Feb. 22
TEXAS:
Oral arguments denied in Larry Swearingen request for DNA testing
Death row inmate Larry Swearingen's request for additional DNA testing of
evidence he believes could exonerate him in the 1998 rape and murder of college
student Melissa Trotter is once again under consideration by the Court of
Criminal Appeals.
The court declined to hear oral arguments in a Jan. 9 notice to attorneys, but
the case was submitted to the court Jan. 21.
Swearingen, who was sentenced to death for capital murder July 11, 2000, wants
testing of Trotter's sexual assault collection kit; hairs recovered from her
body, the gloves used to move her body and a hairbrush found on the ground near
her body; all hairs collected from her clothing; the ligature and the pantyhose
used to strangle Trotter, among other evidence his appellate attorneys believe
contain biological evidence that has not been tested.
Trotter was last seen leaving the Montgomery College (now Lone Star College)
campus on Dec. 8, 1998. Her body was found by hunters in the Sam Houston
National Forest Jan. 2, 1999, north of Lake Conroe.
Judge Kelly Case, of the 9th state District Court in Montgomery Count, has
granted a 5th motion requesting DNA testing, even though prosecutors and
Swearingen's attorneys dispute whether the latest request is a supplement to
the 4th motion or a new request, since it calls for testing of additional
materials.
4 scheduled execution orders have either been halted or vacated by the
Montgomery County trial court and appeals courts since 2007.
Swearingen's 1st execution date was set for Jan. 24, 2007, then stayed by the
CCA for the trial court to resolve fact issues. A 2nd execution date was set
for Jan. 27, 2009, but the CCA again stayed the execution for further review.
A 3rd execution was stayed July 28, 2011, and the most recent order for Feb.
27, 2013, was struck by Case to allow for more DNA testing.
During the previous legislative session in 2013, Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston,
proposed a bill passed by lawmakers mandating DNA testing for all biological
evidence in death penalty cases.
But a CCA decision last year denying DNA testing in the Swearingen case - on
the basis he could not prove the existence of biological material that could
exonerate him - has led to an effort by Ellis to clarify language in the law.
In the 84th Legislature, Ellis has filed Senate Bill 487, which seeks to expand
the access to DNA testing by allowing courts to grant DNA testing that has a
"reasonable likelihood" of containing biological material that is not apparent
to the naked eye, as opposed to having to prove exculpatory results of testing
would cause a different outcome in light of overwhelming evidence showing
guilt.
The bill was filed earlier this month, after the CCA declined to hear oral
arguments on the DNA testing issue.
Montgomery County District Attorney Brett Ligon said he does have some concerns
about some of the specific language of SB 487, but Ligon said he would reserve
further comment until he and Ellis discuss the bill in person, which he
anticipates happening in the near future.
Assistant District Attorney Bill Delmore added that Ligon is appreciative of
Ellis being willing to consider the concerns of the D.A.'s Office regarding
potential effects of the bill.
Ellis said at a press conference earlier this month that the proposed bill is
about making sure the right person is convicted and making sure communities are
safe. Ellis added that he believes the changes are simple and would "provide
the courts with the clear guidance that they have asked for."
Swearingen's request for DNA testing focuses on 2 primary issues - the
appropriate burden of proof in seeking testing under the amended law concerning
post-conviction DNA evidence; and whether the evidence in the record, including
photographs, police reports, criminal laboratory results and expert testimony
showing the existence of biological materials, is sufficient to prove that such
materials exist.
James Rytting, an appellate attorney for Swearingen, said the CCA will have to
heavily consider possible legislative action with the DNA testing request in
the court's hands.
"The Legislature is about to react to the (2014 CCA) Swearingen decision,"
Rytting said. "The courts are supposed to interpret the laws as lawmakers pass
them. And here we have a piece of legislation that clearly says they violated
the spirit of the law and what the Legislature was trying to do. And now they
have to go back and fix it. I think the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
understands that. The Legislature is basically saying they have interpreted
this statute far too narrowly and now they've got to basically overturn the
Swearingen decision in order to do what they originally were planning to do,
which was make sure that people, where there is testable DNA that could show a
client is innocent, gets tested rather than road blocked. That's what that bill
is about."
During a phone interview with The Courier Dec. 29, 2014, Trotter's parents,
Charles and Sandy Trotter, expressed frustration with Case's decision to stall
Swearingen's execution date to allow for more DNA testing.
Like Montgomery County prosecutors, the Trotter family views the move as a
delay tactic designed to distort facts of the case.
Their family still grieves more than 16 years later, and Charles Trotter said
there is not a day that goes by without thinking of Melissa, who died at age 19
- whether they would have more grandchildren and the memories they have missed
out on.
"We would just like to have some closure with this," Melissa's mother Sandy
Trotter said. "With this case not resolved, you've got all of this unfinished
business lingering in your mind. You're not really able to totally move forward
and remember all of the good things because all of this is lingering."
(source: yourhoustonnews.com)
*********************
Man accused of killing 2 sons sent photo of baby boy hanging from rope
A Texas man accused of killing his 2 sons sent their mother a series of
gruesome text messages, including a picture of 1 boy hanging with a rope around
his neck.
The photos were sent just hours before he strangled them, prosecutors said in a
Texas court.
The man, 32-year-old Gabriel Armandariz, is on trial for capital murder,
accused of killing sons Luke, 8 months, and Gatlin, 2, on April 13, 2011.
Prosecutors say he hid their bodies in a space underneath the house they shared
with relatives in Graham, in north central Texas. Police searched the house for
several hours before they found the bodies.
NY Daily News reports Armandariz sent his ex-girlfriend Lauren Smith, who lived
in Sudan, northwest of Lubbock, a text hours before the murders. It read: "I
commend the spirits of these 2 boys to the Lord. I would much rather be with
them than to be out partying with friends."
Another said: "Look, I'm trying to offer you another opportunity to see our
children. But as usual you would much rather be with your friends."
Mr Armandariz then sent a picture of their 8-month-old baby Luke hanging from a
closet ceiling with what appeared to be a rope around the neck, prosecutors
said.
He also took a photo between the 2 boys before they were killed on a bed. The
caption read, "We love u, goodbye."
Texts sent to Mr Armandariz's phone by Ms Smith suggest she believed she was
talking to a woman whom Armandariz was seeing at the time. One of the texts
read: "If I were you I'd get the hell away from him. Looks can be deceiving."
According to the Graham Leader, Mr Armandariz called Ms Smith to confess to the
murders 10 hours before police found the boys??? bodies. He claimed his
ex-girlfriend made him do it.
Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty.
(source: news.com.au)
*****************************
Family of Death Row prisoner Rodney Reed beg for his freedom
With less than 2 weeks until the scheduled execution of prisoner Rodney Reed,
people from all over the nation are joining together to fight for his freedom.
Saturday afternoon Reed's family made another plea to Gov. Greg Abbott to stay
the execution.
"It's took'en 18 years, but we haven't slacked up one bit. We're here till the
end," said Rodrick Reed, Rodney's brother.
The Reed family said it's time for Rodney to come home.
"My heart breaks every day. Every morning I wake up and I know where he's at
and I can't be there to hug him, to hold him, to tell him I love him, you know
what I mean. My heart breaks every day. Until he gets home, my heart will break
every day," said Rodrick.
In 1996 Bastrop teen Stacey Stites' body was found by the side of the road.
Evidence showed Stites was raped and killed by strangulation. 2 years later,
Rodney was sentenced to death for the crime, but his legal team said new
evidence shows the jury got it wrong.
Now, less than 2 weeks from Rodney's scheduled execution, his family and
supporters are making 1 final push to get the case reopened.
"I feel that justice will prevail in the end. I don't think that they'll be
able to execute my brother based on all the new evidence that has come up,"
said Rodrick.
Rodney's legal team said new evidence shows Reed and Stites were in a
relationship. Lawyers for Reed say DNA will show that Rodney did not sexually
assault Stites and that at the time of her death she was with her fiancee not
with Rodney.
"Test all DNA, you know what I mean, and give us a fair trial. That's all I'm
asking," said Rodrick.
The Reed family said the real killer was Jimmy Fennel, Stites' fiancee at the
time of her death. Fennel went on to become a Georgetown police officer, but
was sent to prison in 2008 for sexually assaulting a woman while on duty.
"We're going to stay strong. We're going to stay positive. That's the only way
we can think. That's only way we can be. Anything else is out of the question,"
said Rodrick.
Its cases like Rodney's that made former north Texas District Attorney Tim Cole
rethink the death penalty altogether.
"Because we can't do it perfectly. That means we're going to execute somebody,
or have executed somebody, who was innocent," said Cole.
Cole said it's important to look at all DNA evidence introduced, even if it's
found after sentencing.
"If we are going to keep the death penalty, we have to make sure that the
people who we are executing are indeed guilty," said Cole.
As for Rodney, his fate sits in the hands of Gov. Greg Abbott, one of the only
people who can stop the execution.
"I'm asking Governor Abbott to just look into his heart and just do the right
thing," said Sandra Reed, Rodney's mother.
Saturday, protestors once again begged Abbott to look into the case because
they fear time is running out.
Stacy Stites' sister Debra Oliver told FOX 7 last month that she believes "...
Rodney Reed was the right person and he committed this crime." Reed's attorney
has also filed a petition with the Board of Pardons and Paroles seeking a
change in sentence from death to life. That board votes and delivers their
recommendation to the governor.
(source: myfoxaustin.com)
PENNSYLVANIA:
Governor's death penalty moratorium violates oath of office
As a result of Gov. Tom Wolf's recent action on the death penalty, 186 people
are celebrating. These 186 people are the worst people in the state.
Each has been convicted of the willful taking of at least 1 innocent life. But
they are not just murderers. To be eligible for the death penalty, the murder
must have aggravating circumstances: These most often involve killing a child
or a police officer; raping and/or torturing a victim; killing more than one
victim; or committing a prior murder.
Each then was sentenced unanimously to death by a jury after yet another
proceeding in which the defense can, for the most part, present almost anything
it chooses to introduce.
One of those celebrating is Landon May. May broke into a home in the middle of
the night. He duct-taped, then tortured, the homeowners, stabbing, beating and
shooting them. Terry Smith succumbed to his multiple wounds first. Lucy Smith
was not so lucky. She fought for her life and suffered at least 147 separate
wounds. May then sexually assaulted her prior to smothering her.
He confessed, there was a mountain of corroboration, and we found his DNA in
the sperm he left inside Lucy Smith.
May was also convicted of a number of serious offenses prior to this horrific
case, including shooting a man in the neck at random just for fun.
There is another group affected by the governor's act: the families of the
victims. Their immeasurable wounds have just been needlessly ripped open. The
families, who have suffered through the judicial process they trusted and want
nothing but justice and truth in sentencing, have been thunderstruck by this
unprecedented and unnecessary evisceration of the law, the courts, the juries
and the entire system. The governor gave no warning, and the families he says
he cares about are suffering because of him.
We prosecutors take no pleasure in seeking death. It is the most solemn
decision. We do so in appropriate cases because we took an oath to follow the
laws of the state. The governor took that same oath but has ignored the law,
the constitution and his chief responsibility to execute the laws of this
state. No one, including the governor, has the right to nullify a jury's
unanimous verdict or to silence those very crime victims and their families who
have suffered so much.
The Legislature makes the laws. The courts decide if they are constitutional.
The executive carries them out. The governor has managed to trample on all of
the above. He has ignored the law, the countless appellate courts that have
upheld the law, and subverted his duties for his own personal and/or political
agenda.
More troubling is that he does not have the authority. A Pennsylvania governor
cannot lawfully issue a moratorium. He has called it a "reprieve" in a twisted
effort to comply with the law. A reprieve, however, is merely temporary relief
in a specific case for a specific legal event to take place; it is not a
blanket moratorium.
The governor can issue a pardon, a reprieve as above, or he can bring the issue
to a public debate in the Legislature. Open discussion should take place.
Unlawful edicts should not. He was elected governor, not king.
The punishment should fit the crime, and there simply are some crimes for which
the only remedy is the ultimate penalty. That decision should remain with the
juries and the courts.
We meet with each family prior to pursuing the death penalty. They have no
illusions as to the protracted appellate process we face if the sentence is
death. Their input is critical, and I have never pursued a death verdict when a
family is opposed and/or simply wants to avoid the appeals. Thus, each family
affected by this moratorium knew what to expect. By this act, the governor has
caused them more pain and shattered any remaining vestige of truth in
sentencing.
The system is indeed flawed, as the governor says. However, the main flaw is
that the federal defenders association has, in essence, taken the appeals
process hostage with a virtually endless supply of taxpayer money and resources
dedicated to overturning every sentence. I believe in a robust appellate
process, particularly in death-penalty cases, but it should not be boundless.
The fact the governor fails to mention the well-documented abuses of the
federal defenders described by Chief Justice Ronald Castille reveals how
closed-minded he is on the issue. So closed-minded, in fact, that he refused to
meet with our bipartisan state prosecutors' association to discuss this very
issue.
The governor has demonstrated a severe lack of understanding of and concern for
the issues involved, as well as for the devastating consequences of his actions
on the most solemn process in our system and on the families of the victims.
Those victims were forever taken from us without the ability to appeal their
sentence.
I welcome open debate on the issue and remain sworn to uphold the laws the
Legislature duly passes. I call upon the governor to do the same.
(source: Commentary; Craig Stedman is Lancaster County's district
attorney----Lancasteronline.com)
************************
Our state doesn't need to rely on execution, and it shouldn't
Last week, Gov. Tom Wolf made a bold decision to grant a temporary reprieve to
inmate Terrance Williams, who was scheduled to be executed on March 4. The
governor vowed to grant other reprieves, in effect declaring a moratorium on
executions in Pennsylvania.
Williams would have been the 1st "involuntary" execution in Pennsylvania since
1978. 3 others who waived their appeals have died by lethal injection since
then, the last in 1999. Currently, about 200 people sit on Pennsylvania's death
row.
These inmates are convicted of serious and violent criminal acts. They deserve
severe punishment for their crimes; but we must ask ourselves, is it necessary
for us to put them to death?
The Pennsylvania Catholic Conference has long opposed the death penalty. The
Catholic Church is committed to upholding the dignity and sanctity of every
human life - even the life of a person convicted of a most heinous crime. Our
Christian faith calls all people to grow in respect for human life and to
oppose the death penalty in our modern society.
In "Living the Gospel of Life," the Catholic Bishops of the United States
affirmed, "Our witness to respect for life shines most brightly when we demand
respect for each and every human life, including the lives of those who fail to
show that respect for others. The antidote to violence is love, not more
violence."
Catholic opposition to the use of the death penalty should not be construed as
a lack of compassion for those who have been affected by violent crime. People
convicted of capital offenses must be punished effectively and appropriately
for their crimes. Family and friends of victims, and society as a whole, demand
this; but can true emotional, spiritual and even physical healing be found in
vengeance?
Governmental authority has the right and duty to assure the safety of society,
and to punish criminals by means of suitable penalties. Keeping the peace could
require the imposition of the death penalty if this is the only possible way of
effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor. If, however,
nonlethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety, the
authority should limit itself to such means.
Our society can appropriately punish without having to rely on execution. We
can imprison and isolate offenders to promote the safety of citizens,
correctional officers and other inmates. The finality of a life sentence
without the possibility of parole, as opposed to decades of drawn out appeals
and hearings, could help to release victims' families to begin their healing.
Further, a life sentence gives the inmate time to focus on repenting of his
crime instead of mounting his next appeal.
Some say that the possibility of the death penalty acts as a deterrent. Studies
comparing murder rates in states that have the death penalty with states that
do not conclude that the death penalty has no effect in dissuading murder. In
fact, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, the murder rate in
states that do not have the death penalty is consistently lower than states
that do.
Nationwide, 150 people have been exonerated from death row, including six in
Pennsylvania. As Bishop Ronald Gainer of Harrisburg has said, this is too many
to "pretend that our criminal system is so precise and exact and just that we
can be confident with the sentence of the death penalty."
A few years ago, the world watched as the families of the Amish students in
Nickel Mines, Lancaster County, demonstrated profound forgiveness by supporting
the widow of the man who murdered their children. They taught us that peace is
not separate from the demands of justice, but it is fostered by mercy and love.
The Task Force and Advisory Commission on Capital Punishment, established in
2011, will soon release its findings on the practice in Pennsylvania. Whether
it recommends abolishing the death penalty or not, it will likely confirm that
our current system of state sponsored executions is flawed, ineffective, unjust
and expensive.
The death penalty creates a potentially greater harm to society by reinforcing
the idea that violence is a solution to society's problems. The death penalty
will not eradicate violent crime any more than abortion is a solution to
unwanted pregnancy.
We, the people of Pennsylvania, have the power to abolish the death penalty and
reinforce a modern penal system that provides alternatives to taking the lives
of the guilty.
Punishment should reflect our belief in the inherent human dignity of each
person, and taking a life to avenge the death of another does not create a
culture of life.
The death penalty isn't necessary. We can do better.
(source: Commentary; Amy B. Hill is director of communications for the
Pennsylvania Catholic Conference, the public affairs agency of Pennsylvania's
Catholic bishops and the Catholic dioceses of
Pennsylvania----Lancasteronline.com)
*******************************
Suspend, then end, death penalty
Newly elected Gov. Tom Wolf cited the close calls of death row inmate Harold
Wilson last Friday, Feb. 13, when he imposed a moratorium on Pennsylvania's
death penalty. Twice, Wolf pointed out, Wilson was nearly executed, yet
eventually he was exonerated. Wilson's brushes with unjustified death are the
strongest reason to suspend, if not end, capital punishment altogether. But
Wolf offered other compelling arguments in his statement, clearly outlining how
Pennsylvania will save both lives and money by suspending it.
The death penalty, Wolf said, is "error-prone, expensive and anything but
infallible," all points this newspaper has made in numerous editorials arguing
against it. Some examples:
Error-prone. Not long ago in Ohio, the 1st execution in years took place, but
putting Dennis McGuire to death took an excruciating 25 minutes, far longer
than the usual lethal injection. McGuire's family asserted the grisly death
amounted to cruel and unusual punishment. They have sued.
Expensive. The governor quoted a Reading Eagle analysis that estimated death
penalty cases have cost taxpayers at least $315 million, thanks in part to the
often decades-long appeals process.
Anything but infallible. Wolf noted that 150 people have been exonerated from
death row, 5 others besides Wilson in Pennsylvania. One had served 21 years
before being exonerated by DNA evidence.
Wolf also cited numerous studies that challenge the "accuracy, and fundamental
fairness, of Pennsylvania's capital sentencing system," studies that suggest a
person is more likely to be charged with a capital offense and sentenced to
death if he is poor or a minority - and that the odds rise further if the
victim was Caucasian.
Wolf's decision was not unilateral. He was acting on a 2 1/2-year-old request
by the bipartisan Pennsylvania Task Force and Advisory Committee on Capital
Punishment. The task force is studying the effectiveness of the death penalty
in Pennsylvania and plans to make recommendations, and in 2012 asked former
Gov. Tom Corbett to suspend executions until it concluded its study and report.
Gov. Wolf acknowledged his responsibility to victims of violent crimes and the
feelings of family members and friends. But, he said, the justice system also
has an obligation to make sure every defendant has appropriate counsel
throughout the process, that the sentence is fair and proportional and that
there is no risk of executing an innocent person. Only then will Pennsylvania
achieve its goal of equal justice for all.
(source: Editorial, Pocono Record)
****************
Pennsylvania's flawed death penalty system in need of a fix
What good is a death penalty system that, in Pennsylvania's case, might more
accurately be called the "We Never Kill Motel"?
Not funny. Not intended to be.
The inability to enforce the state's death-penalty law stands in stark contrast
to the brutality of crimes that causes reasonable people to support capital
punishment. In declaring a so-called moratorium on executions in Pennsylvania,
Gov. Tom Wolf was true to his campaign pledge, and, we suspect, his own moral
compass.
But that's not his job.
Last week Wolf issued a temporary reprieve for a death-row inmate whose
execution was scheduled for March. That's far from a stay of all executions;
governors don't have that power. Wolf is buying time until a Senate task force
studying the death penalty returns with its findings -- hopefully soon, and
hopefully with some clarity on how to disentangle a system that has managed 3
executions in 20 years. Pennsylvania's death row houses 186 convicted killers,
4th most in the U.S.
The easiest way to eliminate endless appeals, lingering uncertainty about guilt
and moral ambiguity is to eliminate the death penalty altogether. New Jersey
and several other states have taken this route. Last week U.S. Attorney General
Eric Holder called for a national moratorium on lethal injection until the U.S.
Supreme Court reviews a suit brought by death row inmates in Oklahoma.
That's not his job, either.
We respect the view of those who believe the state should not be in the
business of killing. When you couple that with the tragedy of killing people
for crimes they did not commit or who lacked competent counsel -- well, the
government can't undo its own wrongful killings. The advent of DNA evidence and
other scientific advances has led to the exoneration of 150 "convicted killers"
across the nation, some posthumously. That remains the most powerful argument
against capital punishment.
But those same advances allow for a higher degree of certainty of guilt in
contested cases, and in other cases, there simply is no doubt. Truly heinous
killings in which there is no question of guilt -- think Timothy McVeigh in the
Oklahoma City bombing, or closer to home, Martin Appel in the cold-blooded
killing of three in an East Allen Township bank -- should be subject to the
ultimate punishment. (Appel is among those whose death sentence was overturned
and converted to life on appeal.) Eric Frein, assuming he is convicted and
proven to be of sound mind, should face the same fate for the sniping death of
a Pennsylvania state trooper.
It's unlikely the Legislature is going reverse its support for the death
penalty. Yet Pennsylvania doesn't have a death penalty. It has a Byzantine
system that bills the taxpayer much more than a life-in-prison maximum would
cost. It frustrates the families of the victims and mocks the intent and
delivery of the law.
We can't fault Wolf for wanting some clarity from a legislative investigation.
No matter how anyone feels about the death penalty, the choices are to fix it
or get rid of it.
(source: Editorial, Lehighvalleylive.com)
INDIANA:
Ruling: Clark County court correct in conviction
The Indiana Supreme Court ruled this week to uphold a 2013 conviction in a
death penalty case held in Clark County Circuit Court No. 1.
The supreme court reviewed the case, which involves Jeffrey Weisheit,
Evansville, setting fire to a home in 2010 while his girlfriend's 2 children, 5
and 7 years old, were inside.
The children did not escape the home and died as a result of the blaze, and
Weisheit was subsequently charged with 2 counts of murder and 2 class A felony
arson counts.
The Vanderburgh County case was held in Clark County because of the media
attention it had garnered in the Evansville area and was presided over by
then-Judge Dan Moore. During the trial's sentencing hearing, then-Clark County
Sheriff Danny Rodden informed Weisheit that he was sentenced to death. In
Indiana, a death penalty sentence results in an automatic appeal to the state's
highest court.
The appeal claims the court erroneously ruled on 8 separate issues. According
to the court's ruling, those issues included the exclusion of testimony;
insufficient evidence; a tainted jury pool; lack of suppression of statements
made to investigators; and the lack of proper consideration to mitigating
circumstances.
The supreme court judges considered each of the issues and drafted, at the
conclusion of its 25-page response to Weisheit's appeal, " ... we affirm
Weisheit's convictions for murder and arson resulting in serious bodily injury
and his death sentence."
Moore was reached by phone Friday, but said it would be inappropriate for him
to comment on the court???s ruling at this time because he had presided over
the trial.
A call to the Office of the Vanderburgh County Prosecutor was not returned
before press time.
(source: News and Tribune)
ARKANSAS:
Justices hear arguments on lethal injection law
A case that examines whether a 2013 law gives the state's correction department
too much authority in setting lethal-injection protocol is now before the
Arkansas Supreme Court.
The court on Thursday heard oral arguments from an assistant state attorney
general and a lawyer representing nine death-row inmates.
Pulaski County Judge Wendell Griffen last year put lethal injections on hold in
the state. He said the law stipulating the department use a barbiturate wasn't
adequate and gave the department too much leeway to decide what drugs to use
and how they should be administered.
The ruling is a response to a 2013 lawsuit by the 9 death-row inmates who
challenged the latest rewrite of the Method of Execution Act, which replaced
the electric chair with lethal injection in 1983.
Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Merritt said during oral arguments that the
law provides "sufficient guidance" to prison officials.
Josh Lee, the inmates' public defender, said that the statute also allows the
correction department to decide whether medical personnel should be present at
an execution.
"What the General Assembly has said is, 'We can have a quick and painless
death, or a slow and agonizing death. Department of Correction, it's up to
you,'" Lee said.
He also said in an email after the hearing that "This case is really not about
the death penalty. It is about making sure that government agencies don't
exceed their authority. Not just prisoners but also Arkansas businesses and
ordinary citizens need government agencies to stay within the limits of their
constitutional authority."
(source: Associated Press)
ARIZONA:
Defense Says Arias Wanted to Give Secret Testimony Due to Threats and Hate Mail
Newly released court documents reveal Jodi Arias begged to testify in a
closed-courtroom during her death penalty sentencing retrial last October
because she feared court watchers were sending her threats and hate mail.
On Thursday, officials at the Maricopa County Superior Court released a
transcript of a closed-door hearing where Arias' lawyers discussed their
request to have the public and media barred from the courtroom. The defense
argued Arias needed to testify in secret because she thought her safety was at
risk.
"A lot of crazy people come to the jail and try to visit me," Arias told the
court, according to a transcript of bench-conference conversations and a
hearing that was unsealed on Thursday, reports USA Today.
Defense attorney Kirk Nurmi argued Arias had received hate mail threatening her
over what she might say in her testimony.
"We know the people here today currently in the courtroom include some of the
people who send her that mail," Nurmi said, referring to unidentified
spectators in the court.
They also discussed a person who had tried to visit the convicted killer by
impersonating her attorney and demanding to see her.
As a result, Nurmi claimed that Arias would be too nervous to think clearly if
spectators were present during her testimony.
Prosecutor Juan Martinez, however, expressed concern that closing the courtroom
based on claims that the defendant is too nervous to testify in public would
set bad precedent and could trigger appeals, reports ABC 15 Arizona.
Initially Judge Sherry Stephens rejected Arias' reasoning for wanting to close
the courtroom, however she ultimately granted Arias her request and kicked the
media and public out of the court on Oct. 30, 2014. Arias then testified for 2
days, until the Court of Appeals overturned Stephens' decision and reopened the
courtroom.
Although Arias was found guilty of 1st-degree murder last May in the gruesome
death of her ex-boyfriend, jurors in her 1st trial failed to reach a unanimous
decision on her sentencing. As a result, the retrial will determine whether she
should be sentenced to death, life in prison or life with a chance of release
after serving 25 years.
(source: Latin Post)
****************************
FM man indicted in child's death
A Fort Mohave man was indicted Thursday for the October murder of an infant
boy.
A Mohave County grand jury indicted Tyler James Kirkpatrick, 20, of 1st-degree
murder by domestic violence, 2nd-degree murder by domestic violence and child
abuse by domestic violence.
He is expected to be arraigned on the charges Friday at the county jail. His
case will then be heard before Superior Court Commissioner Billy Sipe Jr.
Kirkpatrick is being held in county jail without bond. If convicted of the
1st-degree murder charge, Kirkpatrick would face either life in prison with the
chance of parole after 35 years, natural life or the death penalty. Prosecutors
have not made a decision yet whether to pursue the death penalty.
Sheriff's detectives arrested Kirkpatrick on Wednesday morning in connection
with the Oct. 23 death of 15-month-old Kade Kryska. The baby suffered traumatic
brain injury at his Fort Mohave home.
Kirkpatrick was arrested at the home he shared with the child's mother, his
girlfriend. He locked himself in his bedroom and initially would not come out
for detectives. Kirkpatrick eventually surrendered and was arrested without
incident.
On Oct. 21, Kryska's mother returned from work to find her son had difficulty
breathing. The child had been in Kirkpatrick's care all day. That night,
sheriff's deputies responded to the Fort Mohave hospital where the child was
determined to have suffered head injuries. The boy was flown to the Las Vegas
hospital where he died 2 days later.
MCSO, the county attorney's office and Clark County Medical Examiner's Office
conducted a 4-month investigation leading up to Kirkpatrick's arrest Wednesday.
(source: Mohave Daily News)
IDAHO:
Defender asks for staff increase ---- Commissioners deny Adams' request
Kootenai County Chief Public Defender John Adams came in asking for an
additional full-time attorney and an extra legal assistant.
The county commissioners on Friday turned him down on both, at least until
budget season.
"I'm not a big fan of adding bodies outside the budget process," Commissioner
Dan Green said.
"I have given the prior boards ample substantiation of why these attorneys are
needed," said Adams, who has asked for additional attorneys in the past, too.
He said the Constitution mandates the county have more public defenders to
provide adequate indigent defense services.
"You have to keep up with the growing population," Adams said.
His office handles more than 6,000 cases per year, he said, and caseloads of
public defenders in the county have been pushed beyond constitutionally
acceptable levels.
He knows his staff would give up pay raises to have extra people in the office
to help share the workload.
"Don't take that out of context, that I don't want my people to get more money,
but I think they would trade $300 per year for more companions in the
trenches," Adams said.
The annual expense of the two additional positions Adams asked for Friday,
including benefits, would have been $120,000. The cost would have been $70,000
through the remainder of fiscal year 2015.
While the board denied the request for those two positions, it did approve a
raise and promotion for a temporary courier employee, who has been running
files between offices for defense attorneys the past couple years.
The courier now becomes a full-time, permanent secretary in the public
defender's office. She will get a pay raise from $10 per hour to $11.37, and
she will also now get benefits, following the commission's vote Friday.
It's been roughly 3 years since Adams' office received additional staff. At
that time he received 2 extra attorneys.
Also Friday, Adams asked for money to pay for a part-time attorney - working 30
hours per week - who could assist him with the defense of Angel
Morales-Larranaga, who has been charged with the murder of his wife and
6-year-old stepdaughter in July.
Adams said the "capital" murder case of Morales-Larranaga, who is an illegal
immigrant from Mexico, is an extraordinary amount of work for one attorney. The
cost for some part-time help would be approximately $2,400 per month, Adams
said.
"Now that there's a death-penalty case, there's a completely different funding
mechanism potentially available to you," Green said.
Adams should be able to receive funds from the Capital Crimes Defense Fund,
Green said.
"Let's use the insurance fund that we've been funding for all these years,"
Green said.
The fund was established by counties to fund costs in criminal cases when the
death penalty is a legal possibility.
(source: Coeur d'Alene Press)
USA:
All the ways America has chosen to execute people since 1776
After a series of botched executions last year, the US Supreme Court has agreed
to review whether a common method of lethal injection is constitutional. If
not, many states will need a new way to kill people.
Utah is already moving forward with a bill that would bring back executions by
firing squad, which it allowed until 2004. There may be no "humane" way to put
a prisoner to death, but if states are going to consider alternatives, they
could reach back in history. Here's a look at popular execution methods since
the US was created in 1776:
The data were compiled from a database maintained by the Death Penalty
Information Center and from research by M. Watt Espy and John Ortiz Smykla.
Legal scrutiny of lethal injection comes as support for the death penalty has
dropped dramatically in the US. In 1994, 80% of Americans said they were in
favor of executing people convicted of murder; now it's just 63%, according to
Gallup.
But the issue is increasingly polarized: Republicans have become more
entrenched in their support, as the rest of the country grows more
disillusioned with the practice:
Professor Austin Sarat, author of Gruesome Spectacles: Botched Executions and
America's Death Penalty, surveyed executions from 1890 to 2010. He found that
roughly 3% of executions were botched over that time, but in the current era of
lethal injection, the portion of botched executions has risen to 7%.
These botched executions can be grisly. The Guardian reported that during the
2014 execution of Clayton Lockett, the doctor was splattered with blood as he
tried to set an intravenous line. Lockett "groaned, writhed, lifted his head
and shoulders off the gurney, and said, 'Man'." The warden called Lockett's
execution "a bloody mess."
America no longer hangs its condemned, nor gas or electrocute them. And it's
unlikely to return to those methods. For one, states now lack the expertise:
Many have mothballed or destroyed their gallows, electric chairs, and gas
chambers. There are also issues of appearance: Some methods carry more baggage
than others, which is why a return to firing squads seems unlikely, even in
Utah.
(source: qz.com)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/deathpenalty@lists.washlaw.edu/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
