August 21
TEXAS:
Death row is not for mistakes
A "mistake."
This is how murder ("the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with
malice aforethought") is defined in a recent column titled "U.S. Should Follow
Pope's Leadership on the Death Penalty" by Anna Arceneaux, a senior staff
attorney for the ACLU Capital Punishment Project. (The column was penned for
InsideSources.com.)
Arceneaux, referencing the thoughts of a corrections officer, wrote "For the
most part, he said, death row is made up of people who made one horrible,
tragic mistake."
What is a "mistake" is the use of such political spin on the horrific and evil
crimes that land a person on death row in Texas.
There are 2 individuals from Lubbock County on death row in Texas.
1 of them has been on death row since 1998.
This individual, who had previously violated parole for burglary, was sentenced
to the ultimate form of punishment for choking a person to death with a rope
and dumping the victim's body on the street as he fled the scene. (This is
according to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.)
To categorize this crime as a "mistake" is an insult to the memory of the
victim.
Such a flippant description of a horrible and violent crime makes it sound as
if a person was killed as the result of someone driving drunk - as if a tragic
accident occurred.
In the case of the aforementioned individual on death row, this was a willful
act of evil that showed zero regard for human life - and it should be noted
that if the individual was not aware that the crime he committed was wrong, why
did he callously dump the victim's body on the street and run?
Those who want to oppose the death penalty are certainly entitled to their
opinions.
However, to gloss over the crimes people commit that result in the ultimate
form of punishment by describing such crimes as simply a "mistake" detract from
the seriousness of such crimes.
Capital punishment is reserved for those who commit the most heinous and
despicable crimes. And with the advent of science (namely DNA evidence - when
available) there is no doubt as to guilt or innocence.
The wilful act of brutally killing another human being should be regarded as
something more than a "mistake" - especially when justice is involved.
(source: Editorial, Lubbock Avalanche-Journal)
FLORIDA:
Santa Rosa County man on death row may get new sentence
A Santa Rosa County man on death row had a resentencing hearing Monday. The
murder happened 20 years ago. Jonathan Lawrence was convicted of killing and
mutilating 18-year-old Jennifer Robinson in Santa Rosa County in May of 1998.
In the original sentencing, a jury voted in favor of the death penalty 11-1.
Lawrence was back in court because in 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled death
penalty recommendations that are not unanimous are unconstitutional. Since
then, several death penalty cases have returned to court for re-sentencing.
The guilty convictions remain, but a jury or judge has to decide whether that
person should remain on death row or serve a life sentence. The State
Attorney's Office said Lawrence wrote a letter in 2017 to a judge asking for
the death penalty to remain. Assistant State Attorney John Molchan said despite
what a defendant wants, the Supreme Court requires the case be resentenced.
Molchan says the defendant's special counsel provided testimony from a doctor
and some of his relatives stating he had problems in the past and didn't
deserve to be executed. The state is asking for the judge to uphold the death
penalty. The judge will announce his decision on September 12th.
A co-defendant was also convicted in the case. Jeremiah Rodgers had his
original case before a judge, so he did not qualify for a re-sentencing.
(source: WEAR TV news)
OHIO----stay of execution
Stay of execution issued for James Worley
The execution process of convicted killer James Worley has hit its 1st speed
bump.
The man found guilty of kidnapping and killing Sierah Joughin filed an appeal
of that conviction back in May.
The Ohio Supreme Court issued a stay of the execution on Monday while that
appeal runs its course.
This is not unusual for death penalty cases.
Worley remains on death row.
(source: WTOL news)
******************
Execution for Sierah Joughin's killer put on hold temporarily
The execution of the man convicted of killing Sierah Joughin has been
temporarily put on hold. This ruling comes as the case of James Worley makes
its way through the appeals process.
Every death penalty conviction case gets several appeals, which includes an
automatic one in the Ohio Supreme Court.
Those justices are the ones that granted what's called a stay of execution for
Worley. That puts the execution on hold for now.
Justices said in their ruling that no execution date is to be set while the
appeal is pending.
Worley was convicted in the 2016 kidnapping and murder of the former University
of Toledo student Sierah Joughin. Her body found a few days after the
kidnapping in a Fulton County field.
Worley was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to the death penalty. A
2019 date was listed for the execution but that date was never set in stone as
everyone involved knew the appeals were coming.
This is just temporary. Worley still may be put to death but this appeals
process will be a several year process.
(source: WTVG news)
********************
Vatican priest to Deters: 'Embarrassed and scandalized' by pro-death penalty
stance
A Vatican official told Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters he is
disappointed, embarrassed and scandalized that Deters would openly defy the
Catholic Church in saying a new Catholic policy opposing the death penalty is
misguided.
And he suggested Deters go to confession.
Deters, as he sought the death penalty for serial killer Anthony Kirkland
earlier this month, woke up to news that Pope Francis changed Catholic Church
teachings about the death penalty. The pope now says the death penalty is
always "inadmissible" because it "attacks" the inherent dignity of all humans.
It didn't deter Deters, a Catholic. He told The Enquirer, that day, "My dear
friends who are priests don't understand what we're dealing with. There is evil
in this world and there comes a point where society needs to defend itself."
The Rev. Paul Mueller, the vice director and superior of Jesuit community at
the Vatican Observatory outside Rome responded to those comments in an Aug. 6
letter to Deters telling him, "I am disappointed, embarrassed, and scandalized
that you, not only a Catholic but also a fellow alumnus of St. Xavier High
School, have used the platform of your public office to oppose and confuse the
moral teaching of the Church in so open a fashion.
"As Prosecutor," Mueller added, "you are obliged to enforce civil law. But as a
Catholic, you are obliged to endeavor to conform your own mind and heart to the
higher moral law and help others in their efforts to do the same - not to
undermine their efforts. The teaching of the Church is clear: in defending
society against evil, it is morally unacceptable to make use of the evil of the
death penalty."
Deters told The Enquirer that he long ago reconciled his faith with the idea
that sometimes he must seek the death penalty in the most heinous cases.
Kirkland, 49, killed 3 women and 2 teenage girls before he was caught in 2009.
He killed Leona Douglas, 28, in 1989, when he was 18 years old and served a
16-year prison sentence. He was released in 2003 and Kirkland started killing
again in 2006. Kirkland killed Casonya Crawford, 14; Mary Jo Newton, 45; and
Kimya Rolison, 25, in 2006. And then he killed Esme Kenney, 13, in 2009.
He strangled or stabbed his victims, then burned their bodies and fled. He told
police, in a confession, "Fire purifies."
Kirkland was convicted in 2010 and is serving life prison terms for killing the
adult women. But a death penalty sentence imposed for killing the teenagers was
overturned by the Ohio Supreme Court, prompting a new sentencing.
The jury recommended the death penalty. Only a judge can impose that sentence.
Sentencing is scheduled for next week.
The Vatican said the pope approved a change to the Catechism of the Catholic
Church, the compilation of official Catholic teaching. Previously, the
catechism said the church didn't exclude recourse to capital punishment "if
this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the
unjust aggressor."
The new teaching, contained in Catechism No. 2267, says the previous policy is
outdated, that there are other ways to protect the common good and that the
church should instead commit itself to working to end capital punishment.
"You(r) comments imply that your personal conscience and experience have given
you moral insight superior to that of your church," Mueller wrote. "May I
suggest that this is indicative of a kind of spiritual pride or rigidity on
your part. An antidote would be for you to chat with a good confessor."
(source: cincinnati.com)
**************************
Ending capital punishment is in accord with human dignity
On Aug. 2, Pope Francis announced a significant revision to the Catechism of
the Catholic Church - the depository of the Church's official teaching - on the
admissibility of capital punishment. Section 2267 of the Catechism now holds
that "the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the
inviolability and dignity of the person."
While the doctrinal weight of this decision is subject to intense theological
debate, the practical effect of the revision is probably relatively minor. In
fact, the revision may simply be an explicit articulation of what had already
been implicit in the prior version.
The former version of section 2267 essentially took a practical approach,
placing the teaching in the legitimacy of society to protect itself from
violent aggressors by a method that does not violate the bounds of justice.
"[G]iven the means at the State's disposal to effectively repress crime by
rendering inoffensive the one who has committed it, without depriving him
definitively of the possibility of redeeming himself," it said, "cases of
absolute necessity [of capital punishment] for suppression of the offender
today are very rare, if not practically non-existent."
In other words, said the prior version, if it is not necessary to inflict
capital punishment, it is necessary not to inflict it.
The new version of section 2267 maintains this pragmatic element, but situates
it in a broader approach, and concludes that "the death penalty is inadmissible
because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person." This
conclusion is based in a three-part rationale for the inadmissibility of
capital punishment, which includes the practical approach of the prior version.
First, the new version emphasizes a growing awareness and appreciation of the
inviolable dignity of the human person. The 1st principle of Catholic Social
Doctrine (and thus of all Catholic moral teaching) is the inviolable dignity of
the human person, created in the very image of God. Regardless of how heinous
the crime committed - or how grievously it offends human dignity - the criminal
can never change this essential nature of his existence: he is created in God's
image, and thus never beyond the hope of redemption. "The dignity of the person
is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes."
Second, the new provision explains, "a new understanding has emerged of the
significance of penal sanctions imposed by the state." This means that the
Church has come to a more chastened view of the legitimate limitations of the
power of secular states. Left to their own devices, states are less likely to
take into consideration such lofty moral ideals as the dignity of the person,
and more likely to seek retribution for violent crimes, especially under
pressure from certain interest groups. Additionally, this rationale is rooted
in the Church's understanding that, while punishment is legitimate, penal
sanctions should have as their ultimate aim the rehabilitation and social
reintegration of the criminal. Obviously, that is not consistent with putting
the criminal to death.
Finally, the new provision echoes the rationale of the prior version of section
2267: "more effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure
the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively
deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption." Because it is possible to
protect society from violent criminals through sophisticated prison systems and
penal codes providing for life in prison without the possibility of parole, it
is not practically necessary to put violent criminals to death in order to
protect society from them. Of course, this requires states to maintain both
secure prisons and effective laws. But, because it is not necessary to put
violent criminals to death, the Catechism is saying, it is necessary not to put
them to death.
As noted above, Catholic theologians will vigorously debate how (or even if)
the revised teaching fits into the historic teaching of the Church. Whether it
is a "development" or a "change" is an important theological question, outside
the scope of this column. But regardless of the answer to that debate, the
teaching is now clear: Capital punishment is inadmissible. As such, the
Catechism concludes, the Church will "work[] with determination for its
abolition worldwide."
(source: Kenneth Craycraft is an attorney, theologian, and member of the
Enquirer Board of Contributors----Opinion, Cincinnati Enquirer)
MISSOURI:
A Lake-Area Teen Was Murdered 34 Years Ago. Her Alleged Killer Is Now Facing
Charges
Martin Dean Priest is finally in a Miller County Jail, facing a murder charge
from a teen who was killed in 1984. Priest was arraigned in Miller County Court
on Wednesday, Aug. 14, where he filed for a change of venue. The case has now
been moved to Laclede County.
Case History
15-year-old Tammy Rothganger disappeared in Eldon, Mo. on May 16, 1984. She was
presumed to be the victim of a homicide, although her body has never been
found. Martin Dean Priest, the primary suspect, was living with Tammy's mother
at the time of the crime.
According to a juvenile witness, Priest and another man picked up Rothganger in
a car that morning at the intersection of First Street and Pine Street, near
the Eldon High School. Rothganger got in the back seat and the car turned left
on Second Street. That was the last time the witness would see her friend.
The male passenger in the vehicle, a juvenile at the time, reported to
witnessing Priest stop the car and hit Rothganger in the back of the head with
a wrench, causing her to lose consciousness. Priest then allegedly raped
Rothganger, strangling her until she was dead, according to the witness. The
witnesses, identified only as D.N., told investigators that he and Priest hid
the body at a residence before later returning to transport and bury the body
in an unmarked location.
While the witness identified as D.N. was a juvenile at the time of the murder,
he would be at least 45 years old today. His identity is currently being
protected and it is unclear if charges are pending for his role in the murder
and subsequent cover up.
Since 1985, Priest has been sitting in a Kansas maximum security prison,
serving a life sentence for an unrelated homicide in Wichita. He faced charges
for - and was subsequently acquitted on - the murder of 2 other people, though,
and nearly faced charges in the murder of a 3rd (a judge decided there was not
enough evidence to proceed with a 2nd-degree murder charge in that case).
Murderer Or Serial Killer? Martin Priest's Troubling History
2 years ago, Kansas denied parole to Priest, but recently he was extradited to
Miller County, and Priest is now incarcerated in the Miller County Jail,
according to jail personnel. Here he faces the charge for Tammy's death:
Capital Murder, an unclassified felony, which Prosecuting Attorney Ben Winfrey
filed in January of 2016.
In May of 2018, Priest filed a 180 Day Writ that limits the timeframe for a
legal proceeding to 180 days. Priest also filed a request for a speedy trial.
Capital Murder is charged where the homicide occurs with forethought or
planning. The range of punishment for capital murder includes the death penalty
or life in prison without parole, but sentencing would not take place until the
2nd phase of the trial and only after a finding of guilt by the judge or jury.
The penalty phase would include consideration of mitigating factors such as
extreme abuse by the victim and aggravating circumstances such as homicide
committed in a vile or depraved manner or involving torture or committed while
attempting other crime such as rape or robbery.
(source: lakeexpo.com)
ARKANSAS:
Decision on death penalty awaits evidence report
Prosecutors are waiting to get evidence back from the FBI before they decide
whether to seek the death penalty for a Rogers man.
Jose Alonso Torres, 26, is charged with capital murder and 3 counts of
aggravated assault. He also faces the possibility of a longer sentence, if
convicted, because prosecutors say the killing occurred in front of children.
He previously pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Samuel Martin, deputy prosecutor, informed Benton County Circuit Judge Robin
Green today they were waiting to evidence back from the FBI.
Torres is accused of shooting and killing Norma Salinas, 24, while she sat in a
Chevrolet Tahoe at a mobile home park on April 3 at North Bloomington Road and
Fullerton Avenue in Lowell.
She was pronounced dead at Mercy Hospital in Rogers.
Torres and Salinas had been in a relationship for five years, but family
members told police Salinas had been trying to end it, according to the
probable cause affidavit.
Torres was trying to get in the Tahoe, but the doors were locked, according to
the affidavit. Ivan Salinas, Norma Salinas' brother, told police he stepped in
and told Torres to leave his sister alone, according to the affidavit.
Torres pulled out a gun with his right hand and pointed it at him before
turning and firing 1 shot through the Tahoe's passenger window, hitting Norma
Salinas, according to court documents.
Areli Soto, Ivan Salinas' girlfriend, told police she was in the driver's seat
of the Tahoe and Norma Salinas was sitting in the front passenger seat. Torres'
and Norma Salinas' 1-year-old daughter was in the back seat, according to court
documents.
Soto told police after Torres fired the gun, Norma Salinas turned to her and
said, "He shot me," according to court document.
Torres is being held without bond in the Benton County Jail. The judge
scheduled the next hearing for 8 a.m. Sept. 20.
(source: Democrat-Gazette)
*******************
1st Death Penalty Case in 30 Years for Faulkner County
The 1st death penalty case in Faulkner County in 30 years is underway.
Scotty Gardner is accused of murdering Heather Stubbs.
Prosecutors say he strangles her at the Days Inn at Oak Street in 2016.
In opening statements, prosecutors told the jury they would hear what happened
to Stubbs from Gardner's own words in a taped confession.
In its opening statement, the defense pointed out that Gardner and Stubbs were
doing drugs.
"It's time to bring it to closure... we love her and we miss her.... justice
will be served," says Jerry Stubbs, Heather Stubbs' Father.
The trial is scheduled to last through Friday of this week.
(source: KARK news)
**********************
Panel won't dismiss complaint over judge's execution protest
A disciplinary panel said Monday it won't dismiss an effort to sanction an
Arkansas judge who participated in an anti-death penalty demonstration outside
the governor's mansion the same day he blocked the state from using a lethal
injection drug.
The Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission denied Pulaski
County Circuit Judge Wendell Griffen's motion to dismiss the ethics complaint
over his participation in the demonstration last year. Griffen was photographed
on a cot outside the governor's mansion last year wearing an anti-death penalty
button and surrounded by people holding signs opposing executions. Earlier that
day, Griffen blocked the state from using a lethal injection drug over claims
the company had been misled by the state. The state Supreme Court prohibited
Griffen from handling any execution-related cases following the demonstration.
A 3-member panel of the commission in June charged Griffen with violating
judicial ethics rules, citing the demonstration as well as comments he made
online and on social media against the death penalty. Griffen had argued his
actions were constitutionally protected. Griffen said he based his ruling on
the law, not his religious beliefs against the death penalty, and noted that
the judge who was reassigned the lethal drug case made the same ruling he did.
The commission, however, said the state has a compelling interest in promoting
the judicial system's impartiality.
"The commission finds that the statement of allegations alleges that (Griffen)
in his conduct failed to uphold and promote the independence, integrity and
impartiality of the judiciary, and failed to avoid not only impropriety, but
the appearance of impropriety," the commission said in its ruling. "Actual bias
is not necessary."
Mike Laux, an attorney for Griffen, said the commission incorrectly ruled that
a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court decision on judicial speech was limited to candidates
for the court. He noted the state Supreme Court in 2003 used the same U.S. high
court decision to overturn previous discipline against Griffen for speaking out
about the firing of a University of Arkansas college basketball coach. He also
noted that the same U.S. high court ruling was cited by the commission in 2007
when it dismissed a case against Griffen over remarks he made criticizing
former President George W. Bush and the war in Iraq.
"At that time, Judge Griffen was serving on the Court of Appeals, and not
involved in any judicial election campaign," Laux said. "Today's
decision--issued one business day after lengthy argument--therefore, makes no
sense."
The decision means the ethics complaint against Griffen now goes to the full
commission this fall. The commission could recommend the State Supreme Court
suspend or remove the judge if it finds he violated judicial rules of conduct.
In a separate order Monday, the commission ruled in favor of Griffen and
ordered the special counsel handling his case to release to the judge any
email, voice mail or other communications the panel and staff had received
regarding the complaint.
A 3-judge panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last month dismissed
Griffen's lawsuit against the state Supreme Court justices over his
disqualification from death penalty cases. Griffen has asked the full 8th
Circuit to review his case.
(source: Associated Press)
NEBRASKA:
Nebraska prison officials on the hunt for more lethal injection drugs
The execution of Nebraska's longest serving death row inmate last week left
many wondering what's next for capital punishment in a state where it hadn't
been used in more than 20 years.
Will officials quickly try to carry out what would be Nebraska's 2nd lethal
injection? Or will decades pass again before another Nebraska inmate pays the
ultimate price for murder?
It's certain the state won't see another execution before one of the four
lethal injection drugs expires at the end of this month.
"I think it will be very unlikely they could do another execution this year,"
said Jeff Pickens, director of the Nebraska Commission on Public Advocacy, a
state office that represents indigent clients in serious felony cases.
Beyond that, it's more difficult to predict.
But consider that nearly 7 months had passed from the day prison officials
notified Carey Dean Moore that they had the drugs until he was put him to death
Aug. 14 at the Nebraska State Penitentiary. And Moore wanted to die, meaning an
inmate who legally fought to stay alive might have been able to cause some
delays.
Gov. Pete Ricketts, a major backer of capital punishment, wants to see a
"functioning" death penalty continue. His corrections director will soon take
up the search to replace expiring drugs, if he hasn't already.
"Capital punishment is functioning in Nebraska because the people of the state
overwhelmingly voted to keep it in 2016," said Taylor Gage, the governor's
spokesman, referring to a referendum vote the governor financially supported.
"We expect it will continue to function moving forward."
Still, the march toward an execution in Nebraska is intended to be methodical.
Attorney General Doug Peterson can't ask the Nebraska Supreme Court for a death
warrant to execute a condemned inmate unless prison officials have the means to
carry it out. Nor can he ask the court to execute an inmate whose sentence is
under a court-ordered stay of execution.
Just how soon another execution might take place depends largely on the state's
ability to get more drugs and finding a death row inmate who is just about out
of legal options.
In the days before Moore's execution, two drug companies filed federal lawsuits
seeking to block the state from using drugs the companies suspected were made
in their factories. In an affidavit submitted to fight the lawsuits, Scott
Frakes, director of the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services, said the
pharmacy who supplied the drugs is now unwilling to sell more to Nebraska.
"I do not, at present nor at any time in the future, have an alternative
supplier for any of the four substances to be administered for execution by
lethal injection," Frakes said in a document submitted Aug. 9.
Frakes also said that he contacted at least 40 suppliers and six states before
he found the drugs the state used last week.
The state employed a four-drug combination to execute Moore, who killed Omaha
cabdrivers Reuel Van Ness and Maynard Helgeland 5 days apart in 1979. The drugs
were: diazepam (commonly called Valium), fentanyl, cisatracurium, and potassium
chloride.
The state's current supply of potassium chloride expires Aug. 31 and the
cisatracurium expires Oct. 31. The supply of fentanyl expires July 31 and the
diazepam expires Sept. 30, both in 2019.
But after last week's execution, Dawn-Renee Smith, chief of staff for
corrections, said the department will resume the search for a new supplier.
"Our responsibility is to carry out the order of the court, which includes
continuing to pursue procuring the necessary substances," she said.
Nebraska has shown that it can carry out executions in relatively quick
succession. In a 2-year span starting in 1996, the state executed 3 inmates
using the electric chair. Prior to that, it had been 37 years since the state
used the death penalty.
J. Kirk Brown was with the Attorney General's Office in those years, and he
played a primary role in litigating the death penalty cases. He said if the
attorney general doesn't push the cases toward the point of seeking a death
warrant, they can languish for years.
"The 1st question is, who's next?" he said.
The answer might be Jose Sandoval or John Lotter.
If the state has suitable drugs, corrections officials must provide written
notice to an inmate listing the substances it intends to use to execute him. 60
days after the inmate receives the notice, the Attorney General's Office can
ask for a death warrant.
Moore actually was the second inmate given such a notice by the state in the
past year. The 1st was in November when corrections listed the same 4 drugs in
a notification to Sandoval, who led 2 other gunmen into a Norfok bank in 2002
and shot 5 people to death.
At the time, Sandoval had no pending appeals and was under no stays of
execution. But since then, he has filed a post-conviction motion in state court
raising a new legal challenge. He also joined 7 other death row inmates in a
lawsuit that claims the 2015 legislative repeal of the death penalty changed
their sentences to life in prison. A district court judge dismissed the
lawsuit, but the inmates are appealing.
With Moore's execution, the longest serving death row inmate in the state is
now Lotter, sentenced to death for killing 3 people in a Humboldt farm house in
1993. The case inspired the film "Boys Don't Cry."
Lotter has spent 22 years on death row, exhausting most of his appeals along
the way. But he currently has an appeal pending before the Nebraska Supreme
Court that challenges the state's system of allowing juries to decide guilt
while allowing a 3-judge panel to hand down the sentence in capital cases.
Lotter's claim was rejected by a lower court. The Supreme Court has scheduled
oral arguments in the case for Aug. 30.
And the next day, 1 of the drugs used to execute Moore will expire.
(source: Scottsbluff Star Herald)
COLORADO:
Colorado man charged with 1st-degree murder in deaths of his wife, 2 daughters
Christopher Lee Watts, the Frederick man accused of killing his wife and 2
daughters, faces 5 counts of 1st-degree murder and 4 other felony charges filed
by the Weld County District Attorney's Office.
The district attorney's office on Monday formally charged Watts with 3 counts
of 1st-degree murder after deliberation for the deaths of Shanann, Celeste and
Bella Watts, along with 2 counts of 1st-degree murder for causing the death of
a person under the age of 12 while being in a position of trust. He also faces
1 count of unlawful termination of a pregnancy and 3 counts of tampering with a
deceased body.
The complaint says mother and wife Shanann Watts "died as a result of the
unlawful termination of the pregnancy."
Weld County District Attorney Michael Rourke refused to answer most questions
about the case, including whether his office would seek the death penalty,
during a press conference held Monday afternoon.
"Way to early to have that conversation," Rourke said about the possibility of
pursuing the death penalty for Christopher Watts.
Rourke said investigators believe Bella and Celeste died on either Aug. 12 or
13, and that they know Shanann Watts had returned from a work trip on Aug. 13.
Shanann Watts' father, Frank Rzucek, spoke briefly during Monday's news
conference, thanking the community and law enforcement for its outpouring of
support.
"Keep the prayers coming for our family," Rzucek said.
Christopher Watts, 33, was arrested late Wednesday. Police said Shanann Watts
was found dead in a shallow grave on property owned by Anadarko Petroleum, one
of the state's largest oil and gas drillers, where Christopher Watts worked as
an operator. Investigators found what they believe are the bodies of 4-year-old
Bella and 3-year-old Celeste nearby on Thursday.
Court documents filed Friday by the defense, which were obtained by 9News and
shared with the Coloradoan, suggest Bella and Celeste may have been strangled
and confirmed their bodies were found in an oil well filled with crude oil.
They had been submerged for 4 days.
Rourke said his office filed a motion to unseal the arrest affidavit for
Christoper Watts after filing formal charges Monday afternoon. The motion was
granted by 19th Judicial District Judge Marcelo Kopcow prior to the 4 p.m.
press conference.
On Friday, Kopcow denied a request by Christoper Watts' defense attorney to
require a coroner to collect DNA from the necks of the young girls.
The judge said in the order he would not tell the medical examiner's office
involved in the case how to do its job.
Autopsies were completed Friday on Shanann, Bella and Celeste Watts. The cause
of their deaths has not been made public.
Weld County prosecutors said Watts was jailed in protective custody. He is
scheduled to appear in court at 10 a.m. Tuesday to be advised of charges levied
against him.
(source: coloradoan.com)
USA:
Why Morality Demands the Death Penalty
The pope's recent declaration that the death penalty is "inadmissible" reflects
received wisdom today. Capital punishment, conventional thinking goes, not only
fails to deter crime, but puts innocent people to death; inflicts "cruel and
unusual punishment"; and, as the pope explained, "attacks the dignity of the
person."
Whatever the merits of these arguments, the case for capital punishment
transcends them. But before examining it, let us consider the points above.
First, does the death penalty deter crime? While scholars disagree about the
evidence, common sense would have us believe it does. As Ernest van den Haag
hypothesized, imagine that those who murder on Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and
Sunday receive life imprisonment, while those who murder on Tuesday, Thursday,
and Saturday receive the death penalty. On which days are murders more likely
to be committed? This thought experiment ought to give us pause when we are
told that cost is irrelevant to those who pay it, which is in effect what is
being said by those who insist capital punishment has zero impact on
deterrence.
Second, does capital punishment put innocent people to death? Any honest person
must admit there is no way to completely eliminate the risk that a non-guilty
person may be executed. That it has happened is morally horrific. However, that
merely reinforces why the death penalty should be reserved for the worst
murderers, and only where evidence is incontrovertible. In other words, it
should be used for cases like Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy.
Moreover, abolishing the death penalty would result in more innocent people
being killed than if it were kept. It is far from uncommon for murderers to
continue murdering both while in prison and upon release, yet it is quite rare
that an innocent person is mistakenly executed. Thus, the unfortunate choice we
face is whether more innocents are killed by eliminating the death penalty or
fewer are killed by keeping it.
On a related note, it is often asked how one can be pro-life but also pro-death
penalty. The answer is that the term "pro-life" means pro-innocent-life. By
taking innocent life, the murderer forfeits the right to his own. Thus, there
is no inconsistency in being anti-abortion and pro-capital punishment.
Third, does the death penalty inflict "cruel and unusual punishment"? The
argument here often retreats to pointing out the disparities between the races
afflicted by the death penalty. Because blacks are disproportionately executed,
this argument maintains, capital punishment is ipso facto racist and must be
abolished. But this thinking is highly dubious. First, men are vastly
disproportionately executed compared to women, so is capital punishment also
"sexist"? Surely not. It so happens that men commit the vast majority of crime
worthy of the death sentence. It also so happens that the men who commit the
most serious crimes are disproportionately black. As a study by the nonpartisan
RAND Corporation concluded, the death penalty is decided by the gravity of the
crime, not by race:
When we look at the raw data and make no adjustment for case characteristics,
we find the large race effects noted previously -- namely, a decision to seek
the death penalty is more likely to occur when the defendants are white and
when the victims are white. However, these disparities disappear when the data
coded from the AG's case files are used to adjust for the heinousness of the
crime. (emphasis added)
Still, even if it were true that blacks are more often punished for their
crimes, that would mean whites should be punished equally for theirs, not that
punishment itself should be abolished.
Fourth, many believe, as the pope says, that capital punishment is an "attack
the dignity of the person." Why? Because it diminishes the value of the human
being. As one article put it, "Reliance on the death penalty diminishes us and
is a sign of growing disrespect for human life."
On the contrary, the death penalty elevates the human being. What better
reflects the value we place on human life than the punishment we apply for
extinguishing it? It is precisely our disapproval of capital punishment that
reflects a softening attitude toward the evil of murder and a cheapening of
human life. As A.L Goodhart put it, "Retribution in punishment is an expression
of the community's disapproval of crime, and if this retribution is not given
recognition then the disapproval of crime may also disappear. A community which
is too ready to forgive the wrongdoer may end up condoning the crime."
That is why, even if every other argument against it were valid, justice alone
demands that we keep the death penalty. For it is the only just and
compassionate response to murder. As Dennis Prager points out, "nearly all
people would deem it terribly unfair if I were to steal my neighbor's car and
be allowed to go on using my car while he is deprived of his. Why does this
fundamental tenet of fairness not hold true concerning life? On grounds of
justice and fairness alone, why should I be allowed to keep my life after I
have deliberately taken someone else's away?"
Consider Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM), the mastermind of 9/11 and the
executioner who sawed the head off of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl
on camera. He's been kept alive for 17 years after he orchestrated the murder
of nearly 3,000 Americans. While the victims' families suffer, he's been held
at Guantanamo Bay, where prisoners enjoy watching movies and news programs, and
often relax in cushy recliners while doing so. Furthermore, he's been given
access to platforms that have allowed him to arrogantly taunt his victims and
their families. "I decapitated with my blessed right hand the head of the
American Jew, Daniel Pearl, in the city of Karachi, Pakistan," he bragged to a
reporter. "For those who would like to confirm, there are pictures of me on the
Internet holding his head."
Ask yourself, does KSM deserve to be alive? What about his victims? Keeping him
alive out of a misplaced sense of compassion inflicts cruelty on his victims
and their families. As Talmudic wisdom says, being kind to the cruel ends up
being cruel to the kind.
Furthermore, failure to enact justice diminishes goodness. Conversely, as
Walter Berns explained, "Punishment... makes the criminal unhappy and it makes
the law-abiding person happy. It rewards the law-abiding by satisfying the
anger he feels at the sight of a crime. It rewards, and by rewarding, teaches
law-abidingness." In other words, achieving justice rewards goodness.
But indifference to justice is apathy toward goodness, and a society unwilling
to execute those who deserve it shows disrespect to the latter and disregard
for the former. Therefore, for the sake of a good and just society, capital
punishment ought to be maintained.
(source: David Weinberger, American Thinker)
_______________________________________________
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
