[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS
March 24 TEXAS: The Trouble with InnocenceFor almost 40 years, Kerry Max Cook did everything to clear his name after being convicted of a horrifying murder in Tyler. So when he was finally exonerated, why did he ask for his conviction back? June 6, 2016, convicted murderer Kerry Max Cook walked into a Tyler courtroom. The 60-year-old was dressed in black, his silver hair trimmed short. Cook's eyes, dark and nervous, shot around the wood-paneled chamber, which was filling rapidly. Local news reporters and a documentary-film crew from New York were setting up cameras and microphones. Cook caught sight of 3 men in the audience, men who had once been convicted criminals themselves: Billy Smith, Michael Morton, and A.B. Butler Jr. All 3, famously, had been proved innocent of their alleged crimes after serving a collective 60 years behind bars. They had come from miles away to attend this hearing, and Cook walked over to greet them. Smiling, the 3 stood to shake his hand. Morton clapped him on the shoulder. Cook, who has a big, square face, smiled too. He had fought for almost 4 decades to get to this moment. In 1978 a jury found him guilty of the murder of Linda Jo Edwards, a 22-year-old Tyler secretary whose body was discovered in her apartment bludgeoned and mutilated. The case confounded the city's investigators and prosecutors with its gruesomeness, and Cook became known as a monster and a deviant, the most notorious killer in Smith County. Over the years, the county's prosecutors had sought - 4 different times - to send Cook to death row. But Cook had always claimed he was innocent, saying he'd had no motive to kill Edwards. Though his protests garnered little attention early on, eventually his case attracted a number of sympathizers and advocates, some who reexamined the evidence and others who represented him in court for his numerous appeals. Cook and his supporters had clashed fiercely with Smith County, making repeated headlines, and he had become a celebrity worldwide, an indelible symbol - at least outside Tyler - of the overreach of the Texas criminal justice system. His story was dramatized in both a play and a movie, and Cook grew into an anti-death penalty hero, accumulating thousands of friends and followers on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter; 1 of his fans, Madonna, had recently posted a short video made by New York fashion photographer Steven Klein about Cook. "Join me and Steven Klein," she wrote, "in his long struggle to prove his innocence and clear his name." Now, finally, Cook had been granted this hearing, to determine whether his conviction should be thrown out at last. Scanning the room, he recognized many of the players who had moved his case through the courts. Up front was Scott Howe, who had represented him in the eighties, sitting next to Paul Nugent, who had done so in the nineties. In the back was Nugent's adversary, David Dobbs, the prosecutor who, for 8 years, had tried relentlessly to have Cook executed. Also present was Jim McCloskey, an investigator for Cook whose research had led to an exhaustive report naming another man - Edwards's boyfriend - as her killer. That man, James Mayfield, was in the courthouse too, waiting in a hallway for his turn to testify. 40 years earlier, Mayfield had been a brazen lothario, carrying on a 17-month affair with Edwards - who was 1/2 his age - under his wife's nose. On this day, though, the 82-year-old sat quietly, wearing a green T-shirt and spectacles, looking tired. Cook took a seat at a table in front of the judge's dais, next to his lawyers, Gary Udashen, the president of the board of directors of the Innocence Project of Texas, and Nina Morrison, from the national Innocence Project. Across from them were the district attorney of Smith County, Matt Bingham, and 2 assistants. The 6 sat in awkward silence as they waited for the judge to appear. Finally Cook whispered something to Morrison, putting his arm around her shoulder. She leaned in and whispered something back. Moments later, at 9:30, Judge Jack Carter climbed into his seat, banged his gavel, and announced to the world what Cook and his lawyers already knew. Peering over the bench, the judge declared in a deep East Texas accent that, as of that morning, the state had agreed to recommend that Cook's conviction be set aside. He was, for all practical purposes, exonerated. Quickly, Udashen, whose graying eyebrows and glasses give him an owlish look, rose from his seat and addressed the court. He and Bingham had struck a deal, he explained: in return for the prosecution's acknowledging that Cook's due process rights had been violated by the state's use of false testimony in earlier trials, the defense had agreed to relinquish 6 of its 8 claims, including several that alleged prosecutorial misconduct. The defense would still fight for Cook to be declared "actually innocent" of the murder, a
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide
March 24 PAKISTAN: LHC acquits 2 death row convicts A Lahore High Court division bench on Wednesday acquitted 2 convicts condemned to death in a murder case. The division bench headed by Justice Sadaqat Ali Khan acquitted the convicts, Aneesur Rehman and Muhammad Naeem, while allowing their appeals against conviction. During the hearing, the defendants' counsel submitted that there was no solid evidence which showed that the convicts were responsible for or associated with the murder. He pleaded the bench to acquit them after setting aside their death sentence. However, the prosecution opposed the request submitting that trial court awarded death penalty to the convicts on basis of eye-witnesses statements. The bench after hearing arguments allowed the appeals and acquitted the convicts after setting aside their death sentence. (source: pakobserver.net) BANGLADESH: Halt imminent executions of three men who tried to kill UK ambassador Bangladesh must halt the imminent executions of 3 men sentenced to death for a grenade attack on the UK Ambassador, Amnesty International said. Prison authorities in Bangladesh today confirmed that the executions of Mufti Abdul Hannan, Sharif Shahedul Alam Bipul and Delwar Hossain Ripon - all alleged members of the banned armed group Harkat-ul-Jihad (HuJI) - would be carried out soon. They were all convicted of and sentenced to death over an attack in 2004 which injured the then-UK High Commissioner, Anwar Choudhury, and killed 3 people. "These executions must be stopped immediately. While those found responsible for crimes after fair trials should be punished, the death penalty is never the solution. It's dismaying that the Bangladeshi authorities are looking to take more lives in the name of fighting 'terrorism'," said Olof Blomqvist, Amnesty International's Bangladesh researcher. "The death penalty is always a human rights violation and is in no way a more effective way to tackle crime than life imprisonment. Sending these men to the gallows will not make Bangladesh safer, it will only add to the death toll." On 19 March 2017, the Bangladeshi Supreme Court rejected the 3 men's final appeals. Their only remaining option is now to seek a presidential pardon to stop the executions. Bangladesh is among the minority of states globally that still implements the death penalty. In 2015, four people were executed in the country, while almost 200 people were sentenced to death. "We urge President Abdul Hamid to pardon these 3 men and spare their lives. Bangladesh should also immediately impose a moratorium on executions with a view to full abolition of the death penalty. More and more countries around the world are coming around to the fact that taking lives neither deters crime nor is an effective mean to deliver justice," said Olof Blomqvist. Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception, regardless of the nature or circumstances of the crime; guilt, innocence or other characteristics of the individual; or the method used by the state to carry out the executions. (source: amnesty.org) MALAYSIA: Malaysia to scrap mandatory death sentence for drug offencesGovernment agrees to give courts discretion in imposing death penalty for narcotics offences.--Close to 800 prisoners currently on death row for drug trafficking offences. The Malaysian government has agreed to do away with the mandatory death sentence imposed for drug offences. Azalina Othman Said, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department, told Parliament that the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 will be amended to allow judges to exercise discretion when deciding on the appropriate sentence. (source: ibtimes.co.uk) ___ 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
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide----NIGER., S. ARAB., BAHR., UGAN., PHILIP., IRAN, TRIN.
March 24 NIGERIA: Cynthia Osokogu's Killers Get Death Penalty A Lagos State High Court in Igbosere on Thursday ordered the hanging of Okwumo Nwabufo and Olisaeloka Ezike who were charged with the murder of a post-graduate student of Nasarawa State University, Ms. Cynthia Osokogu. The judge said the convicts should be hung by the neck until they are dead. Osokogu had been lured from Abuja to Lagos on July 21, 2012 by Nwabufo, whom she had met and befriended on Facebook. Nwabufo had paid for the deceased's flight ticket from Abuja and lodged her in Room C1 at Cosmilla Hotel, Lake View Estate, Festac Town, Lagos, where he later, in collusion with Ezike, murdered her on July 22, 2012. In the hotel room, the convicts had drugged Cynthia, who was 25 years old, by putting Rohypnol in her Ribena drink after which they chained her hands to her back and secured same with a padlock. Rohypnol is legally prescribed for medical use in more than 50 foreign countries for the treatment of insomnia and as a pre-anesthetic. It may cause drowsiness, confusion, impaired motor skills, dizziness, disorientation, dis-inhibition, impaired judgment, and reduced levels of consciousness. The deceased's legs were also chained while her mouth was stuffed with a handkerchief and part of the weave-on that she had on her head. A tape was thereafter fastened across her mouth to secure the materials stuffed in her mouth. The convicts then made away with her 2 Blackberry mobile phones, jewelry, a sex toy vibrator, her international passport, and a pair of shoes. After the murder and their apprehension, the Lagos State Government on February 8, 2013 arraigned Nwabufo and Ezike on 6 counts of conspiracy, murder and stealing, contrary to Sections 231, 221 and 409 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2011. Arraigned along with them was a pharmacist, Orji Osita, who was accused of dispensing Rohypnol to the convicts without a doctor's prescription. Also arraigned was the second defendant's brother, Nonso, who was accused of being in possession of the 2 stolen Blackberry mobile phones. In a judgment delivered on Thursday, almost 5 years after the crime, Justice Olabisi Akinlade convicted Nwabufo and Ezike as charged by the state. She, however, discharged and acquitted Osita and Nonso on the grounds that the state did not prove the charges of recklessness and negligence pressed against them beyond reasonable doubt. In convicting Nwabufo and Ezike, the judge relied on the oral evidence of 10 witnesses and the 17 exhibits tendered by the prosecution, as well as the confessional statements of the accused persons. Among the witnesses were two receptionists at Cosmilla Hotel, who booked the convicts into the hotel on the night of July 21, 2012. Also called was the hotel manager and a pathologist, who gave the cause of Cynthia's death as asphyxia, and the policemen who investigated the case. In her judgment, Justice Akinlade held that though there was no direct eyewitness, the circumstantial evidence placed before the court by the state were "cogent, complete, unequivocal, compelling and leads to the irresistible conclusion that the accused persons and no one else committed the crime". "The 1st and 2nd defendants were positioned at the scene of the crime at Cosmilla Hotel. The circumstantial evidence against the 1st and 2nd defendants is compelling and cogent and leaves no doubt in anyone's mind that they killed the deceased. "It is on record that the first and second defendants made a confessional statement describing how they caused the death of the deceased," the judge held. After pronouncing them guilty, she sentenced them to 14 years imprisonment for conspiracy, 3 years imprisonment for stealing, and imposed the death sentence by hanging for the offence of murder. Before handing down the sentences, the judge asked the defendants if they had anything to say. Counsel for the convicts, Mr. Victor Opara and S. Eze, urged the judge to temper justice with mercy. Opara said Nwabufo was a 1st-time offender, adding that the convict was a young man who had "tremendous energy to do something worthwhile with his life". "I urge this court to grant him a reformative sentence," Opara pleaded. But in her response, Justice Akinlade said: "I have listened passionately to the allocutus of counsel. Section 221 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State says clearly that a person who commits murder shall be sentenced to death. "In judgment, justice is required not only for the victim, but also for the society. "In their attempt to steal Cynthia's property, they stole her life. They were not even remorseful. "But for the efforts of the police and the Ministry of Justice, we wouldn't have been able to do anything. This court cannot change the law." Concluding her ruling, the judge said: "I pronounce the judgment of this court upon you, Okwumo Nwabufo and Olisaeloka Ezike,
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----CONN., VA., FLA., ARK., UTAH, NEV.
March 24 CONNECTICUT: Justice Palmer's Proven Decency Rep. William Tong, the co-chairman of the judiciary committee, says that Supreme Court Justice Richard Palmer has the votes to be reappointed to the state's highest court today. No one should get a free pass on job performance, including Supreme Court justices. Luckily for Connecticut, Justice Richard N. Palmer has survived a tough evaluation to earn a fourth term on the state's highest court. Justices serve for 8 years and are reconfirmed by the legislature. Most confirmations are rubber-stamped. Mr. Palmer's was not. He endured unusual scoldings from conservatives before being confirmed earlier this month. "I'm ... concerned about the activism that has taken place on the court through his opinions," said Rep. Richard A. Smith. Critics took particular aim at his role in ending the state's death penalty in 2015. The majority opinion that he wrote in the 4-3 decision was on point, however, even if it offended some with the harsh truth that putting people to death "no longer comports with contemporary standards of decency." The legislature had confirmed that truth in 2012 when it abolished the death penalty going forward, thus signaling that state-sanctioned killings were too indecent to continue. If executions were indecent for the future, surely they were also indecent for the 11 men then on death row. Mr. Palmer wasn't so much making policy with his death penalty opinion as trying to interpret the legislature's confusing 2012 law and finding it unworkable, arbitrary and unconstitutional. Up till then, he'd upheld the state's death penalty statutes. Those in power should be held to account. Justice Palmer is no exception. By our account, he's been a very good justice, one willing to do the sometimes unpopular but ultimately right thing. (source: Editorial, Hartford Courant) VIRGINIAimpending execution Scheduled Virginia Execution Based on False and Recanted Testimony More than 113,000 people have signed a Change.org petition urging Governor McAuliffe to intervene to prevent the April 25th execution of Ivan Teleguz. Teleguz was charged with hiring someone in 2001 to murder his former girlfriend. According to the Supreme Court of Virginia, in order to convict Teleguz, jurors "had to believe the testimony of [Alexsey] Safanov, [Edwin] Gilkes, and [Michael] Hetrick." Teleguz was sentenced to death based on testimony that he also was involved in arranging an additional murder in Ephrata, Pennsylvania; prosecutors told jurors this proved Teleguz "solve[d] problems" by arranging murders, and that he could "dial up a murder" from prison if he was allowed to live. Concern about the execution is growing quickly as people learn that 2 of the 3 witnesses jurors "had to believe' - Safanov and Gilkes - have provided sworn statements that their trial testimony was false, and they could not implicate Teleguz in the murder. Of equal concern is the fact that law enforcement has confirmed not only that Teleguz was not involved in a murder in Ephrata but that no such murder occurred in the small central Pennsylvania township. So how could Teleguz have ended up on Virginia's death row in the first place? A petition filed in the U.S. Supreme Court explains the case as follows: As soon a police learned of Teleguz's previous relationship with the victim, they focused on him as their suspect. However, they could find no evidence implicating him. Years after the crime, Safanov, who was facing criminal charges and deportation, offered to testify against Teleguz in exchange for help obtaining a US visa and a generous reduction in his sentence. Safanov claimed that Teleguz confessed while the 2 worked at a construction site that he had hired a "black man" to kill his girlfriend. After the trial, Safanov gave a sworn, written statement admitting that his testimony against Teleguz was not true. Safanov identified the "black man" as Edwin Gilkes, who he had met through Teleguz and other friends. Police confronted Gilkes, told him they were investigating Teleguz for the murder, and threatened him with the death penalty - unless he testified against Teleguz. Gilkes denied that he was hired to commit any murder, but testified that he was tricked into accompanying his roommate, Michael Hetrick, to Virginia to commit the crime. In exchange for his testimony, Gilkes received a significantly reduced sentence and will be released in 2018. After the trial, Gilkes gave sworn, written statements admitting that his testimony against Teleguz also was a lie. Hetrick initially told police he did not know Teleguz. Police explained that they had found his blood at the crime scene, and that Hetrick would have to implicate Teleguz to avoid the death penalty himself. After police told him details about the case and even let him study a written summary of the police investigation, Hetrick agreed he would
