Oct. 26
NEW YORK:
Cornell Launches Center to Help Defeat Death Penalty Worldwide
A new center at Cornell Law School aims to help eliminate the death penalty
across the globe through research and lawyer training.
The school on Tuesday announced the launch of the Center on the Death Penalty
Worldwide - an initiative made possible by a $3.2 million grant from the
Atlantic Philanthropies, the private foundation of university alum Chuck
Feeney, founder of the Duty Free Shoppers Group.
The center, led by Cornell professor Sandra Babcock, aspires to help end
capital punishment internationally by highlighting the flaws in the application
of the death penalty worldwide, and by strengthening the training of defense
lawyers who handle such cases. Administrators say it's the 1st center of its
kind in the United States. A handful of schools have domestic-focused death
penalty centers or death penalty clinics, including the University of Texas
School of Law; Yale Law School; Harvard Law School; and the University of
California, Berkeley School of Law. The new center will elevate the
international death penalty research Cornell Law faculty started in 2011.
"I think this is the right moment for a center like this to explicitly focus on
the convergence of national and international [death penalty abolition]
movements and fill in the gaps in the research that's being down around the
world," Babcock said.
The centerpiece of the initiative is a summer institute for capital defense
lawyers around the world to convene and share notes on effective defense
strategies. The first institute will convene death penalty defense lawyers from
sub-Saharan Africa, where the judicial system is plagued by a lack of
resources, Babcock said. Future conferences will focus on other regions. "The
resources available to lawyers around the world who are working on these issues
is really nonexistent," she said.
The center also will conduct research on the death penalty and maintain a free
online database on capital punishment law and practices around the world. Among
the items on the center's research agenda are how discrimination impacts
Latinos facing the death penalty in the United States, and the gathering of
information on the death penalty and vulnerable groups, such as women and
people with metal illnesses or intellectual disabilities.
The center will house law school clinics focused on the international death
penalty and human rights.
"Capital punishment has emerged as one of the most important human rights
issues in the 21st century, and I am pleased that the Atlantic Philanthropies
has recognized Cornell Law School's leading role, globally, in this debate,"
said law Dean Eduardo Penalver.
Feeney, 85, graduated from Cornell University in 1956, and co-founded the Duty
Free Shoppers Group - the airport-based purveyor of perfume, booze and candy -
4 years later. He transferred his nearly 39 % ownership in the company to the
Atlantic Philanthropies in 1984, which is focused on funding health and social
programs around the world. Feeney, though the foundation, had donated about
$100 million to Cornell University.
(source: New York Law Journal)
FLORIDA:
Death sentences in 2 infamous Keys crimes could be reviewed
Death sentences for 2 men convicted of horrific murders in the Florida Keys
could be among cases reviewed after recent rulings by the Florida Supreme Court
and U.S. Supreme Court.
Of the 386 inmates on Florida's death row, Thomas Overton, 60, and Michael
Tanzi, 39, are the only inmates sentenced to death by courts in Monroe County.
The Florida Supreme Court basically ruled Oct. 14 that death sentences imposed
with less than a unanimous vote by a jury are unconstitutional.
"That may reopen hundreds of cases," Monroe County State Attorney Catherine
Vogel said Friday. "I'd venture to say that most death-penalty cases were not a
unanimous decision."
Overton was convicted in 1999 of the infamous August 1991 murders of Susan
"Missy" MacIvor, husband Michael MacIvor and their unborn child at their
Tavernier home. Missy MacIvor, a popular teacher, was 8 months pregnant when
she was sexually assaulted and killed during a burglary.
Tanzi admitted kidnapping Miami Herald supervisor Janet Acosta from a Miami
park in April 2000 to steal her van and later strangling her in the Lower Keys.
He was arrested in Key West 2 days later and eventually pleaded guilty to
1st-degree murder, kidnapping and armed robbery.
A jury in a 2003 sentencing hearing voted 12-0 to sentence Tanzi to death.
"Since that was 12-0, it seems unlikely the Florida Supreme Court decision
would have any effect on Tanzi," Vogel said.
Overton's jury, however, was not unanimous on its death sentences. Jurors voted
9-3 for death for killing Missy MacIvor and 8-4 for killing Michael MacIvor.
Overton strangled both victims.
"The death penalty actually is very rarely imposed. It's kept for the most
heinous of crimes," Vogel said. "All murders are awful, but strangling is a
cruel method of killing."
"We've been through all kinds of appeals and litigation on Overton so we're
hoping the court decision does not have any effect retroactively on that
sentence," the state attorney said. "We'll cross that bridge when we come to
it."
State Attorney General Pam Bondi's office is working to clarify which cases the
Oct. 14 ruling will affect.
Lloyd Chase Allen, convicted of murdering Lower Keys winter resident Dortha
Gibbs at her Summerland Key home in November 1991, died in July 2015 while
awaiting execution on death row.
(source: flkeysnews.com)
ALABAMA:
Woman sentenced to death now asking for acquittal
22-year-old Saraya Atkins is on trial for the murder of Robert Perry.
Saraya Atkins' attorneys are asking for an acquittal following the jury's
recommendation of the death penalty last month.
Atkins was convicted of murder in the death of Robert Perry, a man Atkins and
another woman, Kymberli Lindsey, robbed and shot.
Atkins' attorneys argue that the state did not prove intent, saying Perry and
Atkins had a struggle for the gun when it went off and that Atkins did not
intend to kill Perry.
The motion was filed on Monday. Atkins would be the 6th woman in Alabama on
death row.
(source: WKRG news)
OHIO:
Prosecutors seek death penalty over child's killing
Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty against a Fort Recovery man charged
in the killing of a 4-year-old child.
Cory W. Eischen, 39, is scheduled to make his 1st appearance in court today on
the charges of aggravated murder, 2 counts of murder, involuntary manslaughter,
2 counts of felonious assault, 2 counts of endangering children and domestic
violence. All charges are felonies.
The murder and manslaughter charges are a lesser option for a jury to consider
at trial if jurors find the crime did not meet the elements of aggravated
murder. None of the charges hinder prosecutors from seeking and obtaining the
death penalty.
Eischen is charged in the Sept. 25 death of Jaxxen Baker inside a home at 5098
Rauh Road outside of Fort Recovery. Deputies were called to the home after a
woman picked up another child and saw Baker unresponsive. Eischen was
babysitting Baker while the child's mother was at work.
(source: limaohio.com)
OKLAHOMA:
Police: Oklahoma Double Murder Suspect Has Hit List, May Be Headed to Nevada
A 38-year-old Oklahoma man who has evaded police for 2 days after killing 2
people and shooting 4 others -- including 2 police officers -- has a hit list
and may intend to kill up to eight more people, authorities said Tuesday.
"This is a man who has indicated a total propensity to kill people, to injure
people, shoot people," said Oklahoma County Sheriff John Whetsel. "He has no
care for human life whatsoever."
Authorities believe Vance may be headed to Nevada and have notified police
there to be on the lookout.
Oklahoma County Sheriff John Whetsel told ABC News that the suspect, Michael
Vance, could face the death penalty if convicted of the crimes. Whetsel is
warning citizens to stay clear if they spot Vance, adding that he has
"absolutely nothing to lose."
Vance's rampage began Sunday evening, when he allegedly shot 2 police officers
responding to the scene at a mobile home park over reports of shots fired in
the area. The 2 officers sustained non-life-threatening injuries, officials
say, and were temporarily disabled as Vance fled the scene in their patrol car.
One officer was shot in the foot and another was hit by gunfire in both legs.
Investigators believe Vance live-streamed 2 videos while on the run, one from
inside the police cruiser and another while inside another vehicle. In one of
the videos, Vance appears in a blood-covered shirt and says he's been shot
before showing a rifle on the seat next to him.
"Letting y'all know, look, this is real," he says in the video, according to
the Associated Press. "If you want to know what's up next, stay tuned to your
local news." Vance said things were "going to be intense," according to an
affidavit released on Monday night.
He then proceeded to a mobile home park, where police discovered the bodies of
2 of his relatives. Officials identified those victims as 55-year-old Ronald
Everett Wilkson and 54-year-old Valerie Kay Wilkson, his wife.
The affidavit describes wounds consistent with attempts to sever one victim's
head and the other's arm.
Vance then allegedly "shot at and injured" a woman as he was in the process of
stealing her silver 2007 Mitsubishi Eclipse.
Vance is also suspected of shooting a man during an attempted carjacking early
Monday.
Vance was last known to be driving a 2007 Mitsubishi Eclipse and was armed with
an AK-47. He is considered to be armed and extremely dangerous, authorities
say.
Sheriff Whetsel instructed any potential witnesses not to approach Vance but to
call 911 and let the police handle the situation.
(source: ABC news)
NEBRASKA:
Criticism prompts Nebraska official to pull death penalty ad
Nebraska Secretary of State John Gale is pulling a set of public service
announcements off the air amid criticism that they could mislead voters about a
death penalty ballot measure.
Gale said Wednesday that the 30- and 60-second radio spots were intended to
ensure voters understand the potentially confusing ballot language. Voting
"repeal" in the election is a show of support for the punishment, while voting
"retain" is a declaration that the death penalty should not be reinstated.
The death penalty opposition group Retain a Just Nebraska argued that radio ads
failed to mention that the state will still have life imprisonment if the death
penalty stays repealed.
Gale says he pulled the ad so the debate will remain focused on "substantive
issues."
(source: Associated Press)
CALIFORNIA:
The Death Penalty on Trial: a Meditation
In just shy of 2 weeks Americans will be going to the polls. What is at the
front of everyone's mind is the presidential election. Totally reasonable. But,
there are other issues going to be decided. Among them in California there are
2 propositions being put to the electorate, 1 to streamline the process toward
execution of someone convicted of a capital crime. And the other to ban the
death penalty and to replace it with imprisonment for life without the
possibility of parole.
This is an issue of considerable concern to me, as a citizen, as a human being.
And, I hope whatever your view of the subject you'll give this reflection on
the subject some consideration.
Thank you.
A quarter of a century ago one of my 1st public actions as a newly minted
Unitarian Universalist minister serving a church outside of Milwaukee, was to
go on a local television show and debate the merits of the death penalty with a
local state legislator. I didn't precisely make a fool of myself. But, let's
just say I had a lot to learn about public witness, starting with losing the
bow tie that made me look like a pointy headed intellectual, which whether I
was or wasn't, did nothing to enhance my position.
The issues around the death penalty have held my attention and heart from a
long time before that televised debate. And, while my thinking has, as they say
in political circles, evolved since then, they continue to smolder within me.
When I left that first ministerial settlement we moved to Arizona, where the
death penalty is very much a fact on the ground. For the 5 years I was there I
participate in various demonstrations against it, but as a practical political
matter, it was sufficiently popular that all I could offer was counter witness.
From there Jan and I spent the balance of our working lives in New England
where the death penalty is largely a matter of history (the exception being
federal prosecutions), and generally thought to be something associated with
the Middle Ages.
Today the death penalty is on the ballot here in California. (I'll forgo the
opportunity to rant about my feelings regarding the initiative system in this
state, originally intended as a democratic reform but which has largely fallen
into the hands of any special pleader with a couple of million dollars to
spend..) Actually there are 2 propositions, one to abolish it, and another to
streamline the process to get people to the executioner with fewer routes to
challenge along the way to the needle.
So, we are in fact at a moment where a vote can decide whether we end this
practice in the largest state in the union. And, so, for those who are not
settled on the question, I want to share some statistics and then some
arguments as to why I hope you'll vote to end the death penalty.
First, a handful of statistics. I promise not to be over long here.
Unfortunately, there are some memes out there that list a tiny number of
countries, usually China, Iran, North Korea, and the United States as the only
countries with the death penalty. Actually, this is not true.
Here are the real numbers. 195 countries belong to the United Nations or have
observer status. Of these some 56 fully retain the death penalty. 6 retain it
but only under extremely rare circumstances, such as war crimes. Another 31
keep it on the books, but according to Amnesty International have not actually
executed anyone in at least a decade and have set up mechanisms that make it
functionally impossible. And the majority of countries, 102 have completely
abolished it.
But there are other calculations to consider. I find these numbers even more
important. According to Amnesty International in the year 2015 there were 1,630
legally sanctioned executions, which took place in 25 countries. Now, China
actually hides its numbers, so this figure is in fact higher, how much higher
is an unknown. The same is true of North Korea.
19 of these countries that can be tracked are in Asia, 5 in Africa, and, well,
us. This statistic for 2015 is troubling, as I see it, in how it doubles the
number from the previous year, and is the highest number recorded in a quarter
of a century. The vast majority of these recorded executions come from Iran,
Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia - a full 90 % of the total. Which is probably the
source of the false meme. We, as Americans, accounted for 25 of those
executions. By world terms, not the worst.
But, I feel, and strongly, we should not be anywhere on that list. What follows
is my why. I offer a cluster of reasons, some "stronger" and others "weaker,"
but all of them driving me relentlessly toward the view that the death penalty
has no place in our culture.
One of my oldest views was that we don't want to trust the state with decisions
about taking the life of its citizens. For me that is more visceral, and I
don't think it in fact stands up all that closely to a real world situation,
unless one is a libertarian or anarchist. And I am neither. I think the state
needs to make some hard decisions. And, frankly, when I was involved in death
penalty issues in Arizona, every single one of the people up for the death
penalty were convicted of crimes that if they did them were execrable - acts so
horrendous that if anything can push someone beyond the bounds of a person and
deserving of being put to death, well, these were text book examples. In the
interest of letting you sleep at night I will not detail some of the acts,
which, just the words, just the words are etched into my memory with other
nightmares. When talking about the death penalty in this country (not
everywhere, not by a long shot) we are talking about horrendous crimes. That
cannot be ignored.
And one can make a very good argument that the state acting in the best
interests of the people at large should be able to execute some people. But.
Way back when I was in that televised debate in Wisconsin my opponent declared
that with the protections in place today, no innocent person is ever executed.
And, then, of course, the Innocence Project started using DNA to examine
standing convictions.
In 1989 they won the 1st DNA exoneration. Since then 347 people convicted of
murder have been exonerated. These are all people who had been convicted
through eyewitness accounts, forensic analysis, confessions, and informants.
Seventy percent of those false convictions were based on those eyewitness
accounts. It turns out we have no idea how many innocent people have been
convicted and executed. What we can be near certain is that innocent people
have been and we have no reason not to believe are being executed.
The response to this is to have complex and multiply redundant appeals
processes to any conviction. In the year 2010 it took approximately 15 years
for someone convicted of a crime to be executed. (Apparently with a result that
nearly 1/4 of deaths for those on death row are in fact from natural causes.)
One of the 2 propositions on the ballot in California is to restrict the
appeals process and require that it all come together within 5 years from
conviction. For me, an astonishing response, to an attempt to prevent the worst
miscarriage of justice that a state can inflict.
If this were it, I think that sufficient reason to end the death penalty. The
problems, however, extend beyond that one issue. In practice race and poverty
are major factors in convictions. If you are white and well to do, your chances
of being executed are vastly less likely than if you are black and poor.
Related to that in our adversarial criminal process it really is like that
cartoon where the lawyer says to the client, "You have a great case. How much
justice can you afford?"
Also, there is absolutely no evidence to support the contention that the death
penalty is any kind of deterrent. In fact in this country states that do not
have the death penalty have lower murder rates than those that do.
When we talk about "closure," whatever its merits, having the necessary steps
to minimize wrongful convictions necessitates putting off that closure for
years, when a simple conviction and the sentence of life without parole not
only brings an end to the process, it brings whatever satisfaction can be had
for the victims and their loved ones that that person can no longer be a
threat.
While there is a disturbing uptick in the number of executions world wide, it
appears anomolous against the trend in the world to walk away from this
practice, where the majority of countries have outlawed it entirely, and where
today fewer than 6 countries account for nearly all executions. It is, to put
it frankly, a barbaric practice that cannot be equitably prosecuted, the poor
and minorities will always be executed more than those with resources and
connections, and that inevitably includes the innocent.
I suspect each of us will consider different points the strong arguments and
the weak. But, for me, and I hope for you, the inescapable conclusion is that
we need to end the death penalty.
The death penalty is a moral outrage.
So, a strong appeal. If you are a Californian:
Please vote yes on proposition 62, which repeals the death penalty, and
replaces the maximum penalty with imprisonment for life without the possibility
of parole.
And, please vote no on proposition 66, which sharply curtails the process by
which a person convicted can appeal that conviction.
Again, thank you.
(source: James Ford, patheos.com)
*******************
Why Are Prison Guards Backing the Death Penalty?
Of the 17 propositions on this year's California ballot, few are as divisive as
the issue of capital punishment. There are actually 2 separate initiatives
targeting the death penalty: Proposition 62, which would abolish the death
penalty and replace it with prison without the possibility of parole; and
Proposition 66, which would speed up the process to send condemned murderers to
the death chamber.
According to campaign finance disclosures compiled by the California Fair
Political Practices Commission, much of the pro-death penalty campaign funding
is coming directly from police and prison guard unions. The California
Correctional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA) alone spent $498,304 on Prop.
62, while the Peace Officers Research Association of California spent $455,000
and the California Association of Highway Patrolmen ponied up $250,000 to keep
capital punishment.
One recent advertisement, paid for by California's largest prison guard union,
opens with grainy surveillance footage. It shows a terrified young woman
squaring off with an attacker. As the woman struggles, a voice-over narrates:
"Charles Ng raped, tortured, and killed women. Murdered their babies. Killed
their husbands..." Another ad bankrolled by CCPOA features a few members of law
enforcement explaining their support of the death penalty - and why voters
should support it, too.
"I've seen what the worst among us can do," says Sergeant Dan Cabral of the
California Deputy Sheriffs" Association in one video. "Killings so brutal,
families never recover. That's why we have the death penalty."
In 2012, another ballot initiative, Proposition 34, also sought (but failed) to
eliminate the death penalty. At that time, however, law enforcement unions
donated a tiny fraction of what they have spent on the 2016 ballot. It begs the
question: Why are law enforcement officers so intent on keeping the death
penalty?
The official arguments provided by California law enforcement groups supporting
capital punishment claim that the death penalty provides closure to victims'
families, saves taxpayers millions of dollars and that repealing it would
jeopardize public safety. Essentially, union officials say the death penalty
process in California is broken, but they want legislators to fix it.
Brian Moriguchi, a lieutenant with the L.A. County Sheriff's Department and the
president of the Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association,
which represents 8,800 members of law enforcement, says the death penalty
should be reserved for the "worst of the worst."
"Most police officers, by a very large margin, support the death penalty," he
says. "We've been to those calls where somebody has raped and mutilated a
child, and we've seen the type of people that do that. They are a threat to the
safety of others as long as they are alive. Even locked down in prison, [they
are] still a threat."
Lt. Moriguchi says there is increased support for the death penalty this year,
as opposed to 2012, because of an increase in violence targeted against police
officers, not just in California, but around the country. (According to FBI
data released in October, 41 officers were killed in the line of duty in 2015.
Already in 2016, 46 officers have been killed.)
Is support for the death penalty a reaction to increased scrutiny over police
and prison officials?
"What has changed since 2012 is that there is a greater attack on police
officers today, where people want to kill police officers," Lt. Moriguchi says.
"We're passionate about that this year particularly because we see the assaults
on police officers increasing. We want to see justice for those police
officers, and we want to see those people on death row."
(The other top 3 unions behind the campaign did not return requests for
comment.)
Some outside of law enforcement, however, believe the motivations to support
the death penalty are far more political than practical.
Bill Zimmerman, a longtime California political campaign manager, says the
current wave of law enforcement support for the death penalty is a reaction to
increased scrutiny over police and prison officials. The unions, he says, are
"feeling threatened by this climate of police reform. They see this as a battle
in a long war, and it's a battle they don't want to lose. If they can win this
battle, they see it as something that gives them more clout, or at least the
perception that they're a powerful political force when it comes to legislative
matters."
Zimmerman believes financial support for the death penalty is a reaction to
movements like Black Lives Matter, which some police officials say undermine
respect for law enforcement.
"Their support for the death penalty fits into a larger context of criminal
justice reform going on in California," Zimmerman says. "The events in
Ferguson, Missouri led to a new wave of public demands for reform - of criminal
justice and police behavior. We've seen an enormous increase in the fundraising
capability of law enforcement [unions]. Organizations that used to give $5,000
to $10,000, in this death penalty fight in 2016 are giving $50,000 or
$100,000."
Both sides agree that the death penalty system is outrageously expensive,
costing some $150 million per year for the state because of extra litigation
costs and a lengthy appeals process. The entire death penalty system is said to
have cost taxpayers $5 billion since 1978. However, rather than just get rid of
it, law enforcement groups say the death penalty process should be reformed.
"Death row inmates have murdered over 1,000 victims, including 226 children and
43 police officers; 294 victims were raped and/or tortured," the campaign
explains. "It's time California reformed our death penalty process so it
works."
Prison guard unions particularly support the death penalty, largely because
their leaders say that convicted murderers would have nothing to fear (and
might target prison guards) if the death penalty were not on the table.
"Without the death penalty, what's to stop the killer who's serving life
without parole, from killing inside the prison? asks CCPOA president Chuck
Alexander in the latest advertisement. "It's our last defense." Cherry believes
police and prison guard unions feel they're under pressure.
"There is a certain sense amongst police that times are changing, that there's
more criticism of police actions and the union leaders are hunkering down and
rallying around the traditional causes that they have supported," Cherry says.
He adds, "I don't think that's universal, though. You see a lot of smart police
chiefs who don't take that opinion."
He's right - not all police chiefs support the death penalty. A 2009 report
from the Death Penalty Information Center, a nonprofit research group, polled
police chiefs around the country about all the different methods that could be
used to reduce crime. Their findings: The use of capital punishment ranked dead
last, according to the police chiefs.
So what???s the disconnect? Why do union leaders and police officials continue
to support the death penalty if many, at least in the privacy of an anonymous
poll, agree it's ineffective and too expensive? According to Dr. George Kain, a
current police commissioner in Ridgefield, Connecticut, it's because police
unions have an "arm-in-arm" mentality.
"It's so polarized," says Kain, who began his career as a probation officer.
"You can't be on the fence with this if you're a cop. The political climate now
is forcing people to one side or the other. It's easier to get pushed towards
support of the bully mentality: 'We're gonna execute more people, and we're
gonna execute them more quickly.'"
In California, that sort of mentality could have extreme consequences. Right
now, there are 741 inmates on death row - more than any other state. However,
California has only carried out 13 executions since it reinstated the death
penalty in 1978. (Its most recent execution was in 2006.)
As of mid-October, opponents of Prop. 62 (which would keep the death penalty
legal) have raised about $4.3 million, compared to $8.9 million raised by
groups that want to abolish the death penalty. Supporters of Prop. 66 (which
would speed up the death penalty process) have raised $4.9 million, compared to
the $10 million collected by its opponents. Put simply, groups supporting the
death penalty are being outspent by about 2-to-1 by groups that oppose it.
However, the most recent polls are showing a tight race; there is a slight lead
for proponents of abolishing the death penalty, but only by a slim margin.
Nationally, support for the death penalty is waning. A September 2016 Pew
Research poll found that support is currently the lowest in more than 4
decades.
Regardless of national sentiment, law enforcement leaders within California,
such as Sacramento Sheriff Scott Jones, are hoping voters will keep (and
reform) capital punishment on November 8. "The public and law enforcement
recognize that [capital punishment] makes our communities safer by acting as a
deterrent and ensures that the most violent criminals will never be released
into our communities again," Jones, the president of California Peace Officers'
Association, wrote in a recent letter.
But they are facing an increasing amount of opposition, not just from wealthy
anti-death penalty advocates - but from crime victims as well.
One of them is Dionne Wilson. Wilson's husband, Dan Niemi, was a police officer
in San Leandro, California who was shot and killed in the line of duty in 2005.
Irving Ramirez, 23, was charged and convicted of Niemi's murder.
At the time of his sentencing, Wilson says, she "begged" the judge for a death
penalty sentence. On August 3, 2007, Wilson got her wish. (Ramirez remains
alive and on death row.)
But as the years went on, Wilson's opinion began to change about the death
penalty. She no longer supports it - in fact, she's on a crusade to get the
death penalty repealed. Instead of executions, Wilson wants to see legislators
use that $150 million go towards victim services, programs to treat mental
illness and drug addiction, education and afterschool programs, and other crime
reduction initiatives.
"I understand that type of vengeance-based reaction," she says. "Trust me, I
get it. But there seems to be a lack of analysis in that position."
She adds, "Our criminal justice dollars are misused in this way. It's
frustrating to me. It's just 'cop killers deserve to die.' Well, okay, but is
there a better way to hold people accountable than propping up a system that
has wasted $5 billion for the past 30 years? I can certainly think of better
ways to invest that money."
(source: capitalandmain.com)
_______________________________________________
A service courtesy of Washburn University School of Law www.washburnlaw.edu
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Unsubscribe: http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/options/deathpenalty
