August 11 TEXAS: Families React To Elderly Couple Murderer's Sentencing----18-Year-Old To Receive Death By Lethal Injection Jurors sentenced a Baytown teen to death Wednesday for murdering his elderly neighbors in November 2003 Convicted Killer's Mother Calls Prosecutors 'Bloodthirsty' Robert Acuna, 18, faced death by lethal injection or life in prison with the possibility of parole in 40 years for the execution-style murders of James and Joyce Carroll, 75 and 74 respectively, in their suburban home Nov. 12. Michelle Cressy, the victims' daughter, spoke directly to the murderer Wednesday after the sentencing was handed down. "I told him that I didn't want him to think about what he did to my parents because I think he obviously got gratification from it. I want him to think about what he did to his parents and the impact it is going to leave on them for a very long time," Cressy said. Acuna's mother, Barbara, said her son does not belong in the adult criminal justice system. "This goes to prove that the Harris County District Attorney's Office is bloodthirsty. They never should have tried this case as a death penalty case," Barbara Acuna said after the sentencing trial ended. Jurors were handed the case Tuesday afternoon and had to make a life or death decision, despite the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision to reconsider whether executing people for crimes committed at age 17 is unconstitutional. Assistant District Attorney Renee Magee said Texas law permits executions for crimes committed by 17-year-olds, and the district attorney's office believed the circumstances of Acuna's case made it appropriate to seek death. If the Supreme Court rules such executions are unconstitutional, death sentences in those cases would be commuted to life sentences, she said. The convict's mother said prosecutors did not have any evidence that tied her son to the elderly couple's murder. She told Local 2 Monday that someone else killed the couple. Acuna was found in Dallas 5 days after the killing, driving the couple's car with the murder weapon and stolen items inside. He was reportedly living with a convicted sex offender in a motel. Prosecutors said the then-17-year-old was living like a gangster, adorned in gold chains and tooth caps. Defense attorneys did not call a single witness during the initial phase of the trial; however, they called several family members during the punishment phase of the trial to try and spare the convict's life. Prosecutors offered no explanation for why the Sterling High School junior killed his neighbors, stole their car and drove to Dallas. Jurors deliberated for less than 3 hours before finding Acuna guilty Friday. The penalty phase began immediately after jurors convicted him. (source: Click 2 Houston.com) VIRGINIA: Supreme Court vacates stay of execution A closely divided U-S Supreme Court today lifted a stay of execution for a man convicted of killing a Christiansburg woman. The court voted 5-to-4 to allow the state to execute James Reid for the 1996 slaying of 80-year-old Annie Mae Lester. Reid bashed Lester in the head with a milk can, strangled her and stabbed her 22 times. A judge found the crime was so vile that it warranted the death penalty, but the Fourth U-S Circuit Court of Appeals granted a stay of execution in December, 1 day before Reid was scheduled to die by injection. The Supreme Court gave NO reason for lifting the stay. The 4 justices who disagreed with the decision were the more liberal members of the court: John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. (source: Associated Press) NEW YORK: Senate bill seeks to reinstate state's death penalty Albany -- Proposal addresses court concern by giving default sentence of life without parole The state Legislature came out Tuesday with the first glimpse of a proposed new death penalty law that could be applied retroactively. If the proposal becomes law, two men charged with killing a police informant in Troy could face a death sentence even though the killing happened last year. The death penalty law on the books at that time was later ruled unconstitutional. The new law would give juries a third sentencing option in addition to death and life without parole and would require a tougher judge-imposed sentence in cases where juries deadlock on the sentence. The state Court of Appeals struck down New York's 1995 death penalty law because of the sentencing guidelines given to jurors. Under that statute, a deadlocked jury unable to choose between death or life without parole would be told that the defendant would receive a lighter sentence -- 20-25 years to life in prison, with the possibility of parole. The court ruled that the instructions could coerce jurors into voting for a death sentence to avoid the possibility of the defendant's release. Under the proposed law, juries would have the option to choose a sentence of 20-25 years to life, with possibility of parole. In the case of a deadlock, a judge would automatically impose life without parole. "If I had my druthers back in '95, this is the way I would have done it," said the bill's Senate sponsor, Sen. Dale Volker, R-Lancaster. "But, to be honest, I think the way we did it then, that the Court of Appeals threw out, was more favorable to the defendant." The bill does not have Assembly sponsorship, although Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said he wants the death penalty reinstated. The Assembly press office said the bill is under review, but with no state budget and other pressing issues, the bill may languish until September, Volker said. That might not affect pending cases, however, if the Legislature passes a bill that ends the way Volker's does: advising that the new death penalty legislation "shall take effect immediately, and shall apply to crimes committed prior to, on or after the effective date of this act." That provision has defense attorneys predicting that the proposed new law would likely be tossed out, as well. "It violates all traditional notions regarding ex post facto laws and fundamental fairness and due process laws," said Raymond Kelly, an attorney representing Michael Hoffler, 1 of 2 men accused of killing police informant Christopher Drabik, 31, of Watervliet, in North Troy last December. Rensselaer County District Attorney Patricia DeAngelis said in June that she would seek the death penalty in the case. Ex post facto laws -- those applied after the fact to criminalize something previously legal -- are unconstitutional, Kelly said. Proponents of the new bill say it would not violate the constitution because only the sentence provisions, not the law against murder, was thrown out. (source: Albany Times Union) ARIZONA: County attorney rules out capital punishment for murder suspects Suspects in the Bret D. Smalling murder case will not be facing the death penalty when they are tried next year. The court was informed of the county attorney's decision last week when murder suspects Michael Gaston and Calvin Stroup went in front of the judge during a status conference. Jack Stroup, who was arrested last month in connection with the Smalling murder, was not at the hearing. The news that Maricopa County Attorney Rick Romley did not intend to seek capital punishment in this case did not sit well with everyone in the courthouse. "We're very sorry to hear of this decision," said Smalling's mother Julie Fields. "We're disappointed and shocked because it was such a violent murder. We can't imagine why this is not a capital case." Deputy County Attorney Ted Duffy submitted a case management summary to the judge, which alleges that on Feb. 29 the defendants dug a grave in the desert outside of Wickenburg to bury Smalling. On March 1, under the ruse of "rock hunting," the defendants allegedly lured Smalling to the area of the grave. The summary said that near the grave, defendant Michael Gaston shot the victim once, fatally injuring him. The defendants then reportedly dragged Smalling's body to the grave and buried him. The summary ended by saying the defendants bragged about the killing and shortly thereafter fled to Montana. A spokesman for the county attorney's office explained that a capital review committee meets on a regular basis to consider cases where the death penalty is a possibility. The recommendation of the committee is sent to County Attorney Rick Romley, who considers both aggravating and mitigating factors. Romley then makes the final decision. That decision, however, can be revoked at any time up to the time of sentencing. Gaston and Stroup already knew of the county's intentions as they stood side-by-side in shackles for a brief moment when called upon by the judge. Jack Stroup, who was taken into custody 2 months after the initial arrests, will appear with his brother Calvin and Gaston during the next status conference. The murder trial is scheduled to start in early April, and it is estimated that it will go for 3 weeks. There are approximately 32 individuals on the witnesses list. The next scheduled status conference for the 3 defendants is Sept. 3. Shyla and Mary Dixon were in court as well to hear the decision made by Rick Romley. Shyla was Smalling's girlfriend and is expected to give birth to their child in September. (source: Wickenburg Sun) OKLAHOMA: Families receive justice; closure will take longer Victims of terrible crimes often long to hear 2 words from the perpetrators: I'm sorry. But Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Terry Nichols, whose actions in 1995 resulted in the deaths of 168 people, demonstrated in court in Oklahoma the limits of those words. His apology - read calmly from a prepared statement - was explicit. "My heart truly goes out to all the victims, survivors and anyone who has been affected by the Oklahoma City bombing," Nichols said. He invited the relatives of those who perished to write to him in prison if it would help in their healing process. Nichols was sentenced to life in prison for his role in the bombing. His partner, Timothy McVeigh, was executed in 2001. But his apology did little to soothe the victims' relatives and survivors. Most interviewed doubted the sincerity of his words. It was left to state District Judge Steven Taylor to formally answer Nichols' comments. "The question of how could you do this, what could motivate you to do this, there is no answer that could satisfy me," the judge said, putting words on the helplessness of the relatives and survivors. If it were in his power, Taylor said, he would order Nichols to place photographs of all his victims on the walls of his prison cell. The exchange between Nichols and Taylor was a rare expression of the emotions felt by criminals and those holding them to justice. Justice is not the same as closure. Justice is something society extracts, while closure is won individually - and in some cases, never won at all. (source: Editorial, San Antonio Express-News)
