[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----USA, MONT., MD., OHIO

[Rick Halperin]

April 29



USA:

Dueling justices on death penalty


Should interpreting the Constitution smack more of knight errantry than a
genuine search for the intent of its makers? That question was center
stage as Justice John Paul Stevens dueled with Justice Antonin Scalia in
Baze v. Rees (April 16, 2008) over the death penalty in a detour from
upholding the constitutionality of lethal injections. Justice Stevens
consulted his evolving moral compass (he had previously endorsed the death
penalty 32 years earlier in Gregg v. Georgia); and, his own experience,
i.e., 33 years sitting on the United States Supreme Court in sublime
tranquility where a falling pin can be heard. He concluded in the manner
of a papal encyclical that, "[T]he imposition of the death penalty
represents 'the pointless and needless extinction of life with only
marginal contributions to any discernable social or public purposes. A
penalty with such negligible returns to the state [is] patently excessive
and cruel and unusual punishment violative of the Eighth Amendment.' "

Justice Scalia assailed Justice Stevens' opinion with the ferocity of a
gladiator. He roared at Justice Stevens' for marginalizing or
subordinating all experience with the death penalty but his own, which
epitomizes a jurisprudence of idiosyncrasy: "The experience of the state
legislatures and the Congress  who retain the death penalty as a form of
punishment  is dismissed as 'the product of habit and inattention rather
than an acceptable deliberative process.' The experience of social
scientists whose studies indicate that the death penalty deters crime is
relegated to a footnote. The experience of fellow citizens who support the
death penalty is described, with only the most veiled condemnation, as
stemming from a thirst for vengeance.' " Justice Scalia underscored that
the Fifth Amendment expressly contemplates the death penalty by
prohibiting a deprivation of "life" without due process and requiring a
presentment or indictment by a grand jury to hold a person charged with a
capital crime. To interpret the Eighth Amendment to proscribe what the
Fifth Amendment permits is to make the Constitution war with itself and to
impute nonsense to its makers.

Justice Stevens sallied forth with an arsenal of additional sophistries.
He asserted the climb in statutes authorizing life imprisonment without
parole destroys the incapacitation rationale for the death penalty. But
life imprisonment may be foiled by escape. It does not foreclose murder of
a fellow inmate. In addition, the threat of a death sentence can elicit
cooperation from a co-conspirator implicated in murder. A lesser
punishment can be promised in exchange for state's evidence.

Justice Stevens harrumphed that a recent poll suggests public support for
the death penalty dips when life without the possibility of parole is
presented as an alternative option. Death penalty statutes will be
repealed, however, when they fail to reflect majority sentiments.
Moreover, no juror can be compelled to vote for death. Any juror who
believes life imprisonment with no parole is indistinguishable from
capital punishment can vote against death.

Justice Stevens disparages the absence of definitive proof that the death
penalty deters. But reciprocally there is no definitive proof that death
does not deter. A befuddling array of factors contributes to crime  for
example, age, education, income, employment and local culture. Every
methodology that has attempted to isolate the influence of capital
punishment has triggered criticism.

Where, as with the death penalty, the evidence is inconclusive, the high
court should not end more analysis and research by ipse dixit. Learned,
attentive and deliberate legislators could conclude that a penalty that
may save lives through deterrence is worth keeping until cogent evidence
discredits the possibility.

Justice Stevens' cerebral stumbles reach their apex in disputing the
retribution rationale for the death penalty. Court decrees interpreting
the Eighth Amendment have made executions less painful. Accordingly,
Justice Stevens maintains (without ever asking a single family of Timothy
McVeigh's Oklahoma City bombing victims), the retribution experienced by
the death penalty has been commensurately diminished, and can no longer
justify capital punishment. Only demands for retribution that can be
satiated by the rack and screw are cognizable under the Eight Amendment,
which itself forbids such barbarity!

Finally, Justice Stevens fretted that the innocent may be convicted in
capital cases in races to punish grisly crimes. Death prosecutions,
however, characteristically attract skilled defense counsel  especially on
appeal  and scrupulous scrutiny by the courts.

That explains why Justice Stevens did not cite a single instance where he
believed an innocent person had been executed. Further, changes of venue
to avoid a mob atmosphere and a higher required proof of guilt in death
cases adequately answer Justice Stevens' concern.

Republican presidential aspirant Sen. John McCain of Arizona applauds
Justice Scalia's modest view of judicial authority. Democratic
presidential candidates Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and New York Sen.
Hillary Clinton are electrified by Justice Stevens' moral sermonizing.
That oceanic divide should influence presidential balloting in November.
The next occupant of the White House can be expected to fill 1 or 2
Supreme Court seats and hundreds of subordinate federal judgeships.

(source: Commentary, Bruce Fein, who is a constitutional lawyer with Bruce
Fein & Associates and chairman of the American Freedom
Agenda----Washington Times)

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

Death penalty for rapists: IU legal experts available to speak about
Supreme Court case


Bloomington professors are available to discuss the recent U.S. Supreme
Court hearing to determine whether child rapists can receive the death
penalty. The case, Kennedy v. Louisiana, concerns an appeal by a man who
was sentenced to death after being convicted of raping his 8-year-old
stepdaughter. The Court heard arguments April 16 and is expected to rule
in June. It is the 1st death penalty case in more than 30 years for a
crime other than murder.

Craig Bradley, the Robert A. Lucas Professor of Law, noted that, in the
1977 case of Coker v. Georgia, the Court struck down the death penalty for
rape of 'an adult woman,' and, in the same year, Eberheart v. Georgia made
it clear that this included rapes in which severe injury was inflicted.
"While the Court did not mention the racial subtext of the case," Bradley
said, "there was no question that this decision was influenced by the fact
that black men in the South were frequently given the death penalty for
the rape of white women, but the death penalty was extremely rare for
other rapes. There was a further suspicion that many of these 'rapes' were
not really rapes at all. But the limitation of Coker's holding to 'adult
women' made it clear that the issue of child rape was reserved in that
case. That issue is now before us and, with the racial subtext no longer
as prominent, and, in any case, not as important as the fact that the
victim is a child, it would not be surprising to see the Court allow the
death penalty in this situation, especially if physical injury is
involved."

Bradley's teaching and research interests include constitutional law and
criminal law and procedure. A former clerk for Justice William H.
Rehnquist and assistant U.S. Attorney, he has worked extensively with
foreign legal systems, including as an Alexander von Humboldt Fellow at
the Max Planck Institute for Criminal Law in Germany and a Fulbright
Senior Fellow at Australian National University. He also lectured on
criminal law and procedure throughout South Africa as a guest of Rand
Afrikaans University in Johannesburg. His most recent books include
Criminal Procedure: A Worldwide Procedure and The Rehnquist Legacy.

Professor Jody Madeira said that, since Coker v. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme
Court has reserved the death penalty for those who take human life. "Over
time," she said, "the Court has increasingly restricted states' ability to
execute members of certain populations, most recently juvenile and
mentally retarded offenders. Though child rape is certainly among the most
heinous offenses, I believe that capital punishment should continue to be
applied only to offenses in which the victim is killed. Executing child
rapists may have serious adverse effects. Children are most likely to be
sexually assaulted by family members or friends, and extending the death
penalty to child rape may encourage family members to attempt to cover up
incidents of child rape to spare guilty relatives from execution. In
addition, child rapists may feel that they have little to lose by killing
their victims to protect their identity if both child rape and murder are
capital offenses."

Professor Madeira's research projects center upon the effects of capital
proceedings and sentences upon victims' families, the role of empathy in
personal injury litigation, and the impact of recent developments in
capital victims' services upon the relationship between victims' families
and the criminal justice system. Madeira is also a research associate at
the Capital Punishment Research Initiative at the School of Criminal
Justice, University at Albany, State University of New York.

Her current book project explores the ways in which victims' families and
survivors came to comprehend and cope with the Oklahoma City bombing
through membership in community groups as well as through attendance and
participation in Timothy McVeigh's prosecution and execution.

(source: News Info--Indiana University)






MONTANA:

Death penalty discussed in Billings


The Justice and the Death Penalty tour is stopping off in the Magic City
on Tuesday.

Coming up and Noon at MSU-Billings, and again at 6:00 p.m. at the Best
Western Clocktower Inn, you can attend a lecture about the death penalty.

One of the speakers is the mother of a murdered child, and the other is
Ron Keine, who was on death row for a crime he didn't commit, and then was
exonerated.

Keine explains that he's tyring "to put a human face on it...let people
understand you're not killing a statistic, you're killing a
flesh-and-blood human being."

(source: KPAX TV News)






MARYLAND:

Baltimore seeks death penalty for inmate in prison-bus slaying


Baltimore County prosecutors are still seeking the death penalty for the
prisoner accused of strangling another inmate aboard a prison bus, despite
a temporary ban on executions in the state.

Kevin Gregory Johns, 25, whose trial opens in Harford County on Monday, is
charged with strangling Philip Eugene Parker on a prison bus carrying
dozens of inmates from Hagerstown to Baltimore on Feb. 2, 2005.

Parker, 20, had testified on Johns behalf in a 2004 case in which Johns
was convicted of killing his 16-year-old cellmate.

Johns attorneys had tried to keep prosecutors from seeking the death
penalty because of a Maryland Court of Appeals ruling in December 2006
halting executions until the lethal injection process could be reviewed
and refined.

"Theres a de facto moratorium because there's no method of execution, but
that doesnt keep prosecutors from seeking the death penalty," said Jane
Henderson, executive director of Maryland Citizens Against State
Executions.

"The death penalty is still on the books in the state of Maryland,"
Harford Circuit Judge Emery Plitt said. "It is merely the procedural
aspects of it which are, in practical terms, on hold.'"

Johns' attorneys have entered a plea of "not criminally responsible" by
reason of insanity. Using doctors' evaluations and medical records, the
attorneys appeared to be making a case that extensive lead poisoning
diminished Johns mental abilities.

"That will be one small part of it," said Harry Trainor, an Annapolis
lawyer representing Johns. "It's up to the state to show what happened on
that bus, and we will go forward with evidence of any mental defect or
disorder he was suffering from at the relevant time."

Johns, who also had been convicted in 2002 of killing his uncle, claimed
that Satan played a part in both of his previous murders.

He wrote Plitt a letter in July 2006 disavowing his lawyers, then
insisting in a lengthy postscript that he would never get a fair trial in
Harford County because of his background.

The judge granted a request to move the trial from Baltimore County to
Harford.

5 prisoners await execution in Maryland.

(source: Baltimore Examiner)






OHIO:

Death Penalty Delays


2 men convicted of multiple murders may benefit from Ohio officials' slow
return to executions after a U.S. Supreme Court decision ended a
seven-month national moratorium on killing inmates.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court decided April 16 to allow Kentucky's lethal
injection process that is similar to the one used in Ohio, Texas and a few
other states already have scheduled executions. But Ohio has not set any
execution dates yet, and top officials have made no public requests for
quick action. And Ohio's lethal injection procedure still is being
challenged in a lawsuit, based on the premise that the lethal injection
drug cocktail  the sole means of execution in Ohio since 2001  could be
considered "cruel and unusual punishment" if anesthetics are improperly
administered.

These legal delays may buy more time for 2 inmates from Belmont County on
death row, who are continuing their years-long appeals processes in
attempts to circumvent their respective death sentences.

Nawaz Ahmed, 53, was convicted in the slayings of his estranged wife, Dr.
Lubaina Bhatti, 39; her 35-year-old sister, Ruhie Ahmed; her 78-year-old
father, Abdul Majid Bhatti' and 2-year-old niece, Nasira Ahmed, at her
rented St. Clairsville home on Sept. 11, 1999. All the victims' throats
were slashed and they suffered head trauma.

Nawaz Ahmed was arrested in New York City just before he could board a
flight to his native Pakistan. He had left his 2 sons in the custody of
strangers.

Ahmed was sentenced to death in February 2001. From his indictment on Oct.
7, 1999, and continuing through his trial, Ahmed filed multiple motions on
his own behalf and argued with his legal counsel. He fired one defender
and attempted to dismiss a second court-appointed defense team, apparently
as part of an attempt to avoid carrying out his death sentence.

In documents acquired from the Ohio Supreme Court and 7th District Court
of Appeals, Ahmed argued in his 2006 appeal there were "6 assignments of
error" related to his trial. One of the alleged errors Ahmed cited was
Belmont County Common Pleas Court's failure to provide resources to
determine his competency and stated he was incompetent during the trial.
To support his claim, Ahmed attached various documents and motions he
filed and reported he was experiencing vertigo and bouts of confusion.

That claim was raised in his direct appeal as well, where the Ohio Supreme
Court found it to be without merit.

He also was slated to appear this month before the U.S. District Court in
Columbus, which was to consider his habeas corpus request  a measure that
asks the federal court to release an inmate based on "significant
constitutional error."

Donald "Duke" Palmer, 43, was convicted of the May 8, 1989, shooting
murders of Charles Sponhaltz and Steven Vargo in November 1989. In that
case, Sponhaltz's car and the vehicle Palmer was riding in collided.
According to documents filed with the Ohio Attorney General's Office,
Palmer got out of the car and shot Sponhaltz in the head 2 times.

Vargo, a passing motorist who was in the wrong place at the wrong time,
stopped at the scene and exited his vehicle. Palmer then shot him twice in
the head and subsequently confessed to police.

Palmer has since exhausted all appeals at the state level and is currently
seeking a review of the U.S. District Court decision of his writ of habeas
corpus.

Belmont County Prosecutor Christopher Berhalter said the question of
lethal injection being "cruel and unusual" should not interfere with the 2
death penalty cases that originated in his county.

"Those cases could still proceed, whether based on state constitutional
claims or if based on different issues than were addressed in the U.S.
Supreme Court," he said. "If it is determined the method of carrying out
the sentence that has been imposed is unconstitutional, the state may need
to look at different means."

On average, a death row inmate in Ohio will spend about 14 years in prison
before his or her sentence is carried out. The state has executed 26
inmates since it resumed putting prisoners to death in 1999.

(source: The Intelligencer)

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

Man's search finds father on death row----Although he thought worst at
first, George Skatzes' son says his dad is innocent


Sean Baker felt out of place his entire life.

He always knew he had been adopted when he was 9 months old. He knew he
was born at Marion General Hospital and he knew he had brothers and
sisters.

"I was raised up with the whole thing. I always knew (I was adopted),"
said Baker, now 41 and an over-the-road truck driver living in Henderson,
Ky. When he turned 18, he took the little information he had and began
searching. "I've been looking off and on for all these years."

He had little luck, however, until late December when he posted an online
plea on the State of Ohio adoption registry Web site seeking information
on his family. Within weeks he located a sister, then a brother, who had
also been adopted. He later located an aunt and several more siblings.

While Baker had finally had found what he was looking for, he was
disturbed to learn his father is a convicted murderer - sentenced to be
executed by lethal injection for his role in the 1993 Lucasville riots at
the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility.

"I'm not going to lie about it, I thought the worst when I first thought
of it," Baker said of his birth father, George Skatzes. Having looked for
so many years, however, he decided he at least wanted to make contact - a
choice that changed his life. "Dad's totally different than what people
see of him. There's still a lot of good in Dad and people need to see
that."

Skatzes was convicted in 1983 in Montgomery County on a charge of
aggravated murder and was sentenced to serve life in prison. Then on April
11, 1993, inmates on the L block where he was housed rioted and took
control of the block, taking 8 corrections officers hostage. By the time
the siege was over 11 days later, 10 people, including 1 corrections
officer, were killed.

In 1996, Skatzes was convicted for his role in the incident in which he
allegedly acted as a leader, participating in negotiations with
authorities and giving a live radio broadcast from the prison. He was
convicted in the murders of Corrections Officer Robert Vallandingham and
inmates Earl Elder and David Sommers.

Skatzes has denied involvement in the riots, saying rather that he
attempted to help end the siege and protect the corrections officers.

"I became a spokesman with high hopes of bringing the situation to a
peaceful ending ... I saved lives in that riot, but you will not hear much
about it," Skatzes states in a blog on his family's Web site. "The powers
that be used every dirty trick and pressure tactics to gain a conviction
for all the above mentioned crimes."

Skatzes' conviction was upheld in the 7-0 decision by the Supreme Court of
Ohio issued in March, 2005.

"The Lucasville riot was an all-together ugly affair; a public display of
the worst humankind has to offer. It took months to clean up the shattered
cellblock; so far it's taken considerably longer to clear up the ensuing
criminal prosecutions," Justice Paul Pfeifer wrote in the decision. "With
our decision in this case, George Skatzes joins the others - including
Robb and Sanders - who have been convicted for their part in Ohio's
deadliest prison riot."

Ohio Attorney General information lists one further appeal is currently
pending for Skatzes.

For years his Marion family members, as well as a number of defense
attorneys, have proclaimed his innocence in the incident.

"My goal these last few years is to prove his innocence and to get him
home," said Jackie Bowers, Skatzes' sister. "He's not the monster that the
state portrayed him to be. He's a human being like the rest of us."

Skatzes' son, Joe Skatzes, said he also believes in his father's innocence
and that what has happened to his father scares him.

"I'm glad I'm on the right side of the law," he said. "My Dad's not going
to be up for any father of the year award, but those people were just
looking for revenge. They weren't looking for justice."

Baker agrees and said his father was railroaded by other inmates who were
responsible for the crimes. Their statements, he said, were full of lies
that helped ensure his father's conviction and their own safety and
eventual parole.

Since first making contact in January by mail, Baker and his father have
been writing one another every week and talking by telephone. When Baker
celebrated his 41st birthday in February, he received his first birthday
card ever from his father.

On March 29, Baker met his father for the first time, having made the trip
from Kentucky to the Richland County Correctional Facility in Mansfield
where Skatzes is being held. He described the moment, which he had waited
more than 40 years for, as "freaking awesome."

"We latched on to each other for 20 minutes," he said, explaining the only
contact he had with Skatzes was between bars. "The macho-man went out of
him that day."

The meeting also gave Baker a chance to ask his father face-to-face many
hard questions that had been pressing on him for years - how he ended up
being adopted and if Skatzes had ever searched for him.

"He was 21 years old when I was born. Dad was in his rowdy days, not
wanting to settle down," he said. "Things just didn't work out the way
they were supposed to."

Skatzes had attempted to look for his son, but was told he had been
adopted by a police officer, which was false. Baker said being a convicted
murderer, Skatzes thought there was no way an officer would allow him to
make contact and thought there was little chance his son would accept him.

Baker said with four children of his own, he can understand his father's
position. He said he holds no grudge for what happened and is only happy
he finally found his family.

"I forgive him. Even before I even got there I forgave him," he said.
"It's totally opposite of what some (adopted) people go through. It put a
lot of peace in my life."

Baker plans to change is name legally to George Skatzes Jr. His friends
and new-found family, who he said have remained supportive throughout his
search, have already begun calling him "George."

Without that support, Baker said, the process would have been much harder.

(My fiancee is ) very supportive," Baker said. "She's been very happy
through the whole thing."

While finding his family may have brought his closure in one area of his
life, it has also given Baker a new challenge - to prove his father's
innocence.

"My goal is to get him home. If we don't get Dad free, his next step is a
needle," he said. "I just want to get people thinking about (his case). I
just love him, that's all."

(source: The Marion Star)