Feb. 24
MONTANA:
House deadlocks on bill to abolish death penalty in Montana
The state House deadlocked Monday 50-50 on a bill to abolish the death penalty
in Montana, likely killing the measure for the 2015 Legislature.
Rep. David "Doc" Moore, R-Missoula, the sponsor of House Bill 370, told members
to "just vote your conscience" moments before the vote.
He said later he's undecided whether to ask the House on Tuesday to reconsider
its action on HB 370, saying it could be difficult to pick up a single,
additional vote to force another emotional debate and vote on the floor.
Monday's vote fell largely along party lines, with most Republicans against it
- but it took 3 of the House's 41 Democrats voting "no" to reject the bill,
which would abolish the death penalty in Montana and substitute it with life in
prison without parole. Montana has 2 murderers on death row.
The vote also marked the closest that death-penalty opponents have come to
getting a bill through the Montana House, which has blocked similar efforts for
years. Bills to abolish the death penalty have been approved by the state
Senate in recent legislatures, only to see them die in the House.
Supporters of the bill argued the death penalty does not act as a deterrent and
costs the states millions of dollars on appeals and other prosecutorial costs.
Rep. Margie MacDonald, D-Billings, also said state prison workers shouldn't be
put in the position of having to operate "the machineries of death."
"It is a ravaging, horrifying task to put in the hands of our state employees,"
she said.
1 longtime supporter of abolishing the death penalty, Rep. Mitch Tropila,
D-Great Falls, spoke as though he thought supporters had the votes to pass HB
370 on Monday.
"This is an historic moment in the Montana House of Representative," he said.
"It has never voted to abolish the death penalty on 2nd reading. This is a
momentous moment and we are on the cusp of history. ... "It is time for Montana
to take her rightful place as a leader among all the great states of the union
... and time to be recognized as a leader on the world stage"
Opponents, however, offered their own emotion-charged testimony against the
measure, saying the death penalty can help prosecutors extract plea-bargains
out of terrible criminals and spare both the state and the victims' families
the financial and emotional cost of a trial.
"How can you put a price on my emotions and what I was going through with my
family?" asked Rep. Tom Berry, R-Roundup, whose son was brutally murdered a
dozen years ago. "All this bill does is reward the murderer, handicap the
prosecutor ... and penalize victims like me."
Rep. Roy Hollandsworth, R-Brady, who opposed the bill, said those who want to
abolish the death penalty should take it to the Montana public as a referendum
- but they won't, because they know they would lose.
The public overwhelmingly supports the death penalty, he said.
"When you vote for this, whichever way you vote, I hope that the people ...
remember in November when you run again," he said.
The 3 Democrats voting against the measure were Reps. Tom Jacobson and Bob
Mehlhoff of Great Falls and Gordon Pierson of Deer Lodge.
(source: The Missoulian)
************************
Bill to abolish death penalty in Montana fails after tie vote
A bill to end Montana's death penalty stalled Monday with a tie vote in the
House.
House Bill 370, sponsored by Missoula Rep. Doc Moore (R), would have replaced
the death penalty with life in prison without parole.
The House voted 50-50, defeating it.
Roundup Rep. Tom Berry (R) described his feelings about the murder of his son.
"Now you put him in prison without parole, why won't he kill again? A prison
guard, another prisoner. It happens, people. All this bill does is reward their
murderer," Berry said. "Handicap the prosecution and victimize, penalize
victims like me."
The tie vote could be reconsidered if 51 representatives vote to do so.
Montana remains 1 of 32 states who use the death penalty in the United States.
(source: KXLF news)
*************************
Bad news for Ronald Smith? Montana bill to abolish death penalty fails
A bill to abolish Montana's death penalty was scuttled by a tie vote Monday in
the lower house of the state legislature.
The proposed law could have affected the fate of Canadian Ronald Smith, 57, 1
of 2 individuals on death row in Montana.
Republican Rep. David Moore introduced the bill which would have abolished
executions and replaced them with a sentence of life imprisonment with no
chance of parole.
The judiciary committee in the lower house of Montana's two-tier legislature
stalled bills to abolish the death penalty in 2007, 2009, 2011 and 2013. But
last week it decided to allow this bill to be voted on by the House of
Representatives.
Moore, who was optimistic that the proposed legislation would pass, said that a
tie vote means the bill has failed.
"It's disappointing to get this far and to have it end in a tie and probably
not for the right reasons," he said in an interview with The Canadian Press.
"There was some passionate discussion on the house floor, but I think the
reason is we had some people more worried about November elections than doing
the right thing.
"I feel like I've let my northern neighbours down."
That means the matter will go on the backburner for at least 24 months since
the Montana legislature only sits every 2 years.
Moore expects the issue will be back for public debate and he is hopeful of a
different outcome.
"I would imagine it will come back again next session. I don't think this ends
it."
Smith, who is originally from Red Deer, Alta., has been on death row since 1983
for fatally shooting 2 cousins while he was high on drugs and alcohol near East
Glacier, Mont.
He refused a plea deal that would have seen him avoid death row and spend the
rest of his life in prison. Three weeks later, he pleaded guilty. He asked for
and was given a death sentence.
Smith had a change of heart and has been on a legal roller-coaster for decades.
An execution date has been set 5 times and each time the order was overturned.
Moore had indicated that bringing forward the legislation wasn't about seeking
leniency for death-row convicts, but about eliminating the costs of protracted
legal wrangling in a death-penalty case.
Ron Waterman, a senior lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Association,
testified before the judiciary committee that the death penalty is flawed and
there is the risk of executing an innocent person.
He said costs also mitigate the benefits the death penalty gives a prosecutor
trying to negotiate a plea bargain.
Waterman is overseeing a civil case on behalf of Smith and another death-row
inmate, William Jay Gollehon.
A hearing is scheduled for July on whether new drugs being proposed by the
state comply with language in execution protocol requiring an
"ultra-fast-acting barbiturate."
(source: Times Colonist)
NEVADA:
Nevada death penalty costs reflect U.S. trends
When Nevada lawmakers were informed in November that death penalty cases in the
state cost $532,000 more on average than other murder cases from arrest through
the end of incarceration, the findings were consistent with other studies
pushed by anti-death penalty advocates. The financial hit taken by taxpayers
has become 1 of the central arguments death penalty foes have used in recent
years in an effort to have states overturn that form of punishment.
A search of the Internet turns up little in the way of arguments that refute
the cost studies, even though the majority of states have death penalty laws
that continue to be defended by victims' rights organizations.
There are 18 states without the death penalty. Michigan has been on that list
the longest, having been without a death penalty since 1846, while Maryland was
last to join this group in 2013.
Nevada is among the other 32 states with the death penalty, with April 2006
being the last time the punishment was applied in this state. That's when
lethal injection was used on Daryl Mack, a 47-year-old inmate who initially was
sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for the 1994
strangulation death of one woman in northern Nevada. He was then given the
death penalty when he was later convicted while in prison for the 1988 murder
of another woman in Reno.
The report from Nevada's Legislative Auditor based its cost estimates by
sampling 28 cases. Cases where the defendant was sentenced to death but not
executed averaged $1,307,000, compared to $1,202,000 where prosecutors sought
the death penalty but didn't get one, $1,032,000 when execution occurred, and
$775,000 when the death penalty wasn't sought by prosecutors.
"Case costs, incorporating the trial and appeal phases, averaged about 3 times
more for death penalty versus non-death penalty cases," the report concluded.
"For incarceration costs, the death penalty is the most expensive sentence for
those convicted of 1st degree murder, but only slightly higher when compared to
those sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. Costs for these 2
sentences largely mirror one another because incarceration periods are similar
considering 'involuntary' executions are extremely infrequent."
The Death Penalty Information Center, a nonprofit organization in Washington,
D.C., that opposes the death penalty, posted on its website the Nevada report
and similar studies from other states. Among the other findings:
--A Seattle University study released in January found that death penalty cases
in Washington state cost $1 million more on average than similar cases where
the death penalty wasn't sought.
--A 2014 report from the Kansas Legislature's Judicial Council concluded that
defending a death penalty case in that state costs 4 times as much as defending
a case where the death penalty isn't pursued.
--The Idaho Legislature's Office of Performance Evaluations reported last year
that the State Appellate Public Defenders office spent almost 8,000 hours per
capital defendant compared to 180 hours per non-death penalty defendant.
--A study published in the University of Denver Criminal Law Review in 2013
found that capital proceedings in Colorado require 6 times more days in court
and take much longer to resolve than life without parole cases.
--The Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review published a study in 2011 concluding
that if the governor of California commuted the sentences of death row inmates
to life without parole, the state would save $170 million a year and $5 billion
over the next 20 years.
The nonprofit website ProCon.org of Santa Monica, Calif., which strives to
promote critical thinking by providing pro and con arguments on dozens of
controversial topics, posed the question of whether the death penalty costs
less than life in prison without parole. The vast majority of respondents said
they believed death penalty cases cost far more than those involving life in
prison without parole.
One of the few respondents in the minority was Tennessee lawyer Chris Clem, who
was quoted by the website as saying: "Executions do not have to cost that much.
We could hang them and reuse the rope. No cost! Or we could use firing squads
and ask for volunteer firing squad members who would provide their own guns and
ammunition. Again, no cost."
Florida attorney Gary Beatty, in a 1997 article posted on the website of the
conservative/libertarian Federalist Society for Law & Public Policy Studies in
Washington, D.C., stated:
"The overwhelming majority of citizens of Florida, as in the rest of the
nation, support the death penalty. To claim that when citizens are educated
about the high fiscal cost of administering the death penalty they always opt
for life imprisonment is intellectually dishonest. If the multiple layers of
appeal are pursued in an ethical and fiscally responsible manner, execution is
less costly than warehousing a murderer for life. Any increased cost is caused
by death penalty opponents."
*******************************
Delays normal in death penalty cases
2 years have passed since a shooting on the Las Vegas Strip led to a fiery
crash and the deaths of 3 people.
The man accused of those murders, Ammar Harris, still has not been brought to
trial. An old adage says justice delayed is justice denied but it's also true
the wheels of justice turn slowly.
As the I-Team learned, the reasons for that aren't always foot-dragging or
delay tactics.
It was in February 2013 when reputed pimp Kenneth Cherry was shot in his
Maserati as he drove away from the Aria resort. The mortally wounded Cherry
crashed his car into a taxicab, causing an explosion that killed cabbie Michael
Bolden and passenger Sandra Sutton-Wasmund.
Since Harris was arrested the trial date in the death penalty case has moved
three times and is now scheduled for July.
Bolden's brother, Tehran Bolden, worries about the toll the case continues to
take on his 93-year-old mother.
"That's the justice system," Tehran Bolden told the I-Team. "It's been 2 years.
My mother's aged 10 years in 2."
But he remains philosophical about the time it is taking for justice to
prevail.
"Well, you can't blame anyone for dragging it out," he said. "I've already went
through the blame game."
He said if anyone is to blame, it's Harris, who has already been prosecuted and
convicted of 2 other felonies while awaiting trial in the triple murder case.
The convictions were for a sexual assault prior to the carnage on the Strip,
and for bribing a prison guard while serving time for the other offense.
"It's been my experience in the state of Nevada that a capital case rarely goes
to trial inside of 2 years of the date that the person is arrested or taken
into custody on the offenses," Clark County prosecutor David Stanton said.
Nevada death penalty costs reflect U.S. trends
A study released to the Nevada Legislature in November showed that the average
death penalty case in the state takes more than 1,200 days, or 3 1/2 years, to
complete. But if Harris goes to trial in July, it will have been roughly 2 1/2
years from the time of the crime.
Stanton: "And, so, the length of time is actually fairly quick compared to
other cases."
I-Team: "But you haven't seen any foot-dragging tactics or delays on the other
side?"
Stanton: "No. Not by defense counsel, and certainly not by the court."
The legislative study indicated death penalty cases routinely take more than a
year longer to bring to trial than other murder cases. The chief reason is that
death penalty cases involve both the guilt phase and the penalty phase.
Prosecutors can use during the penalty phase evidence of other bad acts or
crimes they cannot use in the guilt phase.
"And they have to go through a painstaking and detailed investigation of Mr.
Harris and his background and the incidences that the state is going to bring
forward -- and, so, that takes time," Stanton said.
Less than 2 months ago, detectives finally were able to interview a former
female associate of Harris. She told police a tale of mental and physical abuse
by Harris that may be used at the penalty hearing. So police are making
progress, even as victims' families wait for justice.
"People talk about closure and I don't think we'll ever have closure but you
know, you get some sense of gratification to know that this part is over with,"
Tehran Bolden said.
Though it may seem these cases move at a glacial pace, statistics show it's not
unusual for a capital case to take several years to get to trial. Witnesses'
memories can fade and evidence can grow stale while waiting for trial, but
police also can use the time to develop new information.
That's what has occurred in this case.
(source for both: KLAS TV news)
*******************
Suspect in shooting death of Tammy Meyers appears in court
The 19-year-old man accused of shooting a valley mother in an apparent road
rage incident appeared in court for the 1st time on Monday morning.
It was a packed courtroom as Erich Nowsch was brought into the courtroom to
face the judge. He is facing charges of open murder, attempted murder and
discharging a gun.
The judge set Nowsch's preliminary hearing for March 10 at 9 a.m.
Nowsch is accused of shooting Tammy Meyers outside of her family's home on Mt.
Shasta Circle on February 12, after what the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police
Department initially said was a road rage incident. Nowsch was arrested at his
home near Meyers' house after a 2-hour standoff on February 19.
Las Vegas police are still looking for another suspect in the case. Outside of
the courtroom on Monday, Clark County District Attorney Steve Wolfson said that
it is imperative the other suspect is found.
When asked if he will seek the death penalty for Nowsch, he replied: "Nothing
is off the table."
Robert Meyers, who was married to Tammy Meyers, was inside the courtroom. When
he left the courtroom, he told Action News he plans to be at every one of
Nowsch's scheduled appearances.
Nowsch's attorney, Conrad Claus, said he is not ready to speak to the media
just about his client.
******************
Mom Forgives, DA Withdraws Death Penalty in Vegas Slaying
A family's forgiveness prompted a dramatic turnaround in a Las Vegas courtroom,
where a judge agreed to let prosecutors withdraw a call for the death penalty
for a man found guilty in a 2011 Las Vegas brew pub slaying.
Brandon Hill apologized Monday to victim Michael Portaro's mother, Cynthia
Portaro, and she stood and asked Clark County District Court Judge Elissa
Cadish to spare Hill's life.
Portaro and Hill family members embraced outside court.
Cynthia Portaro told reporters she's relieved because good Christians can't
live with hatred, animosity and anger.
The 26-year-old Hill was convicted Friday and still faces life in prison at
sentencing April 16.
Michael Portaro was a 22-year-old aspiring musician when he was shot dead
during a robbery outside Tenaya Creek brew pub in northwest Las Vegas.
(source for both: KTNV news)
ARIZONA:
Jodi Arias trial: 'Death penalty or life in prison' closing arguments
The Jodi Arias sentencing retrial resumes Tuesday, as lawyers make closing
arguments on whether the convicted murderer should receive life in prison or be
executed for the 2008 killing of her former boyfriend.
Lawyers in the Jodi Arias sentencing retrial are scheduled to make closing
arguments Tuesday on whether the convicted murderer should receive life in
prison or be executed for the 2008 killing of her former boyfriend.
Arias was convicted in 2013 of murdering Travis Alexander, but jurors
deadlocked on her sentence. A new jury that has been hearing testimony over the
last 4 months will decide only her punishment.
Prosecutors said Arias attacked Alexander in a jealous rage after he wanted to
end their affair and planned a trip to Mexico with another woman. Arias has
acknowledged killing Alexander but claimed it was self-defense after he
attacked her.
The retrial revealed few new details about the crime and was more subdued than
Arias' 1st trial, which turned into a media circus as salacious and violent
details about Arias and Alexander were broadcast live around the world. At the
retrial, the judge barred the broadcast of footage from the proceedings until
after a verdict is reached.
The new penalty phase also was marked by a judge's decision to kick the public
out of the courtroom for the testimony of a then-unspecified witness, who cited
personal safety concerns about testifying in a public setting.
An appeals court later overturned Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Sherry
Stephens' move to close the courtroom and revealed that the witness was Arias
herself. Her testimony was halted before the prosecutor got a chance to
question her, although he did so at her 2013 trial.
A transcript of her testimony in late October was eventually released,
revealing few new details about Alexander's killing.
Arias passed up a chance Monday to address the jury, saying she wanted to make
such comments but insisting the courtroom be cleared. She said she wouldn't
make any remarks if she could be seen and heard from a remote viewing room.
Stephens said an appeals court has forbidden Arias from making such comments
behind closed doors.
Earlier in the retrial, the judge denied a bid by Arias' lawyers to stop
prosecutors from seeking the death penalty on several grounds.
They alleged authorities examining Alexander's laptop destroyed thousands of
files - including files from pornographic websites - that would have been
beneficial in defending Arias. They said the computer files could have helped
them argue that Alexander had treated their client in a sexually humiliating
manner.
Arias' lawyers also asked the judge to dismiss the death penalty because three
witnesses on her behalf have refused to testify in open court for fear they
will be harassed.
(source: Associated Press)
CALIFORNIA:
The death penalty in California: Yes, no, maybe?----The state seems to lack the
will to carry out executions that were twice endorsed by voters; will that
change?
California has a death penalty on the books. Both the California constitution
and the United States constitution specifically recognize capital punishment.
Yet somehow California seems unable to actually execute anyone even though
Texas, Florida and other states, which operate under the same federal
constitution, manage to execute condemned prisoners with some regularity. Why
is that so?
Let's look at the current Dramatis Personae. They are Jerry Brown, Kamala
Harris, Kermit Alexander, Bradley Winchell, Jeremy Fogel and Shellyanne Chang.
Jerry Brown is the Governor of the formerly great state of California. He is in
his fourth term (non-consecutive) in office. He was well known as a young man
and Jesuit seminary student when he attempted to intercede with his father, who
was at the time Governor, in the matter of Caryl Chessman. Chessman was on
death row for kidnap-rape, which at the time was a capital offense. Chessman
was eventually executed under his father's administration.
Jerry Brown has regularly said he has a personal objection to the death
penalty, but would act in accordance with the law.
Kamala Harris is the state Attorney General. She was formerly the District
Attorney for the City and County of San Francisco. She was well-known for
saying up front that, during her tenure in office, if elected, there would not
be a death penalty prosecution in her bailiwick. She was, as far as it went, an
honest politician. She caught heat from the SFPD when she refused a death
penalty prosecution for a cop killer. Of course it didn't matter in the
knee-jerk liberal haven of San Francisco; most of the voters applauded her for
it. When she ran for A.G. she stated that she would enforce the law on the
books.
There are now over 700 criminals on death row. One might almost think that
Jerry and Kamala were slow-dragging the process of bringing California's death
penalty into line with court orders.
Kermit Alexander and Bradley Winchell are private citizens. They have generated
a legal action against the State of California to compel the state to bring its
procedure into line and start executing condemned prisoners. Both men are
related to murder victims whose killers have been caught, tried and sentenced.
Kamala Harris submitted a brief in the case opposing their action on the basis
of lack of standing. On February 9, 2015, Sacramento Superior Court Judge
Shellyanne Chang ruled in favor of Alexander and Winchell.
U. S. District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel, an in interesting interpretation of
"cruel and unusual," has ruled that if there is even 0.001 % chance that a
prisoner would experience pain during the execution that procedure is not
constitutionally valid. He stayed the execution of Michael Morales, who raped,
beat with a hammer, stabbed and strangled Teri Winchell, 17, sister to Bradley
Winchell.
So, what will shake out? Within my memory California voters have twice endorsed
the death penalty by referendum. Yet the state, or at least the state's
political leaders, seem to lack the will to carry through. Is that likely to
change in the near future? In my humble opinion, no.
Our political ruling class will continue to obfuscate slow-drag and use a
cooperative court system and media to drag the system out and out and out ad
infinitum, in the hopes the system collapses under its own weight.
(source: correctionsone.com)
*******************
Man Tied to Beaumont Crime Faces Death Sentence in Trial of
Home-Invasions-Turned-Fatal----He's accused of crimes which began in 2004 in
Desert Hot Springs, Thousand Palms, North Palm Springs, Cathedral City and
Beaumont.
Opening statements are scheduled in the death- penalty trial of a 34-year-old
Desert Hot Springs man accused of involvement in a violent spree of
home-invasion robberies across and near the Coachella Valley, culminating in
the driveway shooting death of a Desert Hot Springs man in August 2004.
Miguel Enrique Felix faces 25 charges, including murder, robbery, attempted
robbery, burglary, kidnapping and a variety of firearms charges, stemming from
the crimes, which occurred from the summer of 2004 until the spring of 2005, in
Desert Hot Springs, Thousand Palms, North Palm Springs, Cathedral City,
Beaumont and unincorporated county areas.
The opening statements Monday are at the Larson Justice Center will be followed
by the prosecution's 1st witnesses.
Authorities have said Felix was 1 of several men who grabbed victim after
victim as they were at or near their homes, forced them inside at gunpoint,
then tied them up with zip ties, pistol-whipped and beat them, and ransacked
their homes in search of money or valuables.
In some cases, victims were kidnapped and taken to automatic teller machines or
other locations to obtain money, while their children or other relatives were
held at gunpoint by accomplices, prosecutors said in court documents.
On August 11, 2004, Felix and an accomplice, Javier Rodriguez Hernandez, who
has remained at large for more than a decade, went to a home in Desert Hot
Springs to rob Armando Gonzalez, prosecutors said.
Felix and Hernandez allegedly confronted Gonzalez as he was backing out of his
driveway, with his wife and children in the vehicle.
The men pulled him out of the truck at gunpoint, but the wife and kids were
able to flee to a neighbors house, authorities said.
Gonzalez resisted and was shot 7 times, some of the bullets traveling through
the palms of his hands in an indication of defensive wounds, prosecutors said.
Felix is also accused of kidnapping his own girlfriend at gunpoint in March
2005.
Also charged for involvement in various parts of the crime spree were
Hernandez, Antonio Jesus Cantu, and Felix's girlfriend, Luisa Beatriz Lopez.
(source: patch.com)
USA:
Crookston nuns devoted to blocking death penalty for Rodriguez
A small group of Catholic nuns who live in the hometown of convicted killer
Alfonso Rodriguez is on a mission to save his life.
Sister Pat Murphy is one of about a dozen members of the Congregation of St.
Joseph in Crookston. Without recognition or fanfare, the nuns have been
devoting their lives to overturning capital punishment.
Sister Pat has been focusing on Rodriguez, who is on death row for the
kidnapping and murder of Dru Sjodin. "We have laws against premeditated murder"
according to Sister Pat. "Capital punishment is premediated - and it's murder."
Sister Pat knows that many people would rather see Rodriguez executed. "I know
there are people here in Crookston who know Alfonso Rodriguez", she said. "I
was in one of the local restaurants during the time (Sjodin) was still being
looked for. Her parents were there in the restaurant; easy to identify. Just
those little connections kept my antennae up."
"It's a risk for me because I've never stepped out and spoken publicly on
issues like this, and I know (my views) are unpopular. Even within my own
family, they won't understand it."
Sister Pat has written letters to the U.S. Dept. of Justice and U.S. District
Judge Ralph Erickson, who presided over Rodriguez's trial in Fargo. She
received a reply from the warden of the federal prison in Indiana where
Rodriguez is on death row. The warden referred her questions to Rodriguez's
attorneys.
Sister Pat says she's realistic about what kind of impact the Congregation's
work can have. She doesn't expect to change the entire justice system, but says
she hopes to make a difference close to home.
(source: KFGO news)
************
A cause for optimism? States running out of ways to execute people
To borrow a speculative construct from pacifists about the fate of war should
soldiers refuse to fight them, what would happen to lethal injections if
pharmaceutical firms simply stopped selling execution drugs to prisons?.
We may find out. One of the U.S. manufacturers of midazolam, used by several
states in multi-drug lethal injection protocols, says it won't sell the drug if
it knows it will be used to execute someone.
Akorn Pharmaceuticals found itself dragged into an Alabama court record when
the Illinois firm was listed in papers filed in connection with appeals by
condemned murderer Thomas Arthur, who is challenging the constitutionality of
the state's lethal injection protocol. The company said it has no record of its
drug being sold to Alabama prisons, and objected to its inclusion in the court
filing.
"To prevent the use of our products in capital punishment, Akorn will not sell
any product directly to any prison or other correctional institution and we
will restrict the sale of known components of lethal injection protocols to a
select group of wholesalers who agree to use their best efforts to keep these
products out of correctional institutions," Akorn investor relations director
Dewey Steadman told the Anniston Star last week.
Remember, it was a revolt by (mostly) European-based pharmaceutical companies
that made the executioners' drug of choice, sodium thiopental, nearly
impossible to find. States have turned to compounding pharmacies, which are
lightly regulated labs that primarily tailor drugs for individual patients, as
an alternative source, but now some of those labs are balking at playing a role
in capital punishment. And states are enacting laws making it a crime to
identify sources of execution drugs, or those who take part. So in the name of
justice we are moving closer to secretive executions.
Interestingly, the U.S. Supreme Court recently agreed to hear a legal challenge
to the use of midazolam in lethal injection protocols, a challenge based on a
record of botched executions and that raises questions - again - about the
nature of capital punishment.
I've argued before that the death penalty is an immoral act by the government,
and that it is applied unfairly and arbitrarily, is an expensive system to
maintain, and that it serves no purpose other than revenge. It is not justice.
Pharmaceutical companies don't want to be connected with it. The American
Medical Assn. warns that "as a member of a profession dedicated to preserving
life when there is hope of doing so, [physicians] should not be a participant
in a legally authorized execution." The American Public Health Assn. similarly
tells members not to take part in executions. And the list goes on.
Of course, death-penalty states and proponents of executions will press for new
ways of killing people, be it fresh drug cocktails or a reversion to the firing
squad.
Let's hope that sanity, and civility, will take root, and the United States of
America - the international beacon of justice - will end this despicable policy
once and for all.
(source: Opinion, Scott Martelle----Los Angeles Times)
***********************
Aurora theater shooting trial judge adds to jury pool over defense
objections----In addition to the two jurors who have previously served on a
jury, Samour selected a woman who works as a special education teacher and a
man who described himself in court as a "small town guy."
5 jurors in the Aurora theater shooting trial were sent to the group
questioning phase Monday while another 6 were released from service.
The 5 jurors moving to the next round - which include 2 who have been jurors
before - bring the total over 22 days of jury selection to 32, still far ahead
of the pace Judge Carlos Samour Jr. had hoped for. Samour expected the court to
need about 16 weeks of individual questioning to get the necessary 120 jurors
for the next round. After just 2 weeks, the 2 sides already have a quarter of
that number.
Among the jurors released Monday, 2 said they could never hand down a death
sentence. 1 person worked at the mall adjacent to the theater and 3 said
serving would be a financial hardship.
In addition to the 2 jurors who have previously served on a jury, Samour
selected a woman who works as a special education teacher and a man who
described himself in court as a "small town guy."
Samour also selected a young man over the defense's objection. The defense said
the man seemed to view the death penalty as a starting point for a heinous
crime, but Samour questioned the man a 2nd time and said the man was willing to
consider life in prison or a death sentence.
Accused gunman James Holmes sat quietly at the defense table wearing a blue
sweater.
Monday's hearing marked the 1st since Samour last week changed decided to call
11 jurors each day instead of 12. Samour had said he hoped the new system would
mean court ended a bit earlier, but Monday's session stretched past 6 p.m.
anyway.
Prosecutors also asked Samour to release a juror who had previously been sent
to the next round. The juror, whio has a criminal record, was previously
questioned and the 2 Samour sent him to the group questioning phase. Deputy
District Attorney Rich Orman said the man recently called the DA's office and
spoke to another prosecutor.
Orman said the man should be released, but Holmes' defense team said they
"strongly object" to the man's dismissal.
What exactly the man said and whether he was released was unclear. Samour
closed the courtroom to the public while the 2 sides discussed the man's phone
call and adjourned court for the day before reopening the courtroom to the
public and press.
Court is in recess until Tuesday morning.
(source: Aurora Sentinel)
_______________________________________________
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
