Jan. 16 LOUISIANA: Court upholds death penalty for killer The state Supreme Court on Wednesday affirmed a St. Tammany jury's 2005 decision that Jesse Montejo should be executed for killing a Slidell businessman. Louis Ferrari, 61, the owner of the Corporate Cleaners dry-cleaning chain, was found shot to death on his kitchen floor Sept. 5, 2002, after he didn't show up for a weekly family dinner. Prosecutors accused Montejo, of Slidell, of planning Ferrari's murder at the suggestion of the businessman's handyman, Jerry Moore, who told him Ferrari kept stacks of $100 bills at home. In April 2006, Moore, of Gretna, was sentenced to life in prison for his role in the slaying. The state Supreme Court determined that the death sentence was imposed reasonably, that the evidence supported the jury's finding and that the sentence is proportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases. It was the 1st death sentence handed down in St. Tammany Parish since 1998. Montejo was 23 years old when he shot Ferrari twice, once in the chest and once in the right eye. Montejo's stepbrother Eric Gai, 18 at the time of the crime, drove Montejo to Ferrari's house and helped ditch the victim's car afterward. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter in October 2006. Gai, of Slidell, received 25 years behind bars. During the trial, Ferrari was described as a person who followed a well-known and predictable routine. He always did his payroll on Thursdays, transporting money, deposits and checks in the trunk of his white Lincoln. He typically could be found at home between 4 and 6 p.m. Ferrari was murdered at his home between 4 and 5 p.m. Witnesses saw Montejo's blue van at Ferrari's home during the murder. Montejo's DNA was found under Ferrari's fingernails. The centerpiece of the state's case was a four-hour police interrogation during which Montejo slowly made increasingly incriminating statements, culminating in his admission that he shot Ferrari after Ferrari interrupted his robbery. Defense attorney Jim Williams filed the appeal to the Supreme Court. He argued, in part, that Montejo's Miranda rights were violated by use of the video and a letter Montejo had written to Ferrari's widow while he was sitting in the back of a police vehicle. In the letter, Montejo told Pat Ferrari that he only intended to commit a burglary but was unable to frighten the victim with his gun, and so fired the 2 fatal shots to escape. The Supreme Court determined that Montejo had adequately waived his rights before giving his video interview and writing the letter. Since 1976, there have been 24 1st-degree murder convictions in St. Tammany, according to the Supreme Court. Jurors returned the death penalty in 9 of those cases. 3 of those death sentences were later annulled. The high court determined that "a statewide review of cases reflects that jurors often return the death penalty when innocent adult victims have been robbed or raped and murdered in or near their home or car." (source: The Times-Picayune) USA: Justices divided over lethal injections The Supreme Court appeared divided Monday over whether the drugs commonly injected to execute prisoners risk causing excruciating pain in violation of the Constitution. Several justices indicated a willingness to preserve the 3-drug cocktail that is authorized by 3 dozen states that allow executions. Such a decision would allow lethal injections, on hold since late September, to resume quickly. Justice Antonin Scalia said states have been careful to adopt procedures that do not seek to inflict pain and should not be barred from carrying out executions even if prison officials sometimes make mistakes in administering drugs. "There is no painless requirement" in the Constitution, Scalia said. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito also indicated their support for the states' procedures. Other members of the court, who have raised questions about lethal injection in the past, said they are bothered by the procedures used in Kentucky and elsewhere in which 3 drugs are administered in succession to knock out, paralyze and kill prisoners. The argument against the 3-drug protocol is that if the initial anesthetic does not take hold, a 3rd drug that stops the heart can cause excruciating pain. The 2nd drug, meanwhile, paralyzes the prisoner, rendering him unable to express his discomfort. "I'm terribly troubled by the fact that the second drug is what seems to cause all the risk of excruciating pain, and seems to be almost totally unnecessary," said Justice John Paul Stevens. Justice Anthony Kennedy, who often plays a decisive role on the closely divided court, gave little indication of his views. The case before the court comes from Kentucky, in which 2 death row inmates are not asking to be spared execution or death by injection. Instead, they want the court to order a switch to a single drug, a barbiturate, that causes no pain and can be given in a large enough dose to cause death. At the very least, they are asking for tighter controls on the 3-drug process to ensure that the anesthetic is given properly. A decision should come by late June. Justice Stephen Breyer seemed to capture the discomfort of the court, which has upheld the constitutionality of capital punishment. "There is a risk of human error generally where you're talking about the death penalty, and this may be one extra problem," Breyer said. "But the question here is can we say that there is a more serious problem here than with other execution methods?" Donald Verrilli, a Washington lawyer who is a veteran of capital cases, offered the court examples of executions in California and North Carolina in which inmates appeared to suffer pain as they were being put to death. He said the best way to avoid repetition was to switch to a single drug, as veterinarians commonly use in putting animals to sleep. "The risk here is real," Verrilli said. "That is why in the state of Kentucky it is unlawful to euthanize animals the way" the state executes inmates, he said. Roy Englert, who typically argues business cases before the Supreme Court, said on behalf of Kentucky that the 1-drug method has never been used in executions. The Bush administration also took Kentucky's side. Englert also defended the state's practices as humane. Kentucky regularly trains its execution team and employs an experienced worker to insert the intravenous lines through which the drugs are administered, he said. The state's lone execution by lethal injection did not present any obvious problems, both sides agreed. The court may decide the Kentucky case is not the right one to settle the constitutionality of the 3-drug procedure and leave that issue for another death penalty case. Justice David Souter, however, urged his colleagues to take the time necessary to issue a definitive decision about the 2-drug method in this case, even if it means sending the case back to Kentucky for more study by courts there. Scalia, however, said such a move would mean "a national cessation of executions" that could last for years. "You wouldn't want that to happen," he said. Recent executions in Florida and Ohio took much longer than usual, with strong indications that the prisoners suffered severe pain in the process. Workers had trouble inserting the IV lines that are used to deliver the drugs. Lined up in front of the court waiting to attend the arguments, college students Jeremy Sperling and Gira Joshi said they oppose the death penalty, but regard making executions less painful and more humane as a worthy goal. "You have the right to die with dignity," said Joshi, a political science and religion major at New Jersey's Rutgers University. Sperling, a psychology and religion major at New York University, said serving a life prison term is the appropriate alternative to the death penalty. After Monday's court session, the brother of a victim of one Kentucky prisoner said the case already has dragged on too long. Powell County Sheriff Steve Bennett was shot to death by Ralph Baze in 1992. "Ralph Baze was tried. The death penalty was what he got and he chose lethal injection," said Orville Bennett of Beattyville, Ky. "And we need to just get this over with." The case is Baze v. Rees, 07-5439. (source: Associated Press) CALIFORNIA: O.C. killer wins partial death penalty review----Edward Morgan was sentenced to death for sexually assaulting and stomping a woman he met at OC Club The California Supreme Court has reversed a death-penalty finding against one of Orange County's most notorious killers, but left intact a second finding that will keep him on death row. Edward Patrick Morgan Jr., who is now 42, was convicted and sentenced to death in 1996 for the brutal sexual assault and beating death of Leanora Annette Wong, 23, in May 1994, outside the old Australian Beach Club in Orange. A security camera captured Morgan leading Wang away from the bar to a secluded parking lot across the street. There, according to prosecutors, Morgan sexually assaulted, beat, bludgeoned and stomped Wong nearly beyond recognition while fracturing her skull by smashing her head repeatedly against the ground. Morgan was convicted of 1st-degree murder plus two special circumstances which qualified him for the death penalty: murder during a sexual assault, and murder during a kidnapping for moving Wong from the bar to the parking lot. The state high court in November reversed the kidnapping special circumstance, finding that the short distance Wong was forcibly moved was too trivial to be considered kidnapping and also of little significance to the overall crime. But the Supreme Court left intact the murder-during-a-sexual-assault special circumstance, which means he will remain under a sentence of death pending the outcome of his appeals in the federal court system. Morgan's case now enters the federal court appellate process, which could take years. All death penalties in California have been stayed pending a legal challenge to the lethal injection method of execution. Opponents of capital punishment claim among other things that lethal injection is cruel and unusual. (source: Orange County Register) WASHINGTON: Let's kill the death penalty in Washington All right, 2008 is still brand new and Im proud to launch the first debate on capital punishment, a good ol fashion discussion on an ol fashion part of our justice system. Within the last month, two stories made national news and provided 2 more reasons why the death penalty should be abolished in Washington State. To put it in words of John McCain-style "straight talk": there is no humane way of putting a person to death. Washington state employs two means of capital punishment: lethal injection and hanging if the guilty party prefers it. Now the U.S. Supreme Court is hearing arguments suggesting that lethal injection may cause excruciating pain to the recipient. In some cases, its been known to take from 30 minutes to an hour for a criminal to die, causing the recipient to undergo intense suffering until his body finally gives up. The procedure calls for three drugs to be injected into the condemned: sodium thiopental, which knocks the person out; potassium chloride, which stops the heart; and pancuronium bromide, which causes muscle paralysis and suffocating from a collapsed diaphragm. Can you imagine being conscious while your heart is stopping and you're asphyxiating? Lethal injection might as well be called "concentrated chemical domestic warfare" without the "war" part. If the evidence is true, it confirms that in our civilized state, there is no way to execute someone in a humane manner, and any application of the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment. For some, the humanity aspect doesn't matter. Regardless, capital punishment should still be abolished because of our tainted justice system. Our state has allowed someone to be convicted of 48 accounts of aggravated murder and still not be put to death Gary Ridgeway, the Green River Killer. Over Christmas break, two people shot a family of 6 to death in Carnation, a small town 30 miles east of Seattle. The murder was horrific, and people are calling for the death penalty. However, the message in our state is this: The more people you kill, the less likely you will be put to death thanks to the outcome of Ridgeway's trial. Remember, 48 killed is fine 6 murdered is not. The only way to restore integrity to our state's justice system is to abolish the death penalty, assuring fair and consistent justice is served. Aside from the Ridgeway trial, the injustices of our system are only compounded by lack of confidence and certainty in a "guilty" verdict. A class of journalism students at Northwestern University uncovered evidence that freed a man on death row. It wasnt the police, the prosecutor, the defense or the justice system. It was journalism students. Think about it. Every single member of the College Republicans can agree that putting an innocent person to death is wrong. The Northwestern case is an example of how our justice system is not strong enough to even consider capital punishment. What perplexes me most about the pro-death penalty constituency in our state is the fact that many are Christians and the death penalty conflicts with the Bible. There is no asterisk next to Hebrews 10:10, where it states, "We have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once and for all." For Christians, Jesus paid the ultimate price as a victim of capital punishment, namely, death, for everyones sins, not most. There is nothing interpretive in the "for all" portion of that verse. Fox News' Father Jonathan Morris yes, Fox has a Catholic priest as a correspondent; try not to laugh wrote an op-ed article on foxnews.com arguing that perhaps every human life has worth because it was created in the image of God, and putting a human to death would destroy something created in God's likeness. I'm afraid pro-capital punishment Christians are wrong on this policy and they should join students down in Olympia for the lobby day next month. Let the legislature know that our state's justice system is too progressive to utilize capital punishment as a means for lopsided justice. Death isn't the greatest punishment our state can produce. The death penalty is a crutch. Without it, our justice system will produce fair and deserving punishments for heinous criminals. (source: The (Univ. Washington) Daily)
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----LA., USA, CALIF., WASH.
Rick Halperin Wed, 16 Jan 2008 23:22:57 -0600 (Central Standard Time)
