[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide
Mar. 5 BRITAIN: Death penalty has no place in Britain EACH day seems to bring news of another murder conviction. Last week it was Shane Haynes, sentenced to life for stabbing Geraldine Brocklehurst on the streets of Huddersfield. Further afield, there's been Leeds nurse Colin Norris, who killed 4 elderly patients in his care, and the Warrington youths who kicked father-of-3 Garry Newlove to death. And of course there was Steve Wright, who murdered 5 women in Suffolk including Anneli Alderton from Huddersfield. Faced with these apparently endless examples of barbarism, some people are demanding the return of capital punishment. Looking at the discussion forum on the Examiner's website, I notice voices raised in support of the death penalty there. And when a national newspaper asked its readers recently if it was time to bring back the hangman, nearly 100,000 of them voted and only 1% said no. It seems that, faced with the daily sight of heartbroken families on television screens, some people have decided that executing those responsible for this grief is the only option. But, though I may be in a minority, I believe that capital punishment is wrong no matter how much some people may deserve to be hung. Supporters of the death penalty often say that it acts as a deterrent to would-be murderers. I have never seen any evidence to support this claim and I think its based on a false assumption. The kind of people who kill are also the sort who put little value on their own life. If you're put off murdering by the possibility of your own death, then you're unlikely to be the kind of person who would commit a pre-meditated killing in the first place. Of all the killers I mentioned at the top of the column, I doubt that any of them has a particularly high sense of their own worth. I don't think they would have been deterred from committing their atrocious acts by the prospect of the hangman's noose. Then there is the issue of vengeance. Some people who have seen a loved one murdered want the culprit to pay for their crime with their life. That is of course understandable. But a civilised government should concern itself with justice not revenge. We need only look at the countries which use the death penalty the most often to illustrate this point. 9 out of 10 executions across the world take place in just 6 countries: China, Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, Sudan and the US. With the possible exception of America, these are not exactly countries whose political systems the average Examiner reader would want to live under. In short, the death penalty club is not one that Britain should wish to join. The only half-way decent argument for hanging which I can see, is a brutal economic one. It is comparatively cheap to execute a man, but hideously expensive to feed and clothe him for the rest of his life. And that hardly seems to me to be a good enough reason to bring back hanging. The single greatest argument against capital punishment is that dead men cannot be released when mistakes whether deliberate or accidental are made. Would those 99% who voted for capital punishment be so keen on it when innocent men swung from the gallows? Would the deaths of the Birmingham 6, the Guildford 4 and a host of others be a price worth paying? And there may be more examples of wrongly-hanged men still to emerge. Several retired police officers in the Huddersfield area are currently investigating the case of Alfred Moore. He was hanged in 1952 for shooting dead 2 police officers outside his Kirkheaton farmhouse the previous year. In the eyes of the law he remains a guilty man, but 3 retired police officers have told me they are convinced he did not pull the trigger. What if they are right? How would Moore's family feel then, knowing that he had died long before his time? Former Conservative Home Secretary Michael Howard hardly a cuddly liberal used to be in favour of the death penalty. But he changed his mind when miscarriages of justice like the Birmingham Six came to light. It is a little ironic that those in favour of capital punishment tend to be like Mr Howard on the right of the political spectrum. Conservatives are often dubious about a government's ability to run something like a rail system or a bank. Yet they would give the criminal justice system which is a branch of government a power of life and death which it doesn't currently have. Surely they can't believe that the police and the courts would do no wrong? Or is the inevitable execution of innocent men a price worth paying? (source: BaryyGibson, The Huddersfield Daily Examiner) SAUDI ARABIAexecution Yemeni beheaded in Saudi Arabia SAUDI authorities beheaded a Yemeni by the sword after he was convicted of murdering a compatriot in the southwestern town of Jizan, the interior ministry said. Abdullah al-Omari was found guilty of stabbing to death Ahmed al-Wadidi after a fist fight between the two men, said a
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----FLA.
March 5 FLORIDA: Jurors Vote for Death in Roadside Slaying Jurors deliberated for about 4 hours today before voting to recommend Lawrence Joey Smith be executed for killing a Land O' Lakes High School student. The final vote was 7-5 to send 30-year-old Smith, of Shady Hills, back to Florida's death row for killing 17-year-old Robert Crawford in 1999. Unlike when a jury is deciding guilt or innocence, when verdicts must be unanimous, a sentencing recommendation is decided by a majority vote. Prosecutors argued Smith deserved the ultimate punishment. Lawrence Joey Smith, back on Sept. 14, 1999, was a young man - 21 or 22 years old, Assistant State Attorney Manny Garcia said in his closing argument today. However, he was old enough to know better. I would suggest there is mitigation in this case, but I would suggest to you that the mitigation does not outweigh the aggravating factors. The mitigation is little, if any. The law and the evidence suggest that you return a recommendation of death. Smith shot Crawford and fellow Land O' Lakes High student Stephen Tuttle, then 16, and left them for dead on the side of State Road 54 near Land O' Lakes. Tuttle survived and recounted the shooting for jurors last week. In giving his closing arguments, defense attorney Keith Hammond urged jurors not to recommend a death sentence for Smith. At this point, what good would it do to kill him? Hammond asked. Does that benefit society? Regrettably, we can't bring Mr. Crawford back. You can't change what's happened. We can change the future. If someone is being a positive influence and if someone is amenable to rehabilitation, if they can be controlled, isn't that the way to break the cycle of violence? Isn't that the merciful thing to do? Smith was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death in 2001. However, the Florida Supreme Court overturned his death sentence and ordered that he be resentenced. Today, jurors will be asked to decide, by a majority vote, whether Smith should live or die. His conviction still stands. A judge will make the final decision, giving great weight to the jury's recommendation. (source: Tampa Tribune) ** Man Convicted in Slaying Makes Plea for Life to Jury Lawrence Joey Smith had a tough upbringing. His father died when he was 10, depriving him of a positive male role model. He began drinking and smoking shortly after and eventually became a drug addict. He became a criminal as a teen and went to prison at a young age. Later, he lost a beloved brother to cancer. Smith, 30, of Shady Hills, testified Monday in a last-ditch attempt to avoid a death sentence for the 1999 murder of 17-year-old Robert Crawford. His sentencing began last week and is expected to conclude today with the jury returning a recommendation of life in prison or the death penalty. Smith ended his testimony with a plea: If you do give me a chance to live the rest of my life in prison, I guarantee you, I'll do my best to do as much good as I can from where I'm at, he said. Smith's recounting of his life story stayed true to what jurors have come to expect from convicted killers trying to avoid a death sentence: a rugged childhood, rebellious teenage years and substance abuse problems preceding their crimes. After come claims of personal change, coupled with spiritual awakening. The panel must decide how much credence to give Smith's testimony of change. Smith testified he hasn't caused any problems for jail or prison staff in seven years. He said he has given his life to mentoring other defendants he meets, including slaying suspect John Ditullio, who testified on Smith's behalf Friday. I see kids coming into jail pretty much walking down the same path I was walking down at the time, Smith said from the stand Monday. I believe I have a better chance of getting through to them then most other people, because I've been there myself. Like with Mr. Ditullio. I can relate to him in a way that few people can because I've been in his shoes. I guess you'd say it gives me more credibility. Smith's journey into the court system began in September 1999. He was using drugs all day, every day. Faunce Pearce, his co-defendant in the case, was his supplier. Getting revenge for $1,200 in lost drug money put the men in Pearce's 1977 Firebird with Crawford and 16-year-old Stephen Tuttle in the wee hours of Sept. 14, 1999. Pearce stopped the car on the side of State Road 54 in Land O' Lakes and ordered Tuttle out. Someone fired a shot into Tuttle's head. Pearce then drove the car 200 yards and stopped again. Crawford was ordered out and shot twice. Tuttle survived the shooting and was able to flag down help. Crawford died on the side of the road. Smith has denied shooting the teens, even though two men who were in the car that night have testified to the contrary. Smith and Pearce, 45, of Shady Hills, were tried separately in 2001. Both were convicted and sentenced to
[Deathpenalty] [POSSIBLE SPAM] death penalty news----TENN., S. DAK., ALA., OKLA., VA., PENN.
Mar. 4 TENNESSEE: 4 carjacking suspects face death penalty Prosecution pushes for new DNA samples Prosecutors' push for death as punishment for all 4 suspects in a fatal carjacking came as no surprise to the quartet's defenders. Their bid for hair and swab samples for DNA testing is proving a legal shocker, however, with at least one defense team questioning whether the state has lost or destroyed similar evidence collected more than a year ago. Knox County Criminal Court Judge Richard Baumgartner has set a Friday hearing on a motion filed by Assistant District Attorney General Leland Price seeking a dozen samples each of head and pubic hair and two swabs from inside the mouths of the suspects in the January 2007 slayings of a 21-year-old University of Tennessee student and her 23-year-old boyfriend. Attorney Kim Parton, who represents Letalvis Rome Cobbins, and defense team Tom Dillard and Steve Johnson, who represent George Thomas, challenged the request Monday, arguing samples were taken and tested more than a year ago. In a brief filed by Johnson, Thomas' defenders went one step further, openly questioning whether samples obtained last year and used in earlier testing had been lost or destroyed. The state's motion raises serious questions about whether it, its agents or others acting on its behalf have degraded or destroyed the biological samples obtained prior to (the quartet's indictment), Johnson wrote. Cobbins, girlfriend Vanessa Coleman, brother Lemaricus Slim Davidson and Thomas all are charged with kidnapping, robbing, raping, torturing and killing Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom after what began as an apparent carjacking. District Attorney General Randy Nichols announced at Monday's hearing that he would seek the lives of Davidson and Thomas should the pair be convicted in the slayings. He and Price already had filed the necessary paperwork to seek the death penalty against Cobbins and Coleman. The hearing was supposed to serve as a chance for Baumgartner to appoint a new attorney to serve as second chair to Parton. Suspects facing death are entitled under state law to 2 defense attorneys, at least one of whom must be skilled in handling capital cases. Parton is qualified under the law and is Cobbins' primary defender. However, attorney Rick Clark, appointed to help Parton in the case, has been hospitalized with cancer. Baumgartner sought on Monday to appoint attorney Bruce Poston to the case. Poston said he was reluctant but would agree at the judge's behest. However, Nichols countered that Poston may have a conflict, alleging Cobbins has made incriminating statements to another of Poston's clients with whom Cobbins is housed in the Knox County Jail. That issue also will be addressed Friday. However, the real fight on Friday will be over DNA testing. According to Price's motion, hair not belonging to either Christian or Newsom has been recovered from the crime scene, although it wasn't clear from his motion whether the hair came from Christian's Toyota 4-Runner or the Chipman Street house where the couple was held hostage and tortured before their deaths. However, search warrant affidavits filed soon after the pair's bodies were discovered and the suspects rounded up show that samples of hair and saliva already have been collected. Johnson wrote in his response that those samples have been tested and compared to the hair found at the crime scene. No match at all was indicated with Mr. Thomas, Johnson wrote. It was not immediately clear Monday whether attorney David Eldridge, who represents Davidson, and attorney Russell T. Greene, who along with a Kentucky attorney is representing Coleman, also will fight the DNA sample request. (source: Knoxville News-Sentinel) SOUTH DAKOTA: Death penalty not pursued The prosecution in the murder case of Tamara Magic of Rapid City has decided not to seek the death penalty against Tad Blackburn. The 44-year-old woman was found beaten and stabbed in her home on November 8th. Blackburn, who is 22, is being held on a $1 million bond. His trial on a charge of 1st-degree murder is scheduled for next month. Authorities say Blackburn was driving Magic's car when he was arrested in Box Elder the day after she was killed. (source: Associated Press) ALABAMA: Lackey facing death penaltyJury finds him guilty of murder, urges execution Andrew Lackey stared straight ahead with no visible reaction Monday morning when he heard a jury had convicted him of 2 counts of capital murder nor later in the day when the jury recommended the death penalty. The jury of 7 women and 5 men deliberated about two hours Monday, after spending about 30 minutes in the jury room late Friday afternoon, before finding that Lackey killed Charlie Newman, 80, in Newman's Hine Street home on Halloween night in 2005. The jury spent about 90 minutes Monday afternoon deciding that Lackey should be put to death for his convictions of
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TENN., KY., USA, ILL., OKLA., N.H., MD.
Mar. 3 TENNESSEE: Death penalty sought against Kingsport candleshop double murder suspect The state will seek the death penalty against a man arrested in New York last March in connection with 2 execution-style killings in November 2005, Sullivan County Assistant District Attorney Barry Staubus said Monday. Leslie Allen Ware Jr., 29, is one of several suspects charged in connection with the murders of Jeffrin Nolan, 27, and Terrance Alexander, 21, at the former Sole candle shop on Myrtle Street. Ware is charged with 2 counts of 1st-degree murder and 1 count each of especially aggravated robbery and criminal conspiracy to commit aggravated robbery. He remains jailed on $500,000 bond. (source: Kingsport Times News) KENTUCKY: Death penaltyMan charged with murder, attempted murder hopes for a non-capital case Defense attorneys for a London man charged with a 2006 Big Hill murder are asking for the death penalty to be taken off the table. Douglas Wayne Hall II, 29, of London is charged with complicity to commit murder, criminal attempt to commit murder and 1st-degree robbery in the death of Margaret Faye Jackson, 56, of Big Hill and attempted murder of Mitchell Turner, 37. A status hearing in Madison Circuit Court was scheduled Thursday, but was continued until next month. We filed a motion to preclude them from seeking the death penalty based upon the plea agreement with the guy who actually did the killing, said Tucker Richardson, attorney for Hall. They (Madison commonwealth's attorneys) gave Tony Hodge a life sentence and now they want to seek the death penalty on Doug Hall. It just doesn't seem proper. Hodge, 27, pleaded guilty in September 2007 to shooting and stabbing Jackson and Turner multiple times at Jacksons home in late January 2006. Turner, who was left for dead, survived his injuries. Jackson was pronounced dead at the scene by the Madison County Coroner's Office, while Turner was taken via ambulance to St. Joseph Berea Hospital and later to the University of Kentucky Medical Center in Lexington. At the time of the incident, Kentucky State Police Trooper First Class Chris Lanham said Hodge and Hall kicked in the front door of Jackson's trailer and looted the home after killing Jackson and injuring Turner. An undetermined amount of cash allegedly was stolen along with a rifle. In October, Hodge accepted a life sentence for Jackson's murder and 20-year sentences for Mitchells attempted murder, first-degree robbery and 1st-degree burglary. We want to proceed as a non-capital case, Richardson said. The facts bear out the fact that my client sat in the car and Tony Hodge, when they took him up in front of the judge to do the guilty plea, he said, 'I just went in there and went crazy.' I don't think it is fair to subject Doug to the death penalty when his co-defendant, the guy who admittedly did the shooting got a life sentence. Hodge also received an additional 40-year prison sentence earlier this year in Laurel County for the murder of Matthew R. Smith. By Kentucky law, the two murder sentences are running concurrently. Hall's case has been dragging through court since the pair were arrested in May 2006. Richardson said Thursday the reason for that has been because of recusals and decisions about Hodge's case. They couldn't try them together and they elected to try Hodge first, Richardson said. And lo and behold, they (prosecutors) turned around and gave him a deal. Hall had a trial date and we were waiting for them to get done with (Hodge's) trial and they ended up doing that. We were waiting to put it on for a status hearing and the prosecutor (Madison Commonwealths Attorney David Smith) recused. Hall's 1st attorney, Earl Ray Neal, also had to recuse himself from the case after being elected district judge. No trial date has been set for Hall and the status hearing was rescheduled for March 14 at 10 a.m. Hall still is lodged in the Madison County Detention Center on a $250,000 bond. (source: The Richmond Register) USA: WE RECOMMEND BARACK OBAMA Texas Democrats have a chance to make history as they choose between 2 qualified presidential candidates. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton often seem to be singing from the same hymnbook, but that doesn't mean this race is a close call. On questions of substance and leadership style, Mr. Obama is the better choice. In sharp contrast to Mrs. Clinton's antics mocking his optimism, Mr. Obama has shown that it is possible to have both hope and intellectual heft. Her campaign has confused proximity to power with work experience, selectively taking credit for her husband's accomplishments. At times, Obama-mania has threatened to obscure the substantive differences between the two candidates' proposed policies. A close examination shows that Mr. Obama is on the right side of several key issues. Both senators aim to overhaul our health care system by lowering premiums and expanding subsidies. Mrs. Clinton's more
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide
URGENT ACTION APPEAL - From Amnesty International USA 27 February 2008 UA 51/08 Death Penalty GUATEMALA Proposed resumption of executions On 12 February the Congress of Guatemala approved Decree 06- 2008, known as the Law regulating the commuting of sentence for those condemned to death (Ley Reguladora de la Conmutacion de la Pena para los Condenados a Muerte), which established a procedure for those condemned to death to request a pardon from the President. Decree 06-2008 effectively leaves open the possibility of executions to resume after a prolonged de facto moratorium due to the absence of the presidential pardon facility. Decree 06-2008 was due to be sent by the Congress of Guatemala to the President on 26 February (according to the Constitution Congress has 10 days after the approval of a law to send it to the President). The President will have 15 days from the date he receives the Decree to either approve the law or veto it. In 2000, Congress had revoked the law which allowed those sentenced to death to apply for presidential clemency. In 2005 the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) found that Guatemala could not carry out executions without a clemency procedure in place and established criteria for such a procedure. Although Congress's passing of Decree 06-2008 is presented as Guatemala's attempt to comply with part of the IACHR's ruling, the new law in fact breaches both the ruling and international human rights law which the Guatemalan state has committed itself to respect: Firstly, Decree 06-2008 fails to mention and define the criteria under which pardons are to be granted, even though the IACHR's ruling ordered the Guatemalan state to specify clear criteria for evaluating individual petitions for pardon. This leaves Guatemala in breach of the American Convention on Human Rights, which establishes that countries must comply with the IACHR's judgements. In addition, Guatemala's own Constitution establishes that international human rights treaties prevail over national law. Secondly, according to Decree 06-2008, the lack of a presidential decision within 30 days of the application for commutation of the death sentence would suffice to consider the request tacitly rejected, which would therefore lead to immediate execution. This is known as negative administrative silence. Under the terms of the new law, administrative silence is effectively used as a means of speeding up executions and would result in the impossibility of appealing in order to stop them. Amnesty International considers the use of administrative silence, when related to the right of life in the context of impending executions as wholly unacceptable. In addition, administrative silence is legally inconsistent with the obligation to establish specific criteria for evaluating each case and take them into account. If an appeal for clemency were rejected by administrative silence, the authorities would be failing in their duty to substantiate their decisions following the criteria established by law. Moreover, by leading to immediate executions by default, administrative silence could lead to the execution of prisoners who have appealed their sentences to international bodies and whose cases are still pending. Amnesty International recognizes the grave situation of public security in Guatemala. With over 5,000 murders a year and a conviction rate of less than one per cent, there is understandably much public anxiety at the lack of security. To oppose capital punishment is not to excuse or minimize the consequences of violent crime. Amnesty International has been among many national and international organizations campaigning on behalf of victims of violent crime and recommending changes in public security policies for many years, in a manner consistent with human rights. BACKGROUND INFORMATION To end the death penalty is to recognize that it is a destructive, diversionary and divisive public policy that is not consistent with widely held values. It runs the risk of the irrevocable error of executing the innocent. It tends to be applied discriminatorily on grounds of race and class. It denies the possibility of reconciliation and rehabilitation. It promotes simplistic answers to the suffering of the murder victim's family, and extends that suffering to the
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, ILL., COLO., MD., US MIL.
March 6 TEXAS: Last year at this time, we were putting the final touches on Death No More, a special edition of our weekend editorial section that announced our reversal of more than 100 years of support for the death penalty. As the project manager on that section and the ongoing effort that it launched, I have fielded a lot of questions from readers about how we made the decision and about the issue itself. Most questions, of course, come from people who disagree with us. Almost immediately, I received e-mails from people asking a question familiar to death penalty opponents: What if it were your family member who was killed? I'm not a robot. I'm human, and I imagine I would want revenge. But I hope I would pray for grace and try to remember that government is not, and should never be, in the revenge business. We should not dispense punishment based on the wishes or emotions of those hurt by crime. If we did, we might see beatings and canings and torture - maybe even done in public to add some level of humiliation. Those punishments - indeed, that entire line of thinking - exist in countries far less civilized than ours, but, thank God, not here. As for how we reached our editorial decision, it had a lot to do with timing. In recent years, we agreed with Supreme Court decisions that limited the scope of capital punishment by prohibiting executions of minors and the mentally retarded. If these executions are unjustified, we asked ourselves, which ones could we defend? At the same time, the number of DNA exonerations nationwide kept growing. The Innocence Project was freeing people falsely accused and convicted of all kinds of crimes, and Dallas County saw more men than any other county in the nation walk free after new facts destroyed the cases against them. To date, 15 exonerates have been recorded in Dallas. After months of debate (we were not unanimous) and discussion, we tried to pick the most persuasive arguments. Recognizing that Texans demand high standards from their government, we decided we could not support a system of punishment that was both irreversible and imperfect. A lot of readers have challenged us on this point. What if DNA evidence is clear? What if there is absolutely no doubt in a case? Why scrap the whole system just because a case here and a case there proved to be flawed? The problem is that standards for a guilt verdict and a death sentence are already extremely high. A jury must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the person is guilty, and Texas juries must satisfy a complicated equation to impose a death sentence. Then the case must withstand the appeals process. And yet, mistakes have been made in non-death cases. Why risk fatal error? And there's a greater truth here: The system relies on the judgment of people, and people are incapable of perfect judgment. Most exonerations - and most cases - have nothing to do with DNA evidence, just the ever-evolving standards of forensic science and the shaky and often flawed memories of eye witnesses. There simply is no such thing as a perfect system of justice. Readers should know that we get questions from death penalty opponents who believe we haven't gone far enough and have failed to decry what they consider the inhumanity of conditions on death row. Others say we should be more aggressive in pushing the Legislature to abolish the death penalty. Still others say we have not chosen the best arguments. In January, I was honored to accept, on behalf of the editorial board, the 2007 Courage Award from the Texas Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. Several coalition members told me they wished we would argue that it costs so much more to kill an inmate than to sentence him to life in prison without parole. Indeed, they reminded me, it was our newspaper in the 1990s that did a comprehensive study of the costs. It needs to be updated, they argued. Maybe they're right, but part of me is uncomfortable reducing life-and-death decisions to dollars and cents. But we'll look into it. In the year since we announced our opposition to the death penalty, I have come to realize that there are a lot of thoughtful, provocative arguments to be made on both sides. More than anything, so far, I'm glad that our work has prompted greater discussion of the issue. After all, in most cases, when the people of the state of Texas take a life, the news is reduced to a brief mention inside the paper. We look forward to continuing the debate. (source: Michael Landauer is The News' assistant editorial page editor for Community Opinions. His e-mail address is mlandauer at dallasnews.com.) * Teenage killer takes 40 years in plea deal 1 of 2 teens charged in the 2006 killing of a longtime Dickinson merchant will testify against the other. That was among the primary terms of a plea agreement that will also send Andrew Young Money Brown III to prison for 40 years. Brown and Litrey Demond Turner, both 17, faced
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., CALIF., OKLA.
March 6 PENNSYLVANIA: Prosecutors seeking death penalty Luzerne County prosecutors say they will try to put a Hazleton man to death for killing a 2-year-old boy. Prosecutors plan to seek the death penalty for Alexander Garcia, 20, of West Diamond Avenue, because of the age of the victim and because Garcia killed the boy by means of torture. Police say Garcia beat his girlfriend's son, Emanuel Gonzalez, to death in December. An autopsy showed the boy suffered multiple beatings. Garcia is charged with homicide, while the boy's mother, Lillian Torres, faces charges of involuntary manslaughter and endangering the welfare of children in the case. The 2 are currently set to be tried together. The case has been assigned to Court of Common Pleas Judge Ann Lokuta. Garcia was charged after Hazleton police were called to Hazleton General Hospital, where the boy was pronounced dead Dec. 9. Torres told police she moved to Hazleton with her son and Garcia from Rochester, N.Y., police said. After the move, Garcia became angry and started hitting the boy for his inability to be toilet trained, police said. Police claim Garcia violently spanked the boy in the days before the death but didn't immediately take the boy to the hospital because the couple had no money and Garcia feared hospital officials would suspect the couple was abusing the boy. They later took the boy to the hospital, where he died. District Attorney Jackie Musto Carroll and two assistant prosecutors, Mary Hanlon Mirabito and Jenny Roberts, filed the court papers outlining the 2 reasons they will seek the penalty. The 2 reasons, age and torture, are part of a list of 18 factors, called aggravating circumstances, which allow prosecutors to seek the death penalty. Prosecutors first need to secure a 1st-degree murder conviction for Garcia at trial. If they do, the case will move to the penalty phase where prosecutors will present evidence to prove the 2 aggravating circumstances to a jury. Defense attorneys will also present factors, called mitigating circumstances, to try and show the jury why life in prison, rather than death, would be an appropriate sentence. The jury would then deliberate. The jury must be unanimous in its decision; otherwise, the judge must impose a life sentence. (source: Times Leader) CALIFORNIA: Closing Arguments Scheduled for Trial Testimony ended Wednesday in the 1st so-called Dead Presidents trial. Closing arguments in the trial for defendant John Adrian Ramirez are scheduled for Monday morning, Judge Michael A. Smith told jurors. The trial opened with arguments and testimony on Jan. 28 in San Bernardino Superior Court. Ramirez, 34, is one of four men charged in a quadruple homicide outside of a West Vine Street duplex in San Bernardino in July 2000. He is charged with 4 counts of murder, 2 counts of attempted murder and special circumstances for multiple murders. If convicted, he could face the death penalty. Emergency personnel arriving at the scene after the shootings found the bodies of Johnny Agudo, 33, his brother Gilbert Agudo, 27, Anthony Daniel Luna, 23, and Luna's half-brother, Marselino Gregory Luna, 19. Authorities arrested 3 men in the case - Ramirez, Luis Alonzo Mendoza and Lorenzo Inez Arias. A fourth man, Froylan Chiprez, is a fugitive prosecutors believe is hiding in Mexico. Ramirez is the first of the defendants to go to trial. Trials for Mendoza and Arias are set for April. Prosecutors said Johnny Agudo was targeted because he provided information to police about other gang members. Court testimony revealed at least one of the shooters may not have wanted to leave any witnesses. The defense team has said that Ramirez was at the shooting scene but he wasn't armed and didn't participate in plans to target Agudo. 2 of the victims were presidents of street gangs, prompting some in the law-enforcement community to dub the case Dead Presidents. 2 men take life terms in deals on slaying spree 2 men who went on a murder spree in 2004 avoided facing the death penalty Wednesday when prosecutors accepted their offers to plead guilty. Christopher Richard Lanteigne and Christopher Weaver pleaded guilty to 3 counts of murder and special circumstances, under the terms of their plea bargains. The move allows Lanteigne, 28, and Weaver, 31, to live the rest of their lives in state prison without the possibility of parole, according to prosecutors. The pleas ended weeks of jury selection and years of preparation for a jury trial in San Bernardino Superior Court. Testimony was set to begin later this month. Nearly a dozen family members of one of the victims in the case - Ramona resident Clayton McCobb - appeared in court Wednesday. One of McCobb's daughters, 24-year-old Melissa McCobb, exited the courtroom after reading a statement and said she was disappointed the defendants won't be facing the death penalty. I'll never be satisfied, McCobb said with her
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., VA., ILL., NEB., US MIL.
March 5 PENNSYLVANIA: Prosecutors seeking death penalty against man accused of beating 2-year-old to death Luzerne County prosecutors are seeking the death penalty against a Hazleton man accused of beating a 2-year-old boy to death. Alexander L. Garcia, 20, is accused of torturing and beating Emanuale Gonzalez in December. 2 aggravating circumstances in the case - a child younger than 16 died and the death was caused by torture -justify the death penalty in this case, according to prosecutors. According to police, Garcia had beaten the child for several days, including hitting him on the face, dropping him in a bathtub and spanking him. Garcia lived with his girlfriend, Lillian Torres, the boy's mother, on Diamond Avenue since October. (source: The Citizens Voice) *** W. Pa. racial spree killer appealing death penalty A man on death row for a racially motivated shooting spree in suburban Pittsburgh that eventually left 6 people dead is appealing his sentence. 42-year-old Richard Baumhammers was an unemployed attorney living in his parents' home in the Pittsburgh suburb of Mount Lebanon on April 28, 2000, when he and shot his Jewish neighbor, 2 Indian men, 2 men of Asian descent and a black man. Prosecutors maintained Baumhammers, who is white, selected his victims because of their religious or ethnic background. Five victims died outright and the 6th victim left paralyzed died in February 2007 from complications from pneumonia. The state Supreme Court will hear the appeal Wednesday. (source: Associated Press) VIRGINIA: Gov. Kaine vetoes death penalty expansion that would've included murder planners Gov. Timothy M. Kaine vetoed bills Wednesday that would expand the death penalty to include people who assist in a murder, not just the primary killer. Kaine's veto of House and Senate bills now sends both back to the legislature for override votes before Saturday's scheduled adjournment. Virginia is already 2nd in the nation in the number of executions we carry out, Kaine said in a message explaining his veto. In the Democrat-controlled Senate, the legislation passed with 24 votes, 3 short of the 2/3 margin necessary to override the Democratic governor. In the House, however, it passed with at least 12 more votes than the 67 necessary to pass the bill over the governors veto. The expansion of the so-called triggerman rule is an effort to expose close accomplices in murder cases to capital punishment. In Virginia, only the person directly responsible for a homicide can be executed for it. There are exceptions for murders for hire, hits ordered by drug dealers and killings that result from a terrorist plot. The state Supreme Court has also repeatedly held that if there is more than 1 immediate perpetrator of a capital murder, all involved may receive the death penalty. The court cited that theory and the terrorism exception in upholding the death sentence of John Allen Muhammad, 1 of 2 snipers whose October 2002 attacks killed 10 people, wounded 3 and terrorized the Washington, D.C., area. The bill's supporters cited several cases in which a killer was not sentenced to die because of the death penalty. Kaine, a Roman Catholic who acknowledged his personal aversion to the death penalty while running for governor 3 years ago, had vetoed similar legislation last year, and the veto stood. I do not believe that further expansion of the death penalty is necessary to protect human life, he said. On the Net: Track HB 933 and SB560: http://leg1.state.va.us/081/lis.htm (source: Associated Press) ILLINOIS: Death penalty sought in slaying Cook County prosecutors plan to seek the death penalty for Reginald Potts, the man accused of killing pharmaceutical rep Nailah Franklin last year. Franklin, 28, went missing in September 2007. Her partly decomposed body was found 10 days later in a wooded area of Calumet City. Potts had an on-and-off dating relationship with Franklin -- and maintains he had nothing to do with her death. Prosecutors charged Potts in December but held off on deciding whether to seek the death penalty. On Tuesday, assistant state's attorney Maria McCarthy told Judge Thomas Gainer the state would seek it because the murder was cold and calculated and occurred while Potts was engaged in other felonies against Franklin. We're not surprised by their decision, said Potts' lawyer, Robert Johnson. We're prepared to meet each and every allegation. (source: Chicago Sun-Times) NEBRASKA: Former Texas prosecutor to speak out against death penalty A former Texas prosecutor will be in Lincoln today to speak out against the death penalty as part of an effort to sway Nebraska lawmakers to repeal the state's death penalty laws. Sam Millsap will speak about his experiences working as District Attorney in Houston. During his term, he successfully prosecuted a man who was executed by lethal injection in 1992. 13 years later, an
