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 capital murder charges in the shooting death of Phuong Lam, 55. Late on Aug. 21, 2006, Lam was closing Storekeeper Minit Mart No. 8, 3112 Lobit Drive, for what would be the last time. 2 robbers walked up and went after her purse, and one of them shot her once in the abdomen. That shot proved fatal, as a PHI Air Ambulance took her from the store Lam's family had owned and run for more than a quarter-century to an isle hospital, where she was pronounced dead on arrival. Police arrived within minutes, and a tip led investigators to a nearby apartment complex. Officers arrested Brown and Turner, both 15 at the time, after investigators said they found Lam's purse in one of the boys' apartments. Under state law, capital murder carries only two punishments - death or life in prison without parole. State law prohibits the death penalty for anyone younger than 18, even for defendants ordered to stand trial as adults - as County Court No. 3 Judge Roy Quintanilla ordered for both Brown and Turner in March. Attorney Greg Russell, who represents Brown, said the amount of evidence against his client and the prospect of a life after prison were factors in Brown's plea. Murder, the charge to which Brown pleaded guilty Wednesday, carries a prison term of five to 99 years and anyone convicted of that charge becomes eligible for parole after serving half his or her sentence. In Brown's case, that means he could receive parole in 2026, with credit for 2 years he has been in custody awaiting trial. "There were a lot of things that would have been problems in a trial, and for a capital murder, life means life," Russell said. "After talking with Andrew and his family, we agreed this would be the wisest thing to do, because he will be eligible for parole when he's 35." Turner's trial had been set to commence Monday. However, Bill Leathers, Turner's attorney, said he would seek a postponement because of Wednesday's plea and because of some new evidence in the case. County Criminal District Attorney Kurt Sistrunk said his office last week received results of DNA tests performed on evidence from the scene of the crime. Leathers said he would need the postponement to have the evidence examined independently, and Sistrunk said he would not oppose a motion to postpone the trial. Judge Lonnie Cox, of the 56th State District Court, said he anticipated conducting a hearing this week, once Leathers filed his motion, to reschedule the trial. (source: Galveston County Daily News) ILLINOIS: Juveniles serving life sentences could get parole Nearly 18 years ago, New Trier High School student David Biro took a deadly path. Biro, then 16, killed a young Winnetka couple and their unborn child on the night of April 7, 1990. Biro was sentenced to three consecutive life terms in prison. But even Biro could get a chance for parole after serving as few as 10 years, under pending state legislation involving juveniles facing life terms. State Rep. Robert Molaro, a Chicago Democrat, proposed that minors sentenced to spend the rest of their lives in prison get a second chance at parole. A request couldn't be filed until the person had served 10 years of the life sentence. The Illinois Prisoner Review Board would then consider it. Prosecutors think it's a flawed idea. Lake County State's Attorney Mike Waller said it would re-open cases that just don't need to be touched. "A lot of time and effort went into resolving the cases and now to come along and open them all up for review is just unwarranted, unmerited and really will cause a lot of grief and hardship for family members of the victims," Waller said. "Although (the convicts) were young at the time, they committed the crimes. They committed horrendous crimes for which they deserve the life sentence." Similar opposition is registering with Molaro. He said he plans hearings with victims' families and prosecutors in Chicago and Springfield before asking colleagues to consider the proposal. "But it'll be this spring," Molaro said of a potential vote. A recent report by the Illinois Coalition for the Fair Sentencing of Children found 103 juveniles in Illinois are serving life sentences without parole. Almost all were convicted for playing a firsthand role in the murders of their victims. The group released the study last month, concurrently with Molaro's proposed legislation. It contended brain research shows teens lack full development or ability to think through the consequences of their actions. Waller, who previously served on a state panel that recommended reforms to the death penalty, added that he thinks the group's study looked at the wrong issues. "If you look at the facts of the case, the crimes merit a life sentence," Waller said. "If there are a few cases that merit relief, there's a process to apply to the governor for reduction in sentence. That path is available now and that's what should be used." (source: Chicago Daily Herald) ******************* Death penalty sought for 2007 murder of Nailah Franklin Prosecutors announced Tuesday that the state will seek the death penalty for a Chicago man accused of killing his ex-girlfriend and leaving her naked body in Calumet City. Reginald Potts Jr., 31, was charged in December with the murder of Nailah Franklin, 28, a pharmaceutical representative from the Near South Side reported missing more than a week before her badly decomposed body was found late September. Cook County Assistant State's Atty. Maria McCarthy said 2 factors qualify capital punishment. First, Franklin was killed during the commission of a felony. In addition to murder, Potts is charged with robbery, kidnapping and vehicular hijacking. 2nd, the slaying was committed in a "cold and calculated," or premeditated, manner, she said. In Circuit Judge Thomas Gainer Jr.'s courtroom Tuesday, private attorney Robert Johnson said he would be taking on the case. Later that day, Johnson said he decided to represent Potts after his family approached him. Potts had considered representing himself. "I do this type of work, and I've done it for a long time," said Johnson, who worked for the public defender's office for 13 years. "He just doesn't seem like the type of person who would do it." Although prosecutors have said Potts was caught lurking around Franklin's residence the nights leading up to her disappearance, Johnson said his client was trying to break off the relationship. "They painted a picture like he was stalking Ms. Franklin, and that's just not the case," Johnson said. "He didn't want anything to do with her." ****************** Bill to free young killers suffers fatal shot of its own To the georgery anistas of Illinois, I have some sad news. They were pushing a bill to grant parole hearings to 103 teen killers -- meaning minors who were convicted of the most heinous murders and sentenced to life without parole. But now, those teenage killers, growing old and impatient for freedom, have to wait. "It's not going to happen," State Rep. Robert Molaro (D-Chicago), the bill's sponsor, told me Tuesday. "The bill isn't ready. I don't know if it will be withdrawn or tabled. Before we do anything, we need a lengthy hearing in which victims and their families can come forward and prosecutors can have their say. "And even then, I don't know," Molaro said. The Illinois Coalition for the Fair Sentencing of Children put out a report on those 103 cases, and considered the main victims to be the killers and the killers' families, rather than the real victims, the ones who were murdered. How do we know this? In the coalition's report, under the heading "Those most affected by juvenile lifers' crimes" were the families of the killers. The families of the dead came second. "It's good news for us," said Melinda Pulido, mother of Ruben Pulido, who was 13 when he and his friend Mark Lopez were shot to death while on a neighbor's front porch in June 2000. The killer, Robert Haynie, was 16. He rode up on a bicycle with a gun. He took orders from a gang chief, Juan Casillas, who thought the 13-year-olds were rival gang members. They weren't. They were athletes and good students who were kept away from the streets by their parents. I sat recently at the Pulido family's dining-room table, with the sisters of Lopez. They showed me photographs of the boys, and they talked about how hard it had been to keep them away from gangs, and how proud they were that they had succeeded, until the boy on the bike was told to light them up. They showed me a child's drawing that Ruben Pulido had made. It was a mini-poster against violence, showing a street with bungalows and a chalk outline of a boy's body on the sidewalk. It was Pulido's block. He didn't know the outline would be his own. The killers on the bikes "literally blew out a bright light in this world," said Lopez's mother, Damaris. "God knows what he could have become. His dream was to be a lawyer, and ironically, they are the ones that are slapping him in the face." When I wrote the original column on this topic, the georgery anistas were furious. They had supported the former governor's death-penalty moratorium as he faced federal corruption charges that would land him in prison. They were livid, accusing me of all manner of sins, human and journalistic. Their PR spin concerned a young man convicted of murder simply for being a lookout in a crime, not the triggerman, and being sentenced to life behind bars. But we have appellate courts for such purposes. And we have another governor, perhaps also hoping to be seen as compassionate as the federal hammers begin to fall about him. Should the killers be forgiven? Yes. If they repent. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't be punished to the full extent of the law. I oppose the death penalty, but this bill merely makes it easier for death-penalty advocates to call for it once again. Another death-penalty opponent is lawyer Jeanne Bishop, a Cook County public defender who worked with her sister, Jennifer Bishop-Jenkins, and others on the issue. But they believe that life without parole means what it says for those who kill. They have a Web site, Illinoisvictims.org. Their sister, Nancy Langert, and her husband, Richard, were murdered in their home in 1990 by David Biro of Winnetka. He was 16 at the time. He stole a gun from his lawyer, broke into the Langert home and shot Richard in the head. The 3 shots Nancy took to the abdomen killed her unborn child. Nancy lived for about 15 minutes. Nancy tried to drag herself toward her husband, pulled down a bookshelf, found a hatchet and banged it, hoping someone would hear, said attorney John Corbett in a 1996 civil proceeding to stop Biro from ever cashing in on the publicity by selling his story. With her husband dead, and life leaving her own body, she scrawled a heart in her own blood on the floor, and the letter "U" and died, Corbett said. Biro is in his 30s now. He must want freedom badly. The group hoping to free the teen killers "sees the world as they want it to be," said Bishop-Jenkins, "and I see the world as it is, and the world is full of irreparably dangerous people." And before we reach with a broad sweep that could release many of the 103, we should consider the dead and the families of the dead. "We know the nightmare isn't over yet," said Priscilla Pulido, sister of a murdered brother. "There are a lot of these people supportive of the killers. But anyone willing to let a murderer free is wrong in my book, Ryanistas or any other istas." (source for both: Chicago Tribune) COLORADO: Lawmaker wants death penalty for child rape A Colorado lawmaker has introduced a bill that would make the death penalty available for anyone convicted of a violent sexual assault on a child. Sen. Steve Ward (R-Littleton) says prosecutors need the tool to punish those who commit the worst of crimes against children younger than 12. "It puts it into a new class of crimes and actually an important one," said Ward. Ward is proposing capital punishment as an option on the 1st offense of violent sexual assault on a child under 12, but he says prosecutors may not use it and choose instead to apply it to repeat offenders. "What Senate Bill 195 does is make this penalty available as a tool to the prosecutors to do their work," said Ward. "I think the death penalty is important to have available to prosecutors when you have crimes as heinous as these crimes can be." Opponents say that in 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states could not put people to death for rape cases because it was unconstitutional. They found it fell under the 8th Amendment as cruel and unusual punishment. "The idea behind capital punishment is to execute those that commit the most heinous and atrocious murders, whether that's stabbing, shooting, bombs, whatever," said Doug Wilson, a public defender for Colorado. "It's not specifically set up - it never has been set up - for execution in cases where people are not killed. (That's) not saying it's not traumatic to the children, because it is, (and that's) not saying those folks should necessarily get out of prison if they're convicted." Ward believes the Supreme Court's ruling leaves room for his type of legislation. "They said in that decision that it applies to the rape of adults. They held the door open for the rape of children," he said. Ward says even though he has bipartisan support for the bill, it may still take several years for legislation of this magnitude to push through the state legislature. "I harbor few illusions that this is going to pass on its first attempt," said Ward. The bill will be heard by the Senate Judiciary Committee in April. 4 states already permit capital punishment for repeat child rapists: South Carolina, Oklahoma, Montana and Texas. However, no one has been sentenced to death under those laws. Louisiana has a similar statute and two people have been sentenced to death there. One is currently appealing the decision to the Supreme Court and his arguments will be heard in April. "There have been briefs filed in the Louisiana case in front of the Supreme Court by victims' groups and I've read those and they have a consistent theme," said Wilson. Wilson says the briefs argue that once the crimes are discovered, it will keep the child from telling the police because they don't want a relative to face execution. "(The briefs) consistently say this not only will not help the situation, this will not deter the offenses. It will actually chill the child's reporting to authorities so we will discover less of the pedophiles out there." (source: KUSA TV News) MARYLAND: Death penalty costs Md. more than life term The death penalty has cost Maryland taxpayers at least $186 million more in prosecuting and defending capital murder cases over 2 decades than would have been spent without the threat of execution, according to a study to be released today. In addition, because most death sentences in Maryland are overturned and eventually reduced to life without parole, state residents are often saddled with the high cost of a capital case and the bill for housing a convicted killer for life, the study found. Paid for by the Baltimore-based Abell Foundation and prepared by the Urban Institute, a national, nonpartisan research organization in Washington, the study estimates that the cost of reaching a single death sentence costs the state an average of $3 million, which is $1.9 million more than a non-death penalty case costs, even after factoring in the long-term costs of incarcerating convicted killers not sentenced to death. The report - the 1st to analyze the cost of capital punishment in Maryland - arrives as state lawmakers prepare to again debate repealing the death penalty. A hearing is scheduled for today in Annapolis on a Senate bill that would eliminate capital punishment as a sentencing option. A similar House bill is scheduled to be heard next week. "This is a compelling argument against the death penalty - the enormous costs to the state's taxpayers," said Rick Abbruzzese, a spokesman for Gov. Martin O'Malley, a death penalty opponent who focused on the financial costs of capital punishment when he testified last year in support of repeal. The bill was defeated by one vote in a Senate committee last year. The top prosecutor in Baltimore County - which accounts for more capital cases than any other jurisdiction in the state - assailed the study's conclusions and its use of attorneys' salaries to calculate the cost of the death penalty in Maryland. "That is a completely worthless number, because we don't go out and hire new lawyers to try these cases," Baltimore County State's Attorney Scott D. Shellenberger said. "They get assigned to my most experienced lawyers, who will work as many hours as it takes to put the case on, and don't get any more money." Speaking of prosecutor S. Ann Brobst, who handles many of the county's capital murder cases, Shellenberger said, "Ann's got a ton to do. It's just a matter of whether she does one ton or two tons. When she takes these cases, she doesn't complain. She doesn't get more money for it. She just does her job." Using data collected by a University of Maryland professor who studied racial and geographic disparities in the application of the state's death penalty law, the Urban Institute researchers examined 162 capital murder cases that were prosecuted between 1978 - when Maryland reinstated capital punishment as a sentencing option - and 1999. To calculate the cost of a capital case, researchers interviewed prosecutors, defense attorneys and judges to estimate the time spent on each segment of a case. That time estimate was then applied to such expenses as the value of court space and the salaries of those handling capital cases. The final tally revealed that prosecuting 162 cases in which death sentences were sought cost $186 million more than what prosecuting those cases would have otherwise cost, according to the study. Of that, $70.9 million was spent on 106 capital cases that did not result in a death sentence while $107.4 million was spent on 56 cases that did. In addition, more than $7 million was spent by the state public defender's capital defense division for activities not accounted for elsewhere in the study. The researchers found that capital murder cases cost more than non-capital murder cases at almost every phase of the case. Trials cost an estimated $616,000 more, they found. The "penalty phase" of a capital case - during which a judge or jury hears testimony to determine a sentence for a convicted killer - costs $326,000. And state and federal appeals cost $605,000 more than appeals filed in non-capital cases. The researchers also found that inmates sentenced to death cost $316,000 more to incarcerate than convicted killers who receive lesser sentences. "This is partly because the type of confinement for death-sentenced inmates is more expensive," the study's authors wrote, "but also due to the reality that few of those sentenced to death are actually executed." The Urban Institute's total dollar figure does not include costs associated with federal court proceedings in state capital cases. Although groups in many death penalty states have analyzed the cost of such cases, the Urban Institute's Maryland study is the first to statistically control for factors that might otherwise make a capital case more expensive, said Andrew Davies, a researcher with the New York State Defenders Association, which in the 1980s completed the first such study. "The argument goes that ... death penalty cases might be worse or more heinous cases, so that even if they weren't death penalty cases, they still would be more expensive," he said. "But in this study, they've isolated the pure effect of the death penalty on inflating the cost of cases." But Shellenberger said it is ridiculous to suggest that all these costs would be avoided simply by getting rid of the death penalty. "No matter what the ultimate punishment is going to be in the state of Maryland - whether it's death or life without parole - every good defense counsel is going to fight their hardest against the ultimate punishment," he said. "There is no magic end to all this litigation just because someone doesn't get the death penalty." (source: Baltimore Sun) ************* Md. death penalty measures face dim prospects----Senate panel hears subdued testimony on 2 bills before lawmakers A perenially divisive issue -- the death penalty -- sparked little emotion today when a panel of Maryland senators took up the question amid signals the debate won't go any further this year. The debate was subdued and some senators stifled yawns or surfed the Internet to while away more than 2 hours of testimony on two bills related to capital punishment. One would abolish the death penalty; another would study the question. "It's an inexcusable waste of resources in Maryland," said Democratic Sen. Lisa Gladden, arguing for her bill to repeal the death penalty. Issues: What to watch for during the session Gladden, a lawyer, cited the high cost of prosecuting a death penalty case. Her bill would replace capital punsihment with sentences of life without parole. "You have the opportunity to settle the case, close the door and say, 'I never want to deal with this guy again,'" Gladden said. But the debate never really got going. Only a handful of citizens sat through the whole thing. And at times the testimony felt more like a high school debate exercise than a real consideration of doing away with capital punishment. It was a marked difference from last year, when Gov. Martin O'Malley attended a hearing to plea for the abolition of capital punishment, telling senators, "the death penalty is not a deterrent." Last session marked the first after a ruling from the state's highest court that Maryland must stop executions until lawmakers set procedures for them. The ruling set up a moratorium of sorts and led death penalty opponents to hope capital punishment would be abolished. But the death penalty repeal failed in the Senate committee last year. O'Malley has said he still thinks capital punishment should be replaced with life without parole, but this year, there was no personal appearance by the governor at the hearing. Top lawmakers, including Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller, have signaled there's little chance death penalty bills will succeed this year. Senators at today's hearing showed little appetite to even study the question. Some noted that University of Maryland criminologist Raymond Paternoster studied the issue several years ago. "How much more studying do we need to do?" asked Sen. James Brochin, D- Baltimore County. The sponsor of the study proposal, Sen. Jamie Raskin, D-Montgomery, insisted the question should be revisited. He cited the repeal last year of capital punishment in New Jersey. "If we can't bring ourselves to summon up the will to abolish the death penalty," Raskin argued, "at the very least we should study it as closely as we can." But the death penalty debates ended with most of the audience gone and no indication from lawmakers a repeal would be considered. "It's difficult to change minds on this issue," said Sen. Larry Haines, a Republican representing Baltimore and Harford counties. On the Net Read Senate Bill 645: http://mlis.state.md.us/2008rs/billfile/sb0645.htm Read Senate Bill 614: http://mlis.state.md.us/2008rs/billfile/sb0614.htm (source: Associated Press) *************** Death Penalty Debate in Maryland 2 death penalty bills sparked little emotion today during debate by a Senate panel in Annapolis. One would abolish the death penalty and another would study the question, but top lawmakers, including Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller, have signaled there's little chance the bills will succeed this year. Today's debate was extremely different from last year when Gov. Martin O'Malley attended a hearing to plea for the abolition of capital punishment, telling senators the death penalty is not a deterrent. (source: Associated Press) US MILITARY----female may face death penalty Davila charged with murder, could face death penalty Army authorities at Fort Lewis on Thursday filed multiple charges against Spc. Ivette Gonzalez Davila in the deaths of Staff Sgt. Timothy J. Miller and his wife, Sgt. Randi Miller, both medics at Fort Lewis. The allegations filed under the Uniform Code of Military Justice include: 2 counts of premeditated murder, one count of burglary for breaking into the Miller home intending to kill them, kidnapping the couple's baby for taking the child after her parents were killed and 1 count of obstructing justice. If convicted of all charges and specifications under the military code of justice, Davila could face a mandatory life sentence or the death penalty if further evidence indicates the case should be tried as a capital case, Fort Lewis officials said. Davila, 22, is being held in brig at the Bangor naval base. The jail at Fort Lewis is being renovated. (source: Seattle Post-Intelligencer)
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, ILL., COLO., MD., US MIL.
Rick Halperin Thu, 6 Mar 2008 20:00:08 -0600 (Central Standard Time)
