[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS
April 18 TEXAS-new execution date Rolando Ruiz has been given a July 10 execution date; it should be considered very serious. (sources: Texas Department of Criminal Justice & Rick Halperin) Impending Texas Execution List: Name Date Texas # since 1982 # under Gov. Perry Ryan Dickson April 26 392 153 Jose Moreno May 10393 154 Charles Smith May 16394 155 Michael Griffith June 6395 156 Cathy Henderson June 13 396 157 Lionell Rodriguez June 20 397 158 Gilberto ReyesJune 21 398 159 Patrick KnightJune 26 399 160 Rolando Ruiz July 10 400 161 Lonnie JohnsonJuly 24 401 162 Kenneth Parr August 15 402 163
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news-----FLA., ORE. CALIF.
Apr. 18 FLORIDA: Lawyer argues for death-row inmateHe says DNA tests raise doubts in the contentious Zeigler case from the '70s. An attorney for death-row inmate William "Tommy" Zeigler asked the Florida Supreme Court to overturn his murder conviction, arguing that DNA tests conducted in 2002 raise doubt that Zeigler killed his wife and 3 others on Christmas Eve 1975. New York attorney John Houston Pope argued Tuesday that blood found on Zeigler's clothing came from a different victim than prosecutors alleged during his 1976 trial. That bolstered Zeigler's claim that other assailants committed the slayings, Pope said. "It weakens the case against the defendant," he said. Pope asked the high court to reverse Zeigler's conviction in the Orange County case on grounds that Judge Reginald Whitehead denied a motion for a new trial based on the DNA evidence. Alternatively, Pope requested an "expansive hearing" to reopen the case. Senior Assistant Attorney General Ken Nunnelley said the evidence does little to refute the case against Zeigler -- whom he said couldn't explain why he was covered in blood -- or witness testimony. Justices seemed confused at times by the long, complicated accounts of the killings presented by lawyers. Ultimately, the court -- which is reviewing Zeigler's case for the 8th time -- said it will rule at a later date. Zeigler, 61, was convicted by an Orange Circuit Court jury in 1976 of killing his wife, Eunice; her parents, Virginia and Perry Edwards; and store customer Charlie Mays. The jury recommended life in prison, but the trial judge, Maurice Paul, instead imposed death. Prosecutors charged Zeigler schemed to collect money on his wife's $500,000 insurance policy. They contended Zeigler killed Mays and then wounded himself in an effort to make it look as though the murders in his Winter Garden furniture store were committed by a masked gang of robbers terrorizing Central Florida. The case would become one of the most controversial murder cases in the region's history. It has been the subject of books, television shows and appeals from anti-death-penalty groups. In 1986, Zeigler came within 2 days of execution. 2 years later, the Supreme Court ordered a new sentencing, but he was again sentenced to death in 1989 by another Orange Circuit judge. After 2 days of hearings in December 2004, Whitehead later ruled that the DNA tests conducted on blood-stained evidence nearly 30 years old had "no reasonable probability" of convincing the jury of Zeigler's innocence. (source: Orlando Sentinel) OREGON: Jurors reject death penalty for killer of Oregon woman The family of Jessie Mary Valero says death is the proper punishment for one of the men responsible for stabbing her to death with a sharpened screwdriver. But despite those wishes, Washington County jurors sentenced Jose Guadalupe Cazares Mendez, 29, to life in prison without the chance for parole. "No matter what sentence he gets, no matter how much time he stays alive in prison, it's still longer than my mother she's dead," Ray Valero, the victim's son, said after Tuesday's announcement. Valero found his 48-year-old mother dead on the living room floor of her Hillsboro apartment on March 17, 2005. Cazares, who showed no emotion during the announcement, was found guilty of murder, robbery and burglary. A co-defendant, Jorge Reyes Sanchez, 23, was convicted of the same charges in February and also was sentenced to life in prison without parole. Jose Luis Lugardo Madero, 27, is scheduled for trial May 22 on murder charges. He testified at the two trials that he, Reyes and Cazares often broke into cars to steal property to trade for methamphetamine. Lugardo said the 3 went to Valero's apartment but that he stayed outside when Reyes and Cazares broke in. Lugardo testified that he ran when he heard the sounds of a struggle inside. Moreover, Lugardo testified that Cazares threatened to kill him if he told anyone about the Valero murder. Prosecutors also tied Cazares and Reyes to the crime through the woman's stolen jewelry. Reyes traded a gold Virgin Mary pendant for meth, his drug supplier testified. In a photo of Valero holding 1 of her 8 grandchildren, she is shown wearing the religious pendant. To find in favor of the death penalty, all 12 jurors would have to answer that the defendant would probably commit violent crimes in the future. They did not. Dan Hesson, Washington County deputy district attorney, tried to convince jurors in his closing argument that Cazares would be a danger to fellow prisoners because so much meth is available at the Oregon State Penitentiary. Before jurors began deliberating on the penalty, Cazares said he got down on his knees and prayed every night to "ask for forgiveness if at any time in my drug addiction I cause pain or harm to another person." (source: Associated Press) CALIFORNIA: Don't kill prison reform IT SEEMS bizarre that the Department of Corrections a
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----GA., S. DAK., MD., NEB.
April 18 GEORGIA: Judge dismisses lawyer In Tifton, Chief Superior Court Judge Gary McCorvey on Tuesday dismissed one of the attorneys representing Stacey Bernard Sims, who is accused in the deaths of six Hispanic men and the assault of 4 others during an alleged crime spree that took place in September 2005. McCorvey had ordered a hearing Tuesday to address the matter of Sims' legal representation. The judge had stated in his order that the Office of the Georgia Capital Defender would be unable to defend Sims, since that office had already taken up the defense of Sims' co-defendent, Jamie Underwood, and that it would be his responsibility to appoint legal representatives for Sims. McCorvey explained the situation to the 19-year-old Sims, of Norman Park, and said that matters had been complicated because the court had the responsibility to appoint Sims' counsel for the death penalty trial, yet Sims had already had counsel appointed for him. "Mr. Sims has the right to be heard," McCorvey said, "and he must understand the limits on him and the court and make an informed decision." McCorvey was also concerned that one of Sims' lawyers, Sylvester attorney Clark Landrum, was a part-time State Court solicitor in Worth County, a position which requires him to prosecute misdemeanor charges. The judge pointed to a 1984 opinion from the State Bar of Georgia which discouraged part-time solicitors from acting as defense attorneys. "I don't believe that the Supreme Court of the United States would allow a solicitor to represent a defendent in a death penalty case," McCorvey said. "In the opinion of the court, Mr. Landrum would not be qualified because he is a part-time solicitor." After pointing this out, McCorvey allowed Sims to confer with his attorneys outside the courtroom. When the hearing reconvened, Landrum announced that Sims was concerned over his role as a part-time solicitor and McCorvey relieved Landrum of his duties in the case. McCorvey then said that he had contacted judges from other judicial circuits and had asked for the names of attorneys who would be qualified to try a death penalty case. Sims' other attorney, Ramon Fajardo of Leesburg, will remain on the case. McCorvey also briefly addressed the defense's motion, filed in November, asking for a change of venue for the trial. The judge said that when the matter comes before him in a future hearing, he intends to grant the motion. In that motion, Landrum argued that newspapers had published extensive articles concerning this case and information has also been broadcast on radio, television and Internet locations. He said that publicity had reached a substantial percent of the prospective jurors in Tift County and the publicity had "severely prejudiced prospective jurors against the defendant." Landrum said that Jamie Underwood and the other defendants are also charged with the same crimes and have received similar publicity. He said, 'The publicity of the other defendants will be imputed to this defendant since he is charged with the same offenses." Landrum said Sims would be faced with a biased jury panel if he was tried in Tift County. Also charged in the case are Thomas Mathis, Jennifer Wilson and Emma Jean Powell. McCorvey indicated to Underwood's defense attorneys last week that he would grant a change of venue motion in that case if it was filed. (source: Moultrie Observer) SOUTH DAKOTA: Parents of woman dismembered by deaf lesbian testify at death-penalty hearing Several jurors and audience members wept Tuesday as the parents of a slain woman testified at the death-penalty phase of the trial for a woman facing life in prison or capital punishment. A jury in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, convicted Daphne Wright, 43, of Sioux Falls, last week of kidnapping and murdering Darlene VanderGiesen, 42, another deaf woman from Sioux Falls. Prosecutors say that in a jealous rage Wright kidnapped VanderGiesen, killed her, cut apart her body with a chain saw, and burnt it. She was jealous of the friendship VanderGiesen had with Wright's former lover, authorities have said. Lawyers plan to give closing arguments Wednesday morning. Then, jurors will start deliberating whether to sentence Wright to life in prison or death by lethal injection. Wright would be the 1st woman on South Dakota's death row and likely the 1st deaf woman on death row in the nation if she is sentenced to die. The judge earlier denied a defense request that the death penalty not be allowed because Wright is a black, deaf lesbian. Gene VanderGiesen, 65, of Rock Valley, Iowa, said words can't express the pain the family felt while his daughter was missing in February 2006, while they waited for all of her remains to be found, and while having 2 funerals. Their daughter was the spark plug who lit up family gatherings, said Dee VanderGiesen, 63. ''She'll never come back. I know that. But in my mother's heart, I would love her back but I know I won't see he
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide
April 18 OREGON: Jurors reject death penalty for killer of Oregon woman The family of Jessie Mary Valero says death is the proper punishment for one of the men responsible for stabbing her to death with a sharpened screwdriver. But despite those wishes, Washington County jurors sentenced Jose Guadalupe Cazares Mendez, 29, to life in prison without the chance for parole. "No matter what sentence he gets, no matter how much time he stays alive in prison, it's still longer than my mother she's dead," Ray Valero, the victim's son, said after Tuesday's announcement. Valero found his 48-year-old mother dead on the living room floor of her Hillsboro apartment on March 17, 2005. Cazares, who showed no emotion during the announcement, was found guilty of murder, robbery and burglary. A co-defendant, Jorge Reyes Sanchez, 23, was convicted of the same charges in February and also was sentenced to life in prison without parole. Jose Luis Lugardo Madero, 27, is scheduled for trial May 22 on murder charges. He testified at the two trials that he, Reyes and Cazares often broke into cars to steal property to trade for methamphetamine. Lugardo said the 3 went to Valero's apartment but that he stayed outside when Reyes and Cazares broke in. Lugardo testified that he ran when he heard the sounds of a struggle inside. Moreover, Lugardo testified that Cazares threatened to kill him if he told anyone about the Valero murder. Prosecutors also tied Cazares and Reyes to the crime through the woman's stolen jewelry. Reyes traded a gold Virgin Mary pendant for meth, his drug supplier testified. In a photo of Valero holding 1 of her 8 grandchildren, she is shown wearing the religious pendant. To find in favor of the death penalty, all 12 jurors would have to answer that the defendant would probably commit violent crimes in the future. They did not. Dan Hesson, Washington County deputy district attorney, tried to convince jurors in his closing argument that Cazares would be a danger to fellow prisoners because so much meth is available at the Oregon State Penitentiary. Before jurors began deliberating on the penalty, Cazares said he got down on his knees and prayed every night to "ask for forgiveness if at any time in my drug addiction I cause pain or harm to another person." (source: Associated Press) CALIFORNIA: Don't kill prison reform IT SEEMS bizarre that the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation would construct a new execution chamber at San Quentin State Prison without telling the Legislature about it. Prison officials tell us that they were only trying to meet the concerns expressed by U.S. District Judge Jeremy Vogel last December about the cramped conditions and poor lighting of an antiquated gas chamber built in 1938 and recently used for lethal injection. Until those concerns are met, no one can be executed in California. Officials say they are also under pressure from the governor's office to meet the judge's concerns so implementation of the state's death penalty law could begin by May 15. Whatever the justification, on a matter of great sensitivity such as the death penalty, even appearing to do an end-run around the Legislature is something that should not have occurred -- and should not occur again. That said, the execution-chamber flap should not be used by Democratic legislators as an excuse to scuttle essential reforms that must be implemented -- not only to relieve overcrowding in California's prisons, but in the entire corrections system. These reforms are too important to be jeopardized by a remodeling project, even one as sensitive as the state's execution chamber. (source: San Francisco Chronicle) ** Killer granted wish to dieJurors quickly decide Karis' fate for 1981 murder, rape James Leslie Karis Jr., convicted of a terrifying murder and rape in Placerville 25 years ago, asked Sacramento County jurors in his closing argument Tuesday to send him back to death row. "I urge you to return with the decision that death is the appropriate punishment," Karis told them. Within hours, they gave him what he wanted and sentenced him to death. It was the first time Karis, who represented himself, directly told the jurors he should face lethal injection for the murder of 34-year-old Peggy Pennington in 1981. The facts of her murder were "terrible enough" to warrant the death penalty, he said. Earlier, outside the presence of the jury, Karis had made it clear to Sacramento Superior Court Judge Trena Burger-Plavan that he wanted to return to death row as quickly as possible. Unless Burger-Plavan intervenes, the 55-year-old Karis will return to San Quentin State Prison, where he spent the past quarter century for the July 8, 1981, murder of Pennington and the rape of her 27-year-old friend. The El Dorado County welfare workers were taking a walk on their morning break when Karis abducted them at gunpoint, drove them to a remote area and raped the
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS
April 18 TEXAS: 'Death no more' editorials Nothing to add except applause for courage Re: "Death no more We cannot support a system that is both imperfect and irreversible," Sunday Editorials. I am unable to add anything to your well-reasoned anti-death-penalty editorial, which contained nearly every point that capital punishment opponents have been arguing for decades, but I applaud you for having the courage to print it. It made me think of a sign I once saw, purporting to be a quote from God, that read: "What part of 'thou shalt not kill' don't you understand?" Steven R. Butler, Richardson ** Gruesome crimes only emphasize the need When I read your politically correct pabulum explaining why the editorial board now opposes the death penalty, I immediately thought about the families of the victims of Dennis Rader, nicknamed BTK for "bind, torture and kill," who murdered 10 people in such a sadistic manner that it would make most people sick to even think about. Are you pleased that the BTK killer is serving life in prison, rather than facing his maker prematurely? What about John Couey, who sadistically raped and buried little 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford alive? Does he deserve 3 hot meals a day and a warm place to sleep? You fail to mention that defendants' many appeals and safeguards are why it costs $2.3 million dollars for each execution. The Dallas Morning News' editorial board is not on the side of justice in this matter. Don Skaggs, Garland ** Death sentence only adds to the tragedy Obviously, the event that leads a person to be on trial with a possible death sentence is tragic. For the state to somehow redeem that tragedy with an additional death only adds to the tragedy. Joe Kalka, Dallas ** One innocent's death justifies your stance I am thankful for the growing diversity of thought we are witnessing in Texas. Your modified position on the death penalty is sufficiently justified by the ethical issue of wrongly executing only one innocent person out of thousands of capital offenders. We have never been provided with data showing a deterrence effect. Persons engaged in violent acts probably spend no energy debating what would happen to them 10 to 20 years in the future. Prevention of all crime is a much broader process than merely terminating an offender's life. Let's spend the $2 million per execution on more reasonable prevention efforts. Matt Jaremko, Dallas (source: Letters to the Editor, Dallas Morning News, April 17) * Does death penalty ever apply to those found insane?The US Supreme Court hears Wednesday the case of a killer who may not grasp the tie between his crime and his punishment. There is universal agreement in the United States that an individual convicted of a capital crime who is mentally incompetent may not be executed. To do so would violate the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishments. But just how mentally ill does a defendant have to be to trigger that broadly accepted Eighth Amendment prohibition? That is the question the US Supreme Court takes up on Wednesday in a case involving the often bizarre legal odyssey of Texas death row inmate Scott Panetti. Mr. Panetti, who has a long history of mental illness, was found guilty of the 1992 double slaying of his wife's parents. He shot them at close range in their kitchen as his wife and his three-year-old daughter watched. He took the child and his wife hostage, but later surrendered and confessed to police. After being found competent to stand trial, Panetti fired his lawyer and represented himself. For the trial, he donned a Tom Mix-style cowboy outfit complete with boots, bandana, and hat. He argued an insanity defense, advising the jury that only an insane person could prove insanity. Then he tried to subpoena 200 witnesses to testify on his behalf, including John F. Kennedy, the Pope, and Jesus. As one psychiatrist put it: Mr. Panetti's mind "saddles up and rides off in all directions." Panetti testified at his own trial. He assumed an alternate personality named "Sarge," who recounted in a barely coherent babble impressionistic details of the killings. The jury found him guilty, and the next day sentenced him to death. Panetti, who refuses to take any medication, has become a jailhouse preacher, perpetually studying and quoting his well-worn Bible. His lawyer says he is convinced that his religious devotion is the true reason for his death sentence. "Mr. Panetti believes that demonic forces, in league with the State of Texas, have orchestrated his execution in a final effort to prevent him from preaching the gospels of Jesus Christ," writes Panetti's lawyer, Keith Hampton of Austin, in his brief to the court. "According to Mr. Panetti, the State of Texas is using the murder of his wife's parents as a pretext to fulfill the devil's plot to silence him." This is the core of the issue before the Supreme Court: Whether a death row inmate whose
[Deathpenalty] FW: [AALSMIN-L] Harvard Kangaroo Law School.doc
ht" to advocate war crimes so long as he does not participate in their commission, or incite them, or aid and abet them. But precisely where is that line to be drawn for law professors? In this regard, the Harvard Law School Faculty currently has at least five professors who have advocated torture and war crimes: 1. Vagts himself, who supported abusing the then recently captured President of Iraq Saddam Hussein despite his being publicly acknowledged to be a Prisoner of War by the Bush Jr. administration itself and thus absolutely protected by the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and the Convention against Torture; 2. the infamous Alan Dershowitz, a self-incriminated war criminal in his own right. Dersh publicly acknowledged being a member of a Mossad Committee for approving the murder and assassination of Palestinians, which violates the Geneva Conventions and is thus a grave war crime; 3. the Con Law non-entity known as Richard Parker; 4. Another one of my teachers, Waco Phil Heymann. Previously Waco Phil had been Deputy to U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, the Butcheress of Waco. Reno ordered the Waco Massacre, while Heymann orchestrated its cover-up and thus earned his well-deserved sobriquet Waco Phil. All those incinerated women and children! R.I.P. 5. The war criminal Jack Goldsmith who while working as a lawyer for the Bush Jr. administration at both the Pentagon and later its Department of In-Justice did much of the legal spade-work designing, justifying and approving the hideous human rights atrocities that the Bush Jr. administration has inflicted on everyone after 9/11. Goldsmith and his co-felon legal colleague from the Bush Jr. administration Professor John Yoo--now desecrating Berkeley's Law School where my friend and colleague the late, great Dean Frank Newman had taught Human Rights--are functionally analogous to Nazi Law Professor Carl Schmitt, who justified every hideous atrocity that Hitler and the Nazis inflicted on anyone. Despite my best efforts to prevent it, the Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans hired the war criminal Goldsmith right out of the Bush Jr. administration knowing full well that he was up to his eyeballs in the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts, torture, war crimes, enforced disappearances, murder, kidnapping, and crimes against humanity, at a minimum. And when Goldsmith's proverbial "smoking-gun" Department of In-Justice Memorandum was published by the Washington Post, Harvard Law School's Dean Elena Kagan contemptuously boasted in response about how "proud" she was to have hired this notorious war criminal. Previously Kagan had also publicly bragged that the future of International Legal Studies at Harvard Law School would be in the "good hands" of their resident war criminal Goldsmith. How true! The Neo-Conservative Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans deliberately set out to hire this Neo-Nazi legal architect of the Bush Jr. administration's bogus and nefarious "war against terrorism" because they fully support it together with all its essential accouterments of torture, kangaroo courts, war crimes, murder, kidnapping, enforced disappearances, crimes against humanity, and Nuremburg crimes against peace. By contrast, after the terrorist bombing of the Murrah Federal Building by Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols in alleged revenge for the Waco Massacre and Cover-up by Janet Reno and Waco Phil Heymann, to the best of my recollection I do not remember that the Neo-Conservative Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans advocated kangaroo courts, torture, and war crimes for America's White Judeo-Christian Males. Yet after 9/11 the fundamentally White Racist Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans have no problem with inflicting torture, kangaroo courts, and war crimes upon Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color, which is exactly why they hired the war criminal Goldsmith to teach these criminal practices to their own law students and thus someday turn them into U. S. governmental war criminals in their own right. This is because for the most part the Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans have always been viscerally bigoted and racist against Muslims/Arabs/Asians and other People of Color since at least when I matriculated there in September of 1971. The Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans are no longer fit to educate Lawyers, Members of the Bar, and Officers of the Court. They are a sick joke and a demented fraud. Groucho Marx would have had a field day with them: Harvard is to Law School as Torture is to Law. The Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans torture the Law. Do not send your children or students to Harvard Law School where they will grow up to become racist war criminals! Harvard Law School is a Neo-Con cesspool. -- next part -- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: ATT2081082.txt Url: http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/private/deathpenalty/attachments/20070418/65a2ef73/attachment.txt
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news-----worldwide
April 17 PAKISTANexecutions Brothers hanged for killing relatives 4 brothers were hanged in Pakistan's eastern Punjab province on Tuesday for murdering their own relatives 8 years ago over a land dispute, police said. The men - Khuda Bukhsh, Mohammad Akram, Mohammad Iqbal and Mohammad Asghar - were executed at the Multan central prison, police officer Afsar Khan told Reuters. He said the brothers along with their father had slaughtered 13 of their relatives including women over a land dispute near Multan in 1999. A court sentenced the 4 a year later but the father died in custody before the conviction. "All of their appeals were rejected as there was solid evidence against them and also nobody left in the deceased family to pardon them," Khan said. Under Islamic law, Pakistani courts can set aside the death penalty if the heirs of a deceased person pardon a murderer. A leading human rights group in Pakistan has reported that more than 7 000 people are still on death row in the Muslim country and more than 50 were executed in the first half of 2006. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan said in its most recent report that most of the death sentences were carried out in Punjab, the country's most populous province, where about 6 985 prisoners are on death row. (source: Reuters)
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news-----WASH., GA., MO, IND.
April 17 WASHINGTON (state): Judge regrets inability to impose death penalty in murder case A man whose home invasion robbery resulted in the beating deaths of an elderly Hoquiam couple was sentenced Monday to 72 years in prison. David Gannon, 39, was sentenced in Grays Harbor County Superior Court in the slayings of Vernon and Maxine Bishop. Gannon killed the couple last May in a home invasion robbery when he and his then girlfriend, April Hensley, went to the home apparently looking for money to buy drugs. Prosecutors said Hensley had her pockets stuffed with jewelry and items taken from the house when she was arrested. Charging documents said that she admitted to police that the jewelry was her share of the items that she and Gannon stole during the robbery. The 72-year sentence was the most allowed by the law after Gannon plead guilty to 2 counts of 1st-degree murder. However, Judge Gordon Godfrey expressed regret at the legal limit, calling Gannon a "walking advertisement for the death penalty." It is believed 75-year-old Vernon Bishop died shortly after the attack, while 80-year-old Maxine Bishop lay badly injured for 5 days until she was discovered by a family member. She died 4 days later at a hospital. (source: KOMO News) *** Gannon called walking excuse for death penalty' It didn't take long for Judge Gordon Godfrey to decide on a prison sentence for David Gannon, a man the prosecutor describes as a sociopathic career criminal and drug abuser. Gannon administered fatal beatings to Vernon and Maxine Bishop in their Hoquiam home last May. 'As far as I'm concerned, you're a walking advertisement for the death penalty," Godfrey told Gannon in Superior Court Monday before announcing he would impose the maximum sentence possible for the 2 1st-degree murder counts to which Gannon had pleaded guilty 868 months, which translates to 72 years and 4 months. Gannon, 39, had attempted to withdraw his guilty pleas after being allowed to get married in jail part of a plea agreement. But on April 4 Godfrey flatly rejected that move. Although Vernon Bishop, 75, died soon after the attack, his 80-year-old wife clung to life for three or four days until she was found and an additional four days in the hospital. Gannon was looking for money, jewelry and coins to trade for drugs, according to prosecutors. Because of the plea agreement, Gannon did not have to answer to theft and drug charges he would have faced in a jury trial. He was also protected from an "exceptional sentence" a jury could have asked a judge to impose. Bishop family members wept openly as the sentence was read. They declined to speak to the court, Menefee said, because they felt their victim statements sufficed in relating their grief. Menefee did, though, relate the story of a woman who contacted him from England. A daughter of Vernon Bishop, she said she had never met her father and was "very upset" when his death denied her the opportunity to get to know him. Started at 9 The sentencing outlined Gannons long history of criminal activity. He was an alcohol and drug user when he was just 9 years old, Menefee said, and, starting at the age of 13, was convicted of a string of burglaries, thefts and an attempted burglary. Almost as soon as he was out of juvenile rehabilitation facilities, Menefee said, Gannon was back in court, charged with 8 counts of burglary, for which he was sentenced to almost 5 years in prison. In the years to come, Menefee said, Gannon was convicted of charges running the gamut theft, obstruction, felony escape, felony meth possession and cocaine possession. Gannons drug-fueled recklessness, Menefee said, culminated in the murder of the Bishops. "It was a vicious and brutal murder," Menefee said. "In my 28 years as a prosecutor, this was one of the worst beatings I've ever witnessed." What made it worse, Menefee said, was the fact that doctors at Harborview Medical Center, where Maxine Bishop was taken, agreed that she might have lived had someone gotten her help earlier. Menefee asked for the maximum sentence, along with restitution for the victims and court costs. "He deserves to serve every day of it, and I don't believe this community or our state would be safer if he did not serve it," the prosecutor said. "... David's problem is a sociopathic personality and drug use." Minimum sought Gannons lawyer, Scott Campbell, asked Godfrey to consider the minimum sentence 54 years and three months on the grounds that it, too, was tantamount to a life sentence for the 39-year-old killer. Campbell also argued that in pleading guilty, Gannon had saved the court a lot of time and resources. But the judge was having none of that. In his view, Gannon did not help the court. Rather, he used his guilty plea to get married to his new girlfriend and then swiftly turned around to withdraw his plea and request a new attorney. "You tried to play a game," Godfrey told Gannon. Godfrey
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., CALIF., S. DAK., MD., FLA.
April 17 PENNSYLVANIA: INTERVIEW: Mumia's lawyer responds to DA In this interview, San Francisco attorney Robert R. Bryan responds to the recent move from the Philadelphia DA requesting that the entire Third Circuit Court recuse itself from Mumias case. Abu-Jamal Attorney Responds to Philly DA Is the DA afraid the Third Circuit will grant a new trial? Hans Bennett interviews Abu-Jamal attorney Robert R. Bryan As reported in two recent Associated Press articles, the Philadelphia District Attorney has filed a motion asking the entire 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to recuse itself from black death-row journalist Mumia Abu-Jamals case on grounds that Gov. Ed Rendell, whose wife serves on the court, was district attorney during Abu-Jamal's 1982 trial. The DA argues that if the court rules unfavorably for Abu-Jamal, the defendant could then argue that the ruling was a result of bias from the court, and as the Associated Press wrote, the DA allegedly "wants to leave Abu-Jamal no grounds for any future appeal." Assistant District Attorney Hugh J. Burns Jr. wrote in his motion that since "Mr. Rendell was the elected district attorney at the time in question, and so would have been responsible for the supposed 'routine' racially discriminatory practices of Philadelphia prosecutors, Abu-Jamal's accusations necessarily implicate Mr. Rendell personally." This request followed the March 22 announcement that Abu-Jamal would have oral arguments in Philadelphia on May 17, where the court will consider 4 different issues that have already been certified for appeal. Supporters have already begun organizing a mass-demonstration in Philadelphia on May 17, and many feel that the DA's request is actually designed 1) to delay the oral arguments and 2) to move Abu-Jamal's case to a more conservative circuit that will be less sympathetic to the issues being presented for a new trial. Abu-Jamals attorney, Robert R, Bryan, strongly opposed this move by the District Attorney and filed his response with the court on April 13. http://www.freemumia.com/pdfs/RecusalResponse.pdf In this interview (conducted on April 16), Bryan responds to this recent move from the DA and provides background on the issues being considered on May 17. San Francisco attorney Robert R. Bryan has appeared as chief counsel in numerous murder cases and specializes in death-penalty litigation. He is a member of the bar of the United States Supreme Court, California, New York, Alabama, various federal courts, and is the former Chair of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, Washington, DC. Mumia Abu-Jamal first began writing Mr. Bryan in 1986 and in 1991 formally asked him to take his case. The attorney had to decline at that time due to a full schedule of other capital case commitments. In 2003 Mr. Bryan was again approached, and finally agreed to become lead counsel for Mr. Abu-Jamal. He can be contacted via email: RobertRBryan [at] aol.com Hans Bennett: Last week, you filed a response to the DA's request to have the 3rd Circuit Court recuse itself? What's this all about? Robert R. Bryan: I was surprised that the Philadelphia District Attorney actually asked for the disqualification of every judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. This seems really over the top. On Friday, April 13, I filed a response aggressively opposing this effort by the DA. One of my concerns is that the prosecution not be allowed to use this ploy to delay oral argument which is set for May 17. Mumia has been locked up for over a quarter of a century and on death row for 24. This day for oral arguments has been a long time coming and we do not want justice delayed. That is the bottom line. Also, I feel that this court can be fair. The grounds presented by the DA for disqualification of every judge are baseless and absurd. I have been doing death penalty work for three decades and this is a novel approach. Of course, in some cases a judge might not be fair and must be disqualified. An example would be when I reopened in New Jersey the Hauptmann-Lindbergh Trial of the Century on behalf of Anna Hauptmann, the widow of Richard Hauptmann. He was executed in 1936 for the kidnap-murder of Charles A. Lindbergh, Jr.; that was long before I was born. In the 1980s I uncovered evidence suppressed by the government establishing that Mr. Hauptmann was in fact innocent. We were litigating the case in the U.S. District Court, Newark. I asked for the recusal of the judge assigned to the case in the belief he could not be fair because his father had been involved in the initial 1932 Lindbergh kidnap investigation as a police chief. Recusal is statutorily required where a judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed facts, or where there is the appearance of impropriety. However, I do not see those conditions in the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal, where the DA wants to disqualify not just one judge, but rath
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, CONN., USA, NEB., TENN.
April 17 TEXAS: Controversial Revelation of Death Penalty Injustice, Last Words from Death Row, Scheduled for Release in April 2007 Nightengale Press will release Last Words from Death Row written by Norma Herrera in April 2007. Norma Herrera lived her brother Leonel Herrera's personal hell as he waited on Death Row for the courts to decide if the new evidence that proved his innocence would save his life. To fulfill her last promise to Leo -- to tell his story, to tell the truth -- Ms. Herrera has authored Last Words from Death Row. In Last Words from Death Row (Nightengale Press, ISBN 1-933449-29-2, $19.95) Ms. Herrera writes: On February 16, 1992, Applicant filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. He showed that he had important and compelling evidence of his innocence and argued that because of his innocence it would violate the United States Constitution to execute him. ... Collins v. Herrera, 754 F.2d 1029 (5th Cir. 1992). The Fifth Circuit held that, based upon Supreme Court precedent, innocence did not provide a basis for federal habeas corpus relief. In 1993, the court ruled in Herrera vs. Collins, 506 U.S. 390 (1993) that a prisoner cannot simply argue in federal court that new evidence points to his innocence. He first must prove that his trial contained procedural errors (the technicalities that may free the guilty but also protect the innocent). In this case, Leonel Herrera had been convicted of shooting two police officers. Ten years later, he submitted affidavits from witnesses who said that his now-dead brother had been the killer (one witness was his brother's son, who says he saw the murders). Without considering the statements, the court told Herrera to sit down and shut up. "Federal habeas courts do not sit to correct errors of fact but to ensure the individuals are not imprisoned in violation of the Constitution," it said. In other words, being falsely imprisoned is not a violation of your rights. Herrera was executed four months after the ruling. Last Words from Death Row documents court events and press coverage, and calls into question the landmark decisions that sent her brother to his death. In the book, Ms. Herrera recounts the tribulations she and her family suffered as they worked to free Leonel Herrera from his fate. In his last words, Leonel Herrera said: "I am innocent, innocent, innocent. I am an innocent man, and something very wrong is taking place tonight." If all the court proceedings, including the Supreme Court's decision prior to Leo's execution represent the visible tip of the death penalty iceberg, Last Words from Death Row exposes the enormous human tragedy that resides below the surface. Her questions drive a powerful wedge between the legal process in capital cases and the truth. Why do the guilty go unpunished? When is innocence not enough to free a convicted man? Does Truth not prevail in the American Justice system? Who pays? Who is next? Last Words from Death Row will be available through Nightengale Press (www.nightengalepress.com), through online retailers and better bookstores in April. For more information, or to interview Ms. Herrera, contact Valerie Connelly at (847) 810-8498. (source: PRWEB) ** Supreme Court Refuses San Antonio Man's Death Row Appeal A convicted killer condemned for an attack in which 2 of the 3 murder victims were injected with household cleaner before they were stabbed to death lost an appeal Monday at the U.S. Supreme Court, moving him closer to execution. The court refused to hear appeals from Clifford Kimmel of San Antonio and 2 other Texas death row inmates -- Lionell Rodriguez, a Houston man convicted of a notorious fatal carjacking, and Christopher Coleman, condemned for a triple slaying in Houston. Rodriguez is scheduled to die by lethal injection on June 20. Neither Kimmel nor Coleman has a pending execution date. Kimmel and another man, Derek Murphy, were arrested for the April 1999 fatal stabbings of Rachel White and Susan Halverstadt, both 22 and dancers at a topless bar, and Brett Roe, 29. Their bodies were found in a San Antonio apartment. Kimmel, who had a previous burglary conviction, was arrested about 6 weeks later for a parole violation and confessed to police. Court records show he and Murphy injected two of their victims with the cleaner Tilex to drug them before they robbed them. Kimmel pleaded guilty to capital murder, and a jury decided he should be executed. A defense psychiatrist testified at his trial the Kimmel, now 31, had been a heavy user of methamphetamines since he was 13 or 14. Kimmel's companion, Murphy, is serving a life prison term for his role in the slayings. Rodriguez is set to die for the 1990 shooting death of Tracy Gee, a 22-year-old woman gunned down while in her car at a stoplight. He was 19 at the time of the shooting and on parole only 3 weeks after serving 3
