Jan. 10


TEXAS----foreign national to face death penalty

Slaying of Dallas officer to be tried as capital case----Mexican citizen
pleads not guilty in shooting; judge denies gag order


A man accused of fatally shooting a Dallas police officer in November will
face a possible death sentence when his case goes to trial in May,
prosecutors announced Monday.

The formal announcement by prosecutor Toby Shook had been expected for
weeks. Attorneys for Juan Lizcano, a Mexican citizen, said they have been
approaching the matter all along as if it would be a death-penalty case
because the Dallas County district attorney's office has a longstanding
tradition of seeking the death penalty in cases involving officers killed
in the line of duty.

If convicted of capital murder, a jury would decide whether Mr. Lizcano is
executed or sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Officer Brian Jackson was shot Nov. 13, after he arrived to investigate a
call from Mr. Lizcano's former girlfriend. She told police that Mr.
Lizcano had threatened her repeatedly at her home in the 2400 block of
Madera Street near North Henderson Avenue in Old East Dallas.

Officer Jackson was shot as he and other officers searched for Mr.
Lizcano, who was hiding outside his ex-girlfriend's home. The fatal shot
entered through Officer Jackson's underarm in an area not protected by his
bulletproof vest.

Speaking through an interpreter, Mr. Lizcano pleaded not guilty to the
charge during a brief hearing. His attorneys, Brook Busbee and Juan
Sanchez, said they were concerned about publicity surrounding the case and
asked District Judge Karen Greene to impose a gag order forbidding comment
about the case outside the courtroom.

"We fear the defendant will not be granted a fair trial because of
pretrial publicity," Ms. Busbee said.

Judge Greene denied the gag order request but said she would reconsider it
if problems arise.

Officer Jackson's wife, JoAnn DeMello Jackson, attended the hearing but
made no comment as she left the courthouse. Mr. Shook said she had not
been able to attend previous hearings and wanted to have a chance to see
Mr. Lizcano in person.

(source: Dallas Morning News)

********************

Statewide judicial candidates speak in city


It's become a tradition in recent years to have statewide judicial
candidates make an appearance in Gainesville every other January before
the primaries.

Keeping with that, in a meeting of the Cooke County Republican Women
(CCRW) Thursday evening, standing 2nd Court of Criminal Appeals Justices
Bob McCoy, Place 4, and Sue Walker, Place 5, and candidate Robert Francis,
running for Place 8, spoke to an audience about the nature of their often
overlooked positions and fielded questions from an audience of political
activists.

Speaking first, Robert Francis, who is opposing the incumbent judge for
Place 8 on the 2nd Court of Criminal Appeals, on policy and the nature of
his position.

"If you live in Texas, you may vote for me," Francis said, to a question
to what his jurisdiction would be.

He faces Rep. Terry Keel of Austin and incumbent Charles Holcomb of
Wimberly in the Republican primary election March 7. There is no
registered Democrat running in the primary for the position.

The salary for the position is $150,000 per year for a 6-year term.

Pat Peale of Lake Kiowa asked what Francis would do differently than the
incumbent if elected.

"I wouldn't say the incumbent has done a bad job," Francis replied, though
not particularly addressing any specific policy differences.

Peale later introduced her son Clifford Peale as Francis' campaign
treasurer.

Angelo Nasche of Muenster asked Francis his thoughts on the death penalty.

"You have to administer it carefully," Francis said. "You don't want
someone innocent being executed."

Francis added he has a Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod, religious
background, which guides his decision on capital punishment.

Other questions involved how to best expedite (speed up) the trial
process. Francis said DNA testing has eased the process of finding
evidence in capital punishment cases, for instance. However, long trial
dates persist.

"Unfortunately, science advances faster than law does," he said.

Walker spoke next, opting to discuss some personal details of her life to
the group, as she discussed policy in previous visits to the CCRW when she
was opposed on the ballot. She mentioned her appearance at the Cooke
County Courthouse on New Year's Day 2005 to swear-in newly elected county
officials.

Walker said she is married to Kenny Walker and they have 2 children,
19-year-old Janie, who attends University of Texas at Austin, and
15-year-old Ben.

Walker said her son is involved with an Optimist Club baseball league in
Arlington, and she became disgruntled with some of the umpires available
to youth sports teams. Frustrated, she enrolled in an umpire class and
became one of the 1st female umpires in the area.

Wayne Dodson of the Callisburg area asked Walker, "As an umpire, do you
get yelled at?"

"Oh yeah, but I let it roll off me," she said.

On a more serious note, Walker answered a question about "the hardest part
of the job." She said the volume of cases is the most difficult aspect of
her bench. She said with a docket of about 1,500 cases per year and 7
judges, the court must offer an average of 3 opinions per day to keep
pace.

Walker also clarified some specific judicial terms such as "en banc" for
the curious.

She explained her court may hear "everything that can possibly be
appealed, except for death penalty cases" which automatically go to the
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

Her courts jurisdiction includes 12 counties.

McCoy followed Walker, who also shared more about the nature of his job
and personal details.

McCoy said he is also involved in baseball, but as a player. He said he
plays as a 3rd baseman with an "old geezers" league.

In between baseball practices, he added, he teaches law at Texas Wesleyan
University in Fort Worth.

He is married to his wife of 13 years, Colleen, and they raise Great
Danes.

"It's very busy up there," he said, echoing that the court must offer 3
opinions per day to keep up.

McCoy said there are times when he has had to work 7 days per week.

"You can't do all the work you need to do in 40 hours a week," he said. He
said his favorite time to report to work is Sunday evenings, when no one
else is in the office and he may work uninterrupted. He said many judges
prefer to take their work home but he prefers the office so he can focus.

"I just like to go to work," he said. "There's something about the
environment."

McCoy said it helps that he "looks forward to going to work" in the
morning.

In club announcements, recently-elected CCRW President Veronica Harper
announced Feb. 6 is the deadline for voter registration for the general
election.

She had each candidate present stand and introduce themselves. She also
noted the Democratic candidates, though none were in attendance.

Harper said the club expresses "great sorry and regret of loss" at the
passing over the last year of members Ray Gaertner, Nita Harlow and Jim
Lemming.

(source: Gainesville Daily Register)






USA:

Questions of justice

Flawed choices. More than 4 years later, the crime is still as horrifying
as the day it happened.

On June 20, 2001, Houston housewife Andrea Yates awoke in her neat, brick
suburban house, saw her husband, a computer expert, off to work, then
filled the bathtub and methodically drowned each of her 5 children. The
youngest was 6 months old.

Yates dialed 911 and later told police that she did it to save the
youngsters from Satan.

Yates, who had long been plagued by mental illness, was tried and sent to
prison for life after the jury rejected her insanity plea in 2002.

That verdict was overturned on appeal last year because the prosecution's
key expert witness had given false testimony. On Monday, Yates was back in
court to be tried again.

Despite the intervening years, which featured a heated political debate
over Texas' insanity defense and a partial rewrite of the law, Texas'
options for dealing with Yates are almost as flawed as they were in 2001.

The insanity defense in Texas - and many other states - is a crapshoot,
both for defendants and the public. The standards for finding someone
legally insane are confusing for juries and easy for lawyers to
manipulate.

Even when a person is clearly guilty of a heinous crime and clearly
mentally ill, as in Yates' case, juries fear that finding him or her "not
guilty by reason of insanity" is tantamount to letting that person loose.

That's unlikely: Someone like Yates would spend years in a secure mental
institution. But few states, including Texas, have laws that guarantee
treatment for a specified period. And many state laws fail to fully
protect the public against precipitous release.

A handful of states are struggling to find the right balance. Laws should
ensure that people get treatment and remain under the jurisdiction of the
courts for the same period they would have served in prison.

In Yates' case, that would have been for life. Defendants should be
released only under strict conditions and with the assurance that they can
get treatment even after release to make sure that they don't relapse.

Such systems protect seriously ill defendants and public safety.

Few would argue that Yates is sane. She has twice tried suicide, was
released from a mental hospital weeks before the killings and was taken
off anti-psychotic drugs.

She is sick. And just as certainly, she is guilty of violent crimes. In
such cases, the judicial system should provide better options.

Unacceptable risk. Did the state of Virginia execute an innocent man 14
years ago?

The answer could be a crucial turning point in this nation's bitter debate
over the death penalty.

Gov. Mark Warner has ordered new DNA tests that might prove whether a coal
miner, who maintained his innocence even as he was strapped into a prison
electric chair in 1992, committed the crime for which he was executed.

Roger Coleman was convicted of the rape and murder in 1981 of his
sister-in-law, Wanda McCoy. If the new tests clear him - results are due
soon - it will be the first time in the history of the American death
penalty that an executed convict was scientifically shown to have been
innocent, say opponents of capital punishment.

DNA testing has helped law enforcement solve cold cases. Even so, some
prosecutors and legislators resist using it on closed cases. They argue
that false convictions are rare, that reopenings are traumatic for
victims' families and that thousands of guilty prisoners will inundate
officials with frivolous demands for new tests. True, perhaps, but
outweighed by the search for truth and the imperative to avoid
incarcerating or executing the innocent.

Around the nation, 172 inmates, including 14 who had spent time on death
row, have been exonerated and released because of DNA evidence, says the
Innocence Project, a non-profit legal clinic that handles cases in which
post-conviction DNA testing can yield proof of innocence.

On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in the case
of a man on Tennessee's death row who says post-conviction DNA testing
proves he's not guilty. He's demanding a new hearing.

Virginia's Warner leaves office Saturday, but other governors should
follow his example. Last September, he ordered forensic scientists to
review hundreds of cases dating to 1973 in which someone was convicted but
no DNA analysis was done. The result: 2 men convicted of sexual assault
who had been paroled after serving long sentences were exonerated by new
testing. Warner pardoned them last month.

No justice system is perfect, but the risk of executing the wrong person
is unacceptable. The Coleman case in Virginia case could strengthen the
argument for life imprisonment with no possibility of parole as an
alternative to the death penalty. DNA testing can reverse an unjust
verdict; nothing can reverse an execution.

(source: Editorial, USA TODAY)<

****************

Wrong on Human Rights


For months, we have been arguing that the Bush administration has
generally the right substantive agenda for badly needed changes at the
United Nations, but that Ambassador John Bolton's scorched-earth
alternative to diplomacy is undermining the prospects for successfully
achieving these reforms. Now it turns out that our criticism has been only
half-right in at least one crucial area - in restoring the United Nations'
moral authority on human rights by excluding egregious violators from a
new human rights monitoring council. Mr. Bolton's latest proposal on this
gets the substance wrong as well.

The problem with the current discredited Human Rights Commission is that
its members are chosen by a system of regional rotation that fails to take
into account the actual human rights performance of prospective members.
The reform was originally intended to change that, by requiring the
approval of at least 2/3 of the 191 member countries to win a seat on the
new council.

Mr. Bolton wants to defeat the whole purpose of that reform by
automatically assuring seats for all five permanent members of the United
Nations Security Council - regardless of their own human rights records.

That would, of course, guarantee a seat every year for the United States,
despite what other countries may think of Guantnamo Bay and Abu Ghraib,
the death penalty, or Washington's practice of secretly flying suspects to
be interrogated in countries that countenance torture. It would also
guarantee a seat every year to China, one of the world's most notorious
human rights violators, and to Russia, whose own human rights record is
less than stellar and which has never hesitated to gloss over the human
rights abuses of dictatorships it considers friendly, like Cuba, for
example.

There are plenty of areas where special weight is, and should be, given to
the Security Council's big five powers, which also happen to be world's 5
legally recognized nuclear weapons states. Most of these areas,
appropriately, are in the Security Council's special domain of war, peace
and sanctions.

But the issue of human rights is very different. It is not about
recognizing the interests of the powerful. It is about protecting the
interests of the powerless. It would be nice if all of the big 5 could be
trusted to do this. But not all of them can, either at home or
internationally. Some of the people most in need of a strong U.N. voice on
human rights live under tyrannies that have carefully cultivated Chinese
or Russian favor: Cuba, Iran, Myanmar, Uzbekistan and Zimbabwe, to name a
few.

Although Ambassador Bolton has repeatedly made it clear that he has little
use or respect for the United Nations and would be happy to see the United
States walk away from it, we have never questioned his commitment to
reform its most dysfunctional institutions. But his behavior on this issue
leaves us questioning his judgment, and that of his bosses in the State
Department and the White House.

(source: Editorial, The New York Times)

******************

Magazine reveals sobering facts about death penalty


The Economist, a British newsweekly publication, recently wrote about
American support for the death penalty.

It was in the Dec. 17-23 issue, which appeared shortly after the Dec. 13
execution of California death row inmate Tookie Williams.

Williams, a founder of the Crips street gang, had devoted himself to
writing books urging kids to avoid gang life. The question was whether
that recent activity should trump his earlier involvement in 4 brutal
murders in 1979.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger argued that it should not, and refused to grant
clemency.

That action prompted The Economist, which opposes the death penalty, to
make this argument in an editorial:

"Even when it is carefully administered, Americas machinery of death still
seems cruel and unusual. The United States is not the only democracy to
retain the death penalty: Taiwan, Japan and India also do. But the number
of executions it carries puts it closer to China, Iran and Vietnam." Its
striking to note the difference between the United States and the
countries in Europe and elsewhere that would seem to most closely share
its democratic values.

The 25 member countries in the European Union do not have the death
penalty. Interestingly, murder rates in those countries are lower than the
United States.

The issue is not necessarily public safety. That can be achieved by
holding the most violent criminals with no opportunity for parole. Even in
Tookie Williams case, not even his supporters were advocating his release;
they simply were calling for his execution to be stayed.

Nor is the argument that the death penalty acts as a deterrent persuasive.
After all, Texas, which has executed 355 people since the death penalty
was reinstated in the United States in 1976, has a higher murder rate than
Wisconsin, which abolished capital punishment in the mid-19th century.

It truly is sobering to consider the differences in attitudes between what
we used to regard as our "European allies" and the United States toward
the death penalty. Then think of the countries which are closer to the
United States in the number of inmates put to death: China, Iran and
Vietnam.

(source: Editorial, La Crosse (Wis.) Tribune)






NEW HAMPSHIRE:

State should rid itself of unused death penalty law


It is time to bring New Hampshires law into line with its current
practices and those of almost all civilized countries in the world. It is
time to end the death penalty in this state.

Today House Bill 1422, sponsored by Portsmouth Democratic state Rep. Jim
Splaine, will be heard before the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety
Committee. It calls for the repeal of the death penalty, but requires
anyone convicted of capital murder to spend his or her life in prison
without the possibility of parole.

In fact, no one has been executed in New Hampshire since 1939. After years
of being without the death penalty, it was reinstated in 1990 only to have
both houses of the state Legislature vote for repeal in 2000. It was only
a veto from then Democratic Gov. Jeanne Shaheen that kept the penalty on
the books.

There is no one on death row currently in New Hampshire and no death
chamber in which to hold executions anywhere in the state. But because
there is still a death penalty on the books here, state officials are
being called on to execute someone convicted of murder outside the state.

In 2003, Gary Lee Sampson, who killed 2 Massachusetts people and a man
from Penacook, N.H., was sentenced to death by a federal court. However,
because Massachusetts has no death-penalty law, the federal judge ordered
Sampson to be executed here in New Hampshire.

Sampson is currently going through the appeals process, but unless the
death penalty is repealed in this state, it is probable New Hampshire will
be called upon to execute a man who has not been found guilty of any crime
in its courts.

There are, of course, ethical and moral issues involved in support for -
or opposition to - the death penalty, along with the financial questions
about whether it is cheaper to go through the lengthy appeals process
required in a death penalty case than to keep a man incarcerated for the
rest of his life.

But the real question hinges on whether the death penalty is a real
deterrent to anyone considering killing another individual. With the
specific criteria for instituting the death penalty in current New
Hampshire law - that the murder take place during a rape or kidnapping, or
that the victim be a law-enforcement officer or a judge - the deterrent
value is obviously limited.

If having such a law on the books offers no deterrent, is initially more
costly because of the appeals process, hasnt been used in more than half a
century, is open to abuse and groups New Hampshire with the likes of Iran,
Saudi Arabia and China, it is time to get rid of it.

We urge members of the House committee to vote to recommend passage of
this bill to the entire House, encourage the full House and Senate to
support it as they did in 2000, and for Gov. John Lynch to sign it into
law as soon as possible.

(source: Editorial, Portsmouth Herald)






GEORGIA:

DA to seek death penalty in Baldwin slayings


The death penalty will be sought against a man accused of shooting to
death his estranged wife and step-daughter at their Baldwin County home in
October, Ocmulgee Judicial Circuit District Attorney Fred Bright said
Monday.

Brian Duane Brookins was indicted Monday by a Baldwin County grand jury on
2 counts of malice murder, 2 counts of felony murder, possession of a
firearm by a convicted felon, aggravated stalking and cruelty to children
in the 3rd degree. Bright said he plans to file his intention to seek the
death penalty this week or next.

This is "as a heinous of a case of domestic violence as it gets, and a
tragic execution of a innocent child," Bright said.

Suzanne McDade Brookins, 44, and her daughter Samantha Giles, 15, were
found dead at their Merry Drive home Oct. 14, authorities said.
Authorities have said it appears Brookins was waiting for Suzanne Brookins
and her daughter before shooting them.

(source: Macon Telegraph)






TENNESSEE----female to face death penalty

Prosecutors Will Seek Death Penalty Against Exotic Dancer


Tennessee prosecutors said they'll seek the death penalty against an
exotic dancer who is already serving a life sentence for killing her
boyfriend during a standoff with Florida state troopers.

Melissa Gale Ferris pleaded not guilty Monday in the death of a Memphis
stripper whose remains were found in a remote area of Mississippi.

Ferris is already serving a life sentence for killing her boyfriend after
a long stand-off with state troopers in a traffic stop in Interstate 95 in
Jacksonville, Florida, on May ninth.

The couple were on the run at the time from Memphis, where they were
suspected in the stripper's disappearance.

The stripper's remains were found May 24th after Ferris drew authorities a
map.

Tennessee prosecutors say the state will seek the death penalty for Ferris
based on her conviction in her boyfriend's death.

(source: Associated Press)

***************

Judge's decision could delay Thompson execution


A federal judge in Chattanooga has indicated he may stop the Feb. 7
execution of Gregory Thompson, the Tennessee death row inmate who
confessed to the murder of Brenda Blanton Lane of Shelbyville 21 years
ago.

U.S. District Court Judge R. Allan Edgar on Friday granted a request from
Thompson's Knoxville-based attorney, Dana Hansen Chavis, noting that
Thompson had only exhausted his opportunity for relief in the Tennessee
courts.

Edgar is willing to consider more information in the case, but according
to the sister of Thompson's victim, the execution could still be conducted
Feb. 7.

Thompson was convicted in 1985 for the murder of Lane, then a 28-year-old
former Shelbyville Times-Gazette reporter. Her sister, Barbara Brown of
the Longview community, survives.

"It's a new deadline," Brown said Monday, referring to Edgar's call for
more information in 30 days.

"It might not change the execution date because there are 30 days between
Thursday (when Edgar signed his order) and Feb. 7," Brown said. "So, I was
looking at it as a routine step."

Meanwhile, Brown maintains her position that Thompson should be executed.

"I would like to see this end," she said, agreeing that in her view the
appropriate conclusion to the 21-year saga would be Thompson's execution.

Edgar previously postponed Thompson's Aug. 19, 2004 execution date. 6
months ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a federal appeals court
improperly reopened Thompson's case. That allowed Tennessee's Supreme
Court to set the Feb. 7 date. Last month, that court refused to stop the
execution.

Yet now, Edgar has agreed to consider information on whether the execution
should happen.

"This is territory that's being revisited after being quiet for a couple
of decades on the issue of insanity," said Randy Tatel, executive director
of the Tennessee Coalition to Abolish State Killing.

The mental competency of an individual to be executed is the issue.

However, lawyers in the Tennessee Attorney Generals Office have pointed
out that Tennessee's standard to determine whether an inmate is competent
to be executed is whether they know that they're to be killed and why.

Those lawyers say Thompson knows he's to be executed because he was
convicted of killing Lane. He used a rusty knife after abducting her from
a Shelbyville Wal-Mart parking lot on Jan. 1, 1985 to get her car so he
and his girlfriend could go to Marietta, Ga.

"There's always somebody who will come up with a theory on law that will
prevent an execution from happening," Sheriff Clay Parker said Monday.

Chavis, an assistant federal community defender at the Federal Defender
Services of Eastern Tennessee Inc., wants a hearing on whether Thompson is
competent to be executed. She also asked that his execution be held in
abeyance until a hearing was conducted.

Attorneys for the state opposed Chavis' request by arguing that the
federal record on Thompson's sanity had not been supplemented with more
evidence.

Edgar then wrote that apparently the state contends that Thompson's
failure to provide more information permits the court to immediately
dismiss any efforts to spare the convict's life without anything more than
what's in the federal record.

Accordingly, Edgar ordered Thompson's defense team to provide any
additional information that had been considered by Tennessee courts and to
do so within 30 days of his order dated Thursday last week.

Through Thompson's co-counsel in Nashville, Michael Passino, and
information from Dr. Faye Sultan who's written about Thompson's condition,
Chavis has increased the size of his psychiatric file. It's now about
4,000 pages long and much of that will be new to Edgar. On Monday, she
claimed state officials have medicated Thompson "to disguise his insanity
and ... he should not be executed."

States should not execute people who are insane, she said.

That, says Tatel, the executive director of the Coalition to Abolish State
Killing, is his group's point, but he explains the legal situation.
Thompson's trial attorneys didn't use the insanity defense. Now, insanity
is offered as a reason to set aside the death sentence.

"Is it an issue that can come back up?" Tatel asks.

Parker said, "It's gotten to the point where execution is practically
nonexistent."

Prosecutors recognize the dilemma.

"Do you spend $1 million to give somebody the death penalty or maybe one
tenth that to keep them in jail for the rest of their life?" the sheriff
asked.

Thompson's insanity existed before he was convicted, his current defenders
have said, claiming he left Shelbyville thinking the Ku Klux Klan was
after him and that since his incarceration he's concluded that he can
survive execution by electrocution because his TV shocks him when he
touches it and he's "used to it."

TCASK also says Thompson believes his victim works at Riverbend Maximum
Security Institution where he's held.

Since Thompson's conviction, "the state has submerged Greg in an ocean of
anti-psychotic drugs," Chavis says. "Greg is medicated twice a day... The
drugs the state is pouring into Greg cause chemically created behavior
that masks his tortured insanity."

Without those drugs, Thompson would return to his insanity at the time of
the murder, she said. Justice is better served by imprisoning Thompson
forever to bring closure to the case and dedicating the state's scarce
resources to other areas.

(source: Shelbyville Times-Gazette)



Reply via email to