Aug. 15
NORTH CAROLINA:
DA seeks death penalty for man involved in death of a delivery driver
The District Attorney's Office will seek the death penalty for at least 1 man
accused of being involved in the death of a delivery driver that happened
earlier this summer.
Authorities indicted 6 people in connection to the murder of Zhen Bo Liu,
according to the District Attorney's Office.
Liu was killed June 14 while trying to make a delivery for China King, where he
was employed. His body was found inside a car near 13th and Queen Streets.
According to Police Chief Ralph Evangelous, the 6 people involved ordered
approximately $48 worth of food, shot Liu, took the food, went back to a house
where they sat down to eat together.
The DA's office said the following people were indicted on murder charges:
--Dwayne Haughabook, 20
--Mustafaa Friend, 15
--Rasheed Thompson, 16
--Manije Johnson-Martin, 16
Authorities plan to seek the death penalty for 20-year-old Haughabook in this
case.
Marvin White, 18, and Nathan Lawrence, 16, were indicted for robbery with a
dangerous weapon.
District Attorney Ben David said the case is a priority to his office and that
in North Carolina, a 16-year-old is considered an adult. Judge J.H. Corpening
said the 15-year-old can't face capital punishment, but can spend the rest of
his life in prison.
Assistant District Attorney Jason Smith said investigators learned through the
interview process that the 15-year-old shot Liu in the foot and Haugabook shot
him in the face, using different weapons.
(source: WECT News)
CALIFORNIA:
End death penalty for dollars and sense
My office sought the death penalty in dozens of cases when I was the Los
Angeles County district attorney for eight years, and chief deputy district
attorney for four. The cases had horrific and compelling facts; I had no
problem seeking death sentences. But though I never was squeamish, I now fully
support Proposition 34 to replace the death penalty with life in prison with no
possibility of parole. Here's why.
California's death penalty is broken beyond repair, hideously expensive, and
inevitably carries the risk of executing an innocent person. The hundreds of
millions of dollars we throw away on this broken system would be much better
spent on solving and preventing crime and investing in our kids' schools.
I have no qualms with the death penalty in theory. I do, however, object to the
way it is carried out in practice. We condemn murderers to death row with the
hope of delivering severe punishment for their crimes.
Yet the reality is that these criminals enjoy special status. Fan mail, private
cells, their own personal television and other special privileges are not what
I envisioned when I sought the death penalty as district attorney. I am sure
that is not what family members of victims envisioned either.
What's more, the costs of this dysfunctional system are staggering. There's
special housing, legal teams and a double trial process, among other costs. The
Office of the Legislative Analyst in California found that replacing it with
life in prison without parole could save us $130 million every year.
We are on track to spend $1 billion on this broken system over the next five
years. All for what? Most inmates die of old age. We need to stop the waste
wherever we can. We need that money for police and teachers, not a death row
that exists in name only.
And a sinister problem lurks with the death penalty: the possible execution of
an innocent person. I'd like to think that not one innocent person has been
sentenced to death in California, but the truth is, we don't know. The only way
to be sure we will never make an irreversible mistake is to vote yes on
Proposition 34 in November.
Let me be clear: I am no less adamant about punishing heinous killers now.
Proposition 34 is tough justice. Convicted murderers and rapists will remain in
prison until they die, with no hope of ever getting out, and will have to work
and pay restitution for their crimes.
The time is now to invest our scarce resources where they can do the most good.
Fighting crime and funding education are sound investments. We can no longer
afford to prop up a system that works only in theory while it robs us of
precious tax dollars. California is ready for justice that works for everyone.
(source: Opinion; Gil Garcetti is the former Los Angeles district
attorney----San Francisco Chronicle)
OHIO:
Error removes, returns convict to death row
An error made by a judge took Nathaniel E. Jackson off of death row for about 2
years, but that same judge put him back on death row Tuesday.
Judge John M. Stuard of Trumbull County Common Pleas Court resentenced Jackson,
40, to the death penalty for conspiring with Donna Roberts in 2001 to kill
Roberts' husband, Robert Fingerhut, in the home Fingerhut and Roberts shared in
Howland.
Roberts is also on death row for her role in the killing.
Judge Stuard on Tuesday set Jackson's tentative execution date for Aug. 15,
2013.
Jackson returned to Trumbull County for the resentencing, which Ohio's 11th
District Court of Appeals ordered Judge Stuard to do in October 2010 as a
result of a finding that the 1st sentencing in 2002 was flawed.
The flaw was a common practice at the Trumbull County Courthouse at the time
involving the preparation of the sentencing opinion, a document filed with the
court.
The appeals court found that Chris Becker, an assistant Trumbull County
prosecutor, prepared the sentencing opinion in the Jackson case at the
direction of Judge Stuard -- without Jackson and his attorneys being made aware
of it.
Judge Stuard said he made his decision in the Jackson case on his own and
discussed nothing of substance with Becker while asking him to prepare the
opinion.
In court Tuesday, Jackson told Judge Stuard he had completed several
educational courses while in prison and had broken no prison rules for 5 years.
His attorney, Randall Porter of the Ohio Public Defender???s office, said
Jackson asked Judge Stuard to resentence him to something less than death.
Jackson, who returns to death row as a result of the resentencing, will appeal
Judge Stuard's resentencing, Porter said.
(source: Youngstown Vindicator)
ARIZONA:
Loughner deserves death for Arizona shooting
I detest the death penalty. We in Florida have in recent years witnessed
mistakes in which people on death row were later proven innocent due to poor
evidence, because science has improved or someone has lied.
Therefore, putting them to death just seems wrong. It gives the prisoner no
chance to be proven innocent at a later time.
But when I heard about a plea agreement that will sentence Jared Loughner to
life in prison instead of the death penalty, I was sick. Here is a guy who
fatally shot 6 people and left 13 wounded in Tucson, Ariz., in 2011. The
shooting spree was witnessed by many. He shot and killed a beautiful young
girl, shot and wounded then-Congresswomen Gabrielle Giffords and killed her
aide Gabe Zimmerman.
The judge declared Loughner competent to stand trial. Why should he be able to
retain his life?
I hope that because he killed a federal employee that the federal government
can retry him for murder. Allowing this man to walk away with his life is
wrong. For the judge to accept this shows how crazy our legal system is and how
inappropriate our judges and legal system can
(source: Letter to the Editor, Mike Bollerman, Lforida Today)
MONTANA:
Views on death penalty a matter of personal preference
In August 1982 Ronald Allen Smith, originally from Wetaskiwin, was hitchhiking
through Montana with a fellow Canadian. Picked up by two men, they captured and
murdered their benefactors. Smith accepted the blame for the 2 killings, his
expressed rationale being that he wanted to experience the feeling of killing
someone. Since early in 1983 Smith has been waiting to experience the feeling
of someone killing him. He first welcomed the prospect of suffering execution,
then hastily changed his mind and for 29 years has been fighting it.
10 years ago I saw Smith momentarily during a visit to Montana's death row,
which I mentioned in a column published on June 12, 2002. I was part of a group
that stood by the control station looking up into the condemned men's tier.
Smith came out of his cell, looked directly towards us for a few seconds
despite the dim lighting of our area, then quickly ducked back out of sight.
Smith's execution is now up to Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer, who is quoted
as being troubled by one aspect of the case -- Smith's accomplice accepted a
plea bargain and has been back in Canada following parole in 1998. Schweitzer
may be waiting until the last moments of his gubernatorial tenure next January
before making a decision. If the governor does not commute Smith's sentence
before leaving office, it is not clear to me whether he must necessarily order
Smith's execution, or can if he prefers do a Pontius Pilate and hand the issue
over to his successor. If Smith's execution goes ahead he will be the 2nd
person I have seen in the flesh who went on to suffer judicial death.
In 1959 7 members of a family were wiped out in Stettler. The eldest son of the
father was quickly arrested. He went through 2 trials. The 2nd took place in
Edmonton in late June 1960, and being done with school I went down to the
courthouse to take in a bit of the high profile case. My main memory is how
uncomfortable Robert Raymond Cook looked in the prisoner's dock wearing a white
sports coat, with an unaccustomed shirt and tie tight around his neck. Cook
went to the gallows later that year, the last man hanged in Alberta. 2 decades
later I encountered 4 men who had been involved with Cook. I only discussed him
with one, who said he had no doubt of Cook's guilt. For that matter, nor did I.
A few months before Cook's trial I attended a workshop which left me a lifelong
opponent of the death penalty for ethical and practical considerations. Despite
my being opposed to execution, Cook's death did not upset me -- nor would
Smith's if the governor does not commute, though I would prefer that he opt for
mercy. I find that the horrific details in a great many capital cases leave me
immune to a sense of outrage over the perpetrator's legally-imposed death.
In 1976, when the United States was emerging from its moratorium on executions,
I wrote to Marcel Lambert, then the member of parliament for Edmonton West,
about the debate which had just brought about abolition in Canada. Mr. Lambert
was a death penalty proponent.
I concluded my remarks by commenting that everything that could be said on the
issue had been said. I received back a courteous letter from Mr. Lambert
agreeing that the question of capital punishment had been thoroughly aired, and
that really now it was just a matter of making one's choice. I think that
remains the case today.
(source: Opinion; David Haas occasionally comments on legal issues----St.
Albert Gazette)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
