[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OHIO, ARIZ., CALIF., USA
Sept. 6
OHIO:
Anti-death penalty group wants court recommendations enacted
Ohio's largest anti-death penalty group wants more recommendations for changing
the state's capital punishment law to be enacted.
Ohioans To Stop Executions says lawmakers have only approved 4 of 56 proposals
made by an Ohio Supreme Court task force in 2014. The organization says in an
annual report released Tuesday that 6 more are pending in the Legislature but
have yet to receive support in both the House and Senate.
The report also says prosecutors sought the death penalty in 26 cases last
year, 5 more than in 2014.
Most cases came from counties that traditionally seek the death penalty more
often. Those include Franklin, Hamilton, Lake, Mahoning, Stark and Trumbull
counties.
Ohio hasn't executed anyone in almost 3 years because of a lack of lethal
injection drugs.
(source: Associated Press)
ARIZONA:
Death penalty possible in killing of BHC 8-year-old girl
A police detective has testified in a court hearing for a man accused of
killing an 8-year-old Bullhead City girl two years ago that there was evidence
the victim was sexually assaulted.
The Kingman Daily Miner and the Mohave Valley Daily News reported that
Detective Brandon Grasse testified Friday during a Mohave County Superior Court
hearing in the case of Justin James Rector.
Prosecutors said they plan to seek the death penalty if Rector is convicted of
first-degree murder in the September 2014 killing of Isabella "Bella"
Grogan-Cannella. Rector is also charged with kidnapping, child abuse and
abandonment of a dead body.
The girl's partially clothed body was found in a shallow grave near her home.
Judge Lee Jantzen ruled during the hearing that prosecutors had established
probable cause to seek a death sentence for Rector, if he is convicted of
murder.
Circumstances cited for a death sentence included: the victim's age being under
age 15, the death being committed in a cruel or heinous manner and the
defendant having committed a serious offense other than murder.
"Asphyxia due to strangulation," Grasse said when asked by prosecutor Greg
McPhillips during the hearing to comment on the autopsy and how the girl died.
He also said there was evidence of sexual assault.
"It was cruel and it was horrible," McPhillips said.
Rector's attorney, Gerald Gavin, argued that there was no evidence of sexual
abuse and there was no evidence the murder was cruel or heinous compared to
other death row inmates whose victims were tortured over time. He argued that
the girl was killed quickly, but he conceded that she was under age 15.
McPhillips countered that the girl's death was cruel because of her young age
and that she trusted Rector, a family friend, who had stayed with her family.
(source: Associated Press)
CALIFORNIA:
Death is Different: What defenders of capital punishment get wrong
Last week, in a reactionary op-ed littered with Trump-inspired flourish,
Sacramento District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert ramped up her personal,
public, and political crusade for Proposition 66 in California (and its dubious
promise of quick, yet somehow still accurate, state-sanctioned killings).
Schubert was responding to my column published at the end of last month,
"California Voters can tip the balance in death penalty debate," or as Schubert
assailed it, "Stephen Cooper's latest rant against the death penalty in
California." Following her dismissive, Trump-style personal attack, Schubert's
response immediately devolves into Trumpish narcissism ("Proposition 66 was
conceived by some of the brightest legal minds in California"), followed by the
trumpeting of a controversial and misleading poll concerning Californians
alleged support for the death penalty.
Schubert's op-ed extols Proposition 66 - which promises to speed executions in
California, though not hardly as much as advertised - given Schubert's
remarkable concession that: "The initiative does not impose a rigid deadline
that must be met in every case. Courts are allowed to go longer in
extraordinary cases."
Schubert badly needs to brush up on Supreme Court case law because, as The New
York Times observed 14 years ago: "The Supreme Court has long professed the
principle that 'death is different,' that in order to deprive someone of his
life, the state must be punctilious about providing him every procedural
protection." Just 1 eloquent example of this is Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1,
45-46 (1957) (on rehearing) (Frankfurter, J., concurring) ("The taking of life
is irrevocable. It is in capital cases especially that the balance of
conflicting interests must be weighed most heavily in favor of the procedural
safeguards of the Bill of Rights.").
What Schubert troublingly fails to grasp, despite touting her background having
prosecuted death penalty cases, is that each and every death penalty case is
"extraordinary." In ignorance of this
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide----CYP., PHILIP., INDON., MALAY.
Sept. 6 CYPRUS: Constitutional changes over death penalty part of House shake-up Plenary sessions of the parliament will be moved from Thursday afternoons to Friday mornings, House president Demetris Syllouris announced on Monday after a meeting with party leaders. Syllouris said Monday's meeting was the 1st with party heads to mark the new parliamentary term. Elections were held in May. "We discussed many issues, some of which will continue at the next meeting," he said. One of the first items on the new plenum's agenda this Friday would be a discussion on the removal of a provision for the death penalty that remains in the constitution even though Cyprus abolished it by law in 1983 for murder cases and in 2002 for all other offences. Article 7 states: "No person shall be deprived of his life except in the execution of a sentence of a competent court following his conviction of an offence for which this penalty is provided by law. A law may provide for such penalty only in cases of premeditated murder, high treason, piracy jure gentium and capital offences under military law." Cyprus is a signatory of the second optional protocol of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which provides for full abolition of capital punishment, even though it registered reservations at the time about abolishing execution for grave crimes in times of war. The last 2 executions by hanging were carried out in June 1962 for murder. British executioner Harry Allen - well known during the EOKA years - along with John Underhill came to Cyprus to carry out the executions. Syllouris said the fact the provision remained in the constitution gives lawmakers the power to vote again on reinstating the death penalty and that is why it needs to be removed. "This morning I spoke with the president and the attorney-general and briefed the party leaders and I will go to speak with the minister of justice in order to change the constitution because our laws abolished the death penalty," he said. He said the issue would be discussed at the Friday, September 9 plenary. Syllouris also said he had told the party leaders that he would be appointing an informal legal council attached to the parliament "composed of 3 eminent lawyers, unpaid and of recognised standing" as advisers to the body. On his reorganisation of the House workings, Syllouris said he had given out a new parliamentary committee programme to deputies so that if they were members of two or more committees, the schedules would not overlap. Party leaders' meetings would from now on also not take place immediately prior to the plenum as has been the practice up until now. "This caused delays to the start of the plenary and put pressure on discussion of the issues themselves," he said. Syllouris said that with his suggestions, parliament could double the amount of work it does. He also plans to find ways to make speech time more efficient during plenary sessions. He said this would involve planning ahead and not deciding at the last minute how much time should be given to what topic or what speaker. "They will know in advance the time limits for each party and MP," he said. (source: Cyprus Mail) PHILIPPINES: The Supreme Court and the Duterte presidency President Rody Duterte will be in office as head of state and head of government from 2016 to June 30, 2022, or for a period of 6 years. Within that span of time, 12 out of the 15 justices in the Supreme Court shall retire. Thus, the president shall have the opportunity to appoint no less than 12 members of the highest court of the land. That is a tremendous opportunity to fill up the Supreme Court with judges, prosecutors and lawyers who share the president's paradigm and perspectives on law and public policy. And so, even after he shall have left the presidency, the Duterte legal philosophies shall continue to animate the High Court. And that is tremendous power and influence. When we say Duterte legal philosophies, we mean the legal perspectives that favor death penalty, that is unforgiving and unforgiving when it comes to drug offenders, and drug-related murders, rapes, robberies, kidnapping, arson and other heinous crimes against persons, against properties and against humanity. The president will most probably appoint legal luminaries who are not hesitant to impose the capital punishment (once death penalty is reinstated in our penal code), and those prosecutors who have records of passionate drives against crimes and corruptions. Mindanao lawyers and San Beda law graduates will have better chances to be appointed to the highest court. 12 justices are retiring compulsorily upon reaching their respective 70th birthday. This year alone, 2 justices are retiring, namely: Jose Perez on 14th of December and Arturo Brion on December 29. 2 justices will retire in 2017, namely: Bienvenido Reyes on July 6 and Jose
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----N.C., NEV.
Sept. 6 NORTH CAROLINA: Death penalty trial in 2013 home-invasion killing of Ardmore woman to start Tuesday Starting today, Forsyth County prosecutors will try to prove that a Winston-Salem man fatally shot an Ardmore woman twice in the head during a home-invasion nearly 3 years ago. And that man, Anthony Vinh Nguyen, 24, is expected to take the stand and tell a jury that he couldn't have shot Shelia Pace Gooden to death in October 2013 for 1 simple reason - he wasn't there. . The case is high stakes and high profile - Nguyen faces a possible death sentence if a jury finds him guilty of 1st-degree murder. He also faces charges of 1st-degree kidnapping, 1st-degree burglary and armed robbery. Nguyen is 1 of 3 men charged in the home-invasion on Oct. 10, 2013; the others are Daniel Aaron Benson, 25, of Stockdale Place, and Steven George Assimos, 24, of Colonial Place. Nguyen is the only one, though, to face the death penalty because prosecutors believe he is the one who pulled the trigger. Benson and Assimos are expected to testify that Nguyen was the one who planned the robbery and killed Gooden. Gooden's son, Cory Joe Prince, was in the house when the home invasion occurred and is expected to testify that he saw Nguyen enter first with a gun. This is the 3rd death penalty trial in Forsyth County in the past 7 years - Timothy Hartford was given the death sentence in 2010 for killing a 64-year-old man in his Jonestown Road home and the Meals on Wheels volunteer who had come to deliver a meal to the man. Juan Carlos Rodrigues was sentenced to death in 2014 for strangling and decapitating his estranged his wife. Assistant District Attorneys Jennifer Martin and Ben White are prosecuting Nguyen. David Botchin and John Bryson are representing Nguyen. Martin and Botchin declined to comment last week about the case. Conflicting testimony Gooden, who grew up in Mocksville and worked at the Waffle House on Jonestown Road, was at her home at 700 Magnolia St., with her son, Cory, when prosecutors say Nguyen, Assimos and Benson broke in about 11:30 p.m. on Oct. 10, 2013, Armed with a .380-caliber gun, the 3 men held Gooden hostage, officials allege. Prince told Winston-Salem police he heard 1 to 5 shots as he escaped through a back door. According to a search warrant, Benson and Assimos told Winston-Salem police that Nguyen shot Gooden and they all left the house with a flat-screen TV worth $200. Winston-Salem police were called and when officers got there, they were told 2 armed suspects were still inside. SWAT team members were called and eventually went into the house in the early morning hours of Oct. 11, 2013. That's when they found Gooden's body. Botchin and Bryson have said in court papers that they plan to present an alibi defense. And the only witness they plan to call is Nguyen. The 2 attorneys have not said what Nguyen's alibi will be, except to say that he was somewhere else when Gooden was shot. It's not clear what physical evidence there is in the case. Winston-Salem police have not said whether a gun was recovered. What is clear is that prosecutors and Nguyen's attorneys have been arguing over access to physical evidence for more than a year. In 2014, Botchin said in court papers that he could not properly advise Nguyen on a plea deal that prosecutors were offering because at that point, he had not been able to see any of the physical evidence. Botchin and Bryson have also complained about the delay in analyzing the physical evidence. Much of the delay had to do with protocols that the State Crime Lab put into place to deal with backlogs. The Crime Lab limits the amount of evidence law-enforcement can submit for analysis. Late last month, Botchin and Bryson filed a motion asking for any handwritten notes that prosecutors took while interviewing various witnesses, including Assimos. Favorable treatment A key issue in the case is going to be whether Benson and Assimos were offered any kind of deals in exchange for their testimony. Martin has said in court that she has not offered any plea deals to Benson and Assimos. But Botchin and Bryson plan to call an expert witness - Ernest L. Connor Jr., a Pitt County criminal defense attorney who specializes in death penalty cases - to argue that Benson and Assimos likely have an expectation for lenient treatment because prosecutors have not pursued the death penalty against them. That fact that they aren't facing the death penalty, Connor said in an affidavit, "is an unspoken concession that implies lenient treatment is to come," Connor said in an affidavit. Connor also points to the fact that no trial dates have been set for either Benson or Assimos. "The impact of the State separating accomplices Benson's and Assimos' cases from Mr. Nguyen's and placing Benson's and Assimos' cases on a different track supports the unspoken concession that their cases will
