July 31 USA: A Killer's Insanity, Cured----His recovery could mean freedom, and renewed controversy. At his murder trial in September, Michael Kane was described as dangerous, a schizophrenic who would require medication and supervision for years to come. That testimony came from a psychologist hired by the defense. The prosecution did not dispute it. The psychiatric expert hired by the state agreed that Kane was mentally ill and had probably been psychotic - disconnected from reality - when he jumped a friend without provocation and stabbed him. The jury found Kane not guilty by reason of insanity; he was sent to a psychiatric hospital. There he made a remarkable recovery. 10 months after his acquittal, Kane is off his medication, and his doctors say he is no longer mentally ill. Under Nevada law, he may be released as early as this week. Kane's rapid turnaround has touched off debate here about how the courts should handle mentally ill criminals - and whether a fleeting diagnosis of insanity should be enough to keep a killer out of prison. Robbin Trowbridge-Benko cannot understand why there's any debate on the issue at all. Her son John Trowbridge, a 23-year-old waiter, had been reading a magazine at a friend's party on Oct. 22, 2001, when Kane jumped him without warning. Kane later told doctors that he had taken LSD that night and was suffering from paranoia so intense he was afraid even to glance up. Objects were morphing into people, people into vampires; he heard shouted warnings: "Watch out!" "He's going to kill you!" He later realized the voices were just his friends commenting on a video game. At the time, though, he feared he was under assault, so he grabbed an ornate dagger he had been showing off earlier in the evening. Seconds later, Kane's friends saw him holding the bloody knife - and laughing. "If the doctors were right and he's schizophrenic, then he's dangerous and he needs to be in a mental institution," Trowbridge-Benko said. "If he's not schizophrenic, then he's evil. And letting him out is like giving him a big pat on the back: Congratulations, you got away with it." With a picture of her son pinned to her shirt, Trowbridge-Benko flew here recently from her home in Indiana to lobby for tighter restrictions on the insanity defense, and tougher controls on defendants who win acquittal. The governor has promised to take up the issue. Kane's lawyer, Public Defender Scott Coffee, said the system worked exactly as it should. Morally and legally, his client is no murderer, Coffee said - just a sick young man who grabbed a dagger to fight off attackers he alone could see. "There was no crime involved," Coffee said. So there is no need for punishment. For thousands of years, society has recognized that some people are so deranged or delusional, they cannot be held responsible for even the most heinous acts. By 1723, English law articulated a formal standard: A defendant was not culpable for his crimes if he did not know what he was doing "any more than an infant . a brute or a wild beast." At least 20 states, including California, have similar statutes today: Defendants are considered legally insane if they cannot understand that their actions are wrong. Other states allow defendants to claim insanity if they are so impaired by mental illness that they cannot control their conduct. Those standards drew little debate for decades. Then John Hinckley Jr. went on trial for trying to assassinate President Reagan. Hinckley's 1982 acquittal by reason of insanity caused national outrage. At least 30 states toughened their insanity laws. Nevada, Idaho, Utah and Kansas abolished the defense altogether. Three years ago, Howard Brooks, a public defender in Las Vegas, went before the Nevada Supreme Court on behalf of a mentally ill client. He reminded the justices that society wouldn't hold a 7-year-old responsible for murder. Or a 70-year-old confused by Alzheimer's. Shouldn't the law also recognize that a man who hears voices commanding him to kill might not be able to understand what he's doing, and why it's wrong? "Some people just aren't as culpable for their crimes," Brooks said. The court agreed - and ordered Nevada legislators to reinstate the insanity defense. Kane's case was its 1st test. It took 3 years to bring Kane to trial. In Clark County Jail, he assaulted guards and gnawed chunks of flesh from his shoulder. He was sent to a psychiatric hospital for treatment. He recovered enough to return to jail a few months later. But toward the end of 2003, he began refusing his medication, claiming it contained glass. Within 6 months, Kane was again delusional and violent. He returned to the hospital, where he resumed his medication. In the fall of 2004, he was finally well enough for court. Det. Phil Ramos, who took Kane's confession, is convinced the breakdowns were an act. "There's nothing wrong with this kid," Ramos said. "His next stop should be Hollywood." But the prosecutor who charged Kane with first-degree murder said he thought Kane's mental problems were genuine, and severe. "If it's malingering, it's the best I've ever seen," said Ed Kane (no relation to Michael Kane). Despite the consensus on his client's mental illness, Coffee knew that pleading insanity was a gamble. Nationally, less than 1% of felony suspects use an insanity defense. 1 in 4 wins acquittal. In the last year, the defense has been successful for a Colorado woman who said she drowned her children after receiving a sign from a spider; a Utah woman who killed her granddaughter to turn her into an angel; and a Texas woman who said God ordered her to stone her sons to death. But in other cases, jurors have resisted such a verdict. Texas mother Andrea Yates was sentenced to life in prison for drowning her children, though the jury heard evidence that she was schizophrenic and had suffered mental breakdowns. "Jurors are scared of the insanity defense," Coffee said. "They think it's a ploy." He said he felt he had no choice with Michael Kane: "The defense doesn't mean anything if you can't use it in cases like this. In Texas this spring, Kenneth Pierott was convicted of murder for smothering his girlfriend's 6-year-old son. Pierott, 29, has schizophrenia. A decade ago, in the grip of his illness, he beat his sister to death - and was acquitted by reason of insanity. He spent four months in a mental institution in 1998, then was released to outpatient treatment. His case helped inspire legislators to rewrite Texas' insanity law. The new statute gives judges more authority to monitor those acquitted by reason of insanity - even after they're considered well enough to be out on their own. Judges can order the acquitted to take medication, to attend therapy sessions and to report to correctional officers. Nevada law has no such provisions. If a judge agrees with Michael Kane's doctors that he's no longer a danger to himself or to others, "he walks out on the street" - with no follow-up care, no supervision and no criminal record - prosecutor Ed Kane said. Trowbridge-Benko finds that unacceptable. Back home in Indiana, she still buys yellow marshmallow Peeps each Easter for John, the oldest of her three sons. She still makes him deviled eggs on Thanksgiving. For his birthday, she bakes his favorite: cherry cake with vanilla icing. Then she takes the goodies to the cemetery. "People say this case is an anomaly," she said. "Well, OK, then let Michael Kane baby-sit your kids. I'm doing everything I can to try to bring some sense into this madness." As for Kane, his lawyer said he was eager to be released. He earned his high-school equivalency degree in the hospital. He can hold rational conversations. He no longer sees vampires. "I have to put my faith in the doctors," Coffee said. "People do get better. Michael was a normal kid before this. He's going to try to get back to his life." (source: Los Angeles Times) HAWAII----possible federal death penalty case Mom calls for death penalty in girls abuse----Talia Williams' father and stepmother both deserve that fate, her natural mother says Tarshia Williams has a wish for the man who fathered her only child and stands accused of beating the 5-year-old girl almost daily, causing her death on July 16. "I would tell him, I wish he was dead," said a grieving Williams, of Orangeburg, S.C., the natural mother of Talia Emoni Williams. "I wish he gets the death penalty and capital punishment, because my daughter didn't deserve it." Army Spc. Naeem Williams, 25, also of Orangeburg but stationed here at Schofield Barracks, was charged Wednesday with murder, conspiracy, making a false official statement, aggravated assault, assault upon a child and obstruction of justice. He has admitted to beating the child with a belt and with a closed fist almost daily since March, calling it "discipline." Army officials say Williams faces life imprisonment if convicted. He is not facing the death penalty because he was charged under a specific section of Article 118 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice that does not call for capital punishment. That section applies to a person who "intends to kill or inflict bodily harm" -- a charge equivalent to 2nd-degree murder in civilian courts. The girl's stepmother, Delilah S. Williams, 21, was charged earlier with 1st-degree murder in U.S. District Court for causing the girl's death "as part of a pattern of practice of assault and torture." Federal prosecutors will not say if they intend to try her case as a death penalty case. Tarshia Williams says Delilah Williams should face the same fate as her husband. "Both should get the death penalty." Federal prosecutors have described the daily abuse inflicted on the girl since March as "the stuff of nightmares." They allege that the parents decided not to send Talia to relatives on the mainland until her bruises disappeared and hair missing on her head grew back. Naeem Williams' military attorney, Maj. John Hyatt, has declined comment on the case. Delilah Williams' federal defender has said she was also abused by her husband and had repeatedly sought assistance from the Army, friends and family to put a stop to the beatings and to leave her husband. Williams told investigators her husband struck the girl twice on July 16 after she had soiled herself. The second time, the girl fell and hit her head, losing consciousness. She said they delayed calling for medical help because she was afraid police would take away the couple's 4-month-old daughter. Tarshia Williams said she is devastated, sad and angry over the death of her daughter, whom she last saw in December. "She was doing great, she was happy, she was joyful -- she was just being a little girl." Although the girl's father was awarded custody that month, the plan approved by the courts said her daughter was to stay with her mother in South Carolina every summer beginning July 1. But when July came around, the girl's father still hadn't sent the girl home. "They had her bruised up, so they didn't send her," Williams said, citing reports of the girl's abuse. "I just can't believe they did all of that." If they didn't want her daughter, they could have sent her back, she said. "I would have been glad to take her back." The courts had placed the girl in her father's custody in part because she exhibited developmental delays and a failure to thrive while with her mother. Glenn Walters, Williams' attorney, said the girl didn't have a healthy appetite and her body didn't absorb nutrients effectively. But her condition continued even while with her father, Walters said. Tarshia Williams said a court order was in also place allowing her to phone her daughter twice a week on Mondays and Thursdays. But those calls eventually stopped. She filed papers in court to regain her court-ordered rights, but the matter is still pending. In a phone conversation before the calls stopped altogether, her daughter told her that she was going to get a beating because she had wet her clothes, Williams said. Delilah Williams allegedly snatched the phone away, preventing her from saying more. Walters said the state and the U.S. Army must be held accountable for the girl's death and hopes that preventive measures are put in place so that this never happens to another child. He is expected to file a lawsuit shortly. Walters said complaints were filed by neighbors, the day care Talia attended and a relative of Delilah Williams, and that the record shows the failure of the state and military to properly investigate instances of abuse against the girl. Army and state officials have defended their actions, saying their response was based on the information available. Tarshia Williams, who has filed papers to serve as representative of her daughter's estate, said all she wants at this time is to have her daughter returned to Orangeburg so she can have a proper burial. The defense for Naeem Williams apparently has filed a motion to have their own expert examine the girl, delaying her return home, Walters said. (source: Honolulu Star-Bulletin) LOUISIANA: Victims mother puts Death Row on trial----Lorilei Guillorys fight to prevent the man who murdered her son being executed has been turned into a powerful theatrical drama, writes Clive Stafford Smith Hollywood movies seem obsessed with death row these days. They inevitably begin with a horrific murder, a suspect is identified, and a death sentence imposed. Being Hollywood, the condemned is generally innocent and, thanks to an inspirational young lawyer, justice almost always prevails after an obligatory courtroom climax. Reality is more sober, as it is in Lorilei, a play being staged by the campaigning organisation Reprieve at this year's fringe. Unlike Hollywood, there is no issue of actual innocence here - simply the most compelling of human stories. The premise for the piece is a crime committed by a Death Row client of mine, Ricky Langley. He is a paedophile who had already served a prison sentence for molesting children when he was accused of murdering the 6-year-old Jeremy Guillory in February 1992. 2 years later, I represented Langley at his 1st trial and he was sentenced to death. I have accompanied clients to the execution chamber 6 times to watch them die. However ugly that moment may be, there is often a glimmer of humanity, often from surprising quarters. The prison guards have often got to know the condemned, and whisper to me in the hallways that they would rather not take part in the execution. For me, far more depressing is the moment when 12 jurors file back into the courtroom and announce a death sentence. This represents the ultimate failure: 12 people with a free choice, who choose death. In the case of Langley, a profoundly mentally ill man, the effect of the sentence on me was almost unbearable. The jurors said afterwards that they believed he was ill - but that meant he was dangerous, and their priority was to ensure that he would never harm another child. But Langley was given a second chance when an appeals court ordered a retrial in 2002. Once again a jury would decide whether Langley should live or die. Lorilei is the story of the person who convinced them to spare his life. Lorilei Guillory is the mother of the victim. By the time of the 2nd trial, she had been living with the horror of her sons murder for almost a decade. The prosecutors promise that the death sentence would provide "closure" for her had proven hollow, and she had struggled with depression and addiction. In the run-up to the second trial, Guillory pored over the evidence, much of which had been hidden from her 10 years before. Ultimately, she asked if she could meet Langley, believing it would help her understand her loss. Langley agreed without hesitation, and she met him alone in the jail. He first apologised and then tried to explain his own story. Those who have met Langley are intrigued by his fascination with genealogy: he has traced his family back through 200 years, and has got as far as 18th-century church records in England. Langley, like Guillory, wants to understand what led him to kill her child. Before he was born, Langleys own 5-year-old brother, Oscar Lee, was killed in a car accident in which his mother Bessie was badly injured. Unknown to the doctors, Bessie became pregnant with Langley while in a full-length bodycast. Langley the foetus floated in waters laced with narcotic medications, exposed to his own private Hiroshima through his mothers regular x-ray examinations. Bessie wanted to abort the pregnancy but her husband refused. He wanted a son to replace the tousle-haired Oscar Lee. Langleys schizophrenia was almost inevitable, and was documented back to the age of 11 when he first announced on his school noticeboard that he was his dead brother, Oscar Lee. Oscar Lee evolved from an imaginary childhood friend into his very real tormentor. Just as Langley came to hate Oscar Lee, so he came to hate himself. His own mother had told him she wished he had never been born. Langley cried when he later told me that when Guillory agreed to meet him it was the kindest act anyone had ever shown him, his victims mother showing more compassion than his own. Guillory came to believe that our defence was the truth: Langley had indeed been insane at the time he killed her son. "Ricky," she said at the end of their three-hour meeting, "I'm going to fight for you." As the 2nd trial progressed it became clear that we had a very educated and sympathetic jury and it was unlikely that they would vote for capital murder. Guillory now faced a far more difficult dilemma: would she follow the logic of her newfound position to its end and testify as to his guilt? She believed that Langley had not understood what he was doing when he killed her 6-year-old child. This would mean that he could be found "not guilty by reason of insanity" and not go to prison at all, but to a secure hospital. Most important to Guillory was that no other child should face harm, and she was comforted by the fact that Langley agreed that he should never be released from a secure psychiatric hospital. Langley signed an agreement requesting that he be hospitalised forever, as he wanted to be studied so that future generations "can avoid another me." Guillory prayed, she agonised, and in the end she announced that she wanted to testify at the guilt phase of the trial. At her request, I was to ask only one question: "Ms Guillory, do you have an opinion as to whether Ricky Langley was mentally ill at the time he killed your child Jeremy?" Her answer was the most powerful moment I have experienced in a courtroom in more than 20 years of practice: "Yes, as a matter of fact I do," she replied. "I feel like Ricky Langley has cried out for help many, many, many times. And for whatever reasons, his family, society and the system have failed him. I feel like he is sick. And even as I sit on this witness stand, I can hear my childs death cry. But I too can hear Ricky Langley cry for help." Delivering the closing argument in a capital case ranks among the most difficult burdens in life. In Langleys case, the task was simple. I merely had to remind the jurors of what Guillory had said. They acquitted him of 1st-degree murder, and found him guilty of second-degree murder, removing the death penalty from the table. Nevertheless, this meant that the jury had rejected that Langley was not guilty by reason of insanity - and he would be sent to prison for the rest of his life. In America, the criminal justice system sometimes seems designed to inspire victims towards revenge. We are told that to try to understand a criminal is to mollycoddle him: right is right, and the criminal is just plain wrong. But as Guillory learned, vengeance does not salve wounds, but rather makes them fester. She who hates becomes twice the victim. Ultimately, the choice is a stark one: do we as a society wish to foster compassion, or would we rather encourage revenge? The answer may seem obvious, but it is still remarkable that Guillory should have found such depths to her compassion. Thankfully, she is not alone. Murder Victims Families for Reconciliation (MVFR) is one American charity that does inspirational work, in helping those who have lost loved ones to forego vengeance and work to end capital punishment. Reprieve works in the trenches, fighting for the lives of people facing the death penalty, so what does an hour of theatre count for in this cause? The answer is that the performance of Guillory tells the story on a much deeper level than simply reading about a case in the headlines, or ploughing through another rant of mine in the opinion pages. What makes this play particularly compelling is that it was written using Guillorys own words - the author, Tom Wright, wrote the script using interviews recorded by Guillory at the time that she was making her momentous decision. Guillory's story was originally heard by an audience of 12 jurors in a courthouse in Calcasieu Parish in southwest Louisiana. The story changed the lives of all who were present. Now a play has arrived in Edinburgh and I invite fringe audiences to take the opportunity to decide for themselves how they would have voted had they been faced with the choice of life or death for Ricky Langley, in the face of this mothers testimony. (source: The Sunday Times (Clive Stafford Smith is the legal director of Reprieve (www.reprieve.org.uk), a UK charity fighting for the lives of people facing the death penalty. Lorilei is at the Pleasance Dome, Aug 7-29) MASSACHUSETTS: Sacco, Vanzetti service slated Despite the War on Terror, which condones the killing of terrorists, the number of Americans opposed to the death penalty has continued to rise, a local death penalty opponent said yesterday. "The War on Terror is making it obvious that death threats are not crime deterrents to certain elements," said John J. Fitzgerald, secretary for the Hampden County Chapter of Massachusetts Citizens Against the Death Penalty. A May 2004 Gallup Poll found that a growing number of Americans support a sentence of life without parole rather than the death penalty for those convicted of murder. Gallup found that 46 percent of respondents favor life imprisonment over the death penalty, up from 44 % in May 2003. Fitzgerald's organization will hold a memorial service to mark the 78th anniversary of what it considers to be the "wrongful executions" of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti by the state in 1927. The service will be held 5:30-7:30 p.m. Aug. 23 at St. Michael's Cathedral on State Street. The event will also include an awards ceremony recognizing Robert Nave, executive director of the Connecticut Network to Abolish the Death Penalty, and Robert Meeropol, executive director of the Rosenberg Fund for Children. During the event, Nave will discuss his work in the recent protest of the execution of serial killer Michael Ross. The state of Connecticut administered a lethal injection to Ross May 13. Meeropol is the younger son of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, who were tried, convicted and executed in 1953 for spying for the Soviet Union. Sacco and Vanzetti were charged with the murders of a paymaster and a guard and the theft of more than $15,000 from a shoe factory in South Braintree April 15, 1920. They were executed in 1927. Defenders of Sacco and Vanzetti charge that the trial was unfair and the 2 men had been condemned because they were guilty only of being immigrants and outspoken anarchists. Former Gov. Michael S. Dukakis took the unprecedented step of proclaiming in 1977 that the men did not receive a fair trial. (source: The Republican)
