Jan. 13
MONTANA:
Ronald Smith Death Row: Board That Rejected Canadian Inmate's Clemency Bid
Under Fire In Montana
The Montana parole board that recommended against clemency for death-row
Canadian Ronald Smith may be examined for being too tough on criminals.
A motion being introduced by the state's Republican Sen. Terry Murphy calls for
a review of the Montana Board of Pardons and Parole. It could result in
limitations on the board's powers or its eventual elimination.
Murphy said a 2011 report by the board indicates that 72 % of inmates in
Montana were eligible for parole and 60 per cent of those were denied parole on
their 1st try.
"They have too much power," Murphy said in an interview with The Canadian
Press.
"A lot of non-violent offenders who qualify for parole are simply not receiving
their hearings and are not being paroled. I'm not sure why except it seems like
there's a real desire to keep as many people in the system as possible," he
said.
"I think the parole board is just so extremely overcautious they don't want to
turn loose anybody who might conceivably make a serious crime later.
"It's costing the taxpayers millions of dollars."
Murphy said it's also disturbing the board has the power to add requirements on
prisoners who are paroled beyond the restrictions imposed by a judge during
sentencing.
The board gave short shrift to Smith's request for clemency, not even giving
reasons for why it recommended against it.
Smith, 55, has been on death row for 30 years for the 1982 murders of Thomas
Running Rabbit and Harvey Mad Man Jr. His request for clemency has been
inherited by new Montana Gov. Steve Bullock, who was sworn in last week.
Smith's lawyer, Don Vernay, said the need for a review was highlighted prior to
the clemency hearing last year. A report prepared by board staff which
recommended the three-member board reject clemency was leaked to The Canadian
Press before the hearing was even held.
"Seems like the current board has come under criticism for their tough-on-crime
standards of operation," said Vernay.
"Look at what they did to us. The staff didn't do their jobs and told the board
what to do. There's a bunch of criteria that has to be met and when they issued
their ruling they didn't give any reasons."
Work is still going on behind the scenes by Smith's supporters.
Lawyers representing the prisoner hope to meet with Bullock as soon as possible
to renew Smith's appeal for clemency.
Ron Waterman, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union that has filed a
civil action on behalf of Smith, said Bullock is familiar with the case because
he is the state's former attorney general. But Waterman expects he'll take his
time.
"What he might want to do is meet with the various constituencies that have
interests," he said. "He might want to meet with the Smith family. I would
think he would probably want to talk to the Canadian consulate as they've been
very involved.
"I would think that before he takes any action ... he would probably want to
pick up those pieces and get a sense from them on what to do and how to do it."
Waterman suggested it comes down to "whether the governor believes in
redemption and 2nd chances."
Vernay believes it's possible to make a compelling argument to convince Bullock
to do the "right thing." It's believed that the new governor, also a Democrat,
isn't an ardent supporter of the death penalty.
There have been four executions in Montana since 1945.
The Montana legislature will also have to deal - again - with legislation to
abolish the death penalty altogether.
Sen. Dave Wanzenried, a Democrat, has introduced 2 bills in the past which were
passed by the Senate but killed by a judiciary committee. This time a bill is
to be introduced in the house with the hope of a different outcome.
"I've been the sponsor the last 2 times and it hasn't passed," he said.
"Hopefully we'll see a better outcome and the work that has been done from two
years ago will pay off."
(source: Huffington Post)
USA:
Is Last Week's Supreme Court Decision a Blow for Anti-Death Penalty Advocates?
In a rare unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court narrowed another avenue of
appeals for death row inmates, ruling that federal judges cannot indefinitely
delay appeals of state criminal convictions in the hope that an incompetent
defendant might eventually become competent enough to help his or her lawyer
out with the appeals process.
The ruling came from a pair of cases. Both Ernest Valencia Gonzales and Sean
Carter were convicted of murder and received capital sentences. Both brought
legal challenges in federal court after their state court trials. By the time
the federal courts actually considered the 2 men's challenges to their state
court convictions, there was significant evidence that they were both mentally
incompetent. In both cases the appeals courts said the challenges must wait
until the men could return to mental competence but relied on different federal
statutes to support that conclusion.
Writing for the bench, Justice Clarence Thomas dismissed outright the idea that
a defendant must be competent in order to assist his or her attorney with the
appeals process. Noting that postconviction challenges typically are based on
the court record and nothing else, an inmate would have very little to add to
the appellate process, said Thomas. "Counsel can generally provide effective
representation to a habeas petitioner regardless of the petitioner's
competence," Justice Thomas wrote, adding that "attorneys are quite capable of
reviewing the state-court record, identifying legal errors and marshaling
relevant arguments, even without their clients' assistance."
Furthermore, a district judge who believes an incompetent defendant could
substantially aid in his defense should examine the likelihood that the
defendant will regain competence. In contrast, "where there is no reasonable
hope of competence, a stay merely frustrates the state's attempts to defend its
presumptively valid judgment," Thomas wrote.
Instead of relying on a cloudy area of case law to support their claim that
they were entitled to stays pending competency, the inmates argued that federal
trial judges should have discretion to enter stays, and the Supreme Court
agreed. "We do not presume that district courts need unsolicited advice from us
on how to manage their dockets," Justice Thomas wrote. "For purposes of
resolving these cases, it is unnecessary to determine the precise contours of
the district court's discretion to issue stays."
While this may sound like bad news for anti-death penalty advocates, the
decision is not as bad as it may seem. Right now a prisoner's competency to
assist counsel is an issue in approximately a dozen capital cases pending
nationwide Dale Baich, an attorney at the federal public defender's office that
represented 1 of the defendants told Reuters. And the Supreme Court's decision
leaves open room for federal courts to put some appeals on hold which means
that rather than a blanket ruling holding that competency is not required to
assist in an appeal, the Supreme Court crafted a narrower standard that tries
to reflect some of the practical realities of litigating criminal cases, even
capital ones.
We've yet to adequately deal with how to assess the guilt or culpability of a
mentally ill individual which means we ultimately have no guarantee those we
are trying and executing are mentally competent, and indeed the evidence
usually suggests closer to the opposite is true. Unfortunately, until states
and Congress eradicate capital punishment entirely, something that doesn't seem
likely in the immediate future, this kind of decision is going to have to count
as a win.
(source: Care2.com)
NEW YORK:
A Cold Case of Cold-Blooded Murder
On a hot July day in 1977, one of New York's ugliest summers, my 23-year-old
cousin, Ellen Hover, left her Third Avenue apartment. She had an appointment
with a young photographer who had asked to take pictures of her. His name, he'd
told her, was John Berger.
She never returned. Posters of Ellen's face went up all over Midtown Manhattan.
Private detectives were hired. I was racked with guilt: because of a family
argument, I hadn???t seen my cousin in years. Now I never would. Eleven months
later, her bones were found on the grounds of the Rockefeller estate in
Westchester County.
It was around this time that the police knew for sure that John Berger's real
name was Rodney Alcala. By then, a confluence of factors - lack of
communication between law enforcement agencies, the lowly budgets and low-tech
forensics of the '70s, and the killer's aggressive wiliness - had combined to
make him elusive. It was not until July of 1979 that he was arrested in
California on charges of murdering a 12-year-old girl named Robin Samsoe. He
was tried, convicted, sentenced to death and remanded to death row in San
Quentin State Prison in California the following year.
We didn't know then that he had killed another New York woman - Cornelia
Crilley, a beautiful flight attendant - 6 years before he killed Ellen. Before
that, he had been in prison in California for molesting and beating an
8-year-old girl, but he'd been released on good behavior after just 34 months.
Within 2 years of Ellen's death, he murdered 4 other young women in California,
in heinous and brutal ways including biting, strangulation and rape.
When DNA science caught up with him, he was eventually charged with those four
other killings. But there was little usable DNA evidence from Ellen's murder,
and besides, the last thing California wanted was for its cases to be muddied
by investigators from another state having access to its prisoner. So while the
California cases went forward, Ellen and Cornelia Crilley would have to wait.
We understood that. What we didn't understand was how long.
Over the years Rodney Alcala's lawyers managed to twice overturn, on
technicalities, his conviction for the murder of Robin Samsoe. He aggressively
fought the use of DNA evidence against him, but ultimately lost. Finally, in
February 2010, a jury re-re-convicted him of the murder of Robin Samsoe, along
with the other 4 California women. He has not stopped fighting his execution
sentence and suing the state for things like failing to provide him with a
low-fat diet.
Since Ellen was killed, both of her parents have died; her brother has died;
her aunt, my mother, has died. In all those years, Rodney Alcala was never
charged with her murder. Many of Ellen's friends and family members felt a
measure of justice when he was convicted in California in 2010 - at least we
felt it was the best we could ask for. We acted as if those acknowledged
victims included Ellen: we wrote 1 another e-mails with exclamation points and
thanked the Orange County prosecutor, Matt Murphy. But there was no trial for
Ellen, and I don't think anyone ever expected there would be. I certainly
didn't.
Shortly after that, though, a detective let me see some of the New York Police
Department's files on Rodney Alcala. In a dank office in Brooklyn, I listened
to a tape of investigators questioning the killer's long-ago girlfriend; I saw
detectives' notes on ancient tollbooth receipts. I realized there were people
in the N.Y.P.D. and the district attorney's office - people who'd amassed that
yellowed, flyspecked file - who had always wanted to open Ellen's case. Cyrus
Vance Jr., who had recently been sworn in as Manhattan district attorney,
ending the 35-year term of Robert Morgenthau, had made the opening of cold
cases a priority. Suddenly it seemed Ellen had not been forgotten.
But it is not easy to open a case from the '70s. Evidence lockers had been
cleaned out; documents were moldering; investigators and prosecutors spent
weeks and months tracking down witnesses, only to find out they were dead,
whereupon they'd politely ask spouses and grown-up children if they could dig
up old files. "Looking for something from 1971," Melissa Mourges, the chief of
the Cold Case Unit, told me about Cornelia Crilley's case, "we might as well
have been looking at something from 1871."
For 2 years investigators worked to turn Ellen's cold case warm. Despite the
fact that her killer was already sentenced to death and would never be
released, despite the time and the resources and the terrible memories
involved, they didn't give up. Eventually, their painstakingly obtained
evidence built a timeline of Rodney Alcala's whereabouts, his route before and
after murdering Ellen. It seemed to me like a devotional act.
Every victim deserves her own day in court, no matter what else the culprit has
been arrested for, no matter how long ago the crime: this is the pure integrity
of opening a cold case. There are hundreds of thousands of cold cases in the
United States. Approximately 14 % of all unsolved homicide cases and 18 % of
unsolved sexual assault cases contain forensic evidence that has not been sent
to a crime lab for analysis.
1 way to close more cold cases would be to enable more states to enter into
national databases the DNA information of everyone they arrest, at least for
violent crimes. Next month the Supreme Court will hear a case, Maryland v.
King, that could open the door to this, by deeming such entries constitutional.
Currently, in part because of concerns about civil liberties, about half the
states, including New York, enter into national databases only the DNA of
people convicted of certain crimes - a much smaller pool of potential matches.
On the bright side, New York at least does appear to be investigating and
solving more cold cases than ever before.
Last year, when I heard that Rodney Alcala was actually going to be extradited
to New York to face a grand jury on Ellen's case, I remembered something a
clergyman had said at the 1st service after 9/11: it was too overwhelming, and
unfair to the victims, to think of 3,000 people dead. The best way to honor
them was to think that "1 person died," 3,000 times. When justice is broken
down to individual victims, humanity is restored.
In a Manhattan courtroom last month, Rodney Alcala, now 69, pleaded guilty to
Ellen's and Cornelia Crilley's murders. After 35 and 41 years - much longer
than the young women lived - he pleaded out, just like that. It was the 1st
time in his long criminal history that he had ever confessed to a killing. The
collapse of his resistance seemed taunting to all of us: Sure I killed them.
What took you guys so long?
On Monday I attended his sentencing. At one point, the judge broke down, saying
she had never had before her a case with such brutality and hoped she would
never again. The sentence for the two murders was, of course, symbolic - a
concurrent 25 years to life. The important punishment will take place in San
Quentin when Rodney Alcala is finally executed - if he ever is.
During the hearing he never once turned to face us, the family members. He
simply clutched his orange Department of Corrections jacket, protection against
the cold on the short trip from court to van and from van to Rikers. All I
could think was: a coward to the end.
Meanwhile, police in Washington State and New Hampshire have been calling the
N.Y.P.D. - there seem to be 2 other murders. That would make 9 dead women, as
far as we know, and their cases are probably just as cold as Ellen's was. I
want to tell these women's friends and families: push for the cases to be
reopened. Get your loved ones' names in the paper to prod - even shame - the
authorities. No matter how many times a serial murderer has murdered, every
victim deserves her singular justice, as late as it may be in coming, as much a
formality as may be the punishment, and as hard as investigators must work to
bring it to pass.
(source: Opinion, Sheila Weller, New York Times)
MARYLAND:
Our say: Maryland needs to end its death penalty impasse
We have no problem with imposing the death penalty on those unquestionably
guilty of heinous crimes. We do have a problem with what currently passes for
capital punishment in Maryland, where the death penalty is on the books - with
5 people on death row - but is not implemented.
With no executions since December 2005, and none likely under Gov. Martin
O'Malley or any probable successor, the state has neither clarity nor a
deterrent.
The General Assembly now seems inclined to resolve the stalemate by voting to
end capital punishment. That's not what we would prefer, but it's the only
resolution that seems plausible in Maryland. We'll at least have clarity -
especially if the legislature, as it should, accompanies any capital punishment
repeal with measures ensuring that the worst murderers can expect life in
prison without possibility of parole.
Still, we suspect that state Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. is
right in thinking that any repeal will be petitioned to referendum, and that
there will be no final resolution until the voters take up the matter in fall
2014.
We have no idea how that will come out. The most recent national Gallup poll on
the issue, done last month, produced numbers similar to those surveys have
garnered for 10 years: 63 % in favor of the death penalty for murderers, 32 5
against. A 2009 poll by Gonzales Marketing and Research found 53 % of
Marylanders in favor of the death penalty, 41 % opposed.
We suspect a majority of Marylanders still favor capital punishment, but that
the margin might be knocked under 50 % by stressing that murderers who would
otherwise get the ultimate penalty will instead spend the rest of their days
behind bars.
O'Malley tried to get capital punishment repealed during the 2009 session, but
couldn't get the requisite votes in the Senate. Instead, the legislature passed
a bill limiting the cases in which the death penalty can be sought.
This time around, Miller - who personally favors the death penalty - thinks
O'Malley has enough support in the Senate, and there are widely assumed to be
enough votes against capital punishment in the House.
Like Miller, we see a good argument for capital punishment for the killing of
prison guards - what other deterrent is likely to register on dangerous felons
already serving life sentences? And in cases where there's no possible doubt
about guilt, we don't see much moral distinction between the government ending
the lives of America's foes abroad and ending the lives of extremely dangerous
individuals at home.
But if there are not going to be any executions, the state should not be
spending extra money on prosecuting capital punishment cases - or on keeping
prisoners on death row for decades. It's time for Maryland's legislators - and
then, probably, Marylanders themselves - to make up their minds.
(source: Opinion, Capital Gazette)
**********************
Death Penalty Debate About To Start
A debate on repealing the death penalty is about to get underway in Annapolis.
NAACP leaders will join clergy and death penalty opponents on Tuesday at a
rally for a repeal.
Meanwhile, Baltimore County Republican Delegate Pat McDonough says he will
introduce his own legislation to mandate the death penalty for the killings of
correctional, and police officers, mass murderers, contact killers and serial
killers.
McDonough says he is introducing the legislation in response to the Newtown,
Connecticut school massacre.
McDonough also wants to shorten the time for death penalty appeals, and he says
lawmakers will have several chances to vote on his proposal.
"We're going to talk about gun violence. We're going to talk about crime. We're
going to talk about law. We're going to talk about the death penalty, and the
fact of the matter is we are going to bring it to the floor of the House in the
form of an amendment, and we are going to get a vote on everyone of these
bills," McDonough told WBAL News.
Governor Martin O'Malley who favors a repeal, isn't saying if he'll propose
one.
Senate President Mike Miller said this week that he believes the Senate will
vote on a death penalty repeal this year, but he believes a repeal is still 1
to 2 votes short of passage.
(source: WBAL News)
CONNECTICUT:
Kain's anti-death-penalty journey leads to Rome
Dr. George Kain of Ridgefield traveled a long road to become a leader in the
successful campaign to abolish the death penalty in Connecticut during 2012.
In November, he journeyed to Rome to join justice ministers and opponents of
capital punishment from around the world in celebration of the state's
legislative milestone.
Dr. Kain, associate professor of justice and law administration at Western
Connecticut State University, recalled how his views on capital punishment have
evolved during his career. He has been a state judicial branch administrator,
WestConn faculty member, and Ridgefield police commissioner.
A onetime supporter of the death penalty, he is now president of the
Connecticut Network to Abolish the Death Penalty. He was invited to join the
network's board in 2004 after he appeared at a local forum discussion at which
he quoted the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall's opinion that
"if people knew the truth about capital punishment, they would never be able to
support it."
He repeated that quote during his Nov. 27 talk representing the network at the
Seventh International Congress of Ministers of Justice in Rome.
"I have been involved in law enforcement for 29 years, and if I thought for a
single minute that the death penalty was necessary to keep law enforcement
officers safe, I wouldn't be standing before you today," he told the congress.
"The arguments supporting capital punishment are full of false promises, but
the evidence tells us another story."
In recent years, Dr. Kain and Associate Professor of Justice and Law
Administration Terrence Dwyer, a retired New York State Police investigator,
have collaborated on several research articles exploring capital punishment
issues.
They earned recognition for best paper presentations at two professional
conferences held in Las Vegas during October.
"Our work on capital punishment has become a passion for me," Dr. Kain said,
"and my hope is that it will draw attention to the wonderful research being
done by the faculty at Western."
The Connecticut network's board asked Dr. Kain to represent the organization at
the Rome conference and the coinciding annual observance of "Cities for Life
Week," culminating in the Nov. 29 lighting of the Roman Colosseum in
recognition of Connecticut's abolition of the death penalty during 2012. Dr
Kain was accompanied by fellow board member and WestConn student Fernando
Bermudez, whose 1992 conviction for a New York City murder was overturned in
2009 in a case championed by the Innocence Project.
Dr. Kain was recruited as an 11th-hour replacement for former network Executive
Director Ben Jones, who recently resigned to join a death penalty abolition
organization in Kansas, and the WestConn professor found himself thrust to
center stage with a surprise invitation to address the opening meeting of the
justice ministers' congress.
His hurriedly drafted speech and subsequent remarks as invited guest at a
closed-door session of ministers received a warm reception, including an
invitation from Zambia's recently appointed justice minister to visit the
southern African nation to advise the government on how to prepare an accurate
survey of public opinion on capital punishment.
"Cities for Life" organizers provided a full schedule for Dr. Kain and Mr.
Bermudez to share their experiences with the anti-death penalty movement in
informal talks at churches and schools in the area.
One of Dr. Kain's most moving experiences came during a lively exchange with
students at a high school in northern Rome. There he learned that the class was
currently reading Charles Dickens' Bleak House - one of several Dickens works
that he and Mr. Dwyer have referenced in their articles because they reflect
the 19th-Century British author's struggles with the subject of capital
punishment - and he framed his classroom talk around the theme of this
"Dickensian dilemma."
"When we took questions and answers afterwards," Dr. Kain recalled, "a girl in
the class said, 'You live in the United States, where more than 1/2 of your
states have capital punishment, and you claim to be the world leader in human
rights. How can you justify that?'
"Her question reminded me that you can learn a lot about the United States when
you listen to people in other countries and understand what they see in us."
Dr. Kain and Mr. Bermudez were guests of honor introduced at the Colosseum
illumination, a traditional symbol during "Cities for Life Week" representing
government actions over the past year to end capital punishment. Dr. Kain said
approximately 100 nations worldwide "have abolished capital punishment either
in law or in practice over the past 10 years." Within the United States, 5
states - New York, New Jersey, New Mexico, Illinois, and most recently
Connecticut - have abolished capital punishment since 2007, increasing the
number of states banning the death penalty to 17.
Dr. Kain said the Connecticut network will continue its work to ensure the
state's abolition of capital punishment is preserved, and "to provide
assistance to movements in states now in the same position we were in with the
campaign to abolish the death penalty."
He said he left Rome with a sense of humility for the opportunity to serve as
"a messenger of world peace, a world without hate. It made me very proud to be
part of this university and to be an American citizen on this mission."
"This was a time to pause, reflect and celebrate," he said, "but our work is
far from over."
(source: The Ridgefield Press)
SOUTH DAKOTA:
Reasons for death penalty legislation
I appreciate that many of the decisions I make as attorney general are by
nature controversial, and it is healthy that they be scrutinized and subject to
criticism, a process that thickens my skin.
I read with interest your recent editorial on the death penalty and the
reference to my legislative proposal causing a "scratching of heads" (Jan. 9).
Indeed, why would the governor and attorney general form an open government
task force, adopt and propose the positive changes on the one hand, and then
the AG move in this direction?
Accepting that you may not agree with it, but as a way of explanation, the
reason I am asking the Legislature to amend the existing statute to encompass
protecting the "entity supplying" the chemical substances used is twofold:
- To include and protect the South Dakota pharmacist that compounds the
substances - a process considered as part of the supplying as set forth in our
protocols. That South Dakota pharmacist is a real person with very legitimate
concerns stemming from the Donald Moeller case.
- Based upon past threats to employees, manufacturers are now either requesting
or in some instances requiring that this information be kept confidential in
order to protect their employees, or they won't supply the chemicals.
I do not have enough information to comment on the seriousness of the
developments with the manufacturers, other than to say that the practical
effect is that the state, as demonstrated within the Donald Moeller litigation,
has had issues obtaining the chemical substances to carry out state law.
I would further add that the state was able to receive and compound the
substances used in carrying out Donald Moeller's sentence in part because this
information was and is presently protected by federal court order for the
safety reasons.
While I am a proponent of the death penalty in very limited circumstances, I
have the additional responsibility as attorney general to carry out a lawful
sentence that is allowed by our state Legislature and set by a court and jury.
I believe this proposed legislation will assist in this responsibility.
Marty Jackley
South Dakota Attorney General
Pierre
(source: Letter to the Editor, Aberdeen News)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/deathpenalty@lists.washlaw.edu/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
