clemency because he had saved their lives; he had graduated from a conflict resolution course and was a certified mediator.
Neither Zagorski nor Sutton received clemency. They were electrocuted by the state of Tennessee in an inherently political process that has nothing to do with justice. You see, by denying clemency a governor proves he is tough on crime. That is why this is a criminal legal system. What is happening is criminal. It is legal. And it is a system. It is all about politics and killing, not justice.
During my 45 years ministering to the condemned, I discerned that those on death row fall into three distinct categories: those truly guilty of murder; individuals who were unequivocally innocent; and others sentenced to death after the true perpetrator negotiated a plea deal with prosecutors, implicating their co-defendant.
Structural inequalities within the legal system perpetuate a cycle of injustice, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities and undermining the principles of fairness and equality. In other words, often it’s not committing the worst crime that lands an individual on death row, but having the worst lawyer — most cannot afford quality legal counsel.
Across the South, everyone I have met on death row has been poor. In addition, extreme racial discrimination is uncontroverted in more than 20 studies conducted across the country. What we have is a criminal legal system that delivers poor victims of racial discrimination right to the executioner’s door.
These condemned to die have been women, men, the mentally ill, the truly insane; almost all suffered from horrific childhood experiences. Many of them have suffered from trauma and brain damage. Yet I have found each to be responsive to caring, concern and empathy. Most have become my friends.
Although our criminal legal system wishes to designate them to the scrap heap, I have experienced these people to be thoughtful, engaging, funny and responsible human beings confined to cages. And despite their circumstances, those on death row retain their humanity and deserve to be treated with dignity and compassion.
When we lose the perspective that each individual is a child of God, we can do terrible things to one another. Yes, many on death row have committed murder, but none of us should be defined by the worst thing we have done, nor our humanity forfeited because of it.
(source: Opinion; Joe Ingle is a death row pastor, United Church of Christ minister and the founder of the Southern Center for Human Rights. He is the author of a forthcoming memoir, “Too Close to the Flame: With the Condemned Inside the Southern Killing Machine.”----Religion News Service)
SOUTH AFRICA:
Populist death penalty calls do not pass constitutional muster
“We must abolish this Constitution!” has become the election carol and election decorations of this year’s poll.
It has become almost routine to hear calls from populist politicians, including those in the ruling party, as well as other influential figures in society, advocating to change the South African Constitution. They often label this proposed shift as the “second transition”, consequentially portraying the Constitution as inadequate for driving social change and economic transformation.
In the 2024 election campaign, the call has yet again been made to reintroduce capital punishment through constitutional amendment. Capital punishment was abolished in the 1995 constitutional court (CC) decision following S v Makwanyane and Another.
It is my view that such an amendment would be impossible as parliament does not have unlimited authority to change the Constitution. Thus, calls for such constitutional amendment are mere rhetoric that scapegoats the Constitution for the government’s failure to fulfil its constitutional obligations and progressively improve the lives of all who live in the country. The calls project the death penalty as the panacea to the unacceptably high crime rate. In this article, I aim to challenge the fallacious notion of introducing the death penalty through a constitutional amendment.
The significance of the Constitution cannot be overstated. It is the supreme law of the land, as explicitly stated in section 2, and embodies the collective aspirations of the nation which are founded on the values of “human dignity, the achievement of equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms”.
The Constitution defines the role and obligations of the state, delineates the powers and responsibilities of each branch, and provides mechanisms for accountability and oversight primarily for the government to ensure that it operates within its defined powers and duties. Our Constitution exists in a dynamic socio-political context and is adaptable to address and accommodate inevitable societal and political changes that are both desirable and necessary. It was purposely drafted in broad and general terms to ensure its longevity and relevance over time.
To that end, the CC in S v Zuma and Others in 1995 approved the view that the Constitution is a living document but the Constitution does not mean whatever we wish it to mean. Thus, there is a clear distinction between amending the Constitution and replacing it, what is termed constitutional abrogation in legal circles.
While it may be argued that both processes involve altering the supreme law of the land, they have vastly different implications and consequences. The former involves undertaking a rigorous process of adding, altering, correcting, enhancing, or even abolishing one or more existing constitutional provisions to address identified shortcomings or evolving societal needs, while maintaining the integral structure of the Constitution. Conversely, the latter entails substituting the existing Constitution with an entirely new document.
Section 74 of the Constitution provides for the amendment of any of its provisions. These procedures are considerably more stringent than other legislative-making procedures. The rigorous procedure is deliberately imposed to shield the Constitution from the volatility of routine political dynamics and the potential for misuse by transient and populist majorities.
Strict procedures were established to ensure that all attempts to amend the Constitution are approached with great care, to prevent hastily executed amendments that could potentially introduce regressive amendments that would ultimately undermine its basic features.
The amendment procedure in section 74 is initiated by introducing a bill in the National Assembly and/or the National Council of Provinces.
Notably, on the plain reading of the text of the Constitution, any of its provisions may be amended, the only hurdle to conquer is to follow the prescribed procedure to satisfy the required majority stipulated in section 74. Section 167(4)(d) then confers upon the CC, as the custodian and guardian of the Constitution, the exclusive jurisdiction “to decide on the constitutionality of any constitutional amendment”.
The delegation of power to the CC to review the validity of constitutional amendments aims to ensure that the court can establish and ensure that following an amendment there will be a reasonable degree of continuity and stability within the legal and political system.
This implies that the power of the CC to determine the constitutionality of constitutional amendments extends beyond merely examining procedural aspects, it also encompasses scrutinising the substantive validity of amendments enacted.
This signifies that there might be a substantive limitation on parliament’s amending powers and introduces the basic structure doctrine phenomenon. This doctrine posits that the Constitution has certain implied and intrinsic characteristics that parliament cannot depart from — any proposed constitutional amendment deviating from this constitutional sub-structure is invalid despite procedural compliance with section 74.
The basic structure doctrine was approved by the supreme court of India in the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru v State Of Kerala and Anr in 1973, in response to the contentious relationship between the judiciary and parliament of India.
The court held that while the authority to amend the constitution rested with India’s parliament, like in South Africa’s case, this power cannot be exercised to temper the basic features of the constitution in a manner that would fundamentally change its essence or identity.
Hence, the Indian constitution has certain unwritten features that cannot be amended because such an amendment would strip the constitution of its identity and purpose. This legal doctrine reinforces the importance of maintaining constitutional continuity and serves as a bulwark against wholesale replacement or retrogressive constitutional changes.
Although the basic structure is yet to be fully established in the South African jurisprudence, as is the case in other jurisdictions, the CC has nevertheless recognised it. In Executive Council of the Western Cape Legislature v President of the Republic of South Africa the CC, in obiter, briefly contemplated whether the basic structure doctrine could apply in South Africa similar to India.
The CC adopted the stance that parliament cannot enact amendments that would fundamentally alter the features of our constitutional order, for instance, it is inconceivable that parliament through a procedural compliant manner can abolish itself. This reaffirms the imposition of a substantive constraint on parliament’s authority to amend the Constitution.
Merely asserting that parliament has complied with the prescribed procedures will not suffice to justify the removal of specific constitutional provisions, the CC, as empowered by section 167(4)(d), will also scrutinise the constitutional validity of such amendments. Similarly, in Premier of Kwazulu-Natal and Others v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others, the CC noted the basic structure doctrine, supporting the decision in Kesavananda Bharati, but decided not to make a ruling on the doctrine as the case before it did not involve amendments that could potentially undermine or abrogate the Constitution.
The CC held that the general rule is that constitutional amendments enacted by adhering to the special amendment procedures are “constitutionally unassailable”. Except for amendments that “radically and fundamentally restructure and reorganise the fundamental premises of the Constitution”, such changes “might not qualify as an ‘amendment’ at all”.
In the Certification of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, the CC identified the basic structure and premise of the South African Constitution, which is immutable and may not be altered or interfered with, whether by a dominant political party or a coalition of parties wielding their collective majority in parliament.
These fundamental features include:
the supremacy of the Constitution protected by an independent judiciary;
the rule of law;
the establishment of a democratic State founded on openness, accountability and equality; and
the separation of powers between the legislature, executive and judiciary.
This structure provided by the CC is built on the foundation of human dignity, equality and freedom. It is clear that this basic structure doctrine, while not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, is implicit in its design and interpretation and is a crucial safeguard against partisan interest and the enactment of retrogressive amendments that would undermine the essence of our constitutional order. This is not a radical departure from our jurisprudence as the CC has reiterated that constitutional provisions must be read textually, purposively and contextually.
Now turning to the decision of Makwanyane where the CC abolished the death penalty. It was held that this form of sanction is not an effective punishment for murderers, nor does it serve as a deterrent from committing such heinous crimes. Instead, the greatest deterrent to crime “is the likelihood that offenders will be apprehended, convicted and punished”, which the court noted to be lacking in the criminal justice system at the time judgment was made, and I argue that this deficiency persists even today and has exacerbated over time.
This decision was based on the rights to life and dignity which are of supreme importance in our Constitution. In addition, as the high court noted in Qozeleni v Minister of Law, our Constitution was enacted to address the “mischief” of the apartheid legal order and it must be interpreted against that background. Thus, reintroducing the death penalty through a constitutional amendment would be invalid because it would violate the right to life and dignity which have been upheld as “the most important of all human rights, and the source of all other personal rights”.
Given the fundamental and inviolable nature of these rights and the fact that they are intricately woven into the structure of our Constitution, amending them in pursuit of reinstating capital punishment would result in fundamentally altering or otherwise obliterating the basic structure of our Constitution, and would not be viewed favourably by the CC when it assesses the constitutional validity of such amendments, irrespective of whether the prescribed amendment procedures were adhered to.
The CC would assess the constitutional invalidity of these amendments in line with the basic structure doctrine, as they threaten the integrity and foundational values of the Constitution if passed. Such a proposed constitutional amendment would obliterate our Constitution which is a dignity-based Constitution in stark contrast to the apartheid laws.
Thus, there is little doubt that the CC would view such an amendment as unconstitutional. These kinds of amendments are regressive and driven by political expediency for short-term gains, rather than a genuine commitment to justice and the protection of human rights.
The process of amending the Constitution should be undertaken with the objective of preserving its basic elements structure intact. Put differently, although our Constitution permits for any of its provisions to be amended, the “old” Constitution must nevertheless be preserved even after amendments have been made to, not dismantle or nullify its foundational structure or framework.
These calls to overhaul or replace the Constitution seem to stem from the misconception that the document itself is inherently flawed, and no mention of the failures in its implementation or enforcement as the course of the state of affairs.
(source: Opinion; Sello Ivan Phahle is a legal adviser and analyst----Mail & Guardian)
***********************************************