[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide
Dec. 8 INDIA: Nithari Killings: Death sentence to Pandher and Koli Special Central Bureau of Investigation Judge PK Tiwari had held them guilty on Thursday, saying that they both deserved to be punished since both were involved in the crime. A CBI court in Ghaziabad has awarded death penalty to businessman Maninder Singh Pandher and his aide Surinder Koli guilty in the rape and murder of housemaid Anjali in 2006. Special Central Bureau of Investigation Judge PK Tiwari had held them guilty on Thursday, saying that they both deserved to be punished since both were involved in the crime. Maninder Singh Pandher has been found guilty in 3 cases - he has been sentenced to death in 2. His aide, Surinder, has also been also awarded death sentence in the 8 cases he has been guilty in. Chargesheets were filed against the 2 accused in 16 of the 19 cases, out of which 9 cases have been decided to date. (source: ddinews.gov.in) * New study: Former top judges acknowledge crisis in criminal justice system, yet back death penaltyA fascinating new study involving 60 former Supreme Court judges brings out the problem of arbitrariness in awarding capital punishment. Judges, especially those from the Supreme Court, have an aura of infallibility around them. They are expected to be objective enforcers of the spirit of the law, keeping aside their prejudices. Ideally, they are to be guided by the law alone. But there are areas in criminal jurisprudence where objectivity slips away and discretion takes over. This can have serious implications, especially if the matter involves the question of life and death. A fascinating new study undertaken by the Centre for Death Penalty and published by the National Law University, Delhi, brings out the many contradictions that plague the process of awarding the death penalty in India. As the debate on whether capital punishment should be abolished rages on, the study, which involved interviews with 60 former judges of the Supreme Court, has exposed serious flaws in the system and presents a solid argument in favour of getting rid of the death sentence. Many of the judges interviewed agreed to the fact that the criminal justice system is broken. That the police resort to all sorts of illegal means to ensure a conviction - they torture the accused, plant evidence and abuse laid down procedures. A weak legal aid infrastructure means that the accused, especially those from weaker sections of society, have no meaningful help to challenge these abuses. More disturbing, however, is the undermining of guidelines the Supreme Court put together in determining a fit case for death penalty. This is often referred to as the "rarest of rare" doctrine. Responses from the judges in the study suggest there was hardly any consistency in how they determined if the case was among the "rarest of rare", with socio-economic background, individual predilections and how the judges as individuals perceive the brutality of the crime often determining the end sentence. Worse, despite the Supreme Court itself having rejected public opinion as a guiding principle in awarding capital punishment, several judges pointed to the effect the crime committed on the public psyche as an important factor in sending the accused person to the gallows. The picture the study paints is this: despite attempts to regulate the award of death sentences, arbitrariness in determination is rampant. This leads to the next obvious question: if discretion drives decision-making, has the "rarest of rare doctrine" failed? The study The study, conducted over the last 18 months, interviewed 60 former judges of the Supreme Court. In India, any death penalty imposed by the trial court has to be confirmed by the High Court. The convict can then approach the Supreme Court in appeal. The decision of the apex court is final, keeping aside the Constitutional power of the President and Governors to commute the sentence or pardon the convict. The interviews are a fascinating window into the workings of the judges' minds when they deal with cases of capital punishment. The 1st part of the study involved eliciting the views of the judges about the current state of the criminal justice system. A criminal case typically involves 3 stages: filing of the case and investigation, judicial trial, and sentencing, which is essentially the awarding of punishment for the crime committed. The 1st stage depends heavily on the quality of the investigation agencies and the law that guides the process. The judges' responses clearly show that the police rampantly abuse procedures established by law to successfully prosecute those it believes have committed that particular crime. In the study, 38 of the 39 judges who discussed the use of torture in investigations believed that it was rampant. Only one judge, a former chief justice of India, said torture
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----COLO., ARIZ., CALIF., USA
Dec. 8 COLORADO: Announcement expected Friday in Montour murder cases The 4th Judicial Circuit District Attorney will make a public announcement about the case of Edward Montour Friday afternoon. The man accused of beating his daughter to death in 1997 and then killing a jail guard in 2002 has run through over a decade of court proceedings. District Attorney Dan May will host a press conference in front of the courthouse on Tejon, across from the Pioneer's Museum at 1:30 p.m. Other law enforcement figures will be there, including Colorado Springs Police Chief Pete Carey and Dr. Leon Kelly from the El Paso County Coroner's Office. According to the DA, in March '97, Montour beat his 11-week-old daughter while her mother was at work. Little Taylor Montour suffered a broken femur, multiple broken ribs, a skull fracture and bleeding in her brain. She would later die. A jury of his peers found Montour guilty of 1st-degree murder and child abuse resulting in death the following year, the DA's office says. He was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. Time would pass before Montour was again in court, this time for allegedly killing Eric Autobee, a prison guard at the Limon Correctional Facility's kitchen. While fighting those charges, he tried to revisit his conviction for killing his daughter. The DA says he was trying to lessen the consequences he would eventually face for killing Autobee. Autobee's surviving family asked the DA to stop trying to get the death penalty for Montour - during the 12 years of trials. Eventually, prosecutors did once Montour pleaded guilty - and agreed to a life sentence without the possibility of parole. In their release announcing the press conference, the DA's office refers to Montour's alleged "endless legal maneuvering, misinformation introduced as fact and seemingly never-ending delays," in his case. Those lines are most likely referring to, among other things, Montour's legal team's successful lobbying in April 2014 to have the cause of his daughter's death changed from "homicide" to "undetermined." His legal team would then ardently, if unsuccessfully push that he was wrongly convicted of his daughter's death - an outcome that allegedly led him to kill Autobee. He also pleaded not guilty to killing Autobee in 2013 by reason of insanity - a plea that would be later dropped. In 2003, he was ordered to be put to death by a judge. The ruling went all the way to the state's Supreme Court where it was decided only a jury could put someone to death. The DA is expected to talk about Montour's case during their press conference: what made it so unique, challenging and interesting? They'll also discuss what they call the importance of the court's ruling. (source: KUSA TV news) ARIZONA: Prosecutors to Seek Death Penalty in Phoenix Serial Killings Prosecutors plan to seek the death penalty against a former city bus driver charged in a string of deadly nighttime shootings in Phoenix that led some people in neighborhoods where the attacks occurred to stay inside after dark. A notice of intent to seek the death penalty against 23-year-old Aaron Juan Saucedo was filed Wednesday in 8 of the 9 killings in which Saucedo is charged with 1st-degree murder. It's not known yet whether prosecutors will seek the death penalty in the 9th killing. Prosecutor Juan Martinez said in court records that the death penalty was being sought because the killings were committed in a cold and calculated manner. Thomas Glow, an attorney representing Saucedo, declined to comment on the plan to seek the death penalty against his client. Saucedo has pleaded not guilty to charges of 1st-degree murder, attempted murder and drive-by shooting in attacks that killed 9 people and wounded 2 others during a nearly 1-year period that ended in July 2016. At court hearing in May, Saucedo declared that he was innocent. Investigators said the victims were shot by Saucedo as he prowled the neighborhoods in a car and opened fire from inside it or stepped out briefly to shoot before driving away. The victims were outside their homes or sitting in cars during the attacks. Most of the killings were in a mostly Latino neighborhood. Police said the victims included a 21-year-old man whose girlfriend was pregnant with their son and a 12-year-girl who was shot to death along with her mother and a friend of the woman. Authorities say a 9mm shell casing was found in Saucedo's car when it was seized by police. Police say the casing was fired from the same gun as the shells found in the aftermath of 9 of the 12 attacks. The killings stumped investigators for months, but they got a break in April when Saucedo was arrested in the August 2015 fatal shooting of 61-year-old Raul Romero, whose girlfriend was Saucedo's mother. It's unclear whether prosecutors are seeking the death penalty against Saucedo in Romero's
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, PENN., FLA., ALA., OHIO, NEB.
Dec. 8 TEXAS: Texas district attorney who prosecuted Jeff Wood now wants him off death row The prosecutor in the death penalty case of a man who didn't kill anyone has asked the parole board and Gov. Greg Abbott to change his sentence to life in prison. Now the Kerr County district attorney, Lucy Wilke was the prosecutor in the 1998 murder trial of Jeff Wood - a man whose scheduled execution last year prompted lawmakers to question when the state should put accomplices to death. Although she originally decided to seek the death penalty for Wood, she said in a letter to the prison parole board that "the penalty now appears to be excessive." Wilke asked the board to recommend Gov. Greg Abbott grant clemency and change Wood's sentence to life in prison. The letter was sent in August, but The Texas Tribune received a copy from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Thursday after a Wednesday court order referred to it. "While I am aware that requests for clemency in Death Penalty Capital Murder cases are normally considered when there is an execution date pending, I respectfully ask that you consider this request for commutation of sentence and act on it now, in the absence of such an execution date, in the interest of justice and judicial economy," she wrote. The letter was co-signed by Kerrville Police Chief David Knight, who was an officer at the time of the murder, and the district judge who is handling Wood's current appeal, Keith Williams. A spokeswoman for Abbott did not immediately respond to requests for comment about the letter, but the governor has not changed a death-sentenced individual's sentence since he took office in 2015. A spokesman for the parole board did not say whether members have voted on the request. Jeff Wood's case gained national attention in August 2016, as his execution date neared. Wood, now 44, was convicted and sentenced to death in a 1996 Kerrville convenience store murder - he was sitting outside in the truck when his friend, Daniel Reneau, pulled the trigger that killed clerk Kriss Keeran. As an accomplice, he was sentenced under Texas' felony murder statute, commonly known as the law of parties, which holds that anyone involved in a crime resulting in death is equally responsible, even if they weren't directly involved in the killing. Wood's attorneys claimed he didn???t go to the store with the intention of having Keeran killed and didn't even know Reneau brought a gun. Prosecutors disputed that fact, saying Wood knew Reneau would kill Keeran if he didn't cooperate. In the months before his scheduled death, Wood's case drew the spotlight on Texas' law of parties, and a bipartisan group of state lawmakers sought to stop the execution. Rep. Jeff Leach, R-Plano, said more than 50 House members signed onto a letter he wrote asking Abbott and the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles to reduce Wood's sentence. In this year's legislative session, lawmakers tried unsuccessfully to limit death sentences for those convicted under the law of parties. 6 days before his execution, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals stopped it and sent the case back to the trial court in Kerr County to review Wood's claim that a jury was improperly persuaded to hand down a death sentence because of testimony from a highly criticized psychiatrist nicknamed "Dr. Death." Wood's lawyers claimed the psychiatrist, Dr. James Grigson, lied to jurors about how many cases he had testified in and how often he found a defendant would be a future danger. The lawyers claimed he almost always found they would be. A person can only be sentenced to death if a jury unanimously agrees that he or she would present a danger. In her letter, Wilke cites the issues with Grigson's testimony as reason for requesting a change of sentence. She claims she was unaware at the time of the trial that he had been expelled from the American Psychiatric Association and Texas Society of Psychiatric Physicians. "Had I known about Dr. Grigson's issues with said organizations, I would not have used him as the State's expert witness in this case on the issue of future dangerousness," she wrote. Wilke said she wants clemency for Wood because of Grigson's testimony and other factors including: the fact that he wasn't the shooter, his documented history of low intelligence and his nonviolent history in and out of prison. She mentioned that 3 jurors have submitted affidavits saying they would not have agreed Wood presented a future danger if they'd been aware of Grigson's issues. In April, the Kerr County court paused its review of the Grigson claims after Wood's lawyers said they and the state???s lawyers were in discussions about a "possible settlement," according to a Wednesday court order by the Court of Criminal Appeals. The order directed the trial court to resume its review regardless of the prosecution's request to leadership that Wood's sentence
