July 24
TEXAS:
Houston judge jails no-show defense witness in 'honor killings' death penalty
trial
A Houston judge on Monday ordered the arrest of a defense witness who did not
appear as scheduled in the death penalty trial of a 60-year-old Jordanian
immigrant accused of 2 "honor killings."
State District Judge Jan Krocker, who is presiding over the 5th week of the
capital murder trial of Ali Mahwood-Awad Irsan, said the female witness would
be arrested for not showing up to testify.
"I hope she shows up and is able to testify or she will have to spend the night
in jail and testify tomorrow," Krocker said in court.
The death penalty trial of Ali Irsan, a Jordanian immigrant accused in a pair
of "honor killings", began Monday.
The witness was expected to be the 1st to testify in Irsan's defense, but it
was not immediately clear how she is connected to the case.
Last month, the woman appeared in court when the trial began and was sworn in
as a witness. At that time, Krocker admonished her not to talk to anyone about
the case and appear when summoned by defense attorneys Allen Tanner and Rudy
Duarte.
On Monday, Tanner and Duarte said they told the woman she would have to be in
court first thing in the morning.
Because she was absent, the defense team asked that Krocker have their own
witness arrested. The proceedings delayed the 1st witnesses for about an hour.
As law enforcement and investigators for the defense worked to find the witness
outside the court, the defense instead called several quick witnesses including
police officers and friends of Irsan to testify that he had a good character.
The defense also indicated that Irsan may testify in his own defense.
Krocker, who telephoned law enforcement while sitting on the bench outside the
presence of the jury, said she was issuing a writ of attachment, which enabled
law enforcement to arrest and hold the missing female witness. A new state law
was enacted during the last session of the Texas legislature after Harris
County prosecutors jailed a mentally ill rape victim to ensure she testified
against her attacker.
The judge also said she expected to appoint an attorney for the woman. Krocker
said Irsan had a right to due process and he would not get that if he could not
get the witnesses he asked for.
Irsan is accused of fatally shooting his daughter's husband, Coty Beavers, and
her close female friend, Gelarah Bagherzedeh, in 2012 because they helped and
encourage his daughter to convert to Christianity.
(source: Houston Chronicle)
CONNECTICUT:
Death sentence appeal rejected in triple murder case
The Connecticut Supreme Court has rejected the appeal by a man who was
sentenced to death for killing 2 adults and a 9-year-old girl in Bridgeport in
2006.
The 5-0 decision Monday dismisses arguments by Richard Roszkowski that his 2014
death sentence be declared null and void. Roszkowski doesn't challenge the
validity of his murder convictions, and much of the appeal was moot because the
state Supreme Court ruled capital punishment unconstitutional in 2015.
Nearly all the state's 11 former death row inmates have been resentenced to
life in prison, not including Roszkowski. He says erasing his death sentence
would free him from stricter prison conditions imposed on former death row
inmates.
Roszkowski killed his ex-girlfriend, 39-year-old Holly Flannery, her daughter,
Kylie, and 38-year-old Thomas Gaudet.
(source: Associated Press)
FLORIDA:
Judge clears way for 4-year-old death penalty case against Michael Jones to
proceed
A series of rulings Friday cleared the way for the death penalty case against
accused murderer Michael Jones to proceed.
Jones, 35, is accused of fatally strangling his 26-year-old girlfriend, Diana
Duve, in his townhouse west of Vero Beach. The Sebastian nurse's partially
clothed body was found in the trunk of her car in a Melbourne parking lot in
June 2014.
Prosecutors and defense attorneys sparred in court Wednesday over 10 motions
Jones' attorneys - Stanley Glenn and Shane Manship, both with the Public
Defender's Office - had filed in an attempt to avoid the death penalty in
Jones' 1st-degree murder case.
In a written order Friday, Circuit Judge Cynthia Cox denied 9 of the motions,
most of which are filed routinely in capital murder cases to make sure the
matter can be raised on appeal, if necessary.
Duve's parents, Bill and Lena Andrews, were present Wednesday in Cox's Vero
Beach courtroom.
"Go back to your cage," Duve's teary-eyed mother Lena Andrews called out to
Jones as he was escorted by bailiffs out of the courtroom to return to the
Indian River County Jail, where he is being held without bail.
The sole motion Cox did not address centered around the language to be allowed
in describing the jury's role in the case's penalty phase.
Capital murder cases such as Jones' have separate trial and penalty phases.
For decades, the jury had to agree unanimously to convict in the trial phase,
but their decision in the penalty phase was considered advisory and did not
require unanimity.
A judge could hand down the death penalty regardless of the jury's
recommendation, though it was traditionally given great weight.
In Hurst v. Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that was unconstitutional
and the Florida Supreme Court issued new guidelines in late 2016 requiring a
unanimous jury recommendation for a death sentence.
Jones' case is set to be Cox's 1st death penalty case, as well as the 1st death
penalty case to proceed to trial in the 19th Circuit since that rule change.
"It certainly is going to be a learning experience for everyone," Cox said at
the Wednesday hearing.
Stanley agreed to work with Chief Assistant State Attorney Tom Bakkedahl, who
is prosecuting the case alongside Assistant State Attorney Brian Workman, to
come up with a proposal for properly addressing the jury.
"We're in completely uncharted territory," Bakkedahl noted.
A trial is unlikely to begin until 2019. Both sides are working to finish
hiring and interviewing expert witnesses more than 4 years after Duve's death.
The next status hearing was scheduled for Sept. 26.
The jury selection and trial are forecast to last 4 to 5 weeks.
Bill and Lena Andrews talk about their daughter, Diana Duve, who was murdered
in 2014. Michael Jones, who Duve broke up with a week prior to her murder, is
accused of the crime.
(source: tcpalm.com)
LOUISIANA:
Conservative doesn't mean supporting death penalty
In a column I wrote Sunday (July 22) about Louisiana Attorney General Jeff
Landry's enthusiasm for resuming and speeding death row executions, some
readers thought I had either betrayed my conservative values or exposed my
secret bleeding liberal heart.
"When will the TP and Nola.com enlist the services of a conservative oped
writer?" commenter Bayou Dog asked. "Jarvis [DeBerry] and Tim are tilting the
scales to the heavily to the left. There should be balance in journalism."
Commenter 3146tal quickly responded that, "Tim was misrepresented to us."
Another reader in the comment stream, K.Kerner, questioned -- as I do --
whether "every topic under the sun" can be rigidly categorized "as left and
right; liberal and conservative."
This is not the first, and certainly not the last, time I have disappointed
readers who believe I have failed to articulate the proper conservative
position on certain policies. Some think being a conservative means an
unyielding fealty to a party or person while others are of the mind that it is
simply finding the polar opposite of some liberal position and standing there.
A smaller group asserts that they are conservative and, ipso facto, any
disagreement with them is a disloyalty to the cause.
Attorney General Jeff Landry is not happy with the pace of executions in the
state.
For those who allege journalistic fraud, I would point out that the
announcement of my new position in January 2017 called me "a self-described
'independent thinker with a Christian worldview and a journalist's sense of
skepticism.'" Editor Mark Lorando said my "more conservative voice" was
intended to "reflect the ideological diversity" of our readership area and
"enliven the ongoing dialogue on our editorial pages about issues critical to
our city, our state and our world."
The part I have taken most seriously in all that is the "enliven the ongoing
dialogue" part, which means I try to write my viewpoints in a way that avoids
name-calling and strawman stereotypes so that the discussion can continue. You
consider my ideas and I consider yours, and we both walk away with something to
think about even if we aren't persuaded to change our minds.
I knew that my opposition to the death penalty and especially the attorney
general's unbridled enthusiasm -- "I support the death penalty -- by lethal
injection, gas, hanging, and firing squad." -- for it, would once again raise
questions about my conservative credentials.
But, I believe that while capital punishment can be morally justified -- the
state has the right to exact the ultimate punishment in certain cases -- our
government has proven to be so inept, biased and corrupt in carrying out that
responsibility that too many innocent people are being sentenced to death. That
82 % of Louisiana death row cases from 1976 through 2015 ended with a reversal
is more than enough proof that the system is not working.
Conservative columnist George Will laid out the conservative case against
capital punishment in a 2015 column for the Washington Post on 3 points:
First, the power to inflict death cloaks government with a majesty and pretense
of infallibility discordant with conservatism.
Second, when capital punishment is inflicted, it cannot later be corrected
because of new evidence, so a capital punishment regime must be administered
with extraordinary competence. It is, however, a government program. Since
1973, more than 140 people sentenced to death have been acquitted of their
crimes (sometimes by DNA evidence), had the charges against them dismissed by
prosecutors or have been pardoned based on evidence of innocence. ...
Third, administration of death sentences is so sporadic and protracted that
their power to deter is attenuated. And the expensive, because labyrinthine,
legal protocols with which the judiciary has enveloped capital punishment are
here to stay.
Longtime conservative thinker and activist Richard Viguerie expressed similar
concerns.
"Conservatives have every reason to believe the death penalty system is no
different from any politicized, costly, inefficient, bureaucratic,
government-run operation, which we conservatives know are rife with injustice,"
Viguerie said. "But here the end result is the end of someone's life. In other
words, it's a government system that kills people."
Council members condemn sham while council lawyers argue that its irrelevant.
As I said in Sunday's column, the death penalty is arbitrary, racially
discriminatory, and doesn't deter crime.
I don't see anything conservative about supporting an inept, biased, corrupt
system. But, as always, I remain open to discussion.
(source: Tim Morris is an opinions columnist at NOLA.com----The Times-Picayune)
************************
3 reasons why the death penalty is on hold in Louisiana
Louisiana hasn't held an execution since 2010, despite having 72 people sitting
on death row -- and it won't be resuming executions anytime soon.
At the request of state authorities, U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick agreed
this week to a 12-month extension of an order temporarily delaying all
executions in Louisiana for at least another year. The state is being sued in
federal court over its lethal injection protocol for the death penalty.
Attorney General Jeff Landry, a Republican, said this week that Gov. John Bel
Edwards, a Democrat, is also dragging his feet on resolving the execution
issue.
Edwards countered that Landry is using the state's difficulty with executions
to score political points, but the governor has also declined to say whether he
supports the death penalty at all.
The 2 men often get into public political squabbles, and Landry is considering
running against Edwards in the 2019 gubernatorial election.
There are some challenges for Louisiana when it comes to resuming executions.
But Edwards, Landry and the Louisiana Legislature have the ability to address
some of these issues -- if they want to get executions moving again.
Here are 3 challenges Louisiana faces:
Louisiana can't get the drugs to perform lethal injection
Louisiana can't put anyone to death because it can't find someone to sell the
drugs needed to carry out executions, said Natalie LaBorde, deputy secretary at
the Department of Corrections.
This has been a problem Louisiana has faced for several years. The state's
execution protocol has been changed a few times in recent years to try using
different drugs that might be easier to acquire -- with no success.
The state's current protocol allows for both a 1-drug and 2-drug combination to
be used in executions, but LaBorde said the state hasn't been able to get the
drugs for either procedure.
"The drug companies will not sell them to us," she said in an interview
Thursday (July 19).
Changing the type of drugs that the state tries to use again might not help
either.
The Edwards administration and Landry's office had discussed using another
drug, like fentanyl, in executions. But at least some drug companies ban
Louisiana from using their products for any purpose unless the state agrees not
to use them for executions.
The state has had to sign agreements with drug companies saying they won't use
the company's products for the death penalty, in order to get access to them
for medicinal purposes.
Louisiana is far from the only state to face this problem. A execution in
Nevada was blocked earlier this month when a drug company sued over its
product, midazolam, being used to carry out the death penalty. The drug company
is accusing Nevada of acquiring the drug through illegitimate means, according
to NPR.
In 2015, Nebraska attempted to purchase lethal injection drugs it wanted to use
from India. The U.S. government said it would not permit the drugs to be
imported, according to the Omaha World-Herald.
Execution drugs became particularly hard to get after 2016, when Pfizer Inc.
joined European drug manufacturers in banning their products from being used
for executions. 31 states have the death penalty on the books, but only 8
states have managed to carry out executions since the Pfizer ban went into
place, according to Reuters.
Louisiana's process to obtain lethal drugs is more transparent than other
states Louisiana could make it easier to obtain lethal injection drugs if
Edwards and the Louisiana Legislature agree to make the process of purchasing
the drugs more secretive, according to Robert Dunham, executive director of the
Death Penalty Information Center.
Most states that have been able to successfully carry out executions in 2018
are not required to be as transparent as Louisiana about where they purchase
their lethal injection drugs.
State law makes how Louisiana purchases its lethal injection drugs a matter of
public record. That makes it easier for drug companies -- who often oppose
their products from being used in executions -- to find out if the state is
using something they manufacture to carry out the death penalty.
It also doesn't provide an incentive for compounding pharmacies, who have
supplied several states with death penalty drugs in recent years, to work with
Louisiana.
A compounding pharmacy can make the product for an execution without involving
a drug manufacturer. States started relying on them for execution drugs after
major pharmaceutical businesses banned their products from being used.
Louisiana tried to contact a compounding pharmacy about obtaining drugs for
lethal injection in 2014, but it's unclear whether the product was actually
purchased, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.
Texas has executed 8 of the 14 people who been put to death in the United
States this year, and has refused to reveal the compounding pharmacy that
supplies its drugs since 2013.
The Texas Supreme Court, however, decided in May that the state's prison system
has to reveal the name of its supplier -- at least the one from a couple of
years ago. The ruling was in response to a lawsuit being brought by death row
inmates, though it won't shed much light on more recent executions.
In 2015, the Texas Legislature passed a law allowing for supplier of execution
drugs to the state to be kept secret, which the Supreme Court ruling won't
affect. Texas will still be able to keep the source of any execution drugs
after 2015 a secret, thanks to the state law.
Louisiana could pass a similar statute to deal with the shortage of execution
drugs in this state. In 2014, former state Rep. Joe Lopinto, R-Metairie,
introduced a bill to do so, then ended up pulling it. Lopinto got into a
disagreement with former Gov. Bobby Jindal over another matter and yanked the
bill from consideration as a result. If he hadn't, it would likely have passed
because it didn't face much opposition.
Any lawmaker has the ability to introduce such legislation again. Neither
Landry nor the governor have pushed to file such legislation since taking
office in 2016. The attorney general -- who is concerned about the pace of
executions -- has refused to say whether he would pursue such a bill during the
2019 regular legislative session.
Louisiana has only 1 legal method of execution on the books
Louisiana could look toward adding options for execution other than lethal
injection, given that it has become so difficult to get the execution drugs.
But the governor doesn't appear to support that approach.
Lopinto, who is now the Jefferson Parish sheriff, had proposed that the state
look at bringing back the electric chair in 2014, before Edwards was governor.
Lopinto scuttled the measure though, once it became clear that several
lawmakers weren't interested in that concept. It never got much of a discussion
in the Legislature as a result.
With the exception of a couple of isolated incidents, states have mostly used
lethal injection to put people to death over the last few decades. But many
appear to be preparing for the day when lethal injection is no longer viable.
Over the past 4 years, several states have passed laws that allow for
alternative forms of execution, according to the National Conference of State
Legislatures.
Alabama passed a new law this year that allows prisoners to be executed by
nitrogen gas -- essentially suffocated -- as opposed to lethal injection.
Mississippi passed a similar law in 2017, allowing for nitrogen gas to be used
if lethal injection no longer becomes available.
If nitrogen gas and lethal injection cannot be used, then Mississippi would be
allowed to carry out executions using the electric chair -- and if that isn't
an option, a firing squad could be used under its 2017 law.
In 2015, Oklahoma also passed a new allowing for nitrogen gas to be used in
executions. That year, Utah put a statute in place that allows for a firing
squad if lethal injection isn't an option.
Edwards' staff and Landry's office have discussed introducing legislation
during the Legislature's 2019 lawmaking session that would allow nitrogen gas
to be used as an alternative to lethal injection for the death penalty.
But in a television interview that aired Monday, Edwards didn't appear
interested in looking beyond lethal injection for executions. "Hangings and
firing squads? No," Edwards told Channel 33 in Baton Rouge. "I'm not inclined
to go back to methods that have been discarded because popular sentiment turned
against them -- maybe some methods were deemed barbaric."
No state has actually tried to put someone to death with nitrogen gas -
essentially suffocation -- yet despite a few passing laws to do so. There isn't
a protocol for how to proceed with using nitrogen gas in an execution. Once one
is developed, it would likely be challenged in court by death row inmates --
causing a whole new round of delays.
(source: nola.com)
TENNESSEE:
Lethal injection case: Dueling experts set stage for closing arguments in death
penalty suit
Experts brought in by either side of a challenge to Tennessee's lethal
injection protocol disagree on whether the drugs effectively prevent death row
inmates from being tortured in their final moments.
That disagreement is the central issue at play in a lawsuit brought against the
state by 33 death row inmates. Attorneys for the inmates argue midazolam - the
1st of 3 drugs in the state's lethal injection cocktail - fails to suppress
brutal, unconstitutional pain caused by the following 2 drugs.
But Dr. Feng Li, Nashville's chief medical examiner and an expert called Monday
by attorneys for the state said the dose of midazolam in Tennessee's protocol
was more than enough to render inmates unconscious and unable to feel pain,
even if they flailed or moaned before the execution was over.
"The patient probably will move," Li said during the final day of testimony in
the trial. "The respiration will be quick, heartbeat will be quick and the
blood pressure will rise but this stage is very quick. ... They are not aware."
The inmates' attorneys questioned Li's expertise on the topic at every turn,
repeatedly saying he was not well-versed in the effects of midazolam,
particularly in executions.
They referred back to their own experts, who said that inmates who receive
midazolam can feel pain and experience the sensation of drowning as they die.
At one point, federal public defender Kelley Henry read several expert accounts
saying benzodiazepines, a class of drugs that include midazolam, are
ineffective at suppressing pain and unreliable as anesthetics.
Li agreed that was generally true of benzodiazepines, but that midazolam was an
exception. He did not specify a source for that assertion.
Lawyers for the state argue the case law is on their side - the U.S. Supreme
Court ruled in 2015 that executions using midazolam are permissible.
But the inmates' attorneys say the state is relying on an unlicensed,
out-of-state pharmacy to mix drugs that may not function as intended. And their
case included discussion of autopsies that they say show inmates suffered
intensely before they died.
Both sides will have a final chance to state their cases in Davidson County
Chancery Court Tuesday. Closing arguments are scheduled to begin at 9 a.m.
Chancellor Ellen Hobbs Lyle is presiding over the case and is expected to make
a ruling at the trial's conclusion. An appeal is likely regardless of the
outcome.
The civil case has been fast-tracked because one of the inmates suing the
state, Billy Ray Irick, is scheduled to be executed Aug. 9. Irick, a Knox
County man, was convicted of the 1985 rape and murder of a 7-year-old girl.
(source: The Tennessean)
NEBRASKA:
Urgent Action
FIRST EXECUTION IN NEBRASKA SINCE 1997 LOOMS
The State of Nebraska is set to carry out its 1st execution in 21 years on 14
August 2018. The prisoner, who has been on death row for 38 years, has given up
his appeals and is not seeking clemency. Amnesty International is urging the
state not to resume executions.
Write a letter, send an email, call, fax or tweet:
* Expressing your opposition to the death penalty in all cases, and appealing
for Nebraska not to resume executions after more than 2 decades without them;
* Noting that since Nebraska last carried out an execution, 7 states in the USA
have abolished the death penalty while others have imposed moratoriums on
executions, recognizing its flaws, and more than 40 countries have abolished
the death penalty for all or ordinary crimes, with 142 countries now
abolitionist in law or practice;
* Pointing to the repeated resolutions at the UN General Assembly calling for a
moratorium on executions with a view to abolition of the death penalty.
Friendly reminder: If you send an email, please create your own instead of
forwarding this one!
Contact these 2 officials by 14 August, 2018:
Governor of Nebraska
Pete Ricketts
Office of the Governor
PO Box 94848
Lincoln, NE 68509-4848, USA
Fax: +1 402-471-6031
Contact Form: https://governor.nebraska.gov/contact-form
Salutation: Dear Governor
Attorney General of Nebraska
Doug Peterson
Nebraska Attorney General's Office
2115 State Capitol, PO Box 98920
Lincoln, NE 68509, USA
Email: ago.info.h...@nebraska.gov
Fax: +1 402 471-3297
Salutation: Dear Attorney General
(source: Amnesty International USA)
UTAH:
Are Utah's 'extremely expensive' death penalty cases worth the cost?
The decision of Weber County prosecutors to pursue the death penalty against an
Ogden couple is raising concerns about the cost associated with capital cases
in Utah.
The announcement caught the attention of Salt Lake City-based attorney Karra
Porter, who is currently representing a client in a lawsuit against Weber
County over death penalty funding.
While Porter has no connection to the cases of Brenda Emile and Miller
Costello, she says the public should be critical of the decision to pursue 2
new death penalty cases.
"Clearly this is an issue of public concern," Porter said in an interview with
2News. "If the prosecutor is successful, this person will be killed."
Porter's client, Sam Newton, says he was fired from a death penalty appeal in
2017 after he went public in a Salt Lake Tribune article with concerns that the
county wasn't providing enough funding for him to provide an adequate defense.
"Our allegations are that Sam was threatened and then terminated for raising
issues about the funding of death penalty cases," Porter said.
Newton was representing death-row inmate Douglas Lovell in his appeal to a
conviction for the rape and murder of Joyce Yost in 1985.
Newton alleges the county was critical of his requests for funding through his
time as Lovell's attorney.
Weber County is 1 of only a few Utah counties to handle their own funding for
capital case appeals.
"Most Utah counties pay into the Aggravated Murder Defense Fund, which acts as
an insurance risk pool to pay for Capital defense attorneys on direct appeal,"
Utah State Courts spokesperson Geoffrey Fattah told 2News.
Salt Lake, Weber, Summit, Wasatch, and Utah counties do not contribute to the
state fund, according to Utah State Courts.
"The very entity that is prosecuting your client, is the one who is deciding on
how much money they are going to give to the defense council," Porter said.
Weber County Attorney Chris Allred disputes Newton's allegations.
"Newton repeatedly continued to misrepresent the circumstances to courts and to
the press alleging that 'the county refuses to fund anything beyond its offer
of $15,000', which Mr. Lovell contends is not adequate for the remainder of the
work to be done." The statement is just not true, and Newton apparently is
still pushing this version of events," Allred wrote in a statement to 2News.
The county says it gave Newton $75,000 to represent Lovell, with the
understanding that additional funding would be provided with "good cause."
Porter says the issue eventually led to county officials forcing Newton out of
his contract to represent Lovell.
"I would love to choose who my opposing counsel is going to be, but how is that
not a conflict of interest," she said.
The conflict with Weber County, Porter adds, speaks to the larger issue of
capital cases being worth the cost to prosecute them.
"I think our legislature has to think about doing away with the death penalty,"
Porter said.
The Utah Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers previously told 2News it wants
Utah to abolish the death penalty.
"The death penalty is going to continue to be far, far, far more expensive than
simply seeking life without parole in prison for these kinds of defendants,"
UACDL executive director Stewart Gollan said at the time.
Utah legislative analysts estimated that estimated in 2012 that a death penalty
case usually costs $1.6-million more per inmate than a life sentence.
"The death penalty is extremely expensive," Porter said. "I have seen counties
spend more money on a zoning dispute with a business owner than they want to in
defending a death penalty case."
(source: KUTV news)
USA:
Tsarnaev's legal team unveils plans to appeal death penalty sentence in recent
motion
A motion recently filed by Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's legal
team is asking for more time to prepare to appeal his death penalty sentence.
The motion filed in the First Circuit United States Court of Appeals in Boston
is asking to extend the Aug. 20 deadline for filing an opening brief by 90 days
to Nov. 18.
Tsarnaev's legal team wrote in the motion that they are looking over 1,738
docket entries, 1,675 exhibits and over 10,000 pages of transcripts as they
focus on the appeal.
"Because of the extraordinary challenges this case poses, we still have
time-consuming work to do," the motion read.
The legal team says they have identified about 30 reasons to drop the death
penalty, including "issues concerning venue, multiple errors in the selection
of the death-qualified jury, (and) the admission of evidence obtained through
the use of Mr. Tsarnaev's involuntary confession."
The counsel is continuing to work on other claims that are going through the
drafting and editing process, according to the motion.
"Undersigned counsel will continue to work diligently and to make it the
highest priority to complete Mr. Tsarnaev's brief promptly," the motion's
conclusion read.
Tsarnaev was sentenced to death after he was convicted on 30 counts in
connection with the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing and the shooting death of MIT
police officer Sean Collier.
(source: WHDH news)
_______________________________________________
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
