[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide
Aug. 17 MALAYSIA: An end to mandatory death penalty? Under Malaysian law, capital punishment (the death penalty) is mandatory for the crime of murder, drug trafficking, kidnapping and several other offences. Since 1992, at least 651 convicted persons (Malaysians) have been given the death penalty, most of them for drug trafficking. According to the Prisons Department, some 800 people are now on death row after being convicted of drug trafficking under Section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952. A minister in the Prime Minister's Department said recently that the act will be amended to "give back" the discretionary power to the trial judge at the end of a drug trafficking case. Welcoming this new move by the government, an executive director of Amnesty International Malaysia was quoted as saying that whilst the proposed amendment is only in respect of drug trafficking, she hopes it will become "a 1st step towards total abolition". Bar Council Human Rights Committee co-chairman Andrew Khoo called upon the government "to repeal all mandatory death sentences", adding that the sentence "robs judges of the opportunity to exercise their discretion" to hand down a punishment that fits the circumstances and gravity of each particular case. Not everyone shares the view that the mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking should be scrapped. A former Federal Court judge was quoted as saying that the status quo should remain because abolishing it might see an increase of such crimes in the future. "Although the death penalty has not reduced such cases in the past, removing it will only cause the number of cases to spike drastically," he had said. The former judge (who was once a prosecutor in the Attorney-General's Chambers) strongly believes that the mandatory death sentence is a deterrent, and scrapping it "will only embolden" more criminals. If the mandatory death sentence is to be replaced with a mandatory life sentence, the Malaysian government will have to bear the financial burden of looking after the welfare of these convicts in prison for the rest of their lives. Should our taxpayers be burdened by this? Furthermore, as said by Amnesty International, there is no evidence in the world to show that the death penalty can be a deterrent. Also, if the 1952 act is amended, and convicted drug traffickers no longer face the mandatory death penalty, a trial judge may (after considering the circumstances of the case and the gravity of the offence) still apply his judicial discretion in imposing the death penalty on him. The amendment therefore, repeals the "mandatory nature" of the punishment, but it does not deprive the trial judge of his judicial power to impose such a capital punishment on the convicted person. In short, the proposed amendment is still a far cry from the total abolition of the death penalty for all crimes. Under Malaysian law, the death penalty can still be handed down by a trial judge upon conviction of an accused charged with any of the following offences: WAGING or attempting to wage war against the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, a ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri (Section 121 of the Penal Code); OFFENCES against the person of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri (mandatory, Section 121A of the Penal Code); COMMITTING terrorist acts resulting in death (mandatory, Section 130C of the Penal Code); MURDER (mandatory, Section 302 of the Penal Code); KIDNAPPING or abducting in order to murder (Section 364 of the Penal Code); HOSTAGE-TAKING resulting in death (mandatory, Section 374A of the Penal Code); RAPE resulting in death (Section 376(4) of the Penal Code); GANG-ROBBERY with murder (Section 396 of the Penal Code); DRUG trafficking (mandatory, Section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952); DISCHARGING a firearm in the commission of an offence (mandatory, Section 3 of the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971); and, ABDUCTION, wrongful restraint or wrongful confinement for ransom (Section 3(1) of the Kidnapping Act 1961). Official statistics (released by the police Narcotics Division) revealed that despite the mandatory death penalty for drug traffickers, the number of drug trafficking cases in the country continued to increase. From 1990 to 2011, the number of persons arrested for drug trafficking increased from 744 to 3,845. The escalating figures showed clearly that the mandatory death penalty law has not achieved the aim of eradicating the drug menace. In March 2012, then home minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein told Parliament that the mandatory death penalty has failed to stem the drug trade in Malaysia. Under the original provisions of Section 39B, conviction for drug trafficking does not entail a mandatory death penalty. At the end of the trial and upon conviction of the accused, the trial judge has the discretion to impose whatever penalty he deems fit in accordance with the
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news-----MISS., OHIO, MO.
Aug. 17 MISSISSIPPI: Mississippi Says It Has Execution Drugs Amid Secrecy FightMississippi prison officials say they have obtained new supplies of execution drugs. Mississippi prison officials have obtained new supplies of execution drugs, which could allow the state to carry out lethal injections after some other drugs expired, they said in court papers. The state provided that information Monday in an ongoing lawsuit over its execution methods. Mississippi's new execution secrecy law should block lawyers for death row inmates from finding out too much about the state's plans to administer the death penalty, the state said. Among the things the state wants is a federal judge to protect the identity of the drug supplier, as well as any clues in other documents about who that supplier might be. Lawyers for death row inmates, though, are asking U.S. District Judge Henry T. Wingate to force the state to provide more information about Department of Corrections' drug-buying effort, saying it's necessary to pursue their lawsuit challenging Mississippi's current execution method. The court showdown will determine whether the state law can trump a federal lawsuit on the subject. Attorney General Jim Hood told The Associated Press in June that he hopes to ask the Mississippi Supreme Court to set execution dates for Richard Jordan and Thomas Loden Jr. this year. Mississippi hasn't executed anyone since 2012, in part because of the legal challenges and the drug shortages. Both Loden and Jordan have filed fresh appeals since they lost state appeals over the use of midazolam and Jordan is also still seeking a rehearing, so it's unclear when executions can move forward. Plaintiffs say they need the information about drugs because under federal law, if they're going to challenge Mississippi's method of execution, they have to propose a "known, available alternative." Lawyer Jim Craig would prefer that the state use only pentobarbital, the drug Mississippi formerly used as the 1st drug in a 3-drug sequence. Craig notes Texas, Georgia and Missouri are all still using pentobarbital in executions. Mississippi now plans to use the sedative midazolam, followed by a paralyzing agent and a drug that stops an inmate's heart. The use of midazolam has been repeatedly challenged nationwide because prisoners have coughed, gasped and moved for extended periods during executions. Lawyers for Jordan and others argue prisoners feel pain as drugs are administered after midazolam, violating the U.S. Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. In court papers, Mississippi officials said they stopped being able to buy pentobarbital in 2015, and couldn't find a pharmacy to make some using raw ingredients. So, after a 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling approved Oklahoma's use of midazolam, Mississippi officials rewrote their execution procedure to use that drug. The state acquired some midazolam that year, but court papers state that it expired at the end of May. Employees of Attorney General Jim Hood and the Corrections Department then found a Mississippi pharmacy identified only as "Supplier 1" in court papers to sell new drugs to the state. An unnamed person testifying on behalf of the pharmacy said the business agreed to supply drugs only under conditions of secrecy, citing fears that death penalty opponents would harass the pharmacy "resulting in physical and/or financial harm" and that drugmakers whose products the pharmacy is selling to Mississippi might cut off business because they don't want their drugs used in executions. Craig wrote that the state has dragged its feet over 22 emails that the state is still refusing to give to the plaintiffs, said the state lied in responses to public records requests and said lawyers lied to Wingate when they said on May 31 that didn't know whether the state had obtained new supplies of execution drugs. The drugs had arrived in early May. Craig wants all the people involved in obtaining drugs identified by name. "Defendants have stonewalled Plaintiffs' attempts to determine exactly who, what, when, and how MDOC has attempted to secure lethal injection drugs," Craig wrote. (source: Associated Press) * State's Longest-Sitting Death Row Inmate Challenges Death Penalty Drug The Mississippi Supreme Court has sentenced Richard Jordan to death 4 times, but with the help of his lawyers, he continues to challenge the state's death penalty method. In July, Jordan filed his 2nd petition for post-conviction relief, continuing to challenge Mississippi's proposed use of midazolam as a part of its lethal injection. Earlier this summer, the state's high court denied Jordan's 1st petition for post-conviction relief, which challenged the Mississippi Department of Corrections' use of midazolam as well as the constitutionality of executing an inmate who has been on death row for more than 40 years
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, N.J., PENN., N.C., ALA.
Aug. 17 TEXAS: 'Shoot me in the head': Defense attorneys claim mental illness was reason Laredo man killed wife A man standing trial for slaying his 23-year-old wife asked responding officers to shoot him in the head and told family members he should be given the death penalty before being taken into custody, according to testimony heard Tuesday in the 111th District Court. Alberto Espinoza's attorneys are not disputing that he fatally slashed the throat of his wife, Yolanda Martinez-Perez, on July 22, 2014. However, they are asking the jury to find Espinoza not guilty of murder by reason of insanity. "He was paranoid, he was delusional and he was hearing voices," Joaquin Amaya, Espinoza's attorney, said. While insanity defenses are rare, Amaya is arguing his client was not responsible for his actions due to a psychiatric disease when he attacked his wife with a knife in their home in 2014. Espinoza wasn't previously competent to stand trial, according to Amaya, who said his client had to be sent to a state hospital so he could know what was going on. Amaya said the jury will hear from 3 experts who will say Espinoza suffers from "severe mental illness" and would not have committed the offense if it wasn't for his illness. During opening statements, assistant district attorney Julia Rubio asked the jury to return a guilty verdict, saying the prosecution will show evidence to prove Espinoza is criminally responsible for his wife's death. "A troubled relationship, stress and rage, that is what this case is about," Rubio said. The prosecution rested its case at 1:30 p.m. Tuesday after calling first responders, police investigators, medical personnel and family members of Espinoza to the stand to provide insight into what occurred in the weeks before and after Martinez-Perez's death. The day of the homicide, Espinoza allegedly heard a voice tell him that his wife, whom he had been estranged from for about 6 months, was cheating on him and betraying him. Espinoza told police investigators he heard a voice tell him that Martinez-Perez intended to kill him by poisoning potatoes being cooked for breakfast. Using photographs taken of the crime scene, Espinoza's defense counsel noted a bottle of bleach on the kitchen sink and a container of ant killer seen in a lower cabinet near Martinez-Perez's body. In a recorded interview played for the jury, Espinoza said he "smashed (the knife) against her on her throat" when Martinez-Perez was standing up from bending down by the oven to pick up a pan. The prosecution said Espinoza approached Martinez-Perez with a knife he had sharpened and slashed her throat in one swift movement, cutting through every part of her neck except the bone. Later in the interview, Espinoza said that after the incident, "I didn't feel rage. I didn't feel anything anymore. I just felt love for my daughters." His daughters, ages 3 and 6 at the time, were in another room inside the residence at the time of the slaying. After Martinez-Perez's death, Espinoza collected a photo of his wife and took it to the girls so they would have something to remember her by. Investigators found the photo lying on the bed, where Espinoza allegedly told his daughters to lay down. The girls were found crying and clinging to each other by a responding officer, according to testimony heard Tuesday. LPD Officer Juan Lorenzo Villarreal said he responded to the 4500 block of Corrada Avenue after Espinoza's relatives called police, concerned about Espinoza's welfare. Espinoza had called a relative, telling her that he had done something bad. Villarreal discussed seeing Espinoza, with blood on his shirt, pants and sandals, answer the door. "The first thing he told me (was) 'I did something very bad. I want to kill myself. I want you to kill me,'" Villarreal said. Another officer, Mauricio Ivan Chaires, recalled Espinoza telling him, "shoot me, shoot me in the head." Alleged voices Lorena Espinoza and her husband, Jesus Eduardo Garay, said they arrived at the scene as Espinoza was being taken to a patrol car. Garay said he approached the vehicle and asked Espinoza where his wife was. In response, Espinoza gestured while smiling, moving his hand across his throat, according to Garay. While Garay said he had heard Espinoza was hearing a voice and didn't trust anyone, he said Espinoza seemed "normal" and did not appear sick when working with Garay at a restaurant. Lorena Espinoza, the defendant's cousin, testified about a conversation that occurred between Alberto Espinoza and some of his extended relatives a few days before his wife's death. "That day, he sat us down to talk to us. He looked very upset and he told us that 'he' - we don't know who he was referring to - would tell him things," Lorena Espinoza said. That same day, Alberto Espinoza had been released from the hospital after seeking treatment. It was
