April 6 MISSOURI: House OKs bill keeping secret who carries out Mo. executions Legislation to keep secret the identities of people who carry out executions in Missouri gained initial House approval Tuesday. The bill makes it illegal for anyone including newspapers and other publications to knowingly disclose the identity of those on a team that carries out executions, which in Missouri are done by lethal injection. Violators could face misdemeanor charges. The identities also could not be disclosed through the legal discovery process or subpoenas under the legislation. The states execution protocol also would be a closed record, except for details on how the lethal chemicals are administered. Supporters say confidentiality is needed to protect such people from retribution for doing their jobs. "As long as this is the law of our state, whether people are for or against the death penalty is not the question here. The question is protection of our state employees who serve on the execution team," said sponsoring Rep. Danie Moore, R-Fulton. Opponents of the legislation, including the Missouri Catholic Conference, say it cloaks the process in secrecy and prevents public oversight, even by the judicial system. "There needs to be public assurance that the execution is being carried out in a competent, professional manner that respects the dignity of all involved, the Catholic Conference said in a letter to lawmakers Monday. The Catholic Conference opposes execution in general. Also under the bill, members of the execution team could not be reprimanded by professional licensing boards for their involvement in carrying out the death penalty. The director of the Department of Corrections would determine who is a part of the execution team, and it could include prison employees and doctors or other medical professionals involved in the process. State executions have been on hold since last year, as a court fight continues over an inmates claim that the lethal injection process is unconstitutionally cruel. A federal appeals court heard arguments in the case in January but has not ruled. U.S. District Judge Fernando Gaitan Jr. ordered specific reforms to Missouris lethal injection procedures, including the use of a doctor specializing in anesthesia. The lawsuit by Michael Taylor, who was to be put to death for the 1989 slaying of a teenage girl in Kansas City, revealed that the physician in charge surgeon Alan Doerhoff of Jefferson City decided to reduce the amount of sedative given to condemned inmates. Taylor was convicted of kidnapping, raping and murdering a 15-year-old girl who was abducted while waiting for a school bus. Doerhoff was first publicly identified in a St. Louis Post-Dispatch article last summer as the doctor who has overseen Missouri executions for years. Doerhoff, 62, had been reprimanded by the state Board of Healing Arts and denied staff privileges by 2 state hospitals. In June, Doerhoff told a federal judge that dyslexia caused him at times to confuse numbers and call drugs by the wrong name. But he later denied it, saying only that he sometimes transposes long numbers. Lethal injection bill is HB820. On the Net:----Legislature: http://www.moga.mo.gov (source: Associated Press) NEW YORK: An appeal to Cuomo District Attorney Richard Brown is waging a tough legal battle to secure the death penalty for the driving force behind the massacre in 2000 of 5 employees of a Wendy's restaurant in Queens. It's an uphill fight, but it's well worth the effort. Brown has forged ahead despite a ruling by the state's highest court that invalidated a key section of New York's capital punishment law. He has a compelling argument that the ruling should not apply to Wendy's killer John Taylor - and he should have the full legal firepower of the state behind him. But he doesn't. Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, a death penalty opponent, has declined to enter the case, explaining through a spokesman that he views the Court of Appeals decision as the last word on capital punishment in New York. He is wrong, because the issue will be settled when the court decides Brown's case. The AG is obliged to defend the constitutionality of a statute whether he likes the law or not. Cuomo's predecessor Eliot Spitzer argued against gay marriage even though he believes homosexuals should be allowed to wed. Here, Brown is saying the death penalty law was applied against Taylor under conditions that comply with the state Constitution - a position that cries out for support by the AG. Setting out to rob the Wendy's, Taylor and accomplice Craig Godineaux herded 7 workers into a refrigerator, bound, gagged and blindfolded them and shot all 7 in the head at point-blank range. 2 survived. Taylor's lawyers did not question his guilt, but they did seek to have his life spared. The jury condemned him instead. Subsequently, the Court of Appeals ruled in an unrelated case that the sentencing section of the death penalty law was unconstitutional because it, in effect, gave jurors only 2 options: Impose death or risk having a heinous killer released on parole after 25 years. The court found that such a risk might push jurors into voting for death. But nothing like that took place in Taylor's case. There, anticipating what the Court of Appeals might do, Justice Steven Fisher told the jurors that if they didn't vote for death, it was "almost certain" he would incarcerate Taylor for life. Clearly, the jury was not cowed into the death penalty, and Taylor got a fair, constitutional shot under the law as it was written. Boiled down to its essence, that is Brown's argument. And it should be Cuomo's argument as well. The caption on the case is "People of the State of New York v. John Taylor." No one represents the people more broadly than the attorney general, regardless of his position on social issues. (source: Editorial, New York Daily News) NORTH CAROLINA: Impasse puts N.C. executions on hold For the foreseeable future, North Carolina's executioners will not be scheduled for late-night shifts. Death penalty protesters will not be planning 2 a.m. vigils outside Central Prison in Raleigh. At least 5 condemned killers' lives will be in limbo, and the death chamber will remain dark. Democrats, who control the legislature, are content to let the death penalty impasse persist while lethal injection litigation winds through the courts. Republicans are pushing for a legislative fix. It will likely be years before a definitive ruling comes down from an appeals court, making it unknown when North Carolina's death penalty could resume. "We just can't know until these threads of litigation and legislative action play out," said Durham lawyer Mark Kleinschmidt, who represents an inmate involved in one of the many lawsuits. Gov. Mike Easley and Democratic lawmakers say they have no plans to end the execution standstill. "The legislature isn't going to be able to move in any direction, really, until it gets some final ruling from the federal and the state courts," Easley said this week. That sentiment was echoed by leaders in the state House and Senate. Bill Holmes, a spokesman for House Speaker Joe Hackney, a Chapel Hill Democrat, said, "His feeling was we could try to give a legislative fix but we don't know what that fix should be until the courts are done with it." And Schorr Johnson, spokesman for Senate leader Marc Basnight, a Manteo Democrat, said in a statement, "This issue is complicated and Senator Basnight thinks we must proceed carefully and with guidance from the courts." Theodis Beck, secretary of the Department of Correction, said in a statement, "The Department of Correction does not support or oppose any particular course of action to resolve the current death penalty gridlock. Like others, we're watching and waiting to see how things will play out in the courts and the legislature." North Carolina is one of 11 states where the death penalty has been halted because of questions about lethal injection. Inmates have raised constitutional challenges to the three-drug cocktail used for lethal injection, saying they may experience cruel and unusual punishment if they are not fully sedated before being injected with paralyzing and heart-stopping drugs. Currently, there are 166 defendants on North Carolina's death row. North Carolina law requires a doctor to be present at executions. Last year, a federal judge allowed two executions to proceed on the condition that a doctor monitor an inmate's consciousness on a brain-wave machine. In January, the N.C. Medical Board passed a new ethics policy prohibiting doctors from doing anything to assist an execution, which would violate doctors' oath to save lives. Prison officials changed their procedures to accommodate the new policy. A state judge ruled they needed approval from Easley and a panel of top state elected leaders before they could proceed. The governor and the Council of State gave approval but litigation abounds in several courts. Lawsuits everywhere Prison officials are suing the medical board, asking a judge to rule that a doctor cannot be disciplined for participating in an execution. Four death row inmates have lawsuits questioning the constitutionality of the execution procedures. 2 inmates also filed a lawsuit challenging the Council of State's approval of those procedures without public comment. The morass doesn't stop there. Dr. Obi Umesi, who was present at the last 2 executions, said last week that he did not monitor the inmate's consciousness, as a federal judge thought would be done. During a deposition in November, Warden Marvin Polk conceded that the doctor's duty was only to be present. And now those inmates' lawyers are considering bringing prison officials back into court to explain to a federal judge why they appear to have violated his order. Republican lawmakers reached out to Easley after introducing legislation last month that would grant immunity to doctors who participate in executions from discipline by the medical board. House Minority Leader Paul "Skip" Stam, an Apex Republican, said, "Senator [Phil] Berger and myself each asked the governor to provide some direction, but we don't have to wait for him." If the legislation is passed, Stam said, he is confident that a willing doctor would volunteer. "If doctors were not being threatened by having their license taken away," Stam said, "you could easily find a doctor who would be present and look at the monitor and do whatever it is that the federal court wants him to do." On Tuesday, the N.C. Conference of District Attorneys endorsed the legislation. "This is a straightforward means of dealing with that issue and the legislature certainly could trump the medical board," said Garry Frank, the conference president and district attorney in Alexander, Davidson, Davie and Iredell counties. Survivors want action Relatives of murder victims are also pushing lawmakers to move on these proposals. "We have certainly not been idle," said Mel Chilton, executive director of the N.C. Victim Assistance Network. "We're continuing to lobby our legislators to get some bills on the floor." Chilton added that she hopes lawmakers or the courts move fast. "We have some victims truly suffering," she said. The unwillingness of Democratic political leaders to resolve the death penalty quagmire doesn't surprise UNC-Charlotte political science professor Ted Arrington. While Republican constituents generally support capital punishment, Arrington said Democrats have constituents who both favor and oppose the death penalty. "Politically, it's a hot potato for the Democrats and an easy choice for the Republicans," Arrington said. "They don't say, 'Let's get rid of the death penalty'." The most they say is, "Let's have a pause.' " Though lawmakers may be able to delay tackling the issue, they cannot avoid it forever. "In the short term, a court is going to have to decide the medical board case," said Raleigh lawyer Ann Groninger, who represents an inmate whose execution has been delayed. "In the long term, I think it's going to have to be addressed legislatively." (source: News & Observer) ************** Hackney Hesitant of Considering Execution Change House Speaker Joe Hackney is sounding hesitant to consider legislation that attempts to resolve an impasse over the role of doctors during executions. Hackney said yesterday that Governor Easley's office has told him any change could prolong the legal fight. Several Republicans have filed bills that would take away the North Carolina Medical Board's authority to punish doctors involved in capital punishments. The medical board declared in January that any doctor who participates in an execution violates medical ethics and could face sanction. That threat has effectively shut down the death penalty in the state as the conflict between state attorneys and the medical board is litigated. The legal morass has led to an unofficial moratorium on executions with a Wake County judge placing 5 scheduled executions on hold. State law requires that a doctor only be present when an inmate is put to death, but a federal judge allowed an execution to proceed last year only after the state promised a physician would monitor the inmate to prevent suffering. (source: ABC News) TENNESSEE: 90-day execution review unrealistic, inadequate, critics say 2 Tennessee attorneys with extensive experience in death penalty cases criticized Gov. Phil Bredesen's executive order to have the Department of Correction (DOC) review the state's lethal injection protocols, saying on Thursday that the 90-day time frame Bredesen gave the department to fully investigate the deficiencies in the lethal injection process is "nonsense." The comments, made by Nashville Attorney Michael Passino and Tennessee-based Assistant Federal Public Defender Kelley Henry, were aired at the sole open forum designed to solicit public input as the DOC, under Commissioner George Little, goes about recommending a new protocol for lethal injections in Tennessee. On Feb. 2, Bredesen ordered a 90-day halt to all lethal injections against Tennessee's death row inmates, which he said would give the state time to correct "sloppy cut and paste" execution proceedings that were "full of deficiencies," as Bredesen described them. But that time window, which will expire on May 2, is wholly inadequate, said Passino and Henry, noting other states, such as Florida and California, that have recently undertaken reviews of their own states lethal injection procedures, did so over far lengthier time frames and with a much more open process that included more public input and far more expert medical testimony. "It is neither responsible nor realistic for the governor to ask you to do this within the next 30 days," Passino told Little, who was flanked by Ricky Bell, warden of the Riverbend maximum security prison, where the state's executions are carried out, as well as by members of his staff working on the new protocol proposal. Henry, too, directly criticized the timeframe, calling 90 days an unrealistic window to fully address a process that has a documented history of problems that have led to the agonizing deaths of multiple inmates, notably Joseph Clark of Ohio and Angel Diaz of Florida. During his "botched" execution that lasted over 40 minutes, Diaz received no anesthesia, Henry recounted. "Diaz was fully conscious when he felt what everyone agrees was the searing and torturous pain of the lethal drug as he suffocated, unable to cry out," Henry said. "The experiences late last year with the Clark execution in Ohio and the Diaz execution in Florida teach that the complaints brought on behalf of death row inmates to the lethal injection procedures are not the mere rantings of anti-death penalty lawyers," she continued. "To think now that this horrible mess can be remedied in 90 days with one short public comment period is nonsense." Passino also told Little that 90 days was too short of a period to ensure that the rights and psychological welfare of the correction workers assigned to death penalty administration are addressed. "The process has to ensure that those people doing those jobs administering IVs, mixing chemicals feel confident in those jobs, and that their psychological well being is protected," Passino said. After the hearing, Little told reporters he was confident the 90 days given to him by Bredesen was sufficient. "We do plan to meet the timeframe thats laid out for us," Little said. "We will provide not only our best efforts but a product that is adequate to the task. "We're looking at all the relevant information that is out there. As was noted a number of jurisdictions are dealing with this issue as we speak, and so we're drawing on that information," Little added. Little, though, would not offer specifics about the new protocol he has been charged with developing, saying it would not be unveiled until the end of the 90-day timeframe. "At that point we will share it with the appropriate policymakers, and it will be their decision as to next steps," he said. (source: Nashville City Paper) ****************** Lawyers doubt quick fix for executions----State says it will be set to kill Workman May 9 If California, Missouri and Florida can't get an execution right in 90 days, Tennessee won't be able to, either, defense attorneys told prison officials Thursday. "The reality is that 90 days is an unrealistic time frame to fix what was broken," said Kelley Henry, an assistant federal public defender who spoke at a public hearing on how Tennessee should put inmates to death. In February, Gov. Phil Bredesen put a halt to all executions and ordered the Tennessee Department of Correction to come up with new protocols by May 2. Commissioner George Little insisted Thursday that the state will be ready for an execution by that time. Philip Workman, convicted in the slaying of a Memphis policeman in 1981, is scheduled to die May 9. Officials at the Department of Correction hosted the meeting to let people talk about guidelines for executions. Defense attorneys, doctors, pharmacologists and the public were invited. Some speakers used the meeting to criticize capital punishment. No doctors or pharmacologists spoke, and it wasn't clear if any attended the meeting, which lasted less than an hour. Bredesen's order came after flaws in the process came to light, including that the guidelines didn't give dosage amounts for the 3 chemicals used in a lethal injection. The governor has insisted that the 2 executions carried out since 1960, in 2000 and in 2006, were done correctly. The governor's order came on the heels of a problematic execution in Florida in December that led to Gov. Jeb Bush ordering a moratorium. Executions also have been halted in North Carolina, California and Missouri because of concerns over lethal injections. (source: The Tennessean)
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----MO., N.Y., N.C., TENN.
Rick Halperin Fri, 6 Apr 2007 12:10:17 -0500 (Central Daylight Time)
