Jan. 30
GEORGIA:
Murdered priest an unlikely ally for man accused of killing him
A murder suspect has an unlikely ally in his fight against being tried for
capital murder: The man he's accused of killing.
A "Declaration of Life" document written by Rev. Rene Robert before his April
2016 murder is being cited by church officials and Steven Murray, 28, as the 2
sides battle to spare Murray from a possible death sentence in Georgia.
"It's not necessary. We don't need to be as violent as he was," Bishop Filipe
Esteves of the Diocese of St. Augustine told WJBF.
A group of bishops and other clergy are set to hold a news conference Tuesday
on the courthouse steps in Richmond County asking authorities to reconsider
seeking the death penalty in light of the discovery of the 71-year-old Robert's
"Declaration," which was signed, witnessed and notarized.
"I believe that capital punishment is not a deterrent to crime and serves on
the purpose of revenge," Robert wrote in a "background" point that was
published by The St. Augustine Record.
"Therefore, I hereby declare that should I die as a result of a violent crime,
I request that the person or persons found guilty of homicide for my killing
not be subject to or put in jeopardy of the death penalty under any
circumstances, no matter how heinous their crime or how much I may have
suffered."
Murray is believed to have met Robert when Murray was released from Duval
County Jail on April 6. Robert, a retired priest, had a ministry specifically
seeking to help those who were serving or had served time in prison.
But by April 12, Robert was reported missing, and later that night Murray
became the prime suspect in the disappearance after leading police on a car
chase - using Robert's car. Murray got away, but was taken into custody on
April 14.
Soon after his arrest, Murray led police to a set of remains; however, due to
the body's condition, officials needed dental records to positively ID Robert.
The cause of death was multiple gunshot wounds. Murray told reporters that he
had "mental problems and I lost control of myself and I apologize."
"I'm very sorry and, if anybody really loves Father Rene, they will forgive me,
because he was a man of God and forgiveness is forgiveness," Murray said,
according to The St. Augustine Record.
Esteves said he opposed the death penalty because no act would bring Robert
back to life.
"You never know what is going through the heart and mind of the person doing a
violent act," Esteves told WJBF. "Justice needs to be joined by mercy."
(source: Fox News)
FLORIDA:
Death Penalty Inching Its Way Back Onto Florida's Books
Florida is one step closer to reinstating the death penalty.
After a year of turmoil for the state's death penalty, one Florida legislator
is trying to rein things in a bit. House Judiciary Chairman Chris Sprowls has
proposed a bill that would bring the state's death penalty in line with several
state court and U.S. Supreme Court decisions that have thrown the sentence into
limbo.
The bill (HB 527) would require that a jury be unanimous in handing down a
sentence of death.
Before last spring, only a simple majority - 7 of 12 jurors - was required to
recommend a sentence of death. But in March 2016, the state had to rewrite
those rules in response to a U.S. Supreme Court decision, which struck down the
old rules about who has the final say in making a sentencing decision, a judge
or a jury.
A compromise was struck last summer between the state Senate, which wanted
unanimous juries, and the House, which wanted a majority. The result was that
10 of the 12 jurors were required to agree to the sentence.
The Florida Supreme Court threw out those new rules in October, ruling that a
jury must be unanimous in its decision. The state Supreme Court had raised its
eyebrows at the practice of allowing non-unanimous juries at least a decade
ago. Then-Justice Charley Wells had written an opinion urging the Legislature
to bring the state in line with almost every other state in requiring unanimous
juries.
The new bill simply strikes from the law each mention of "10 jurors" and
replaces it with "unanimous jury." Less than a unanimous decision would
automatically lead to a sentence of life in prison.
Florida Sen. Randolph Bracy has introduced a nearly identical bill (SB 280)
with slightly different phrasing.
While the state has had no constitutional law on the books, state prosecutors
have been fighting to continue capital trials with a new understanding that all
12 jurors have to agree. For a few hours, there was some clarity on that issue,
when the Florida Supreme Court ruled that prosecutors would have to wait until
the new rules become law. The same day, the court rescinded that opinion,
saying it was issued prematurely.
3 people were sentenced to death row in 2016, the fewest since 1979 when the
death penalty was reinstated nation-wide. Whether those sentences will hold up
is very much in question.
(source: WUSF news)
OHIO:
Ohio must find best route to restore death penalty
After a 3-year-long moratorium on capital punishment, will Ohio ever revive the
practice of executing its most heinous cold-blooded murderers?
We and other proponents of keeping the death penalty as a viable punishment
option in capital murder cases are beginning to wonder.
That's because it's been 3 years this month since Ohio began what was
originally planned as a temporary delay in carrying out capital punishment.
That came after the botched execution of Dennis McGuire, a Preble County man
who raped, sodomized and murdered a 22-year-old pregnant woman in 1989.
McGuire, many will recall, endured a 26-minute cycle of repeated snorting,
gurgling and gasping for air as the 1st death-row inmate in Ohio to be served a
new lethal-drug cocktail.
In the intervening years, Ohio has struggled to find less painful methods and
more easily available drugs for its lethal-injection executions. But just as a
new 3-drug mix used by other states was adopted and 3 long-delayed executions
were rescheduled for the 1st few months of this year, along comes a federal
judge to torpedo the plans.
3 EXECUTIONS DELAYED
Magistrate Judge Michael Merz of U.S. District Court for Southern Ohio in
Dayton last Thursday barred the state from executing murderers Ronald Phillips,
Raymond Tibbetts and Gary Otte as scheduled early this year using the newly
adopted 3-drug protocol.
Judge Merz's decision has left many of us, including Trumbull County Prosecutor
Dennis Watkins, scratching our heads.
"It makes no sense that Georgia and Texas are carrying out executions, and we
can't," Watkins said.
The principal drug in question in the new cocktail that the judge targeted is
midazolam, a sleep-inducing and anxiety-reducing sedative. In his ruling in the
case filed by counsel for killers Phillips, Tibbetts and Otte, he argued, "The
court concludes that use of midazolam as the first drug in Ohio's present
3-drug protocol will create a substantial risk of serious harm or an
objectively intolerable risk of harm."
His ruling is doubly perplexing, given that other states commonly use the drug,
and other courts have upheld it as constitutional.
In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision released in June 2015, ruled
that Oklahoma's use of midazolam did not violate the Eighth Amendment guarantee
against cruel and unusual punishment. The Dayton judge's seeming disregard of
this precedent from the highest court in the land proves puzzling indeed.
Legal officials within the Ohio Attorney General's Office and the Department of
Rehabilitation and Correction apparently feel likewise. They acted with
jackrabbit speed late last week to file an appeal of Judge Merz's ruling in the
federal appeals court in Cincinnati.
Judges in that court should act with similar speed and alacrity to honor the
Supreme Court's decision and overturn Judge Merz's decision so that the
executions can proceed.
EXPLORE ALL OPTIONS
But in the event the decision is upheld, state officials should also explore
alternative options by consulting other states that have execution methods that
clearly have passed constitutional muster.
They must do so in order that capital punishment can be restored as
expeditiously as possible to bring closure and justice to victims.
Too often, in the caustic debates over the death penalty, victims plus their
family members and loved ones get short shrift.
In coming days and weeks, we expect more forces to use the judge's decision as
a springboard to decry the death penalty as a barbaric practice of
state-sponsored killing and an inhumane retribution.
The death penalty, however, is neither inhumane nor retributive. It is justice.
After all, executions primarily are not a transaction between a criminal and
his victim or the victim's family. It is a process whereby the state seeks
justice for the people of Ohio.
The vast majority of Ohioans and Americans concur by supporting the death
penalty for the most cruel and heartless killers. The state must respect that
sentiment by working quickly to find a suitable execution solution.
The longer the state delays cold-blooded killers' legitimate and constitutional
dates with death, the longer justice will be denied to the victims' survivors
and to the purity of jurisprudence in Ohio.
(source: vindy.com)
***********
Death row inmates' lawyers want to witness other executions
Attorneys for 5 condemned Ohio killers are asking a judge to let them witness
upcoming executions.
The attorneys say that observing executions that come before their own clients
are put to death will allow them to ensure that the procedures are being
carried out constitutionally.
The attorneys said in a court filing Friday that their observations could have
an impact on a continuing lawsuit over Ohio's new 3-drug lethal injection
process.
The state opposes the request, saying additional witnesses aren't included in
Ohio's current execution protocols.
The Ohio attorney general's office has appealed Magistrate Judge Michael Merz's
ruling last week declaring the state's new process unconstitutional and delayed
3 upcoming executions
(source: therepublic.com)
NEBRASKA:
Nebraska Steps Closer to Executing Prisoners
Nebraska inched closer to executing prisoners, as its governor signed off on a
new execution protocol with fewer confidentiality protections for manufacturers
of lethal injection drugs.
"Finalizing the protocol will help carry out the will of the people of Nebraska
in regards to the death penalty," Gov. Pete Ricketts said in a statement about
the Jan. 26 Execution Protocol.
Ricketts signed the protocol and delivered it to Secretary of State John Gale
to file and make it official. Both are Republicans.
Ricketts' approval came four weeks after a public hearing in Lincoln to take
comments. 20 people spoke, all but 2 of them with misgivings, particularly
about measures to keep the identity of drug suppliers secret.
Whether due to public pressure or legitimate legal concerns, the updated
protocol removed stipulations to hide the identities of those who supply lethal
drugs to the state.
Danielle Conrad, executive director of the ACLU of Nebraska called it a win for
open government.
"This is a victory for the thousands of Nebraskans who spoke out and opposed
this misguided policy that attempted to shroud the death penalty in a cloak of
secrecy," Conrad said in an interview.
The secrecy provision was seen as a crucial element to the new protocol, as no
domestic pharmaceutical firms will produce execution drugs and the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration has banned their importation.
With this in mind, state Senator John Kuehn, a Republican rancher from
Heartwell, introduced legislation that would guarantee confidentiality for
providers of lethal injection drugs.
It is not clear how the changes to the protocol made by corrections officials
might influence his bill, LB 661, but Kuehn has said he intends to pursue
passage of the bill regardless.
Previous protocols required 3 drugs - sodium thiopental, pancuronium bromide
and potassium chloride - to be administered in precise order and dosage.
The new protocol removes restrictions on what drugs corrections officials can
use, provided that "the substance or substances can be intravenously injected
in a quantity sufficient to cause death without the unnecessary and wanton
infliction of pain," according to guidelines issued by corrections director
Scott R. Frakes.
Frakes' office declined to comment for this article.
Once the revised protocol is made official, a formality at this point, the
secretary of state can ask the state supreme court to set an execution date for
1 of the 10 prisoners on Nebraska's death row.
That would be just 1 more step in what promises to be a protracted legal battle
to test the validity of the state's new protocols.
Back in November, the ACLU vowed to continue the fight against the state's
effort to clear its death row backlog - it's been nearly 20 years since
Nebraska performed an execution.
ACLU director Conrad said much of the battle lies ahead.
"The death penalty remains a failed government program that is broken beyond
repair. There are no quick fixes or easy answers when the state tinkers with
the machinery of death," she said.
60 % of Nebraska voters approved Referendum 426 in November, to restore the
death penalty.
(source: Courthouse News)
*********************
Death penalty protocol signed, sealed and delivered by Governor Ricketts
On Thursday Governor Pete Ricketts signed the protocol for carrying out death
penalty sentences in Nebraska.
Governor Rickets delivered the protocol to Secretary of State, John Gale
saying, "The Department of Corrections was responsive to feedback provided in
the public hearing".
He also said that finalizing the protocol would help carry out the will of the
people of Nebraska in regards to the death penalty.
Governor Rickett's final protocol to carry out death penalty sentences will be
available on the Secretary of State's website.
(source: nebraska.tv)
_______________________________________________
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
