Feb. 21
TEXAS:
Community Calender----McKINNEY
FROM RAGE TO RECONCILATION is the topic of Bud Welch's talk at 7 p.m.
Tuesday at St. Gabriel the Archangel Catholic Church, 110 S. St. Gabriel
Way. Mr. Welch, whose daughter was killed in the Oklahoma City bombing, is
a death penalty opponent.
(source: Dallas Morning News)
*****************
Katy man's family: He is not a murderer----They say there's proof he
didn't kill wife, unborn child
The family of a Katy man accused of killing his pregnant wife and her
unborn child stood behind the headstone of the victims' grave Sunday to
speak in his defense.
"I am here to state clearly and emphatically that my brother, David Mark
Temple, is completely innocent of the charge brought against him," said
his older brother, Darren, who read a brief statement from the family. It
was their 1st comment on the case.
David Temple, then a coach at the Hastings Ninth Grade Center, was
arrested in November in the 1999 shooting death of his wife, Belinda, who
was 8 months pregnant. Investigators say he had been having an affair with
another teacher, whom he later married.
Belinda Temple's body was found in an upstairs closet at the couple's
home. She was killed by a shotgun blast to the back of the head.
David Temple's parents, Kenneth and Maureen, stood with their sons, Darren
and Kevin, behind the tombstone engraved with Belinda's name and with the
name of her unborn child, Erin Ashley.
They said they had undisclosed evidence they were prepared to present to
the Harris County grand jury that will re-examine the case, including
videotapes from surveillance cameras showing him and his son, now 10,
shopping at the time of his wife's death.
Darren Temple said witnesses saw 2 men in a 4-door car speed away after a
shotgun blast was heard.
He repeated allegations that District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal charged
Temple with murder because the facts were similar to the Laci Peterson
case, creating publicity to further his political career.
"(The investigation) has been going on for a while and has absolutely
nothing to do with, whatever that case is, in California," Rosenthal said.
"Lastly, I don't need any publicity."
(source: Houston Chronicle)
******************
DA, Staples do not support proposed bill
Some state lawmakers in Austin are once again talking about adding life
without parole as a sentencing option for convicted capital murderers, but
Anderson County leaders are offering little support for such a push.
State Sen. Eddie Lucio, D-Brownsville, has introduced Senate Bill 60 which
proposes the life without parole option for juries who find a defendant
guilty of capital murder.
Currently in Texas, the only punishments for defendants found guilty of
capital murder are death by lethal injection or life in prison. Many
observers say Texas district attorneys are essentially evenly split on the
adding the life without parole option.
Proponents of SB 60 say juries need more options, while some critics say
the 3rd option would dramatically reduce the number of defendants being
sentenced to death.
Even if it passes, Anderson County District Attorney Doug Lowe said the
proposed new law is not "really much different" from the present system.
In Texas, a defendant receiving a life sentence for capital murder does
not have the possibility of parole until serving 40 years.
"When you get 40 years, that's effectively life without parole," Lowe
said. "It's close to it." Lowe, however, does not support any change in
the state's laws relating to the death penalty. "The justification for the
death penalty in the first place, I think, is the security of the people
who work in the prisons," Lowe said. "Is he (the offender) a threat to the
other inmates and the guards who work there?"
When an offender is sentenced to die, he is "more restrained" and has
"less access" to other people, therefore greatly diminishing his
opportunities to assault or perhaps even kill another person, according to
Lowe.
"And there is a fair amount of certainty he'll be executed or she'll be
executed within a reasonable period of time in 10 or 12 years," Lowe said.
Offenders sentenced to life without parole would have a greater
possibility of becoming "unmanageable" in the prison environment in Lowe's
opinion.
"There's no hope of any kind," the district attorney said.
State Sen. Todd Staples, R-Palestine, also does not support any change in
state law relating to capital murder defendants. He believes the present
system is working fine.
"Today's system of sentencing capital offenses has served justice well,"
Staples said. "The current option for life with possibility of parole
requires a two-thirds vote by the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles and,
in most cases, the offender does not leave the prison system.
"This does give the option for the Board to parole terminally ill and
incapacitated inmates who cannot pose a threat to society," the senator
continued. "I am unconvinced a change is needed at this time and will
listen to the arguments as this legislation is considered."
Local defense attorney Dan Scarbrough, who described himself as neither an
advocate or opponent of the death penalty, supports the 3rd alternative
for juries.
In December 2000, Scarbrough and Sam Hicks, also a Palestine attorney,
represented Danielle Simpson, one of four local youths charged in the
January 2000 murder of 84-year-old Geraldine Davidson, a former Palestine
school teacher.
The trial was moved to neighboring Henderson County, and Simpson was
ultimately sentenced to death by lethal injection by a jury there.
Scarbrough, however, said multiple members of that jury told him they
wished the option of life without parole would have been available.
Had that option been there, Scarbrough indicated at least some members of
the jury would have chosen it.
Still, Scarbrough realizes SB 60 has "a long road to hoe" and is a
longshot due, in part, to the balance of political power in Austin. He,
for one, will not be holding his breath waiting for the legislation to
pass through both chambers.
"If I do," Scarbrough quipped, "I'd turn blue."
(source: Palestine Herald-Press)
********************
Danny Glover speaks at civil rights fund-raiser
Actors Danny Glover and Felix Justice brought to life the words of poet
Langston Hughes and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. at a fund-raiser on
Saturday for the Texas Civil Rights Project.
The Austin-based nonprofit organization provides legal services and
education to help protect the civil rights of under-served communities,
handling cases including freedom of speech, privacy rights, disability
rights and gender and racial discrimination. About 400 people gathered
this year for the 14th annual Bill of Rights Dinner at the Four Seasons
Hotel to help support the work of the organization.
"Not only do we earn money to represent our clients, but it's also a time
to get everyone in the civil rights community together," said James
Harrington, TCRP director and founder. "We wanted to have a way to
commemorate something that was significant in terms of civil rights,
because it sends a message about the kind of work we do."
Harrington said it is important for the community to get together because
these are difficult times for human rights. First Amendment issues are
threatened by authorities who have been heavy-handed in stopping political
demonstrations, he said.
"The freedom to make demonstrations is important because that's how you
bring about change and build consciousness," Harrington said. "Sometimes
we have the idea that the courts give us our rights, but it's not like
that. We have to demand our rights and get the courts to recognize them."
Evan Smith, editor and executive vice president of Texas Monthly, who
served as master of ceremonies for the event, also said these are hard
times for human rights, citing cases in which reporters are called
unpatriotic for asking difficult questions. Smith also talked about
freedom from torture as an important human right.
"We're here to advance the cause for human rights for all people, not just
those we like or are friends with," Smith said.
The organization honored Ada Anderson, a long-time leader in Austin's
political and economic scenes, with the Henry B. Gonzalez Human Rights
Award, named for the former congressman and civil rights leader in Texas.
"We try to look at people in the community that do human rights work but
don't often get recognized," Harrington said. "It gives perspective in
terms of what individuals can do and gives inspiration to keep on doing
it."
Felix Justice, an actor from San Francisco, recited the words of the late
civil rights activist Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. criticizing the Vietnam
War. Danny Glover performed poems of the late Langston Hughes such as "The
Negro Speaks of Rivers" and "The Weary Blues." Glover also received the
Michael Tigar Center Human Rights Award for his work in Texas in the fight
against capital punishment and the fight for equality.
"I stand here today because my mother didn't have to pick cotton in
September," Glover said in his acceptance speech. "I am here today because
of the vision and wisdom of those on whose shoulders I stand."
(source: The Daily Texan)
******************
2nd week of trial begins
Judge James Fry surprised spectators Monday when he recessed the Andre
Thomas capital murder trial until 1 p.m. At that time Fry will conduct a
hearing on the qualifications of one of the prosecutors expert witnesses.
Earlier, on the 1st day of the second week of the trial, prosecutors
called doctors and mental health professionals who had seen Thomas in the
weeks before the killings. Thomas faces three charges of capital murder in
the deaths of Laura Boren Thomas, Andre Boren and Leyha Marie Hughes. The
trial, going on this week at the Grayson County Courthouse, concentrates
on the death of 13-month-old Leyha.
Texoma Medical Center Emergency Room Doctor William Bowen testified that
on March 26, Thomas went to the ER because of a superficial stab wound to
the chest and was clearly psychotic. Bowen testified that Thomas could not
take part in a rational conversation and said he was trying to cross over
into heaven.
Bowen testified that he started trying to get Thomas admitted to a local
hospital, but while Bowen was doing the paper work, Thomas was allowed to
leave the ER.
(source: The Herald Democrat)
NEVADA:
Judge upholds death sentence in hatchet slaying of UNR cop
A judge has ruled that Siaosi Vanisi is competent to help his lawyers
appeal his death sentence for the murder of a University of Nevada, Reno
police officer in 1998.
Washoe County District Judge Connie Steinheimer issued the ruling at a
hearing Friday after conflicting conclusions from two mental health
experts.
The 34-year-old Vanisi was convicted in 1999 in the hatchet slaying of UNR
police Sergeant George Sullivan. He later used a gun to rob two
convenience stores and steal a car.
The Nevada Supreme Court upheld his death sentence in 2001.
(source: Associated Press)
USA:
Brain-based leniency would give teen killers a pass
Any day now, the Supreme Court is expected to decide whether executing
minors ages 16 and 17 constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. There are
good reasons why the justices might say that it is, but they should reject
one of the central arguments put forth by opponents of juvenile death
penalty- that the brain of the average 17-year-old is too immature to
render him fully morally accountable.
On the night of Sept. 9, 1993, in Jefferson County, Mo., Christopher
Simmons, then 17, burglarized the house of 46-year-old Shirley Crook. When
she awoke, he and a younger accomplice tied her up, drove her to a
railroad bridge and pushed her into the Meramec River to her death,
following a plan they had made before the break-in. Simmons would later
boast about killing the "bitch," court records said. Before the murder, he
had assured his accomplice that they would "get away with it" because they
were juveniles.
When a crime is exceptionally cold-blooded, sympathy is hard to muster.
Even so, such cases are rare, and national polls show that Americans are
moving toward a consensus that executing offenders younger than 18, no
matter how heinous their deeds, is uncivilized.
Bundling all juveniles
The Supreme Court, which heard the case last fall, could take account of
these evolving standards of decency to prohibit all executions of minors.
But in Simmons' case, his lawyer, Seth Waxman, cited recent research to
argue that juveniles have problems with moral logic and self-restraint.
In fact, the National Institutes of Health's Institute of Mental Health
and UCLA's Laboratory of Neuro Imaging made headlines this month with the
finding that intellectual maturity, the age of reason, does not arrive
until age 25.
In Simmons, an amicus brief by the American Medical Association and seven
others had a detailed description of normal adolescent brain development.
It explained how the frontal lobes of the teen brain - the region that
helps curb impulses, make plans and weigh risks - are "one of the last
parts of the brain to reach maturity."
To be sure, adolescent brains neither look nor function the same as adult
brains. Teens can be reckless: They often drive too fast, drink too much
and skateboard down staircases. But premeditated murder? The brains of
6-year-olds are far less developed than teens', but even they fully
understand that binding an innocent person and throwing her off of a
bridge is wrong.
Examine each case
Courts should and do recognize the relevance of brain function in
sentencing. Killers who are psychotic or who have a diminished capacity
for moral calculus or self-restraint deserve, and generally receive,
leniency. In such cases, experts conduct careful neurological, medical and
psychiatric evaluations of those individuals. Similarly, when we suspect
significant neurological deficits in a teen who has committed murder, we
should consider the circumstances individually, not grant brain-based
leniency to an entire class of defendants.
We are just emerging from an era of "abuse-excuses" that made a mockery of
the notion of personal responsibility. If the court is seduced by dramatic
brain images - advertised as showing why a murderer had no choice but to
kill - it will be a regrettable example of presumptive science shaping
law.
Lawyers of older homicidal defendants will say that their clients'
immature brains caused them to function, biologically, like adolescents.
All behaviors have physical markers. As neuroscientists identify more of
them, will anyone be held accountable for anything?
Erik Menendez was only 17 in 1989 when he and his brother fatally shot
their parents in their Beverly Hills home. If he were to get another
trial, doubtless his lawyer would use teen brain deficiency in his
defense. The Supreme Court exists to protect us from such travesties of
the rule of law.
(source: USA TODAY (Sally Satel and Christina Sommers, both resident
scholars at the American Enterprise Institute, are co-authors of One
Nation Under Therapy, to be published this spring)
NEW JERSEY:
Contributing Editor James Ahearn indicated that capital punishment
opponents felt the death penalty was "icky and uncivilized" ("Undying
issue: the death penalty," Opinion, Page O-2, Feb. 6). Icky is far too
trivial a word to apply to a practice that is brutal, barbaric and, yes,
uncivilized.
I spent several hours Feb. 4 at a packed Department of Corrections hearing
on the state's lethal injection regulations. If Ahearn had been there he
would have heard the story of a woman whose mother was murdered by her
father. Her grief was only exacerbated, and she became a victim again,
when her father was executed. One man told of spending years on death row
before DNA evidence proved his innocence. He was in tears as he told us
that his mother had died shortly before his release, and she never knew.
Ahearn would also have heard the New Jersey juror who voted to send an
innocent man to prison for 20 years because of evidence that had been
withheld. And Ahearn would have heard the father of a murdered daughter
eloquently say, "We need justice but not more killing."
John C. Goodwin----Demarest, Feb. 17
--
"Undying issue: the death penalty" (Opinion, Page O-2, Feb. 6) discussed
executing vicious murderers in Texas.
Having selected juries in different venues for nearly 35 years, I can tell
you that all jurors bring baggage into the jury selection process. Some of
that baggage is very well-hidden from trial attorneys. Some jurors are
bright, and some aren't.
Some witnesses on trial tell the truth, but some lie. Some are mistaken.
Some witnesses tell the truth so poorly that juries discard their
testimony. Other witnesses lie very well; they impress jurors. Judges will
charge the jury to consider the demeanor of witnesses in assisting them in
evaluation of witnesses. This empowers a juror to accept false testimony
that has been presented well and to disregard honest testimony presented
poorly. This is a quirk in our very excellent legal system, the best in
the world. These are the variables that should be considered before we
sentence people to die.
Not all jurors are colorblind. In different locations with different
values, and with victim and the accused of different ethnic backgrounds,
how can you guarantee ultimate justice? In that regard, if we don't have a
death penalty and then make a mistake by wrongfully convicting someone,
perhaps those 10 percent or so who have been wrongfully convicted will
have opportunities to prove their innocence.
We cannot guarantee innocent people will not spend time in prison, but we
should guarantee that they not be put to death.
Michael Cohen----Teaneck, Feb. 7
--
James Ahearn's "Undying issue: the death penalty" (Opinion, Page O-2, Feb.
6) illustrates a fundamental problem with the broken death penalty system:
It drags murder victims' families through a seemingly endless process.
That's just one of many reasons why New Jerseyans are rethinking the death
penalty. It is the only punishment that cannot be reversed when the system
gets it wrong. And as Ahearn points out, annual statistical reviews show
that killers of white people are more likely to be sentenced to death in
New Jersey than killers of black people.
Those annual reviews offer valuable statistical analysis but should not be
confused with the comprehensive death penalty study proposed by state
Sens. Shirley Turner, D-Mercer, and Andrew Ciesla, R-Ocean. Their bill
would examine such areas as risk of executing an innocent person, cost,
reversal rate, and impact on murder victims' family members and society at
large. The bill would also examine alternative punishments, including life
without parole with restitution to the victim's family.
Acting Governor Codey is right to endorse a death penalty study and
moratorium on executions.
Celeste Fitzgerald----Chatham, Feb. 9
(The writer is director of New Jerseyans for Alternatives to the Death
Penalty)
(source: Letters to the Editor, Bergen Record)
