Jan. 21
KANSAS:
Suspects in Harvey Co. triple homicide could face death penalty
2 people arrested in connection with a triple homicide in Harvey County could
face the death penalty. That's according to county attorney David Yoder.
Yoder said Jereme Nelson and Myrta Rangel are both charged with capital murder
and 3 counts of 1st-degree murder each.
Yoder said in the alternative for the deaths of Angela Graevs, Travis Street
and Richard Prouty last October would be life in prison without the possibility
of parole.
Nelson and Rangel were arrested on Jan. 13 in or near Rosarito, Mexico, by
Mexicans authorities.
They have since been turned over to the United States and are awaiting
extradition in a California jail.
Yoder said the 2 will be brought back to Kansas in the near future.
He said interviews are still being conducted and the investigation is ongoing.
No hearings have been scheduled at this time.
(source: KWCH news)
OKLAHOMA:
New bill bolsters execution methods in Oklahoma
The Oklahoma Legislature will consider a bill this session to beef up the
state's ability to carry out the death penalty.
In November, state voters overwhelmingly supported a measure to guarantee the
state's power to impose capital punishment.
Currently, lethal injection is the only method in use, even though it has been
highly criticized and mired in legal challenges.
Oklahoma State Rep. Harold Wright has filed a bill to clarify execution
methods.
There is no mention of the electric chair in the republican's proposal, which
many believe removes it from the list of potentials.
"I personally support the death penalty in heinous homicide," Wright said. "In
Oklahoma, the majority of the people supported that. This helps to clarify the
methodology that might be used in case of the death penalty."
HB 1697 outlines three methods of execution: lethal injection, nitrogen hypoxia
and firing squad.
The measure also allows for the possibility for any other method of execution
not prohibited by the U.S. Constitution.
"The statutes were a little bit unclear about how to carry out the death
penalty. And so, I felt it was necessary, working with the attorney general's
office, to get some language that would help clarify the corrections department
was in charge of the executions and that if one method was not available, they
could go to another area," Wright said.
Opponents are already raising questions about this legislature's ability to
prioritize state concerns, pointing out our education crisis and funding
shortfalls.
"Really, do we trust these men and women at 23rd and Lincoln who can't seem to
run basic functions of government?" said ACLU of Oklahoma President Ryan
Kiesel. "Do we really trust these men and women to put a needle in your arm? Do
we trust them to put a mask on your face or put you in front of a firing squad
and take your life?"
The next legislative session begins Feb. 6.
(source: KFOR news)
NEBRASKA:
Legislature Fights Over Lethal Injection Drug Company Secrecy; Heavican Doubles
Down on Budget Warnings
Under a proposal in the Nebraska Legislature, the public would not know which
companies are supplying Nebraska with death penalty drugs. And the head of the
state's court system is stepping up warnings that budget cuts could lead to
more prison overcrowding.
Senator John Kuehn introduced LB661, which would make information about
companies that supply lethal injection drugs exempt from public disclosure.
Kuehn said his proposal won't prevent public discussion about which drugs are
used. "It simply protects individuals who manufacture the drug from undue
harassment," he said.
Kuehn, a death penalty supporter, says the idea is to prevent what has happened
in recent years, when death penalty opponents succeeded in drying up the supply
of lethal injection drugs by putting pressure on suppliers.
His proposal is already stirring controversy, with a fight over which
legislative committee should hold a hearing on the bill. Kuehn said it should
go to the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee, since it deals
with public records.
Others, like Sen. Sue Crawford, said the bill should go to the Judiciary
Committee, since it deals with the death penalty. Crawford, a death penalty
opponent, said senators consider which committee has the expertise and would
provide the best public hearing.
But Crawford said political strategy also plays a part in where to send a bill
like this. "I think it is the case that it would be more likely to have a
better chance of advancing from Government, and it would have a rougher hearing
and more scrutiny if it went to Judiciary," Crawford said.
Senators on the Executive Board split 4-4 Thursday over where to send the bill.
Sen. Tyson Larson was absent, and presumably will provide the tie-breaking vote
when he returns. Several other proposals - on guns and abortion - that have
traditionally gone to Judiciary have been sent to other committees this year.
But Kuehn denied his bill was caught up in committee-shopping politics. "It
makes for a compelling narrative to say that it's part of an ongoing turf war,"
he said. However, he added, "The documented reality at this point is, I began
the process of drafting this legislation in this statute long before I had any
idea who might be serving on any committee, who any committee chairs might be,
or who might be sitting on the Executive Board."
Also on Thursday, Chief Justice Mike Heavican delivered his annual State of the
Judiciary speech to the Legislature. Heavican used what is usually a speech
about technical developments in the court system to once again criticize Gov.
Pete Ricketts' proposed budget cuts. Heavican said the cuts would undermine
programs like increased use of probation instead of imprisonment, passed 2
years ago under the rubric of "Justice Reinvestment."
'''Justice Reinvestment' is the code word for
"we-can't-afford-to-build-a-new-prison-so-we-need-to-find-some-way-to-handle
-the-persistently-growing-population-of-convicted-criminals-in-our-prison-
system," Heavican said.
Heavican said studies show short prison terms don't rehabilitate prisoners.
"They come back to our local communities and immediately return to using and
selling methamphetamine, crack cocaine, and heroin. They physically assault
their spouses and abuse their children. They burglarize our neighbors' homes,
shoplift from our local merchants, rob our convenience stores and resort to
escalating violence in our largest cities," he said.
But Heavican said it doesn't have to be that way, if senators maintain funding
for probation, community corrections, and other alternatives to prison. He
invited senators to talk to people on probation. "Chances are you will hear
this: 'Probation saved my life.' 'You saved my family.' 'I have a job.' 'I'm a
positive part of my community,'" Heavican said. "Good community corrections
programs work. They save lives and they save money. Keep the good community
corrections programs you already have," he urged senators.
If senators approve Ricketts' proposed budget cuts, Heavican predicted, the
court system would "gut" programs to supervise people leaving prison and begin
closing centers where they report in for counseling and other services.
After the speech, Sen. John Stinner, chairman of the Appropriations Committee,
reacted to the chief justices plea for continued funding. "He was saying
'Here's the outcome. If I don't have the money, here's what we have to do.' And
he was expressing that very emphatically what the outcomes are going to be,"
Stinner said.
"I think that resonates with a lot of people in the body. I think it ties into
the priority that the governor has established. And remember ... that budget
that the governor put out is a proposal. We have the opportunity to take a look
at it and set our own priorities," Stinner added.
Ricketts spokesman Taylor Gage was conciliatory, while defending the governor's
proposal. "The Supreme Court has been an important partner with the executive
and legislative branches over the last couple of years. And the budget proposal
the governor's put forward maintains their flexibility to continue to
prioritize reform going forward," Gage said.
After the Appropriations Committee decides on its budget recommendation, it
will be up to the full Legislature to decide how much money the courts will
get.
(source: KVNO news)
NEVADA:
Death penalty trial for woman accused of plotting the stabbing death of her
husband
More than 6 years after the stabbing death of Joe Stutzman, his former wife,
Brandy Stutzman is on trial for his murder. The prosecution laid out their side
of the case on Friday playing the original 9-1-1 call. Brandy rushed to a
neighbor's home to make the emergency call where she is heard sobbing as she
tells the dispatch that there was blood on his "arms and chest" and that his
body was "cold". Prosecutors said the neighbor was suspicious of Brandy
Stutzman at the time Joe Stutzman was found stabbed to death.
During the call the neighbor answers questions from the operator:
9-1-1 Operator: "She doesn't have any blood on her does she?"
Neighbor: "Yes, she does... (pause) I don't know what she did."
Brandy said she was at to her former home the night before with Joe, but she
left and planned to meet him with their son the next day. She said she tried to
call and text him, but when he did not respond she went to the house. That was
when she discovered his body lying bloody on the floor. But prosecutors said
she wanted her husband dead long before November 7th, 2010. The 2 were already
getting divorced and Joe wanted full custody of their 5-year-old boy.
Five people on the stand each described how Stutzman -- 31-years-old at the
time -- often had a group of teens at her home while her husband was deployed
overseas. One of the teens hanging at her home was 19-year-old Jeremiah
Merriweather. Merriweather pleaded guilty and is awaiting sentencing for Joe's
murder.
The prosecution says evidence shows neighbors were already suspicious about her
role in his death trying to prove she allegedly plotted with Merriweather to
kill her husband. Defense, on the other hand, asking questions about
Merriweather's affection for Stutzman.
(source: NBC news)
CALIFORNIA:
Murder suspect could potentially face death penalty
In what's a death penalty-eligible case, a Redding man arrested Thursday in the
vicious death of a 54-year-old Burney man is being charged by the Shasta County
District Attorney's Office with 1st-degree murder and a torture-related
enhancement.
But Shasta County Chief Deputy District Attorney Stephanie Bridgett said Friday
no decision has been made on whether to seek the death penalty for Juan Manuel
Venegas, 39,
And, she said, a decision won't be made anytime soon.
Typically, she said, such a decision won't be reached until after the
preliminary hearing stage, which could be many weeks or months away.
Venegas was initially slated to be arraigned Friday afternoon in the murder of
David Wicks, who was set on fire while behind the register at a gas station in
Johnson Park outside Burney on Dec. 21.
But the criminal case was dropped late that morning from the court calendar and
he's now scheduled to be arraigned Monday by Superior Court Judge Cara Beatty.
He remains in Shasta County Jail without bail.
Venegas, who is being charged with 1st-degree murder and an enhancement
alleging the infliction of torture, was arrested Thursday afternoon on an
arrest warrant for the murder of Wicks.
Sheriff's officials said his arrest was based on evidence collected and
identified during the investigation.
There is still no known motive for the attack and a sheriff's investigative
report does not disclose whether Venegas and Wicks might have known each other.
On Dec. 21 a man now believed to be Venegas walked into the Rocky Ledge Shell
gas station in Johnson Park wearing rain gear and a black hood .
The attacker sprayed Wicks with a liquid and then set him on fire, according to
the Sheriff's Office, adding that the attacker is also shown on video
surveillance adding even more of the liquid to Wicks as he's on fire.
The sheriff's investigative report also says the attacker is seen standing in
flames on the floor for a second or two before running toward the gas station's
front door.
"As the suspect was leaving, his/her right foot was on fire," the report
states, later adding that the right leg of the rain suit later recovered
appears to be burnt.
Sheriff's officials said Thursday that Venegas was arrested at his home on
Telecaster Lane in west Redding after he was seen by detectives driving a blue
Toyota truck. Detectives served a search warrant and booked him into the Shasta
County Jail on suspicion of murder.
According to a sheriff's report filed in Superior Court, a detective
interviewed Venegas on Dec. 23.
Venegas said he heard about the homicide through Facebook, but refused to
provide a DNA sample and eventually left the interview, according to the
report.
Items found during the sheriff's investigation, including rain gear found in
Johnson Park, were sent to the California Department of Justice for DNA
analysis. The analysis showed the items belonged to Venegas, according to the
Sheriff's Office.
Venegas was a resident of Burney, Johnson Park and the Fall River Mills area.
He has a long local court record dating back to the mid-1990s, including
several property crime convictions, driving under the influence charges,
battery and resisting arrest, according to Shasta County electronic court
records.
The investigation is ongoing, according to the Sheriff's Office. Detectives
continue to collect evidence.
Anyone with information on the Wicks case is encouraged to call the Major
Crimes unit at 530-245-6135 or send an email to m...@co.shasta.ca.us.
Information can also be provided anonymously to Secret Witness of Shasta County
at 530-243-2319 and www.scsecretwitness.com.
(source: Redding Record Searchlight)
**********************
Which Justices Write the Longest Majority Opinions in Death Penalty Appeals
Yesterday, we looked at the distribution and average length of the Court's
majority opinions in criminal cases not involving the death penalty between
2008 and 2015. Today, we address the distribution of the Court's most recent
death penalty appeals.
Between 2008 and 2015, Justice Chin wrote the most majority opinions in death
penalty cases with 31. Justice Corrigan wrote 30, Justice Werdegar wrote 24 and
Justice Baxter 23.
For the year 2008, Justice Baxter led with 5 majority opinions. Chief Justice
George and Justices Kennard and Chin wrote 4 apiece, and Justices Corrigan,
Werdegar and Moreno wrote 3 each. For 2009, Justice Moreno led with 6
majorities. Chief Justice George and Justice Baxter wrote 5, Justice Corrigan
4, and Justice Chin wrote 2. For 2010, Chief Justice George and Justice
Corrigan led with 5 majority opinions each. Justices Werdegar and Moreno wrote
4 apiece, and Justices Kennard, Chin and Baxter wrote 2 each. For 2011, Justice
Corrigan led with 7 majorities. Justice Chin was next with 6, Justice Werdegar
had 4, and Justices Baxter and Moreno wrote 3 each. For 2012, Chief Justice
Cantil-Sakauye led with 7 majority opinions in death penalty appeals. Justice
Chin wrote 5 and Justices Kennard and Werdegar wrote 4 each. For 2013, the
Chief Justice once again led with 5 majority opinions. Justices Chin and Baxter
wrote 4 each, and Justice Liu wrote 2. For 2014, Justice Corrigan led with 5
majority opinions. Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye and Justice Chin wrote 4
apiece, and Justices Werdegar and Baxter wrote 3 each. For 2015, Justices
Werdegar and Chin led the Court with 4 majorities each. Chief Justice
Cantil-Sakauye and Justice Corrigan each wrote 3, and Justice Liu wrote 2.
The average length of the Justices' majority opinions each year is reported
below in Table 154. The data shows no consistent pattern of Justices writing
the longest death penalty opinions on the Court, but 1 of only 3 Justices had
the shortest average each year in the period: Justices Chin, Corrigan and
Kennard. But because the numbers at times show substantial shifts - the result
of the small year-by-year data set - these same 3 Justices were at other times
among the highest on the Court in terms of length.
For 2008, Chief Justice George averaged 101.75 pages per death penalty majority
opinion. Justice Kennard was next at 85.5 pages. Justice Moreno averaged 77.33
pages. The shortest averages were Justice Corrigan at 60.67 and Justice Chin at
55.75. For 2009, Justice Kennard led, averaging 110 pages. Chief Justice George
averaged 91.6 pages and Justice Baxter averaged 71.4 pages. Justice Chin
averaged 54.5 pages and Justice Corrigan 45.25. For 2010, Justice Chin led,
averaging 117.5 pages. Chief Justice George averaged 97.8 pages and Justice
Baxter averaged 97 pages. Justices Corrigan and Kennard had the smallest
averages at 71.2 and 61.5. For 2011, Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye led with an
average majority opinion of 139.5 pages (the result of a single 198 page
opinion). Justice Baxter was next at 80.67 pages. That year, 3 Justices were
under 60 pages - Justices Moreno (59.67), Kennard (56) and Chin (52.83). For
2012, Justice Baxter led, writing a 161 page majority opinion. Chief Justice
Cantil-Sakauye and Justices Werdegar and Chin were next at 88.29, 76.5 and
72.6, respectively. Justice Kennard had the shortest average at 48 pages.
In 2013, Justices Liu and Werdegar were both over 100 pages - 111 and 106, to
be exact. The Chief Justice and Justice Baxter were close behind at 94.8 and
93. Justice Corrigan, on the other hand, averaged only 45 pages. For 2014,
Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye and Justice Liu were both in 3 digits, averaging
128 pages and 105.5. Justice Baxter averaged 90.67. The shortest death penalty
majorities were by Justice Werdegar (56 pages) and Justice Kennard (50.5). Last
year, majority opinions in death penalty appeals were a bit shorter than recent
trends. Only 2 Justices averaged more than 70 pages - Justice Liu at 79.5 and
Justice Werdegar at 71.5. The shortest opinions on the Court were by Justice
Corrigan (53.33 pages) and Justice Chin (52.5 pages).
(source: lexology.com)
OREGON:
Inmate moved off death row off after appeal
An inmate sentenced to death in 2003 for a Curry County murder was moved off
Oregon's death row this week after reaching a settlement with the state that
makes him eligible for parole in 12 1/2 years.
Gregory Allen Bowen, 64, was convicted of aggravated murder in the death of his
friend, Donald Christiansen, 76, of Brookings. Bowen, a violent ex-con with
earlier convictions for manslaughter and accessory to murder after the fact,
was sentenced to death, a punishment later upheld by the Oregon Supreme Court.
During a 2nd round of appeals, Bowen's lawyers raised questions about the
circumstances of the shooting.
The state, during Bowen's trial, argued that the victim had been shot from a
distance of 5 feet or more, suggesting an execution, said Steven Gorham, 1 of
the lawyers handling Bowen's appeal.
Gorham said the original defense team didn't do enough to challenge that
conclusion.
Bowen's attorneys told the Oregon Department of Justice lawyers handling
Bowen's appeal that they identified weapons experts who concluded that the
victim had been shot at close range, which he said supported Bowen's claim that
he'd accidentally fired at his friend.
Gorham said that information prompted the state to negotiate a new charge and
sentence. Those talks resulted in a felony murder conviction and a life
sentence with the possibility of parole.
"Mr. Bowen felt that this was at most manslaughter, an accidental shooting, a
reckless shooting," Gorham said. "He never intended to kill his friend."
Bowen maintained that Christiansen died accidentally during a struggle. During
the original trial, witnesses claimed that Bowen described Christiansen's death
as a robbery gone bad.
The attorneys who handled the appeal for the Department of Justice didn't
respond to an email from The Oregonian/OregonLive seeking comment.
By the time negotiations wrapped up, Bowen had been on death row for 15 years.
Under the rules in place at the time he was originally convicted, he would have
been sentenced to life with a minimum of 25 years for felony murder.
Bowen must also serve another 2 1/2 years for convictions stemming from an
assault on a woman before Christiansen's killing. He will be eligible for
parole after that.
It's not uncommon for death row inmates to be resentenced at some point as a
result of the appeals process.
According to the Department of Corrections, Oregon has 34 inmates on death row,
including 2 awaiting new sentencing. Since Oregon voters approved the death
penalty in 1984, 23 have been resentenced, 4 have died and 2 were executed.
(source: oregonlive.com)
USA:
Fell might not face capital penalty
A decision from a U.S. District Court judge may make it harder for prosecutors
to seek the death penalty in the 2nd trial of Donald Fell.
Fell, 36, is expected to be tried next month in the kidnapping and carjacking
of Terry King, 53, of North Clarendon. The charges are modified because the
prosecutors have argued that King's death was a result of the crimes.
Fell was convicted of the charges in 2005 and sentenced to death in 2006.
However, after determining that a juror had investigated the case outside of
the confines of the trial and shared his findings with other jurors, Fell's
conviction was overturned and the case was sent back.
The U.S. attorney's office has decided to try the case again and seek the death
penalty a 2nd time.
The decision filed Thursday by U.S. District Court Judge Geoffrey Crawford was
written in response to a motion by the attorneys representing Fell seeking to
either dismiss the attempt to seek the death penalty or remove some of the
aggravating factors the jury will be asked to consider.
Police have said Fell and his childhood friend, Robert Lee, killed Fell's
mother, Debra Fell, and her friend, Charles Conway, in Rutland in November
2000. To escape, they carjacked King in a Rutland parking lot, drove her to New
York and killed her, police said.
Lee killed himself while awaiting trial in 2001.
The prosecutors in the case filed notice in July 2015 that they would seek the
death penalty. The filing included some information about the aggravating
factors the prosecutors would cite in their request for the death penalty.
Under Crawford's decision, the prosecutors will be required to eliminate
reference to "interstate flight."
"Most jurors, responding to the atavistic memory of the Lindbergh case and
resulting enactment of the Federal Kidnapping Act ... are likely to interpret
this factor as a statement of a jurisdictional requirement for a federal
charge," the judge wrote.
Crawford ordered the prosecutors to file more information about their intent to
offer evidence of "future dangerousness." The decision said no federal case has
eliminated future dangerousness as a factor in death penalty cases so Crawford
said he wouldn???t rule it out but asked prosecutors to provide more
information about what they intend to offer.
The updated information must be filed by Monday.
But while the decision granted some requests by Fell's attorneys, others were
rejected.
For instance, the decision pointed out that Fell was not being charged directly
with the deaths of Debra Fell, Conway or King. However, if Fell is convicted,
prosecutors will be allowed to argue those deaths could be considered as
aggravating factors.
The prosecutors will also be allowed to provide information about the impact of
the deaths on family members.
"Such testimony goes to the gravity of the offense and may be considered by the
jury in the weighing process," Crawford wrote. "The court is keenly aware that
a trial is not the same as a funeral and has experience in other cases in
setting appropriate limits for victim impact testimony, It will be different
when the jury rather than the judge is the decision-maker, but the same
principles of dignity, restraint and economy will apply in the event the case
reaches that stage."
With the trial approaching, motions by the prosecution and defense, as well as
decisions by Crawford, are being filed with increasing frequency. The judge's
decision was 1 of more than a dozen filings made in the case that were listed
as having been added Friday.
(source: Rutland Herald)
***********************
Federal charges filed against airport shooting suspect, US seeks death penalty
Federal prosecutors have filed charges against the Florida airport shooting
suspect that could bring the death penalty if he is convicted.
The Iraq war veteran accused of killing 5 travelers and wounding 6 others at
the busy Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport was charged Saturday.
Esteban Santiago, 26, told investigators that he planned the attack, buying a
1-way ticket to the Fort Lauderdale airport, a federal complaint said.
Authorities don't know why he chose his target and have not ruled out
terrorism.
A criminal complaint filed Saturday by the Miami U.S. attorney's office accuses
Santiago of an act of violence at an international airport resulting in death.
The punishment is execution or any prison sentence up to life.
Prosecutors also charged Santiago with 2 firearms offenses.
"Today's charges represent the gravity of the situation and reflect the
commitment of federal, state and local law enforcement personnel to continually
protect the community and prosecute those who target our residents and
visitors," U.S Attorney Wifredo Ferrer said.
Authorities said during a news conference that they had interviewed roughly 175
people, including a lengthy interrogation with the cooperative suspect, a
former National Guard soldier from Alaska. Flights had resumed at the Fort
Lauderdale airport after the bloodshed, though the terminal where the shooting
happened remained closed.
Santiago spoke to investigators for several hours after he opened fire with a
Walther 9mm semi-automatic handgun that he appears to have legally checked on a
flight from Alaska. He had 2 magazines with him and emptied both of them,
firing about 15 rounds, before he was arrested, the complaint said.
"We have not identified any triggers that would have caused this attack. We're
pursuing all angles on what prompted him to carry out this horrific attack,"
FBI Agent George Piro said.
Investigators are combing through social media and other information to
determine Santiago's motive, and it's too early to say whether terrorism played
a role, Piro said. In November, Santiago had walked into an FBI field office in
Alaska saying the U.S. government was controlling his mind and forcing him to
watch Islamic State group videos, authorities said.
"He was a walk-in complaint. This is something that happens at FBI offices
around the country every day," FBI agent Marlin Ritzman said.
On that day, Santiago had a loaded magazine on him, but had left a gun in his
vehicle, along with his newborn child, authorities said. Officers seized the
weapon and local officers took him to get a mental health evaluation. His
girlfriend picked up the child.
On Dec. 8, the gun was returned to Santiago. Authorities wouldn't say if it was
the same gun used in the airport attack.
U.S. Attorney Karen Loeffler said Santiago would have been able to legally
possess a gun because he had not been judged mentally ill, which is a higher
standard than having an evaluation.
Santiago had not been placed on the U.S. no-fly list and appears to have acted
alone, authorities said.
The attack sent panicked witnesses running out of the terminal and spilling
onto the tarmac, baggage in hand. Others hid in bathroom stalls or crouched
behind cars or anything else they could find as police and paramedics rushed in
to help the wounded and establish whether there were any other gunmen.
Mark Lea, 53, had just flown in from Minnesota with his wife for a cruise when
he heard three quick cracks, like a firecracker. Then came more cracks, and "I
knew it was more than just a firecracker," he said.
Making sure his wife was outside, Lea helped evacuate some older women who had
fallen, he said. Then he saw the shooter.
"He was just kind of randomly shooting people," he said. "If you were in his
path, you were going to get shot. He was walking and shooting."
Over the course of about 45 seconds, the shooter reloaded twice, he said. When
he was out of bullets, he walked away, dropped the gun and lay face down,
spread eagle on the floor, Lea said.
By that time, a deputy had arrived and grabbed the shooter. Lea put his foot on
the gun to secure it.
Lea went to help the injured and a woman from Iowa asked about her husband, who
she described. Lea saw a man who fit his description behind a row of chairs,
motionless, shot in the head and lying in a pool of blood, he said. The man,
Michael Oehme, was identified as one of the dead victims on Saturday.
Bruce Hugon, who had flown in from Indianapolis for a vacation, was at the
baggage carousel when he heard four or five pops and saw everyone drop to the
ground. He said a woman next to him tried to get up and was shot in the head.
"The guy must have been standing over me at one point. I could smell the
gunpowder," he said. "I thought I was about to feel a piercing pain or nothing
at all because I would have been dead."
Santiago had been discharged from the National Guard last year after being
demoted for unsatisfactory performance. Bryan Santiago said Saturday that his
brother had requested psychological help but received little assistance.
Esteban Santiago said in August that he was hearing voices.
"How is it possible that the federal government knows, they hospitalize him for
only four days, and then give him his weapon back?" Bryan Santiago said.
His mother declined to comment as she stood inside the screen door of the
family home in Puerto Rico, wiping tears from her eyes. The only thing she said
was that Esteban Santiago had been tremendously affected by seeing a bomb
explode next to 2 of his friends when he was around 18 years old while serving
in Iraq.
Santiago, who is in federal custody, will face federal charges and is expected
to appear in court Monday, Piro said.
It is legal for airline passengers to travel with guns and ammunition as long
as the firearms are put in a checked bag - not a carry-on - and are unloaded
and locked in a hard-sided container. Guns must be declared to the airline at
check-in.
Santiago arrived in Fort Lauderdale after taking off from Anchorage aboard a
Delta flight Thursday night, checking only 1 piece of luggage - his gun, said
Jesse Davis, police chief at the Anchorage airport.
(source: Associated Press)
*************************
A more humane approach to the death penalty
As an anesthesiologist for three decades, I can tell you there are better
choices for execution, moral issues aside, than midazolam and rocuronium
bromide ["Va. execution to use a controversial drug cloaked in secrecy," Metro,
Jan. 18.]. Midazolam, also known by the trade name Versed, is very short-acting
and does not alleviate pain, as the article stated. Rocuronium bromide, a
paralytic, is shorter acting on the spectrum of such drugs (muscle relaxants)
and is a questionable choice. A better choice would be fentanyl, the powerful
pain-killing narcotic, coupled with a long-acting paralytic, such as
pancuronium bromide. These drugs, together with potassium chloride, would be
much more effective and humane in this already ghastly scenario.
David Sherer, Chevy Chase
(source: Letter to the Editor, Washington Post)
**************
Pondering the death penalty under a Trump presidency
Many scenes from "The Silence of the Lambs" stuck with me over the quarter
decade since I first saw the film in a since-demolished Eric theater in South
Jersey, but I'll never forget the guttural gasp brought about by one in
particular.
Dr. Hannibal Lecter disemboweled Officer Jim Pembry (dammit) and, to escape
from captivity, carved the guard's face off, placed it atop his own and tricked
medics into loading him into an ambulance.
When Lecter peels that face mask off and makes his great escape, it was
jarring, most notably because you didn't know what was coming next or before or
ever.
Those types of scenes take your mind and emotions, put them in a Boggle grid
and send them flying about in all different directions.
Where I part with liberal orthodoxy is in how I support the death penalty.
I woke up thinking about that scene on Friday, January 20, 2017 not because I
think a depraved serial killer will take the reins of our country at high noon.
I don't. That'd be silly even for me.
But the impossibility of knowing - with any level of certainty - what exactly
Donald Trump will do once he's sworn in comes close to matching the Pembry
scene;s visceral audience reaction. That is, until I had a moment of clarity,
and here it is:
I wouldn't be surprised if Trump tries to bring back public executions and -
despite the fact that he's only facing life in a U.S. prison if convicted -
he'd start if off with a "Make America Great (and Safe)" push to nominate
Mexican drug kingpin Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman as the 1st.
When our leaders give little indication of what specifically they want to do
when installed in office, the best we can do is hypothesize in advance. This
hypothesis makes sense, if you ask me.
America's last public execution was carried out in 1936 in Owensboro, Kentucky.
Before a bloodthirsty audience of 20,000 observers, a man named Rainey Bethea
was hanged for the rape and murder of a 70-year-old woman.
Fast forward 81 years, and America elected a president who rode to victory a
slogan of reviving the past.
He's also a man who, in 1989, dropped $85,000 on full-page newspaper ads
lobbying New York state to bring back capital punishment for 5 black and
Hispanic teenagers accused of raping and brutally beating a Central Park
jogger. They were cleared when the rapist confessed; Trump never apologized.
He's also noted that he'd sign a "strong, strong statement" of an executive
order calling for the death penalty for those who kill police officers.
He's Tweeted about "missing children (sic) grabbed by the perverts" in order to
call for fast trials and executions for said perverts.
He's noted there "should be like death penalty or something" for the people
behind WikiLeaks for using classified documents and videos obtained from
Chelsea Manning (y'know, the source whose sentence was recently commuted by
Trump's successor at the White House).
In other words, the man has a death penalty fetish.
He also has a disdain for Mexico (the country that handed over El Chapo to the
United States on the eve of the inauguration).
And a vindictive streak (aimed at those who demanded a Central Park 5 apology
from a man allergic to apologies).
And a penchant for projecting his shortcomings onto others (a stretch, but the
2 men's "management styles" exhibit some minor parallels.)
"You can't take pity if someone makes a mistake, you can't back down when
underlings make excuses for not keeping to the schedule. If there was a
problem, El Chapo eliminated it."
Eliminated it = you're fired (albeit one that's markedly more violent).
Already, El Chapo's abrupt extradition is being framed as a gift to the United
States made before Trump is sworn in. To wit:
It's also seen by many in Mexico as a delicately timed maneuver aimed at
limiting political fallout for President Enrique Pena Nieto, already deeply
unpopular in part for his perceived mishandling of Donald Trump's tough
rhetoric on Mexico....
"It could be a coincidence, but I think that's unlikely," Mexican security
analyst Alejandro Hope said, noting it came the last full day of Barack Obama's
presidency and hours before Trump's inauguration. "They could not send him
after Trump was inaugurated because the interpretation would have been that of
a tribute."
Where I part with liberal orthodoxy is in how I support the death penalty. (Fix
the problems, but don't abolish; some people deserve to die.)
When I think about the reactions I've gotten each time I've written about
capital punishment in the past, I can relate to how non-liberals feel when that
flock rains disdain down upon them. That's part of the motivation for their
obnoxious "we won, you lost, get over it" victory prance.
And when I think about everything I've seen from Trump and his deplorables over
the past year or so, I see people getting inspired by visions of payback
against everybody who's wronged them (both in reality and fantasy).
Those are my guiding principles when I try to figure out what's going to happen
in America after Trump's hand lifts off that Bible and he walks into a world of
unmatched power.
He likes the death penalty, and hates Mexico.
He's seen his security beefed up after threats from a drug kingpin who just
arrived, cuffed and shackled, in the country he's about to lead.
He wants to bolster support of American law enforcement, and close off access
to others.
He takes shots at criminals, whether they're patently guilty or wrongly
accused.
He loves big ratings.
He makes the rules, and seemingly doesn't feel beholden to abide by those
established in history and tradition. (Sure, the death penalty's a
state-by-state issue, but if this campaign proved anything, it's to expect the
unexpected).
His utter unpredictability makes it folly to consider anything off limits -
i.e. the legality of legislators returning to a deadly vestige of the past -
which is why I can't shake this idea of public executions in the waning hours
before inauguration.
What will happen when he peels the mask of a candidate and president-elect off
and reveals himself as the leader of the free world?
Nobody knows, but we're all about to find out.
(source: Opinion, Brian Hickey----phillyvoice.com)
_______________________________________________
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
