Sept. 2
TEXAS:
British woman on Texas death row should not get new trial, judge says -- Linda
Carty's lawyers argued that she was denied due process in trial for 2002
kidnapping and murder of neighbor, but judge found evidence insufficient
A judge has recommended that a British woman on death row in Texas should not
be granted a new trial, dealing a blow to her hopes of avoiding execution.
David Garner made his decision on Thursday after listening to closing arguments
on Monday at the end of a hearing in which Linda Carty's defence team argued
that she was denied due process at trial because prosecutors allowed false
testimony, failed to disclose evidence and hid the existence of deals with
witnesses.
Carty was sentenced to death in 2002 for orchestrating the kidnap and murder of
her neighbour in Houston, Joana Rodriguez, who was found bound and asphyxiated
in the trunk of a car the previous year. Prosecutors said that after several
miscarriages, Carty was desperate for a child, wanted to steal Rodriguez's
newborn baby and recruited 3 men to carry out the plot. The baby survived.
The 57-year-old former teacher and ex-Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)
informant, who is a British citizen because she was born on the Caribbean
island of St Kitts when it was under UK rule, has insisted she is innocent.
But Garner, a visiting judge based in nearby Galveston County, recommended that
her application be denied, finding that the evidence did not show that Texas
knowingly used perjured testimony, failed to correct untrue testimony or
presented misleading testimony at trial.
His assessment will be passed to the Texas court of criminal appeals, which
will review it and decide whether to grant a new trial.
"The judge found that the State did not coerce any witnesses to provide false
or misleading testimony," Jeff McShan, a spokesman for the Harris County
district attorney's office, said in a statement. "The court of criminal appeals
will review the case and make a final determination on Carty's writ."
Garner did determine that the state withheld or failed to disclose witness
statements and information that could have helped Carty's cause - known as
Brady violations - but concluded it was unlikely that this would have made a
difference to the jury's decisions. He ruled that it is up to the appeals court
to decide whether he can make a judgment on the significance of an alleged deal
between the state and a witness.
Carty has lost multiple state and federal appeals, previously contending that
her counsel was ineffective. Her trial lawyers spent only 2 weeks preparing;
one, Jerry Guerinot, became infamous for his lack of success when representing
capital murder clients.
She did not appear at this hearing, which centered on the alleged lengths that
prosecutors in a county dubbed "America's death penalty capital" went to in
order to secure a death sentence for a high-profile and particularly egregious
killing.
Connie Spence and Craig Goodhart, 2 trial prosecutors who still work for Harris
County, were accused during the hearing in Houston of "gamesmanship" and a
"pervasive ends justify the means attitude" by Michael Goldberg, one of Carty's
attorneys.
He claimed that prosecutors cherry-picked questionable evidence to fit their
narrative and withheld information from Carty's trial attorneys, resulting in a
distorted picture that persuaded a jury to convict Carty of capital murder.
The judge was also told by Carty's lawyers that prosecutors had destroyed
documents and emails that might have helped her cause.
Charles Mathis, a former DEA agent, testified that Spence threatened to invent
a story about him having had an affair with Carty in order to blackmail him
into testifying against her.
Carty's alleged accomplices avoided the death penalty. One, Chris Robinson,
claimed in a 2014 affidavit that he was told to testify that he saw Carty put a
bag over Rodriguez's head, which he said was untrue.
"Spence and Goodhart had a version of events in their minds and they were
alternating between coaching me and threatening me to get me to say their
version," he said.
Spence and Goodhart appeared at the hearing and denied misconduct, with Spence
rejecting Mathis's claim, the Houston Chronicle reported.
Judge Garner made it clear in his findings that he was not persuaded by
Mathis's testimony or Robinson's affidavit.
Joshua Reiss, an assistant district attorney, conceded Monday that standards
are now different regarding the ways prosecutors provide information to defence
attorneys. "There are things that went on in the trial that today might
honestly make us wince a little bit," he said. "[But] that was the law [at the
time]."
Goldberg disagreed. "The state's basic theory was that they could hide what
they wanted because that was the norm back in 2002, but the reality is the
constitutional requirements have never changed," he told the Guardian after the
hearing. The judge concurred, writing that prosecutors at the time operated
under a misunderstanding of the law, deciding whether to turn over certain
evidence based on "gut instinct" and "judgment call".
The scrutiny of Carty's case and unusual decision to hold a hearing into the
misconduct claims comes at a testing time for the death penalty even in Texas,
which carries out the punishment more than any other US state.
15 people have been executed in the US this year; 6 in Texas, which is the only
state with executions scheduled in the remainder of 2016, according to the
Death Penalty Information Center.
Though Texas has not endured the botched executions and difficulties sourcing
lethal injection drugs that have paralysed the process in other states, it has
not put anyone to death since 6 April - an unusually long gap caused by
multiple stays granted by the appeals court, which seems to have become more
willing in recent months to give inmates extended opportunities to push for the
re-examination of their cases.
(source: The Guardian)
*****
Death row Briton Linda Carty loses latest appeal
A Texas court has dismissed the latest appeal by a British grandmother against
her death sentence in America.
Linda Carty has been on death row since 2002 after she was convicted and
condemned for the murder of her neighbour, Joana Rodriguez, and the abduction
of Ms Rodriguez's 4-day-old son the year before.
The 57-year-old was previously granted the chance for her case to be reviewed
after lawyers claimed to have unearthed new evidence, saying prosecutors
coerced witnesses into giving false evidence at her trial.
But a district court judge dismissed her appeal that they engaged in misconduct
or hid information which may have changed the outcome of the trial.
Responding to the decision, minister for the Americas Sir Alan Duncan said: "I
am disappointed by the decision to dismiss Linda Carty's latest appeal. The
British Government is deeply opposed to the death penalty in all circumstances.
"We have long held concerns about the handling of Ms Carty's case and will
continue to raise these with the relevant authorities. We will continue to
provide assistance to Ms Carty and her family."
Carty, from the British Virgin Islands, had lived in Houston for nearly 20
years.
(source: bt.com)
**************
LaHood defends decision to seek death penalty against Avalos, will keep open
mind
The trial against a San Antonio man accused of killing multiple women last year
will move forward as a death penalty case, for now. That decision is a story we
broke last week.
"It's a matter of justice," Bexar County District Attorney Nico LaHood says.
By the time 29-year-old Celia Lopez's body was found in a field, her accused
killer was already sitting in the Bexar County Jail. Johnny Avalos was there
because police say he sexually assaulted and strangled 15-year-old Natalie
Chavez. San Antonio police say he also killed 45-year-old Genevieve Ramirez,
and is considered a person of interest in the murder of 27-year-old Rosemary
Perez.
On just the Natalie Chavez charges alone, LaHood says his office will seek the
death penalty, "At this point we're moving forward with death."
Chavez's dad told us this last September about the prospect of the death
penalty, "The lethal injection would be good but for what? I'd rather him get a
life sentence."
In an exclusive interview with Lopez's mom, who's serving 15 years on a heroin
charge in Gatesville, said the death penalty would let Avalos off too easy,
"Having been incarcerated Most of my adult life, I know what goes on back here.
And the death penalty is really too good for an individual like that," Maria
Avila says.
LaHood says it's possible for him to reverse his decision to seek death for
Avalos, "I'm always open minded to make sure we get it right and seek justice
in every situation."
He'll weigh the family's wishes, even meet with them if they want, but also
consider 2 other main factors: future danger he could pose and are there any
reasons or mitigating evidence why Avalos shouldn't be put to death.
"We'll make that analysis and I'll ultimately reassess it over those 2 issues."
For now, that decision is death.
In December, the trial will be scheduled.
(source: foxsanantonio.com)
VIRGINIA:
Prince William judge: Death penalty possible for man accused of killing wife,
officer
A Prince William County judge on Thursday said that prosecutors can seek the
death penalty in the case of Ronald W. Hamilton, the Pentagon
information-technology specialist accused of fatally shooting his wife at their
Woodbridge home and then a responding rookie police officer.
Circuit Judge Lon E. Farris denied two requests by Hamilton's attorneys to bar
a jury from weighing execution as an option in potential sentencing. Hamilton,
32, dressed in a navy blue blazer and lighter-blue collar shirt and slacks,
appeared straight-faced as Farris announced his ruling.
Prince William Commonwealth's Attorney Paul B. Ebert has said he is "likely" to
ask a jury to impose a death sentence if Hamilton is convicted.
In court, Hamilton attorney Edward J. Ungvarsky, pointedly criticized Prince
William's longtime prosecutors for seeking the death penalty more frequently
than the vast majority of other jurisdictions, arguing that Hamilton might be
executed simply because of the "arbitrary" nature of where the shootings
happened. If the killings had occurred elsewhere in Virginia or in a different
state, Ungvarsky contended that his client would likely face - at most - life
in prison if found guilty. Prince William's high rate of death penalty cases
compared with the rest of the nation's, he said, violates Hamilton's
constitutional rights against "cruel and unusual punishment."
James A. Willett, a Prince William County prosecutor who handled the capital
murder case of Washington sniper John Allen Muhammad, who was convicted and
executed, fought back against the contention that his office seeks the death
penalty without careful consideration. Willett also lashed out against
Ungvarsky's motion labeling Prince William as "one of the few counties
nationwide that is actively involved in seeking death and executions of its
citizens."
"It's stunning," Willett said. "It reveals the mind-set of the defendant," he
said, adding that Ungvarsky's criticisms of his office have "abandoned any
pretense of objectivity." He pointed at Hamilton and said there was nothing
"arbitrary" in pursuing the death penalty against someone who "gunned down 2
people with no justification at all."
"Yes, it is arbitrary," Ungvarsky told the judge.
He then cited a 1998 interview that Ebert, the top prosecutor, gave to the
Richmond Times-Dispatch saying that he frequently seeks a capital murder charge
"even if it's questionable as whether or not it fits in that category."
Ungvarsky laced his argument and written motion with numerous statistics: He
said that despite a downward trend in death sentences in Virginia, Prince
William leads the commonwealth with the highest number of executions since 1976
and that it still ranks among the top 2 % of counties - 62 out of more than
3,100 - that have produced the majority of executions "in the modern death
penalty era."
A 2013 analysis by the D.C.-based Death Penalty Information Center found that
in Prince William, there were 9 executions of death row inmates between 1976,
when the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty, and 2102.
Farris denied the defense motions but didn't say why.
Under Virginia law, prosecutors can seek capital murder in specific
circumstances that include the killing of a law enforcement officer, a
murder-for-hire or the premeditated killings of more than 1 person within 3
years.
On the night of Feb. 27, Hamilton and his wife, Crystal Hamilton, 29, a
recovery-care coordinator for wounded and ill Marines, had an argument in their
Woodbridge home, according to police, family and friends. Crystal was planning
to go out with friends for dinner, and their 11-year-old son, Tyriq, had just
returned home from a slumber party and was taking a shower. But Hamilton began
arguing with his wife, telling her not to go.
After Crystal Hamilton called 911, her husband threw her against a wall and
shot her while their son was fleeing the house, authorities said.
3 Prince William police officers arrived, including Ashley Guindon, 28, who was
on her 1st day on the street. When Guindon approached the door to their home,
Ronald Hamilton fatally shot her with a rifle and wounded the other 2 officers,
police said. The Hamiltons' son, their only child, had safely reached a
neighbor's house.
The double slaying prompted an outpouring of support and grief across
Washington. Thousands of people turned out for a live-streamed memorial service
for Guindon, who had been sworn in the day before the shooting. Services for
Crystal were held in her home state of South Carolina and at the Marine
Memorial Chapel in Quantico.
During an earlier hearing, a sergeant testified that Hamilton confessed to the
killings after his arrest.
For Hamilton's family, charges that he killed his wife, let alone a police
officer, generated an excruciating irony. His father, also named Ronald
Hamilton, served as a former 2nd-in-command of the Charleston, S.C., police
department before retiring in 2001. The younger Hamilton has claimed, through
his attorney, that his 2 tours in Iraq psychologically damaged him.
(source: Washington Post)
FLORIDA:
Prosecutors to seek death penalty in David Mariotti case, records show
Prosecutors will seek the death penalty in the 1st-degree murder trial of David
Mariotti if he's found guilty of killing an elderly Leesburg woman in June,
Lake County court records show.
Mariotti was jailed in early July, following an investigation into the
disappearance of Bernadine Montgomery, an 84-year-old woman who lived alone in
the Palmora Park neighborhood of Leesburg. Police said Mariotti tried to
convince Montomgery to allow him to help around the house while Tracie Jo
Naffziger was raiding it.
When Montgomery discovered Naffziger, Mariotti, who police said was high on
heroin, struggled with the woman before grabbing a piece of rope from the couch
and suffocating her.
Assistant State Attorney Rich Buxman listed five factors the state believes can
be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. They are that the crime involved the abuse
of an elderly person resulting in great bodily harm, that the felony was
committed to avoid arrest, it was committed for financial gain, was especially
heinous and the victim was vulnerable because of age or disability, records
show.
New information released in discovery says Mariotti told a man that he did
something that could send him away for life, and told another "Don't ask me no
questions, I'll tell you no lies."
In the days that followed Montgomery's slaying, Mariotti and Naffziger hid the
woman's body on the couch beneath blankets and pillows while they used her
credit cards at various local restaurants and convenience stores and pawned a
few of her items.
Using the name of Tyler Everett Mason, a current state prisoner, Mariotti
received $100 for a set of cuff links and a pendant with a large stone. He also
pawned a set of antique silverware in a decorative box for $250 and a silver
flatware set for $225, records show.
Last week, Mariotti was charged in connection with drug-smuggling ring that
sheriff's officials allege smuggled narcotics into the Lake County Jail. He was
hit with charges of illegal use of a 2-way communication device as well as
conspiracy to introduce contraband into a county detention center.
(source: Orlando Sentinel)
KANSAS:
Man charged with capital murder after body of Overland Park woman is found ----
Overland Park police continued their investigation near Indian Creek Parkway
and Bluejacket Drive Thursday morning in the death of Julianna Pappas, an
Overland Park woman whose body was found in that area late Wednesday.
The Johnson County district attorney's office has charged a 22-year-old man
with capital murder and rape less than a day after he was taken into custody in
connection to the disappearance of an Overland Park woman.
Korrey Raine White Rinke of Ottawa, Kan., was charged Thursday in the killing
of Julianna Pappas.
Rinke made his 1st appearance Thursday afternoon in Johnson County District
Court.
Because the capital murder charge carries a possible death sentence, an
attorney from the Kansas Death Penalty Defense Unit was appointed to represent
Rinke.
Rinke's next court appearance was set for Wednesday.
The body of 46-year-old Pappas, who was last seen Aug. 22, was found late
Wednesday in a wooded area south of 115th Street, between Switzer Road and
Indian Creek Parkway. Police say Rinke killed Pappas on or around Aug. 22 after
assaulting her. Court documents do not say how she was killed.
Rinke was booked into the jail early Thursday, according to jail records. His
bond is set at $1 million.
Records show that Rinke is unemployed and has lived in both Iowa and Kansas in
the past decade. He was born in Iowa.
(source: Kansas City Star)
MISSOURI:
Muckraker Wants Executions Stopped Until He Can Watch
A reporter who exposed questionable execution procedures in Missouri, including
cash payments to pharmacists and members of the execution team, sued the state
Wednesday for refusing his request to witness executions.
Christopher McDaniel sued Missouri Department of Corrections Director George
Lombardi in Federal Court, alleging due process violations.
McDaniel wants an injunction to stop executions in Missouri until its process
for selecting witnesses for executions meets constitutional requirements of due
process.
2 years and 8 months ago, McDaniel applied to the Department of Corrections to
witness an execution. He's still waiting for a response.
McDaniel is a death penalty reporter for BuzzFeed News and a former reporter
for St. Louis Public Radio.
The state's refusal to reply to his January 2014 application "effectively
den(ied) him the opportunity to witness any of the 17 executions that the state
has carried out since he submitted his application," his attorneys with the
ACLU of Missouri said in a statement.
ACLU of Missouri legal director Tony Rothert added: "The Missouri Department of
Corrections has shown a disturbing pattern of behavior that's been keeping the
public from knowing about its unsavory and possibly illegal practices related
to the death penalty."
Rothert is McDaniel's lead attorney. He says in the 7-page lawsuit that
McDaniel's reporting "shone an unfavorable light" on Missouri and its
officials.
One of McDaniel's stories revealed that Missouri's execution drug supplier was
not licensed to sell in Missouri.
Another exposed Missouri's practice of injecting inmates with dangerous levels
of a sedative before ushering in witnesses to an execution.
His Jan. 28 story this year "showed that high-ranking Department of Corrections
officials have handed out more than $250,000 in cash stuffed in envelopes to
pharmacists and members of the execution team, likely in violation of federal
tax law," according to the complaint.
Missouri law allows the Department of Corrections director to select and invite
at least 8 "reputable citizens" to be present at an execution. It allows the
director "unfettered discretion to determine who is, or is not, permitted to
witness an execution," according to the lawsuit.
"The Department of Corrections maintains no policy governing how the director
decides whether to grant or deny requests to witness an execution by members of
the public or media, leaving the decision of who is a reputable citizen and who
among those qualified should be selected to the discretion of the director,"
the complaint states.
McDaniel and Rothert say a question on the witness application allows the
department of prisons to discriminate against anyone who opposes the death
penalty, by asking: "Are you, or have you ever been, a member of any group or
organization opposed to, or in support of, the death penalty?"
This provides a perfect "opportunity for discrimination based on viewpoint or
retaliation for First Amendment protected activity," the complaint states.
It gives the prisons director "unbridled discretion to deny an adult citizen
the benefit of serving as an execution witness based on the individual's
viewpoint, expressive or press activity, or membership in a church or other
organization."
It also violates the due process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, McDaniel
says.
The Department of Corrections did not respond to an emailed request for
comment.
McDaniel seeks a permanent injunction barring the prison director from inviting
anyone other than the Missouri attorney general as an execution witness until
the Department of Corrections establishes a policy for selection that does not
violate due process.
"Execution witnesses are an important check to ensure the department does not
abuse its power," Rothert said. "That check does not work when the department
can choose to exclude anyone critical of its behavior."
(source: Courthouse News)
NEBRASKA:
Nebraska needs death penalty
To the editor:
Let's analyze the death penalty for its positive benefits.
Earlier, prior to recent assaults on penitentiary guards, a public conversation
in a local business regarded the elimination of the death penalty. One man
said, "I feel sorry for the guards." "What?" He stated that getting rid of the
death penalty makes the guards a target; and inmates will say, "What are you
going to do, give me life in prison? I already have that."
It's not only the guards. "No penalty" also places other inmates at higher
risk.
Life in prison: Free room, free meals, free health care, free recreation, at
least some free education. Without the death penalty, nothing much to lose. And
so far, inmates sentenced to life are still eligible for parole/release.
What does one do with the serial killer? Or the unrepentant, already-confined
killer who remains a risk to those around him? How much money is the state
going to save when sued for failure to provide any ramifications whatsoever for
the deaths or serious injuries of prison guards and inmates? Further, who wants
to work in a position so undervalued that your life can be taken with
absolutely no risk to the perpetrator?
Fear of wrongfully putting people to death can better be addressed by changing
other laws, perhaps only allowing external/originating death penalties in
heinous crimes based on actual physical evidence.
The financial aspect can also be addressed by law changes. If the ultimate goal
is saving tax dollars, review and amend the appeal process itself.
Fear of the death penalty is supposed to inhibit the likelihood of murder in
our communities and further murders by incarcerated inmate killers. We may need
to enact laws to limit when the penalty is applied, but eliminating it entirely
invites anarchy. We need the death penalty.
Anita Zavadil--Columbus
(source: Letter to the Editor, Columbus Telegram)
_______________________________________________
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
