News and Updates (as of 12/22/96)

MARCH 28, 2024:

TEXAS:

Texas criminal appeals court takes man off death row over intellectual disability----Since Randall Mays was sentenced to death in 2008 for the murder of two sheriff’s deputies, his lawyers have argued his intellectual disability exempts him from execution.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals re-sentenced a 64-year-old man on death row to life in prison without parole on Wednesday after a state expert confirmed in trial court that he is intellectually disabled.

Randall Mays was sentenced to death in 2008 for the murder of 2 sheriff's deputies in Henderson County but in the years since his legal team has filed multiple appeals arguing he is exempt from execution due to his mental competency and intellectual disability.

Over two decades ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that executing people with intellectual disabilities violates the Eighth Amendment’s restriction of cruel and unusual punishments, which the criminal appellate court cited in its resentencing decision.

“The evidence of Randall's intellectual disability is overwhelming. He has a 63 IQ. His intellectual deficits have been seen, and observed by others, throughout his life from childhood to military service, and throughout his adulthood,” Benjamin Wolff, the director of the Texas Office of Capital and Forensic Writs, said in a statement on Wednesday. An expert hired by the state confirmed those findings, the office said.

The state public defender’s office that represents people on death row in post-conviction proceedings has represented Hays since 2015. Mays is also represented by the law firm Haynes and Boone and the Federal Public Defender’s Office in Dallas.

During a trial court last year, experts who conducted neuropsychological evaluations of Mays confirmed that he met the criteria for an intellectual disability diagnosis. An expert hired by the state said she could not rebut that finding. The Henderson County District Attorney also did not dispute Mays’ intellectual disability.

That point in the case was remarkable, Wolff told The Texas Tribune, “when the state of Texas, which sought the death sentence against Randall Mays, could no longer stand behind it.”

Mays shot and killed Henderson County Sheriff’s Deputies Tony Ogburn and Paul Habelt after the officers responded to a domestic disturbance call at his property in Payne Springs, a small town that lies on the border between Central and East Texas.

In the 16 years Mays has been on death row, his lawyers have repeatedly appealed his conviction on the grounds that he is intellectually disabled, a neurodevelopmental condition. His legal team has also argued that Mays is incompetent to stand trial on the grounds that he has a lack of rational understanding of the case against him.

In 2019, a judge halted an execution of Mays over questions of his competency. A schizophrenia diagnosis and a lack of understanding of why he was set to be executed resulted in a withdrawal of the death warrant less than two weeks before his execution. The Court of Criminal Appeals stopped Mays’ first scheduled execution in 2015 over similar claims.

Ultimately, the state’s highest criminal court cited the 2002 U.S. Supreme Court case Atkins v. Virginia, which forbids the execution of people with intellectual disabilities but grants states the power to define that designation.

Texas has executed 1 person this year. 8 people were put to death in 2023 — more than any other state.

The Texas House has repeatedly attempted to exclude some people with severe mental illnesses from the death penalty. Last year, the House passed a bill that precluded defendants diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder from the death penalty. But that effort, like previous ones, died in the more conservative chamber.

(source: Texas Tribune)

******************

ABA urges U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider Texas capital case involving deficient DNA evidence

The American Bar Association filed an amicus brief today with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the court for the 2nd time to take up a Texas death penalty case in which defendant Areli Escobar was convicted on DNA evidence and testimony from a police laboratory that was later deemed unreliable by the state.

In 2022, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied relief to Escobar, even though a state habeas court had determined that reliability problems at the police laboratory that processed the DNA evidence used to secure Escobar’s conviction and death sentence called into question whether Escobar received a fair trial. The state agreed with Escobar’s request for relief and confessed error in the case.

Escobar petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review his case, and the ABA filed an amicus brief in support, relying on the ABA’s Criminal Justice Standards on DNA Evidence. The Supreme Court vacated the ruling by the Court of Criminal Appeals and remanded the case for further consideration in light of the state’s confession of error. But on remand, the Texas court again denied Escobar relief, prompting Escobar to petition the Supreme Court for review again and the ABA to file a second amicus brief in support.

“This case involves a remarkable confession of error by the prosecution based on state court findings that petitioner’s conviction was based on false, misleading and unreliable DNA evidence,” the new ABA brief said. It added that on remand the appeals court failed to add “anything substantive to its prior analysis, other than a clarification that it had consciously disregarded the state’s confession of error and believed, in conflict with essentially every other stakeholder in the case, that the evidence does not warrant relief.”

The case has provided the ABA its first opportunity to bring its Criminal Justice Standards on DNA Evidence to the Supreme Court’s attention. The standards were approved as policy by the ABA House of Delegates in 2007 and recommended “minimum requirements for the collection, handling, analysis and use of DNA evidence in criminal cases.”

The new ABA brief in Escobar v. Texas is here, at: https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/news/2024/escobar-v-texas-amicus.pdf

The law firm of Sparacino PLLC in Washington, D.C., filed both briefs pro bono on behalf of the ABA.

(source: americanbar.org)

GEORGIA:

Before his execution, Willie Pye thanked Georgia prison staff in his last recorded words

A week after his execution, the Georgia Department of Corrections has released the final recorded statement of Willie Pye. Pye was put to death on March 20 for the murder and rape of Alicia Yarbrough in the 1990s.

Georgia is rare among states in making recordings of death row inmates near the time of their executions. As a public record, the tapes are available to anyone.

GPB requested this recording, made the same day as the execution, while Pye was still alive and the Supreme Court had not yet decided whether to grant Pye a stay.

Pye's attorneys, none of whom were present for this recording, had argued he suffered from a mental disability which made it illegal under state law for him to be executed. The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles was not swayed by that argument and denied Pye clemency.

Pye spends most of the recording reeling off names to Georgia Department of Corrections employees to whom he said he became grateful during his time incarcerated at Georgia’s death row at Georgia Diagnostic Prison in Jackson.

When the pronunciation of a name stumps him in the recording, he appeals to others in the cell for help. In at least one instance, Pye appears to be prompted by an official to repeat the name of a jailer. It’s unclear if that was part of an effort to help Pye thank everyone he wanted to thank or something else.

“The whole staff in Jackson prison, everyone has been very nice to me,” Pye said. “I ate like a dog on Death Watch. I slept good. I never shed a tear — although I'm remorseful for everything that happened — but the staff here made everything so easy for me."

Pye went on to thank by name a childhood friend, Eddie Roberts, who would go on to honor Pye’s request to witness the execution.

"I'm so at peace," Pye said near the end of the recording. "Whatever go on, whatever happen, I'm at peace."

The Georgia Department of Corrections declined to identify any of the apparently many people in the cell with Pye during this recording, either by name or job description. None present were attorneys for Pye.

Pye was the 1st person executed in Georgia since the COVID-19 pandemic inspired an execution moratorium in the state.

(source: gpb.org)

FLORIDA:

Judge denies 6 motions in Wade Wilson case, who faces death penalty for 2019 murders----The motions challenged recent changes to death penalty recommendations by jurors; sought separate trials for the different charges; and sought to bar victim impact evidence at trial, among others.

A judge this month declined 6 attempts by a man charged with capital murder in the 2019 deaths of 2 women to avoid the death penalty and seek separate trials.

Lee Circuit Judge Nicholas Thompson between Jan. 11 and March 12 denied 6 motions filed in the capital murder case against Wade Wilson, 29, of Fort Myers.

Wilson is charged with the 1st-degree murder of Kristine Melton, 35; grand theft of Melton's car; battery on Melissa Montanez, 41; 1st-degree murder of Diane Ruiz, 43; burglary of a dwelling belonging to Kent Amlin or Fannie Amlin; and petty theft from Kent Amlin or Fannie Amlin.

Since January, Wilson has challenged recent changes to death penalty recommendations by jurors; sought separate trials for the different charges; sought to bar victim impact evidence at trial; and hoped three aggravating factors would be dismissed in his case, alleging unconstitutionality.

Melton and Ruiz were killed within days of each other in October 2019. Melton was found dead in her home; Ruiz’s body was found in a field days after her disappearance.

Wilson was indicted by a Lee County grand jury in November 2019. He has been at the Lee County Jail since October 2019.

State prosecutors have said in court documents that on Oct. 7, 2019, Wilson stole Melton's car after killing her and visited Montanez in Melton’s car and use Melton’s cellphone to contact Montanez.

After Wilson attacked Montanez, Gardiner said, he fled in Melton's car and encountered Ruiz in Cape Coral, where police say he killed her and repeatedly drove over her body using Melton's car.

Wilson then entered a nearby business, where he confessed the homicides to an acquaintance. When the acquaintance dialed 911, Wilson fled on foot and broke into a nearby home, leading to the latter 2 of the 6 charges.

Authorities found Ruiz's body in Melton's car, along with both women's cellphones, according to court documents.

Wilson has at least twice faced additional charges since his initial incarceration at the Lee County Jail for the 2019 homicides. In April of last year, he faced charges in a narcotics scheme.

In October 2020, Wilson, along with a man accused in a domestic violence case, was thwarted in a bid to escape Lee County Jail.

Wilson and his cellmate at the time, Joseph Katz, 33, were both involved, authorities said.

The sheriff's office report said Wilson was the primary planner and instigator of the attempt.

Wilson is next due in court April 29 for a motions hearing.

(source: Fort Myers News-Press)

ALABAMA----new execution date

Execution Alert “ALL LIFE IS SACRED!”

Alabama has set 5.30.24 as the execution date for JAMIE MILLS

Please contact Governor Kay Ivey and ask her to stay this execution and remind her of her statement “that all life is sacred!”

THE HONORABLE GOVERNOR Kay Ivey

STATE CAPITOL N 104

600 Dexter Ave

MONTGOMERY, AL 36130-2751

PHONE 1-334-242-7100

FAX: 1-334-242-3282

Email: http://governor.alabama.gov/contact/

Suggested Talking Points

1). Ineffective assistance of trial counsel

2). Prosecutorial misconduct

3). Mr. Mills had a dysfunctional childhood. Both of his parents were addicted to methamphetamine and used drugs throughout his childhood; Mills used methamphetamine for the first time when he was a teenager.

4). Alabama is failing to reveal its execution protocol including the expiration date of the execution drugs and has a history of botched executions.

5). Alabama is failing to reveal the source of its execution drugs.

6). Alabama still uses a method of execution with drugs considered by some States to be in violation of the Constitution and ethically, morally wrong.

7) Alabama ought to delay all executions to allow for a thorough independent study of its capital punishment process and consider the serious objections raised as to how it administers the death penalty.

(source: phadp.org)

**************

Alabama sets execution date for Jamie Mills to die by lethal injection

The governor has set a time frame for the next execution in Alabama, this time to be carried out by the previously used method of lethal injection.

Gov. Kay Ivey announced that Jamie Ray Mills will be put to death sometime between 12:00 a.m. on Thursday, May 30, and Friday, May 31. The lethal injection will happen at William C. Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore. The south Alabama prison houses the state’s only execution chamber.

Mills, 50, was convicted of three counts of capital murder for the June 2004 killings of Floyd Hill and Vera Hill.

The north Alabama couple was beaten to death by Mills, according to court records. Mills and his wife then robbed the Hill’s home.

Vera Hill, 72, was in poor health. Her husband of 55 years, Floyd Hill, was 87 years old and her caretaker.

Ivey’s announcement comes after a change in the way Alabama sets execution dates. Prior to January 2023, the Alabama Supreme Court issued a death warrant, good for one 24-hour period. Now, the Alabama governor sets a time frame for the execution. The change allows the Alabama Department of Corrections more time to carry out executions, after a slew of lethal injections had to be called off because they couldn’t be completed before midnight on their respective dates.

Jamie Mills was convicted and sentenced to death by a jury vote of 11-1.

The lethal injection comes after Alabama conducted the country’s 1st execution using nitrogen gas earlier this year. Kenneth Eugene Smith died January 25 by inhaling pure nitrogen through a gas mask, while the state faced national scrutiny for using the untested method.

After nitrogen gas was approved as a method of execution, death row prisoners were given an opportunity to choose that method over lethal injection but Mills did not opt in.

(source: al.com)

******************

‘This system is broken’: State officials call for change to Alabama’s parole board----Denied: Alabama's Broken Parole System: How Alabama became one of the worst prison systems in the US

More than 3,700 prisoners came up for parole last year, the vast majority meeting state guidelines for release from a jampacked system. Yet Alabama denied almost all of them, releasing just 312. Now, some leaders across the state are looking for a way to change the small board that did all that denying.

“This system is broken,” said former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore, a Republican. “And needs to be examined by the legislature.”

Another former Chief Justice, Sue Bell Cobb, a Democrat, agreed.

“There’s an old phrase that sunshine is the best antiseptic,” she said. “The sunshine that AL.com has brought upon the decisions by the Alabama parole board chair exemplifies this old adage.”

Already, things appear to be changing. Numbers from January show a 19% parole rate, far higher than the 8% rate of 2023.

Numbers from February aren’t available yet, but AL.com attended 57 hearings in February and March and witnessed a 16% parole rate.

Meanwhile, state lawmakers this year introduced five bills focusing on the parole board, its members and how they make their decisions.

Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, said there’s a “new motivation” in Montgomery to talk about Alabama’s unwillingness to let people out of overcrowded prisons and find solutions.

“The system was never designed to have a parole board that didn’t let anyone out,” said England.

What’s next?

Currently, inmates can’t attend their own parole hearings. Occasionally, lawyers will record a voice memo on their phones to play in front of the board. That’s not typical, though, and many inmates don’t have lawyers.

England introduced a bill that would change that, allowing inmates to appear virtually before the board. And he introduced 3 more bills.

The 2nd would change who gets a say in the decisions. The bill aims to increase the number of parole board members from the current three to five, reducing the power of any single board member.

Last year, the board also ignored its own criteria on who should be let out, as 4 out of 5 inmates who came before the board met the board’s own guidelines for parole. England wants to change that too.

His third bill seeks to create something called the Criminal Justice Policy Development Council, which would develop a new risk assessment for those up for parole. The bill would require the parole board to use those guidelines, and explain any deviations. The bill would also set up a way inmates could appeal if they met the state guidelines but were denied anyway.

Alabama has also been reluctant to parole inmates with cancer, serious illness or failing health due to old age. The board rejected all 10 people over 80 who were up for parole in fiscal year 2023.

England’s fourth bill seeks to give “weighted consideration to the health of an inmate” when deciding parole. It calls for inmates 60 and above who are denied parole to be given a detailed plan on how to improve their chances for their next hearing. It has other provisions for inmates seeking medical parole and medical furlough.

“There’s evidence there is some recognition on both sides of the aisle that something is wrong,” said England, saying there could be bipartisan movement on paroles. “And recognizing that if they continue to operate as they are, we will never be able to build a big enough prison for or hire enough people to care for the population they’re creating.”

What’s different?

Already, things may be shifting. Three members sit on the state’s parole board. Their decisions are final.

One member almost always voted no in 2023. Last summer, the ACLU of Alabama attended parole hearings and recorded each member’s vote. According to data gathered by the ACLU over a 10-week period, the board heard 251 parole hearings in June and July of 2023. In those, chairperson Leigh Gwathney voted to grant parole in just 6 cases — or 2.4% of the time.

This year, that’s changed slightly. The bureau doesn’t electronically record which member voted yea or no per inmate, a spokesperson said, but in the hearings attended by AL.com this year, chairperson Leigh Gwathney voted yea in 6 out of 52 cases where the votes were read aloud.

That’s 11.5%.

The uptick appeared to begin in early 2024, as seen in the bureau’s January numbers.

Gwathney has not discussed her voting with AL.com nor commented on the reporting.

AL.com began reporting its series, Denied: Alabama’s Broken Parole System, in January.

Alabama struggles with prisons at 168% capacity, prisons so overcrowded the Justice Department is challenging them as unusually deadly and unconstitutionally cruel in a trial set to begin this fall.

In the series, AL.com explored decisions by the state not to create more space by releasing people who were eligible, the vast majority of whom met the state’s own criteria for release.

People denied parole include those on work release, like Christopher M. McClinton. Arrested years ago for marijuana, McClinton spends his days selling fast food and his nights sleeping at a work release center. But the board thought he shouldn’t be able to spend his nights at home with his mother and denied his parole last year.

They denied Kenneth McCroskey, who was sent back to prison on a technical violation because he missed a meeting with his parole officer. His parole officer didn’t think he should be sent back, but that didn’t matter to the board. And now he’s back indefinitely, serving a life sentence for a 1996 3rd-degree robbery.

There are people being denied for crimes across the spectrum; not getting out for drug crimes, crimes from the 80s and 90s where they got a sentence they wouldn’t get today under updated Alabama laws.

And yet, Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall has said there is no one left to reform in Alabama prisons. His office often sends someone to oppose parole, and when they do, data shows that Gwathney votes with them.

When asked if the state’s top prosecutor still stood by that remark, or had anything else to add on the situation, a spokesperson responded via email:

“We do not have anything further to add,” said the spokesperson for the Attorney General, “as we disagree with the premise of every article you have written on the topic.”

What’s the effect?

Douglas Layton Jr. said the constant parole denials led to a loss of hope across the lock-ups. Layton was denied parole after years of a clean prison record, but got out under a separate court order.

That hopelessness can lead to more dangerous conditions in prison; conditions the feds are set to challenge in court this fall.

Sen. Linda Coleman-Madison, D-Birmingham, said the parole system isn’t helping rehabilitation efforts.

“Everyone deserves a second chance, but our laws don’t say that. The Pardons and Parole system in Alabama is not working but we refuse to change it, that’s not good business practice. If it does not work we should see what best practices do, and try something new.”

At the same time, according to a presentation given by Alabama Department of Corrections Commissioner John Hamm to state lawmakers, there are 17,549 inmates who cannot earn Correctional Incentive Time, or what’s better known as “good time.”

That’s nearly all of Alabama’s inmates. The latest available data from the department shows that, in December, there were 20,497 inmates in prisons across the state.

Coleman-Madison said the two combined to leave “little incentive in a dog-eat-dog environment.”

“Low level felons should be offered incentives to rehabilitate,” said Coleman-Madison via email.

A 5th bill, sponsored by Coleman-Madison, seeks to require the board to restore voting rights for certain people who meet the criteria.

Coleman-Madison said via email, “The name is ‘Pardons and Parole.’ They’ve not been doing much of either in more than a decade.”

“Certainly not everyone deserves to be released but many do. Because they have not done a good job, violence in our prisons have escalated. I do feel an oversight committee or a review board is needed. I realize victims and their families have rights but everyone should be given opportunity to repent and change.”

England said the bills appear to have momentum this year.

“All of these things, these stories, are shining a brand new light on how bad the situation is.”

This project was completed with the support of a grant from Columbia University’s Ira A. Lipman Center for Journalism and Civil and Human Rights in conjunction with Arnold Ventures.

(source: al.com)

MISSOURI:

Decision on Craig Wood’s death sentence could take months

A 3-day hearing wrapped up Wednesday afternoon, and it is now up to a judge to decide whether a death sentence is constitutional for the man who killed 10-year-old Hailey Owens.

Judge Thomas Mountjoy originally sentenced Craig Wood to death in 2018. Mountjoy was back on the bench this week for Wood’s post-conviction hearing. Wood’s defense team wants the death penalty overturned since it was handed down by a judge instead of a jury.

Several witnesses took the stand throughout the trial, including Wood’s childhood friends and his old attorney. Wood’s friends said he was a smart person and never expected him to commit crimes like this.

Wood’s trial attorneys said they lost every significant ruling during the trial. They said Wood had substance abuse problems and mental health disorders at the time of the crimes in 2014. The trial attorneys also mentioned it took a long time for Wood’s family to cooperate, and they believe his family did not disclose everything.

Wood’s trial attorneys also mentioned how Wood was perceived in the Springfield community when the homicide happened. They said it appeared many community members were angry at Wood, and there were extremely graphic and negative comments about him.

Although the testimony wrapped up Wednesday, it will be a while before Judge Mountjoy announces his decision. The state and the defense both have to submit written and formal proposals to the judge. The defense won’t have the proposal done until after they get the transcription from this week’s hearing, which could take 90 days. Then the judge will consider those filings and and the evidence this week and conclude.

(source: ozarksfirst.com)

*****************

Missouri lawmakers discuss changes to the state’s death penalty law

Missouri and Indiana are the only states allowing a judge to impose a death penalty in capital cases, where a jury is deadlocked. That’s what some state lawmakers in Missouri want to change.

On Tuesday, a Missouri House Committee heard from the public on a bill to repeal that provision and align with most other states. Typically, a “hung jury” in the most serious cases would result in an automatic life sentence.

A representative of the state’s defense attorneys organization spoke out in favor of the repeal, saying he believes the public is mainly reassessing capital punishment.

“I think we’re moving away from the death penalty as a policy,” said Brian Bernskoetter, Missouri Organization of Defense Lawyers. “We’ve seen that it isn’t as effective as a deterrent as it was meant to be. And so a lot of these bills in this sort of area moving away from the death penalty have been, well, more well-received than I have in the past.”

The bill could come to a vote in the committee’s meeting next week.

(source: ky3.com)

OKLAHOMA----impending execution

Death row inmate loses bid for stay of execution----Oklahoma panel denies clemency for death row inmate, paves way for lethal injection

Death row inmate Michael DeWayne Smith this week lost his request for a stay of his execution.

Smith, 41, asked for the stay because of a proposed moratorium on the death penalty before the state Legislature.

He is set to be executed by lethal injection on April 4 at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester.

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals voted 5-0 against his request.

“Petitioner’s claim of harm is based solely upon speculation that House Bill 3138 will pass and become law,” judges said in a statement, denying the claim. “Petitioner has failed to show a clear legal right to the relief requested.”

(source: journalrecord.com)

*************************

Legislation to shield Oklahoma death penalty drug manufacturers from public scrutiny advances

Oklahoma lawmakers on Wednesday advanced legislation that would shield those involved in executions from public scrutiny.

Senate Bill 1702 specifically shields the entities who produce or supply the drugs used in Oklahoma’s execution process from discovery in civil and criminal proceedings. While the identities of those participating in executions have long been protected, the bill also expands protections to any participating entities.

The bill extends the confidentiality to documents, records, photographs and any other information that the head of the Department of Corrections determines may lead to the identification of any person or entity that participates in the execution process, according to the bill.

Rep. Rande Worthen, R-Lawton, the House author, said the bill clarifies that such information shall “remain inaccessible to outside members.”

He said there’s been issues with people trying to work around the existing law to find out the identities of individuals tasked with carrying out executions or the names of manufacturers or pharmacies that provide the drugs.

The change to state law will ensure their identities are kept secret and protect them from harassment, Worthen said.

“They have a hard enough job as it is without 3rd parties being able (to), trying to access that information, picket their home, make death threats to their families or things like that and that’s what we’re trying to prevent,” he said.

Rep. Jason Lowe, D-Oklahoma City, said he agrees that the information of a person who carries out an execution should be protected.

But he said Oklahoma has had issues as far as drugs used during the death penalty process. He questioned whether that information would remain confidential.

“As far as the drugs are concerned, I think that’s kind of problematic that that’s going to be basically a secret,” Lowe said.

The state’s problems with executions started in 2014 when officials bungled the execution of Clayton Lockett, who took 43 minutes to die. Lockett writhed and appeared to be conscious. A state investigation found that an IV used to administer the drugs had unknowingly come loose.

In January 2015, state officials next used a non-approved drug to execute Charles Warner.

Rep. John George, R-Newalla, said the type of drugs used to carry out executions will continue to be available, it’s just the manufacturers or pharmacies providing those would not.

The measure passed a House committee by a 6-1 vote. It now heads to the full House.

The full Senate, largely along party lines, previously approved the measure by a 38-8 vote.

(source: newsfromthestates.com)

USA:

Federal Appellate Court Ruling Requires Investigation into Jury Bias in Boston Marathon Case

FEDERAL DEATH PENALTY MASSACHUSETTS U.S. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

On March 21, 2024, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the judge who presided over Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s (pictured) trial to investigate his defense attorneys’ claims of juror bias and determine whether Mr. Tsarnaev’s death sentence should be overturned because of this bias. In a 2-1 decision, the 1st Circuit declined defense attorney requests to overturn Mr. Tsarnaev’s death sentence for his participation in the April 2013 Boston Marathon bombing but found that the trial judge “fell short of what was constitutionally required” in his investigation of potential jury bias, remanding the case for a new investigation. If Mr. Tsarnaev’s trial judge determines that either of the jurors in question should have been disqualified from serving on the jury, he could vacate Mr. Tsarnaev’s death sentence and require a new penalty-phase trial. In the appellate court’s ruling, the judges wrote that “even then, we once again emphasize that the only question in any such proceeding will be whether [Mr.] Tsarnaev will face execution; regardless of the outcome, he will spend the rest of his life in prison.”

In a 2020 ruling, the 1st Circuit set Mr. Tsarnaev’s sentence aside when it determined that the trial court erred in excluding evidence surrounding Mr. Tsarnaev’s brother’s influence over him during the commission of the crime and because “prospective jurors were not questioned enough about their exposure to news about the bombings.” 2 years later, the United States Supreme Court restored Mr. Tsarnaev’s death sentence in a 6-3 ruling, where Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the U.S. Constitution “guaranteed [Mr. Tsarnaev] a fair trial before an impartial jury. He received one.” After the Supreme Court’s reversal, Mr. Tsarnaev’s attorneys returned to federal appeals court in January 2023, urging the Court to consider additional issues that the Supreme Court did not hear, including the issue of seating jurors who may have lied during questioning, as well as three other claims pertaining to venue of the trial, the erroneous dismissal of a qualified juror, and the mistreatment of particular evidence.

During oral arguments in front of the appellate court, attorneys for Mr. Tsarnaev argued that one juror untruthfully told the judge she had not commented about the case online but found she had retweeted a post that referred to Mr. Tsarnaev as a “piece of garbage.” The other juror in question said his Facebook friends had not commented on the case, despite one friend urging him to “play the part” and get on the jury to send Mr. Tsarnaev to “jail where he will be taken care of,” according to defense attorneys. These concerns were initially raised at trial, but the trial judge did not investigate these claims further. William Glaser, a Justice Department lawyer, acknowledged the inaccuracies of the jurors’ statements, but said additional information suggests the jurors misremembered but did not lie. 1st Circuit Court Judge William Kayatta Jr., who delivered the 2-1 opinion, questioned Mr. Glaser on how the trial judge could have known this without investigating Mr. Tsarnaev’s claims.

The U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) has continued to aggressively defend Mr. Tsarnaev’s death sentence, despite Attorney General Merrick Garland’s 2021 announcement of a moratorium on federal executions during a review of the government’s death penalty policies and procedures. AG Garland’s moratorium came six months after former President Donald Trump left office. 13 individuals were executed during the final six months of President Trump’s administration. During the 2020 presidential campaign, President Joseph Biden promised to end the federal death penalty, however, his administration has taken no action towards abolition during his presidency.

AG Garland’s moratorium does not prevent the Department of Justice and its prosecutors from seeking new federal death sentences. On January 12, 2024, the DOJ announced that it will seek a death sentence for Payton Gendron, the then-18-year-old who killed ten Black people at a Tops supermarket in Buffalo, New York in 2022. Mr. Gendron’s case is the first capital case authorized by AG Garland and the Biden Administration’s DOJ but is not expected to proceed to trial until 2025. Mr. Gendron has already pled guilty to state charges and has offered to plead guilty to federal charges in exchange for a life sentence without the possibility of parole. The federal charges against Mr. Gendron include hate crimes, similar to many of the 63 charges brought against Robert Bowers after he shot and killed 11 worshippers at the Pittsburgh Tree of Life Synagogue in 2018. Mr. Bowers was also charged federally and received a death sentence on August 1, 2023. Mr. Bowers’ sentence was the first new federal death sentence since 2019 and the first secured by the Biden administration. Mr. Bowers and Sayfullo Saipov, for whom the DOJ also sought but failed to secure a death sentence, were initially charged under the Trump administration and Attorney General William Barr.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

COUNCIL OF EUROPE:

Informal exchange with civil society on the death penalty in the framework of a seminar of the Group of French-speaking Ambassadors

In the Framework of a seminar of the Group of French-speaking Ambassadors and the 2 secretariats of the Council of Europe and of the International Organisation of La Francophonie (OIF) on the co-operation programme between the 2 organisations, an informal exchange on advocacy against the death penalty took place on 22 March 2024 with civil society.

This part of the seminar dedicated to the abolition of the death penalty is also linked to the Committee of Ministers decision taken on 18 October 2023 which instructed to explore the possibility of co-operation on advocacy in favour of the abolition of the death penalty, as a first step, within the framework of the ad hoc interventions envisaged in the co-operation programme.

The participants to the seminar had the opportunity to exchange with Mrs Bronwyn Dudley, Programme manager at the World coalition against the death penalty, and with Mrs Xavière Prugnard, FIACAT Representative to the African Union, inter alia on the contribution of the Council of Europe to the global abolition and on the situation in Africa regarding the death penalty.

(source: coe.int)

RUSSIA:

My Family Knows the Injustice of the Death Penalty. We Can’t Let It Come Back to Russia

My great-grandfather taught me two things:

Don’t do drugs

Never trust your government

He was an expert in both: a reputable doctor whose healthy lifestyle allowed him to live to 92, he spent a decent amount of time in the late 1970s in various KGB quarters. He, along with other members of his family including his pregnant daughter, was interrogated in relation to the 1977 bombings in Moscow. His cousin, Stepan Zatikyan, was one of the suspects.

A lot of people in Russia disagree with my great-grandfather’s assertion that they should never trust their government. In fact, they trust the government so much that they are willing to delegate to it the ultimate right: to decide who deserves to live, and who deserves to die.

In 1979, the Soviet government decided that Stepan Zatikyan did not deserve to live. After a secret investigation and trial, he was sentenced to death and killed less than a week later. The case remains classified to this day.

A lot of things in the case simply don’t add up. Nobody has seen concrete proof of Zatikyan’s involvement in the attack, in contrast to two other convicts — but even they denied that Zatikyan took any part in the bombings. He himself never pleaded guilty.

The case drew the attention of Andrei Sakharov, a Soviet dissident and human rights advocate. In a series of articles and open letters, he pointed out evidence that raised doubts that Zatikyan was guilty. He had an alibi confirmed by several witnesses showing he was not in Moscow on the day of the attack. There was nothing that could tie him to the terrorists except for his nationality and his hatred of everything Soviet. For that, he had already spent 4 years in prison, after which he ceased his political activities.

In his letter to General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev, Sakharov wrote:

“The investigation showed no interest in clarifying this and other important circumstances. The trial, unnecessarily, was completely closed and secret; even his relatives knew nothing about it. Such a trial, in which the principle of transparency is completely violated, cannot establish the truth.”

When I shared Zaktikyan’s story online, some people dug up a video recording of his speech at the trial — as if that was proof of his guilt. In the video, he says that he does not accept the authority of the Soviet judges and then goes on to scream “vrejh!” (“Take revenge”).

As I mentioned, the process was secret. This short video is one of the few things KGB decided to share publicly. That means that the most incriminating thing they had on Zatikyan was the fact that he wanted to get revenge on the people who sentenced him to death. To me, that does not look like proof of his guilt. I would have been very surprised if he had praised the judges instead.

I have no idea if Zatikyan was a terrorist. But I am absolutely certain that with the information we have, there is a very plausible chance that he could be innocent. All it takes for me to wish that the moratorium will never be lifted is the belief that even 1 innocent person could be wrongfully killed by the state.

But the terrible truth is, it will never just be 1 person who dies by the death penalty. That has never been the case. There are hundreds of thousands of people who were definitely innocent but were nevertheless killed.

In a country where every 2nd person had a great-grandparent sentenced to death in or around 1937, it astounds me that anyone would cheer the revival of the death penalty.

Another relative of mine, my great-grandfather from the other side, was among the hundreds of thousands executed during Stalin’s Great Purge. His wife was sent to a gulag. Their children, including my grandfather, grew up in an orphanage. His name and birth date were changed, so that his three fake birth certificates issued by the orphanage would not link him to an enemy of the people.

It took me over 10 years to even find out the name of my great-grandfather. From the scarce documents that my family discovered, I learned he worked as a teacher in various village schools and then studied engineering at a university. The note on his sentence simply says “Article 58-8, 9, 1. Capital punishment.” Article 58-8 detailed the punishment for terrorism.

I have no idea on what grounds the state accused him of terrorism, except for maybe the fact that he was originally from Poland. His execution might have been part of the Polish Operation, when over 111 thousand people were sentenced to death in an ethnic cleansing carried out by the NKVD.

Almost a million people were executed under Article 58 — thousands of them, like my great-grandfather, under Section 8 — as terrorists. At the time, the state did not even bother to hold a trial as a formality.

In 2024, Russian law enforcement agents do not bother to follow the law either. They showed off videos where they tortured the suspected gunmen behind the Crocus City Hall attack. We are left to trust that those people are the terrorists because, under Russian law, a person can only be ruled guilty by the judge. But they were tortured before they were even brought to trial. Shockingly, there are people who approve of this practice.

I have to ask them if they think this will only ever happen to terrorists. Check the list of people that Russia declared to be terrorists. How many of them have actually killed anyone in real life, not just on Minecraft? Are they 100% sure they or someone they know and love would never end up on that list?

Accepting that things like torture or death sentences can happen to innocent people is a very heavy load. And so trusting your government to ensure that everything is fair is somehow easier than admitting that there is a clear risk of a miscarriage of justice.

As for me, I think I will stick to my great-grandfather’s advice, and not only when it comes to drugs.

(source: Opinion; Alyona Kojevnikova, The Moscow Times)

TUNISIA:<

Tunisian court sentences four to death for 2013 assassination of Chokri Belaid----4 people were sentenced Wednesday to death and 2 to life in prison for a murder that sparked widespread unrest in Tunisia and became emblematic of the country's early challenges transitioning from dictatorship to democracy after the Arab Spring.

Chokri Belaid, the 48-year-old leader of the Popular Front coalition, was a prominent critic of the Islamist Party Ennahda that ascended to power after 2011 uprisings toppled the country’s longtime dictator. His assassination was among a spate of violent episodes that provoked social unrest in 2013 and became emblematic of Tunisia’s early struggles to reconcile its celebrated secular traditions with the revival of long suppressed religious ultraconservatives.

A criminal court tasked with handling terrorism cases handed down 23 sentences for Belaid's murder. The sentences, in addition to the death penalties and life sentences, ranged in length from two to 120 years, a public prosecutor said outside of the court.

Belaid’s brother Abdelmajid Belaid called the sentences “a positive step” and said that supporters were still awaiting the trial of those suspected of planning the assassination.

Belaid's case was reopened last month after a former investigating judge was arrested on suspicion of concealing certain files. Wednesday's sentencing came after hours of late night delays and lengthy deliberations due to “the complexity of the very thorny case,” said Mohamed Jmour, a member of Belaid's defense committee.

Before his death, Belaid had earned a following for his forceful denunciations of Ennahda, which rose to power after President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali was toppled in 2011. Belaid's supporters blamed Islamists for taking an overly accommodating approach toward extremists after his assassination.

Ennahda leaders subsequently took a harder line against fundamentalists and classified Ansar al Sharia as a terrorist group when another left-wing politician, Mohammed Brahmi, was slain later that year. Law enforcement killed several alleged members of the al-Qaida-linked group suspected of involvement in Belaid's death.

Several members of Ansar al Sharia were among those sentenced for Belaid’s murder on Wednesday.

The assassinations and subsequent unrest set off a political crisis for Tunisia as it struggled to transition from dictatorship to democracy. The country teetered on the brink until a Nobel Prize-winning quartet of civil society groups negotiated with various parties to prevent the nascent government's institutions from unraveling. Belaid's supporters have protested on the anniversary of his death to demand recourse, including in 2021 when police violently quashed their unauthorized demonstration.

2 dozen defendants were ultimately charged in a sprawling case that took years to investigate and bring to trial. One died in prison. Of the 23 defendants sentenced on Wednesday, five were acquitted.

Aymen Chtiba, a deputy prosecutor in the terrorism court's judicial unit, said the dismissals had to do with the similarity of sentences already handed down against some defendants in other cases.

(source: france24.com)

INDIA:

Bombay High Court upholds death penalty awarded to Vivek Palatkar----The Nagpur Brench of the Bombay High Court upheld the death sentence; Palatkar was convicted in the gruesome murder of five members of his family

The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court on Wednesday upheld the death penalty awarded to Vivek Palatkar, who was convicted in the case involving the gruesome murder of 5 members of his family. In April 2023, a sessions court had sentenced him to death after examining the testimonies of 29 witnesses. Palatkar had then approached the Bombay High Court, where his plea was quashed, with the High Court upholding the verdict of the lower court.

The murder took place on June 11, 2018, in Aradhana Nagar in Dighori, Nagpur at Palatkar’s brother-in-law Kamlakar Pawankar’s home, over a property dispute. On the day of the crime, Palatkar had lunch with Pawankar’s family, after which the entire family fell asleep, when Palatkar smashed their heads with an iron rod. The victims of the crime were identified as Pawankar, his wife Archana, their daughter Vedanti, Pawankar’s mother Meerabai, and Palatkar’s son. The crime came to light with the help of the only survivors of the murder, Palatkar’s elder daughter Vaishnavi, and her cousin Mitali Pawankar. The girls pretended to be asleep among the corpses for a few hours, waiting for Palatkar to leave before approaching the neighbours. He was later arrested.

In May 2014, Palatkar had killed his wife Savita and burnt her corpse to destroy the evidence. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. Pawankar paid ?5 lakh to secure his bail. The dispute began when Palatkar refused to return the money.

(source: thehindu.com)

SINGAPORE:

Unveiling Singapore’s Death Penalty Discourse: A Critical Analysis of Public Opinion and Deterrent Claims

While Singapore’s Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) maintains a firm stance on the effectiveness of the death penalty in managing drug trafficking in Singapore, the article presents evidence suggesting that the methodologies and interpretations of these studies might not be as substantial as portrayed.

THE “LIFE-SAVING BENEFITS” OF THE DEATH PENALTY

Singapore is one of the rare executioner countries responding to international criticism regarding its use of the death penalty. Singapore’s Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) claims that capital punishment acts as a deterrent in relation to capital offences such as drug trafficking, ostensibly “saving more lives.” This assertion becomes even more disturbing considering that it is compounded by people’s support for such policies. Indeed, according to a survey on Singapore Residents’ Attitudes towards the Death Penalty conducted in 2021 (66%) of people agreed with the following statement: “The mandatory death penalty is appropriate as the punishment for…trafficking a significant amount of drugs.” However, the surveys’ methodology and framing raise questions about the accuracy of these findings. The definition of “significant amount” of drugs and the public’s understanding of this term remain unclear, affecting the interpretation of survey results. Furthermore, the level of public knowledge about the death penalty varies, potentially influencing survey responses.

REEVALUATION OF DEATH PENALTY POLICY

While MHA studies claim widespread belief in the deterrent effect of the death penalty among individuals outside Singapore, the methodology and representativeness of the samples used are questionable. The studies fail to provide conclusive evidence of deterrence and overlook factors such as irrational decision-making by offenders and the limitations of empirical research on deterrence. Additionally, Sato’s scrutiny of MHA studies underscores the importance of transparency and accountability in policymaking. The government’s reluctance to share anonymized raw data and its reliance on studies conducted by ministry staff raise concerns about the integrity and impartiality of the research. While MHA surveys indicate a level of public support for capital punishment, the article argues that the findings may be influenced by limited knowledge or misconceptions about the efficacy and fairness of such measures.

In sum, Sato’s inquiry reveals significant discrepancies and limitations in the methodology, data interpretation, and transparency of the research conducted by the MHA regarding its use of the death penalty. Find the full report here, at: https://www.academia.sg/academic-views/review-of-death-penalty-research/

(source: worldcoalition.org)

MARCH 27, 2024:

FLORIDA:

Former death row inmate serving life for Pensacola woman's murder dies in prison

A man serving life in a Florida prison for beating and stabbing a Pensacola woman to death in 2001 died in prison Thursday, Florida's Department of Corrections told the News Journal.

Willie James Hodges, 63, was serving a life sentence for murdering Patricia Belanger in her Mayfair home Dec. 19, 2001. Hodges was initially sentence to death but later had his sentence overturned.

FDOC confirmed Hodges died in its custody March 21 and said the department would release a cause and manner of death once the medical examiner concludes the autopsy and subsequent report.

Belanger was found in her home by family members, bludgeoned and stabbed to death. Her family members had arrived to pick her up for a holiday trip.

Escambia County Sheriff's deputies tied Hodges to the case after they found matching fingerprints at the crime scene and Hodges' blood found on a sock.

After his initial conviction, Hodges filed an appeal saying he was convicted due to ineffective legal representation. The Supreme Court dismissed those claims, but in a 4-3 opinion found Hodges was penalized under faulty Florida law allowing a majority of jurors, as opposed to all jurors, to impose the death penalty.

The court vacated Hodges' death penalty sentence and remanded the case back to trial court for a new jury after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the state's capital punishment system based on another Pensacola murder case, (Timothy) Hurst v. Florida in 2016.

A legislative rewrite of the law allowing a 10-2 majority of jurors to impose death failed to pass muster with the Florida Supreme Court, which demanded a unanimous jury finding. Legislators rewrote the statute to address unanimity, and then-Gov. Rick Scott signed a new capital sentencing scheme into law.

During a 2nd penalty phase, court records show Hodges was resentenced to life in prison without parole in 2021, 20 years after Belanger's death.

Florida's death penalty law changed once again in 2023 after Gov. Ron DeSantis signed into law a bill that allows juries to recommend a death sentence with as little as an 8-4 vote rather than a unanimous vote.

The bill received some bipartisan support from Florida lawmakers and some families of the victims of the Parkland shooting, who felt that the man who killed 17 people at Parkland's Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in 2018 got off too easy after a Broward County jury rejected the death penalty months before.

(source: Pensacola News-Journal)

TENNESSEE----book review

When the State Is a Serial Killer----In “Death Row Welcomes You,” Steven Hale follows the cases of men in an American prison awaiting execution, examining what they did as well as the people they’ve become.

In 2018, Steven Hale, a writer for The Nashville Scene, was selected by lottery to be among the handful of witnesses to a Tennessee man’s death by lethal injection. Hale knew about the condemned man, Billy Ray Irick, only from court records that detailed the abuse he’d suffered as a child and the horrible suffering he’d gone on to cause. In 1985, Irick raped and murdered a girl he was babysitting.

After more than three decades on death row, Irick, 59, was bound to a gurney by thick straps. As a strong sedative entered his veins, his eyes shut and he started to snore. Then his body responded to another drug, maybe the one meant to stop his heart.

“He jolted,” Hale writes in “Death Row Welcomes You,” an up-close exploration of the recent revival of capital punishment in Tennessee. “His face turned almost purple.” Eventually, he stopped breathing. “That concludes the execution of Billy Ray Irick,” a voice announced over a loudspeaker. “Please exit now.”

The last public hanging in the United States was carried out in 1936, in front of 20,000 people, like a medieval revenge ritual. Today, even the most extreme punishments are administered privately, behind prison walls, with efforts to inflict as little pain as possible. “Barbarism dressed as bureaucracy,” Hale writes of a century’s progress.

The Supreme Court actually ruled the death penalty unconstitutional in 1972. A majority of justices argued that it amounted to cruel and unusual punishment. They gave different reasons — because it was “excessive” and “morally unacceptable”; or because Black defendants were sentenced to die far more frequently than white ones, even when convicted of the same offenses. Four years later, however, the court softened its position, deciding that capital punishment, if administered more fairly, could provide a legitimate “expression of society’s moral outrage.”

The death penalty was legal again, but many states still found it too troubled by chronic unfairness, long delays, wrongful convictions and inhumanity. The District of Columbia and 23 states have outlawed the death penalty, and more than a dozen other states either have moratoriums or haven’t carried out an execution in at least a decade.

Hale is focused on Tennessee, which has conducted more than 500 legal executions since it became a state in the late 18th century. In the 1930s and ’40s, Tennessee sometimes electrocuted three people on the same day. But in 1959, Gov. Frank Clement announced his opposition to the death penalty, saying he was haunted by the men he’d met on death row whose executions he’d overseen: “I had no idea what it was like to look a man in the eye and know I had to decide on this man’s life.” From 1961 to 2000, Tennessee did not carry out a single execution.

Hale writes with urgency about a startling reversal of this trend. In the 19 months after Billy Ray Irick’s 2018 execution, Tennessee put 6 more men to death. Hale was in the death chamber as witness for three of these executions. During that time, he also joined a group that visited a maximum-security prison most Mondays and spent time with the men on death row, becoming part of “a fellowship of the living and the condemned.”

“Death Row Welcomes You” is an eye-opening journey to a place that’s hard to access, rarely seen and shrouded by myths of monsters and abominations. The weekly gatherings in the prison, Hale writes, “are so ordinary as to be extraordinary and so life-giving as to feel defiant.”

Support for capital punishment spiked in the 1990s, during the height of the tough-on-crime era. Support today is at a 50-year low, at 53 percent, but Tennessee, once a swing state, has gotten steadily redder in the past two decades and Republican backing for capital punishment has remained solid, at around 80 percent. This may help explain both the resurgence in Tennessee and the 13 federal executions carried out in a rush during the last months of the Trump administration.

Hale does not unpack the many legal and philosophical arguments surrounding the death penalty, nor does he explain why public opinion and policies have continued to shift. What he does do powerfully, however, is show that all people have the capacity to change. When Hale introduces the men on death row, he is careful to describe their crimes and the tremendous pain they caused their victims. But Hale also insists on seeing them as they are in the present — as far more than their worst acts.

We meet a man named Terry King who has been awaiting his execution for murder since 1985. King puts together welcome packages for new arrivals to the unit and cares for others as they become sick or enfeebled. He tells Hale that “he hated who he’d been but that he loved who he’d become.”

Another man, Donnie Johnson, declined his last meal before his 2019 execution, asking instead that the clergy members and other visitors who supported his clemency feed the homeless, prompting churches and activists to pass out pizza on the streets of Nashville.

Hale comes to share the opinion of many of the regular visitors: “that support for executions, or indifference to them, could not survive a Monday night with the men facing them.”

As he delves into one capital murder case after another, Hale is aware of a blurring sameness to these horrific crimes and to the people who commit them. “The stories start to run together, of boys whose bodies and brains were beaten and bruised before they became the violent men who were sent to death row.”

Too often the book’s own storytelling and structuring contribute to this blurring of people and events. But these shortcomings also reflect the broader challenge of making people confront the cruelty and ineffectiveness of extreme punishments. Hale observes that, as the executions in Tennessee continued, the news crews and crowds outside the prison disappeared. Putting people to death had become both too distressing and too routine.

“Death Row Welcomes You” demands that we not look away, that we reckon more honestly with how and whom we punish. After one execution, in which the condemned man chose to die in Tennessee’s electric chair rather than be injected with a dubious new drug cocktail, the man’s lawyer addressed the news media. He asked them a question that, inexcusably, we as a society still can’t adequately answer. “What is it we did here today?”

DEATH ROW WELCOMES YOU: Visiting Hours in the Shadow of the Execution Chamber | By Steven Hale | Melville House | 276 pp. | $28.99

(source: Ben Austen is the author, most recently, of “Correction: Parole, Prison, and the Possibility of Change.”----New York Times)

ARKANSAS----female faces death penalty

Mom charged in murder of 5-year-old drowned in toilet and buried under the house challenges death penalty eligibility

The defense for an Arkansas mother are trying to save her from the death penalty, saying she played no role in her live-in boyfriend drowning her 5-year-old son in a toilet.

Both Ashley Rolland and Nathan Bridges are charged with capital murder in the horrid death of young Blu Rolland, but the mom’s attorney argues that evidence shows that her client is not eligible for the death penalty under case law.

“In this case, the State filed a criminal information against Rolland stating that the codefendant, Nathan Bridges, was solely responsible for the homicidal act and that Rolland was merely present at the scene. The State declined to address how Rolland participated in the murder or how she was otherwise involved,” attorney Erin Lewis said in a filing dated Thursday. “Other discovery produced to Defendant by the State includes a statement from a witness present at the residence on the night of incident telling law enforcement that Rolland was screaming ‘Stop it!’ to the co-defendant. These facts, when viewed in conjunction with the case law cited to above, demonstrate that Rolland is not eligible for the death penalty.”

Authorities in Lee County, Arkansas, say that Bridges stuck his finger in Blu’s mouth and the young boy bit him. Bridges allegedly responded by drowning the child in a toilet.

“Rolland stated that she was in the living room while [Blu] was in the bathroom with Bridges,” authorities previously wrote. After Bridges left the bathroom, she entered and found her son struggling to breathe, his body limp, she allegedly claimed.

After that, Bridges cut a hole in the floor of the home, dug a hole in the ground, and buried the child’s body under the house.

Rolland allegedly said that Bridges also caused burns to her 6-year-old daughter’s head by holding the child’s “head and upper torso under hot water in the bathtub” as “punishment for her behavior issues.” But according to authorities, she at first told them the burns were an allergic reaction, and that Blu was not at home.

Defendant Rolland is charged with capital murder, abuse of a corpse, tampering with physical evidence, endangering the welfare of a minor in the 1st degree, and battery in the 1st degree. She is also charged with 2 counts of permitting child abuse, with 1 count being for her daughter’s injuries.

The case against Bridges is also ongoing. He is charged with capital murder, abuse of a corpse, tampering with evidence, endangering the welfare of a minor in the first degree, and battery in the 1st degree.

(source: lawandcrime.com)

OKLAHOMA:

Oklahoma Gives Michael Smith New Execution Date of April 4, 2024

Michael Smith is scheduled to be executed at 10 am on Thursday, April 4, 2024, at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester, Oklahoma. 42-year-old Michael is convicted of murdering 40-year-old Janet Moore and 24-year-old Sarath “Babu” Pulluru, on February 22, 2002, in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Michael has spent the last 20 years of his life on death row in Oklahoma.

Michael Smith grew up in a violent neighborhood, rife with gang and drug activity. After his father died, Michael had difficulties coming to terms with his death. Michael began abusing alcohol and becoming more involved with gang activities.

Michael Smith was a member of the Oak Grove Posse, a subset of the Oklahoma City Crisps gang. In November of 2000, 3 members of the OGP attempted to rob a convenience store in Oklahoma City. One of the gang members was shot and killed by the store owner. Smith was not involved in the robbery but was close to the gang member killed. The other 2 gang members were eventually arrested. Their trial was set for February 2002.

Two days before the trial was scheduled to begin, Smith tracked down a man he believed to be a police informant. Smith broke into the apartment of Janet Moore. Her son was the man Smith believe to be a police informant. Smith kicked in the door and shot Janet to death when she began screaming. Before leaving, Smith wiped down the apartment to avoid leaving any fingerprints.

Smith then went to a convenience store directly next to the one his fellow gang members attempted to rob. He shot to death the clerk on duty, Sarath Pulluru, and took money from the cash drawer. He then used lighter fluid to set the store on fire, along with Sarath’s body, in an attempt to remove evidence. Smith then disposed of the clothing he had been wearing and returned home, where he told his roommate what had happened. A few hours later, Smith went to the home of Sheena Johnson and told her what he did.

Sheena later reported her conversation with Smith to the police. By the time Sheena reported Smith, he had already been arrested on a different matter. After waiving his Miranda rights, police interviewed Smith about the murder of Janet and Sarath. After initially denying involvement, Smith confessed. He claimed he committed the murders “in retaliation for wrongs done him or his family.”

Smith was charged, convicted, and sentenced to death.

This is not Michael Smith’s 1st execution date. Michael was previously scheduled to be executed on Thursday, July 6, 2023. His execution was rescheduled at the request of Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond. Drummond requested that several upcoming scheduled executions in Oklahoma be rescheduled to allow more time between executions. Oklahoma’s Department of Corrections is currently understaffed and preparing for an execution is time intensive.

Please pray for the families of Janet Moore and Sarath Pulluru. Pray for strength for the family of Michael Smith. Pray that if Michael is innocent, lacks the competency to be executed, or should not be executed for any other reason, that evidence will be provided before the execution. Please pray that Michael comes to find peace through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

(source: theforgivenessfoundation.org)

**************

Death penalty opponents to honor Senator George Young on May 18

The Oklahoma Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (OK-CADP) will host its 2024 Annual Awards Dinner & Meeting on Saturday, May 18 at New Covenant Christian Church, 12000 N. Rockwell Avenue, from 5:30 – 8:30 p.m. During the fundraising event, 3 members of the community will be honored with the group’s Abolitionist Awards.

The Oklahoma Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty will honor 3 members of the community at their Annual Awards Dinner on May 18. (L-R) Sue Hosch, OK-CADP Executive Board Member, will be given the Phil Wahl Abolitionist of the Year Award and Gretchen Garner Mosley, Chief of Capital Trials Division (Tulsa) at the Oklahoma Indigent Defense System (OIDS), will receive the Opio Toure Courageous Advocate Award. Rev. Dr. George E. Young, senior pastor at Greater Mt. Carmel Baptist Church and retiring state senator will be honored with the Lifetime Abolitionist Award. Sue Hosch, OK-CADP Executive Board Member, will be given the Phil Wahl Abolitionist of the Year Award and Gretchen Garner Mosley, Chief of the Oklahoma Indigent Defense System’s (OIDS) Tulsa Capital Trials Division, will receive the Opio Toure Courageous Advocate Award.

Rev. Dr. George E. Young, senior pastor at Greater Mt. Carmel Baptist Church and a retiring state senator will be honored with the Lifetime Abolitionist Award.

A longtime anti-death penalty advocate, then Oklahoma Legislative Black Caucus Chair-elect and State Rep. Young gave high praise to the Oklahoma Death Penalty Review Commission report released in 2017.

The commission, comprised of 11 members – both men and women from different backgrounds – met for more than a year to evaluate every part of the state’s death penalty proceedings.

“These men and women conducted an exhaustive look at Oklahoma’s death penalty practices I have been concerned about this state’s capital punishment protocol for a while now, and I cannot thank the commissioners enough for their dedication to reviewing this important subject,” said Young, (D-Oklahoma City).

“This is heavy work, and the commissioners left no stone unturned when evaluating legal precedents and how they apply to Oklahoma’s practices. Few people would’ve been willing to spend days entrenched in capital punishment procedures, but it was a necessary and noble commitment,” said Young. “It’s critical we do everything possible to ensure no innocent person is executed in our state.”

Young added, “To value life ought to be the goal of our state when it comes to punishment. My faith leads me to believe all life is valued.”

Formerly Senior Pastor at Holy Temple Baptist Church in Oklahoma City and Board Chair and CEO of Faith to Government, Inc., Dr. Young is also a former Commissioner for the Oklahoma Department of Human Services. He has a Masters of Arts in Ministry, Oklahoma Christian University; Master of Divinity, Phillips Theological Seminary; and a Master of Business Administration, Oklahoma Christian University. Senator Young was a House Member from 2014-2018 and a Senate Member from 2018 to present, where he is to step down from his Senate District 48 seat effective Nov. 15, 2024.

Young is a published author and an alumnus of Leadership Oklahoma, and has received multiple awards, including honors for his work promoting social justice and health care advocacy.

“We have 3 deserving recipients with diverse perspectives on abolition,” Heath said. “I’m sure we will be inspired by their stories.”

Since 1992, the Phil Wahl Abolitionist of the Year Award is presented each year at the OK-CADP Annual Awards Dinner to someone who exemplifies a “conspicuous effort in the organization’s purpose.” Phil Wahl, (Aug. 17, 1906 – Sept. 26, 2009) was a retired United Methodist Minister from Duncan, who served as a model of untiring work for abolishing the death penalty. In 1980 he completed a speaker's booklet called "Capital Punishment: Questions and Answers," which helped lead him to receive one of his many awards, the 1981 ACLU of Oklahoma Angie Debo Civil Liberties Award. Wahl was a board member of OK-CADP for 5 years.

The Opio Toure Courageous Advocate Award was established in 2008 to honor outstanding efforts by Defense Attorneys. The award is named after the late Oklahoma State Representative Opio Toure (March 31, 1954 – February 4, 2008). A die-hard opponent of the death penalty, Toure shepherded House Bill 2635 through the legislature, which was a measure that sought to stop the execution of mentally disabled offenders with intelligence quotients of 70 and/or below, and received wide bipartisan support. Later, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Atkins v. State of Virginia that executing the mentally disabled was in fact cruel and unusual punishment.

The Lifetime Abolitionist Award is presented to those for a life serving to end capital punishment.

The 32nd annual OK-CADP Annual Dinner will feature keynote speaker Justin Jones, who has served as Director of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections and as warden of Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester. The topic of his talk will be “Punishment, Revenge, or a Breach of Humanity?”

“I will be sharing my journey of evolution concerning the death penalty along with various observations after attending 27 executions,” Jones said.

“Justin Jones will give us a unique perspective of the challenges prisons face in executing inmates and the trauma it inflicts on prison employees,” said Rev. Don Heath, OK-CADP chair.

Registration and a wine reception will begin at 5:30 p.m., dinner will be served at 6:15 p.m. and the program will start at 7 p.m. The event will also be available via Zoom.

The evening will include the election of At-Large board members and the past year’s activity report. Music will be provided by The Jah Mystics.

Oklahoma has executed 11 inmates since resuming lethal injections in October 2021 following a 6-year moratorium after problems with drug mix-ups and a botched lethal injection in 2014. Death row prisoner Michael Dewayne Smith is scheduled for execution on April 4 and Wade Greely Lay is scheduled for execution on June 6.

In-Person & Virtual OK-CADP Annual Awards Dinner tickets are $75, students are $25. Tables (8 tickets) are $600. To purchase tickets online, visit okcadp.org.

To order tickets by mail, send checks along with each guest’s name to: OK-CADP, P. O. Box 713, Oklahoma City, OK 73101-0713.

(source: citynewsokc.com)

NEW MEXICO:

Possibility of death penalty in Jaremy Smith case

Gov. Bill Richardson repealed the death penalty in 2009.

Fatal shootings of police officers in the past year have some rethinking the move.

“Many of the police officers I've worked with over the years we'd like to see the death penalty come back. We recognize with the current makeup of our government that it's almost impossible it's not going to happen,” Former Bernalillo County Sheriff, Darren White said.

Darren White led efforts to get the death penalty reinstated.

8 people are currently accused of killing an officer and are in prison not facing the death penalty but that may not be the case for Jaremy Smith.

“Under the New Mexico charges the most he can get would be life in prison. Under the Federal Charges, the most extreme sentence is the death penalty,” KOAT Legal Expert John Day said.

White says there are several similarities to the in-line-of-duty death of deputy James McGrane in 2006, his killer serving a life sentence.

“Michael Paul Astorga was wanted for murder, and he assassinated Deputy McGrane, and this case with Officer Hare is very similar,”

His accused killer also had a criminal history and allegations of murder before his encounter with police.

Similar to allegations against Smith in South Carolina, where he is accused of killing a paramedic.

Even with supporters of the death penalty, White says it's something that will likely not change at the state level.

“The conversation that we will have, unfortunately when these tragedies take place it'll be about once upon a time we used to have a death penalty and New Mexico does not have it and it will never have it again,” White said.

(source: KOAT news)

USA:

Death Row Documentary About Nun Who Inspired ‘Dead Man Walking’ Set at Universal Pictures Content Group

Universal Pictures Content Group and Passion Pictures have wrapped on a new documentary about the nun who inspired 1995 Oscar-winning hit “Dead Man Walking,” Variety can exclusively confirm.

Titled “Rebel Nun,” the doc follows the story of Catholic nun and leading death penalty abolitionist Sister Helen Prejean. Susan Sarandaon won her 1st and only Oscar playing Prejean in “Dead Man Walking,” which was written and directed by Tim Robbins and co-starred Sean Penn as a convicted murderer.

“Rebel Nun” will explore Sister Helen’s life to date and her ongoing fight against the death penalty.

“Sister Helen Prejean was a humble nun from Louisiana who embarked on a controversial battle that would change the world,” reads the logline. “Now 84 years old, Sister Helen is currently fighting to stop the execution of a Death Row inmate in Oklahoma even lawmakers are convinced is innocent.”

The doc is directed by Dominic Sivyer (“The Masked Scammer”), who was granted unprecedented access to Sister Helen as well as unseen archive footage dating back 6 decades and interviews with key people involved in her work, including victims’ families.

Dawn Porter (“Gideon’s Army”) is an exec producer alongside Universal Pictures Content Group EVP Helen Parker, Oscar winner Andrew Ruhemann (“Searching for Sugarman”), Amy Foster (“The Masked Scammer”), Kari Lia (“Break Point”) and Hamish Fergusson (“Once Upon a Time in Iraq”) of Passion Pictures.

“Sister Helen has been such an inspirational force for justice, it was a true honor to join this talented team,” said Porter. “There is so much work to do to reform the criminal justice system in the United States. Films like these shine a light on pressing social justice issues.”

Parker said: “We knew a project like this needed creative powerhouses behind the scenes to match Sister Helen’s passion, dedication, and commitment; and we have found just that in Dominic, Dawn and the team at Passion Pictures.”

Lia added: “‘Rebel Nun’ is an honest, unflinching portrait of Sister Helen, tireless advocate against the death penalty. Director Dominic Sivyer isn’t afraid to ask the difficult questions, blasting through the public, at times controversial, persona to reveal a character of both incredible strength and fragility.”

(source: variety.com)

***************

Citing a Lack of Evidence, Editors of the Scientific American Call for Abolition of the Death Penalty in New Op-Ed

NEW VOICES

“It is long past time to abolish the death penalty in the U.S.,” write the editors for the Scientific American. In a March 19, 2024 op-ed titled “Evidence Does Not Support the Use of the Death Penalty,” the authors cite an abundance of studies demonstrating that the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime, but is a flawed, racially biased, and costly practice responsible for sentencing innocent lives to death.

In discussing the numerous problems with the death penalty, the opinion and analysis article highlights the increasing occurrence of botched executions, using the recent execution of Kenneth Smith to illustrate “this barbarity.” Alabama used an untested method of nitrogen hypoxia in the January 25 execution of Mr. Smith, who the state had previously tried and failed to execute via lethal injection. While the state attorney general deemed the execution a success, media eyewitnesses reported visible and violent reactions to the inhalation of nitrogen gas and an execution that took at least 20 minutes. After reviewing other execution methods, authors conclude that there “is no ethical, scientifically supported, medically acceptable or morally justifiable way” to carry out an execution.

Given growing public opinion that the death penalty is applied unfairly, the authors urge President Biden to fulfill his 2020 campaign promise to work toward elimination of the federal death penalty and for state legislators to abolish the death penalty. Although 27 U.S. states retain the death penalty, only a small number of counties, primarily in southern states, are responsible for most new death sentences.

In 1972, the Supreme Court found serious constitutional concerns with the arbitrariness and racial discrimination in the application of the death penalty and struck down existing death penalty statutes in Furman v. Georgia. Following a 4-year moratorium, the death penalty was reinstated in 1976 after the Supreme Court’s decision in Gregg v. Georgia. Since then, 1,585 executions have been carried out. DPIC has identified at least 197 cases since 1973 in which a person was exonerated after being wrongfully sentenced to death and another 20 cases where an execution was carried out despite credible claims of innocence. The authors cite this data to support their contention that the current death penalty system is “wholly ineffective.” “Too many of these victims have been Black or Hispanic,” the authors note. “This is not justice. These are state-sanctioned hate crimes.”

The article argues that retribution, rather than evidence-based reasons, is the primary driving force behind retaining capital punishment. “A furious urge for vengeance against those who have done wrong—or those we think have done wrong—is the biggest motivation for the death penalty,” the authors assert. “But this desire for violent retribution is the very impulse that our criminal justice system is made to check, not abet. Elected officials need to reform this aspect of our justice system at both the state and federal levels. Capital punishment does not stop crime and mocks both justice and humanity. The death penalty in the U.S. must come to an end.”

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

NIGERIA:

Mom, others hail death sentence on Chinese who killed lover

Hajiya Fatima Zubairu, the mother of Ummulkhulsum Buhari who was killed by her Chinese boyfriend, Frank Geng Quarong, has commended the death sentence slammed on Quarong by the Kano State High Court on Tuesday for killing her daughter.

Quarong, who is resident in Kano, was convicted on one count of culpable homicide, and sentenced to death by hanging.

Reading his judgement, the Presiding Judge, Justice Sunusi Maaji, rejected all 6 witnesses and evidence provided by the accused person.

Maaji said the prosecution counsels led by the state Commissioner for Justice and Attorney General, Haruna Dederi, have proved the case beyond reasonable doubt.

He sentenced Quarong to death by hanging but added that they had a stipulated time to appeal the case if they were not convinced by the judgement.

Speaking with newsmen after the verdict, the victim’s mother expressed satisfaction with the judge’s decision.

She said, “I am extremely sad I lost my daughter, but I am satisfied justice has been served,” Zubairu said.

Also reacting to the development on X (formerly Twitter), some Nigerians stated that the ruling would serve as a deterrent to others.

A user, @Mrwateeter wrote, “What goes around comes around.”

Another user, @Simontaver, noted “It’s a good thing that justice has had its day in court. However, nothing can take away the pain this devil caused the family of the victim.”

On his part, @trueaficionado stated, “Every criminal must be made to face the consequence of their crimes to serve as a deterrent to others so that sanity can prevail in a society so engrossed in unending criminal activities of different dimensions.”

Also reacting, @Jerrydjft wrote, “Good one. It should serve as a deterrent to foreigners coming to Nigeria to commit crimes unabated.”

Others, however, expressed fear that the convict might plot an escape as it was in the case of Nadeem Anjarwalla, a Binance executive detained in Nigeria for alleged tax evasion and other offences, who reportedly escaped from custody.

@Sakinmuwagu wrote, “You will soon hear that he escaped from prison just the way the Binance executive escaped from the prison.”

@GAdeyela, who described it as good news, stated, “A lesson for some of our sisters to stop selling themselves to foreigners because of money. Let them overcome their low esteem. I hope he will not escape from detention like the Binance director because some of our security men are corrupt.”

@Chiefudo, on his part, wrote, “They should keep him in an underground jail and chains before he disappears like Binance boss; you know Nigeria is a country of many wonders.”

Quarong reportedly killed his erstwhile girlfriend, Buhari, following a misunderstanding.

During the proceedings, the prosecution counsel informed the court that the convict committed the offence on September 16, 2022, at Janbulo Quarters, Kano metropolis.

He said on the same date at about 9 pm the convict stabbed the deceased with a knife in her house situated at Janbulo Quarters Kano for an undisclosed reason.

“The victim was rushed to the Murtala Muhammad Specialist Hospital Kano where she was confirmed dead by a medical doctor,” he noted.

At the court, the defendant pleaded not guilty to the charge.

The prosecution then presented 6 witnesses to prove their case against the defendant along with 4 exhibits.

The prosecutor also said the offence contravenes the provision of section 221(b) of the Penal Code.

Moreso, the defence counsel, Muhummad Dan’azumi, presented the defendant to defend himself, and one other witness and tendered 5 exhibits.

He further urged the court to recommend the defendant for the prerogative of mercy pursuant to Section 313 of ACJL.

(source: punchng.com)

TUNISIA:

4 face death penalty for 2013 Tunisian opposition leader murder----23 individuals have been accused in connection with the assassination of leftist Chokri Belaid

4 individuals were handed the death penalty, while two were given life imprisonment for the killing of Tunisian opposition leader Chokri Belaid in 2013, as stated by the deputy public prosecutor of the anti-terrorist judicial division Wednesday.

A total of 23 individuals had been accused in connection with the assassination of leftist Belaid.

Various sentences, ranging from two to 120 years, were imposed on other defendants, with 5 acquitted.

Belaid, a vocal opponent of the then-ruling Islamist party Ennahdha, was assassinated on February 6, 2013, in his vehicle outside his residence.

Tunisia continues to issue death sentences, particularly in terrorism-related cases, despite an unofficial halt implemented in 1991.

Extremists affiliated with the Islamic State claimed responsibility for Belaid's murder, as well as that of Mohamed Brahmi, another leftist opposition figure, six months later.

Authorities announced in 2014 that Kamel Gadhgadhi, the primary perpetrator in Belaid's case, had been eliminated in an anti-terrorist operation.

Both Belaid and Brahmi were ardent critics of Ennahdha, the party that held significant sway in Tunisian politics and had a parliamentary majority for a decade following the 2011 revolution.

The party's political dominance ended in July 2021 when President Kais Saied orchestrated a comprehensive seizure of power.

(source: Associated Press)

********************

4 sentenced to death for assassinating Tunisian opposition leader in 2013

(see: https://thestreetjournal.org/four-sentenced-to-death-for-assassinating-tunisian-opposition-leader-in-2013/)

UNITED KINGDOM:

Assange Extradition Delayed: British MP Jeremy Corbyn on U.K. Court Seeking More Assurances from U.S.

GUESTS

Jeremy Corbyn, U.K. member of Parliament who served as Labour Party leader from 2015 to 2020.

The British High Court in London has put the extradition of Julian Assange on hold until the United States provides assurances that he would get a fair trial in the U.S. without facing the death penalty. If those assurances are not met, Assange will be granted the right to a full appeal hearing. Speaking outside the court Tuesday, Stella Assange called for the Biden administration to “drop this shameful case” against her husband. “Julian should never have been imprisoned for a single day,” she said. We speak with MP Jeremy Corbyn, who led the U.K. Labour Party from 2015 to 2020 and who has been calling for all charges against Assange to be dropped. “The pressure needs to now go on to the Biden administration,” Corbyn says. “If Julian goes down for this, every serious journalist around the world is going to be slightly more cautious about exposing war crimes, about exposing corporate greed.”

Transcript

AMY GOODMAN: The High Court in London has put the extradition of Julian Assange on hold until the U.S. provides Britain with more assurances about how the WikiLeaks publisher will be treated in U.S. custody. The court asks the U.S. for assurances that Assange will be permitted to rely on the First Amendment, that he won’t face discrimination at trial because he’s Australian, and that he will not face the death penalty. The London High Court also ruled Assange may be able to file additional appeals to block the extradition, but that will depend on how the U.S. responds to the court’s request.

Julian Assange has been held in London’s Belmarsh Prison for nearly 5 years awaiting possible extradition to the U.S., where he faces up to 175 years in prison for publishing classified documents exposing U.S. war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Julian Assange’s wife Stella spoke outside the courthouse just before our broadcast.

STELLA ASSANGE: Today’s decision is astounding. The courts recognize that Julian is exposed to a flagrant denial of his freedom of expression rights, that he is being discriminated against on the basis of his nationality, an Australian, and that he remains exposed to the death penalty. And yet, what the courts have done have been to invite a political intervention from the United States to send a letter saying it’s all OK. I find this astounding.

Five years into this case, the United States has managed to show the court that their case remains an attack on press freedom, an attack on Julian’s life. What the courts haven’t agreed to look at is the evidence that the United States has plotted to assassinate Julian, to kidnap him, because if it acknowledges that, then, of course, he can’t be sent to the United States.

Julian is a political prisoner. He is a journalist. And he is being persecuted because he exposed the true cost of war in human lives. This case is a retribution. It is a signal to all of you that if you expose the interests that are driving war, they will come after you, they will put you in prison, and they will try to kill you.

Julian is just a few days away from the 5th anniversary of his arrest and imprisonment in Belmarsh prison. He has been in Belmarsh for five years without conviction. And the charges against him are to punish him for publishing the truth, for publishing evidence of the war crimes committed by the country that is trying to extradite him.

Now the U.K. courts have invited the United States to issue assurances. The Biden administration should not issue assurances. They should drop this shameful case that should never have been brought. Julian should never have been in prison for a single day. This is a shame on every democracy. Julian is a political prisoner. He is a publisher, and he is being [punished] for expressing his political opinion, for expressing freedom of the press in its purest form.

Free Julian. I ask everyone to rally behind him and call for his freedom, call for the Biden administration to drop the case and support House Resolution 934 before the U.S. Congress to drop this case. Thank you.

AMY GOODMAN: That was attorney Stella Assange, the wife of Julian Assange and mother of their 2 young children.

We’re joined now by British MP — that’s British member of Parliament — Jeremy Corbyn, who served as the leader of the Labour Party from 2015 to 2020. He’s standing outside the High Court.

Welcome back to Democracy Now!, MP Corbyn. If you could start off by responding to the court’s decision? And if you can explain it in lay terms?

JEREMY CORBYN: Thanks, Amy. And it’s a real pleasure to be on the program with you.

And this morning there was a decision by the court, which, as Stella has pointed out, effectively invites the U.S.A. to give some assurances. But it also gives the opportunity for a further appeal by Julian against his removal to the U.S.A.

But if we can sort of unpick the whole thing, the reality is the pressure needs to now go on to the Biden administration, go on to President Biden, to say, “Look, you are trying to get somebody extradited from Britain under the Espionage Act, the same act that was used against Daniel Ellsberg, to be put into a supermax prison for the rest of his life — a death penalty. Why? Because he told the truth, about Afghanistan, about Iraq. Because he told uncomfortable truths about many other issues around the world.” And if Julian goes down for this, every serious journalist around the world is going to be slightly more cautious about exposing war crimes, exposing corporate greed and so many other things. And so, I appeal, if I may, through you and your audience, on Democracy Now!: We need the maximum pressure all across the U.S.A. on the Biden administration, on the candidates in the forthcoming election, to say, “Drop the charges against Julian Assange.”

We’ve had a big crowd outside the High Court here. And the date has been set for return here on May the 20th, and we’ll obviously be back here. But I should also say the support for Julian is growing. We’ve got good decisions out of the European Parliament. That’s the European Union Parliament. We’ve also got good decisions out of the Council of Europe, which is a parliamentary assembly — I’m a member of it — of all European countries. We’ve also got the support of a significant number of governments around the world: Mexico, Brazil, Colombia and so on, all around the world.

And so, we have got through today. We’ve got a slight move forward, but it’s no more than that. It’s now up to us, all of us, who believe in democracy, believe in freedom of speech, to put that pressure on the Biden administration, and, in the case of Britain, on my own government here, where the home secretary ultimately has the right to decide whether or not an extradition goes ahead. Whatever the courts say, ultimately, it’s a political decision by the governments of the day. And there’s a growing number of us in the U.K. Parliament that will continue putting that pressure on, as well.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Jeremy Corbyn, you mentioned the support for Julian among institutions in the European Union. How likely would it be, regardless if the British authorities and the courts decide to extradite him, that the European Court of Human Rights might intervene in the case?

JEREMY CORBYN: The next stage would be to take the case to the European Court of Human Rights. The European Court of Human Rights is not a European Union institution. It’s much older than that. It was founded in the postwar settlement when the European Convention on Human Rights was set up. And it is a court that meets in Strasbourg and has judges elected from every European country, and pretty well all of them, except Russia and Belarus, are in the European — the Council of Europe, and therefore in the European Court of Human Rights. And the case would go there under the convention rights.

And it’s significant, the numbers of members of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly that have shown their support for Julian Assange. Now, obviously, that would be a political expression. This would be a judicial decision. But if it goes there, that would be, in my view, a good thing. But the much better option would be if President Biden recognized that within the terms of his job as president of the United States to defend the U.S. Constitution, does the U.S. Constitution not protect the right of free speech, the right of assembly, the right to publish? That’s really what it’s about.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And there have been some media reports that the Biden administration was considering a plea deal, which would end up with Julian pleading guilty to a lesser charge but then not having to serve any time in prison. Your reaction to — do you think this is another fallback position that the Biden administration is considering?

JEREMY CORBYN: Well, it shows — if the Biden administration is even thinking about that, that shows they are having second thoughts about their decision to pursue the Espionage Act against Julian. I don’t know what negotiations have gone on or not gone on. What I do know is that Julian has suffered unbelievably in almost five years in a supermax prison in Britain, the most maximum-security prison we’ve got in this country. The conditions there are pretty awful. And before that, he was 5 years, almost, in the Ecuadorian Embassy. My principle is that he is being punished for publishing extremely uncomfortable truths about Abu Ghraib, about Afghanistan and about much more else around the world. And he’s an embarrassment to governments like those that have committed war crimes around the world. Well, surely, all of us that believe in democracy should now be standing alongside Julian.

(source: democracynow.org)

RUSSIA:

Russian senator says death sentence for terrorists unworkable even without moratorium

United Russia Senator Andrey Klishas weighed in on the possible return of the death penalty on Wednesday, warning that even if the moratorium on capital punishment in places since 1996 were lifted, sentencing terrorists to death would remain legally impossible.

Noting the increased discussion of the topic in light of last week’s Crocus City Hall terror attack, in which 140 people were killed and another 360 were injured, Klishas argued that more would be necessary to reinstate the death penalty than simply the acquiescence of the Constitutional Court, as State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin had previously claimed.

The Russian Constitution allowed the death penalty in exceptional cases and only for those convicted of particularly serious crimes in a jury trial, Klishas said, adding that, under current legislation, terrorism did not fall into those categories and carried a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

Klishas said that Russian law allows for the death penalty only for culpable homicide, attacks on select public servants and statesmen, and genocide.

“In view of the above, ‘experts’ and lawyers pointing to the Constitutional Court as an obstacle to ‘fair retribution’ after the tragic events at Crocus City Hall … is unfair speculation,” Klishas added.

(source: novayagazeta.org)

INDIA:

5 SENTENCED TO DEATH FOR MURDER OF FORMER ODISHA BLOCK CHAIRMAN

In a landmark verdict, a court in Odisha’s Keonjhar district on March 3, 2024 sentenced 5 individuals to death for the murder of former Anandpur block chairman Ram Chandra Behera. The brutal crime occurred 5 years ago on March 25, 2019.

The convicts, identified as Sanjay Prusti, Ajit Prusti, Arun Prusti, Alekha Prusti, and Dola Boitei, were found guilty by the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge at Anandpur. The verdict comes after a thorough examination of evidence collected during the investigation and testimonies from 53 witnesses.

According to reports, Behera was hacked to death with sharp weapons near his residence in Dhakotha village, located within the Ghasipura Assembly segment.

The former block chairman, who had previously contested the 2004 Assembly elections from Ghasipura, succumbed to his injuries while being transported to SCB Medical College and Hospital in Cuttack.

The police, following the incident, arrested 5 individuals linked to the murder. Investigators asserted that the motive behind Behera’s murder stemmed from prior enmity.

(source: handsoffcain.info)

******************

Murders of BJP Worker, 4 Others: HC upholds accused Palatkar’s death penalty by Nagpur Court

(see: https://www.nagpurtoday.in/murders-of-bjp-worker-4-others-hc-upholds-accused-palatkars-death-penalty-by-nagpur-court/03271401)

****************************

Textile Worker: Death Sentence For Textile Worker For Murder Of Wife & 3 In-laws

(see: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kolhapur/death-sentence-for-textile-worker-for-murder-of-wife-3-in-laws/articleshow/108803579.cms)

MALAYSIA:

Man accused of drug trafficking six years ago, asks court for death penalty

A man accused of drug trafficking six years ago surprised the Ayer Keroh High Court today when he asked the judge to hand down the death penalty to him.

According to the charge sheet, Ng Chan Keong, 39, was accused of trafficking 2.7 kilogrammes of methamphetamine on the emergency lane at KM 215 of the North-South Expressway, near Alor Gajah on Oct 2, 2018, at around 5pm.

"I want the death penalty. That's all," Ng said.

However, Judge Datuk Anselm Charles Fernandis reiterated that it was the court's right to determine the sentence and adjourned the proceedings for five minutes.

Upon resumption of proceedings, he sentenced the accused to life imprisonment starting from the date of his arrest on Oct 2, 2018, and 12 strokes of the rotan.

Earlier, in delivering his judgement, Anslem said after considering all the evidence and arguments from both the defence and prosecution, the court found that the accused failed to raise a reasonable doubt about the case.

He said, however, that the court was satisfied that the prosecution had proven the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

He was charged under Section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and could be punished under Section 39B(2) of the same act, which carries the death penalty upon conviction.

Deputy public prosecutor Mohd Asri Abdul Rahman Sidik and Nabilalif Mohd Rosli prosecuted, while the accused was represented by lawyer Wan Zaleha Abdul Wahab.

A total of 13 prosecution witnesses and 2 defence witnesses gave their testimonies throughout the trial, which began on Sept 10, 2020.

Meanwhile, a female family member of the accused had tried to stop journalists from taking pictures of the accused after the proceedings concluded.

The accused had also verbally abused journalists before being calmed down by bailiffs.

(source: nst.com.my)

*************

FISHERMAN WHO KILLED WIFE HAD HIS DEATH SENTENCE COMMUTED TO 33 YEARS

(see: https://www.bernama.com/en/crime_courts/news.php?id=2283300)

BANGLADESH:

Wife, 3 others get death penalty for killing man in Cumilla

A Cumilla court on Wednesday sentenced a woman and 3 other people to death for killing her husband in Cumilla’s Homna upazila.

The convicts are Shahanaj Begum, Md Kuddus Mia, Abdul Khalek, Md Rajib.

Jahangir Hossain of Additional District and Sessions Judge's Court-4 handed down the verdict in the absence of the accused.

According to case statement, Abdul Jalil went missing on June 9, 2013, after leaving his home in Homna on his way to Dhaka.

Jalil's mutilated body was recovered from the roadside in Baher Khola area the next day.

His brother Tajul Islam filed a case with Homna Police Station against unidentified miscreants.

Later, the investigating officer of the case submitted the charge sheet to the court accusing five people -Abdul Jalil's wife Shahnaz Begum, Md Shahjahan, Md Kuddus Mia, Abdul Khalek and Md Rajib.

The court sentenced 4 people to death as the charges against them were proved after the prosecution examined 14 witnesses.

(source: unb.com.bd)

YEMEN:

Houthis Sentence Men to Death, Flogging----Serious Due Process Violations in Sentences That Include Stoning, Crucifixion

A Houthi court sentenced 32 men, 9 of them to death, on January 23, 2024, in an unfair mass trial based on dubious charges of “sodomy,” Human Rights Watch said today. The Houthis should end their use of the death penalty and other forms of cruel and degrading punishment and provide fair trials for those charged.

In addition to death sentences that include crucifixion and stoning, the Houthi court sentenced 23 men to prison for periods of up to 10 years. Three of them were also sentenced to public flogging. The initial court indictment, dated October 17, 2023, included serious due process violations and egregious violations of Yemen’s own criminal procedural code, Human Rights Watch found.

“In an abhorrent disregard for the rule of law, the Houthis are handing down death sentences and subjecting men to public mistreatment without a semblance of due process,” said Niku Jafarnia, Yemen and Bahrain researcher at Human Rights Watch. “The Houthis are using these cruel measures to distract from their failure to govern and provide people in their territories with basic needs.”

Human Rights Watch reviewed the official indictments against the 32 men by the Houthi courts and videos of the Houthi court proceedings posted on social media, and interviewed a lawyer with knowledge of the case. Blatant due process violations included police officers failing to provide arrest warrants and unlawfully searching and confiscating the men’s phones. The lawyer questioned whether those charged had adequate access to legal counsel.

Human Rights Watch has documented serious violations by governments in the Middle East and North Africa targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people online and using “illegitimately obtained digital photos, chats, and similar information” to prosecute them.

The Yemeni Criminal Procedures law, under articles 132 and 172, prohibits warrantless arrests as well as seizing people’s belongings in police custody. Article 181 also prohibits police interrogations without the presence of a lawyer.

The Houthi armed group took over Yemen’s capital, Sanaa, in September 2014, causing the internationally recognized Yemeni government to flee. The Houthis, as a non-state actor that exercises “de facto control over [a] territory and population,” are obligated to “respect and protect the human rights of individuals and groups” living under their control.

Human Rights Watch has also documented systematic abuses in Houthi prisons. In a 2023 report, the UN Security Council’s Panel of Experts on Yemen found that “Houthi-held prisoners are subjected to systematic psychological and physical torture, including the denial of medical intervention to cure the injuries caused by the torture inflicted, which for some prisoners resulted in permanent disabilities and death.”

On October 10, 2023, another Houthi-run court in Dhamar city, a Yemeni governorate south of Sanaa, convicted 16 men of committing “immoral acts,” according to the official indictment reviewed by Human Rights Watch. According to a post on X by al-Mashhad al-Yemeni, a local news website, on February 14, 2024, Houthi forces gathered 30 men, including the 16 men who had been convicted on October 10, in a cemetery in Dhamar, and stated that they were going to execute the men by stoning them to death. The men were instead returned to detention, according to the same local news website.

2 activists and a lawyer told Human Rights Watch that the families of several defendants fled Dhamar governorate to escape the social stigma associated with the accusations. Another Yemeni activist with knowledge of the case said: “Charging and putting people on trial because of ‘immoral acts’ has catastrophic long-term consequences on people’s lives in Yemen, even if they are fabricated or made up. Those charged and their families will be impacted and stigmatized forever.”

Houthis have repeatedly arrested people who have been critical of their policies under the guise of “committing immoral acts,” Human Rights Watch said. In January 2024, the Houthis arrested Judge Abdulwahab Qatran on charges related to alcohol consumption after he criticized the Houthis’ Red Sea attacks on social media. In 2021, a Houthi court sentenced a Yemeni model and actress, Intisar al-Hammadi, as well as three other women, to prison after convicting them on charges of committing “an indecent act.”

According to Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor, Houthi courts have sentenced 350 people to death since taking over the capital in 2014 and executed 11 of them. On September 18, 2021, Houthi forces executed 9 people, reportedly including a 17-year-old, in Sanaa’s Tahrir Square. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights said that “the defendants were sentenced to death in a judicial process that violated their constitutional rights and did not comply with fair trial standards under international law.”

International human rights standards, including the Arab Charter on Human Rights, ratified by Yemen, obligate countries that use the death penalty to restrict its enforcement to exceptional circumstances for the “most serious crimes.”

Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all countries and under all circumstances. Capital punishment is unique in its cruelty and finality, and its determination is often plagued with arbitrariness, prejudice, and error, Human Rights Watch said.

“To cover up their brutality, Houthis are charging people with immoral acts, especially for those who oppose them,” said Jafarnia. “The Houthis should immediately end the use of the death penalty and other forms of cruel and degrading punishments and provide due process for those charged.”

(source: Human Rights Watch)

IRAN----executions

Execution Carried Out in Tabriz Prison for Drug Conviction

Tabriz Prison officials executed an inmate convicted of drug-related offenses on March 25, 2024, as reported by the Iran Human Rights Organization. The executed inmate has been identified as Abbas Aghaie (Aghayi), aged 36, from Tabriz. He was sentenced to death for drug offenses 28 months ago.

No official sources or domestic media outlets within the country have provided coverage of this execution at the time of writing. The lack of official information raises concerns about transparency and accountability in the execution process.

The reports from the Department of Statistics and Publication of Human Rights Activists for the year 2023 reveal a concerning prevalence of executions for drug offenses in Iran, constituting 56.4% of the total executions.

(source: en-hrana.org)

******************

Iranian political prisoners hold their 9th round of hunger strike in protest to executions in Iran

Iranian political prisoners in Qezal Hesar Prison held their 9th round of hunger strike in protest to the regime’s spate of executions on Tuesday, March 26, 2024.

A number of political prisoners in the women’s ward of Evin Prison as well as prisoners in wards 4, 6, and 8 joined the hunger strike as before. Political detainees in the prisons of Khorramabad, Mashhad, Saqqez, Naghadeh, Khoy, and the Central Prison of Karaj also went on hunger strike.

On Tuesday, January 30, several death-row prisoners in Qezel Hesar made an announcement: “In order to amplify our voices, we will commence a hunger strike every Tuesday. We have chosen Tuesdays because this day often marks the final moments for our fellow inmates, who are usually transferred to solitary confinement a few days prior.”

The ongoing resistance of Iranian political prisoners against the clerical regime’s killing machine persists amidst a concerning escalation in the issuance of death sentences.

(source: women.nc-org)

***************

Iran Executes Three on Drug-related Charges

The Islamic Republic recently executed 3 individuals, including a woman, on drug-related charges amidst a surge in capital punishment in the country.

On the morning of March 25, a 36-year-old man named Abbas Aghaei, from Tabriz, faced the death penalty at Tabriz Central Prison.

His conviction stemmed from drug-related charges, as reported by the Norway-based Iran Human Rights organization.

According to a source familiar with the case, Abbas Aghaei had been arrested 28 months prior on drug charges.

However, he consistently denied ownership of the drugs, claiming they did not belong to him.

Following his father's death, Abbas became the primary caretaker of his siblings, all under the age of 15.

Despite these circumstances and his recent engagement four months before his arrest, Abbas was sentenced to death by the court.

According to the Iran Human Rights organization, the death sentence of a couple convicted in a drug-related case was also executed at Tabriz Central Prison on March 18.

The man is identified as Yasin Zulfaghari, but his wife's identity remains undisclosed.

They were arrested and sentenced to death for possession of 3 kilograms of crystal meth.

The couple, married for a year, were both top defendants in the case, leading to the execution of their sentence.

According to the Iran Human Rights organization's report, the Islamic Republic executed approximately 834 individuals last year. Of these, 471 – constituting 56 % – were put to death for drug-related crimes.

(source: iranwire.com)

MARCH 26, 2024:

TEXAS:

I'm excited to share that our documentary, "Pain and Peace," was premiered at Cinequest film festival in San Jose, CA on March 16th. We were deeply moved by the standing ovation the film received after the screening. During the Q&A session, numerous audience members echoed our message, highlighting that "Pain and Peace" offers a timely exploration of the human capacity for healing and reconciliation in an era marked by unprecedented hate, division, and extremism.

Later, the festival director told us that many audience members praised our Q&A session as the best. It felt like all the hard work we put into producing this film had paid off, and our goal of inspiring audiences and helping them find hope and meaning in their lives was achieved at the premiere.

Additionally, I wanted to share a powerful review of our film recently published in a movie magazine. I hope you'll find it impactful.

“I screened Pain and Peace for its world premiere at Cinequest. I highlighted it as one of two Must See films in my Best of Cinequest. It’s not very often that I see a movie as potentially life-changing, but this one is.”

https://www.themoviegourmet.com/?p=42244&fbclid=IwAR3BAZp1J2pXk-bCqqV0o-VKcenpOwCk0VQETaoofdSlyL8keduFtqLnTLU Thank you, Rais Bhuiyan, Founder, World Without Hate

[MY NOTE----Mark Stroman killed 2 and wounded 1 (Rais), in Dallas, in the first hate crime attacks in the USA following the tragedy of 9/11....Stroman was eventually executed in Texas]

(source: RB, worldwithouthate.org)

DELAWARE:

Bishop Koenig urges Delaware legislators to get behind bills that would bar death penalty in the state

Bishop Koenig has asked lawmakers in Delaware to get behind legislation that would bar capital punishment in the state.

It’s been 12 years since the state carried out an execution in Delaware.

House Bill 70 would formally end the death penalty in Delaware. House Bill 301 seeks to amend the Delaware constitution to prohibit the institution of the death penalty in the state.

HB 70 made it through House Judiciary Committee last week and needs a majority vote in both the state house and senate before being sent for the signature of Gov. John Carney. HB 301 was passed last week by the House Administration Committee and is part of the amendment process, which requires a two-thirds vote in two consecutive General Assemblies.

“This is rooted in the church’s fundamental belief in the sacred dignity of all human life from conception to natural death and the teaching that all people are made in the image and likeness of God,” Bishop Koenig wrote in a letter to legislators dated March 25.

Bishop Koenig noted that in 2017, when the question of whether to remedy a constitutional flaw which brought about a de facto moratorium on the death penalty in Delaware was before the state House, his predecessor, Bishop W. Francis Malooly said: “The true question at the heart of this issue is whether or not the death penalty is a just and necessary method of punishment … Prison provides an effective alternative to the death penalty by removing the serious offender from society and allowing an opportunity for repentance, reformation, and reconciliation.”

Bishop Koenig said he agrees.

“During this Holy Week leading up to the Feast of Easter, I join with my brother bishop, and many others who advocate for life in Delaware, in urging you to support HB 70 and HB 301,” Bishop Koenig wrote.

“The Catechism states that ‘[T]he death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person,’” Bishop Koenig wrote. “Saint Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis have all called for the abolishment of capital punishment globally. The U.S. bishops have repeatedly advocated for an end to the death penalty in our country.”

The last execution in Delaware was April 20, 2012, when Shannon Johnson, 28, was put to death by lethal injection, according to the website delaware.gov. Johnson had been convicted of 1st-degree murder in the 2006 killing of Cameron Hamlin.

(source: The Dialog)

FLORIDA:

Convicted murderer again faces possible death sentence for 1991 sword slaying in Daytona----James Guzman's previous convictions and or death sentences for a 1991 murder were struck down. Now, he faces a possible 4th death sentence in the case in which he used a sword to kill a man.

For the 4th time since 1992, a man is facing a possible death sentence for the sword-slaying of a man in a Daytona Beach motel 3 decades ago.

A Volusia County jury last week recommended in a 12-0 vote that James Guzman, 59, be put to death for killing David Colvin, a 48-year-old businessman from Norfolk, Virginia, more than 3 decades ago.

The decision on whether Guzman will return to death row or spend the rest of his life in prison rests with Circuit Judge Dawn Nichols. A sentencing date has not been set yet.

Guzman had been free from prison less than 4 months for killing a woman in Miami-Dade County when he killed Colvin.

Guzman inflicted 19 sword wounds on Colvin on Aug. 10, 1991, in a room at what was then the Imperial Motor Lodge on South Ridgewood Avenue.

Guzman had been chauffeuring Colvin. But Guzman killed Colvin to rob him and had told his former girlfriend that if he ever robbed someone he would kill the person because dead witnesses can't talk, according to court records.

Guzman stole cash and a diamond ring from Colvin. He sold the ring for cash and used some of the money to buy crack cocaine.

Guzman was found guilty in 2016 of 1st-degree murder and robbery with a weapon in Colvin’s killing and sentenced to death. The jury then voted 11 to 1 to recommend Guzman’s death.

But the Florida Supreme Court in 2018 struck down the death sentence because it had not been unanimous.

But last year, state law changed requiring only eight out of the 12 jurors to recommend death.

Guzman's previous 2 convictions and death sentences in Colvin's murder were overturned on appeal.

“The jury spoke loudly with a 12-0 death recommendation,” State Attorney R.J. Larizza stated in a release. “We are one step closer to reaching a final disposition in a case that has eluded justice for too long.”

(source: news-journalonline.com)

MISSOURI:

Man convicted of killing Hailey Owens back in Greene County Jail for hearing

Craig Wood, who was convicted in the 2014 kidnapping, rape and murder of Hailey Owens, has returned to Greene County Jail ahead of a hearing regarding his death sentence.

Wood was booked into the Greene County Jail on Friday, March 22 after being transferred from the Potosi Correctional Center in Mineral Point, Missouri.

Court documents state that Wood will attend a three-day evidentiary hearing before the Greene County Circuit Court from March 25-27 to try and change his death sentence.

Wood was sentenced to death by Greene County Judge Thomas Mountjoy in 2018 after a jury was unable to unanimously decide whether to give him a death sentence or life in prison without parole.

“Death penalty cases in general are rare,” Criminal Defense Attorney Adam Woody said, who is not involved in Wood’s case. “There’s only a couple a year, and realistically, the death penalty has not been handed down by a jury in Missouri for several, several years.”

The decision was appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court, which affirmed the ruling, while the United States Supreme Court denied an additional appeal. Wood’s attorneys have argued that his death sentence by the judge was unconstitutional.

On Feb. 18, 2014, Craig Wood abducted Hailey Owens in his truck while she was walking home from school. In his basement, Wood raped Hailey and shot her in the back of her head. Craig Wood was convicted of first-degree murder by a Greene County jury in 2017.

“Missouri is even in the more rare category where if the jury can’t decide if they’re hung up, for example, and can’t decide whether the defendant should be sentenced to death, then the judge gets to decide,” Woody said. “Missouri and Indiana are the 2 states that allow that process and procedure.”

Woody said other state default to life in prison if the jury cannot make a unanimous decision.

“Several states, even in the past ten years or so, have taken this issue up, and their Supreme courts have determined that this is an unconstitutional practice for there to be a hung jury at the sentencing phase of a capital case,” Woody said.

The Death Penalty Policy Project said in the last decade, there have been three death sentences in Missouri. Two of them were imposed by a judge and one by a jury.

“We believe as a people, that the Community has better judgment than any single person,” Director of Death Penalty Policy Project Robert Dunham said. “If you’re going to have a death penalty system, it has to be administered in a way that’s fair. Our system in the states in which we have it fails that test.”

Woody said a defendant will automatically receive life in prison without parole if a jury cannot come to a unanimous decision in almost all states.

“To serve on a death penalty jury, you have to swear to be willing to cast the first stone,” Dunham said. “You cannot be against the death penalty. So you’re dealing with a group of jurors who are already more predisposed to impose a death penalty. If you cannot get them all agree, then you shouldn’t be imposing the death penalty.”

No matter the decision of the case, Woody said this is not the end of the appeal process. The side against the decision can appeal all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

(source: ozarksfirst.com)

OKLAHOMA----impending execution

This Oklahoma death row inmate had a novel reason for asking for an execution stay. He still lost

Death row inmate Michael DeWayne Smith on Monday lost his request for a stay of his execution.

Smith, 41, asked for the stay because of a proposed moratorium on the death penalty that is before the state Legislature.

He is set to be executed by lethal injection April 4 at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester.

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals voted 5-0 to deny his request.

"Petitioner's claim of harm is based solely upon speculation that House Bill 3138 will pass and become law," judges said. "Petitioner has failed to show a clear legal right to the relief requested."

Smith asked for the stay March 8, after the House Criminal Justice and Corrections Committee voted 4-0 to pass HB 3138. The moratorium, if it becomes law, would halt executions currently scheduled and prevent state courts from imposing new death penalty sentences.

"A stay ... until the resolution of this pending bill calling for a moratorium would protect Mr. Smith from the deprivation of his life and liberty and prevent a manifest injustice in the event that a moratorium on executions becomes effective just shortly after Mr. Smith's execution," his attorneys told the court in their emergency request.

Death penalty moratorium passes Oklahoma House committee, but it's unlikely to become law Attorney General Gentner Drummond and an assistant told the court a request for that reason is barred by state law. They also pointed out that the bill's author, Rep, Kevin McDugle, R-Broken Arrow, "is very pessimistic about its chances."

The bill is not expected to even be heard on the House floor.

Oklahoma death row inmate Michael DeWayne Smith speaks during his clemency hearing March 6. Smith faces execution for two 2002 murders. He claims he is innocent even though he confessed to police. His attorneys also claim he is intellectually disabled.

The Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board voted 4-1 March 6 to deny him clemency.

Smith told the parole board he was hallucinating from his drug use when he confessed to police. "I didn't commit these crimes. I didn't kill these people. I was high on drugs," he said.

What to know about the case

Smith was convicted at trial of 1st-degree murder for 2 fatal shootings in Oklahoma City on Feb. 22, 2002. Jurors agreed he should be executed for both deaths.

The 1st victim, Janet Moore, 40, was shot once at her apartment. The second victim, Sharath Babu Pulluru, 24, was shot 9 times at a convenience store then doused with lighter fluid and set on fire.

Neither was Smith's original target, according to testimony at the 2003 trial.

At the time, he was 19 and a member of a street gang in Oklahoma City known as the Oak Grove Posse. He also was high on PCP and hiding from police, who had a warrant for his arrest on a 2001 murder case.

In the first shooting, Smith actually was looking for Moore's son, Phillip Zachary, because he mistakenly thought Zachary was a snitch, prosecutors said.

"It's her fault she died," he told police. "She panicked and she got shot. ... She like, 'Help! Help!' I'm like, I had to. I had no choice."

Smith next went to the A&Z Food Mart to shoot a worker over comments to the newspaper about a robbery at another food mart next door, prosecutors said. He instead killed Pulluru, who was filling in at the store for a friend.

A clerk at the Trans Food Mart had killed a fellow gang member during a robbery on Nov. 8, 2000. A worker at the A&Z Food Mart had told The Oklahoman in 2000 he was proud of his neighbor.

"The rest of the kids will learn a lesson by him being dead and stop doing these things," the A&Z Food Mart worker had said.

The shootings in 2002 came days before a trial for two other gang members involved in the robbery was set to begin. Smith confessed to his roommate and a neighbor before his arrest, according to their testimony at his trial.

Smith also had asked for a stay of his execution as he seeks DNA testing on evidence from the A&Z Food Mart in support of his innocence claim. The Court of Criminal Appeals denied that request Monday in a separate order.

Smith was convicted at a separate trial of 2nd-degree murder for the fatal shooting of Otis Payne outside an Oklahoma City club on Nov. 24, 2001. He had admitted to police that he handed the gun to the shooter, David Burns. He was sentenced to life in prison for that crime.

(source: The Oklahoman)

NEBRASKA:

Laurel murder suspect wants trial moved, saying finding a fair jury is ‘extremely difficult if not impossible’

One of the suspects charged in the death of four people in a small northeast Nebraska town wants his trial moved after receiving the results of a questionnaire sent out to potential jurors.

Jason Jones is charged with the murders of 4 people in Laurel, Nebraska. In the lead-up to his trial in Cedar County, Nebraska, Jones’s lawyers sent out a questionnaire asking potential jurors their opinions about the case.

Court documents filed Friday, March 22, show 200 questionnaires were sent out and one of the questions asked the potential jurors if they had an opinion on Jones’s innocence. Those documents showed 139 people, or about 69 % of the respondents, replied that they thought Jones was guilty of the murders he is accused of.

The court documents go on to say that 48 people given the questionnaire, about 24 % of the respondents, said Jones should receive a death sentence.

Additionally, documents show 52 of the 200 potential jurors knew Gene, Janet and Dana Twiford, who were 3 of the 4 murder victims. 64 potential jurors also said they knew one or more of the people on the potential witnesses list, with some saying they knew 90 p% of the list.

Jones’s defense said the potential jurors also left comments on the questionnaire regarding their view on the trial. The defense is arguing these comments show there is a prejudice against Jones in Cedar County making it unlikely he would get a fair trial.

Some of the comments made by potential jurors include:

“Why should he still be on the earth.”

“This trial is a waste of time.”

“He’s a fruitcake; Psychopath: Nutjob; Don’t waste my tax money on this nutjob.”

“He has already cost us taxpayers enough money already.”

< “This man is cruel and has no heart.”

“Eye for an eye as the Bible says.”

The defense also says the coverage of the Laurel murders by local newspapers and TV stations, including KTIV, has “severely prejudiced prospective jurors against Mr. Jones, thereby making the selection of a fair and impartial jury extremely difficult if not impossible.”

The judge for this case has yet to respond to the defense’s argument to move Jones’s trial.

Also charged in the quadruple murder case is Jason Jones’s wife, Carrie Jones. Jason Jones is facing the death penalty with four murder counts and a host of others. Carrie Jones is facing a single murder count and lesser charges, but she currently doesn’t face the death penalty.

The defense for Carrie Jones said back in January 2024 they intend to file for a change of venue as well but no official documentation has been filed in online court documents. Court documents show a questionnaire was sent out to potential jurors for Carrie Jones’s trial as well. No additional information on her questionnaire has been submitted to online court documents.

Both Joneses are expected back in court later this week on Thursday, March 28. During their hearings, they are expected to discuss possibly changing the venue for their trials.

(source: KTIV news)

IDAHO:

Chad Daybell, husband of ‘doomsday mom’ Lori Vallow, to go on trial next week

The quest for justice is not over for the family of two murdered children with SWLA ties.

Lori Vallow Daybell is serving 3 consecutive life sentences for the murders of her 2 children and her husband’s former wife, Tammy Daybell. Now, her 5th husband, Chad Daybell, is facing trial in Boise, Idaho.

Part of Chad Daybell’s alleged role in the 2019 murders included allowing the bodies of Lori’s children, JJ Vallow and Tylee Ryan, to be buried on property he owned in Idaho. He’s also charged in his previous wife’s murder.

Tammy Daybell died at the age of 49. At first, it was believed to be natural causes, but after suspicions arose, her body was exhumed, and asphyxiation was determined to be the cause of death.

JJ’s grandparents, Larry and Kay Woodcock, heard the evidence in Lori’s trial.

“Somebody had to hold her arms, sit on her, and then somebody had to put a pillow over her,” Larry Woodcock said. He said the evidence showed Tammy was badly bruised when she was killed.

The Woodcocks, who live in Lake Charles, cared for JJ as a baby until Lori and her previous husband adopted him. They initially reported their suspicions about JJ’s well-being to police in Idaho, starting the search that led investigators to the children’s bodies.

Larry Woodcock said he bonded with JJ when he was a tiny infant. He has a photo of baby JJ tucked in the front of his robe, sleeping on his chest.

“That was the love that I developed for that little man. I was 65 years old, and I had a baby. At that age to start over as a new daddy, it was a feeling I’ve never had, and I never lost it,” he said.

JJ was just 7 when he died. Woodcock said the children’s murders have caused unimaginable pain.

Though the state is seeking the death penalty, Woodcock is not as sure as before that he wants the harsh sentence. If Daybell is convicted, Woodcock figures he may be targeted by inmates who have children and grandchildren.

“Who’s next to come after him? Who’s going to come after him? Who wants to end his life? So that fear, to me, I think, is a worse sentence than death,” he said.

The judge ruled in Lori Vallow Daybell’s case that she could not be sentenced to death.

Jury selection for Chad Daybell’s murder trial is expected to begin April 1. The Woodcocks plan to be there to watch the evidence phase of the trial.

Kay Woodcock is subpoenaed to be a witness and said she has been instructed not to do interviews before the trial.

Vallow Daybell also faces conspiracy charges in the murder of her 4th husband, Charles Vallow, and the attempted murder of her niece’s ex-husband. That trial is set to begin April 4.

(source: KPLC TV news)

CALIFORNIA----death row inmate dies

Condemned Person Richard D. Turner Dies

Condemned person Richard D. Turner passed away at an outside medical facility on Saturday, March 23, 2024, while incarcerated at San Quentin Rehabilitation Center. He was 65 years old.

Turner was pronounced deceased by medical staff at 3:45 a.m. with a manner of death identified as natural causes. The Marin County Coroner’s Office will determine his official cause of death.

Turner was admitted to CDCR on April 16, 1980, from San Bernardino County to serve life without the possibility of parole for 1st-degree murder. While incarcerated, on Oct. 19, 1988, he was placed on condemned status for another conviction of 1st-degree murder.

There are currently 643 condemned people in CDCR. More information about capital punishment in California can be found here: https://www.cdcr.ca.gov/capital-punishment/

(source: cdcr.ca.gov)

***************

As San Quentin’s death row empties, condemned inmates get a glimpse of hope

There’s an utterly new feeling at San Quentin’s death row these days, and it’s not just for the people running the place. You can feel it like electricity all up and down the grim, time-worn cell blocks housing the worst criminals in the state.

It’s hope.

For the 1st time since they were sentenced to death and locked into the 170-year-old prison to await execution, the 402 men on the infamous cell block are going to other California prisons. They’ll still be freighted with their death sentences, but they’ll be in the general population there, able to move around more and able to socialize and get a wide range of rehabilitation and educational services.

For many, it will amount to the closest thing to freedom any of them have felt in years — which means decades for many of them. It’s all part of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s 5-year-old effort to transform the prison into a gentler place of rehabilitation.

The fortress-like lockup even has a new name: San Quentin Rehabilitation Center. A small crowd of reporters on Monday got to tour the row, which will be emptied by late summer, and everyone from the guards to prisoners squeezed into their tiny 4-by-10-foot cells had an almost buoyant attitude.

Nobody feels that more than the longest-serving man on Death Row, convicted serial rapist-killer David Carpenter.

At 93 years old, Carpenter has been on the row since 1984, after being convicted of murdering at least eight people in Bay Area parks and earning the nickname the Trailside Killer.

“Moving away from here will be like being free,” he said from behind the black-grated door of his cell. “Here, whenever I leave this cell I have to put on waist chains. They walk me everywhere. It’s being caged all the time.”

His wizened face, framed by brown-rimmed glasses, lit into a smile. “I’m telling you, people are moving boom-boom out of here, someone leaving every day,” he said. “And the word comes back to us that they’re all happy as can be out of here.”

Carpenter said he wants to go to the prison system’s California Health Care Facility in Stockton because he has friends and family living nearby.

“I’m still trying to prove my innocence, but in the meantime if I can get that move it will be wonderful,” he said. “I cannot wait.”

San Quentin spokesperson Lt. Guim’Mara Berry led the media tour with a big smile.

“It’s a very different feeling here,” she said. “I feel like we’re really trying to bring a level of trust between staff and inmates here that we haven’t had in decades. We’re about giving a person purpose. It’s going to be grand — not just for us, but for them, for their mental health, for everything.

“I’ve always been taught that if you treat people with respect, it will be reciprocated. That’s what we’re trying.”

The last execution here was in January 2006, when triple-murderer Clarence Ray Allen was put to death by lethal injection. Before him, there had been 12 others executed since the practice resumed in 1992, but after Allen, there was great legal debate over whether lethal injections constituted cruel and unusual punishment.

That point became moot shortly after Newsom was elected in 2018 when he declared a moratorium on executions. Since then, the governor had the death chamber shut down. It’s now an empty room, and his plan is to turn the entire prison into a Scandinavian-style model of rehabilitation, taking precedence over mere punishment.

Some of the nation’s most notorious killers are still among the condemned — from Yosemite quadruple-killer Cary Stayner to Polly Klaas’s murderer Richard Allen Davis. At its height, there were more than 700 inmates on the row. A long, slow process of transferring prisoners out of San Quentin has already placed hundreds in other facilities, leaving the 402 who are there now.

Not only is Newsom aiming for a more humane environment at the prison, but emptying Death Row saves money. The average prisoner in San Quentin costs the state around $60,000 a year, but those on the row cost twice that.

“This change is good,” said San Quentin officer Andrei Kinshin, who for 10 years has guarded the door of the East Block of Death Row, the main building for the condemned men. (There are no women on death row in San Quentin.)

“Most of the inmates here behave like normal people, but you think about what they’ve done,” he said. “I always keep that in mind. But everyone is a person. You can’t forget that.”

Robert Galvan, 49, of Fresno admitted that he needs to do his time, but he said he wants to be a better person while doing it.

“Hey, I’m here because I killed my cellie (cellmate) in Corcoran” state prison, Galvan, whose entire upper body and face is coated with tattoos of skulls and family depictions, said in a special interviewing cage in East Block. “But I do think it would be great if we were transferred. Look, we’re not doing anything here, but if I can go to Folsom (prison) — that’s where I want — I can be near my wife and my kids.”

He looked down contemplatively. “If I could do my life differently, I would think before I act,” he said. “I’ve been locked up most of the time since I was 12, and I got here (to Death Row) in 2012. But I’m changing.

“And there’s always hope. My wife’s brother just got out of prison after 46 years, and my uncle just got out after being inside since 1981. My wife and kids keep me sane while I’m in here, and I’m trying to do good so maybe, just maybe, someday I can get out.

“I’d like to build houses. Not spend my whole life in prison.”

(source: The San Francisco Chronicle)

USA:

National Registry of Exonerations’ Annual Report Finds Majority of Exonerees are People of Color and Official Misconduct is the Main Cause of Wrongful Convictions

INNOCENCE

This week, The National Registry of Exonerations published its annual report on exonerations that took place in 2023. According to the report, “The Registry recorded 153 exonerations last year, and nearly 84% (127/153) were people of color. Nearly 61 percent of the exonerees (93/153) were Black,” while the most frequent factor in their wrongful conviction was official misconduct. “Seventy-five homicide cases—85% of homicide exonerations in 2023—were marred by official misconduct.” 3 out of 4 death row exonerees were people of color, and in all instances, official misconduct was the main factor.

Official misconduct, which can encompass falsifying evidence, coercing witnesses, and withholding exculpatory information—poses various challenges to the criminal justice system, most importantly in the way it affects public confidence in the integrity of its justice system and elected officials. Inadequate legal defense, mistaken witness identification, and perjury or false accusation are also causes of wrongful conviction.

Each exoneration represents a human being who lost years and sometimes decades of their lives behind bars while the guilty party remained free to possibly commit other crimes. Many states now have statutes that provide some recompense; since 1989, nearly $4 billion in compensation has been paid to wrongfully convicted persons. The amount has almost doubled since 2019. The authors note that there are disparities in compensation that will prompt future research. “Why […] are payments so much greater in New York than in other states—$6 million on average for all exonerees, compared to $1.8 million in Illinois and $1.2 million in Texas? And why did 79% of all exonerees receive some compensation in Illinois, but only 33% in Texas?”

In 2023, the 4-death row exonerees were John Huffington, Jesse Johnson, Glynn Simmons, and Noel Montalvo. The number of years between conviction and exoneration was 48 for Mr. Glynn Simmons (the longest number of years before an exoneration in U.S. history), 42 for Mr. Huffington, 20 for Mr. Montalvo, and 19 for Mr. Johnson. The report notes that for all exonerees, “People exonerated in 2023 lost 2,230 years collectively for crimes they did not commit. That is an average of 14.6 years per exoneree for wrongful imprisonment.”

Among the 153 exonerations (total) that took place within 32 states (there were no federal exonerations), the largest number occurred in Illinois (24), followed by Texas (22), New York (21), and Pennsylvania (16).

The National Registry of Exonerations is a consortium of 3 universities: the University of Michigan Law School, Michigan State University College of Law, and the University of California Irvine Newkirk Center for Science and Society.

You can access the report here, at: https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Documents/2023%20Annual%20Report.pdf< DPIC also maintains a comprehensive database and other resources on death penalty exonerations and innocence cases. **************

LDF Welcomes New Board Members Ron Wilson and Kenji Yoshino

Today, the Legal Defense Fund (LDF) announced the addition of 2 new members of its Board of Directors: Ron Wilson, renowned civil rights attorney, and cooperating attorney with LDF, and Kenji Yoshino, Chief Justice Earl Warren Professor of Constitutional Law at NYU School of Law and faculty director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging.

“Ron Wilson and Kenji Yoshino are excellent additions to the LDF’s Board of Directors,” said Board co-chair Angela Vallot. “Each brings a wealth of knowledge and expertise in civil rights that is especially vital as LDF navigates the legal complexities, opportunities and challenges that lie ahead. We welcome them warmly and look forward to the fresh perspectives and sharp insights they will offer.”

“Joining us with a deep understanding of the most pressing civil rights issues impacting our society today, Ron Wilson and Kenji Yoshino will provide extraordinary expertise and perspectives to LDF’s work,” said Board co-chair Kim Koopersmith. “Advancing voting rights, reimagining public safety, and navigating threats to equitable education and the truthful telling of history are all priorities for the organization and both Mr. Wilson and Mr. Yoshino possess unique experience that will serve us well in helping to guide and support LDF’s continued success.”

“I am thrilled by the addition of Ron Wilson and Kenji Yoshino to LDF’s esteemed Board of Directors,” said LDF President and Director-Counsel Janai Nelson. “I also am excited that Mr. Wilson, who is a longtime cooperating attorney with LDF, will be joining the organization in this capacity. As exceptional leaders in the field of civil rights law, both Mr. Wilson and Mr. Yoshino embody the values and principles that define LDF’s commitment to advancing racial justice. Their lifelong dedication to advancing equity and justice through scholarship, litigation, and advocacy align directly with our mission, and I am confident they will play a critical role in driving our vision towards a more inclusive, multi-racial democracy.”

Ron Wilson is a civil rights icon known for his far-reaching litigation and advocacy. Since graduating from law school in 1975, Mr. Wilson has been engaged in the private practice of law—primarily public interest and civil rights litigation. He is a cooperating attorney with LDF, handling primarily employment and voting rights cases, and a former board member of the American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana. Mr. Wilson has litigated numerous cases in the areas of housing discrimination, employment discrimination, school desegregation, voting rights, police misconduct, prison conditions, separation of church and state, freedom of speech, freedom of association, due process of law and equal protection. He is especially well-known for several voting rights cases which have had a significant impact in the state of Louisiana.

“The Legal Defense Fund is the pre-eminent civil rights organization in the United States when it comes to protecting constitutional and civil rights,” said Mr. Wilson. “There will be many attempts in the future seeking to significantly minimize, if not altogether obliterate, those rights. Having had the privilege of serving as a cooperating attorney since the 1980s, it is both an honor and a privilege to be a member of LDF’s Board of Directors, an organization that works indefatigably to make certain that those challenges do not succeed.”

As a scholar, leader and educator, Kenji Yoshino specializes in constitutional law, antidiscrimination law, and law and literature. Mr. Yoshino has been published in major academic journals, as well as more popular forums such as the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, and the Washington Post. He is the author of 4 books, including his latest book (co-authored with David Glasgow), Say the Right Thing: How to Talk About Identity, Diversity, and Justice. Yoshino currently serves on the Oversight Board for Meta, the Board of the Brennan Center for Justice, on advisory boards for diversity and inclusion for Morgan Stanley and Charter Communications, and on the board of his children’s school. A graduate of Harvard, Oxford, and Yale, Mr. Yoshino has won numerous awards for his teaching and scholarship, including the American Bar Association’s Silver Gavel Award, the Peck medal in jurisprudence, and NYU’s Distinguished Teaching Award.

“In teaching Constitutional Law for the past quarter century, I have often alluded to the work of Thurgood Marshall as evidence that one can achieve intellectual and moral genius in the law,” said Mr. Yoshino. “It is the honor of a lifetime to join the organization he founded. I look forward to serving LDF as it advances its critical mission to achieve racial justice, equality, and a more inclusive society.”

###

Founded in 1940, the Legal Defense Fund (LDF) is the nation’s first civil rights law organization. LDF’s Thurgood Marshall Institute is a multi-disciplinary and collaborative hub within LDF that launches targeted campaigns and undertakes innovative research to shape the civil rights narrative. In media attributions, please refer to us as the Legal Defense Fund or LDF. Please note that LDF has been completely separate from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) since 1957—although LDF was originally founded by the NAACP and shares its commitment to equal rights.

(source: naacpldf.org)

*******************

Editorial: Tsarnaev appeal caves to anti-death penalty crowd

The lead attorney in Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s latest federal appeal hung up on Boston.

He hung up the phone Monday on the Herald rather than face questions about why Tsarnaev deserves to be spared the death penalty after murdering and maiming innocent marathon spectators on Boylston Street in 2013.

He hung up on the community that tried to help the Tsarnaev family make a new start in Massachusetts.

He hung up on decency!

Attorney Daniel Habib, a Harvard grad from the Federal Defenders of New York, Inc., would not say if this appeal is more about the death penalty than Tsarnaev’s terrorism. It’s clear he could care less about needing to explain his motivations.

The federal appeals court based in Boston ruled late last week the district court was “obliged” to probe “plausible claims of juror bias” in Tsarnaev’s “penalty-phase hearing.”

This latest appeal, the court document reveals, is all about the death penalty. The campaign to forever stop executions has now set up shop in Boston.

The federal judges state that “if and only if the district court’s investigation reveals that (jurors 138 or 286) should have been stricken for cause on account of bias, Tsarnaev will be entitled to a new penalty-phase proceeding.”

Tsarnaev will never get out of jail but could escape death once again.

This is a terrorist who ran over his own brother while racing away from a gunfight with police in Watertown after executing MIT campus police officer Sean Collier just days after carrying out the Boston Marathon bombings.

This all comes down to 2 jurors chattering on social media. It is cruel to those living without loved ones and those surviving without limbs to face another decade with no end due to a few tweets and Facebook messages.

The appeals court writes that “virtually all prospective jurors admitted exposure to some amount of publicity regarding the case” and many in the jury pool held different opinions about the death penalty.

Yet, we must now wait as the district court in the Seaport studies jurors 138 and 286 again. The fact Juror 138 denied receiving Facebook posts where friends said Tsarnaev had “no shot in hell” and “send him to jail where he belongs” is unbelievably thin gruel — especially since he didn’t write back.

Juror 286, a female from Dorchester, tweeted on the day of the April 15, 2013, bombings that “be polite to officers” and surgeons were “forgotten heroes” and days later adding she was uplifted by “Boston Strong” photos, is also seen as a potential bias. Really?

We agree with appeals Judge Jeffrey Howard who wrote in his dissenting opinion that there’s no “ancient and artificial formula” for determining bias. In forcing an investigation, he adds, the appeals court “robs” the lower court of its authority.

It doesn’t pass the smell test, our words. It is a case of politics interfering with justice, and that stinks.

When can Martin Richard, Krystle Campbell, Lingzi Lu, Sean Collier and BPD Officer Dennis Simmonds rest in peace?

(source: Editorial, Boston Herald)

UNITED KINGDOM:

UK court says Assange can’t be extradited on espionage charges until US rules out death penalty

A British court ruled Tuesday that Julian Assange can’t be extradited to the United States on espionage charges unless U.S. authorities guarantee he won’t get the death penalty, giving the WikiLeaks founder a partial victory in his long legal battle over the site’s publication of classified American documents.

2 High Court judges said they would grant Assange a new appeal unless U.S. authorities give further assurances within three weeks about what will happen to him. The ruling means the legal saga, which has dragged on for more than a decade, will continue — and Assange will remain inside London’s high-security Belmarsh Prison, where he has spent the last 5 years.

Judges Victoria Sharp and Jeremy Johnson said the U.S. must guarantee that Assange, who is Australian, “is afforded the same First Amendment protections as a United States citizen, and that the death penalty is not imposed.”

The judges said that if the U.S. files new assurances, “we will give the parties an opportunity to make further submissions before we make a final decision on the application for leave to appeal.” The judges said a hearing will be held May 20 if the U.S. makes those submissions.

The U.S. Justice Department declined to comment Tuesday.

Assange’s supporters say he is a journalist protected by the First Amendment who exposed U.S. military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan that was in the public interest.

Assange’s wife Stella Assange said the WikiLeaks founder “is being persecuted because he exposed the true cost of war in human lives.”

“The Biden administration should not issue assurances. They should drop this shameful case, which should never have been brought,” she said outside the High Court in London.

The ruling follows a two-day hearing in the High Court in February, where Assange’s lawyer Edward Fitzgerald said American authorities were seeking to punish him for WikiLeaks’ “exposure of criminality on the part of the U.S. government on an unprecedented scale,” including torture and killings.

The U.S. government said Assange’s actions went beyond journalism by soliciting, stealing and indiscriminately publishing classified government documents that endangered many people, including Iraqis and Afghans who had helped U.S. forces.

The judges rejected six of Assange’s nine grounds of appeal, including the allegation that his prosecution is political. They said that while Assange “acted out of political conviction … it does not follow however that the request for his extradition is made on account of his political views.”

The judges also said Assange could not appeal based on allegations, made by his lawyers, that the CIA developed plans to kidnap or kill Assange during the years he spent holed up in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, to prevent him from trying to flee.

The judges said “plainly, these are allegations of the utmost seriousness,” but concluded they had no bearing on the extradition request.

“Extradition would result in him being lawfully in the custody of the United States authorities, and the reasons (if they can be called that) for rendition or kidnap or assassination then fall away,” the ruling said.

They accepted 3 grounds or appeal: the threat to Assange’s freedom of speech, Assange’s claim that he faces disadvantage because he is not a U.S. citizen, and the risk he could receive the death penalty.

U.S. authorities have promised Assange would not receive capital punishment, but the judges said that “nothing in the existing assurance explicitly prevents the imposition of the death penalty.”

Jennifer Robinson, one of Assange’s lawyers, said that “even if we receive the assurances, we’re not confident we can rely on them.”

Assange, 52, an Australian computer expert, has been indicted in the U.S. on charges over Wikileaks’ publication in 2010 of hundreds of thousands of classified documents.

U.S. prosecutors say he conspired with U.S. army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to hack into a Pentagon computer and release secret diplomatic cables and military files on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Assange faces 17 counts undee the Espionage Act and one charge of computer misuse. If convicted, his lawyers say he could receive a prison term of up to 175 years, though American authorities have said any sentence is likely to be much lower.

Assange’s wife and supporters say his physical and mental health have suffered during more than a decade of legal battles and confinement.

Assange’s legal troubles began in 2010, when he was arrested in London at the request of Sweden, which wanted to question him about allegations of rape and sexual assault made by two women. In 2012, Assange jumped bail and sought refuge inside the Ecuadorian Embassy.

The relationship between Assange and his hosts eventually soured, and he was evicted from the embassy in April 2019. British police immediately arrested and imprisoned him for breaching bail in 2012. Sweden dropped the sex crimes investigations in November 2019 because so much time had elapsed.

A U.K. district court judge rejected the U.S. extradition request in 2021 on the grounds that Assange was likely to kill himself if held under harsh U.S. prison conditions. Higher courts overturned that decision after getting assurances from the U.S. about his treatment. The British government signed an extradition order in June 2022.

(source: Associated Press)

NIGERIA:

Chinese national gets death sentence for killing girlfriend in Kano

(see: https://guardian.ng/breakingnews/chinese-national-gets-death-sentence-for-killing-girlfriend-in-kano/)

RUSSIA:

Russia, the president of the Duma: “Revoke the moratorium on the death penalty? There's no need for a referendum."----Vjacheslav Volodin underlines: "We have left the Council of Europe, this topic requires discussion

The possible lifting of the moratorium on the death penalty in the Russian Federation requires discussion. This was stated by the president of the State Duma (lower house of the Russian Parliament), Vyacheslav Volodin, during a plenary session of the body. “We have to analyze all the decisions made.

We left the European Council, so this topic requires discussion,” the official said.

Volodin explained that the possible lifting of the moratorium would not require a referendum, but an appropriate decision of the Russian Constitutional Court.

(source: agenzianova.com)

****************

Former President of Russia Calls for Death Penalty for the Moscow Attack Perpetrators

(see: https://lankasara.com/news/former-president-of-russia-calls-for-death-penalty-for-the-moscow-attack-perpetrators/)

INDIA:

8 dacoits given death penalty for killing 3

(see: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bareilly/8-dacoits-given-death-penalty-for-killing-three/articleshow/108318118.cms)

*****************

Emotion Should Not Become An Influencing Factor To Impose Death Penalty: Karnataka High Court Reduces Sentence For Beheading Mother's Head

The Karnataka High Court has set aside the death penalty imposed on an accused for murdering his mother by beheading her, and sentenced him to life imprisonment.

A division bench of Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar and S Rachaiah partly allowed the appeal filed by accused Thimmappa challenging the conviction and death sentence imposed on him by the trial court under section 302 of the India Penal Code.

The bench said “If we take an analysis of the entire situation, we find that this is not a rarest of rare case though it is a fact that the incident was cruel and brutal. Emotion should not become an influencing factor to impose a death penalty. Degree of criminality matters much while imposing the death penalty.”

As per the prosecution case the accused inflicted a severe blow on the neck of his mother with a machete that resulted in instantaneous death due to decapitation. The motive was apparently accused's belief that his mother was responsible for his wife deserting him.

The prosecution seeking confirmation of the death penalty argued that the Trial Judge had imposed the death sentence in the background of the fact that the accused resorted to killing his mother in a very cruel manner. The incident was witnessed by 4 witnesses whose evidence was not discredited in cross-examination. The weapon used for committing the offence was also recovered at the instance of the accused.

The counsel for the accused contended that the accused was not properly defended in the trial court. It was claimed that even though the cross-examination is ineffective, from the material on record it can be demonstrated that the testimonies of the witnesses can be disbelieved. In regards to the seizure of the machete, it was submitted that evidence is inconsistent in the sense that PW.3 has stated that the accused went inside the house after committing crime; recovery of weapon was not from inside the house.

The bench on going through the evidence of the prosecution witnesses said “The testimonies of these four witnesses are believable, it can be said that the trial court is justified in recording conviction against the accused.”

Rejecting the contention that cross-examination of the prominent witnesses is not so effective due to the accused not being defended properly, the court said, “That cannot be a reason for discarding the entire evidence of PWs.4, 5, 7 and 9. Nothing prevented the counsel who appeared on behalf of the accused from effectively cross-examining the witnesses. We do not think this itself can be grounds for remanding the case to the trial court.” Court said rhe entire incident can be clearly brought within the scope of Section 300 of IPC. "The accused had a grouse that his mother was responsible for his wife to desert him. It appears that the wife left the company of the accused about four or five years before the incident occurred. It cannot be said that the said reason cannot be accepted as motive for the incident because the reason thus stated by the witnesses has not been controverted in any way.”

It added, “PWs.3 and 6 being the brother and sister of the accused respectively also speak consistently that in the background of the desertion by the wife, there used to take place quarrel between the deceased and the accused. This being the actual position, the motive also stands proved.”

Further it held there is no evidence to hold that the accused was suddenly provoked by the deceased which resulted in the accused resorting to killing her.

However, coming to the sentence of death penalty imposed the bench said “If we read the order of the trial court on sentence, we do not find reasons which prompted the trial court to arrive at a conclusion that the life imprisonment is inadequate.”

Noting that it is a settled principle now that the Court should first record that a rarest of rare case has been made out and then it must take a balance sheet of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances before imposing the death penalty, it held “The trial court has not made this effort at all.”

Further it said “In this case, the prosecution has not brought on record that the accused is a hardcore criminal. In this view, we do not find that a rarest of rare case has been made out for imposing the death penalty on the accused. Only if the Court finds that a rarest of rare case has been made out, it should proceed further to take balance sheet of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, in the light of the pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of BACHAN SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB and MACHHI SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB2 . As we do not find this case has reached that stage, we are not inclined to confirm the death sentence.”

Accordingly it set aside the death penalty and imposed life sentence on the accused along with fine of Rs.25,000.

Appearance: SPP II Vijaykumar Majage, for Appellant.

Advocate N.Tejas for Respondent.

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 145

Case Title: THIMMAPPA AND THE STATE BY HOLALKERE POLICE

Case No: CRIMINAL REFERRED CASE NO.6 OF 2018 C/W CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1301 OF 2018

(source: livelaw.in)

MALAYSIA:

2 Filipinas escape death sentence after apex court grants 30 years’ jail for drug trafficking

2 Filipinas, who had been on death row since 2013, were granted a reprieve when the Federal Court on Tuesday granted them a revision of their sentence, bringing it down to 30 years’ jail.

A 3-member bench, led by Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, substituted the death penalty punishments initially given to Aisa Bello Mensong, aged 44, and Eleonor Cantor Sadullo, aged 66, with 30 years’ jail instead.

Bello Mensong and Cantor Sadullo had been jointly convicted for trafficking 272.5g of heroin and 31.7g of morphine in 2008 and sentenced to death by the High Court in 2011.

The conviction and death sentences were initially upheld by the Court of Appeal and Federal Court in 2014.

The other 2 judges on the bench who sat with Tengku Maimun were Federal Court judges Datuk Rhodzhariah Bujang and Datuk Abu Bakar Jais.

The women are said to be the first 2 Philippine nationals to have their sentence relieved from the death penalty to 30 years’ jail following the apex court exercising its revisionary powers under Section 2 (revision of sentence) of the newly enacted law, Death Penalty and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023, that empowers the Federal Court to review and substitute a death penalty sentence.

Since the amendment law passed last year, courts are given the discretion to mete out either 30 years or a lifetime imprisonment penalty to replace the death sentence for the offences of trafficking and murder.

The Philippine embassy appointed Amin Othman as counsel to represent them, while Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohd Khusairy Ibrahim appeared for the prosecution.

Amin, who confirmed the reduction in the sentence with The Edge, said the duo are expected to be released possibly in three to four years’ time, depending on the remission order by the Prisons Department for good behaviour.

(source: theedgemalaysia.com)

PAKISTAN:

Hope for Christian 22 Years on Death Row for ‘Blasphemy’----Supreme Court seeks Islamic body’s opinion on evidence.

In a significant move, the Supreme Court of Pakistan has directed the country’s top Islamic body to advise on whether content that has left a Catholic on death row for 22 years was in fact blasphemous, sources said.

Attorney Rana Abdul Hameed said the top court on March 12 sought the opinions of the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) and 2 Christian religious bodies on whether a letter by a 70-year-old former government employee, Anwar Kenneth, falls within the definition blasphemy under Section 295-C of Pakistan’s controversial of statutes. The section calls for a mandatory death sentence for insulting Islam’s prophet, Muhammad.

The 3-judge bench comprising justices Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Musarrat Hilali gave the direction after a long-awaited hearing of Kenneth’s appeal against the Lahore High Court’s 2014 decision to uphold his death sentence by the trial court, Hameed told Christian Daily International-Morning Star News.

Kenneth, a former senior officer in the Punjab Fisheries Department, was convicted for sending a letter to Muslim religious scholars, Muslim heads of state, foreign diplomats in Pakistan, the United Nations secretary-general, and Christian theologians in 2001 in which he rejected Muhammad’s prophethood, Hameed said.

The lawyer argued that the rejection of Muhammad’s prophethood by non-Muslims could not be considered blasphemy.

“Though Islam is 1 of the 3 Abrahamic faiths, and Muslims believe in all prophets, including Jesus Christ, Christians and Jews don’t believe in Prophet Muhammad,” Hameed said. “In his open letter, Kenneth merely stated that his Christian belief does not endorse Islam. He hasn’t used any derogatory language for Prophet Muhammad that warranted a conviction under blasphemy.”

He added that the court had directed the Council of Islamic Ideology, the Pakistan Church Council, and the United Church Council of Islamabad to submit their opinions at the next hearing expected on April 10.

A three-member Supreme Court bench in January 2023 noted the need for legal representation for Kenneth, who has been in prison since his arrest in September 2001, and requested the Pakistan Bar Council to provide a defense attorney after five state-provided lawyers recused themselves from the case.

Hameed, a Muslim attorney who has successfully defended several persons falsely charged with blasphemy, agreed to represent the Christian with the support of advocacy group Jubilee Campaign Netherlands.

“It is now up to the religious institutions from both sides to analyze the matter in light of their respective teachings and jurisprudence and inform the court,” he said. “Kenneth is suffering from mental and physical ailments and has already spent 22 years in solitary confinement in various prisons in Punjab Province. I believe it’s high time he gets the justice he deserves and reunites with his family.”

In July 2002, an additional sessions judge in Lahore handed the death penalty and a fine of 500,000 rupees (US$1,796) to Kenneth. Despite the conviction, the Christian refused the assistance of a defense lawyer, saying God was his counsel.

On June 30, 2014, the Lahore High Court upheld the verdict of the trial court, confirming his death penalty. Due to the absence of legal counsel, however, the case faced challenges in proceeding.

‘I Wish to See My Brother Before I Die’

Kenneth worked as a deputy director in the fisheries department when he was arrested. His family members say he’s a well-educated man with a deep interest in his Christian faith.

“My brother was a Bible scholar and often engaged in scholastic discussions with his Muslim friends and religious leaders,” said Kenneth’s 83-year-old elder sister, Reshma Bibi. “He also communicated his religious ideas and values through his letter-writing, but he was never disrespectful towards any holy personality. It was one of these letters that was used to silence him.”

She expressed her deep desire to see her brother walk free in her lifetime.

“It’s been years I haven’t been able to see my brother in prison due to my weak health,” Bibi said as tears welled in her eyes. “I miss him every day of my life, and I just hope that God will give me a chance to spend time with him before I die.”

Haroon Gill, a nephew of Kenneth, said he had last met his uncle in February.

“He is very weak and under a lot of stress,” Gill told Christian Daily International-Morning Star News. “We can only visit him twice a month, but for the last five months, we weren’t allowed to meet him.”

He added that Kenneth’s 65-year-old wife also hadn’t seen her husband for a long time due to health reasons.

“My uncle’s only son permanently left Pakistan soon after his arrest due to threats to his life,” Gill said. “We have also suffered a lot of difficulties due to this case. The attitude of our Muslim neighbors is still very hostile after all these years. Several people have attempted to stir religious tension in a bid to grab our ancestral agricultural land.”

The young Christian said that he hoped that the Supreme Court would consider the appeal on humanitarian grounds and acquit Kenneth of the charge.

“We can only pray and hope for justice for my uncle,” he said. “He has suffered enough, and it’s our greatest wish that he’s able to spend whatever years are left of his life in peace and comfort of his family.”

Pakistan ranked 7th on Open Doors’ 2024 World Watch List of the most difficult places to be a Christian, as it was the previous year.

If you would like to help persecuted Christians, visit https://morningstarnews.org/resources/aid-agencies/ for a list of organizations that can orient you on how to get involved.

If you or your organization would like to help enable Morning Star News to continue raising awareness of persecuted Christians worldwide with original-content reporting, please consider collaborating at https://morningstarnews.org/donate/

(source: Christian Daily International-Morning Star News)

IRAN:

Movements Promoting Abolition and Mobilising Civil Society in Iran in 2023

This is an extract from the 2023 Annual Report on the Death Penalty in Iran.

Over the last 3 years, there has been a growing trend of Iranians expressing their opposition to the death penalty. This trend reached its 44-year peak to save “Woman, Life, Freedom” protesters, with protests held inside and outside prisons, hunger strikes, acts of protest, including wall writing, and online activism.

On 9 January 2023, following news that protesters Mohammad Ghobadlu and Mohammad Boroughani were transferred to solitary confinement, their families were joined by ordinary citizens outside Rajai Shahr (Gohardasht) Prison to stop their executions. Their brave action helped save the two protesters’ lives that night.

Families of drug death row prisoners who began organising protests in September 2022 have continued their protests despite brutal crackdowns and arrests. On 16 January 2023, families of drug death row prisoners travelled from all over Iran to gather outside the Judiciary building. They held signs that read “no to drug executions”, “don’t execute my dad” and “no death penalty”.

On 25 January 2023, families gathered outside Ghezelhesar Prison after 3 prisoners on death row for drug-related charges were transferred to solitary confinement in preparation for their executions.

On 16 March 2023, protesters gathered outside Urmia Central Prison to save the life of five prisoners including Kurdish political prisoner Mohiyedin Ebrahimi.[1]

Protests also took place outside Isfahan Central Prison on 14 and 17 May 2023, when protesters Saleh Mirhashemi, Saeed Yaghoubi and Majid Kazemi were transferred to solitary confinement.

On 24 May 2023, drug death row families gathered outside the Judiciary building once again as executions and drug-related executions in particular were being carried out at an unprecedented rate in recent years.

In addition to public protests on the streets and outside prisons, prisoners have also made their voices heard against the death penalty on a regular basis. This includes messages from prison and physical protests behind bars. When Samad Moradi was transferred for execution on 29 September 2023, other prisoners protested and set their blankets on fire to prevent his transfer. Ultimately, prison guards took Samad out of the ward. 8 prisoners were injured by prison guards.”[2]

Anti-death penalty graffiti and signs have also become more common since the start of the “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement.

The 2020 #(don’t execute) online campaign, which successfully saved the lives of 7 protesters from death row, has expanded to #(no death penalty). Online campaigns shed light on cases and mobilise protests. Anti-death penalty posts have been effectively criminalised through charges and sentences.

Forgiveness movement

As mentioned under the section for qisas executions, according to the IPC, murder is punished by qisas, where the family of the victim can demand a retribution death sentence. But they can also demand blood money (diya) instead of a death sentence or can simply grant forgiveness. This opens an opportunity for citizens to counter the death penalty by promoting forgiveness without being subjected to persecution by the authorities. In the past six years, the movement for forgiveness has grown significantly. Ordinary citizens, celebrities, civil society and other local and national campaigns have been active in promoting forgiveness instead of the death penalty.

One of the most moving stories was that of Morad Biranvand, whose mother was murdered during the course of an armed robbery while he was on death row for drug-related charges. In an interview, he explained how his views had changed on death row, where he shared cells with the same people he watched being taken to the gallows. “Life is short, and I decided to forgive my mother’s murderer after I gained a better understanding in prison. I don’t expect anything in return and did it for God’s sake.” Morad was executed in Khorramabad Central Prison on 29 November 2023.[3]

[1] See video: https://x.com/IHRights/status/1636492125083774976?s=20

[2] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6214/

[3] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6365/

(source: iranhr.net)

MARCH 25, 2024:

TEXAS:

Nash, Texas, teen charged with multiple murders of family, deemed not competent to stand trial

A Nash, Texas, teen who allegedly murdered his family in May of 2023 was recently deemed not competent to stand trial.

According to an affidavit, Olalde said he had to kill his family because they were cannibals and they were going to eat him.

According to court records, earlier in March, Cesar Olalde’s attorney filed a motion suggesting the defendant's incompetence in the Bowie County District Court, saying that after an expert’s evaluation, he was not fit to stand trial.

The motion said that the expert’s evaluation concluded that Olalde was incompetent under Texas law to stand trial.

According to court records, Olalde has a hearing scheduled for Monday at the Bi-State Justice Center.

He remains at the Bi-State Jail on a $10 million bond.

Capital murder in Texas carries a punishment of either life in prison without possibility of parole or the death penalty.

(source: Tyler Morning Telegraph)

GEORGIA:

An open letter to Willie Pye RIP

Dear Willie

I feel the need to write to you posthumously after your execution to remember our friendship and companionship over 13 years. It was the organisation 'Lifelines' that put us in touch and we used to correspond regularly after that.

I was sorry that I could not meet you in person but I knew from the start that you were a generous and warm hearted person. We used to share our joys and sorrows - you always took a close interest in my family and at the time of the illness and death of my wife you were of great comfort.

In spite of those restrictive surroundings you were always positive and optimistic. You were filled with faith and hope and I am sure that this sustained you greatly. You must have suffered to be aware of how the legal system let you down but you tried not to let this influence you too much.

More recently you enjoyed seeing pictures of the countryside around me - you took a particular liking to seeing cows grazing in the field. You enjoyed talking about your favourite TV shows and you loved to talk about our Royal family - a true monarchist ! And from what I know you were a great support to your fellow prisoners.

And so we will remember you as a God given, precious human being. We will remember you as someone who showed us the best of humanity from your prison cell. And we will not forget you in our struggle to make the world a better place. We will not forget those who condemned you in the hope that their hearts may listen to the voices of humanity and compassion. We will not forget you as the struggle against the death penalty continues.

And so Willie its your turn to rest in peace, away fron this hurtful and unjust world that we inhabit. Remember to pray for us from that special place you have in Heaven that we might make the world a better place.

With best wishes

Your friend

Ben

(source: Ben Bano, Independent Catholic News)

ALABAMA:

Proposal could resentence some death row inmates

Jurors in 1994 recommended by a 9-3 vote that Rocky Myers be spared the death penalty and serve life in prison. A judge sentenced him to die anyway.

Myers is now one of nearly 3 dozen inmates on Alabama’s death row who were placed there under a now-abolished system that allowed judges to override a jury’s recommendation in death penalty cases.

Activists held a rally Thursday outside the Alabama Statehouse urging lawmakers to make the judicial override ban retroactive and allow those inmates an opportunity to be resentenced.

“Justice demands us to afford those individuals who are still on death row by judicial override the opportunity to be resentenced,” state Rep. Chris England, the bill sponsor, said.

Alabama in 2017 became the last state to abandon the practice of allowing judges to override a jury’s sentence recommendation in death penalty cases. The change was not retroactive. Alison Mollman, senior legal counsel of the American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama, said there are 33 people on Alabama’s death row who were sentenced to death by a judge even though a jury had recommended life imprisonment.

The bill is before the House Judiciary Committee. It has yet to receive a vote with 13 meeting days remaining in the legislative session.

A telephone message to a victims’ advocacy group left late Thursday afternoon about the bill was not immediately returned.

Alabama this year became the 1st state to carry out an execution with nitrogen gas when it executed Kenneth Smith. Smith was one of two men convicted and sentenced to die in the 1988 murder-for-hire slaying of Elizabeth Sennett.

Smith’s initial 1989 conviction, where a jury had recommended a death sentence, was overturned on appeal. He was retried and convicted again in 1996. The jury that time recommended a life sentence by a vote of 11-1, but a judge overrode the recommendation and sentenced Smith to death.

“11 people on his jury said he should still be here today. 11. One judge was all it took to override that decision,” Smith’s wife, Deanna Smith, said.

After the rally Thursday, supporters carried a petition to Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey’s office asking her to grant clemency to Myers.

Myers was convicted in the 1991 stabbing death of his neighbor Ludie Mae Tucker. Mae Puckett, a juror at Myers’ trial, told a legislative committee last year that she and several other jurors had doubts about his guilt but feared if the case ended in a mistrial, another jury would sentence Myers to death. Puckett said she learned later that the judge had overridden their recommendation.

“I never for a minute thought he was guilty,” Puckett said last year.

Before she died, Tucker identified her attacker as a short, stocky Black man. LeAndrew Hood, the son of Myers, said they knew Tucker and would buy ice from her. Hood said he was always struck by the fact that Tucker gave a description instead of saying she was attacked by her neighbor.

“She knew us. … If she had enough strength to say it was a short, stocky Black man, why didn’t she just say it was the man across the street?” Hood said.

(source: Associated Press)

*********************

Activists march to State Capitol to demand clemency for death row inmate

More than 40 activists marched to the Alabama State Capitol recently to demand that Gov. Kay Ivey grant clemency to ‘Rocky’ Myers, an Alabamian who was sentenced to death by a judge over the recommendation of a jury, a process known as judicial override.

Organized by the Alabama chapter of the human rights organization Amnesty International, the march was preceded by a rally in front of the State House in support of House Bill 27. The bill would reform the manner in which Alabamians could be sentenced to death.

While Ivey signed a bill in 2017 that prohibited judicial override, it was not retroactive, leaving those sentenced to death by a judge over the recommendation of a jury prior to the bill’s passage still set to be executed.

Sponsored by Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, HB27 would grant the 33 Alabamians still sitting on death row that were sentenced via judicial override an opportunity to be resentenced.

Myers, who was diagnosed with an intellectual disability, was convicted for the 1991 killing of Ludie Mae Tucker, though critics say the case against Myers lacked any forensic evidence tying him to the murder. The jury had voted to sentence Myers to life in prison, though the judge overrode that decision to impose the death penalty.

Myers’ son, LeAndrew Hood, said at the rally that despite the grim circumstances, both he and his father remained optimistic as to the prospects of his release.

“I’m happy that he still tells me that he’s coming home; he believes that, that’s in his heart, and I believe it too,” Hood said. “If he don’t come home, he’s going to heaven, so if they don’t want to let him go in the world, he’s going home anyway.”

England spoke to the few-dozen in attendance of the 2017 bill that removed a judge’s ability to override a jury’s decision to impose the death penalty, and said that the bill had originally included retroactivity and the requirement for a unanimous jury decision before a death sentence could be imposed.

Those elements, however, were ultimately removed from the bill upon its passage.

“Towards the end of that session, we didn’t want the perfect to be the enemy of the good, so we took what we could in hopes of coming back later on and adding additional components to require jury unanimity, and also retroactivity,” England said.

“If the entire state of Alabama, regardless of party affiliation, can come together and say that a judge should not be able to override a jury’s verdict when it comes to sentencing, justice demands us to afford those individuals who are still on death row, who were there from a judicial override, the opportunity to be resentenced.”

England called on the chair of the House Judiciary Committee – Rep. Jim Hill, R-Odenville – to place HB27 on the committee’s agenda “as soon as possible.”

A near-identical bill was filed by England last year, though it ultimately never made it to the House floor. England noted that had his previous version of the bill been passed, Kenneth Smith, who was executed by nitrogen hypoxia in January, would have had the opportunity to be resentenced.

Smith was convicted in 1988 for the murder of Elizabeth Sennett, whose husband, a preacher, had allegedly paid Smith $1,000 to carry out the murder-for-hire plot. Sentenced to death via judicial override.

Smith’s wife, Deanna Smith, was among the last speakers at the rally, and urged Alabama lawmakers to adopt HB27.

“Kenny was not sentenced to death; 11 people on his jury said he should still be here today,” Deanna Smith said.

“One judge is all it took to override that decision. Right now, we have a chance and a choice to make it right for people like Rocky and the other men on death row, so please, vote for HB27. Don’t let it slip by like it did last year, because the truth is, people’s lives are at stake.”

Following the rally, activists began to march down North Union Street to the State Capitol, and informed a representative for Ivey of the hundreds of thousands of signatures a petition to grant clemency to Rocky had amassed. As of Friday, the petition has amassed more than 860,000 signatures.

(source: Alabama Daily News)

DR CONGO:

Death Penalty Degrading, “incompatible with the Gospel”: Catholic Bishops in DR Congo

Catholic Bishops in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) have condemned the decision by the government of the Central African nation to lift a 2003 ban on the death penalty, saying it is a “degrading treatment” that is not in accordance with the Gospel.

In a statement issued March 13, DRC’s Justice Minister, Rose Mutombo announced the lifting of the 2-decade-old moratorium on the death penalty in the Central African nation.

Minister Mutombo has been quoted as saying that “acts of treachery or espionage have taken a toll on the population and the Republic”, and that the restoration of the death penalty is to “rid our country’s army of traitors… and curb the upsurge in acts of terrorism and urban banditry resulting in death.”

In a Friday, March 22 statement, members of the National Episcopal Conference of Congo (CENCO) reaffirmed their “unconditional commitment to the defense of life and the abolition of the death penalty in our country.” “The death penalty and its logic of retribution are not compatible with the Gospel. No matter how it is carried out, the death penalty implies cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. Jesus does not close the door to life for the condemned. He is the one who always gives everyone a chance,” CENCO members said.

They added, “God's infinite love gives every human being a dignity that even crimes cannot take away.”

“Soon we will be celebrating Easter, the pinnacle of Christian festivals. The resurrection of Jesus, the triumph of life, shows that God is against the death penalty for his Son. Nor does he allow the taking of a human life,” Catholic Bishops in DRC said.

They urged the government to “fight against the various facets of the culture of death in our society.”

CENCO members also urged the government to abolish capital punishment for all crimes but to instead set up more effective detention systems and improve prison conditions for detainees.

The Catholic Bishops encouraged the Congolese people to train and educate themselves in the respect and promotion of human dignity, saying, “Educate children and young people by moving them from the culture of death to the culture of care and protection of life.

With the lifting of the moratorium in DRC, the death penalty is to be carried out following any judicial conviction for offenses that include criminal conspiracy, treason, espionage, participation in armed gangs, participation in an uprising, crimes against humanity, military conspiracy, and rebellion, among others.

In a March 17 interview with the French-language Catholic television channel, KTO, Fridolin Cardinal Ambongo said the decision to lift a 2003 ban on the death penalty is retrogressive.

“This is a step backwards! I don't think that a responsible government can raise such an option to punish people who are called traitors,” he said, adding, “First of all, on the notion of traitors, we must 1st agree on what that means. And when I look at the reality here in the Congo, the great traitors to the country are precisely those in power.”

(source: Jude Atemanke is a journalist for ACI Africa)

SOUTH AFRICA:

We will treat criminals like dogs and bring back death penalty, says ATM leader Vuyo Zungula

African Transformation Movement (ATM) leader Vuyo Zungula has vowed that criminals will be treated like dogs, with their human rights not having much weight under a government led by his party.

Speaking in Jabulani, Soweto, during the party’s Johannesburg regional rally on Sunday, Zungula said criminals deserve no mercy and he would not want to be politically correct in the treatment of people that are terrorising society.

“Under the ATM government, we are not going to be playing sweetheart with criminals. We are not going to be saying to a criminal ‘baby, come to prison, you have got three meals a day, baby, you got free DSTV baby, you’ve got water and electricity, baby’,” he quipped.

“Under the ATM, a criminal will be afraid to think they can succeed as a criminal. Under the ATM, be rest assured the law will say ‘nja’ [dog]. Under the ATM we are not going to protect people who do not respect the right to life for others.”

Zungula made the comments against the backdrop of the latest crime statistics released by Police Minister Bheki Cele which showed that from October to December last year, 7 710 people were murdered, an increase of 155 from the same period in the previous year.

Zungula said the death penalty — which South Africa abolished in 1995 — would be brought back under an ATM government.

“If you look in neighbouring countries like Botswana, they have got a death penalty and no one is complaining about criminals,” he said.

“We are going to empower the police that if your life is under threat by a criminal, do not shoot the leg or up in the sky, erase that thing. We can’t be thinking about human rights for criminals.”

Zungula said the ATM would expropriate land without compensation and every home would be given a farm to ensure food security. He said when land had been taken from black people, it was not asked for and those who took it didn’t buy it.

“They killed our people and that is why we must never negotiate over the injustice of land disposition,” he said.

“We can’t have food security that is dependent on a few farms, we need food security in our country that is dependent on citizens themselves. We need to invest in farming to ensure that 50% of these produce in each and every retailer in their community, it is not sought from big farmers but emerging farmers.”

To create jobs, the party would aim at reindustrialisation and stop buying things such as “umbrellas and toothpicks” from other countries, Zungula said.

“South Africa will not be a made-in-China product under the ATM. Most products under the ATM government will be made in South Africa and that is how you create jobs,” he said.

“You build factories, you manufacture in the country. We will make sure South Africa stops importing things that it can produce. We want a state in our country whereby South Africans can enjoy their economy.”

(source: mg.co.za)

RUSSIA:

'Kill Them All': Crocus Massacre Spurs Talk Of Restoring Death Penalty----Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev: "It is more important to kill everyone involved. Everyone. Those who paid. Those who sympathized. Those who helped. Kill them all.”

Senior Russian officials on March 25 continued to call for the strictest punishment, including the death penalty, for all those found to be involved in the terrorist attack on a Moscow region concert hall that left 137 people dead.

Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin told a meeting of Communist Party lawmakers that those found responsible will “bear punishment.”

“They do not deserve pity,” he added.

Dmitry Medvedev, the former Russian president who is now deputy head of the country’s Security Council, wrote on Telegram that people had been asking him if the gunmen who carried out the attack should be killed.

“They should,” he wrote. “And they will. It is more important to kill everyone involved. Everyone. Those who paid. Those who sympathized. Those who helped. Kill them all.”

The previous day, Medvedev repeated Moscow’s ungrounded accusations that Ukraine was involved in the concert hall attack, writing that the country’s leadership should be “found and pitilessly destroyed like terrorists.”

On March 23, the head of the State Duma faction of the ruling United Russia party, Vladimir Vasilyev, said on state television that people had begun discussing reinstating capital punishment in response to the attacks.

He said the topic would be discussed “profoundly and professionally” before “a decision is made that will respond to the mood and expectations of our society.”

The death penalty remains in the Russian Constitution but has been under an indefinite moratorium for nearly 3 decades.

Russia adopted the moratorium in 1996 as part of its post-Soviet efforts to join the Council of Europe. Russia was expelled from the council in March 2022 as a result of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on March 25 that the Kremlin was not involved in the calls to restore the death penalty following the Crocus City Hall attack.

“We are not taking part in the discussion at the moment,” Peskov said.

(source: rferl.org)

*****************

Russian politicians call for reinstatement of death penalty

Senior politicians in Russia are advocating for the reinstatement of the death penalty following the terrorist attack on Moscow’s Crocus City Hall on March 22.

The moratorium on capital punishment in Russia dates back to the 1990s when Russia joined the Council of Europe. Abolishing the death penalty is a requirement for joining this organisation. However, according to Russian law, the death sentence is still legal but has simply been paused. Some lawmakers are now calling for the moratorium to end.

In the aftermath of what is now considered the deadliest attack in the country in two decades, voices close to President Vladimir Putin are growing louder in their calls to lift it.

One of those voices was Vladimir Vasilyev, the head of the ruling United Russia party in the State Duma, who noted that the topic of the death penalty had now come to the surface again.

“This topic will definitely be deeply, professionally and substantively studied. And a decision will be made that will meet the moods and expectations of our society,” he said in a statement.

Others who spoke out about the end of the moratorium include Yury Afonin, deputy head of the State Duma's security committee, State Duma Deputy Andrei Gurulev and Duma speaker Vyacheslav Volodin.

Former President Dmitry Medvedev also spoke out in favour of reinstating capital punishment, writing on Twitter: “Terrorists understand only retaliatory terror. No trials or investigations will help if force is not countered by force and deaths by total executions of terrorists and repressions against their families.”

The attack on the Crocus City Hall concert hall resulted in the loss of over 130 lives. Two of the suspects arrested for the attack, Saidakrami Murodalii Rachabalizoda and Dalerdjon Barotovich Mirzoyev, have already been seen in court, facing charges of a "terror attack committed by a group of individuals resulting in a person's death.”

(source: intellinews.com)

*****************

Kremlin: we are not joining death penalty debate after concert hall attack

The Kremlin said on Monday it was not taking part in discussions about restoring the death penalty, broached by top allies of President Vladimir Putin in the wake of the Russia's deadliest attack in 2 decades.

Gunmen men burst into the Crocus City Hall concert venue near Moscow on Friday, killing at least 137 people and wounding 182 - the worst loss of civilian life in Russia since the 2004 Beslan school siege.

Russia has detained four men, at least one a Tajik national, who it says directly carried out the attack. The Islamic State militant group has claimed responsibility.

"Now many people are asking questions about the death penalty. This topic, of course, will be deeply, professionally, meaningfully studied," Vladimir Vasilyev, parliamentary leader of the United Russia faction in the lower house of parliament, was quoted by the state news agency TASS media as saying on Saturday.

Dmitry Medvedev, a Putin ally who served a term as Russia's president and has become stridently hawkish since Russia sent its troops into Ukraine two years ago, discussed the detained suspects on his Telegram channel on Monday.

"Do they have to be killed?" he asked. "They have to be. And will be."

The Kremlin said it would not participate in conversations about lifting the moratorium on the death penalty.

"We are not taking part in this discussion at the moment," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters at a daily briefing.

Capital punishment is legal in Russia but no executions have been carried out since 1996, when President Boris Yeltsin issued a decree establishing a de-facto moratorium, which was explicitly confirmed by the Constitutional Court in 1999.

Russia's penal code currently allows for the death penalty for 5 offences: murder, genocide, and attempted murder of either a judge, police officer or state official.

(source: Reuters)

INDONESIA:

Bali Prosecutors Seeking Death on Appeal

The Indonesian criminal justice system allows appeals by defendants and prosecutors when the convicted party considers the sentence handed down in a trial too harsh or when prosecutors feel the punishment handed down by the Court is too lenient. After the appeal process, sentences initially meted out by the Court can be affirmed, abolished, enhanced, or reduced.

The ability of the State and convicted criminals to challenge sentences was demonstrated when the Public Prosecutor in Buleleng, North Bali, filed for a formal review of a 20-year prison sentence and Rp. 2 billion fine handed down against I Gede Krisna Paranata, also known as “Ode.” in a high profile narcotics conviction. Unsatisfied with the sentence, Prosecutors are now asking the Court to increase that punishment to death before a firing squad.

As reported by Kompas.com, Ode, a recidivist with numerous drug convictions, was sentenced to life in prison in a verdict delivered by the Court on Thursday, 14 March 2024.

While Prosecutors want to see Ode punished with death, his defense team has filed the necessary appeal to see his 18-year prison sentence substantially reduced.

Ode was found guilty before a Singarajai Court of organizing the delivery of 58,799 ecstasy pills while he was imprisoned in the North Bli prison.

The spokesman for the Buleleng Prosecutor’s Office, I Dewa Gede Baskara Aryasa, confirmed that prosecutors had filed the paperwork with the Singaraja Court for final review before the High Court to see the man’s life sentence upgraded to execution before a firing squad. Aryasa continued, explaining: “The consideration was that the life sentence was less than the death penalty demanded in Court by prosecutors.”

State prosecutors are also appealing 2 other prison sentences for Ode’s accomplices, I Gusti Ngurah Bagus Tri Adhi Putra, also known as Pongek, and Dewa Alit Krisna Meranggi Putra.

The case presented before the panel of judges detailed how, on 26 June 2023, Ode, while still imprisoned in Singaraja, sought someone to fetch a car loaded with ecstasy pills in Denpasar. “Pongkek contracted Bimbim,” or Bimantha Wijaya, to drive a white Toyota Agiya used to transfer the drugs to Alit in Pancasari Village in North Bali.

Police subsequently seized the car containing a suitcase containing the 58,799 ecstasy pills.

(source: balidiscovery.com)

BANGLADESH:

One gets death sentence for killing teenager in N'ganj

A court in Narayanganj on Monday sentenced a man to death for killing a boy at Sonargaon upazila in the district in 2022.

Narayanganj Additional District and Sessions Court Judge Aminul Haque announced the verdict in the afternoon.

The condemned convict was Apurba Chandra Das, 21, a resident of Bagmahisha Rishipara village under Sonargaon municipality.

However, 3 other accused in this case were acquitted as the charges were not proved against them.

The court Police Inspector Asaduzzaman confirmed it.

He said the body of a school student named Faisal Ahmed, 17, was recovered on February 4, 2022 after eight days of his missing. A case was registered in this regard with Sonargaon Police Station.

Later, Apurba Chandra Das, who was arrested in the case, confessed that he had killed Faisal Ahmed on the night of 26 January 2022 and had buried Faisal's body under the mud in a canal.

(source: observerbd.com)

IRAN:

“Black Tuesdays” Prison Hunger Strikes Against the Death Penalty

Political prisoners participating in mass hunger strikes against the death penalty in five prisons for the last seven weeks have issued a statement calling for support from “all awake consciences and free people.”

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, political prisoners in Ghezelhesar Prison, Evin Prison, Karaj Penitentiary, Mashhad Central Prison and Khorramabad Central Prison have on hunger strike every Tuesday against the implementation of the death penalty in prisons. The hunger strike was initiated by political prisoners in Alborz’s Ghezelhesar Prison where group executions were carried out on a weekly basis after the closure of Rajai Shahr (Gohardasht) Prison last summer. The first hunger strike took place on 29 January 2024 in what became known as “Black Tuesdays” after prison officials cracked down on anti-death penalty protests at the prison. In the course of the last seven weeks, political prisoners in four other large prisons have joined the strikes on a weekly basis.

In 2023, at least 834 people were executed in prisons across Iran. The following statement was issued on the last Tuesday of the Iranian calendar year, marking the 8th Black Tuesday.

To the noble and free people of Iran,

We, a group of prisoners, have been on hunger strike every Tuesday for the past seven weeks to protest the issuance of death sentences and executions, and to stop the killing and execution machine.

Today, on the last Tuesday of the year, as we hunger strike for the eighth week, we remember all the victims of the religious tyranny repression system, particularly those executed.

The aim of our ‘Black Tuesday’ campaign and the weekly hunger strikes is to draw the public’s attention to the fact that ‘the death penalty is state murder, is an irreversible punishment and a tool of repression and intimidation of the despotic minority government ruling the country.’

We are deeply grateful for the support of all who have joined the ‘Black Tuesdays’ campaign for “No Death Penalty” and have become our voices.

Now, on the eve of the new year and the arrival of the spring of nature, we extend our greetings to all our compatriots and we hope that the new year will be the year of victory for the Iranian people and the realisation of freedom and justice. And soon, in a society free from discrimination, violence, tyranny and exploitation, a system guaranteeing human rights for all citizens will emerge and medieval orders such as the death penalty will be abolished.

We are confident that the day is not far when the Iranian people will achieve democratic power to determine their own destiny and no citizen will be subject to oppression and injustice because of their opinion. But until that day, we see it as our moral duty to continue to protest the death penalty from behind bars in the coming year, and we call on ask all awake consciences and free people to support our campaign.

Finally, in light of the recent reports presented at the UN Human Rights Council and the necessity for international condemnations of human rights violations and executions in Iran, we believe that the victory of the people and achieving justice is not possible except through unity and solidarity of the Iranian people. In the case of the death penalty, we emphasise the need for unity and collective action to stop the executions regardless of the opinion, nationality, ethnicity, religion, and type of charges, and we ask for support from all free consciences in Iran and the world to walk this difficult path.

A group of prisoners on ‘Black Tuesday’ hunger strike in Ghezelhesar, Evin, Karaj, Mashhad and Khorramabad prisons

(source: iranhr.net)

MARCH 24, 2024:

GEORGIA:

Witness to an execution — sort of----Observations from a vigil for a murderer who was put to death Wednesday night.

“For or against?”

The questions startled me. I didn’t know really how to answer. I didn’t think that anyone coming here actually would be for the execution. I remained silent, as the guard looked over our drivers licenses, made notes on his clipboard, and consulted with other guards.

“Against, right?” he came back at me as he finished up his paperwork and prepared to direct us to the next area.

“Right,” I said, without much conviction.

We came here, to the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison, because our pastor last Saturday evening made an announcement at the end of Mass. The folks who had made a presentation at church in January – Georgians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty – informed him that an execution was scheduled for Wednesday evening at the prison in Jackson and that there would be a vigil outside. Anyone could attend.

Being relatively new to Georgia, we had no idea that (1) the Peach State had a death penalty, and (2) it could be administered right here, so close to where we live.

I thought about it for a few days, the possibility of attending the vigil. I would need to maintain my journalistic neutrality. I wouldn’t go there and take part in any demonstrations, for or against – although, again, I didn’t imagine that anyone would go there and clamor for the prisoner to be executed. It just didn’t occur to me until that guard put the question to us.

But I’d never been to such a thing, and I don’t think our website ever covered something like this in person.

“I know,” I thought: “I’ll go there and shoot some video on my phone and put something together. A video report of the prayer vigil.”

Wednesday morning came, and I was starting to feel more confident about going. I also started to think about Willie Pye, 52, who had been convicted of the 1993 murder of his ex-girlfriend, Alicia Lynn Yarbrough. I knew nothing about the man, but I kept thinking of the fact that this would probably be his last day on earth. What must it feel like to know that you’re going to die tonight? No matter what you think about the death penalty, when you get this close, it’s hard to run from the fact that here is a man, a human being, facing something imminent that all of us will have to face some day – our death. Except that he knows with much more certainty that it will happen on a particular date and a particular time.

We all have a death sentence, in a manner of speaking. We just haven’t been served the warrant yet.

Pye’s name had been in the news for a few days already. A number of people, including Atlanta Archbishop Gregory John Hartmayer, had presented petitions for clemency to the State Board of Pardons and Parole. The board met on Wednesday and turned down the appeal. Those arguing for a commutation pointed out that Pye’s IQ was only 68, that he had been abused as a child, that one of his first court-appointed lawyers was a racist, and that some of the jurors in his trial subsequently said that if they had known certain things that hadn’t come out in trial they never would have voted for the death penalty.

These were details reiterated during the vigil by Mary Catherine Johnson, director of New Hope House, a prison ministry. People were gathering for the vigil behind ropes set up in a grassy area under tall slender pines, just inside the prison complex. We joined them after a bomb-sniffing dog checked out our car. Apparently, another pen was set up for the pro-death penalty side, but I didn’t notice anyone there. Johnson told me later that members of the KKK used to come and fill that space.

She should know. She’s been attending executions for many years. Her prison ministry, which is not far from here, offers support and hospitality to death row inmates and their families.

Our pen was so far from the prison that we couldn’t see the buildings. But we could see official vans going through the front gate and making their way up to the prison: probably family members of the condemned, witnesses, journalists.

Light turnout

My idea of shooting video of the vigil was dashed by a guard who came up to us as we walked from our car to the protest enclosure. He’d seen me already starting to shoot some video of the surroundings, which included a gaggle of guards.

“You’re going to have to leave your phones in the car,” he told me and my wife. We obeyed. What else could we do?

Johnson told us that no one in the small gathering had been allowed to take a phone along either. The guards had never done that before, and she wasn’t sure why the change.

I took a quick glance at some of the other cars. I always look at bumper stickers, and my attention was quickly drawn to a Sonski/Onak sticker – this year’s presidential ticket of the American Solidarity Party. There were an assortment of pro-life and LGBTQ stickers on a variety of vehicles.

Arriving around the same time as us was a self-professed ex-con named Tom who let us and everyone else in earshot know that he’d been to the Pardons and Parole Board hearing yesterday in Atlanta and knew as soon as the board came in the room that they were going to deny. He said he could see hostility in their faces and demeanors.

Tom claimed to have known Pye in prison.

We were welcomed into the enclosure in a very friendly way and thanked for coming out. There couldn’t have been more than 10 people there, including Johnson and Cathy Harmon-Christian, executive director of Georgians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. The weather was so lovely. The second day of spring, but spring had been making its presence known for some time here, and tonight the temperature and humidity were just right. I could understand how some people might just rather stay home and eat out on the deck, instead of standing outside a state prison. I suppose some people would have similar difficulty choosing to spend Saturday morning at a 40 Days for Life vigil when it’s good beach weather.

Keeping hope alive

My wife wanted to pray the Rosary and Divine Mercy chaplet. I fingered my chotki and intended to pray the Jesus Prayer for the condemned man. But Johnson soon began the vigil, and I wanted to listen to what she had to say.

“We’re here to celebrate Willie Pye, in his humanity,” she began. “As far as we know, he’s still alive, and we’ll keep hope alive until we hear otherwise.”

Pye’s execution would be the first one in four years. Johnson read some testimonials about him, how he had delved deeper and deeper in his faith over the years, how he was adored by a niece, and how he took so much pride in her accomplishments that she was all he could talk about sometimes.

In other words, if the death penalty is meant to protect society from violent criminals, Pye certainly didn’t seem to be one of them.

She had a sheet with the names of every man and woman who had been executed in Georgia since 1976, when the death penalty was restored. She asked that we pass the list around, and that one by one we each read a name. By this time, a number of other people had arrived, including two women Episcopal ministers, but our number was still small, and the list went around at least 5 times. I was somewhat startled when I heard one name – a man who had the same family name as mine.

On one go-around the woman to my right, who held a sign saying, “We remember Alicia Yarbrough,” almost broke down in tears. The name she just read “was my husband’s best friend,” she said.

It turns out that this woman’s husband was inside this very prison – also on death row.

A woman across the circle from me, who wore a Roman collar and a black outfit with “BLM” printed on her shirt – she later told me that she was from a Unitarian Universalist church in Atlanta – prayed aloud in the name of the whole group. And then the circle sang several verses of “Amazing Grace.”

I noticed other t-shirts, including one that said “Democrats for Life of America,” and another that had “Pro-Life” on the back and an anti-death penalty message on the front.

It was long past 7, the time when Pye was to have been executed. One member of the circle did have a phone with her – she said the guards never told her otherwise – and she was getting messages that Pye’s attorney had filed an appeal to the US Supreme Court. So we waited.

Finally, we told Johnson and Harmon-Christian that we really needed to get home. They understood completely, but they would be there until they got some news, one way or the other. “Sometimes I’ve been here till 2 in the morning,” Johnson told me.

We drove home and prepared dinner, which we ate in a rather somber mood. I kept wondering if I should rewrite the Good Friday meditation that our pastor had asked me to deliver at the Seven Last Words service, somehow working in this experience. I was assigned the penultimate word, “It is finished.”

For Pye, those words took effect at 11:03 that night. The Supreme Court had turned down the appeal. Official witnesses reported that he had declined to make a final statement before the lethal injection was administered. But he accepted that a minister say a final prayer for him.

That wasn’t the only one.

(source: Jessica McGowan, aleteia.org)

FLORIDA:

State continues pursuit of death penalty for Steven Lorenzo in torture murders

The state will continue to seek the death penalty for Steven Lorenzo in connection with the murders of Jason Galehouse and Michael Wachholtz.

A month after Lorenzo offered to plead no contest if the state discontinued its pursuit of capital punishment, prosecutors announced in court Friday that they had decided to move forward toward an April trial.

“We are not willing to accept any proposal for negotiation with Mr. Lorenzo,” Assistant State Attorney Justin Diaz said.

The decision came after discussion with the families of the 2 victims and a meeting of a homicide committee in the office of Hillsborough State Attorney Andrew Warren. Family members of both men have previously expressed their desire to see Lorenzo sentenced to death.

Galehouse and Wachholtz disappeared on back-to-back nights in December 2003 after visiting a gay nightclub. A lengthy investigation led authorities to Scott Schweickert, who ultimately confessed that he helped lure the men to Lorenzo’s Seminole Heights home, where they were drugged, sexually tortured and killed.

Lorenzo was convicted in federal court of drug-related crimes and sentenced to 200 years in prison. But a murder case took years for state authorities to assemble.

Schweickert, who was also convicted in federal court, later pleaded guilty to state charges in exchange for a life sentence.

Lorenzo, 63, who has insisted on representing himself in his state murder case, last month filed a lengthy handwritten letter in which he offered to plead no contest and outlined numerous arguments against the death penalty.

“I am withdrawing my offer to settle,” he said Friday, upon hearing the state’s decision. “The information that I gave them was only partial. There is always more. I am not going to negotiate with the state. They didn’t give me what I wanted in the beginning.”

A trial date remains set for April.

(source: Tampa Bay Times)

MARCH 23, 2024:

GEORGIA:

LDF Condemns Georgia’s Resumption of Death Penalty Executions

The state of Georgia executed Willie James Pye via lethal injection late Wednesday evening after the Georgia Parole Board denied his request for clemency based on his intellectual disability and the gross ineffectiveness of his trial counsel.

Prior to Mr. Pye’s execution, Georgia had not executed anyone in 4 years. In response, the Legal Defense Fund’s (LDF) Director of Strategic Initiatives Jin Hee Lee issued the following statement:

“The execution of Willie Pye is a tragic example of the extreme inequities and inhumanity of our capital punishment system. With his life on the line, Mr. Pye was appointed an attorney overwhelmed with hundreds of felony cases and ill-prepared to provide the legal representation required by our Constitution. Moreover, Mr. Pye’s intellectual disability should have automatically disqualified him from execution. There is no evidence that the death penalty improves safety or otherwise benefits our society.

Instead, it is a barbaric form of punishment to which the most vulnerable and disadvantaged are relegated.

“The need to abolish the death penalty in Georgia and throughout the United States is long overdue and is especially urgent as states resume executions or otherwise decide to test novel execution methods. We can achieve justice for even the most heinous crimes while remaining true to our humanity.”

###

Founded in 1940, the Legal Defense Fund (LDF) is the nation’s first civil rights law organization. LDF’s Thurgood Marshall Institute is a multi-disciplinary and collaborative hub within LDF that launches targeted campaigns and undertakes innovative research to shape the civil rights narrative.

(source: naacpldf.org)

MISSOURI----impending execution

Attorneys say Missouri corrections director unqualified to oversee execution next month

Lawyers for a man who faces lethal injection next month say his execution should be halted because the Missouri Department of Corrections does not have a permanent director. Brian Dorsey was convicted in the 2006 killing of his cousin Sarah Bonnie and her husband Ben Bonnie in central Missouri. He was given the death penalty.

On Dec. 13, the Missouri Supreme Court scheduled Dorsey’s lethal injection for April 9.

In a motion filed late Thursday, a team of pro bono attorneys argue that the head of the Missouri Department of Corrections, acting director Trevor Foley, should not be allowed to oversee an execution.

Foley was named by Missouri Gov. Mike Parson as acting director of the corrections department on Nov. 30. According to a news release, Foley began his career with the department as a budget analyst in 2000 and left the agency in 2008 before returning as director of budget and finance in 2018.

Dorsey’s attorney contend that Foley is inexperienced and has “no applicable correctional experience.”

According to state law, “The director shall have education, training and experience in correctional management.”

The director also oversees the selection of the confidential execution team and the implementation of the lethal injection protocol.

“The multiple risks attendant to an execution require an experienced Director, as do the Missouri Constitution and statutes,” the motion says.

It goes on to say that Foley is the acting director, not the director. The director is confirmed by the Missouri Senate, a process the motion says provides checks and balances.

In January, a hard-right group of Missouri senators held up more than two dozen appointments nominated by Parson in a fight over a proposal making it harder to change the state constitution.

The governor’s office and the Department of Corrections did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Dorsey’s motion.

Dorsey’s primary legal team has filed other cases seeking to halt his execution. One argued that Dorsey was in a state of drug psychosis the night of the double murder and was “incapable of deliberation,” making him ineligible for a first-degree murder charge. That was struck down by the Missouri Supreme Court on Wednesday.

A federal case contends that Missouri’s protocols present a “substantial risk of serious, torturous, physical and psychological pain.”

Over 70 corrections staff support granting Dorsey life without parole. So does Michael Wolff, a former Missouri Supreme Court justice. He was on the high court when it upheld Dorsey’s death sentence in 2009.

But in a March 4 letter to Gov. Mike Parson, Wolff wrote that he did not know how ineffective Dorsey’s trial attorneys were. The attorneys, who were paid a flat fee for taking the case, allowed Dorsey to plead guilty while the death penalty was still on the table.

“There are rare cases where those of us who sit in judgment of a man convicted of capital murder got it wrong,” Wolff wrote. “The decisions affirming Brian Dorsey’s death sentence is just such a case.”

Members of Dorsey’s family are divided on his upcoming execution. Some oppose capital punishment for him. But a statement from the family of Sarah Bonnie’s family, said, “All of these years of pain and suffering we finally see the light at the end of the tunnel. Brian will get the justice that Sarah and Ben have deserved for so long.”

Missouri has ramped up its use of the death penalty, executing four people last year. It is one of five states with executions scheduled this year, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

(source: The Kansas City Star)

OKLAHOMA:

Oklahoma lawmakers seek tougher shoplifting, domestic abuse penalties

Proposals cracking down on retail theft and domestic violence have momentum at the state Capitol.

Several reform measures have also advanced at the Legislature’s unofficial halfway point, though ambitious efforts to mandate pretrial data collection statewide and impose a death penalty moratorium were not heard on the full House or Senate floor and are effectively dead.

Oklahoma’s prison population is down 15% since March 2019 but has increased in recent years as the justice system fully recovers from COVID-19 pandemic delays. Criminal justice reform advocates fear efforts to require more prison time for certain offenses and roll back parts of State Question 780 could cause the prison population to keep trending up.

With 9 weeks left in the 2024 legislative session, here’s a look at where criminal justice bills stand:

Anti-shoplifting bill rolls back State Question 780

Citing an uptick in retail crime, lawmakers have advanced 2 bills that would enable prosecutors to file more felony shoplifting charges.

House Bill 3694 by John George, R-Newalla, lowers the felony threshold for shoplifting offenses from $1,000 to $500. That’s a partial reversal of State Question 780, the 2016 voter-approved criminal justice reform initiative that reclassified several drug and property crimes from felonies to misdemeanors.

Senate Bill 1450 by Pro Tem Greg Treat, R-Oklahoma City, increases the period during which prosecutors can aggregate multiple thefts from 90 days to one year. The change was recommended by the Oklahoma Organized Retail Crime Task Force, which began meeting in October.

Both measures cleared their chamber vote with overwhelming Republican support. Debating in favor of HB 3694 on March 6, George said failing to act on the proposal would cause prices to rise and small businesses to shutter.

“I do agree we need to help people who want help, but we also need to protect our law-abiding citizens and businesses,” said George, a former Oklahoma City Police Department officer who led the OKC Fraternal Order of Police for several years.

Rep. Jason Lowe, D-Oklahoma City, said the Legislature is moving backward in increasing criminal punishments and should instead focus on bolstering diversion and treatment programs.

“We’re creating a situation where our prison population is going to increase again,” Lowe said. “At one time our state had the highest incarceration rate in the nation for women. We don’t want to go back to that.”

George also claimed the state’s shoplifting rate tripled after State Question 780 took effect. While the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation’s crime statistics page shows a considerable increase over the six-year period, that’s because law enforcement agencies were transitioning to the agency’s current crime reporting system, OSBI Statistics Coordinator Kara Miller said. All agencies have transitioned to the National Incident-Based Reporting System as of January 2021.

Oklahoma law enforcement reported an incremental increase in shoplifting offenses after State Question 780 took effect in July 2017, OSBI statistics compiled before the January 2021 transition show. There were 15,231 shoplifting offenses reported in 2023, an 8.7% decrease from 2018.

Bills seek more prison time for domestic abusers

Several bills would crack down on Oklahoma’s domestic violence rate, which consistently ranks among the top three in the nation and reached a 20-year high at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

Senate Bill 1211 by Kristen Thompson, R-Oklahoma City, raises the maximum penalty for domestic abuse by strangulation from three to 10 years. Researchers have found strangulation can cause long-term injuries and trauma and is often a precursor to homicide. Despite that, it was not classified as a violent crime.

House Bill 3784 by George and Darrell Weaver, R-Moore, adds domestic assault upon an intimate partner or a family or household member with a deadly weapon to the list of crimes for which offenders must remain incarcerated for at least 85% of the sentence. The Oklahoma Domestic Violence Fatality Review Board recommended the change in its 2023 annual report, noting that the state’s criminal code is more lenient toward someone who assaults an intimate partner than a stranger.

More than 25,000 domestic abuse incidents were reported to Oklahoma law enforcement in 2022, according to the OSBI. Of those, 105 victims were murdered.

Some reform bills advance

While significant justice reform efforts have not gained traction this session, several incremental changes remain before lawmakers.

House Joint Resolution 1053 by Regina Goodwin, D-Oklahoma City, would modify the Oklahoma Constitution to clarify that a tie clemency vote from the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board in death penalty cases does not constitute a denial. The resolution proposes adding three alternate board members who could settle a tie if a full-time member recuses.

The resolution advanced through the House on a 90-3 vote last week. If approved by the Senate, the question would appear directly before voters, likely on the November general election ballot.

The resolution comes after the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board voted 2-2 to deny Richard Glossip’s clemency recommendation last April. Former board member Richard Smotherman recused himself from the vote because his wife was a prosecutor on Glossip’s case.

Senate Bill 1470 by Treat would allow courts to consider the physical, sexual or psychological injuries a person endured as a mitigating circumstance. Offenses that require sex offender registration or carry the possibility of the death penalty are exempt.

The measure, known as the Oklahoma Domestic Violence Survivor’s Act, includes a retroactivity clause for those currently incarcerated. Among its advocates include April Wilkens, a Tulsa woman serving a life sentence for killing her ex-fiance´ and alleged abuser, Terry Carlton, in 1998.

“Oklahoma’s legal system is structured to punish survivors who defend themselves,” Tara Tyler, executive director of Ponca City’s Survivor Resource Network, said in a statement after the bill cleared the Senate. “The Oklahoma Survivors Act is a beacon of hope for domestic abuse survivors across the state.”

Other reform bills up for consideration include:

Senate Bill 1663 by Todd Gollihare, R-Tulsa, and Collin Duel, R-Guthrie: Allows a person to petition for early release from probation.

Senate Bill 1770 by Adam Pugh. R-Edmond and Nicole Miller, R-Edmond: Allows multiple expungement petitions to be consolidated into one file.

House Bill 3499 by Tammy West, R-Oklahoma City and Dave Rader, R-Tulsa: Specifies that affordable housing applicants cannot be denied tenancy based on their criminal record, with certain exceptions.

(source: Keaton Ross covers democracy and criminal justice for Oklahoma Watch----The Oklahoman)

USA:

Women’s History Month Profile Series: Carol Steiker, Harvard Law School Professor

This month, DPIC celebrates Women’s History Month with weekly profiles of notable women whose work has been significant in the modern death penalty era. The third entry in this series is Harvard Law School Professor Carol Steiker, a renowned educator and influential death penalty scholar.

Professor Steiker began her legal career as a clerk in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court. Professor Steiker clerked for Justice Thurgood Marshall and has attributed her interest in and knowledge of the death penalty to him. After her clerkships, Professor Steiker worked at the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia, where she defended indigent criminal defendants. She has represented criminal defendants in all stages of the criminal process, including arguing death penalty cases in front of the Supreme Court.

At Harvard, Professor Steiker is the faculty sponsor of the Capital Punishment Clinic, and the Henry J. Friendly Professor of Law, specializing in criminal justice and capital punishment. In addition to her work on individual cases, Professor Steiker has served as a consultant and expert witness on the criminal justice system and capital punishment issues.

Her 2016 book, Courting Death, which she co-authored with her brother and frequent collaborator, University of Texas Law Professor Jordan Steiker, examined the U.S. Supreme Court’s decades-long efforts to reform the death penalty. In Harvard Magazine, Lincoln Caplan called Courting Death, “the most important book about the death penalty in the United States—not only within the past generation but, arguably, ever—because of its potential to change how the country thinks about capital punishment.”

Professor Steiker also played a key role in the 2009 decision of the American Law Institute (ALI) to remove the death penalty from its Model Penal Code. The ALI, a nonpartisan group of judges, scholars, and lawyers, commissioned Carol and Jordan Steiker to produce a report on the administration of the death penalty. Together, the Steikers called for “the rejection of capital punishment as a penal option under current circumstances” because “such a statement would reflect the view that the death penalty should not be imposed unless its administration can satisfy a reasonable threshold of fairness and reliability.” Since the publication of this report, six states have abolished the death penalty. In 2015, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer of the Supreme Court cited the Steikers’ report in his dissent in Glossip v. Gross, where he opined that it was “highly likely that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment.”

(source: Death Penalty Informatino Cecnter)

***************

Living With Death: How Judges Experience Capital Cases

The curtains opened, and Judge Lawrence L. Piersol looked through a window at the man he had allowed to die.

On the evening of Oct. 30, 2012, inside the execution chamber at the South Dakota State Penitentiary in Sioux Falls, Donald E. Moeller, who was convicted for the gruesome 1990 rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl, initially declined to say any last words.

"They're my fan club?" he eventually said, apparently meaning the people on the other side of the glass. Then, a few minutes after the chemicals began flowing through tubes into Moeller's veins, he was pronounced dead.

Moeller didn't want his mother to see his execution — he didn't want her to suffer — but he did ask Judge Piersol to come. It was a sign of the strange bond that formed during habeas corpus proceedings during which Moeller challenged the state's execution method before later abandoning his defense, a move that amounted to a de facto agreement to be put to death. Judge Piersol, who presided over the case in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota, granted Moeller's wish with an order that allowed him to abandon any further legal challenges and paved the way for his execution.

Witnessing that lethal injection was so haunting for Judge Piersol that, as a prolific amateur artist, he felt the need to channel his emotions into the creation of a 6-foot-long installation representing the girl "butchered" by Moeller, with two large acrylic and oil paintings recalling the man's execution.

"I was dealing in my own mind with the execution and the fact that I was the last judge that he appeared before," Judge Piersol, who at age 83 still hears cases as a senior judge, told Law360. "Doing the art afterwards was probably my way of working through, you know, watching somebody die."

Before ascending to the federal bench, Judge Piersol, who served first as an infantry officer and then as a judge advocate in the U.S. Army, knew that one day he could be called to decide a case where the life of a person would be at stake. Despite his own personal reservations about capital punishment, he said he made his peace with the idea because he believed in his role as a public servant.

I don't believe in the death penalty. But that's not the point. I have to call these cases as they are. ... Think of the responsibility that you have: a human life. And you're the last call.

"I don't believe in the death penalty. But that's not the point. I have to call these cases as they are," he said.

But, Judge Piersol added, those involving the death penalty are the "worst" cases judges get, because of the moral burden that comes with them.

"Think of the responsibility that you have: a human life. And you're the last call," he said.

Law360 recently spoke to multiple judges with experience in capital practice about what it means to handle death penalty cases, which are legally complex and emotionally taxing. Whatever their beliefs on the morality, effectiveness and fairness of the death penalty, the judges said they must put those feelings aside while they're on the bench.

"I have to follow the law and I have to do my job," said Gary B. Randall, a longtime state judge in Nebraska who sentenced three defendants to death throughout his career before retiring in 2020.

But many judges say they aren't always prepared to handle cases involving capital punishment, and most of them learned to do it with little to no instruction.

"You have to learn on the job. You take the cases as they come and you do your best," Michael A. Wolff, the dean emeritus of Saint Louis University School of Law and a former chief justice of the Supreme Court of Missouri, told Law360.

Judges have the option to attend the National Judicial College, a nonprofit based at the University of Nevada, Reno that provides training for judges. In January, the college received a $1 million grant from the U.S. Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance to prepare state judges to handle death penalty cases.

According to a statement by the college, the grant will fund 2 years' worth of programming that includes quarterly webinars, a six-week online course, a bench practice book, a clearinghouse of model orders, and 8 podcasts.

Each phase of a death penalty trial presents judges with unique challenges, from impaneling a jury to providing instructions before a verdict. Judges must weed out jurors who don't want to be involved with a case involving a possible death sentence. They must show extreme attention to detail when considering aggravating or mitigating factors, including severe mental illness or disability, that could make the difference in whether a defendant lands on death row. And because capital cases are almost always high-profile, judges must also learn to manage the media.

In addition to the technical and legal issues, presiding over death penalty cases carries a heavy mental and emotional burden that judges can struggle to deal with. It's something that the National Judicial College is also looking to address as part of its new programming lineup, which will offer on-site courses in 4 locations around the country on a broad range of topics, including "judicial wellness and vicarious trauma," according to a statement announcing the grant.

An Emotional Toll

The most visceral aspects of trying a capital case — including the psychological burden of oftentimes gory evidence, the desire for closure on the part of victims' families, and the stress of facing a defendant whose life hangs in the balance — can hardly be taught.

"There's all sorts of intellectual knowledge that we can give to a judge," said Randall, who has served as a faculty member for the National Judicial College. "But there's nothing that would ever emotionally prepare a judge for making a decision about the death penalty."

Randall said that, over the course of his 23-year judicial career, discussions about the death penalty came up regularly in his personal life. From time to time, as cases he presided over made the news, his children, who supported his political campaign for the state bench, challenged him about his role in enforcing the death penalty.

"'Dad, how can you do that?'" he recalled his children saying. "My answer was pretty simple: I have to."

Randall told Law360 that his three capital trials — the most recent one in 2018 involving Anthony Garcia, who was convicted for murdering four people, including an 11-year-old boy, and who remains on death row — have at times caused him to lose sleep.

It could take over a large part of your life. Your family is around to support you, but sometimes you just have to individually address things in order to process them and work through.

Nancy Gertner, a former Massachusetts federal judge who now teaches at Harvard Law School, said that judges sometimes develop "dual consciousness" when forced to confront criminal justice policies, including capital punishment, that clash with their ideological and political beliefs.

Gertner told Law360 she was an anti-death penalty activist when she went before the Senate Judiciary Committee as part of her confirmation hearings in 1994. Asked about her stance on capital punishment, then-Judge Gertner said that she would ensure a fair trial.

Years later, that scenario became reality. Gertner presided over a case involving five people who were indicted following a shooting at a parade. 2 of those defendants, Branden Morris and Darryl Green, ??were charged with murder in aid of racketeering for shooting a member of a rival gang to death.

"I had sentenced individuals for doing exactly the same thing to a term of years. And now suddenly the government wanted the death penalty," Gertner said.

Neither defendant was ultimately sentenced to death, but the prospect of having to impose the death penalty had an effect on her, she said.

The Weight of Heinous Crimes

Hesitations about the death penalty sometimes fade away when judges are called to try cases involving vile, gruesome murders.

Even a self-described liberal like Randall said that his perception of capital punishment as a whole changed from the time he first became a lawyer in 1974, in part because of the reprehensible nature of the crimes involved in the cases he went on to hear after taking the bench.

"I don't think I really believed in the death penalty," he said. "However, as a judge, I developed a different opinion of it because I saw how heinous some of the acts that were [committed] by individual defendants."

On the other hand, Ronald Reinstein, a retired judge in Arizona, said that he was never opposed to the death penalty, even in principle.

Reinstein, who previously served as a prosecutor in charge of the criminal trial bureau and sex crimes unit at the district attorney's office in Maricopa County — home to Phoenix — imposed the sentence in 9 out of 15 capital cases he heard during his 22-year tenure, and says he has no regrets.

"I never had problems getting to sleep," said Reinstein, who now serves as a consultant for the Arizona Supreme Court, chairing committees on capital punishment and state forensic science. "One thing I've learned is, you know, some people are just not good people."

"When you're dealing with a case that involves torture, murder, or murder for hire, or rape murder, as opposed to say, somebody robbing a convenience store and shooting the clerk and then somehow that gets filed as a death penalty case — those kinds of cases are actually easier," he said. "I don't want to sound crass."

The Moeller case was so ghastly, it even made a deep impression on Judge Piersol, who said he generally opposes the death penalty "under any circumstances."

On May 8, 1990, Moeller kidnapped 9-year-old Becky O'Connell near a Sioux Falls convenience store, where she'd gone to buy sugar to make lemonade. After driving her to a wooded area along the banks of the Big Sioux River, he raped her and stabbed her to death. The girl's naked body was found the next day, her throat slashed. Semen found on her body matched a DNA sample taken from Moeller, who was arrested 8 months later in Tacoma, Washington. He was found guilty twice — the South Dakota Supreme Court reversed an initial conviction in 1996 after concluding that he didn't have a fair trial — and he was sentenced to die by lethal injection.

In early October 2012, Moeller, who until then had always maintained his innocence, appeared before Judge Piersol for an evidentiary hearing after he asked to put an end to a lawsuit his public defenders had filed to challenge South Dakota's lethal injection protocol.

"Do you want to take any more legal action to try to prevent your execution?" Judge Piersol asked, according to a transcript of the hearing.

"No, sir, I do not."

"Why not?"

"I killed the little girl. It is just that the punishment be concluded. I believe that," Moeller said. "The law has spoken. I killed. I deserve to be killed."

Moeller and the judge continued their exchange, talking about TV and radio shows and Moeller's daily prison routines, and then Judge Piersol questioned him again about his intentions: "I want to ask you again, even though I've already asked you. Tell me, why is it that you want to be executed?

"Your Honor, that's a tricky question, the way you put it there. I don't want to be executed. I don't want to die. I want to pay what I owe. I believe the death penalty is just in this case," Moeller said. "I've denied it for 20 years. The last couple years I have accepted responsibility."

He added: "Judge, I know what's happening. I am competent. I don't want this to drag through the courts anymore, because there's no reason to do it. It's been judged. Let's do it."

Less than a week later, Judge Piersol granted Moeller's voluntary dismissal of the legal challenge, and he went on to accept Moeller's invitation to be present at his execution.

More than a decade after Moeller's lethal injection, and with the lingering thought of him dying on the gurney, Judge Piersol said he has no remorse for greenlighting the execution.

"He was guilty, he received a fair trial," he said. "I don't have any regrets."

When sentencing defendants or hearing their legal challenges, judges must consider the families of the victims and the public at large. When it comes to capital punishment, the U.S. is an outlier amid democratic countries, Judge Piersol said.

"You might wonder why that is. Is there something of a frontier [mentality] ... or something in our ethos?" he said. "It's easy for the public to say, 'Well, string him up.' We used to do that with ropes."

Perceptions and Misperceptions

In America, capital punishment has come to be reserved for the most serious cases, mainly those involving murder. A long list of aggravating factors, which vary widely from state to state and can involve aspects such as the heinous nature of a crime, whom the victim is, and whether there was any premeditated intent, distinguish ordinary murders from those for which the death penalty becomes a possibility.

In 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Ring v. Arizona that any aggravating factors must be decided by juries, not, as it had been previously, by individual judges. States have different sentencing schemes for the formal imposition of the death penalty, and they set their own rules for situations in which juries are deadlocked.

Judge Catherine Torres-Stahl, of the 175th District Court of Texas, which covers parts of San Antonio, said members of the public often wrongly assume that judges still determine whether a defendant's crime warrants the death penalty.

"A lot of people don't understand that we don't assess the death penalty," she said. "Our job is to sign the death warrant so that the execution actually happens."

Judges presiding over capital cases must also contend with a fictional — and frequently inaccurate — image of the court system portrayed in movies and TV shows, which complicates the role of jurists to impanel and instruct jurors.

"I literally, during my voir dires, have to talk about shows like 'Law & Order' and 'CSI,'" Judge Torres-Stahl said. "We're fighting against that information, because that is the expectation that jurors have when they come to our courtroom."

Because the Supreme Court has held that "death is different" than other forms of punishment and requires higher scrutiny to avoid violating the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, judges are reluctant to push capital cases through trial quickly. That can create frustration for family members of victims and people who support the death penalty.

"One of the issues that the public doesn't understand is why these cases take so long," Reinstein said. "They seemingly never end."

The shift to jury-approved death sentences ushered in by the Ring ruling, along with increased sophistication by defense attorneys in putting on mitigation evidence, has further extended the time needed to bring a death penalty case to completion, he said.

The public is also often unaware that a capital case begins with a decision by prosecutors over whether to seek the death penalty in a particular case. Judge Torres-Stahl noted that, compared to the past, fewer prosecutors seek the death sentence for defendants, in part because it's harder to find jurors who are willing to approve it, a trend that reflects a faltering support for capital punishment nationwide. But it's also because death penalty litigation is extremely expensive and tends to drag on for years or decades, she said.

According to a recent Gallup poll, 53% of Americans surveyed last year said they supported the death penalty for people convicted of murder, down from 80% in 1994.

And a separate Gallup poll published in November showed that, for the 1st time, more Americans think the death penalty is carried out unfairly than fairly. That perception is compounded by a deeply uneven national landscape surrounding the death penalty; a report by the Death Penalty Information Center in December found that all 24 executions in 2023 were concentrated in 5 states: Alabama, Florida, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas. Among the states that allow capital punishment, some, like Texas, carry out death sentences regularly, while others, like California, have not executed anyone in years.

But inequities in the use of the death penalty are seen in other ways too, most notably the socio-economic status, mental health condition and sometimes race of the condemned, all of which increase mistrust in capital punishment as an institution.

Moreover, many exonerations in recent years have amplified those perceptions. One such case involved Lamar Johnson, a Missouri man who was exonerated last year after spending nearly three decades in prison for a 1994 murder he didn't commit.

Wolff, who voted to affirm several death sentences during his tenure in Missouri, said that many errors or instances of misconduct committed in the course of a prosecution — overlooked DNA evidence, coerced interrogations or recantations by witnesses — do not necessarily come to the attention of appellate courts, and he thinks that several people have been put to death despite those errors.

"This is a very human process. It's fallible," he said. "That causes me to have great skepticism about the effectiveness of the death penalty."

Overall, judges say they often need to contend with the public perception that the system is unfair.

"I wish the law did not allow the death penalty," Judge Piersol said. "If it's going to be applied, it should be applied evenly — and it isn't — so it shouldn't be applied at all."

He added, "Do you know of any wealthy people being executed lately?"

(source: Marco Poggio, law360.com)

**********

The unprecedented shift in attitudes towards abolition in the US

The Death Penalty Information Center’s 2023 report highlights a rising trend towards abolition in the US, evidenced by a decrease in states conducting executions and heightened backing for individuals asserting innocence. In 2023, the United States witnessed 24 executions, 21 death sentences, and three exonerations, reflecting this evolving trend.

ONGOING SHIFT TOWARDS ABOLITION

Public opinion in the US is increasingly leaning towards skepticism the fair application of the death penalty. After the Gallup Crime Survey has asked for opinions about the fairness of the death penalty application, the results show that more Americans believe the Death penalty is applied unfairly (50%) than fairly (47%). The survey affirms that (53%) of Americans favor the death penalty which represents the lowest number since March 1972. Results from 2019 indicate that support for the death penalty drops even lower (36%) when respondents are given the option of life without parole. 2023 also represents the 9th consecutive year with fewer than 30 people executed and fewer than 50 people sentenced to death. This marks a notable departure from historical execution rates.

John Huffington, Jesse Johnson, and Glynn Simmons were exonerated in 2023 after a cumulative 109 years of wrongful imprisonment. John Huffington was granted a full pardon based on conclusive evidence of innocence, leading to his release. Similarly, Jesse Johnson was released in Oregon due to ineffective representation and the unavailability of critical evidence. Glynn Simmons, sentenced to death in Oklahoma, was exonerated after 48 years when prosecutors failed to disclose exculpatory evidence. Despite their release, these cases underscore systemic flaws within the criminal justice system.

MOST EXECUTED PRISONERS WOULD LIKELY NOT BE SENTENCED TO DEATH TODAY

Executed prisoners spent an average of nearly 23 years on death row, the longest duration in the modern era. This prolonged incarceration has been associated with negative mental health impacts, as many prisoners on death row experience worsening mental health conditions. Significant changes in legal frameworks and societal understanding suggest that many of those executed would not have received the death penalty under current circumstances including the introduction of life without parole as an alternative sentence, and advancements in understanding mental health and trauma which has significantly strengthened the case for alternative sentencing over the years. Furthermore, high Profile innocence cases received intense media attention but found no relief in the courts. Innocence cases dominated much of the media’s attention on death penalty cases in 2023, however in the past decade, only 15 clemencies have been granted. In Florida for instance, the Supreme Court denied petitions questioning the fairness of the clemency process, resulting in the executions of Darryl Barwick and Michael Zack shedding light onto challenges in accessing clemency and revealing flaws within the legal system when safeguarding innocent individuals.

In August 2023, Alabama unveiled new execution method using nitrogen suffocation. Alabama officials sought the Supreme Court approval to set an execution date for Kenneth Smith, who survived an earlier, botched attempt to execute him in 2022. These developments intensified debates over the cruel treatment of those facing execution. Legal battles erupted, challenging the morality and constitutionality of these approaches. Read the full report at: https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/dpic-reports/dpic-year-end-reports/the-death-penalty-in-2023-year-end-report

(source: World Coalition Against the Death Penalty)

****************

Can you be Christian and support the death penalty?

(THE CONVERSATION) Pope Francis has declared the death penalty “inadmissible.” This means that the death penalty should not be used in any circumstance. It also alters the Catholic Catechism, a compendium of Catholic doctrine, and is now binding on Roman Catholics throughout the world.

But in spite of his definitive statement, Pope Francis’ act will probably only deepen the debate about whether Christians can support capital punishment.

As a Catholic scholar who writes about religion, politics and policy, I understand how Christians struggle with the death penalty – some cannot endure the idea and others support it as a way to deter and punish terrible crimes. Some Christian theologians have also observed that capital punishment could actually lead to a change of heart among criminals who might repent when faced with the finality of death.

(source: Mathew Schmalz,College of the Holy Cross----bigrapidsnews.com)

ARMENIA:

Entry into force of Armenia’s ratification of the European Protocol for abolition in all circumstances

In February 2024, Armenia’s ratification of Protocol No. 13 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms concerning the abolition of the death penalty in all circumstances entered into force. Armenia was already abolitionist for all crimes and a State Party to the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty.

Protocol No. 13 to the ECHR entered into force on 1 July 2003 and has been ratified 45 of the 46 Member States of the Council of Europe. Azerbaijan signed it in March 2023 but has yet to ratify it.

The World Coalition has been leading the campaign for the ratifications of this treaty, and targeted both countries in 2022, for its 20th anniversary. A milestone in the anti-death penalty movement will be reached when both Protocol 6 and Protocol 13 to the European Convention on Human Rights will be ratified by all the Member States of the Council of Europe!

(source: World Coalition Against the Death Penalty)

NIGERIA:

Why govs no longer sign death warrants – Ogun, Rivers

Ogun, Niger and Rivers State governments have explained the reasons why governors have always shunned signing death warrants for the execution of condemned criminals.

This followed the continuous debate on whether the state governors would begin sign the death sentence like former Edo State governor, Adams Oshiomole, did in 1999.

The states have shown the lack of readiness to implement law guiding death sentence for persons who have been convicted by courts despite its constitutionality.

In 2023, the Nigerian Correctional Service disclosed that 3,413 inmates were currently on death row across the country’s custodial centres.

The service also put the total number of inmates in these facilities at 77,849, adding that 53,836 individuals were awaiting trial, with 52,512 males and 1,324 females.

It was noted that the high number of awaiting trial persons was challenging for the Service.

It was disclosed that the service was spending N800 per day to feed each of the 900 dogs in the service while oly N750 was being allocated to feed each prisoner, the majority of whom were awaiting trials, at N250 per meal.

According to the 2024 budget, NCoS will spend N24,447,582,237 on the supply of catering materials and foodstuffs.

Meanwhile, in 2012, the then Edo State governor, Adams Oshiomhole, signed the death warrant bill into law. Four persons were convicted to death as of this time.

Similarly, the former governor of Kano State, Ganduje, in 2019, signed a bill approving the death penalty for anyone found guilty of kidnapping across the state.

The law provides for the death sentence for kidnappers who abduct and kill their victim, while kidnappers who abduct but did not kill their victim, if apprehended and found culpable, would be jailed for life.

Speaking on the matter, the Commissioner for Justice and Attorney General of Ogun State, Olusina Ogungbade, told Saturday PUNCH that he was not aware of any pending death warrant waiting to be signed by the governor of the state.

The commissioner explained that the inexhaustible debate on the appropriateness of death sentence, which he said, many countries of the world had abolished, contributed to the state governors’ general reluctance towards signing a death warrant for the killing of condemned criminals.

Ogungbade noted, “I am not aware of any warrant awaiting the signature of His Excellency, Governor Dapo Abiodun. Again it takes a long time for a condemned person to exhaust the appeal process and as you know, a death sentence cannot be carried out when an appeal against it is pending.”

“In addition, I don’t think it would help to approach this issue on a state-by-state basis. It is better to look at it from the national perspective. For a long time, there has been unwillingness by governors to sign death warrants.

“This is partly due to the long-lasting debate about the appropriateness of the death penalty. You will recall that at a time, Olisa Agbakoba, SAN, took the matter to the Supreme Court.

Similarly, the Rivers State Governor, Siminalayi Fubara, explained why he could not sign death warrants for condemned persons.

The State Commissioner for Information and Communications, Joseph Johnson, who spoke in a telephone interview with Saturday PUNCH, said Governor Fubara was a human being who had human feelings, adding that it was not his priority to do so.

Johnson stated, “The governor is a human being and cannot sign a document that will take the life of another. For my governor, I think that anybody who is humanitarian may not be quick to sign the death warrant of another person. So, we are human beings; it is not anybody’s priority to sign a death sentence of another person.”

Also, it was gathered that neither the current Niger State Governor Mohammed Bago nor any chief executive of the state has signed any death warrant since the country returned to democratic rule in 2023.

A government official, who declined speaking on record, disclosed that no Niger State governor since the inception of democratic rule in 1999 had signed the death penalty.

Meanwhile, the former Chairman of the Ilorin branch of the Nigerian Bar Association, Joseph Bamigboye, said that governors’ refusal to sign death warrants of convicted criminals was unconstitutional and was an attempt to blackmail the judges.

Speaking with Saturday PUNCH, Bamigboye noted that by refusing to sign death warrants for those convicted of capital offences, the governors had run against the constitution which they swore to protect.

Bamigboye said, “The governors’ refusal to sign the death warrant is blackmailing the judiciary and it is a way of disobeying the constitution which they have sworn to protect.”

Another Lawyer, the Secretary of the Ilorin Branch of NBA, Taofiq Olateju, told Saturday PUNCH that signing of death warrants by the governors was part of the oath they took during their swearing-in as the governors of their respective States.

He said by constitutional provision, the governors had committed an impeachable offence.

(source: punchng.com)

INDIA:

Maharashtra Man Gets Death Penalty For Rape, Murder Of 6-Year-Old Girl----The mother of the accused was also sentenced to 7 years imprisonment for hiding evidence and not reporting the incident to the police.

The Sessions Court in Pune on Friday sentenced a 24-year-old man to death for the rape and murder of a 6-year-old girl in Maval Taluka of Pune district

. In August 2022, the girl, aged 6 years, was playing in the courtyard of her house when the accused, a resident of Kamshet in Maval Taluka, kidnapped her, raped her, and slit her throat. The girl's body was found the next day in the accused's backyard.

The mother of the accused was also sentenced to 7 years imprisonment for hiding evidence and not reporting the incident to the police.

During the investigation, both the accused had confessed to the crime but later pleaded not guilty after a chargesheet was filed in the court by the police.

According to Public Prosecutor Senior Advocate Rajesh Kavediya, during the trial, the prosecution submitted that "on the basis of all evidence brought on record, the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused kidnapped the deceased girl while she was playing in the courtyard, took her to his home, committed aggravated sexual assault on the deceased, and murdered her brutally by cutting her throat.

"The accused thereafter attempted to hide the dead body by burying it in a pit below a tree behind his house. His mother had hidden the clothes and articles on the person of the deceased to protect her son from punishment, and so both accused should be convicted," Mr Kavediya added.

He further submitted that, "The accused is a sex maniac, obsessed with uncontrolled, relentless sexual thoughts and addicted to viewing child pornography."

Mr Kavediya expressed his gratitude towards the court for conducting a speedy trial.

The case came to trial around October 2022, and 29 witnesses were examined in just 8 months after the chargesheet was filed.

Reacting to the court order, Defense Lawyer Advocate Yashpal Purohit said, "I welcome the judgment given by the honorable court, but the defense will be moving to a higher court to seek the legal remedies available to the accused."

The Sessions Court, in its order, stated that, "The present crime seems to be one of the most heinous, brutal, and barbaric acts by a sexually obsessed and hardened cruel person."

The trial was conducted by Additional Sessions Court Judge BP Kshirsagar of Pune Sessions Court.

The incident occurred in August 2022. The case was registered at Kamshet Police Station under Pune Rural Police, and the conviction came in approximately one year and 7 months.

(source: ndtv.com)

***************

(see: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/reborn-pb-man-back-from-gallows-in-sharjah/articleshow/108720916.cms)

MARCH 22, 2024:

TEXAS:

Retired Judge Elsa Alcala on the Death Penalty in Texas

DISCUSSIONS WITH DPIC

In this month’s episode of Discussions with DPIC, Managing Director Anne Holsinger speaks with Judge Elsa Alcala, who served on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals from 2011 to 2018. In addition to serving as a judge at the appeals and trial level, she worked as a prosecutor, criminal defense attorney, and most recently as a justice-reform lobbyist during her three-decade career in criminal law. She shares how these experiences have informed her perspective on the death penalty and identifies recommendations for criminal legal reforms.

TRANSCRIPT

Anne Holsinger

Hello and welcome to Discussions with DPIC. I’m Anne Holsinger, Managing Director of the Death Penalty Information Center. Our guest today is Judge Elsa Alcala, who served as a judge on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals from 2011 to 2018. In addition to serving as a judge at the appeals and trial level, she’s worked as a prosecutor, criminal defense attorney and justice-reform-lobbyist during her 3 decade career in criminal law. After leaving the bench, she worked as Policy Director for the Texas Defender Service, a nonprofit that seeks death penalty reform and represents capitally charged defendants. Thank you for joining us, Judge Alcala.

Elsa Alcala

Thank you so much for having me. I appreciate it.

Anne Holsinger

You were appointed to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals by Governor Rick Perry in 2011 and subsequently won election to a 6 year term in 2012. But, upon the terms completion in 2019, you opted not to seek re-election? Could you briefly explain why you decided not to seek re-election?

Elsa Alcala

Thank you for asking that question. It’s actually a long and difficult answer for me, but the simple answer is: I did a list of pros and cons and the cons far outweighed the pros of staying. By then, I’d been a judge for 20 years and I was being very impacted by the death penalty litigation. While I was on the court, 60 people were executed, which was at the rate of about 1 person every month and the number of people being killed by the government was significantly bothering me — partly because I felt it was excessive, partly because I felt some of them didn’t deserve to be executed, at least not at that time. I had worries on a couple of occasions that the person might have been innocent. On several occasions, I had concerns that the person had not had a fair shake, either at trial or on appeal or in the habeas litigation, and that they should have gotten at a minimum, a new sentencing hearing. So I was having a lot of concerns about the litigation, and I was writing about them quite a bit, but it was difficult for me to keep up with that pace. I wrote 117 dissenting opinions, which is a lot for any Supreme Court judge and that, that meant I was writing a dissent one every three weeks, plus I wrote 88 majority opinions. So I was working at a pace that was almost impossible for me to keep up with, it had completely taken over my life. I also feel like I had a mild case of PTSD from dealing with all of the death cases and the stress of the litigation. And I don’t want to overstate anything, but I did feel like it was taking a toll on my mental state and on my physical state, even. And so I just felt like the best thing overall was for me to leave. But I felt a lot of guilt about it because I knew that when I left, there really wasn’t going to be anybody there at the Court of Criminal Appeals in Texas, who would be saying the things that I was saying. I was the only one speaking out on a variety of issues and I knew that my voice needed to be there, but I also knew that I couldn’t be the only person carrying that burden for, for, for much longer. And so I just made what I felt was the best decision overall, to retire at that time from the court.

Anne Holsinger

That pace that you talked about of executions actually leads well into the question I wanted to ask next, which is, you know, Texas does lead the nation in execution. There have been 587 since 1976 and that’s nearly 5 times as many as Oklahoma, which has the 2nd highest number, and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has to review every one of those cases. So how did serving on the bench and reviewing all of those cases affect your perspective on capital punishment?

Elsa Alcala

What the pace did for me was to convince me that government has no no right, no, no, no place in taking another person’s life. I think human beings are too imperfect to make the ultimate decision to take anyone’s life. And I’m not saying that as a matter of opinion, I’m saying that as a matter of fact. And I say that because what we know today is that we have gotten a large number of cases wrong. According to the National Registry of Exonerations, between 1989 and 2022, 2,939 people were exonerated, they were in wrongly convicted of crimes for which they were innocent. And when I was on the court, we found the San Antonio Four ladies to be innocent, we found Steven Chaney to be innocent. And in Texas, 101 innocent people were given money judgments, who were wrongly convicted between 1990 and 2015. So this is not just an opinion that innocent people are wrongly convicted, and I believe executed. This is a fact. I think there are some very persuasive cases of innocent people in Texas who were innocent, who were wrongly executed. And two of those come to mind, in in my mind. One was Carlos DeLuna, who was executed in 1989, out of Corpus Christi, for a crime out of Corpus Christi, Texas. And the other one is David Spence, who was executed in 1997 for a crime out of Waco. I think it was the lead and police detective in this man’s case, ended up coming out and saying that he did not believe Spence had committed the crime. So I saw that in a large number of cases, whether it was death cases or non-death cases, there was a large number of claims of innocence, and even a larger number of people who had very persuasive cases that their trials had been unfair for a variety, variety of reasons, either defense counsel was ineffective, or the prosecutors had cheated and hidden evidence, or not revealed exculpatory evidence. There was DNA evidence, like in the Larry [Swearingen] case, who was executed while I was on the court. In [Swearingen’s] case, it was just a horrific crime out of Montgomery County, and so everybody seemed to focus on the horror of the crime and they decided that there was some evidence against [Swearingen], and in my mind, there was some evidence against him, but there was also a ton of untested DNA evidence that the prosecutors for a long time fought against having tested because they relied on the claim that [Swearingen] should have asked for that testing before he did, and therefore it was too late. And that’s kind of a laughable argument, except that the prosecutors were raising that a lot, in a lot of cases, and continue to do that in a lot of death penalty cases. They say, ‘Well, you know, it’s past the time, you should have done A, B, C, or D earlier than now. And now it’s too late.’ So I saw all of those problems while I was on the court and I became convinced that the risk of executing an innocent person is just too high and that too many prosecutors and judges are overly focused on making the crimes or the convictions for the crimes final. They’re more interested in finality than they are in the accuracy of the conviction or the sentence. Once I became convinced of that, becoming anti-death penalty was, was pretty simple. For a long time, I used to say, well, you know, yes, the system is all messed up, but we need to have the death penalty for those rare cases when there is just this terrible crime, like a serial killer or terrorism or something like that. But then the more I worked on the cases, the more I realized that the serial killers and the terrorists rarely get the death penalty, because they end up with with far superior lawyers who are appointed by the courts and those lawyers are able to convince jurors not to give the death penalty. The people who end up with the death penalty, in, at least in Texas, historically, were poor people who were people of color. And so when I realized that discrepancy between who was getting the death penalty, the types of crimes that we’re having the people get the death penalty, the risk of convicting an innocent person, I became convinced that we had to abolish the death penalty altogether.

Anne Holsinger

Thank you for sharing your perspective on that. The United States is one of the only countries that elects its judges, could you talk about how the realities of having to run for re-election affect judicial decision making?

Elsa Alcala

Yes. And I left that part out when I talked about why I retired. Ultimately, that’s why I retired. My term was finishing, and I had to make the decision whether I was going to run again for another term, or whether I just didn’t want to do another election. I ran for, I was appointed by, three times by Texas governors to the three courts I was on and I won four elections to stay on my court. So I never lost an election, but I did feel like I was vulnerable if I ran again. I was a Republican back when Republicans were not like, in my opinion, today’s Republicans. I am now a Democrat, I switched to become Democrat. But I was a Republican back when Republicans talked about compassionate conservatism and that sort of thing and broaden-, broadening the tent and I felt like, you know, strict enforcement of a constitution – which I felt I was doing on the Court of Criminal Appeals – all of that was consistent in my mind with the old brand of Republican. Something changed when Donald Trump entered the field and I don’t want to go far into politics, because I know this is not a political forum, but I’m simply saying that things in my mind at least changed and I didn’t want, I didn’t like where the party was going. So today’s Republicans, in my mind are different. In 2024, just last month, three judges out of the nine judges on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals lost in the Republican primary. One of them was Sharon Keller, who I think has been on the Court of Criminal Appeals over 20 years, I think, almost 30 years, if not 30 years. And she was about as Republican and far right as I could ever tell you and I say that because many people felt that she was one of the strongest voices and in favor of the death penalty and denying claims of innocence and for new trials and that sort of thing. She was very much a far, a conservative for whatever that means, a conservative person in terms of opposing relief for many people seeking relief from the death penalty or, or with claims of innocence. Barbara Hervey also last last month, she too was was aligned with the Republican Party for decades. She was a little more moderate than Judge Keller, but but moderate under Texas standards, which is to say not that moderate, for, you know, for what most people will consider as moderate. And then the third person who lost was the person who replaced me on the court, Michelle Slaughter. She lost after one term and she was also very conservative and not, and more aligned, I think with a prosecutor mentality than with a defense mentality. So the three judges who lost, were firmly entrenched in the Republican Party, and it’s peculiar that they lost. They lost to three people who some people believe are even more conservative or far right than even they were, which is hard to believe that that’s possible. And so when I spoke about you know, this, this thought that I might not survive a primary, it was a very realistic view of Texas Republican politics. Now, you might be asking at this point, if you’re not from Texas, well, why did these three longtime far-right, conservatives lose in the Republican primary? And media reports, and I think all this is has been verified, the story is that they ruled against Ken Paxton, who is the Texas Attorney General, the incumbent right now, on an issue, on an election issue, that he wanted to be able to prosecute elections violations and the Court said that he couldn’t do that because the Texas Constitution didn’t allow it. And he was unhappy with that ruling and so he ran three people against them, and they lost their seats. So we’re in a pretty dangerous area here where judges are being targeted, not for some kind of radical ruling, because that was not radical, most of us believe they ruled correctly, and strictly in line with what the Texas Constitution said, but instead, they lost their seats, because someone high up in the Republican Party decided that they should have ruled his way regardless of what the law was. And I think that’s, that should concern most of us. Now, what that’s going to do to the court looking forward assuming these three win, most of us believe they will win, not because they are the most qualified over their Democratic opponents, rather, it’s just based on history. Texas has not elected a Democrat to a state-wide office, which the Court of Criminal Appeals is, in something like almost three decades. So the probability is that the three Republicans who just won, will be on the court starting in, starting January 1 of 2025. And so then the issue is going to be how much do they change the court? Are they going to try to, I don’t, I think one of them has judicial experience, two of them do not. So they’re, and I think one of them has some criminal law, one has more criminal law experience than the other two. So many criminal practitioners in Texas are a bit worried about what this is going to, to do to the law, are they going to stick with precedent? Are they going to just abandon it altogether and do whatever they want to do? And if and if they’re going to do the latter, then, you know, unfortunately, that might mean that they’re going to do an even worse job of granting relief to criminal defendants. However, you know, I was not lost at this point. I foresee a five-four court because only three of them are new. Kevin Yeary has been one of the far right judges aligned more with like the Ken Paxton mentality, so even assuming those three go to that extreme with Kevin Yeary, I think that leaves a court of five judges who are incumbents, who will hopefully stick with the precedent that they have. It’s not that the precedent is fantastic for criminal defendants or for people to get relief, but it has granted some relief to some people and if the incumbents stick with the precedent, then then all is not lost with the election of these three people. But I think we’re just going to have to wait and see. Of course, the other problem is this message to the incumbents. Look, if you don’t do what I want you to do, then I’m going to run people against you and you’re going to lose your seat — hopefully that the incumbents won’t be afraid of that kind of threat. They’re all the incumbents that are not the four extremists that I talked about. They are talented people who would be able to get a job other places so in my mind, it’s better they stick with the, with having their own integrity than to being afraid of losing their job. And I hope that they they they choose integrity over implied threats. I don’t know that there is any actual threat but the implied threat that, you know, these three judges lost their seats because they didn’t do what we, we Republicans at the top wanted them to do and if you don’t do what we Republicans at the top want you to do, the implied threat would be that we’re going to run somebody against you as well. But of course, that’s all implied I don’t think there’s been any kind of actual threat.

Anne Holsinger

You’ve just given us several examples of ways that the impartiality and integrity of the court system has come under scrutiny in recent years. Are there changes that you think should be implemented in the judicial system to help restore public confidence?

Elsa Alcala

I can think of many. When I worked with the Texas Defender Service as a lobbyist at the Texas Legislature in 2019, we wrote a number of bills that, that drew the support of elected district attorneys in Texas. So I don’t really want to ever give the message that, that these reforms are one sided. Many, many prosecutors also support reform, because they too want to have some, bring back some kind of integrity to the justice system, in order to bring back public confidence. One of our bills, and one of the things I think that would be, that some states have done to some degree, is to have an out of time motion for new trial in Texas. The bill that we wrote had said that, that when the prosecutor and the defense and the judge all agree that there’s been a miscarriage of justice, that the three of them can together, agree to a motion for new trial, even if it’s not timely. And we felt that that would bring back integrity, I would extend it to say that when a sentence is unjust, such as an old drug case where somebody got life in prison for, you know, less than a gram of cocaine, you know, in today’s standard, that would never happen. But back when I was a prosecutor that, that did happen. So I don’t think it’s just death cases, but I think all it could also apply to death cases where the three entities agree that it, that it that it no longer makes sense to execute this person, either because it’s out of line with what would happen today or because there’s a question of innocence, or because under today’s standards, we know that the punishment scheme today would not yield that result. It could be any number of reasons. But when everybody agrees that there’s a miscarriage of justice, to me, it seems obvious that there should be some mechanism to allow, if not actual release, in other words, not if not just we’re going to set you free, certainly that could be one thing. Or it could just be a lowering of the sentence in order to make it more in line with what would happened today. But that did not pass, and in Texas, there’s issues with that, because of the way that the Constitution is written. Some people would consider that to be only within the executive power to reduce a sentence, like your clemency, after the appeals process has ended, so it might require a constitutional amendment in Texas, which the public is, you know, probably unlikely to understand it enough to vote for it, because people would probably mistate what the bill was intended to do, or what the reform was intended to do. But I know that some states have done this to some degree. I would allow, I would change the law, not only to allow new trials when junk science was used, and that did pass in Texas, and that has led to many people getting new trials. But when when I dealt with that issue in ex parte White, in 2016, where the defendant asked my court to extend the junk science writ in 11.073 D of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, we wanted to, in White, he asked us to extend, it the junk science writ, to allow relief not only in the guilt stage, but also in the punishment stage when junk science had been used to lead to a death penalty. Now it makes no sense to limit junk science writs to guilt. If it’s junk science and the guilt stage of trial, it’s junk science in the punishment stage of trial. So, so carving a distinction between the two is, is silly, really, to say, well, you know, you can introduce bad arson evidence in the punishment phase, and use that ask for a death sentence and, and not allow anybody to review that in the post-conviction stage on the basis of junk science. But if that had happened in the guilt stage, we’d give you a new trial. So it just made no sense at all, but that that is the law in Texas, the Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that way and then when we’ve tried to change that at the at the legislature to extend it, the junk science route to the punishment phase by statute, the Texas Senate, shot that down. So that’s the way we are today. I also think that the execution of severely mentally ill people should be barred. Again, I think it’s silly to say that somebody was intellectually disabled, and really wasn’t able to make a good decision as to whether to commit a crime or not, well, that person is exempt — a good decision, and by that I mean, knowing decision or an intelligent decision to commit a crime or not — well, that person is exempt from the death penalty, but somebody who was severely mentally ill, and in a state of schizophrenia, or in a state of, you know, believing that the devil was talking to them, you know, just completely unaware of rational thought, that person can be executed because the law allows that. I think that’s just a ridiculous line to draw. We also, we got that bill passed in the Texas House, but when it hit the Texas Senate, that bill was killed in Texas senate by some of the leading Republican senators. The fourth change that I would think would help a lot would be to permit post-conviction challenges, asserting that the initial habeas counsel was ineffective. And that, this gets a bit technical, but to keep it short, the Anthony Graves case is where Texas held that as the law, in Graves’ case, who was sentenced to the death penalty, he had an ineffective trial attorney, ineffective appellate attorney, ineffective initial habeas attorney. When good counsel got involved, later on, they were able to show that the earlier attorneys had performed in effectively and that, that Graves was innocent, essentially. But the Court of Criminal Appeals held that it would not recognize in the subsequent habeas stage, where there was a good attorney, they would not recognize a claim of ineffective counsel at the initial habeas stage, and so consequently, the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Graves’ death sentence. He ended up going to the federal courts, the federal courts ended up granting him relief, and he was ultimately declared innocence, innocent, but it was not because of anything the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals did. They ended up affirming his death sentence and were they the last word he would have been executed even though he is innocent. When I was on the court, just one second, when I was on the court, we revisited that Graves decision three times: in ex parte Taylor in 2011, in John Ballentine’s case, I think in 2011 or 2012, and in Cleve Foster’s case in 2012. I dissented against that decision, and along with a couple of other judges, Judge Cheryl Johnson and Judge Tom Price, and we lost those, that, those decisions 6-3. And those three people were executed: Taylor, Ballentine, and, and Foster. So I think there’s significant problems with the justice system as it is, but the changes that we’ve tried to make have been met with obstacles by people who I think either just don’t know better, or they don’t care.

Anne Holsinger

Before we move on to the next topic, I just want to note for our listeners that we have a podcast from just a couple months ago with Anthony Graves. So you know, you mentioned his case, and I want to note that people want to learn more, our January 2024. podcast was an interview with Mr. Graves. During your tenure as a judge, you alluded to this, you were outspoken about issues in some capital cases, and you often wrote opinions that drew attention to flaws in the application of capital punishment. Can you talk about what you saw and why you chose to speak out about them as a judge?

Elsa Alcala

Yes. When I first got on the court in 2011, almost immediately as I got on the court, I had a case called [Arthur] Williams land on my desk. He was convicted of capital murder in 1982 for shooting and killing a Houston police officer by the name of Daryl Shirley. Shirley was dressed in plainclothes with I think jeans and a cowboy hat or something like that, and he was arresting people who were a parole violators and Arthur Williams was a parole violator out of Minnesota. So Shirley approached him, according to the prosecutor, Shirley showed him his badge because he was in plainclothes not in uniform, and Williams ended up shooting and killing Shirley. The issue at trial was, at guilt, was Williams’ claim that he didn’t know that Williams was a police officer and he claimed he hadn’t seen the badge. According to police, the badge had been found on the ground near Shirley’s body when they approached the scene. At the guilt stage, the lawyers heavily litigated that issue of knowledge because if, if Williams had not known that Shirley was a police officer, then that would be a murder of a single person without a special characteristic, and the most that Williams could have gotten is life in prison for a first degree murder. But with the additional element that he had shot a police officer, that additional characteristic is what changed it into a death penalty case. The jury did not believe Williams’s assertion that he didn’t know and the jury found him guilty of capital murder. At that point, defense counsel basically gave up, they did nothing. The state put on its punishment case and the defense didn’t put on any case at all. They didn’t call any witnesses. The case went through the system, it got affirmed by the Court of Criminal Appeals on direct appeal, it got affirmed in the initial habeas review. It went through the federal court system, as well. And Williams is conviction got, I’m sorry, I said that, while he did not get an initial habeas review, it was before that was required. And he went through the federal system, and it got upheld. But meanwhile, in another totally unrelated case, the U.S. Supreme Court said that defendants were entitled to have a jury instruction on mitigation, anything to show that they were not deserving of the death penalty. So the case came back to the Court of Criminal Appeals and the lawyers asked us to grant him a new trial, on the basis that they had several allegations, but the one that I focused on was the mitigation special-issue that Williams had been remorseful, he had confessed, he had made statements that he was he felt terrible after he found out it was a police officer that he had never intended to kill a police officer. And so I said that that was mitigation evidence that should have gotten a jury instruction to allow the jury to consider his feelings of remorse over having killed someone not, not knowing that the person he killed was a police officer. But my court basically was, I think it was an eight to one decision. I was alone in the in the dissent. And my court said basically, well, even if the jury had gotten that jury instruction, we don’t think that it would have ruled in favor of him on the grounds of mitigation, and therefore we affirm. Now the problem with that reasoning is that now you have totally circumvented the jury process, these appellate judges, all Republicans, all conservatives, have decided that not a single juror could reasonably ever have ruled in favor of mitigation. Because in Texas, all you need is one juror to rule that way and then the defendant gets a life sentence. So I thought that was just absurd. I thought the whole thing was absurd, that these longtime conservative Republican judges could just ignore the entire jury process and say, even if there was this mistake in the jury questionnaires, or in the jury instructions, it just didn’t matter, because we think he would have ended up on death row anyway and I felt like that was pretty nonsensical. And that’s how I started at the court, that was in 2011, like my first death penalty case and it just screamed out to me that there is a problem on this court. They are just not willing to make sure that, that people are getting a fair shake or the fair shake that they deserve. After that, there were a few cases that I’ll move on from so I can we can go back to the questioning, but I ended up dealing with the Duane Buck case. That ended up going to the US Supreme Court. My Court affirmed the Duane Buck case, even though one of the, the so called experts, psychiatric experts had said that black people are more likely to be violent and my court upheld it even though the prosecutor said, quote, the race factor, Black, increased the future dangerousness for various complicated reasons. So even though the state relied on race as a reason to say that someone was more dangerous, my court upheld that conviction over my dissent again, and the US Supreme Court ended up reversing that case, and he was sentenced to life in prison. I left out that in the Williams case, about five years later, a federal district court reviewed the case. That district court judge said many of the things that I said, then the case got reversed by the Federal District Court, the case got sent to the Harris County, newly elected district attorney, and that district attorney agreed to resentence him to life in prison. So, Williams was ultimately resentenced to life in prison. But both of these were, you know, despite the Court of Criminal Appeals, not because of the Court of Criminal Appeals. And then the last case that I dealt with quite a bit, and maybe we’ll talk about more, more later on, if we have time, is the Bobby Moore case, where I again alone dissented and I said that, that my court was resolving intellectual disability cases incorrectly. When that went up to the US Supreme Court, the US Supreme Court agreed with my point of view, they reversed the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, the case went back down to the Court of Criminal Appeals while I was on it, even though the US Supreme Court had told them you are doing this wrong and strongly implied, if not out and out said, that Moore, this is Bobby Moore, that Moore was intellectually disabled, my court again affirmed his death sentence. Then it went back up to the US Supreme Court in 2019 and finally, the US Supreme Court said, ‘No, we really mean it. He is intellectually disabled and you all are incorrectly applying the standard for determining intellectual disability.’ And I think since then, something like 11 people I think, have been taken off of death row now that the Court of Criminal Appeals has been forced to change its intellectual disability standard. So those were three of the primary cases that that influenced my thinking about the death penalty.

Anne Holsinger

To return to an earlier part of your career during your time as a Harris County prosecutor, you sought the death penalty in a few cases. Could you explain how that experience later influenced your perspective as a judge?

Elsa Alcala

I was a prosecutor from 1989 to 1998. I was the first year prosecutor in 3 death penalty trials. Two of them were sent to death row and one, the jury hung in the punishment stage of trial and that defendant got life in prison. The way it influenced me, I think, was just to normalize the death penalty. Back in Harris County at that time under the elected District Attorney, Johnny Holmes, he was one of the leading district attorneys in the country, in terms of seeking the death penalty, and I was trained under him and I worked in that environment. So when I became a judge, I continued to believe in the death penalty, I continued to think that we had to have it for the worst of the worst offenders. I believed that prosecutors were making the correct decisions. I became a prosecutor before we started using DNA regularly in the courts. When we first, when DNA first came out in the early 1990s, back when even OJ Simpson was tried in the 1990s, most, most of us, including me, believed that the jury wouldn’t understand DNA, the jury wouldn’t be willing to use it to, to convict people. And we just were unsure about it and I think you you see that in that OJ Simpson trial, you see that being played out. But as we started using DNA, we started realizing that the things that we thought were rock solid pieces of evidence turned out not to be so. We thought eye witnesses were the gold standard. If we had an eyewitness, we were so happy. And then it turns out that eyewitnesses often get it wrong, particularly when it’s somebody of a different race. We thought confessions were the gold standard. If we had a confession, we thought, you know, who, who would confess if they weren’t really guilty? And then come to find out with DNA evidence that lots of people confess, who are innocent for lots of different reasons, one of which is just the pressure of the situation. And then you hear a lot of them say, well, I was innocent. I figured even if I said it was I was guilty, there was no evidence against me and they’d figure that out. But come to find out prosecutors didn’t figure it out. Prosecutors thought, well, we have confession and so that’s all that we need and jurors also were of that mindset, well, you know, who would confess if they, if they didn’t do it? I wouldn’t have confessed. So we saw pieces of evidence being undermined that we had before thought were solid pieces of evidence. And so I think that caused some of the mindset to change. But, but coming back to your answer, I was trained at a time when we thought the police weren’t mostly infallible, prosecutors were mostly infallible, and that the death penalty was the best solution. Now, mind you, it was also at a time when defense lawyers didn’t do a whole lot in defense. It was before the U.S. Supreme Court had said that a defense that in death penalty trials, we need to have mitigation jury instructions to give jurors a safety bow well, that that didn’t exist back then. That was before the US Supreme Court disallowed the execution of intellectually disabled people. So there’s been an evolution in how death penalty cases are being litigated and with that evolution, we are now seeing that much of our thinking back in the 1990s was incorrect. And I think that is what is causing a lot of people like me to reassess our views about capital punishment.

Anne Holsinger

Earlier you offered some thoughts on judicial reforms. Are there any changes that you think should be made to the way that prosecutors handle capital cases in Texas?

Elsa Alcala

I think that prosecutors who have units devoted to innocence and are trying to find wrongful convictions that the integrity conviction units, I think those are very important, as long as the those units are given free reign to reexamine, not to uphold the conviction, but actually to find the truth of the situation. I think those units are very important. I think that prosecutors, again, with that mindset, should much more willingly agree to factual reviews than to try to rely on procedure to avoid factual reviews. Like I said, in this [Swearingen] case, for the longest time, the prosecutor opposed DNA testing, claiming that he should have done that before. Well, that’s ridiculous, the prosecutor should have said, we are here to make sure that we know the truth. And so prosecutors in my mind should never oppose DNA testing in any case, where, where there were there were that evidence is available to be tested, that testing should be done and prosecutors should never oppose it. I think in other situations, we see prosecutors who tried the case cling to their belief that they got it right because of course, admitting that they got it wrong is a difficult thing. And so prosecutors, you know, 20 years later will, will cling to their original belief, not because there isn’t an abundance of evidence out there to show that the person may be wrongly convicted or it was wrongly handled, maybe through no fault of the prosecutor at all, but the prosecutor’s unwilling to admit that they had any role in a wrongful conviction. So I think cases like that should be reassigned to somebody else. And right now, my mind is drawing a blank about the Bastrop person on death row, but I think that may be a problem in that case where that prosecutor was the one who sent him to death row many years ago and she is now still arguing against his claims of innocence, even though there’s just a ton of evidence there, that he at a minimum might be innocent, you know, do I know for a fact that he is innocent? In my mind? No. But do I think that there’s enough evidence there to warrant a retrial? I think at this point, given everything I’ve seen, there there is. And so I think that’s the problem is, when you have the same prosecutors that are still handling the case, they often are unwilling to admit to themselves that they had a role in a wrongful conviction. So I think the election of, of new DAs can actually be a very positive thing, because with the election of new DAs, there’s new people brought in, who can maybe have a fresh perspective on, on some of these older cases that really do need to be reviewed.

Anne Holsinger

Is there anything else that you’d like to share with our listeners?

Elsa Alcala

A lot of the problem is legislative, at the federal level and at the state level. We have too many laws that prohibit review of cases under the theory that you should have one bite at the apple that you know, you have your one full and fair trial, one full and fair appeal or habeas review, and that that should be the end of it. What I know for sure is that that’s not working. And it’s not working because of the issue of ineffective counsel at the trial level at the appellate level and at and at the initial habeas level, and that by the time you have these law schools or civil law firms or maybe it’s just the progress of science, you know, that the development of DNA could be less sinister than ineffective assistance of counsel. It could just be the development of new science, but you have things, life goes on and things, things, new evidence is discovered, but the problem is that in the state and federal system, we pretend as if things stand still after some litigation has ended. And that’s just not realistic, I think we need to be much more permissive in allowing reviews of cases based on justice and take out the focus on procedure because I think this focus on procedure is, is leading to too many erroneous outcomes. I think the other things that I saw while I was on the court, I saw and I know that there’s statistics that bear it out, but that there were just too many, poor black and brown people wrongly convicted, and wrongly on death row. In my mind, you know, you’re just not going to see a wealthy white, Anglo person on death row. It just doesn’t happen, because that person is able to hire, you know, maybe it has happened in the history of time, but it didn’t happen when I was at the court. What you see is those people get the better attorneys and they get the better review of their cases, and they either win at trial, or they win on appeal. It’s the poor or indigent black or brown people who often ended up on death row who had, I believe, valid claims of either innocence, or that they should, or the sentencing, that the sentence was flawed. I also want to add that money has a terrible influence in death penalty litigation. For people who are, who have fiscal concerns about our society, it makes no sense to spend millions upon millions to execute one person. It doesn’t help society at all. It doesn’t make us any safer when that person could be in prison for life, and some people say, well, they could go to we don’t want them in general population. Well, they have reviews of general population, and if somebody truly is a danger in general population, then they go into administrative segregation, they get placed in solitary confinement and taken away from general population. So that idea that we need death row in order to keep people from general population is really a falsehood, but that’s one of the newer things that prosecutors are saying today. And then the only other thing I can add is that, I think it was my last year that I was on the Court of Criminal Appeals, I revisited death row. I had gone to death row as a prosecutor in the 1990s back before, they were in solitary confinement. Back in the 1990s in Texas, they were not in general population, but they had their own row where they shared cells and interacted with each other. But then that changed, and they, and now they’re in Livingston, Texas. And each person on death row is in solitary confinement. And I went into one of those cells when I was there and all I left was thinking that, you know, the, the dogs at the pound, had it better than the people on death row. The dogs at the pound, could actually see the other dogs and the people and that sort of thing. On death row, it’s concrete walls all the way up and down, even the door is concrete, there’s just a little sliver where you can put the tray in for food. There’s one window that you can’t really see out of if you’re just standing in the cell, you have to according to what I was told, you have to get on top of the bunk and then you can kind of see out of this little sliver of a window at the very, very top. So the most it serves really is to just tell you if it’s day or night, or if it’s you know, sunny or raining or that kind of thing, but you’re not going to see anything looking out of that window and you’re not going to see any people. And then some people say well, they get an hour of recreation, but I saw that recreation cell, and it’s not anything I would say is much, basically they’re alone in that little room and the only difference is that that room has bars that I guess you can see out of into the hallway. But, but it’s not like you get to interact with another person or play game with another person, the way that they communicate with each other I think is by speaking loudly. And they can hear each other across the walls, but they don’t like see each other or, or interact even at the recreation area. The whole thing just seem, seems to me to be just a senseless way of, of handling this whole issue. There’s a better way is simply to not have the death penalty like so many of these states, I think the vast majority of states in the US don’t use the death penalty, even if it’s still on the books, they don’t use it. Even in Texas, there are very few new death sentences coming out of Texas. The problem in Texas is that you have right now almost 200 people still on death row for crimes that in my opinion, wouldn’t have landed them there under today’s standards, that the state wouldn’t be seeking the death penalty on them today. But yet it is it is seeking to execute them for, for crimes that today would land them on death row. So the whole thing to me is just nonsensical and that’s how I firmly ended up in this camp of opposing the death penalty.

Anne Holsinger

Thank you so much, Judge Alcala.

Elsa Alcala

Thank you Anne, I really appreciate you having me. I also wanted to extend my appreciation to Robin Maher, the Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information Center.

Anne Holsinger

Well, thank you so much for joining us today. If our listeners would like to learn more about the death penalty, they can visit the DPIC website at deathpenaltyinfo.org. And to make sure you never miss an episode of our podcast, you can subscribe to Discussions with DPIC on your podcast app of choice.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

****************

AN OPEN LETTER TO RICHARD LINKLATER ON OUR TEXAS DEATH PENALTY----Capital punishment ensnares us all in a labyrinth of our own making, as your new film poignantly reveals.

Dear Richard,

Your movie “God Save Texas: Hometown Prison,” which debuted recently on HBO, was joyfully upsetting for me. Kudos to you for loving Huntsville, the complex setting of your formative high school years. Kudos for not moving on, for coming back time and again to the life and culture there in your many films. Kudos for loving the people there but not looking away, bringing your unflinching lens to the things they find hard to see. Spoiler alert: This is a movie review about the human subjects of your film.

Working as a postconviction capital defense attorney for almost 3 decades, I drove through Huntsville many times a year en route to visit clients on death rows at the nearby Ellis and Polunsky units. Ultimately, upon entering the town on U.S. 190, I would veer off to the north on parallel streets to avoid passing and having to look at your hometown prison, the Walls Unit, where some of my clients had been killed. Unlike the many Huntsville residents who drive daily by the Walls, paying it no attention, I chose to avoid it as an aspect of my self-care.

Others who have taken into their minds and hearts what goes on in the Walls have reacted differently. In your film, when Fred Allen, the former execution tie-down team guard, says he’s opposed to the death penalty, you flash a black-and-white photo of a silver-haired man whose name is David Atwood. Dave, a Catholic peace activist who recently died, is the only person I know who has committed an act of nonviolent civil disobedience at the Walls. Dave frequently traveled from Houston to protest at the Walls on execution days. In November 2004, when a man named Anthony Fuentes was being killed, Dave found himself standing next to Anthony’s grandmother who was shaking from cold and fear. Her husband was inside witnessing their grandson’s death, and, when she said she’d like to get closer to the building, Dave and his wife Peggy accompanied her to the yellow crime scene tape that the guards spread in front of the unit on execution days. Dave suddenly felt he needed to do more. He gave his wallet, keys, and phone to his wife, and he crossed under the tape. After he was arrested, when he was offered no community service or probation for his trespass offense, Dave chose to serve five days in the Walker County Jail rather than pay a fine.

“THE DEATH PENALTY TAKES ONE TRAGEDY, A MURDER, AND EXPANDS THE PAIN AND SUFFERING TO INCLUDE SO MANY OTHERS.”

You also captured my friend Dennis Longmire, the bearded Sam Houston State University professor standing as a witness outside the Walls where he has stood on 90 percent of execution days since Texas reinstated capital punishment in 1973. Dennis is compassionate and intelligent, a prolific author of studies on the death penalty and violence. “Moral disengagement” is one of the subjects he’s explored, “the cognitive restructuring of harmful actions or behavior as good or moral through mechanisms of moral justification, drawing palliative or advantageous comparisons to harmful acts of others, and the euphemistic labeling or use of euphemistic language in regard to harmful conduct.” Although “execution” and “murder” are both the premeditated killing of a human being, we take great care to make execution look nothing like murder. We ritualize and medicalize the procedure. We embrace it as somehow less violent than the crime being punished.

Near the end of the film, you interview Dennis. He shares how, every time he stands at the Walls, he keeps “the victims as well as the offenders” in his prayers, and he imagines the conversations between the parents and children in the cars driving by. “The ultimate measure of the justice of what we do,” he suggests, “is, ‘Can we rightly explain it to our children?’”

Then there’s Gloria Rubac, who is just as determined as my other friends to be at the Walls for every possible execution. She always carries her bullhorn, through which she tries to awaken consciences in passersby, loudly accusing the State of Texas of murder. More than once I have lectured Gloria about how if she calls the governor a “murderer” he won’t be able to hear her. Offending him, I tell her, won’t awaken his conscience. And it’s the law itself that is the murderer, not the governor. The law’s designed to kill; it’s the labyrinth that we have tragically built to trap ourselves. All of us. We are all in this thing that we built with no exit and even Governor Ann, a saint among Texas liberals, was as caught up in it as the boys. In the face of all my protests, Gloria is quite unrepentant, just as she appears in your film. She is all about exposing “moral disengagement” without excuses. I’m for that too.

Richard, your mother dated Bill Habern? I knew Bill, an attorney legendary for his expertise on parole issues. With most of my clients in no danger of being paroled, I had spotty interaction with Bill. On one occasion, however, with his help, I and one of his firm’s lawyers collaborated to help a prisoner’s mother have a last visit before her son was executed. The mother had been accused of trying to introduce contraband into the Polunsky death row unit and, as a consequence, she had been banned from the prison under Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) rules. Last visits between family members and the condemned are held in the Polunsky visiting area before the prisoner is transported to the Walls. Shortly prior to the execution date, the prison was refusing to let the mother see her son. While Bill’s colleague was negotiating his way through the TDCJ bureaucracy, I drafted a civil rights lawsuit to file if diplomacy failed. It was like the suit Bill describes in your movie: I had next to no idea what I was doing, but it needed doing. As I typed at my computer, the mother lay slumped over a desk on the other side of my Austin office in a catatonic state, surrounded by family rubbing and soothing and cooing, trying to elicit a response from her. Ultimately, TDCJ relented and allowed the mom a noncontact visit surrounded by guards before her son was whisked away.

It is more than interesting to me that you share the story of Bill rescuing Darrell Shaw, who was expelled from Huntsville High School for declining to be paddled by the principal.

Over the last half-century, American society has moved away from corporal punishment in tandem with its move away from the death penalty. Now, none of the states that have abolished the death penalty allow corporal punishment in the public schools. States that continue to have the death penalty but have abolished corporal punishment are responsible for only 7 percent of all modern executions. I suggest this is no coincidence. Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court largely has limited its investigation into “evolving standards of decency” to questions about the acceptable severity of court-ordered criminal punishments under the Eighth Amendment. However, if the court were to take a broad view of the “evolving standards” as reflected in our changing laws, it would be easy for the court to see that the restrictions on and ultimate abolition of the death penalty fall right in with the strong social and legal currents in our society moving us away from male dominance and justified violence within the family and in society.

Evolving standards of decency are tantamount to the decline of patriarchy. The author bell hooks defined patriarchy as “a political-social system that insists that males are inherently dominating, superior to everything and everyone deemed weak, especially females, and endowed with the right to dominate and rule over the weak and to maintain that dominance through various forms of psychological terrorism and violence.” This definition essentially describes the law as it stood two centuries ago. Adult white men had a monopoly on rights, wealth, power, everything. But, unquestionably, American and Texas law have evolved, and we have evolved with it. Husbands and fathers may no longer legally treat their wives and children as property nor terrorize them with impunity. Women are no longer prohibited from voting and the male-dominated political, academic, artistic, sports, and business spheres have been flooded with women demanding to be treated equally.

My mother was born before women could vote. In 1963, she gained the federal right to equal pay. In 1974, she gained the federal right to open her own bank account without a male co-signer. In 1994, Texas finally removed the “marital rape exception” from the law, dissolving a legal shield that had allowed husbands to assault their wives with impunity. Government child protective services began in the 1960s responding to a rise in awareness of the detrimental mental health and social effects of child abuse in the home. By 2005, in this world of rising rights for women and children, the U.S. Supreme Court decided it made no sense to maintain the death penalty for crimes committed by children.

You’ll notice that many prosecutors and politicians who still promote the death penalty as somehow “necessary” are attached to the old patriarchal world. They are likely to support “traditional family values,” with the husband in charge, and to embrace corporal punishment. They believe that respect for authority in society is built upon violence. When your friend Ed, a warden troubled over participating in executions, sought guidance from his pastor, he was told not to worry about God’s chastisement because the law allows capital punishment. Doubtless, the same pastor would refuse to conduct a gay marriage, although the law allows it. He’d say that’s an ungodly law, so he mustn’t follow it. What I think he was really telling Ed is that God requires a measure of necessary violence, that Ed needed to subordinate the feeling he had “when one minute the guy was fine and the next he was deceased” to the righteousness of necessary violence. Long ago, when we built the trap for ourselves that is the death penalty, we buttressed it in Texas with patriarchal religion that promotes domination—children obey your fathers, wives obey your husbands, slaves obey your masters—and the measure of violence perceived as needed to maintain that order. The trap barred compassion.

Yet, when Fred Allen, your high school football teammate who later served as a captain on an execution tie-down team, met Karla Faye Tucker, she opened the door of compassion to him. There in the holding cell next to the death chamber, while Karla was waiting to be killed by Fred, she asked Fred, “Are you doing okay?” Karla knew that Fred felt troubled and she spoke straight to him and held him tenderly with her words in a time of distress for him. He wasn’t aware of the distress. In other movies, Fred has dramatically described what happened to him when he became aware a couple of days later. Sitting in his shop at home, he heard a news account of Karla’s execution and he began shaking uncontrollably, sweating, and shedding tears. He saw Karla in front of him and, then, he began to visualize the scores of men he’d led to execution sitting in their holding cells, one right after another. Karla opened the trap in Fred’s mind that had enabled his moral disengagement.

Karla was my client. When Fred was executing her, my co-counsel (George McCall Secrest, lead counsel, and David Botsford, Mac’s co-counsel and my boss) were at the Walls Unit and I, exhausted after a final string of litigation, was alone in our Austin office fielding calls from concerned people as far away as Australia asking about her. Karla was the real thing. The scores of people who visited her at the Mountain View Unit to get spiritual advice recognized that. I’m not aware if she studied Martin Luther King Jr. or Gandhi. But she daily practiced the active nonviolence of Jesus that King and Gandhi articulated. It resulted in the transformed lives of others, like Fred and like me. Some evangelical Christians, of the sort that hawk a gospel of afterlife and normalize systems of oppression, laid hold of Karla as an exemplar. I felt as though they turned her into a tool to advance their proselytizing. I want to correct the record on that. Karla was way more. She held a key to the labyrinth. She was walking with Jesus and when she touched Fred, the captives were released.

Richard, we’ve had common contact with so many people. We also share, I think, a love of place, a sense of duty to our place and people. In discussion with the writer Lawrence Wright, whose book inspired your movie, you talk about Huntsville “radicals” who have the option to move but choose to stay. Wright describes them as cherishing the place they come from in order to help it become something better. I don’t know if you consider yourself one of those radicals, but in my opinion you are. You keep coming back to the place in movie after movie, studying the people, loving the people, being present, looking for understanding, going toward the root. The thing that I intentionally have avoided looking at, in order to manage my own trauma, you portray in almost every other scene: the red-bricked Walls from all sides and the air. You examine how its architecture of cruelty holds your friends and high school mates. When you come to your conclusion in voice-over as to why you oppose the death penalty, you let them know that you see them in the way Karla let Fred know she saw him. I felt seen too. That is why the film was joyfully upsetting for me. The subject matter is deeply upsetting. But there is no greater joy than to be seen.

You say, “The death penalty takes one tragedy, a murder, and expands the pain and suffering to include so many others, all the people involved in the legal and criminal appeals process that get dragged slowly to the death chamber, all the obligatory witnesses, and all the people with various jobs in the system.” Then you lay bare the moral disengagement that leads to moral injury: “The Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, but what could be more cruel, certainly unusual, than to have to play a part in or witness another person’s murder, however state-sanctioned?” The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs defines moral injury as occurring when “in traumatic or unusually stressful circumstances, people … perpetrate, fail to prevent, or witness events that contradict deeply held moral beliefs and expectations.” That is all of us who have any real contact with Texas’ death penalty system. The ones most damaged by the moral injury inflicted by capital punishment are those ensnared in the outworking of the lethal law, whether we are killing or rescuing or bystanding, whether we are aware of the damage or not.

The death penalty is mental torture as defined by the United Nations Convention against Torture. Everyone in contact with the tortured prisoner or the system doing the torturing is subjected to the same threat that constitutes the torture. Richard, beautifully you put it: We all are “dragged slowly to the death chamber.” We live in a State of anticipatory homicide.

(source: WALTER C. LONG, an Austin attorney, is the founder and a board member of the Texas After Violence Project. He is a public health advocate for recognition of the death penalty as a trauma-organized social system that reproduces on a large scale the abusive family system----Texas Observer)

DELAWARE:

Death penalty bills would codify Supreme Court’s 2016 ban

2 bills moving through the General Assembly officially will ban the death penalty in Delaware.

Both are sponsored by Sen. Sean Lynn, D-Dover.

The state Supreme Court in 2016 ruled that Delaware’s death penalty was unconstitutional and effectively banned it but state laws are still on the books.

House Bill 70 would eliminate the death penalty. Instead, it would establish a life sentence without probation, parole or other reductions for anyone 18 or older convicted of 1st-degree murder.

His House Bill 301 would start the process to remove the death penalty from the state Constitution.

That bill must be passed by 2/3 of the Senate and House twice – 1st in one session of the General Assembly and again in the next session of the assembly. The governor’s approval is not necessary.

The 52rd session is running now. The 53th starts in January.

“Before us is a bill that I think goes to the very essence of justice,” Lynn (D-Dover) told the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday. It passed there with no opposition and goes to the full House for a vote.

House Bill 301, which would amend the constitution, passed in the House Administration Committee.

Former correction officer Robert O’Mast, a member of the execution team at Delaware Correctional Center in Wilmington, spoke against the bills at both committee meetings Wednesday.

He pointed to James “Red Dog” Allen, a mob member known to have killed approximately 50 people, who was executed under O’Mast’s tenure.

“He promised us correction officers he would kill one of us,” O’Mast said. “And he was hoping it would be a female.

“All he saw was blood in his eyes. He had no interest in rehabilitating himself. That’s why we need the death penalty.”

Death penalty court decision

The Supreme Court decision in 2016 came in Rauf v. State, when the court ruled the capital defendants’ Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial had been violated.

Then, a judge, rather than a jury, determined whether the prosecution proved all facts necessary to impose a death sentence.

Under the Sixth Amendment, it must be a jury that unanimously and beyond reasonable doubt decides the validity of facts, and whether those facts are aggravating (reasons of death) or mitigating (reasons for life) circumstances, the court said.

Delaware still has a death penalty statute, even though it can’t be imposed.

Lynn’s bills would prevent a future General Assembly from reimposing it without jumping through major hurdles.

He cited some facts about the death penalty he described as “sobering”:

For every 8 people executed in the United States, 1 is exonerated;

In 2022, the countries with the largest amount of executions were China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United States and Iran;

Prior to 2016, Delaware had the third highest rate of executions in the nation.

One reason the death penalty is flawed, he said, is race.

As of 2012 in Delaware, black defendants who kill white victims were 6 times more likely to receive the death penalty than black defendants who kill black victims.

“Moreover, black defendants who kill white victims are more than three times as likely to be sentenced to death than white defendants who killed white victims,” Lynn said.

“It’s simply unconstitutional and inhumane to consider and continue this practice,” Lynn said.

The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution states explicitly: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

Delaware’s Constitution goes one step further, Lynn said.

“Section 11 of the Delaware constitution says excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor punishments inflicted, and in the construction of jails a proper regard shall be had to the health of persons.”

Coroners in Delaware declare the cause of death listed for those executed by the state as “homicide.”

Lynn said innocence is another major flaw when it comes to the ethicality of executions.

“Once you’ve executed an innocent person, there’s no fixing that mistake,” Lynn said.

The death penalty is expensive, another underlying reason cited by Lynn.

Capital trials cost more than non-capital trials because of higher costs for prosecution and defense lawyers, time-consuming pre-trial investigations, the jury selection process, enhanced security requirements, longer trials, solitary confinement and unnecessary appeals to ensure fairness, Lynn said.

According to an economic analysis of 15 death penalty states from 2001-2017, cases seeking the death penalty cost an additional $700,000.

“One of the popular misconceptions about the death penalty is that it acts as a deterrent,” Lynn said, “that if faced with the possibility of being executed by the state, a person won’t commit a crime. That’s a complete fallacy.”

A report by the National Research Council titled “Deterrence and the Death Penalty” stated studies claiming that death penalties lower murder rates are fundamentally flawed.

“More importantly, law enforcement officers are actually safer in states that do not have the death penalty,” Lynn said.

He pointed out research that found the states with the highest rates of police killed highest were disproportionately death penalty states.

In a 2015 poll by the Delaware Center for Justice, 64% of Delawareans oppose the death penalty with an alternative of life imprisonment, compared to only 30% who continue to support the death penalty.

“It’s well past time that we’ve had this bill end…the Delaware death penalty,” Lynn concluded.

Rep. Peter Schwartzkopf, D-Rehoboth Beach, said in the Judiciary Committee that he does not oppose the death penalty in extreme cases. He voted yes, however, after speaking with Lynn prior to Wednesday’s meeting.

“I will support and vote for it to get out of committee because I think it deserves a vote on the floor,” Schwartzopf said.

(source: Betsy Price is a Wilmington freelance writer----delawarelive.com)

GEORGIA----execution

Georgia executes Willie J. Pye for 1993 murder, despite call for clemency

Willie James Pye, a Georgia man convicted and sentenced to die for the 1993 abduction, rape and murder of his former girlfriend, was executed Wednesday night at a prison in Jackson, the Georgia Department of Corrections said in a statement.

Pye’s execution was carried out by lethal injection at 11:03 p.m. and is the 1st in the state since 2020. It took place despite a flurry of last-minute legal challenges and a clemency request to spare his life. Pye’s lawyers cited their client’s intellectual disability as a reason the state should reconsider execution. They also said Pye had been poorly represented in the initial trials that resulted in a death sentence.

The U.S. Supreme Court denied a request to stay the execution late Wednesday, and the Georgia parole board, which has the authority to grant clemency in a death penalty case in the state, denied a clemency request on Tuesday.

Pye, 59, accepted a final prayer but did not record a final statement before he was put to death, said Lori Benoit, a spokeswoman for the Georgia Department of Corrections. He was visited by six family members, a clergy member and an attorney on the day of his execution.

Georgia uses the sedative pentobarbital in lethal injections, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

Nathan Potek, one of Pye’s lawyers, said in an emailed statement that Pye’s initial attorney, the late Johnny B. Mostiler, was “racist and incompetent.” Georgia also insisted on executing Pye despite his “lifelong intellectual disability and the fact that he presents a danger to no one in prison,” Potek wrote.

Pye had been assessed to have an IQ of 70, court documents show.

Mostiler, who handled 900 cases a year as the only public defender in Spalding County, Ga., died in 2000 of a heart attack at the age of 53, according to an obituary that described him as a “gruff-talking, chain-smoking” lawyer who was “turning over one case every 100 minutes, less time than a private attorney might devote to a simple traffic violation.”

Pye had been in a “sporadic romantic relationship” with Alicia Lynn Yarbrough before her murder, according to court documents. On the night of Nov. 16, 1993, Pye and two accomplices — Chester Adams and Anthony Freeman — plotted to rob Yarbrough, who at the time was living with another man and her newborn, whom Pye thought was his child.

Wearing ski masks, they kicked open the door of Yarbrough’s home after noticing that only Yarbrough and her baby were there. They then held her at gunpoint. “After determining that there was no money in the house, they took a ring and a necklace from Ms. Yarbrough and abducted her, leaving the infant in the house,” according to court documents.

They next took her to a motel and raped her. After attempting to remove their fingerprints from the scene, they drove her to the side of a road, where Pye ordered her to lie face down and shot her three times. Pye and his accomplices drove away, tossing their masks and gun from the car during the drive.

Pye claimed during court hearings that Yarbrough voluntarily came to the motel room that evening to trade sex for cocaine. Judges dismissed those claims, saying Pye’s assertion was unreliable partly due to its reliance on inconsistent witness testimonies.

Georgia paused executions after January 2020 because of the coronavirus pandemic. The state has 35 men and one woman on death row, according to its corrections department.

(source: Washington Post)

******************

USA: Georgia carries out its 1st execution since 2020

Willie Pye, a 58-year-old Black man, was executed in Georgia on 20 March 2024. He had been on death row for more than a quarter of a century. His appeal lawyers said he had intellectual disability, which would render his execution unconstitutional. 3 of the surviving trial jurors appealed for clemency. The Board of Pardons and Paroles denied clemency on 19 March, and final appeals to the courts were dismissed.

GEORGIA CARRIES OUT ITS FIRST EXECUTION SINCE 2020

Willie Pye, a 58-year-old Black man, was executed in Georgia on 20 March 2024. He had been on death row for more than a quarter of a century. His appeal lawyers said he had intellectual disability, which would render his execution unconstitutional. 3 of the surviving trial jurors appealed for clemency. The Board of Pardons and Paroles denied clemency on 19 March, and final appeals to the courts were dismissed.

NO FURTHER ACTION IS REQUESTED. MANY THANKS TO ALL WHO SENT APPEALS.

Willie Pye was arrested in 1993 and charged with the 1992 murder of his former girlfriend. At the 1996 trial, after the jury found him guilty, the trial moved into its sentencing phase. This lasted one morning and ended in a death sentence. His trial lawyer failed to investigate and present compelling mitigation evidence that was available, including about Willie Pye’s childhood of abuse, deprivation and neglect, and also of his possible intellectual disability.

In 2021, a 3-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit unanimously found that this was one of the rare cases under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) of 1996, a federal law aimed in part at facilitating executions, in which a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel denied on the merits in state court is found to warrant relief on federal review.

The judges concluded that it was quite evident that the trial lawyer had not provided constitutionally adequate representation, having conducted only the “most cursory” of investigations into mitigation evidence, including failing to obtain a mental health evaluation. As a result of his “paltry” investigation, the jury heard “virtually none of the “powerful mitigating evidence” presented on appeal, including evidence of Willie Pye’s sub-average intellectual functioning, frontal lobe brain damage and severe depression, or of his traumatic childhood. Willie Pye was entitled to a new sentencing. However, the state appealed for a rehearing before the full 11th Circuit, which in 2022, over a strongly worded dissent, reversed the panel’s decision. It did not dispute the panel’s finding that the lawyer had failed to prepare for trial but ruled that, Willie Pye had not shown that his case was one of the rare cases permitting federal relief under the high level of deference to state court decisions required under the AEDPA.

On 19 March 2024, the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles considered Willie Pye’s request for executive clemency. The clemency petition presented a range of information, including expert evidence that Willie Pye met the diagnostic criteria for intellectual disability; the appalling conditions of his childhood and their impact on his development, with expert evidence of the “crushing number of childhood risk factors” he endured; the fact that the jury never learned of such mitigating evidence because of the failures of his trial lawyer and the public defender system more broadly at the time; evidence of the trial lawyer’s racist views towards his Black clients; the AEDPA’s obstacles to remedy; and Willie Pye’s non-violent record in prison and constructive role there, contrary to what the prosecutor had argued at trial. The petition presented letters from three of the surviving trial jurors who supported clemency. One wrote that “I want the board to know I do not want Mr Pye to be executed.;” another that “I don’t want Willie Pye to die;” and a third that “I would like Mr Pye to live out the rest of his life in prison.” One of them recalled that at the time, “many of the jurors” had felt the defence lawyer “did an inadequate job of defending him” and “could not have cared less”. One of them said that “During the sentencing phase, we didn’t learn anything about Mr Pye’s mental health and impairments” and wished that “everyone had heard that Mr Pye didn’t get any of this before we decided his sentence.” Another wrote: “Now learning about Mr Pye’s intellectual disability, and that people with this disability are ineligible for the death penalty, him growing up in extreme poverty and [the trial lawyer’s] racism, I am not comfortable with my decision to sentence Mr Pye to death.”

After the hearing, the Board issued a statement announcing that it had denied clemency. Final appeals to the courts were unsuccessful, with the US Supreme Court declining to intervene in the evening of 20 March. The execution – by a lethal dose of the sedative pentobarbital – went ahead. Willie Pye was pronounced dead at 11.03pm. According to the Department of Corrections, “Pye did accept a final prayer and did not record a final statement.

There have been 3 executions in the USA this year, bringing to 1,585 the total number of there since 1976. Georgia accounts for 77 of these. Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases and under any circumstances.

(source: Amnesty International USA)

******************

Georgia Executes Prisoner Willie Pye After 4-Year Pause in Capital Punishment

In Georgia, prison officials executed Willie James Pye in the state’s 1st execution in over 4 years. 59-year-old Willie Pye was put to death with an injection of pentobarbital after the U.S. Supreme Court denied a clemency appeal despite his lawyers arguing he was “intellectually disabled” and that the state of Georgia was not ready to resume executions after halting the practice during the pandemic. Pye’s supporters and anti-death penalty advocates gathered for a vigil Wednesday ahead of his execution. Cathy Harmon-Christian is executive director of Georgians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty.

Cathy Harmon-Christian: “On the death certificate, it will say 'homicide.' The state is committing homicide, and that’s what’s on Willie Pye’s death certificate. … The drug itself for this particular lethal injection, to my knowledge, is a single-dose drug, and my understanding is that what it will do, it will boil — Willie Pye will experience boiling in his own blood.”

(source: democracynow.org)

*****************

Athens residents hold silent vigil for Georgia’s 1st execution since the pandemic

This is not John Vodicka’s first time protesting a Georgia execution, but he hopes that it is his last.

On Wednesday, March 20, Vodicka helped organize a silent vigil held at the Arch in opposition to capital punishment and the execution of Willie James Pye. The event was sponsored by Oconee Street United Methodist Church as one of the latest protests against the death penalty in Georgia.

“Typically whenever there is a scheduled execution, and thankfully there hasn't been one for the last 4 years in Georgia, but when there is one, we try to get folks out in a public space to convey our opposition to capital punishment,” Vodicka said.

Vodicka’s history with capital punishment extends far past the last few protests that have occurred in Athens. Over the years, he has dedicated much of his time to speaking with inmates on death row throughout the nation.

“Most of the folks who commit the kinds of crimes for which the death penalty is an option are pretty bruised and broken themselves,” Vodicka said. “I'm not trying to excuse the violence, but I’ve visited lots of people on death row in Louisiana, here in Georgia and in California, [and when] you get the backstory, it's like, how did we not see this coming?”

Vodicka notes that a majority of inmates on death row are exposed to a variety of factors that significantly contribute to their behavioral misconduct. He also states that the death penalty often applies disproportionately to those from marginalized and impoverished communities.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 41% of the people on death row are Black or African-American. In Georgia, Black people make up 53.66% of the inmates on death row.

Willie Pye was an African-American male who was convicted in 1993 for murdering his former girlfriend, Alicia Yarbrough. Pye was intellectually disabled with an IQ of 68, and “ineptly represented at his 1994 trial,” according to the handouts provided at the protest.

In 1989, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that executing those who are intellectually disabled violates the state constitution. However, Georgia is the only state that requires defendants to prove intellectual disability beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the highest legal standard for burden of proof.

Pye’s request for clemency was rejected Tuesday by the State Board of Pardons and Paroles, and his execution was set to be at 7 p.m. by lethal injection at a state prison in Butts County. According to the Georgia Department of Corrections, Pye’s execution was carried out at 11:03 pm, after attempts to postpone the execution were denied by an appeals court and the U.S. Supreme Court, according to NBC. A press release from the GDC said that Pye did accept a final prayer, but he did not have a final statement.

Though its legality has faced opposition before, capital punishment remains authorized by 27 states, including Georgia. Since the 1976 U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to rule capital punishment constitutional, following a brief 4-year national moratorium, Georgia has executed 75 men and one woman. As of March 20, Pye is the 77th person to be put to death in Georgia since 1983 and the 1st one since 2020.

Anti-death penalty groups have commonly expressed their opposition to capital punishment for various reasons. According to the vigil handouts, they feel that in addition to being “racially and economically applied,” the death penalty is also “arbitrary and capricious.”

“It's sad, you know that we're in this time of our country's history and still putting people on death rows around the country – picking a time when they die and telling them how they're going to die,” Vodicka said. “It's a violent response to someone who's allegedly committed a violent act.”

Wednesday’s protest consisted of advocates from the Oconee United Methodist Church and members of other religious communities that explained strong religious reasons for their activism as well.

“We believe all human life is sacred and created by God and therefore, we must see all human life as significant and valuable,” an informational handout at the protest said. “When governments implement the death penalty (capital punishment), then the life of the convicted person is devalued and all possibility of change in that person’s life ends.”

One of the protesters at the event, Elijah Fish, is a member of the Oconee Street United Methodist Church and sophomore at UGA. Through the church’s advocacy, Fish learned of Pye’s execution and decided to join the protest against the punishment.

“We oppose the death penalty in all cases,” Fish said. “In every other state, Mr. Pye’s execution would be illegal due to his mental condition … We believe that death is not the answer for death.”

The protest started at 6 p.m. with a prayer, and ended at the supposed time of Pye’s execution with a reading of the names of those executed in Georgia.

“God of mercy,

We gather to pray for an end to the many acts of violence occurring in our society.

We pray in a special way for all those impacted by the use of the death penalty.

Guide us with your love and compassion, O God,

As we strive to be vessels of your mercy

And live in a manner that lifts up the dignity of all life.

Help us to live the path of discipleship and faith

As we work to end the death penalty and promote a more restorative justice system

Amen.”

(source: theredandblack.com)

**************

What it was like to witness the execution of Willie James Pye

Willie James Pye lay strapped to a gurney in the death chamber. No one in the witness room spoke. No one moved.

The 54th execution carried out by lethal injection in Georgia began shortly before 11 p.m. at Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison, which houses the state’s male death row inmates.

Witnesses were taken by vans to the small building on the prison campus that houses the state’s death chamber. Each group was led single-file by a prison officer up a short cement ramp, the base flanked by 2 members of the prison’s tactical team in full riot gear. They cradled assault rifles. The face shields on their helmets were lowered.

The outside darkness gave directly into the full light of the execution witness room. By the time media witnesses crossed the threshold, the warden had pulled back the curtains over tall windows. The condemned man, strapped in place, was in full view.

The gurney was positioned to face the witnesses and tilted so Pye’s head was elevated, his feet lowered. His arms were splayed out on either side and each was hooked up to intravenous lines. A sheet covered most of his body.

Pye, 59, who had been on Georgia’s death row for nearly 3 decades, accepted a prayer from a prison chaplain but declined to speak from the death chamber.

Pye was convicted in the 1993 kidnapping, rape and murder of his former girlfriend, Alicia Lynn Yarbrough. She was found shot to death on a rural road in Spalding County. Court records say Yarbrough had recently had a baby Pye believed was his, and Pye was upset that the new man in her life was listed as the father on the birth certificate.

After Warden Shawn Emmons read Pye’s death warrant, he and the chaplain exited the death chamber. Then a fatal dose of pentobarbital began flowing into Pye’s veins.

The execution took 5, maybe 10 minutes. Witnesses were not allowed to wear watches or bring in cellphones. The clock on the wall was visible to the officials in the death chamber but not to those in the back row of the gallery.

Multiple groups of witnesses were present. Their identities were not immediately available and prison officials kept the groups sequestered, except for the few minutes everyone had to squeeze into the witness room. There was no opportunity for small talk.

Witnesses had one thing in common: somber, grave looks on their faces.

The groups had been driven across the sprawling prison grounds, past a basketball court and neatly trimmed grass that would have resembled a public park if not for the massive fences topped with concertina wire that glowed in the reflection of the prison’s security lights.

The execution was officially scheduled for 7 p.m. During the hours of waiting, press witnesses were situated in a staff kitchen.

When the time came, Pye briefly glanced up at the ceiling, then shut his eyes and didn’t open them again. For a moment, he began to snore.

His cheeks puffed with air few times as he took his final breaths. His head shuttered slightly at one point, briefly. He tilted his head to one side, and after a little bit, to the other.

After a few moments, Pye stopped moving. The warden reappeared with 2 men in white coats with stethoscopes. They evaluated Pye, then nodded slightly to each other.

The warden announced the time of death as 11:03 p.m., and a Department of Corrections officer in a light blue shirt closed the curtain.

(source: Atlanta Journal-Constitution)

***************

Tiffany Moss is the only woman on death row in Georgia----The case has been called horrible, graphic and disturbing.

Nearly 5 years after being convicted of murder in the death of her stepdaughter, Tiffany Moss remains the only woman on Georgia's death row.

Should her death sentence be carried out, Tiffany Moss would become only the 3rd woman executed in Georgia.

In April 2019, Moss was convicted of numerous charges, including murder, in the death of her 10-year-old stepdaughter, Emani Moss. Authorities said the child starved to death before her body was burned and stuffed in a trash bag in November 2013.

What happened to Emani Moss?

Tiffany Moss and her husband, Eman Moss, were arrested and charged after Emani's body was found at the Coventry Pointe Apartments on Nov. 2, 2013. At the time, Gwinnett County District Attorney Danny Porter called the death the worst case of child abuse he had ever seen.

< Emani Moss' Division of Family and Children Services (DFCS) case file notes how her father described to police the torture the young girl endured: scalding with boiling water; isolation like a prisoner; and the starvation that ultimately killed her.

Investigators said it appeared her body was placed in the trash can to conceal her death, and that her body had been in the can for "more than a couple of hours."

She weighed just 30 pounds at the time of her death -- about the size of a 3-year-old.

During the trial, prosecutors showed evidence that the Tiffany Moss fed and took care of her biological children while Emani was denied food.

Tiffany Moss represented herself in the capital murder trial. Gwinnett County District Attorney said his office made repeated attempts to convince her to get professional representation.

A jury took less than 3 hours to find Moss guilty.

When will Tiffany Moss be executed?

As of March 2024, an execution date remained unclear.

After Moss's 2019 sentencing, a judge set an execution date in June 2019, but that passed as Moss retained a new lawyer and sought a new trial.

In a January 2024 ruling, Gwinnett County Superior Court Judge Karen Beyers rejected Moss's motion for a new trial, stating, in part, Moss "intelligently, voluntarily, and knowingly invoked her right to self-representation".

How many women have been executed in Georgia?

Only 2 women have previously been executed by the state of Georgia.

In March 1945, Lena Baker was executed in Randolph County for killing the white man she worked for. Baker said he took her from her home and held against her will in a grits mill. When she got a chance, she claimed she shot him in self-defense. Baker, a Black woman, was convicted by an all-white jury.

However, in August 2005, the State Board of Pardons and Paroles posthumously pardoned her.

In September 2015, Kelly Renee Gissendaner became the 2nd woman to be executed by Georgia. She was convicted for her role in the 1997 murder of Doug Gissendaner.

Moss is the only woman on death row. After William Pye's execution on March 20, there are 36 men currently awaiting execution in the state, according to the Georgia Department of Corrections.

Under Georgia law, only 3 offenses are punishable by death: treason, aircraft hijacking and murder.

(source: 11alive.com)

*****************

Here is a list of every Georgia inmate who has been executed since 1983

The state of Georgia executed its 77th inmate this week. This week, 59-year-old Willies James Pye was executed at the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison in Jackson at 11:03 p.m. by lethal injection.

According to Georgia officials, since the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976, 76 men and one woman have been executed in the state for various crimes.

The death penalty in Georgia had previously been struck down by the Supreme Court in 1972 after officials declared all existing death penalty statutes as unconstitutional.

The following are all of the people who were put to death in Georgia:

(see: https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/here-is-list-every-georgia-inmate-who-was-put-death-since-1983/XMQVKWSJ5VHCFMGTPOMZYRLZNM/)

ALABAMA----new execution date imminent

Alabama high court authorizes execution date for man convicted in 2004 slaying

The Alabama Supreme Court on Wednesday authorized an execution date for a man convicted in the 2004 slaying of a couple during a robbery.

Justices granted the Alabama attorney general's request to authorize an execution date for Jamie Mills, 50. Gov. Kay Ivey will set the exact date. Ivey spokeswoman Gina Maiola said the office would provide updates as they become available.

Under Alabama procedure, the state Supreme Court authorizes the governor to set an execution date.

Mills was convicted of capital murder for the 2004 slaying of Floyd and Vera Hill in Guin, a city of about 2,000 people in Marion County.

Prosecutors said Mills and his wife went to the couple's home where he beat the couple and stole money and medications.

Floyd Hill, 87, died from blunt-and sharp-force wounds to his head and neck, and Vera Mills, 72, died from complications of head trauma 12 weeks after the crime, the attorney general's office wrote in a court filing.

Attorneys for Mills had asked justices to deny the execution date request while they pursue a pending claim of prosecutorial misconduct in the case.

Mills' attorneys wrote in a March petition to a Marion County judge that prosecutors concealed that they had a plea deal with Mills' wife that spared her from a possible death sentence. She was the key prosecution witness against Mills at his trial.

The attorney general's office disputed that there was a pretrial agreement.

Alabama, which carried out the nation's 1st execution by nitrogen gas earlier this year, says it plans to put Mills to death by lethal injection.

(source: Associated Press)

*************

Alabama Supreme Court approves execution of Jamie Ray Mills

The Alabama Supreme Court has approved the execution of Jamie Ray Mills, 50, who was convicted of 3 counts of capital murder in the brutal 2004 slayings of an elderly Guin couple.

Gov. Kay Ivey will set the execution date and timeframe. State law says the execution date must be at least 30 days after the inmate is informed of his pending execution.

Mills will be executed by lethal injection, court records show. If the execution goes forward, it will happen in the death chamber at William C. Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore.

In January the Alabama Attorney Generals’ office filed a motion with the high court to have Mills executed.

“There is no doubt that Mills committed those offenses,” the motion states. “… Mills’ convictions and sentence are final because he has completed his direct appeal, state post-conviction review, and federal habeas review. Accordingly, it is time for this death sentence to be carried out.”

The crime

Mills and his wife, Joann, went to the home of Vera Hill, 72 and Floyd Hill, 87, in June of 2004 with the request to make a phone call, court records and media accounts say. Mills was 30 at the time. Guin is in Marion County in northwest Alabama.

Afterward, the 4 of them went to a shed where the Hills kept items to sell as part of a yard sale, the Alabama Reflector reported.

The AG’s motion states that the women went back to the home, leaving Floyd Hill and Mills in the shed. Mills beat Hill, who fell to the ground. The women then returned to the shed and found Floyd on the ground. Mills then beat Vera on the back of the head with a hammer, as JoAnn stood in the corner.

Vera Mills died several months later from her injuries.

According to the motion, Jamie Mills then locked the shed and stole items valued at $140 from the home including a tackle box, medicines, wallet, purse and police scanner.

Mills was convicted of 3 counts of capital murder in August 2007 and the jury recommended the death penalty by a 11-1 vote. The trial judge took the jury’s recommendation and sentence Mills to death.

Joann Mills was convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison.

(source: The Gadsden Times)

*******************

Death penalty opponents rally for change in Alabama law, clemency for ‘Rocky’ Myers

The son of an Alabama death row inmate and the widow of the last person executed in the state took part in a rally at the Alabama State House on Thursday calling for the Legislature to pass a bill that would allow 33 condemned inmates to have their sentences changed to life in prison.

Robin LeAndrew Hood, son of Robin “Rocky” Myers, and Deanna Smith, widow of Kenneth Eugene Smith, spoke at the rally in support of the legislation and in support of clemency for Myers, who has been on death row for 30 years on his conviction for the fatal stabbing of Ludie Mae Tucker, 69, who was a neighbor.

After the rally, some in the group crossed the street to the Capitol went to Gov. Kay Ivey’s office to notify her staff about a petition asking her to commute Myers’ sentence to life without parole.

TJ Riggs of Birmingham, who works with Amnesty International USA, said there are more than 600,000 signatures on the petition, which he said was being sent to the governor’s office electronically.

No date has been set for Myers’ execution.

The Morgan County jury that convicted Myers in 1994 recommended a sentence of life without parole. But the judge overrode that and sentenced Myers to death. One of the jurors said last year she believes Myers is innocent.

In 2017, the Alabama Legislature eliminated the judicial override and gave juries the authority to decide whether those convicted of capital murder receive the death penalty or life in prison without the possibility of parole, the only 2 options on a capital conviction. But the law did not apply retroactively, meaning that judicial override death sentences handed out before 2017 remain in place.

HB27, by Rep. Chris England, would require a judge to resentence those inmates to life without parole.

“Justice demands us to afford those individuals who are still on death row, who are there for a judicial override, the opportunity to be resentenced,” England told the crowd at the rally. “It only makes sense, and that’s in its purest sense what justice means.”

England’s bill is pending in the House Judiciary Committee. It has not come up for a vote this session.

England sponsored the same bill last year, but it did not advance.

Alison Mollman, interim legal director for the ACLU of Alabama, noted that Kenneth Eugene Smith, who was executed in January, was also on death row because of judicial override. She said that underscores the urgency of passing the bill.

“Oftentimes when we talk about legislation, we can say, ‘We’ll see what happens next year,’” Mollman said. “But while we were seeing what happened next year, Kenny Smith was executed, and he would not have been executed if that bill had passed last session.”

Smith was the first inmate ever executed by nitrogen hypoxia, an alternative to lethal injection. Smith was convicted for the murder-for-hire of Elizabeth Dorlene Sennett in Colbert County in 1988. Sennett was a pastor’s wife who was beaten and stabbed.

Mollman and death penalty opponents who spoke at the rally talked about the humanity of the people on death row.

“Mr. Smith was beloved by men on the row, by his family, by his friends, and although the state of Alabama has tried to define him by the worst thing he’d done, what we know is Kenny is much more than that,” Mollman said.

Smith’s widow, Deanna Smith, called on the Legislature to change the law and spare the lives of those sentenced by judicial override, including Myers.

“If seven years ago this was decided as unconstitutional, that we have a right to a jury by our peers, then it’s still unconstitutional today, and it was unconstitutional all the years before that,” Deanna Smith said. “We shouldn’t have to fight for them to do the right thing. If we leave it to the courts, well, you know where that will be. The Alabama Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court did not stand up for Kenny.

“But right now we have a chance and a choice to make it right for people like Rocky and the other men on death row. So please, please vote for House Bill 27. Please don’t let it slip by like it did last year. Because the truth is, people’s lives are at stake. This isn’t just something we can continue to push on and wait. Because once a person’s life is taken, it cannot be given back.”

Hood, who is Myers’ son and was 11 when Ludie Mae Tucker was killed, said he loves his father and believes he is innocent.

“He’s always in good spirits,” Hood said. “He tells me I’m his hero, or whatever, but he’s my hero. I don’t think I could be in there as long as he’s been in there and still have the mindset that he has. He told me he still sees the light at the end of the tunnel.”

Hood said his father still thinks he is coming home after 30 years on death row. Hood said he believes that could happen because of his faith in God.

“I believe God can do all things through Christ,” Hood said. “I know my father, if he don’t come home, he’s going to heaven. He’s going home. So if they don’t want to let him go in the world, he’s going home anyways.”

(source: Associated Press)

***************

Amnesty International Delivers Thousands of Petitions to Alabama Governor, Asking Her to Grant Clemency to Rocky Myers and Commute His Death Sentence

Amnesty International delivered thousands of petitions to Alabama Governor Kay Ivey on Thursday, asking her to grant clemency to Rocky Myers, a man who has spent nearly 30 years on death row in Alabama. The delivery is part of Amnesty International’s “Write for Rightsopens in a new tab” campaign that unites activists around the world in their desire to take action on behalf of people whose human rights have been violated. Worldwide, nearly 700,000 actions have been taken in support of Rocky.

Rocky Myers, a Black man with an intellectual disability, was sentenced in 1994 to death for murder even though no evidence directly linked him to the crime scene. After a jury sentenced Rocky to life without the possibility of parole, the judge overrode the jury and imposed a death sentence through a now outlawed practice called judicial override.

In 2017, as one of her first acts as Alabama Governor, Kay Ivey signed a bill into law that barred judicial override going forward, but the new law was not applied to people already on death row at the time, leaving Rocky and others stranded on death row even though their death sentences would now be considered illegal.

“With a swipe of her pen, Governor Ivey can end the injustice that has tarnished Rocky Myers’ case for 3 decades,” said Amnesty International’s Alabama State Death Penalty Abolition Coordinator TJ Riggs. “The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment, and, pending abolition, we urge her to halt all executions in the state and conduct a review of Rocky’s case as well as others on death row who were sentenced under judicial override.”

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that defendants with intellectual disabilities “face a special risk of wrongful execution,” which is certainly true for Rocky. Burdened with ineffective legal representation and abandoned by his post-conviction lawyer, Rocky missed deadlines for appeal. There are concerns that racial and class bias also tainted Rocky Myers’ trial, which is in line with the fact that Black defendants are 7.5 timesopens in a new tab more likely to be wrongfully convicted of murder than white defendants. His execution could be scheduled at any time, and his best hope is for Governor Ivey to grant him clemency.

The petitions were delivered to Governor Ivey after a rally that took place at the Alabama state house, where dozens of people gathered to ask the Alabama legislature to support HB27, a bill that would make the banning of judicial override retroactive, bringing Alabama in line with the rest of the country. In passing this bill, Alabama would be upholding the legal principle recognized under international standards that those under sentence of death should benefit from retroactive leniency in the event of a change in the law after commission of the crime.

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception – regardless of who is accused, the nature or circumstances of the crime, guilt or innocence or method of execution.

(source: Amnesty International USA)

****************

Amnesty International Delivers Thousands of Petitions to Alabama Governor, Asking Her to Grant Clemency to Rocky Myers and Commute His Death Sentence

Amnesty International delivered thousands of petitions to Alabama Governor Kay Ivey on Thursday, asking her to grant clemency to Rocky Myers, a man who has spent nearly 30 years on death row in Alabama. The delivery is part of Amnesty International’s “Write for Rightsopens in a new tab” campaign that unites activists around the world in their desire to take action on behalf of people whose human rights have been violated. Worldwide, nearly 700,000 actions have been taken in support of Rocky.

Rocky Myers, a Black man with an intellectual disability, was sentenced in 1994 to death for murder even though no evidence directly linked him to the crime scene. After a jury sentenced Rocky to life without the possibility of parole, the judge overrode the jury and imposed a death sentence through a now outlawed practice called judicial override.

In 2017, as one of her first acts as Alabama Governor, Kay Ivey signed a bill into law that barred judicial override going forward, but the new law was not applied to people already on death row at the time, leaving Rocky and others stranded on death row even though their death sentences would now be considered illegal.

“With a swipe of her pen, Governor Ivey can end the injustice that has tarnished Rocky Myers’ case for three decades,” said Amnesty International’s Alabama State Death Penalty Abolition Coordinator TJ Riggs. “The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment, and, pending abolition, we urge her to halt all executions in the state and conduct a review of Rocky’s case as well as others on death row who were sentenced under judicial override.”

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that defendants with intellectual disabilities “face a special risk of wrongful execution,” which is certainly true for Rocky. Burdened with ineffective legal representation and abandoned by his post-conviction lawyer, Rocky missed deadlines for appeal. There are concerns that racial and class bias also tainted Rocky Myers’ trial, which is in line with the fact that Black defendants are 7.5 timesopens in a new tab more likely to be wrongfully convicted of murder than white defendants. His execution could be scheduled at any time, and his best hope is for Governor Ivey to grant him clemency.

The petitions were delivered to Governor Ivey after a rally that took place at the Alabama state house, where dozens of people gathered to ask the Alabama legislature to support HB27, a bill that would make the banning of judicial override retroactive, bringing Alabama in line with the rest of the country. In passing this bill, Alabama would be upholding the legal principle recognized under international standards that those under sentence of death should benefit from retroactive leniency in the event of a change in the law after commission of the crime.

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception – regardless of who is accused, the nature or circumstances of the crime, guilt or innocence or method of execution.

(source: Amnesty International USA)

INDIANA:

Time for gubernatorial candidates to get real on the real issues

Up until now, the GOP gubernatorial candidates have mostly fallen back on national talking points. But that does a disservice to Hoosier voters who want their next governor to be focused on Indiana issues.

And despite what many of their ads say, that’s not China or the southern border or even online safety — which are largely federal issues.

It appears that even Gov. Eric Holcomb is getting impatient. Though he has declined to endorse any candidates, he recently had some interesting comments about the race.

“My thought process is: there are a lot of folks who approach me that are undecided because they’re uninformed about where (the candidates) stand on issues that a governor has to address on a day in day out basis.

“We can repeat words. And (in) most of those words I see broad agreement within the candidates,” he said. “But there are items that come across the governor’s desk and what the Legislature grapples with that aren’t being discussed that I think should be more in detail.”

“And so,” he continued, “I may offer some thoughts on that, as I said sooner rather than later.”

Holcomb mentioned economic development, a new road program with funding options, mental health, broadband and a sustainable Medicaid program as subjects the candidates should focus on: “I want to see not just the vision, very important to have a vision, more so to have the mission, the plans to actually realize that vision and that’s what I hope is shared because that will help whoever the next governor is carry out the planning of the day.”

The real issues

So, as the race kicks into high gear, it’s time for the candidates vying for the GOP nomination to get specific. And I have a few prompts myself.

Road funding – Legislators and the governor put together a long-term road funding program in 2017 that included a large gas tax increase. But those dollars are fluctuating and future infrastructure is at stake. Where do candidates stand on this topic, and how would they ensure Indiana’s crossroads remain an asset?

Medicaid – Supporting poor and disabled Hoosiers through this health care program is a must. But the price of that care is rising exponentially and could threaten the state budget. How would candidates address the sustainability of Medicaid? If cuts are needed, where would they apply them? Are they across-the-board cuts or limits on optional parts of Medicaid?

Taxes – Indiana lawmakers seem set on cutting some tax no matter what. It is income tax? Sales tax? Or how about the tax the most Hoosiers despise: property tax? I want specifics on what they would recommend for tax reform. And not on just what they’d cut, but how they’d replace that money or do without in the state budget.

Death penalty – Indiana has a death penalty on paper but hasn’t executed anyone since 2009, and several men on Death Row have languished there for decades. The holdup is that Indiana can’t get the necessary drugs for the lethal injection cocktail. So do candidates support eliminating the death penalty and saving money on those court battles? Or, would they move to other execution methods? And how does their position square with their anti-abortion rhetoric?

Education – After 20-plus years of Republican control over education, why aren’t we seeing improvement? Test scores, graduation rates and more have stagnated while the state transitioned to money following the student and funding private vouchers. What innovative ideas do these candidates have to make improvements? And should we keep funding essentially three systems: traditional public, charter and private schools?

Health care – Lawmakers have made attempts for several years to tackle this beast of a topic. But most of those efforts have focused on transparency and they simply aren’t working. Some states have capped insulin and other necessary medication prices. Others have limited profit margins. What would these candidates do to make a dent in this problem for Hoosiers?

When a candidate can answer these questions with depth and specifics they will earn my vote. And I don’t necessarily have to agree with them philosophically on every matter — they just have to be willing to speak beyond slogans and political dog whistles.

(source: Commentary; Niki Kelly, Indiana Capital Chronicle)

MISSOURI----impending execution

Missouri Supreme Court declines to halt execution of a man who killed 2 in 2006

The Missouri Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to halt the execution of Brian Dorsey, who is scheduled to die next month for killing his cousin and her husband 18 years ago.

Judge W. Brent Powell wrote in the unanimous decision that Dorsey “has not demonstrated he is actually innocent” of the killing. Powell also wrote that the state Supreme Court previously turned aside Dorsey’s claim that his trial lawyer was ineffective, and he is barred from raising that claim again.

Dorsey’s attorney, Megan Crane, said he would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“The Missouri Supreme Court’s refusal today to even consider the merits of the Brian’s Dorsey’s critical Sixth Amendment constitutional claim — that his lawyers pleaded their client guilty for no benefit, with the death penalty still on the table, without conducting any investigation, as a result of the low flat fee they were paid by the Missouri Public Defender System -- is yet another example of how our legal system has failed him,” Crane said in a statement. “We will appeal to the United States Supreme Court and ask that Governor Parson consider this injustice in our plea for mercy for Brian.”

Dorsey is scheduled to die by injection at 6 p.m. April 9 at the state prison in Bonne Terre. It would be Missouri’s first execution in 2024 after 4 people were put to death last year. Another Missouri inmate, David Hosier, faces execution June 11 for killing a Jefferson City woman in 2009.

Dorsey, who turns 52 on Thursday, was convicted of fatally shooting Sarah and Ben Bonnie on Dec. 23, 2006, at their home near New Bloomfield. Prosecutors said that earlier that day, Dorsey had called Sarah Bonnie seeking to borrow money to pay two drug dealers who were at his apartment.

Sarah Bonnie’s parents found the bodies the next day. The couple’s 4-year-old daughter was unhurt.

In his appeal, Dorsey alleged that he was incapable of premeditation at the time of the killings because of drug-induced psychosis. The appeal said Dorsey had not slept for more than 3 days, had been drinking and was withdrawing from crack cocaine usage, causing him to experience hallucinations and paranoid delusions.

But Powell wrote that attorneys for the state cited “significant evidence” of premeditation.

Dorsey pleaded guilty in 2008, but he later claimed he should have instead been sentenced to life in prison without parole. The Missouri Supreme Court first upheld the death sentence in 2010 and again in 2014.

(source: ky3.com)

USA:

US appeals court directs probe of juror bias in Boston Marathon bomber's case

A federal appeals court on Thursday directed a trial judge to assess whether 2 jurors in Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's 2015 trial were biased and should not have been seated, creating grounds potentially to overturn his death sentence.

The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stopped short, opens new tab of granting Tsarnaev's latest bid to overturn his death sentence for his role in the 2013 attack that killed three people and wounded 260 others.

But on a 2-1 vote, the panel concluded that a trial judge did not adequately investigate Tsarnaev's claims of juror bias. Tsarnaev had argued that two jurors at his trial lied about whether they discussed the case on social media before being seated.

The U.S. Supreme Court had not addressed that argument when it restored Tsarnaev's death sentence in March 2022, after the 1st Circuit set it aside in an earlier ruling in 2020, prompting a new round of arguments before the appeals court.

Lawyers for Tsarnaev, 30, said one juror was told by a friend on Facebook to "get on the jury" and send Tsarnaev "to jail where he will be taken care of," while the second juror retweeted a Twitter post that called Tsarnaev a "piece of garbage."

U.S. Circuit Judge William Kayatta, writing for the majority, said a trial judge's earlier investigation into Tsarnaev's plausible claims of juror bias "fell short of what was constitutionally required."

He said that conclusion on its own does not necessarily mean a new trial was needed to determine whether Tsarnaev deserved the death penalty or life in prison for his crimes, but did necessitate an inquiry into whether either juror should have been excused.

"If and only if the district court's investigation reveals that either juror should have been stricken for cause on account of bias, Tsarnaev will be entitled to a new penalty-phase proceeding," Kayatta wrote.

Prosecutors and defense lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Tsarnaev and his older brother Tamerlan detonated 2 homemade pressure-cooker bombs near the Boston Marathon's finish line on April 15, 2013. Tamerlan Tsarnaev died four days later after a shootout with police.

Jurors found Dzhokhar Tsarnaev guilty on all 30 counts he faced and said 6 warranted the death penalty, which was later imposed.

The U.S. Department of Justice has defended Tsarnaev's death sentence despite President Joe Biden's opposition to capital punishment, and Attorney General Merrick Garland's July 2021 moratorium on federal executions.

The 1st Circuit had overturned Tsarnaev's sentence in 2020, saying evidence about his brother's influence over him was wrongly excluded, and prospective jurors were not questioned enough about their exposure to news about the bombings.

In reinstating Tsarnaev's death sentence, conservative Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for a 6-3 Supreme Court majority that the constitution "guaranteed him a fair trial before an impartial jury. He received one."

Kayatta's opinion on Thursday was joined by U.S. Circuit Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson, a fellow appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama.

U.S. Circuit Judge Jeffrey Howard, an appointee of Republican former President George W. Bush, dissented, saying that given the relative weakness of Tsarnaev's juror bias claims, it was within U.S. District Judge George O'Toole's broad authority to not subject the jurors to further questioning.

Victims of the bombing have been split for years over whether Tsarnaev should be put to death, and Thursday's opinion reexposed those divides.

"My stance is he should already be dead," said Marc Fucarile, who lost his right leg in the second blast. He said further court proceedings would be a waste of time and money.

Mikey Borgard, who sustained hearing loss and a brain injury in the attack, agreed with the ruling, saying further investigation was needed "to ensure that justice has been fairly rendered and the Constitution and law has been upheld."

(source: Reuters)

****************

Boston Marathon bomber's death sentence up in air as court orders juror bias probe

A federal appeals court on Thursday ordered Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's case to be returned to a lower court to probe claims of juror bias and determine whether his death sentence should stand.

Tsarnaev's death sentence holds for now

The ruling from the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals keeps intact Tsarnaev's death sentence for now. But the judges found that further investigation is needed to determine whether two jurors should have been stricken for biases.

If the lower court's investigation reveals either person should have been disqualified, the court should vacate Tsarnaev's death sentence and hold a new penalty-phase trial to determine whether he should sentenced to death, the court said.

"And even then, we once again emphasize that the only question in any such proceeding will be whether Tsarnaev will face execution; regardless of the outcome, he will spend the rest of his life in prison," the court said.

The Boston-based appeals court issued its ruling more than 2 years after the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the sentence imposed on 30-year-old Tsarnaev for his role in the bombing that killed three people and injured hundreds near the marathon's finish line in 2013.

"Waste of taxpayer dollars"

Marc Fucarile lost his right leg in the bombing. He calls this probe "a waste of taxpayer dollars" defending a convicted murderer.

"A bias on what? The fact that he took a bomb, put it down, and blew up innocent people? We saw it on tape, the evidence is there," Fucarile told WBZ-TV. "Does it matter how anybody on that jury felt? His actions were what they were. If someone had a bias, would it have changed anything? He still killed people. He still took and dismembered people."

2 jurors in question

The 1st Circuit took another look at the case after Tsarnaev's lawyers urged it to examine issues the Supreme Court didn't consider. Among them was whether the trial judge wrongly forced the trial to be held in Boston and wrongly denied defense challenges to seating two jurors they say lied during questioning.

The appeals court first overturned Tsarnaev's death sentence in 2020 and ordered a new penalty-phase trial to decide whether he should be executed. The court found then that the trial judge did not sufficiently question jurors about their exposure to extensive news coverage of the bombing. The Supreme Court justices voted 6-3 in 2022 when they ruled that the 1st Circuit's decision was wrong.

Despite a moratorium on federal executions imposed by Attorney General Merrick Garland, the Justice Department has continued to push to uphold the death sentence in Tsarnaev's case. The moratorium came after former President Donald Trump administration's put to death 13 inmates in its final 6 months.

Oral arguments before the 3-judge 1st Circuit panel more than a year ago focused on two jurors Tsarnaev's lawyers say were dishonest during the lengthy jury selection process.

One of them said she had not commented about the case online, while Tsarnaev's attorneys say she had retweeted a post calling Tsarnaev a "piece of garbage." Another juror said none of his Facebook friends had commented on the trial, even though one had urged him to "play the part" so he could get on the jury and send Tsarnaev to "jail where he will be taken of," defense attorneys say. Tsarnaev's lawyers raised those concerns during jury selection, but say the judge chose not to look into them further.

William Glaser, a Justice Department lawyer, acknowledged during oral arguments before the 1st Circuit appeals court that the jurors made inaccurate statements, but said other disclosures suggested they misremembered rather than lied. He argued that the trial judge did nothing wrong.

Tsarnaev's guilt not the issue

Tsarnaev's guilt in the deaths of Lingzi Lu, a 23-year-old Boston University graduate student from China; Krystle Campbell, a 29-year-old restaurant manager from Medford, Massachusetts; and 8-year-old Martin Richard, of Boston, was not at issue in the appeal, only whether he should be put to death or imprisoned for life.

Defense lawyers argued that Tsarnaev had fallen under the influence of his older brother, Tamerlan, who died in a gun battle with police a few days after the April 15, 2013, bombing.

Tsarnaev was convicted of all 30 charges against him, including conspiracy and use of a weapon of mass destruction and the killing of Massachusetts Institute of Technology Police Officer Sean Collier during the Tsarnaev brothers' getaway attempt.

Prosecutors told jurors that the men carried out the attack to punish the United States for its wars in Muslim countries. In the boat where Tsarnaev was found hiding, he had scrawled a confession that referred to the wars and wrote, among other things, "Stop killing our innocent people and we will stop."

(source: cbsboston.com)

*****************

Why states are moving away from lethal injection executions----Multiple lethal injection executions have been botched in recent years

Willie James Pye became the 1st person to be executed by Georgia in four years but some campaigners say that putting the man to death by lethal injection was inhumane and secretive.

Ahead of the execution on Wednesday evening, attorneys for Pye argued that he shouldn’t be executed because of his intellectual disability and the remorse he held for his victim’s family. He was sentenced to death over the 1993 rape, murder and robbery of 21-year-old Alicia Lynn Yarbrough.

Pye was scheduled to be executed at 7pm, but officials announced his time of death as 11.03pm. Attorneys for Pye filed a last-minute appeal for a stay of execution that was unanimously rejected. The appeal might’ve been the reason for the delay.

“This is the death penalty in 2024: an intellectually disabled man executed using unapproved drugs from a secret supplier, with witnesses prevented from seeing the IV insertion, a sheet drawn over the body during the execution to conceal movement and audio cut from the chamber,” Maya Foa, director of Reprieve US, an anti-death penalty organisation, said in a written statement.

“In Georgia, so much is hidden from view that witnesses can’t know how much Pye was brutalised in the process”.

Other states are choosing to step back from lethal injection executions due to the drugs becoming increasingly difficult to find. Additionally, companies that normally supply the drugs are concerned about their names becoming public.

As a result, some states have chosen to shift toward nitrogen hypoxia, a method that was used to put Kenneth Eugene Smith to death in January. Other execution methods, including electrocution and fire squad, are available in other states but not regularly used.

States have used the gas chamber and electric chair when lethal injection drugs can’t be obtained, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. Additionally, several issues have come up when trying to use lethal injection in the past.

Nitrogen hypoxia was a 2nd execution method for Smith after officials failed to establish IV lines in 2022. His was the third consecutively botched lethal injection execution in Alabama.

Also this month, corrections officials in Idaho had to abort an execution attempt for Thomas Creech, citing the same reasons. Still, lethal injection remains the primary method of execution for states and the federal government. In Pye’s case, he was given the sedative pentobarbital and was declared dead within minutes.

Only 27 states currently have the death penalty.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center, a non-profit, states are attempting to cut off debate surrounding lethal injection executions by “concealing their execution practices under a veil of secrecy.”

Some states are not required to disclose their execution practices due to recently passed laws. Such statutes make “it impossible to judge the reliability of the manufacturer or the possible expiration of these drugs,” the non-profit notes on its website.

(source: independent.co.uk)

*********************

Crime and Punishment

After being incarcerated on death row for 35 years, and after surviving a multiple hours-long botched lethal injection attempt 16 months earlier, on Jan. 25 Kenneth Smith became the 1st person in the world to be executed with nitrogen gas.

Alabama state officials described his execution as a model for other states looking for alternatives to lethal injection. Even though most witnesses to this morbid event, which took 22 minutes, described it as profoundly disturbing, several states began considering laws to adopt the use of nitrogen gas in their executions. A moral person might ask not how, but why? What really is the objective when we, as a society, decide to carry out a death sentence as punishment for crimes, even for those that cause irreparable harm like murder, sexual crimes and crimes against children?

Typically, we recognize four purposes for punishment: deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation and retribution. Deterrence is rooted in the idea that incentives modify behavior. If a crime is followed by a severe enough punishment, the offender will think before committing that crime. However, if people perceive that the odds of getting caught are low, they are less likely to be deterred. Incapacitation involves physically preventing an offender from committing a crime. Opportunities are limited in prison. They are expensive and temporary. Rehabilitation aims to change offenders into law-abiding citizens through education, vocation training and other programming. However, some behaviors and individuals are more susceptible to rehabilitation than others. Retribution, really the only objective attributable to the death sentence, is effectively “an eye for an eye.” It strives to impose a proportionate punishment validating victims and expressing societal condemnation of behavior beyond the pale. It is essentially “revenge.”

Thinking about the purpose for punishment can be a powerful mental tool to discuss whether something should be a crime and, if so, what type of punishment will effectively serve the interest of society. American culture assumes that crime deserves punishment. But if punishment is not tailored to serve a purpose it ends up being pointless suffering. Suffering for the offender and expensive for the taxpayer.

Over the centuries political elites have used the threat of punishment to control their adversaries. From the Roman and Greek time to the Middle Ages potential culprits faced the threat of stoning, burning, quartering, whipping, drowning and other violent acts. Subsequently, well into the 18th century, dominant elements used horrifying torture methods, like “brazen bull,” “iron maiden” and “the rack” to force confessions, punish the accused and strike fear in the minds of potential offenders.

Governments became gradually more civilized in their approach to punishing crime. For a long time the primary focus of state administered punishment became banishment or exile. Incarceration was not widely used to detain prisoners before trial or for imprisoning people without judicial process until relatively recently. In 1689 England even adopted a Bill of Rights which prohibited “cruel and unusual punishment.” In December of 1791 the Eighth Amendment to our Constitution did the same.

Today we are one of 55 countries in the world which still imposes the death penalty. We are joined by China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt as the countries that execute the most people. Several other states, especially in Africa and Asia that apply a Sharia-based criminal code also continue the process, sometimes even for offenses like homosexuality. Most countries in our sphere of influence have rejected the practice. The European Union routinely reaffirms its “strong and unequivocal opposition to the use of the death penalty at all times, and under all circumstances.” None of its member states will even consider extraditing criminals to the United States if they could face the death penalty in our system.

27 U.S. states still keep the ultimate punishment on their books. They tend to argue that it is legal punishment, which deters crime, and that, essentially, retribution is appropriate. Although opponents vehemently disagree, the Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty does not violate the Eighth Amendment ban on “cruel and unusual punishment.” (1976 – Gregg v. Georgia). It is difficult to argue, however, that the mere ability of the state to execute offenders for certain crimes is a deterrent. Typically, death row inmates spend a decade or more on death row prior to execution. (Kenneth Smith was incarcerated for 35 years before he was killed.) Nearly 1/4 of inmates on death row in the U.S. die of natural causes while awaiting execution. And then there is the issue of convicting innocent people – in some cases to satisfy the need of a prosecutor to show results regardless of the facts. Since 1973 at least 197 people who had been wrongly convicted and sentenced to death in the U.S. have been exonerated. According to the Academy of Sciences, 4.1% of people currently on death row are likely innocent of committing the crimes they have been sentenced for.

Again, revisiting our objectives when establishing the type of punishment we mete out for certain crimes should generate a wake-up call. Case in point is the situation in The Netherlands. For the past two decades crime rates in that country have fallen spectacularly thanks to its approach to law enforcement which prefers rehabilitation over incarceration. Dutch prisons are being converted into hotels and apartments because of the lack of prisoners. According to Rene van Swaaningen, professor of criminology at the Erasmus School of Law in Rotterdam: “The Dutch have a deeply ingrained pragmatism when it comes to regulating law and order. Prisons are very expensive. Unlike the U.S. where people tend to focus on the moral arguments for imprisonment, The Netherlands is more focused on what works and what is effective.”

(source: Opinion; Theo Wierdsma, The Pajaronian)

DR CONGO:

Lifting of moratorium on death penalty in Congo ‘a step backwards,’ cardinal says

The decision by the government of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) to lift a 2003 ban on the death penalty is retrogressive, the local ordinary of the country’s Kinshasa Archdiocese, Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo, has said.

In a statement issued March 13, DRC’s justice minister, Rose Mutombo, announced the lifting of the two-decade-old moratorium on the death penalty in the Central African nation.

Mutombo has been quoted as saying that “acts of treachery or espionage have taken a toll on the population and the Republic” and that the restoration of the death penalty is to “rid our country’s army of traitors … and curb the upsurge in acts of terrorism and urban banditry resulting in death.”

In a March 17 interview with the French-language Catholic television channel KTO, Ambongo faulted the justice minister’s pronouncements, saying he finds it “abnormal that a government that claims to be responsible could take such a decision.”

“This is a step backwards! I don’t think that a responsible government can raise such an option to punish people who are called traitors,” he said. “First of all, on the notion of traitors, we must first agree on what that means. And when I look at the reality here in the Congo, the great traitors to the country are precisely those in power.”

When those in power “don’t serve the interests of the people, they are the ones we have to start considering as traitors, because they don’t assume the roles for which they have been entrusted, that is, service to the population,” Ambongo said.

“I wouldn’t want us to take advantage of a vague notion of traitors to settle political scores,” said the cardinal, who is also the president of the Symposium of Episcopal Conference of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM).

With the lifting of the moratorium in DRC, the death penalty is to be carried out following any judicial conviction for offenses that include criminal conspiracy, treason, espionage, participation in armed gangs, participation in an uprising, crimes against humanity, military conspiracy, and rebellion, among others.

In his March 17 interview, Ambongo also addressed a number of issues in his country including violence in the Eastern Province and the Church’s stance on political and social issues.

“I always say the Catholic Church, and especially the cardinal, is not neutral. Jesus Christ was not neutral,” he said. “The political class would like to see the Catholic Church, and especially the cardinal of the Congo, maintain an attitude of neutrality with regard to their actions.”

The Congolese cardinal, who has been a member of Pope Francis’ Council of Cardinals (C9) since his appointment in October 2020 and reappointment in March 2023, went on to clarify the position of the Church against oppressors, seeking justice for the oppressed and marginalized.

“But if the Catholic Church comes to this, it’s because the Church has taken a stand for the powerful against the little ones. But we have taken up the option of accompanying our people in their quest for a little more dignity,” he said. “Naturally, our words, our stance, irritate those who make the people suffer.”

Reflecting on the violence in the eastern part of the country, Ambongo highlighted bad governance and the influence of western countries as some of the reasons behind the security challenge.

“There’s an internal cause; what we call bad governance on the part of the Congolese themselves, because we can ask ourselves why this is only happening in the Congo and not elsewhere,” he said.

“From independence to the present day, we have the impression that the Congolese man, the Congolese human being, has never been at the heart of the concerns of our leaders,” Ambongo added.

Another reason behind the violence in the eastern part of DRC, he said, “is a sort of combination of economic interests — big oil, forestry, and mining companies want to operate in the Congo, but they sometimes use neighboring countries, hence the current anger in the Congo towards Rwanda.”

“The majority of the population is the victim of all this violence, and we have some absolutely terrible accounts of the violence taking place in the country,” Ambongo lamented.

(source: catholicnewsagency.com)

NIGERIA:

28-year-old Man Sentenced To Death By Hanging For Killing His Wife's Lover In Ekiti----Alomoge was arraigned before Justice Jubril Aladejana in April 2023 on one count charge of murder.

A 28-year-old man, Ayodeji Alomoge, has been handed a death sentence by a High Court sitting in Ado-Ekiti, Ekiti State, over the murder of Ogunleye Ayomide, whom he accused of having an extra-marital affair with his wife.

Alomoge was arraigned before Justice Jubril Aladejana in April 2023 on one count charge of murder.

According to the charge, Alomoge had on the 21st of June, 2022 at Ikere Ekiti murdered the deceased, contrary to Section 234 of the Criminal Law of Ekiti State, 2021.

In his statement to the police, the father of the deceased, Ige Ogunleye, said that he got a call that his son had been beaten to a pulp by Alomoge and his gang.

“I rushed down to the place, and I met my son in the pool of his own blood with various degrees of injury on the head and mouth,” he said.

"I also met Alomoge being held by some people. I asked him the reason for his action, and he said Ayomide had been having affairs with his wife, and he had warned him to desist or else he would kill him

"I took him (Ayomide) to a nearby hospital and later to the University Teaching Hospital, Ilorin, Kwara State, where he later died.”

The prosecutor, Kunle-Shina Adeyemo, called five witnesses and tendered the defendant’s statements, pictures of the deceased, and a medical report of the cause of death as exhibits.

The defendant spoke in his defence through his lawyer, Adeyinka Opaleke, who pleaded to the court to temper justice with mercy. He called no witnesses

Delivering judgment on Thursday, March 21, 2024, Justice Jubril Aladejana said, “It would appear to me that rivalry between men over the affection of a woman should not be a ground to justify provocation, except the situation is such that it is sudden and leading to a heating of passion.

"I consequently find the defendant guilty of the murder charge against him and therefore convicted as charged

“The judgement of the court upon you is that you, Ayodeji Alomoge shall be hanged by the neck until you die.”

(source: tori.ng)

TAIWAN:

Lawmakers claim Constitutional Court could abolish death penalty in Taiwan----KMT legislators call on government, Judicial Yuan to respect public opinion and keep death penalty

Kuomintang (KMT) lawmakers held a press conference on Friday (March 22) at the Legislative Yuan urging the outgoing Tsai administration and the Constitutional Court not to abolish the death penalty in Taiwan.

The 3 lawmakers, Wang Hong-wei, Wang Yu-min and You Hao, claimed on Friday that 9 out of 15 Justices on the Constitutional Court are prepared to vote in favor of abolishing the death penalty within the next few months, reported UDN.

The Constitutional Court will hear arguments on the issue during a session scheduled for April 23. According to legal process, the Constitutional Court will then have the power to make a ruling on the constitutionality of the death penalty within 3 months.

On Friday, the lawmakers called on the Judicial Yuan and the Tsai administration to respect public opinion and avoid a hasty ruling during the transition between presidential administrations. They presented data saying that 88% of Taiwanese favor maintaining the death penalty for especially inhumane offenses, per UDN.

The lawmakers said that Tsai Ing-wen has been trying to remove the death penalty in Taiwan. With the support of justices she appointed to the Constitutional Court, they claim she may have the opportunity to achieve the goal as she exits the presidency on May 20.

A list of nine Constitutional Court justices was presented by the KMT lawmakers at the press conference. Based on the justices’ previous rulings and statements, the lawmakers say the Tsai government likely has enough support to abolish the death penalty via judicial ruling.

(source: taiwannews.com.tw)

CHINA:

Former gaming executive sentenced to death in poisoning of billionaire Netflix producer in China

A former executive at Yoozoo Games was sentenced to death on Friday in the 2020 poisoning of the founder of the high-profile Chinese gaming company, which has links to Game of Thrones and the new Netflix series, "The Three-Body Problem."

Xu Yao poisoned the food of company founder Lin Qi in December 2020 because of a dispute over the running of the business, the Shanghai First Intermediate People's Court said. The Hollywood Reporter, citing local media, reported at the time Lin was allegedly sickened by a cup of poisoned pu-erh tea.

Lin, who was 39, died about 10 days later. Police detained Xu a few days after Lin's death.

4 other people were sickened but did not die after Xu poisoned beverages in the office between September and December 2020 because of disputes with two of them, the court said in a statement.

Yoozoo owns the film rights to "The Three-Body Problem," a best-selling Chinese science fiction trilogy, and Xu headed up a subsidiary in charge of business related to it, according to Chinese media reports.

In September 2020, the company granted Netflix the right to produce an adaptation of the trilogy, Chinese state media reported at the time. It is produced by "Game of Thrones" creators David Benioff and D.B. Weiss, and Lin was listed as an executive producer on the series.

Yoozoo, also known as Youzu Interactive, developed "Game of Thrones: Winter Is Coming," a game based on the TV series.

In 2000, Lin ranked No. 870 among China's richest entrepreneurs with a net worth of 6.8 billion yuan ($1 billion), according to Hurun Report, which follows China's wealthy.

After Lin died, the BBC reported that his company issued an emotional statement on its official Weibo microblog.

"Goodbye youth," it said, adding, "We will be together, continue to be kind, continue to believe in goodness, and continue the fight against all that is bad."

(source: CBS News)

*************

Death penalty for man killing game company head by poison

Xu Yao, the former CEO of Three-Body Universe (Shanghai) Cultural Development Co Ltd, was sentenced to death by the Shanghai First Intermediate People's Court on Friday for the murder of the company's founder, Lin Qi.

The court ruled that Xu intentionally caused the death of Lin through poisoning and as a result, should receive capital punishment and be deprived of political rights for life. Additionally, Xu was given a 6-year prison sentence and deprived of political rights for life for poisoning four other employees.

The court's review of evidence revealed that between Dec 14 and 15, 2020, Xu deliberately poisoned Lin by lacing edible items consumed by Lin with toxins, leading to Lin's death on Dec 25. The court also found that between September and December 2020, Xu premeditated poisoning 2 other colleagues amid workplace disputes by contaminating their office beverages. 2 more colleagues were also poisoned from drinking the office beverages.

Xu was arrested on Dec 18, 2020, by public security authorities.

The court's ruling stated that Xu willfully caused the death of one individual through the use of poison, constituting the crime of intentional homicide. Additionally, the court found that Xu poisoned 4 people and endangered public safety, thereby committing the offense of delivering hazardous substances. As per the law, these crimes warranted cumulative punishments.

Lin, who was 39 at the time of his death, was the founder of the Chinese gaming giant Yoozoo Games. He established Yoozoo in 2009 and was named one of the Best 10 Asian Young Business Leaders by Wealth-X with a net worth of 15 billion yuan ($2.75 billion) in 2015.

The Yoozoo Group, the parent company of Three-Body Universe (Shanghai) Cultural Development Co Ltd, is an entertainment company specializing in game development and distribution. The firm has also expanded into the field of TV and film, with Lin being one of the producers of the TV series The Three-Body Problem.

(source: chinadaily.com.cn)

************

Man sentenced to death for homicide

A man has been sentenced to death on Friday for poisoning his co-workers' food and drinks, leaving 1 dead and 4 others injured.

The man, named Xu Yao, was given capital punishment and a 6-year sentence after being convicted of homicide and releasing hazardous substances, according to the Shanghai First Intermediate People's Court.

Between Dec. 14 and 15, 2020, Xu poisoned the food of a co-worker surnamed Lin after they had a conflict over company operation and management, resulting in Lin's death.

Besides, between September and December 2020, Xu poisoned drinks and other items in an office, leaving 4 co-workers poisoned.

The defendant Xu Yao deliberately killed people by poisoning and endangered public safety. His criminal motive is extremely despicable and should be severely punished according to law, said the court.

(source: english.news.cn)

MARCH 21, 2024:

DELAWARE:

Lawmakers revive efforts to abolish the death penalty in Delaware, makes it out of committee

Legislation to formally outlaw the death penalty in Delaware was voted out of committee on Wednesday. State Rep. Sean Lynn (D-Dover) is sponsoring 2 bills — the 1st would remove the option of imposing capital punishment from Delaware Code entirely.

In 2016, the Delaware Supreme Court ruled the state’s capital sentencing statute unconstitutional based on a prior U.S. Supreme Court decision because it empowers judges, rather than jurors, to find the necessary facts to impose a death sentence.

Since this court decision, Delaware has been unable to impose the death penalty, but it remains codified in state law.

“After more than 50 years of an on-again, off-again relationship with the death penalty, I think that what history has taught us is that this is an experiment in constitutionality that we no longer can afford as a state," Lynn said.

The bill was released from the House Judiciary Committee on a party-line vote, but both Democratic and Republican lawmakers expressed their concerns.

Former Speaker of the House Peter and State Rep. Schwartzkopf (D-Rehoboth Beach) says he still believes in capital punishment in extreme cases, but feels the bill should have the opportunity to make it to the House of Representatives.

"I am still not going to support this legislation, but I will support and vote for it to get out of committee because I think it deserves a vote on the floor," Schwartzkopf said. “The hardest vote we have to take in this building is when you understand both sides and agree with both sides of the issue – and that’s where I am on this issue.”

State Rep. Sherry Dorsey Walker (D-Wilmington) signaled full support for the bill, saying for years she was in favor of the death penalty, but has since "evolved," citing religious reasons for her shift in opinion.

State Rep. Valerie Jones Giltner (R-Georgetown) did not vote to release the bill from committee, asking Lynn if he considered amending the law to make the parameters for enforcing capital punishment "more strict" instead of "wiping it out completely."

Lynn responded to Jones Giltner saying he understood her concerns, but he believes the state "can't constitutionally effectuate the death penalty."

State Sen. Eric Buckson (R-Dover South) filed legislation in May that would, in theory, make the death penalty constitutional again under the Sixth Amendment by requiring a jury to unanimously decide on death penalty cases. This bill has yet to have a committee hearing.

Lynn's second bill is the first leg of a state constitutional amendment that would permanently outlaw the death penalty. The bill requires a 2/3 majority vote in both chambers to pass, and a 2nd leg will have to be approved in the next General Assembly.

The bill passed in the House Administration Committee, this time with unanimous bipartisan support.

Both pieces of legislation now await a floor vote in the House.

(source: delawarepublic.org)

GEORGIA----execution

Georgia executes death row inmate Willie Pye for the 1993 murder of Alicia Lynn Yarbrough

The state of Georgia on Wednesday executed death row inmate Willie Pye, who was convicted and sentenced to die for the 1993 murder of Alicia Lynn Yarbrough.

The execution – Georgia’s 1st in more than 4 years – was carried out by lethal injection at 11:03 p.m. at a prison in Jackson, about 50 miles south of Atlanta, the Georgia Department of Corrections said in a news release. Pye did not make a final statement, it said.

Pye, 59, was put to death after the US Supreme Court denied his final appeals late Wednesday. In a clemency petition and various court filings, Pye and his attorneys had argued for his life to be spared, citing an intellectual disability, a troubled upbringing and ineffective assistance of counsel.

“The State of Georgia obtained Willie’s death sentence only after providing him a racist and incompetent defense attorney. And the State has insisted on standing by that death sentence in spite of his lifelong intellectual disability and the fact that he presents a danger to no one in prison,” his attorney, Nathan Potek, said after the execution.

“The people of Georgia deserve better,” he added, describing Pye as a loving son, brother and uncle who “will be dearly missed by his friends, family, and his legal team.”

Pye’s execution marked Georgia’s 1st since January 2020, according to the non-profit Death Penalty Information Center. Executions were halted there as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, the American Bar Association has said.

Pye was convicted in 1996 of malice murder, kidnapping with bodily injury, armed robbery, burglary and rape in the killing of Yarbrough, with whom he had an on-again, off-again romantic relationship, according to court records.

The execution was preceded by a flurry of last-minute appeals – not uncommon in capital cases – including 2 filed with the US Supreme Court that were ultimately denied. In one, Pye argued he should not be executed because of a pandemic-era agreement between the Georgia Attorney General’s Office and capital defense lawyers that effectively paused executions in the state until certain conditions were met.

Pye’s attorneys argued that by excluding him from the agreement, the state placed him in a “disfavored class of death row prisoners,” allegedly violating the equal protection and due process clauses of the 14th Amendment. The state urged the justices to deny Pye’s appeal, citing a state court’s determination that he was not party to the agreement.

The other appeal stemmed from Pye’s argument that he had an intellectual disability, which his attorneys argued should make his execution unconstitutional. Georgia, however, requires inmates to prove an intellectual disability beyond a reasonable doubt – a burden of proof Pye’s attorneys said was so high that it, too, should be unconstitutional.

The state again urged the Court to deny due, in part, to a state court’s previous rejection of similar claims. In declining to halt Pye’s execution, the Supreme Court did not explain its reasoning, as is often the case in emergency appeals; there were no noted dissents.

The murder of Alicia Lynn Yarbrough

Pye, with two accomplices, intended in 1993 to rob a man with whom Yarbrough was living, an appeals court decision says. Pye was angry with Yarbrough because that man had signed the birth certificate of a child Pye claimed was his. Pye bought a .22 pistol before the three men went wearing ski masks to the man’s home, where Yarbrough was alone with the baby.

Pye kicked in the door and held Yarbrough at gunpoint, the court decision says. The men took a ring and necklace from Yarbrough, then abducted her and took her to a motel, where they raped her.

They then took Yarbrough down a dirt road, where Pye ordered her out of the car, told her to lie face down and shot her three times, according to the court ruling. One of Pye’s accomplices later confessed and testified for the state, and DNA analysis of semen taken from the victim’s body matched Pye.

Pye’s jury recommended a death sentence, which was ultimately imposed by the court in addition to three life sentences plus 20 years, according to the Georgia Attorney General’s Office. Pye’s accomplices are both serving life sentences for their roles in Yarbrough’s murder, Georgia correctional records show.

Inmate claimed trial attorney ‘abandoned his post’

Pye’s clemency petition argued for a commutation to a life sentence, pointing in part to the ineffective assistance of his trial attorney, who died in 2000.

Indeed, three of Pye’s jurors were opposed to his execution, citing factors in the inmate’s background that were not presented by what his clemency petition said was an overworked and ineffective public defender. The state parole board, however, was unconvinced: After meeting Tuesday and “thoroughly considering all of the facts and circumstances of the case,” it denied clemency, according to a news release.

At the time of Pye’s trial, his attorney “was responsible for all indigent defense services” for Spalding County, Georgia, through a contract for which he was paid a lump sum, the petition says.

With the help of just 1 other attorney and an investigator, Pye’s lawyer was responsible for hundreds of felony cases at the same time – in addition to his private practice, the petition said. When he represented Pye, the lawyer was also representing defendants in four other capital cases. As a result, the attorney “effectively abandoned his post.”

If he had provided Pye adequate representation, jurors “would have learned that Mr. Pye is intellectually disabled and has an IQ of 68,” his petition said, well below the 100 average. “They also would have learned the challenges he faced from birth – profound poverty, neglect, constant violence and chaos in his family home – foreclosed the possibility of healthy development,” the petition said.

The Georgia Supreme Court in 1989 ruled executions of the intellectually disabled violate the state constitution – a ruling echoed years later by the US Supreme Court, which found in 2002 that such an execution would transgress Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment.

Still, Georgia is the only state that sets its burden of proof at the “insurmountably high standard” of beyond a reasonable doubt, Pye’s petition stated.

His conviction and sentence were upheld on appeal in state and federal court, though in 2021 a 3-judge panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the sentence, finding his trial attorney’s work during the sentencing phase of Pye’s trial was deficient and prejudicial. That ruling, however, was overturned a year later, following a hearing before the entirety of the 11th Circuit.

Similarly, a state court previously reviewed Pye’s claim of intellectual disability but found in a 2012 ruling that Pye did not prove it required. On Wednesday, that court rejected a similar appeal by Pye, ruling finding the claim was successive – meaning it had already been decided, referring to the 2012 order.

(source: CNN)

******************

GFADP Statement on the Execution of Willie James Pye

Last night, We the People of the State of Georgia, killed Willie James Pye.

Mr Pye was an intellectually disabled man with an IQ of 68. The challenges he faced from birth – profound poverty, neglect, constant violence and chaos in his family home – foreclosed the possibility of healthy development. These facts alone should have resulted in a life verdict, with or without parole.

Mr Pye’s trial in 1996 revealed a racist, overworked public defender, Johnny Mostiler, who effectively abandoned his post, leaving no one and nothing, to stand between his client and death.

The last 28 years have proven what Mr. Mostiler did not: Mr. Pye can be safely confined to prison. In spite of his disability, his circumstances, and a global pandemic that cut him off from the outside world, Mr. Pye did not complain. Mr. Pye thought often of the Yarbrough family and their suffering and would have done anything to repair the tragedy of Alicia Lynn Yarbrough’s loss.

We, the state of Georgia, did not allow restorative justice to happen for the Pye and Yarbrough families as we sought vengeance and political gain instead.

Mr Pye is intellectually disabled and should have been protected by the State from being sentenced to death and executed. Georgia once was the first state in the country to prohibit the execution of persons with intellectual disability - first by statute, then by judicial decision - but we now stand as the true outlier to all other states in our burden of proof and procedural barriers. The State of Georgia is willing to and does execute those with intellectual disability.

While on death row, Mr Pye has devoted his time to his relationship with God, to being a positive and encouraging presence in the lives of his family, and to trying to make the. prison a more pleasant place for those who live and work there alike.

Every execution dehumanizes us, but when it is done to those most vulnerable, it is particularly egregious. We the People of Georgia are responsible for executing Willie Pye.

###

(source: GFADP is a Georgia-based, state-wide organization of individuals and groups working together to end the death penalty in Georgia)

FLORIDA:

Judge denies request to move sentencing trial for man who killed Nassau County deputy

The jury members who will decide the fate of Patrick McDowell -- who killed a Nassau County deputy in 2021 -- will come from Nassau County, Judge William Daniel decided Tuesday.

Or at least that’s where they’ll try to seat a jury first.

Daniel denied a defense motion for a change of venue but left the possibility open to move the case if they can’t find an impartial jury in Nassau County.

McDowell pleaded guilty to shooting and killing Nassau County Deputy Joshua Moyers during a traffic stop in 2021.

Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty against him and the case has received extensive publicity.

In a hearing on the change of venue motion on Monday, the defense presented a survey that showed 85% of Nassau County residents recognized the case, which Daniel said in his ruling wasn’t a surprise, given the level of publicity.

But Daniel said what the survey doesn’t do is translate how many residents “are unwilling or unable to lay aside their impressions or opinions based upon any pretrial information and render a verdict based on the evidence presented in the courtroom.”

The survey found 56% of respondents believe McDowell is definitely guilty and 26% believe he’s probably guilty.

Daniel pointed out that McDowell has pleaded guilty, so that’s not helpful in determining the impact of pretrial publicity.<>P> As for the potential sentence, Daniel noted that 44% of respondents either said they could be convinced he should get life in prison without parole or had no opinion.

Right now, the trial is set to start no later than April 4. The next status conference is on March 28.

In another important issue, there has yet to be a ruling on whether a death sentence for McDowell will require a unanimous jury recommendation or the much lesser 8 to 4 standard. Florida’s current requirement is an 8-4 recommendation from the jury, but the rule when McDowell committed the crime was that all the jurors had to agree for a defendant to receive the death penalty.

Dozens of people have been given notice by McDowell’s attorneys that they may be called to speak on his behalf once the sentencing trial starts.

(source: news4jax.com)

OHIO:

Death penalty case ends in hung jury, defense attorney says

The trial for a man facing the death penalty in a 2019 deadly assault case ended with a hung jury.

Defense Attorney Clyde Bennett said the life of his client, Jabar Ishmail, “was spared” when the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict on the aggravated murder or murder charges.

Ishmail was on trial after he was arrested in connection with the death of 25-year-old Kailin Jones at a hotel in Union Township, the township police department previously announced.

“My client was charged with aggravated murder, murder and kidnapping for allegedly kidnapping, torturing, terrorizing and killing a woman by stabbing her more than 50 times over a 5-hour period,” Bennett wrote on Facebook.

Bennett stated that the prosecution claimed Ishmail had confessed, but the defense attorney said a “fair” Clermont County jury was unable to convict his client.

(source: WXIX news)

TENNESSEE:

‘What We Do With Guilty People’ — an Excerpt From ‘Death Row Welcomes You’----Former Scene reporter Steven Hale’s new book about Tennessee’s death row is out March 26

Steven Hale first began covering the death penalty for the Nashville Scene a decade ago.

Convicted murderer and rapist Billy Ray Irick was set to be executed on Oct. 7, 2014, but the Tennessee Supreme Court delayed the execution due to a lawsuit related to secrecy surrounding the state’s lethal-injection protocol. Hale — who at the time reported on myriad issues for our publication, including criminal justice — watched the case closely. As closely as anyone could.

Ultimately, Irick was executed by lethal injection on Aug. 9, 2018, at Riverbend Maximum Security Institution in Nashville. It was the first in a spate of executions carried out at the prison — seven over the course of about a year-and-a-half — and the first in Tennessee since 2009. Hale was among the few media witnesses selected via a Tennessee Department of Correction lottery to watch the killing in person. That was the first of three executions he would observe during his time as a reporter for the Scene, and part of a process he describes in his new book, Death Row Welcomes You: Visiting Hours in the Shadow of the Execution Chamber,as “barbarism dressed as bureaucracy and armed with legal jargon.”

“After Billy Ray Irick’s execution, which is one of the ones I witnessed, I got an email from a man who’s in the book quite a bit, Al Andrews, who is one of the members of this community that I write about,” Hale tells me on a recent afternoon at the Scene offices. “He reached out to me and said, ‘Hey, we’re going to be having kind of a memorial service for Billy Ray Irick, and I read your coverage of the execution and of his life.’ And just for whatever reason, he was moved to invite me to this.”

That invitation blossomed into a network of relationships that inspired Death Row Welcomes You, out March 26 via Melville House. As much as the book centers on Hale’s experiences covering the death penalty in Tennessee, it focuses just as much on the community surrounding the state’s condemned men — the people who refuse to look away.

“The folks on death row are often kept at a distance from society,” Hale says. “Not just physically at a distance, but their stories and their humanity are kept behind a wall there in a way that does make it easier for it to remain abstract. And we don’t have to confront what we’re doing.”

“I feel much more passionate about the question of what we do with guilty people,” he says when asked if the process of writing the book changed his own personal outlook on the death penalty. “Early on, I was — and I still am — very interested in innocence cases. And I think obviously, those are incredibly important … and the work that the Innocence Project and other organizations do around people who are wrongly convicted is hugely important. But almost everyone that I write about in the book is guilty, admittedly. [Writing the book has] made me much more interested in that question: ‘OK, well, what does it mean that someone could commit this horrible crime, and then later be this person? And how do we handle that as a society? How do I look at them as an individual?’”

Hale left the Scene in 2022 to pursue investigative work, but he’s back in journalism once again — he recently joined the team at the newly launched Nashville Banner, where he’ll continue his work covering criminal justice.

Here you’ll find a short excerpt from Chapter 5 of Death Row Welcomes You. The excerpt centers on Hale’s October 2018 visit to Riverbend’s Unit 2, home to all of Tennessee’s male death row prisoners. There he meets others who have formed relationships with death row inmates — “people associating themselves in ink with men the state was determined to kill.” These are advocates who believe, as Hale writes, that “the best way to expose the inhumanity of the death penalty was to expose people to the humanity of the men condemned to it.” —D. PATRICK RODGERS, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

On a Monday night in early October, around two months after Billy’s execution and a few days before another, I made my first visit to Unit 2 at Riverbend. I had seen the death, but not the row — the dying, but not the living.

Shortly before 5 p.m., I met [death row activist David Bass] and [his therapist and fellow activist Al Andrews] in a parking lot on the west side of town and climbed into the back seat of David’s car. They were buzzing with the energy of people going to see friends. The return of executions had brought a weight to their evenings on death row and forced the reality of the place into clear, distressing view. But to David and Al, these visits were still life-giving. And they seized opportunities to bring new visitors into their peculiar community.

The men on Tennessee’s death row who have visiting privileges are allowed to designate eight people, in addition to their immediate family members, who can visit them once a week. But they can also invite others to come as guests for special visits, subject to the warden’s approval. So, by meeting David or Al, a person was suddenly just one degree removed from the men on death row. With permission [from death row inmate Terry King], they had invited a number of people out to the prison — friends, family, professional acquaintances, well-connected businessmen, and me.

But their drive to introduce people to Terry and the other men on death row wasn’t just an outgrowth of their sociable personalities. It was a conscious and, to some, subversive act. David and Al, along with many of the other regular visitors, had come to believe that support for executions, or indifference to them, could not survive a Monday night with the men facing them; that the best way to expose the inhumanity of the death penalty was to expose people to the humanity of the men condemned to it.

Death Row Welcomes You: Visiting Hours in the Shadow of the Execution Chamber

By Steven Hale

Available Tuesday, March 26, via Melville House

288 pages, $28.99

We started driving out toward the prison, winding through industrial areas and working-class neighborhoods that were rapidly gentrifying. We passed the Walls [Tennessee State Prison, which closed in 1992 but still stands not far from Riverbend], where many of the men we were going to see had started their time on death row.

It had been around 4 years since David drove out to Riverbend for the first time. After [an invitation from Joe Ingle, an advocate and spiritual adviser for death row inmates], he’d eagerly told everyone in his life about his plans, which seemed to them to be a sign of an ongoing crack-up.

“We’ve got the kind of family with the picket fence,” he said when he first told me the story. “And all of a sudden dad and husband comes home going, ‘guys, I got this great idea, I’m gonna go to death row’ and everybody looked at me like I was crazy. And some of ’em still feel that way. But most of the family has come around on it.”

4 years later, David’s wife, Michelle, had still never met Terry and he didn’t think she ever would. He attributed this, at least in part, to her past experiences with murder and the trauma that emanates from it. She’d worked for the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, and taken part in the autopsies of victims, including children. David was open about the fact that his relationship with Terry and the other men he’d come to know on death row had complicated his marriage. But he did not expect his wife, or anyone else in his life, to share the passion he’d fallen into. One of their two sons had visited Terry, though. And to their 2 daughters, Katie Ann and Caroline, he’d become like an uncle. They corresponded with Terry regularly and often visited him with David when they could.

But the man who later felt comfortable bringing his then teenage daughters along for visiting hours at the prison would be unrecognizable to the one who showed up to Riverbend on his first Monday night. Sitting in his car in the prison parking lot that evening, before leaving his phone and heading inside, David sent a final text to his family and loved ones, as if he might not make it out.

“I’m going in ...”

His friends on death row would tease him about this for years.

But the man who went into Riverbend that night didn’t really make it out after all. That first Monday night visit upended David’s life. He met men he previously would have simply called murderers. And they were murderers, of course. But as he sat with them, he realized that was a lie by omission. These men had not been wheeled out on a dolly to speak to him from behind a leather muzzle. They were sitting unshackled before him, looking into his eyes. They even seemed to care about him. He felt destabilized in their presence, not because they were menacing but because they were not.

“These men had not been wheeled out on a dolly to speak to him from behind a leather muzzle. They were sitting unshackled before him, looking into his eyes. They even seemed to care about him. He felt destabilized in their presence, not because they were menacing but because they were not.”

The first man David met that night was Abu-Ali Abdur’Rahman, a slight, Black man known among the community of people close to death row simply as Abu. He’d been sentenced to death for his role in the 1986 killing of a small-time drug dealer named Patrick Daniels and the stabbing of Daniels’ girlfriend, Norma Jean Norman, in Nashville. His case had become well known for its myriad problems, not the least of which was an overwhelmed defense attorney who later admitted he’d hardly given Abu a defense.

But it wasn’t the injustices of Abu’s case that left David feeling, as he put it to me, like his whole world was breaking down. It was the fact of the man himself, whose peaceful presence seemed to contradict the very premise of the place where he was confined. In more than thirty years on death row, Abu had maintained a deep interest in spirituality. He’d adopted his name after converting to Islam. Later, he converted again and was confirmed as an Episcopalian in a service on death row where he sang “Amazing Grace.” Among the several degrees he’d earned during his incarceration was one as a mediator, and he was an active part of a conflict resolution program in the unit.

After Abu, David met Terry, who told him a story of murder, yes, but also a curious story of redemption, one deemed impossible by the sentence handed down before Terry turned twenty-three years old. David would recall how uniquely present Terry seemed, and how aware he was of the overwhelming effect that the setting could have on a first-time visitor from the free world. Occasionally during their conversation, he would reach over and gently touch David’s shoulder, asking “Are you OK?”

Toward the end of their visit, Terry asked David a question that he regularly asks new visitors. For David, who had already lost his sense of equilibrium, it was the blow that knocked him over.

“How do you feel about the death penalty?”

David didn’t really answer. He stammered through a response, finding that he was unable to look this man in the face and tell him, “As it happens, I think people like you should be exterminated.” He left the prison in an existential fog. A couple years later, though, after spending many Monday nights at the prison, he went to death row and told Terry about that old line he used to repeat about the condemned, that “we need to fry ’em until their eyes pop out.” That was how he felt, he said, and he asked for Terry’s forgiveness.

We arrived at Riverbend around 5 p.m., about the same time I’d arrived for Billy’s execution, only now it was quiet and still. There were no armed guards at the top of the driveway, no white tent prepared for a press conference. We got out of the car and walked toward the entrance, assured that everyone we saw in the prison that night would be alive when we left.

A small group of men and women sat on benches outside the prison’s front doors. They greeted us like regulars at a neighborhood bar, and David introduced me around.

Like us, they were waiting for visiting hours to begin. Some were going to death row, others had family members in the prison’s general population. One of the women was the mother of a man whose crime and trial had made national headlines. David had gotten to know her well and soon they were laughing, but she looked to me like a person smiling from behind a veil of grief.

Sitting there on the benches, as afternoon turned to evening, the group seemed a lonely few. But they are not, of course. Around 2 million people are incarcerated somewhere inside America’s sprawling system of prisons and jails. On that day, more than 2,700 people were languishing on death rows around the country. For so many of those locked-away men and women there are people like these, people who have not forgotten them.

Soon, the small group started jokingly bickering about who would go first through the door, risking the ire of the corporal who was perched at a desk behind the security checkpoint. She was short in stature and in temperament and particularly intimidating to uneasy newcomers. This tension did at times give way to some levity, though. Alvaro [Alvaro Manrique Barrenechea, a friend of Billy Ray Irick] had told me how his long last name used to peeve the corporal when he first started visiting Billy but eventually became a sort of running joke between the 2 of them. David, who seemed to view tough personalities as a kind of challenge, worked to win her over. Still, the visitors found her whims somewhat difficult to predict. Visitation began at 5:30 and the group was typically allowed to come inside around 5:15 to start going through security. But on the wrong day, for reasons that were not always obvious, they might be bluntly told to go back outside and wait longer.

An even bigger hassle, though, was the prison’s dress code for visitors, the enforcement of which seemed to ebb and flow on an arbitrary basis. This trouble mostly affected the women, whose outfits were scrutinized according to the visitation handbook’s various dictates. A visitor’s attire could not be “provocative or offensive to others”; clothing was to “fit in an appropriate manner,” neither too tight or too loose; underwear was required, but underwire bras and thongs were banned, as were pieces of clothing with rips in them, such as a pair of jeans with a hole in the knee. After a while, most of the women who visited the prison regularly had cordoned off a collection of approved clothes in their closets. But they found that even an outfit they’d worn multiple times without incident could get them sent back to their cars or their homes for a wardrobe change. Looming executions also seemed to put the guards on edge. On the Monday night before Billy’s execution, the visitors had seen an unusual number of people turned away for minor violations.

On this night, though, we made it through security without any problems. After passing through the metal detector and the body scanner and retrieving my belt and shoes on the other side, I approached the desk where the corporal oversaw the proceedings. With David’s direction, and the corporal’s prodding, I leaned over a large black binder and wrote Terry’s name and the Department of Correction ID number assigned to him—103308—followed by my own name. We repeated the same process in another binder designated for Unit 2 visitors. Its pages were a picture of radical solidarity, a catalog of people associating themselves in ink with men the state was determined to kill.

We waited quietly for a moment before the corporal waved us out the door and down the same path I’d taken to the execution a couple months before. We walked through the first of the two tall barbed-wire gates, waiting for it to close behind us before the next one would open in front of us. From there, we entered the central building that houses a large visitation gallery for men from the general population. Some of the visitors left us there to find a seat with their loved ones. Soon, an officer arrived to escort the rest of us to death row.

As we made our way down a long sidewalk, I saw what looked like large rectangular cages with concrete floors outside the unit buildings. A tiger pacing back and forth in one of them would not have looked out of place. Several of the regular visitors had told me about how the men on death row often spoke about how long it had been since they’d stepped foot on grass. I later learned that these cages — surrounded by grass the men couldn’t quite touch — were as close as they got. Small red signs beside the sidewalk urged us to stay off the grass; they felt almost like taunts.

When we arrived at Unit 2, we stood outside a heavy metal door, waiting for the guard seated at a desk inside to unlock it. We stepped inside, crowding into a small space between the first door and a second, waiting again for a door to close behind us before another could open in front of us. We each handed the guard a slip of paper we’d been given at the security checkpoint, to prove, I suppose, that we hadn’t gotten to death row’s door by some other means. With that, we were in.

(source: nashvillescene.com)

MISSOURI----impending execution

Missouri Supreme Court declines to halt execution of a man who killed 2 in 2006

The Missouri Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to halt the execution of Brian Dorsey, who is scheduled to die next month for killing his cousin and her husband 18 years ago.

Judge W. Brent Powell wrote in the unanimous decision that Dorsey "has not demonstrated he is actually innocent" of the killing. Powell also wrote that the state Supreme Court previously turned aside Dorsey's claim that his trial lawyer was ineffective, and he is barred from raising that claim again.

It was unclear if Dorsey would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. A message was left Wednesday with his attorney, Megan Crane.

Dorsey is scheduled to die by injection at 6 p.m. April 9 at the state prison in Bonne Terre. It would be Missouri's 1st execution in 2024 after 4 people were put to death last year. Another Missouri inmate, David Hosier, faces execution June 11 for killing a Jefferson City woman in 2009.

Dorsey, who turns 52 on Thursday, was convicted of fatally shooting Sarah and Ben Bonnie on Dec. 23, 2006, at their home near New Bloomfield. Prosecutors said that earlier that day, Dorsey had called Sarah Bonnie seeking to borrow money to pay 2 drug dealers who were at his apartment.

Sarah Bonnie’s parents found the bodies the next day. The couple’s 4-year-old daughter was unhurt.

In his appeal, Dorsey alleged that he was incapable of premeditation at the time of the killings because of drug-induced psychosis. The appeal said Dorsey had not slept for more than three days, had been drinking and was withdrawing from crack cocaine usage, causing him to experience hallucinations and paranoid delusions.

But Powell wrote that attorneys for the state cited “significant evidence” of premeditation.

Dorsey pleaded guilty in 2008 but later claimed he should have instead been sentenced to life in prison without parole. The Missouri Supreme Court first upheld the death sentence in 2010 and again in 2014.

(source: Yahoo News)

***************

As a Judge, I Was Wrong to Uphold Brian Dorsey’s Death Sentence. Governor Parson Should Grant Him Clemency.

Sitting in judgment of a man sentenced to death is an awesome responsibility, one I undertook with great care during my 13 years on the Missouri Supreme Court. In the case of Brian Dorsey, I now believe this is the rare case where we got it wrong. I am so convinced of our error that I have asked Governor Parson to grant clemency to Mr. Dorsey. If Mr. Dorsey is executed on April 9, it will dishonor our system of justice.

There is no dispute that Mr. Dorsey killed the 2 victims in his case. But when my colleagues and I upheld his conviction and death sentence in 2009, we were unaware of how compromised his defense lawyers were. The most glaring problem, one that undoubtedly influenced everything, was that Mr. Dorsey’s lawyers were paid a flat fee by the state public defender system.

The courts rarely have any evidence of fee arrangements, and did not on direct appeal in this case. Flat fees are no longer used because the Missouri Public Defender system recognizes they create an inherent financial conflict of interest that compromises an attorney’s ability to provide adequate representation. Such arrangements are improper in capital cases, according to the American Bar Association, and are contrary to the Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys.

The conflict is now readily apparent in Mr. Dorsey’s case. His lawyers did little to no investigation, including none of the basic preparations to determine whether he truly was eligible for the death penalty, before pleading him guilty – waiving trial – with the death penalty still on the table. Had counsel investigated the case and used an expert to evaluate their client, they would have discovered he had a defense to capital murder. With that in hand, they could have negotiated a plea deal for a penalty less than death or taken his case to trial. In either case, the likely result would have been a life without parole sentence, not death.

I am convinced that the system got it wrong in Brian Dorsey’s case because the available information plainly shows he is not “the worst of the worst.”

What we now know, and what Mr. Dorsey’s lawyers could have presented to the jury and the courts, is that at the time of the crime, he was experiencing a drug-induced psychosis. Mr. Dorsey had no history of violence, and had suffered severe depression for most of his life. He repeatedly sought treatment, turning to self-medication with alcohol and crack cocaine when antidepressants failed to alleviate his symptoms. None of these tragic circumstances, which were crucial to judging Mr. Dorsey’s actions fairly, were known to the courts.

The available evidence indicates that a jury may have found that Mr. Dorsey was not capable of forming the mental state required to commit first-degree murder. His lawyers, however, conceded his guilt without doing the work that would have revealed he had a viable defense. The evidence of Mr. Dorsey’s impaired mental state should have taken the death penalty off the table or, at the very least, led the jury to return a life sentence. In fact, several of Mr. Dorsey’s penalty phase jurors now say this evidence would have altered their verdict.

The legal system now recognizes that flat fee arrangements skew the outcomes in death penalty cases with dire results. But the flat fee and its impact on counsel’s representation was not evident when I sat in judgment of Mr. Dorsey in 2009. Mr. Dorsey has sought to raise this issue in post-conviction proceedings, but the court has rejected it on procedural grounds, most recently on March 20. No doubt the shoddy representation he received was a direct result of the conflict induced by the fee arrangement, and the outcome of the case flowed from counsel’s errors.

Unlike the jury and the courts, the governor has all of this information for him to consider. And when an injustice is plainly apparent, a procedural bar that cements that unfairness is a powerful reason why clemency exists and is warranted here.

Governor Parson knows something else the courts did not: Mr. Dorsey has an exceptional record of good conduct while incarcerated, earning so much trust and respect from correctional staff that he has served for many years as the prison barber. By all accounts, he is deeply remorseful for his crime and has not committed a single disciplinary infraction in 17 years in prison.

Given everything we now know to be true, I am convinced that Brian Dorsey’s death sentence is the result of a rare failing by the legal system itself. Executing him would be a miscarriage of justice. I hope Governor Parson will commute Mr. Dorsey’s death sentence.

(source: Opinion; Hon. Michael A. Wolff served as a Judge on the Missouri Supreme Court from 1998 to 2011, including serving as Chief Justice from 2005 to 2007. He has taught for many years at the St. Louis University School of Law, where he remains Professor Emeritus. Judge Wolff served as Dean of the law school from 2013 to 2017----The Missouri Times)

*************

Missouri Supreme Court Rejects Death Row Inmate Brian Dorsey's Appeal----Dorsey's execution is scheduled for April 9

A Missouri man on death row failed to show that drug-induced psychosis left him innocent of first-degree murder charges — or that his attorneys' counsel was ineffective, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled today.

The court's decision paves the way for Brian Dorsey to be executed in April as scheduled.

Dorsey is today a model inmate (as the Post-Dispatch's Tony Messenger has written, he's received support for his efforts to be saved from execution from no less than 60 employees of the Potosi Correctional Center, where he is incarcerated and works as a barber). But the crime that he was found guilty of was shocking in its brutality.

Prosecutors say Dorsey killed his cousin Sarah Bonnie on December 23, 2006, and then sexually violated her corpse. He also killed her husband Ben Bonnie and left both of their bodies locked in a bedroom before stealing from them and fleeing their house. It wasn't until another family member checked on the couple a day later that they found the couple's four-year-old daughter Jade in another part of the home, oblivious to the carnage behind her parents' bedroom door.

Dorsey turned himself in for the slaying on the day after Christmas. Two years later, he pled guilty at trial. He has said he doesn't remember committing the crime due to being drunk and withdrawing from crack cocaine, but has never challenged allegations that he did it.

Dorsey's habeas plea, filed last December, asked the Missouri Supreme Court to halt his execution. He argued that the flat fee he paid his lawyers gave them a conflict of interest in that they were inclined to act swiftly rather than explore all options. He also argued that because he was under the influence of drugs, he couldn't be guilty of the deliberation required in a 1st-degree murder charge. He also sought to have his sentence converted to life in prison without parole, arguing that his "unblemished prison record for more than 17 years on death row" would make his execution "cruel and unusual punishment."

The court flatly rejected those arguments.

In a unanimous opinion, Justice W. Brent Powell writes, "Neither Dorsey nor his experts are able to claim with any certainty that he was actually experiencing psychosis at the time of the murders. This evidence does not clearly and convincingly persuade the Court that Dorsey lacked the ability to deliberate when weighed against the evidence showing the murders were premeditated.

"The State presented significant evidence of Dorsey’s deliberation, including that Dorsey retrieved the unloaded single-shot shotgun from the shop, loaded the shotgun to shoot [Sarah Bonnie], emptied the chamber, reloaded the shotgun to shoot [her spouse], poured bleach on [Sarah Bonnie's] body to cover up evidence of the rape, locked the bedroom door, stole their property to sell, turned himself in to the police, and identified himself as the one the police needed to talk to about the murders."

Powell also notes that Dorsey previously raised the same argument about having ineffective lawyers, and it was previously rejected by a different court. "The Court found that funds independent of counsel’s flat fee were available as needed and counsel’s actions were based on reasonable trial strategy and not finances." Powells adds that Dorsey should raise the idea of his unblemished record with Governor Mike Parson, not the court.

Barring the intervention of the U.S. Supreme Court, which would be extremely unusual, Dorsey will be executed on April 9.

(source: riverfronttimes.com)

OKLAHOMA:

Lawmakers chime in after DA's comments surface about Drummond, Glossip clemency

State lawmakers citing the need for government transparency have chimed in after it was reported that District Attorney Jason Hicks maligned the attorney general for sharing his views during a highly publicized death-penalty case.

Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond has been criticized by some state prosecutors for taking the position that the death-penalty conviction of Richard Glossip should be set aside.

Glossip was first convicted in connection with the death of his employer, Oklahoma City motel owner Barry Van Treese, in January 1997. The case has been back and forth in court, but jurors in 2004 determined that Glossip should be sentenced to death after concluding that he paid to have Van Treese murdered.

Last year, Drummond told the U.S. Supreme Court that the 2004 verdict should be set aside because a key witness against Glossip gave “false testimony that was not corrected by the prosecution.” The Supreme Court in January agreed to give new consideration to the case.

Months ago, state Reps. Justin Humphrey, R-Lane, and Kevin McDugle, R-Broken Arrow, asked to see public records and communications from state district attorneys related to the Glossip appeal.

In a press release Wednesday, Humphrey said he and McDugle filed the records request and a lawsuit to “promote transparency in government."

"These records show that some district attorneys are more interested in protecting their own than acknowledging how problems in the Glossip investigation undermined the integrity of his death sentence,” Humphrey wrote.

“The public deserves to know if district attorneys illegally opposed Oklahoma’s chief law enforcement officer in the Richard Glossip case. We will continue our pursuit for transparency. District attorneys are officials who wield enormous power in our justice system, and they should be held to the highest standards."

McDugle has said he believes that members of the Oklahoma District Attorneys Council had improper communications with the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board prior to Glossip’s clemency hearing in April 2023.

Hicks, a prosecutor in south-central Oklahoma who serves on the District Attorneys Council, released texts and emails only recently, after Humphrey and McDugle filed a public records lawsuit.

According to The Oklahoman reporter Nolan Clay, the communications revealed that district attorneys referred to Drummond as a “douche” and complained among themselves that the attorney general had turned Glossip’s clemency hearing into a “circus” and that Drummond “needs to stick to his job, not looking at his run for governor.”

“It is time to end the ‘shiny’ politicians who have no spine and get people who are willing to fight for justice into the offices that can change things for victims and law enforcement,” Hicks wrote in one exchange.

Glossip, 61, was not recommended for clemency because the Parole Board split 2-2 after one member recused. He is suing for another clemency hearing.

(source: Tulsa World)

VATICAN CITY:

Pope Pius XII and the execution of the Rosenbergs

I have spent much of the last 2 days deeply engrossed in the latest book about Pope Francis, Life: My Story Through History, in which the pope recounts his life through his memories of major world events, such as the outbreak of World War II, the Holocaust, the moon landing, and Argentina’s 1986 World Cup victory. The presentation of each event begins with an overview by author Fabio Marchese Ragona, followed by comments by Pope Francis in his own words. I have been switching between the Kindle version and the Audiobook, depending on what I am doing. Ragona’s narration is read by the well-known US television personality (and practicing Catholic) Stephen Colbert, who does a fine job with the role.

I am approaching the end (I have reached the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center) and I will have much more to say about this remarkable book, but one passage jumped out at me about a historical fact that I hadn’t heard before. I thought it was worth looking into more deeply.

When discussing postwar communism, Francis mentioned that Pope Pius XII asked the US government for clemency on behalf of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, the American couple executed in 1953 for spying for the Soviet Union. The Rosenbergs were members of the Communist Party and were convicted of passing secret information about the atomic bomb to the Soviet Union in 1945. They were condemned to death.

Pope Francis recalled:

“I remember that the pope—it was Pius XII at the time—asked in a message that the couple be spared the death penalty. For the Church, no matter how long it has gone on, and no matter how much it persists to this day in so many countries of the world, the death penalty is inadmissible. Even for a person who is convicted of a crime, there must be a window of hope, whereas capital punishment represents the defeat of justice. People can redeem themselves to the last, they can change. This practice doesn’t allow for that possibility; it destroys the most important gift we have received from the Lord: life. And I ask myself: Who are these people to decide to deprive others of life? Maybe they wish to take the place of God! I want to reaffirm that, today more than ever, we need a collective spiritual mobilization of all Christians to give concrete support to organizations that are fighting for the abolition of the death penalty. In this we must be united!”

Pope Francis. Life: My Story Through History. HarperCollins Publishers, Spring 2024, p. 52.

I had never heard this little bit of history. I was well-aware that Pope Paul VI abolished the death penalty from the legal code of Vatican City in 1969, and that Pope John Paul II had made many pleas for clemency in US death penalty cases, but most discussions of papal opposition to the death penalty stop there, and then shift their focus on how Pope Pius XII and his predecessors affirmed the legitimacy of the death penalty in principle. Catholic death penalty supporters tend not to spend much time discussing the fact that papal opposition to the death penalty goes back much further in practice.

This fact lends support to the assertion of former CDF prefect Cardinal Luis Ladaria that “The new revision of number 2267 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, approved by Pope Francis, situates itself in continuity with the preceding Magisterium while bringing forth a coherent development of Catholic doctrine.” Many opponents of the 2018 revision to the official Catholic teaching, which declares that the death penalty is inadmissible, argue that this teaching (and often the previous revision promulgated by John Paul II in 1997 as well) represents a rupture with Catholic tradition, rather than a true development.

I found an article on the front page of the New York Times from February 14, 1953, that corroborates Pope Francis’s recollection. The headline reads, “POPE MADE APPEAL TO AID ROSENBERGS; PLEA ONE OF MERCY.” The subheadings add some intrigue to the story, however: “But Neither White House Nor Justice Department Has a Record of Its Receipt,” “REDS FORCE REVELATION,” “Kaufman Indicates Rejection of Another Long Delay in Fixing Spies’ Death Date.”

The article reports that the official Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, had published a statement on behalf of Pope Pius XII, saying that he sent a message to the US government asking that the Rosenbergs be spared from the death penalty. The article explains the pope’s position that, “when it was a matter of saving human lives, the Pope never refused to intervene, ‘though without being able to enter into the merits of the case.’” In other words, regardless of the crimes that the Rosenbergs may have committed, Pope Pius attempted to save their lives from execution.

The story says that the public announcement of the pope’s attempted intervention “was prompted by the Communist press in Italy, which for some time has been accusing the Pope of callousness in allowing Julius and Ethel Rosenberg to approach the electric chair without raising his voice on their behalf.” The pope’s intervention itself, “however, was made as a result of appeals to the Pope from Catholics in several countries.” In other words, the pope intervened after Catholics from around the world appealed to him to plea for clemency for the Rosenbergs.

Unfortunately, according to the US State department, the pope’s message never came through. The article says that the Apostolic Delegation in Washington said it transmitted the pope’s appeal to the Justice Department the previous December. But the president’s press secretary, James C. Hagerty, “said that no notification on the subject had been received by the White House, the State Department or the Justice Department. Former President Truman likewise was said to have no knowledge of the plea.”

This was an interesting time in US-Vatican relations. Prior to 1984, in fact, the US government did not have official diplomatic relations with the Holy See at all. The story notes, “L’Osservatore, in giving news of the Pope’s action in the Rosenberg case, hinted strongly that perhaps it might have been more effective if diplomatic relations existed between the Vatican and the United States. It thus appears that the Pope’s plea did not go through any of the recognized diplomatic channels.”[1]

Regarding where the message originated, the author added, “the best guess in Rome is that the Pope’s views were forwarded to a prominent churchman or layman whom the Pope had received sometime in the last few months, possibly through [New York’s] Cardinal Spellman, who was received in private audience in the early part of January.”

Sadly, the pope’s plea had no effect and the Rosenbergs were executed at Sing Sing Prison on June 19, 1953.

I found the final section of the article fascinating, because it demonstrates clearly that the Rosenberg case was neither unprecedented nor unusual:

Papal interventions to save the lives of persons condemned to death are recalled as far back as World War I. when Benedict XV appealed unsuccessfully for clemency in the case of nurse Edith Cavell, condemned by the Germans for helping war prisoners to escape.

The present Pope intervened in favor of the Italian general, Nicola Bellomo, who was shot by British military authorities in Italy in 1945; Pietro Caruso, Chief of Police in Rome, who was shot by Italian military authorities in 1945; Arthur Greiser, condemned in Poland in 1946, and Albert Forster, condemned in Poland in 1948.

In 1948 General Lucius Clay, on the appeal of the Roman Catholics in Germany, stayed the execution of 45 condemned Germans. In this last case, the Pope’s intervention was not direct, but it was thought that the German clergy acted on instructions from the Vatican.

These historical appeals for clemency are not often discussed by pro-execution apologists. They do not, for example, appear in By Man Shall His Blood Be Shed: A Catholic Defense of Capital Punishment, an absolute nightmare of bloodthirsty anti-life propaganda written by Edward Feser and Joseph Bessette published by Ignatius press in 2017. The authors certainly cite Pius XII frequently (although selectively and almost always out of context, as John Finnis has pointed out), but they make no mention of the appeals for clemency made by him or his predecessors.

It is only fair to note that the article does state that there was one situation where Pius XII seemed not to have involved himself in a death penalty trial:

There is one notable exception in papal appeals for clemency. The Pope did not intervene in favor of men condemned to death at the Nuremberg war crimes trial, and the Vatican made a special point of announcing that the Pope had taken no action in that case.

When publishing that claim, the editors of the New York Times must have forgotten their October 6, 1946 article about Pope Pius XII’s plea for clemency for Hans Frank, the former Nazi governor of Poland, who had been sentenced to death at Nuremberg. I think it is reasonable to say that in opposing the executions of figures as ideologically different as Frank and the Rosenbergs, Pius seems to have completely rejected the use of the death penalty in practice.

Edward Feser, author of the aforementioned pro-execution tome, demonstrates his ignorance of this history in a screed against Pope Francis’s views on the death penalty and on life sentences without the possibility of parole:

Consider the Nuremberg trials, at which many Nazi war criminals were sentenced to death or life imprisonment. Pope Francis’s view would imply that all of these sentences were unjust! Indeed, Pope Francis’s position seems to entail that, had Hitler survived the war, it would have been wrong to sentence him to more than about twenty years in prison! For Hitler was in his fifties when he died, so that if he had been sentenced to more than that, he could not “plan a future in freedom” – as a greengrocer or crossing guard, perhaps. Pope Francis’s views imply that the Nuremberg judges should have been at least open to the possibility of letting Hitler off with such a light sentence and letting him return to a normal life – despite being guilty of the Holocaust and of fomenting World War II! Perhaps Pope Francis would shrink from these implications of his views. One hopes so. But they are the implications of his views.

Inevitably, Catholic dissidents who promote the death penalty resort to hypothetical scenarios and motivated reasoning to justify their views. It can be seen for what it is with a bit of sober historical analysis and critical thinking.

Realizing that papal opposition to the death penalty goes back more than a century (and noting that Catholic countries were abolishing it even earlier than that), we can see that the Church’s present teaching on the inadmissibility of the death penalty is truly a development in continuity with tradition. And this teaching may continue to develop. Only God knows. As Pope Francis says so often, reality is greater than ideas. Neo-Scholastics and traditionalists can continue to argue among themselves in the realm of ideas over whether the death penalty is “intrinsically evil” to their hearts’ content. But in the real world, the Church’s position on the death penalty is that it is inadmissible. This is a matter of saving lives, and we should never refuse to intervene.

(source: Commentary; Mike Lewis, wherepeteris.com)

DR CONGO:

DR Congo’s reinstatement of death penalty faces fierce Church opposition

In a controversial move, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) announced the lifting of its 21-year moratorium on executions.

This drastic measure is a response to the surging violence and insurgent attacks in the nation’s eastern provinces. The government says it aims to deter collaboration with the M23 rebels by citizens, military, and police personnel.

The February 13 text signed by the Congolese Justice Minister, Rose Mutombo, notes that “acts of treachery or espionage have taken a heavy toll on both the population and the Republic in terms of the immensity of the damage suffered,” and therefore the reinstatement of capital punishment is meant to “rid our country’s army of traitors on the one hand, and to curb the upsurge in acts of terrorism and urban banditry resulting in the loss of human life on the other.”

Numerous members of the military – including top officers from the Democratic Republic of Congo’s (DRC) armed forces – alongside lawmakers, senators, and influential business leaders from the eastern region, have been apprehended on charges of “aiding the adversary.”

These detentions have taken place against the backdrop of the ongoing hostilities between the DRC’s military and the M23 rebels. The Congolese army’s retreat and the capitulation of its supporting militias in the wake of the M23’s advances have raised alarms about the possibility of the rebels infiltrating the security ranks – often with the complicity of people charged with defending the country.

In reinstating the death penalty, the government has argued that the moratorium was “seen by all these offenders as a guarantee of impunity, because even when they were irrevocably condemned to capital punishment, they were assured that this sentence would never be carried out against them.”

The development has received significant pushback from rights organizations, including Catholic institutions and the leadership of the Church.

A leading Catholic prelate has particularly taken exception to the reinstatement of the death penalty in the DRC. Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo of Kinshasa condemned the new development as “a step backwards.”

In a March 17 interview with the French-language Catholic television channel, KTO, Ambongo said he found it “abnormal that a government that claims to be responsible could take such a decision.”

“This is a step backwards! I don’t think that a responsible government can raise such an option to punish people who are called traitors,” the cardinal said

. He said he found it ironic that a death penalty should be passed on people considered traitors, whereas the greatest traitors are actually those in power.

Ambongo pointed out that when people in power “don’t serve the interests of the people, they are the ones we have to start considering as traitors, because they don’t assume the roles for which they have been entrusted, that is, service to the population.”

“I wouldn’t want us to take advantage of a vague notion of traitors to settle political scores,” the cardinal said.

Ambongo also serves as the president of the Symposium of Episcopal Conferences of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM) and is a member of Pope Francis’s Council of Cardinals.

Reacting to the reinstatement of capital punishment by the Congolese government, FIACAT – an international federation of mostly Catholic NGOs advocating for the abolition of capital punishment – said in a collective statement that they followed the development “with shock and dismay” and denounced “the dramatic consequences of a resumption of executions, in the event that this proposal were to be applied.”

“The signatory organizations recall that the application of the death penalty will have no effect on the ground apart from fueling false and dangerous ideas according to which the death penalty could contribute to putting an end to war and atrocities to Eastern DRC,” the FIACAT statement says.

The group said only the rule of law and the enhancement of justice can help fight impunity.

“The resumption of executions of those sentenced to death would mark a most regrettable step backwards in view of the positive efforts made by the Congolese authorities with a view to abolishing the death penalty since the establishment of the moratorium in 2003,” the statement reads.

More than 800 people sentenced to death are detained in DRC prisons. In 2022, courts handed down more than 163 death sentences. The same year, the country voted for the 1st time against the United Nations resolution for a universal moratorium on executions.

FIACAT argues that what has happened in the DRC is at variance with the general trend in Africa today. In 2023, 27 African states abolished the death penalty.

The group called on President Felix Tshsisekedi to reverse the legislation and instead focus attention on the “lethargy” that has characterized the dysfunctional judiciary system.

(source: cruxnow.com)

VIETNAM:

Vietnamese Prosecutors Demand Death Penalty for Alleged Graft Mastermind----Truong My Lan, the head of a Ho Chi Minh City-based real estate group, has been accused of the biggest fraud in the country’s history

Vietnamese prosecutors are calling for the death sentence for the businesswoman who allegedly masterminded the biggest fraud in the country’s history, state media reported yesterday.

Truong My Lan, 68, the chairperson of the Ho Chi Minh City-based real estate developer Van Thinh Phat Holdings Group, is accused of using “thousands of ghost companies” to embezzle 304 trillion dong ($12.54 billion) from Saigon Commercial Bank (SCB), in collusion with family members and scores of accomplices.

On March 5, Lan’s trial opened in Ho Chi Minh City, and she faces a variety of charges, including bribery, violating banking regulations, and embezzlement. The proceedings are expected to last until the end of April.

In a hearing yesterday at Ho Chi Minh City People’s Court, prosecutors said that Lan had not shown contrition or remorse for her alleged actions, “making evasive statements and blaming subordinates,” in the paraphrase of VnExpress.

“The criminal behaviors of Lan, her accomplices and the inspection team have infringed on the government’s economic management, causing a loss of public trust, and therefore needs to be dealt with strictly,” prosecutors said. She therefore needs to be “ostracized from society forever.”

As VnExpress reported, prosecutors yesterday “recommended 19-20 years for bribery, 19-20 years for violating banking regulations, and death for embezzlement. The combined sentence recommended for her is death.”

They called for life sentences for several former SCB executives, including chairmen Dinh Van Thanh and Bui Anh Dung and CEO Vo Tan Hoang Van, who prosecutors said actively helped facilitate Lan’s fraud. They also recommended life prison for Do Thi Nhan, former chief bank inspector at the State Bank of Vietnam, who is alleged to have taken $5.2 million in bribes from Lan, in order to turn a blind eye to her machinations.

State investigators accuse Lan of engineering a vast structure of fraud involving more than 1,000 domestic and foreign shell companies that were set up under the auspices of Van Thinh Phat Group. They claim Lan and her accomplices used the SCB, of which she has been the majority shareholder since 2012, as their personal ATM, withdrawing an estimated 1 quadrillion dong ($44 billion) in loans against the savings of SCB’s customers between 2012 and 2022. Of this, she eventually appropriated 304 trillion dong, an amount equivalent to nearly 3 percent of the country’s GDP in 2022, through false loan applications and the “ghost companies.”

In total, 86 people have been charged in relation to the crime, which was excavated as part of the country’s ongoing anti-corruption campaign. These include Lan’s daughter Truong Hue Van and Hong Kong billionaire husband Eric Chu, as well as 45 SCB executives, 15 State Bank of Vietnam officials, three officials from the Government Inspectorate, and one former official from the State Audit Office.

Lan has denied any wrongdoing. “I had many assets and money at the bank,” she said during the trial. “Why would I steal my own money?” All of the other defendants have confessed to their crimes and said that they were acting on Lan’s orders.

The first 2 weeks of the trial has been exhaustively covered by state media outlets, suggesting that the authorities wish to make an example of Van Thinh Phat. Whether its anti-corruption campaign succeeds in deterring future schemes remains a subject of speculation, given the continued revelations of corruption at the highest levels of business and government.

(source: thediplomat.com)

PAKISTAN:

2 Pakistani women get death sentence for ‘blasphemy’ murder of teacher----Women aged 23 and 24 sentenced to death while a minor is jailed for life for the 2022 killing of a young teacher.

2 Pakistani women have been sentenced to death for murdering their religious school teacher who they accused of committing blasphemy, police said. A district judge on Wednesday handed down the death penalty to 2 and a life sentence to one upon proving their involvement in the murder of Safoora Bibi in Dera Ismail Khan city in the northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province in March 2022.

The pair sentenced to death are aged 23 and 24 while the one sentenced to life in jail is 16 years old, a local police official said.

Blasphemy is an incendiary charge in Muslim-majority Pakistan, where even unproven allegations of insulting Islam have provoked deadly vigilantism.

Police said the convicted women first injured their 18-year-old teacher with a stick at the gate of the school and later slit her throat, according to a report in Dawn news website.

They committed the murder after one of their classmates told them about a dream she saw in which the teacher had committed blasphemy, and that her killer “would be given the glad tidings of paradise,” said the report.

The teacher’s uncle told the police he found his niece tortured and slaughtered in the street after he was informed of the incident. Police recovered knives and sticks from the accused when they were arrested, said the Dawn report.

The death penalty is technically allowed in Pakistan and courts regularly hand down the sentence, but there have been no executions since 2020, according to Amnesty International.

Before that, executions of women were not frequent, but many female inmates have languished on death row for years.

Pakistan has been hit by a spate of high-profile blasphemy cases in recent weeks.

In February, police were forced to intervene in the eastern city of Lahore when a woman wearing a shirt adorned with Arabic calligraphy was surrounded by a mob accusing her of blasphemy.

The crowd of men said the clothing depicted Quranic verses but it was in fact emblazoned with the Arabic word for “beautiful”.

Pakistan’s top Supreme Court judge has also been targeted by veiled death threats after ordering the release of a man accused of disseminating a blasphemous text.

(source: aljazeera.com)

IRAN:

Hunger strike of prisoners on the last Tuesday of the year----The hunger strike of the prisoners continues in the 8th week of “Black Tuesdays, no execution”

According to the Iranian Human Rights Society, on Tuesday, March 19, 2024, the prisoners’ hunger strike continues on the last Tuesday of the year 1402. This hunger strike started on January 29, 2024, in protest against widespread executions, including the execution of political prisoners – an ideology that is often carried out on Tuesdays, and the 8th is underway.

Prisoners from Qazalhasar prisons, wards 4, 6 and 8 of Evin, women’s ward of Evin prison, central Karaj prison. Also, Vakilabad prison of Mashhad, Khorramabad prison, etc. participate in this hunger strike.

The following statement is the statement of the striking prisoners. While congratulating the new year, they wished that “the new year will be the year of the victory of the Iranian people and the realization of freedom and justice.” And soon, in a society free from discrimination, violence, tyranny and exploitation, a structure guaranteeing the observance of human rights for all citizens will emerge and medieval decrees such as execution will abolished.”

The prisoners also expressed their gratitude for the support of this campaign.

The full text of the striking prisoners’ statement is as follows.

“Statement of prisoners on strike “Black Tuesdays, no to execution”

The honorable and freedom-loving people of Iran

We, a group of prisoners, over the past seven weeks, have been on a hunger strike in protest against the issuance and execution of death sentences and to stop this killing machine and executions. Today, on the last Tuesday of the year, for the eighth week, we remember all the victims of the religious dictatorship’s repressive apparatus, especially all those who executed during the hunger strike.

Our goal in the Black Tuesday campaign and this weekly strike was to draw public attention to the fact that “execution is state murder, an irreversible punishment, a tool of oppression and intimidation by the minority despotic government ruling the country.”

Thank all those who have joined the Black Tuesday campaign

We sincerely thank all those who have joined the Black Tuesday campaign in any way to say, “no to execution” and have supported our cause.

Now, on the eve of the new year and the arrival of the spring of nature, while congratulating all our compatriots, we hope that the new year will be the year of the victory of the Iranian people and the realization of freedom and justice. And soon, in a society free from discrimination, violence, tyranny and exploitation, a structure guaranteeing the observance of human rights for all citizens will emerge and medieval decrees such as execution will abolished.

We are confident that the day is not far when the Iranian people will realize their sovereignty over their own destiny and no citizen will be oppressed or brutally tyrannized because of his thoughts. But until that day, from inside the prisons of the government, we know it is our moral mission to continue our protest against the death penalty from inside the prison as the new year approaches. We also ask all awake consciences and free people to help us in this way.

Recent report of the United Nations Human Rights Council

Finally, according to the recent report of the United Nations Human Rights Council and the emphasis on the necessity of international condemnation of human rights violations and executions in Iran, we believe that the victory of the people and the realization of justice is only possible with the solidarity of the Iranian people. And in the case of stopping the execution machine, we also emphasize unity and collective action to stop the execution without considering the convictions, nationality, ethnicity, religion and the type of accusation. And also, we extend a helping hand to all the awake and free consciences of Iran and the world in this difficult path.

Currently thousands of prisoners awaiting execution

It should be noted that there are currently thousands of prisoners awaiting execution in GHezelHesar prison and other prisons. Nearly 340 prisoners are on the death row in only 2 Lakan prisons, Rasht and Zanjan. On the other hand, nearly 50 political prisoners named Khosro Besharat, Kamran Sheikhe, Anwar Khezri, Mujahed Korkuri, Reza Rasaei, Mansour Dehmardeh. And also, Fazel Bahramian, Mehran Bahramian, Mohammad Javad Vafai Thani, Abbas Dris, Eidou Shahbakhsh, Abdul Ghani Shahbakhsh, Abdolrahim Ghanbarzahi Gargij and Suleiman Shahbakhsh. Also, Shahab Nadali in Evin prison, teacher Mohammad Khezrnejad in Bukan prison, etc. are at risk of execution.

(source: en.iranhrs.org)

MARCH 20, 2024:

SOUTH CAROLINA:

South Carolina inmate says ‘psychopath’ defense doomed him to death row----Stephen Stanko says the trial attorney in his double murder case inflamed the jury by calling him a "psychopath."

A South Carolina death row inmate argued Tuesday he deserved a new trial in a high-profile double murder case because his defense attorney told jurors he was a "psychopath."

Stephen Stanko was convicted in 2006 for strangling his girlfriend Laura Ling at their home outside Myrtle Beach. Stanko then sexually assaulted Ling’s teenage daughter and slit her throat.

The girl survived and called 911 for help. Stanko next drove to the Georgetown home of a 74-year-old friend, Henry Turner. He shot Turner while the man was shaving, using a pillow to muffle the blasts.

The brutal crimes led to a manhunt that drew national attention. Stanko was eventually arrested in Augusta, Georgia, where he was pretending to be a wealthy restaurateur during The Masters golf tournament. He still had Turner’s truck and the revolver he used to shoot him.

Stanko was convicted in separate trials of committing both murders. His defense attorney William Diggs didn’t dispute his client committed the crimes, but argued he was insane at the time.

Stanko suffered from a congenital brain defect that was aggravated by a head injury in high school, Diggs told the jury. The injury caused his client to develop an antisocial personality disorder, Diggs argued, transforming him into a “psychopath.”

It was a controversial and, ultimately, unsuccessful defense strategy. Stanko, now 57, was sentenced to death in both cases.

Stanko claims on appeal he received ineffective counsel from Diggs, among other issues. On Tuesday, a three-judge Fourth Circuit panel heard those arguments. U.S. Circuit Judge Pamela Harris and Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Albert Diaz, both appointees of Barack Obama, served on the panel with U.S. Circuit Judge Toby Heytens, appointed by Joe Biden.

Joseph Perkovich, a New York attorney for Phillips Black, represented Stanko at the hearing. He told the judges that Diggs’ strategy at trial was “extremely damaging” to Stanko’s case. Telling the jury that Stanko was a psychopath didn’t help explain his actions, but instead turned him into a monster.

It was well-known among capital defense attorneys that psychopathy is not an effective insanity defense, Perkovich explained, and actually hurts the client during the penalty phase.

“The jury views this evidence and they want to euthanize the defendant,” Perkovich said.

He said if Stanko underwent a meaningful psychological evaluation, it would provide a better picture of his mental state at the time of the killings.

Anthony Mabry, a senior assistant attorney general for South Carolina, argued Diggs offered the best defense he could at trial but was “trapped” by the brutal facts of the case.

Harris expressed concern that the ineffective counsel issue was not properly raised on appeal before the South Carolina Supreme Court.

Diaz asked Perkovich if Diggs failed to present any evidence of Stanko's mental health problems, or if the evidence simply was not presented to his liking.

"It wasn't competently developed," Perkovich responded. "There were pictures, there was 'dazzling evidence' put forward by a very plainly incompetent presentation."

Perkovich also argued Diggs should not have represented Stanko at both trials.

After Stanko was found guilty for Ling’s murder, he filed an appeal claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. But Diggs continued to represent him in Turner’s murder.

Stanko told the trial judge he wanted Diggs to represent him in Turner’s murder case, despite the issues in the 1st trial.

Perkovich argued Tuesday the defendant should have been provided conflict counsel to advise him of the issues.

Stanko is being held at Broad River Correctional Institution.

(source: Courthouse News)

GEORGIA----impending execution

Georgia board declines to stay man's execution after lawyers claim he's intellectually disabled----Willie James Pye was sentenced to death in 1996 for murdering his ex-girlfriend.

A Georgia board declined Tuesday to stay the execution of a man sentenced to death in the killing of his former girlfriend.

Willie James Pye, 59, is set to be executed Wednesday at 7 p.m. ET at the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison in Jackson via lethal injection, in what is the state's 1st execution in more than 4 years.

Pye was convicted in 1996 of malice murder, kidnapping with bodily injury, armed robbery, burglary and rape in the death of his former girlfriend, Alicia Lynn Yarbrough, in 1993. The jury recommended a death sentence for the malice murder count, which was ordered by a trial court.

Last month, the Superior Court of Spalding County set the 7-day window for Pye's execution, beginning at 12 p.m. ET and expiring on March 27 at 12 p.m. ET.

Pye's previous appeals have been denied as have his state and federal habeas corpus proceedings.

Last week, Pye's attorneys filed for clemency with the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles, arguing that he has an intellectual disability with an IQ of 68 and is therefore ineligible for execution per state law, according to the clemency application.

His attorneys also argue that Pye had a "difficult early life," growing up in extreme poverty in a home that had no kitchen or bathroom. Because his mother allegedly had no prenatal care, ate inadequately while pregnant as well as drank alcohol, Pye's attorneys say that he was "already at risk for myriad cognitive and developmental problems."

Additionally, Pye's attorneys say he has had a positive impact in prison on his fellow inmates, has never been a threat to the lives of correction staff and that he feels remorse for his crimes.

Pye's attorneys did not immediately return ABC News' request for comment.

Lethal injection has been the method used for most executions in the modern era, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, a non-profit that provides data and analysis on capital punishment.

States and jurisdictions can use a one-, two- or three-drug combination. The 3-drug combination involves, firstly, an anesthetic or sedative, then a drug to paralyze the prisoner and, lastly, a drug to stop the heart, the DPIC said.

Georgia's last execution of a prisoner was in 2020, according to the DPIC. The state currently has 41 prisoners on death row.

However, problems have arisen with lethal injections in the form of botched executions. Officials have struggled to find veins, intravenous lines have clogged with the deadly chemicals and prisoners have had violent reactions to the dispensed drugs. Additionally, there have been shortages of the drugs used for lethal injection.

This led to Alabama becoming the 1st state to execute someone via nitrogen gas, which medical and legal experts said is an untested method and there's no evidence it will be any more humane or painless than lethal injection.

(source: ABC News)

***************

Georgia set to execute death row inmate Willie Pye, whose lawyers claim he has an intellectual disability

As Georgia plans to carry out its 1st execution in more than 4 years on Wednesday, the condemned inmate’s attorneys argue he should be spared because of an intellectual disability and a troubled upbringing, evidence of which were never heard by his jury at trial.

Indeed, three of Willie Pye’s jurors are now opposed to his execution, citing factors in the inmate’s background that were not presented by what his clemency petition says was an overworked and ineffective public defender. The state parole board, however, was unconvinced: After meeting Tuesday and “thoroughly considering all of the facts and circumstances of the case,” it denied clemency, according to a news release.

Pye still has litigation pending that could potentially halt his execution, records show. It’s not uncommon for death row inmates to pursue efforts to avoid execution up to the last minute before they are put to death – some that reach the US Supreme Court.

If Pye’s execution by lethal injection proceeds as planned Wednesday evening, it would be Georgia’s 1st since January 2020, according to the non-profit Death Penalty Information Center. Executions were halted there as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, the American Bar Association has said.

Pye, 59, was convicted of malice murder, kidnapping with bodily injury, armed robbery, burglary and rape and sentenced to death for the 1993 killing of Alicia Lynn Yarbrough, with whom he had an on-again, off-again romantic relationship, according to court records.

Pye’s clemency petition argued instead for a life sentence, pointing in part to the ineffective assistance of his trial attorney, who died in 2000. At the time, that attorney “was responsible for all indigent defense services” for Spalding County, Georgia, through a contract for which he was paid a lump sum, the petition says.

With the help of just one other attorney and an investigator, Pye’s lawyer was responsible for hundreds of felony cases at the same time – in addition to his private practice, the petition says. When he represented Pye, the lawyer was also representing defendants in four other capital cases. As a result, the attorney “effectively abandoned his post.”

If he had provided Pye adequate representation, jurors “would have learned that Mr. Pye is intellectually disabled and has an IQ of 68,” his petition says, well below the 100 average. “They also would have learned the challenges he faced from birth – profound poverty, neglect, constant violence and chaos in his family home – foreclosed the possibility of healthy development,” the petition says.

The Georgia Supreme Court in 1989 ruled executions of the intellectually disabled violate the state constitution – a ruling echoed years later by the US Supreme Court, which found in 2002 that such an execution would transgress Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment.

Still, Georgia requires defendants who claim an intellectual disability to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt – the only state that sets its burden of proof at that “insurmountably high standard,” Pye’s petition states.

Pye, with two accomplices, intended to rob a man with whom Yarbrough was living, an appeals court decision says. Pye was angry with Yarbrough because that man had signed the birth certificate of a child Pye claimed was his. Pye bought a .22 pistol before the three men went wearing ski masks to the man’s home, where Yarbrough was alone with the baby.

Pye kicked in the door and held Yarbrough at gunpoint, the court decision says. The men took a ring and necklace from Yarbrough, then abducted her and took her to a motel, where they raped her. They then took Yarbrough down a dirt road, where Pye ordered her out of the car, told her to lie face down and shot her three times, according to the court ruling. One of Pye’s accomplices later confessed and testified for the state, and DNA analysis of semen taken from the victim’s body matched Pye.

Pye’s jury recommended a death sentence, which was ultimately imposed by the court in addition to three life sentences plus 20 years, according to the Georgia Attorney General’s Office.

His conviction and sentence have been upheld on appeal in state and federal court, though in 2021 a 3-judge panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the sentence, finding his trial attorney’s work during the sentencing phase of Pye’s trial was deficient and prejudicial. That ruling, however, was overturned a year later, following a hearing before the entirety of the 11th Circuit.

Pye’s accomplices are both serving life sentences for their roles in Yarbrough’s murder, Georgia correctional records show.

(source: CNN)

******************

Vigils across Georgia to be held for death row inmate Willie Pye

The Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles denied clemency for death row inmate Willie James Pye at a specially called meeting Tuesday, March 19.

The Georgians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (GFADP) gathered Monday at the Georgia Capitol Building to deliver a petition for clemency, which had more than 4,000 signatures.

On March 7, Archbishop Gregory Hartmayer, OFM Conv., wrote a letter to the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles asking to grant clemency on the basis that Pye’s intellectual disability was not considered at trial.

Archbishop Hartmayer and the GFADP also said that his execution would contradict precedent in the United States Supreme Court case decision Atkins v. Virgina, which held that executions of intellectually disabled persons are prohibited.

Georgia is the only state that requires proof of intellectual disability beyond a reasonable doubt to prevent execution; other states use a preponderance of evidence.

Pye was convicted of the 1993 killing of Alicia Yarbrough and was sentenced to the death penalty for malice murder in 1996.

Pye will be executed March 20 at 7 p.m. at the Georgia Diagnostic & Classification State Prison in Jackson. It will be the state’s 1st execution in 4 years.

Vigils for Pye will be held across the state on March 20. Locations for the vigils are stated below. For more details, visit the GFADP homepage.

Americus–Koinonia Farm

Athens–Downtown Athens, UGA Arch

Atlanta–Georgia Capitol. Bishop John Tran will attend this vigil.

Augusta–Augusta Judicial Center

Blairsville–St. Francis of Assisi Church

Clarksville–Gazebo in Clarksville square (silent vigil)

Comer–Cliff Yarbrough Memorial Park

Decatur–Ponce at the old Courthouse

Jackson – Georgia Diagnostic & Classification Prison

Johns Creek–St. Brigid Church

Macon–Macon City Hall

Marietta–Marietta Square at the Marietta Courthouse

Savannah–City Hall

(source: georgiabulletin.org)

LOUISIANA:

Letters: Why Catholic bishops opposed expansion of death penalty

House Bill 6 is the most consequential life and death bill that passed in the recent 2024 crime special session of the Louisiana State Legislature. HB 6 extends the means of execution of another human being by nitrogen hypoxia (asphyxiation) and the electric chair. It also has elements of secrecy to protect anyone associated with the administering of the death penalty.

During the session we heard from victims’ families who felt justice would be exacted if this were carried out and victims' families who chose mercy as justice and did not want this carried out. On behalf of the Louisiana Conference of Bishops, one bishop stayed six hours to deliver his testimony vigorously opposing this bill.

Pharmacists and many pharmaceutical companies will not provide the lethal injection drugs. And Airgas, Inc., the largest distributor of nitrogen in the U.S., refused to give it to Alabama or any state for executions because it was not consistent with its company values. They did not need secrecy.

There is concern that the state of Texas is using expired drugs since the pharmacist will not give it to them for lethal injections.

As far as using nitrogen gas that induces asphyxiation, experts appointed by United Nations Human Rights Council cautioned that this execution method would violate the prohibition against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.

What is equally disturbing is that the American Veterinary Medical Association wrote in its 2020 euthanasia guidelines that nitrogen hypoxia can be an acceptable method of euthanasia, under certain conditions for pigs, but not for other mammals.

The Louisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops, with all resolve, opposed HB 6 at every stage, since it will usher in a culture of death by sanctioning new means of execution of another human being on behalf of the citizens of Louisiana.

TOM COSTANZA, executive director, Louisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops

(source: Letter to the Editor, The Times-Picayune)

MISSOURI----impending execution

His Lawyers Advised Him To Plead Guilty In Exchange For Nothing. Now He’s Facing Execution.

It was 2 days before Christmas in 2006 and 34-year-old Brian Dorsey was in trouble: 2 drug dealers were at his apartment, demanding money.

Despite repeatedly seeking addiction treatment, Dorsey had been drinking daily for years and routinely binged crack cocaine, a drug that caused him to experience psychosisand left him feeling deeply ashamed.

And now he was in a position where he had to call several family members and ask them for cash. They declined but went to Dorsey’s apartment and convinced the drug dealers to leave. Dorsey’s cousin, Sarah Bonnie, and her husband, Ben Bonnie, invited Dorsey to spend the night at their place. He took them up on the offer, and spent the evening drinking and playing pool with his relatives.

The next morning, Sarah Bonnie’s parents found her and Ben Bonnie dead in their bedroom. Their 4-year-old daughter sat on the couch in the living room. Dorsey turned himself into the police two days later. Following the advice of his appointed counsel, he pleaded guilty to two counts of first-degree murder without securing any deal from prosecutors to take the death penalty off the table. After a 2-day sentencing trial, a jury sentenced him to death. On April 9, the state of Missouri plans to execute Dorsey, using a lethal injection of pentobarbital.

Like most people on death row, Dorsey couldn’t afford to hire a lawyer for the resource-intensive work of a death penalty trial. Instead, the Missouri State Public Defender’s Office, which has faced chronic underfunding, contracted with 2 private attorneys, Christopher Slusher and Scott McBride. They were each paid a flat fee of $12,000 to represent Dorsey. Between 1998 and 2004, defense lawyers for people facing the death penalty spent an average of 3,557 hours per trial, according to a 2010 report. If Dorsey’s lawyers had put in that much time on his case, they would have been paid about $3 per hour.

“Had counsel investigated and completed an expert evaluation of their client, they would have learned that Mr. Dorsey was not guilty of first-degree murder, as he was neurologically incapable of deliberation,” Dorsey’s current lawyers wrote in a petition for writ of habeas corpus, asking the state supreme court to either overturn his death sentence or order evidentiary development on his claim.

“Yet, Brian Dorsey was sentenced to death because counsel was laboring under a financial conflict-of-interest, and pressuring Mr. Dorsey to plead guilty to a crime he could not have committed was a sound financial strategy for counsel,” the petition continued.

Former Missouri Supreme Court Judge Michael Wolff, one of the judges who upheld Dorsey’s death sentence during his direct appeal, described it as a “rare case where those of us who sit in judgment of a man convicted of capital murder got it wrong.”

“At the time, none of us on the Court were aware of how compromised and ineffective his trial lawyers were,” Wolff wrote in a letter to Gov. Mike Parson (R), urging him to grant Dorsey clemency.

In a separate letter to the governor recommending clemency, Missouri Public Defender director Mary Fox noted that her office no longer uses flat fees in death penalty cases because it incentivizes spending a minimal amount of time on a case. The American Bar Association’s guidelines describe the use of flat fees as “improper in death penalty cases.”

Slusher declined to comment. McBride did not respond to a request for comment.

Dorsey, whose father struggled with alcoholism throughout Dorsey’s childhood, began drinking and using crack cocaine as a teenager, according to the habeas petition. He suffered from treatment-resistant major depressive order and survived multiple suicide attempts. He tried addiction treatment programs, but was unable to stay sober. He preferred to isolate during drug binges because he often experienced paranoid delusions, the petition said.

When Sarah and Ben Bonnie brought Dorsey to their home on Dec. 23, 2006, he had spent the previous 2 to 3 days drinking and smoking crack, with no sleep or food. When he got to their home, he noticed a gun in the barn when they were playing pool, and thought about how easy it would be to kill himself, he would later testify during his sentencing trial. Although he has never denied killing the Bonnies, his memory of the evening is spotty, he testified, leaving him unable to describe exactly what happened or why.

Dorsey called his mother late on Christmas night and said he wanted to end his life. He ultimately agreed to have his parents pick him up and spend a final night together in a motel room. He turned himself into the police the next day.

Dorsey was charged with 2 counts of 1st-degree murder — the crime of “knowingly” causing the death of another person “after deliberation upon the matter.” The state sought the death penalty.

Ahead of Dorsey’s trial, Slusher called Janet Thompson, who, at the time, was an appellate lawyer in the state public defender’s office. Slusher told her he planned to have Dorsey plead guilty even though there was no deal from prosecutors to take death off the table and he wanted her opinion.

“I told him it was a really bad idea, that every time anybody had done that kind of procedure, the result had been abominable,” Thompson testified at a 2011 post-conviction evidentiary hearing.

ABA guidelines similarly advise defense lawyers to be “extremely reluctant” to waive a client’s trial rights without a guarantee that the death penalty will not be imposed.

But Dorsey’s lawyers did not change their approach. “I think the idea was, is that we were hoping for some credit for acceptance of responsibility … from the jury,” Slusher testified at the post-conviction evidentiary hearing.

The 1st time they spoke with Dorsey about pleading guilty was on March 10, 2008, the morning of his plea hearing, his current lawyers wrote in his habeas petition. With no time to consult with his parents about this life-or-death decision, Dorsey trusted his lawyers. He pleaded guilty.

At the time, Slusher and McBride had done no investigation into alternative defense strategies, according to the habeas petition. Although the trial lawyers had the option of requesting funding to staff their team, they declined to hire a dedicated investigator or mitigation specialist, as ABA guidelines recommend in capital cases.

“Ultimately, this meant the jury was never presented with an alternative narrative — much less the truth: that Brian Dorsey was experiencing drug psychosis and not guilty of first-degree murder,” the habeas petition read.

Indeed, Robert Lee Smith, the clinical psychologist who testified for the defense during Dorsey’s sentencing trial, described Dorsey as having “diminished capacity.” However, that testimony was struck since Dorsey had already pleaded guilty, the habeas petition noted.

Even if Dorsey’s trial lawyers hadn’t been able to convince jurors Dorsey was innocent of first-degree murder, going through the guilt-innocence stage of the trial would have presented an opportunity to “front-load” mitigation evidence for the penalty phase, said Arin Melissa Brenner, a federal public defender who is currently representing Dorsey.

Mitigation evidence is information, such as evidence of family trauma, addiction or mental illness, that can reduce a defendant’s culpability. It is a key part of the sentencing stage, but it can also be introduced during the first stage of trial to give jurors a fuller picture of the defendant’s life and the events that led to the crime.

“You’re kind of getting the jury ready to hear about what went wrong here,” Brenner told HuffPost. “Yes, maybe they are guilty, but you are framing how the jury should receive all the information they are about to get overloaded with — and that’s especially true for experts. If you are introducing a lot of brain science to jurors, it helps to pave the way for it in the guilt phase, so it’s more readily understandable and applicable in the penalty phase.”

Presenting a strong defense during the guilt-innocence phase of trial can also impact the penalty phase by leaving jurors with “residual doubt” about what happened, Brenner said. “If there isn’t any concrete proof of what actually happened at a crime scene, or what the defendant was actually thinking or doing, I have seen that residual doubt translate into life without parole sentences instead of death.”

During the sentencing phase, prosecutors argued that Dorsey had sobered up by the time of the killings. They portrayed him as a calculated murderer who lied to the jury about having a spotty memory of the night of the crime.

“Despite defense counsels’ supposed strategy of putting all their eggs into the sentencing phase basket, they made no effort to counter the government’s erroneous assumptions and allegations,” Dorsey’s current lawyers wrote, citing research showing that cocaine-induced psychosis can last for days.

Although the state never charged Dorsey with sexual assault, they claimed at trial that he raped Sarah Bonnie, and used that allegation as an argument in favor of the death sentence. The state’s evidence of rape was thin, but their narrative went largely unchallenged at trial, according to court documents. When the jury announced their verdict, they cited the rape as one of the aggravating factors in support of their decision.

“It’s hard to put into words what I — what I’ve done to my family and Ben’s family,” Dorsey testified at his sentencing trial. “It just breaks my heart … [I’m] very, very angry with myself. I — I — I’ve never ever wanted to hurt anybody in my life, much less people that I love and care for.”

Thompson, the appellate public defender who advised Slusher against pleading guilty without a deal to remove the death penalty, went on to represent Dorsey during his direct appeal. After speaking with Dorsey and learning that the plea idea was sprang on him with little time to consider, she reported her concerns to her supervisor.

“I further opined that the System should not hire Mr. Slusher nor Mr. McBride for death penalty cases again,” Thompson wrote in a 2015 affidavit.

During Dorsey’s 16 years on death row, he has never had a single disciplinary infraction, a rare feat in a place where guards can issue infractions for something as minor as a prisoner’s tone of voice or the number of pieces of paper they have in their cell. He lives in the prison’s “honor dorm” and is entrusted to work as a barber, cutting the hair of other prisoners, staffers and even wardens.

More than 70 prison staffers, including a former warden, signed an extraordinary letter urging Parson to commute Dorsey’s sentence to life without parole. “We are part of the law enforcement community who believe in law and order,” they wrote. “Generally, we believe in the use of capital punishment. But we are in agreement that the death penalty is not the appropriate punishment for Brian Dorsey.”

A handful of the signatories wrote additional personal notes, describing their observations of his remorse and accountability. “It would be a loss to the state if he were executed,” one signatory wrote. “I have never written a letter like this before, and I doubt that I ever will again. Brian Dorsey is just different.”

Last month, Dorsey filed another state habeas petition, arguing that it would violate Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment to execute someone who had been rehabilitated.

Dorsey also asked a federal court to delay his execution, arguing that the state’s lethal injection protocol risks causing Dorsey “serious, torturous, physical and psychological pain” and could prevent him from any meaningful spiritual discussion with his spiritual adviser during his final moments. Because the prison staffers setting the IV lines are not trained medical professionals, they sometimes resort to “cut-downs,” a procedure that involves slicing into an individual’s skin to access the veins.

Dorsey’s clemency request is currently pending. The Missouri Probation and Parole Board will issue a nonbinding and nonpublic recommendation to Parson, who makes the final determination about whether to allow Dorsey to live.

(source: huffpost.com)

SOUTH DAKOTA:

State to seek death penalty in deputy’s death----Joseph Gene Hoek arrived to the Moody County Courthouse Wednesday escorted by members of Moody County and Lake County Sheriff’s offices. While walking into the courthouse Hoek took opportunity to give “peace” sign to media members present and offered free autographs.

The State of South Dakota will seek the death penalty in the case of a man accused of killing a Moody County Sheriff’s Deputy, Attorney General Marty Jackley announced Wednesday.

“This is a decision that is never taken lightly,” Jackley said. “Based upon the aggravating circumstances of this case, we believe it is appropriate.”

Joseph Hoek was formally indicted on Wednesday during a status hearing in Moody County on charges of 1st-degree, premeditated murder and aggravated eluding in the death of Moody County Chief Deputy Sheriff Ken Prorok.

Prorok died the evening of February 2 after Hoek fled officers in a high speed chase out of Madison. The deputy sheriff had just placed a spike strip down on Highway 34 near the I29 exit outside of Colman when an eyewitness reported seeing Hoek’s vehicle intentionally swerve to hit Prorok as he backed off the roadway.

Hoek, a Sioux Falls resident, pleaded not guilty to the charges. A competency evaluation is ordered and scheduled for later this week. The results of that evaluation will be made public on June 20 during a status update on his case.

A decision about how to proceed will be made at that time given the evaluation could have Hoek arguing he is not competent to stand trial — and the state possibly asking for a second evaluation. If there are no concerns with Hoek’s competency, a grand jury could be empaneled to move the case forward.

The trial that began in Moody County had transferred to Brookings during the previous hearing and to Judge Dawn Elshere’s courtroom. The defense sought to have the trial moved back to Moody County, according to Jackley.

Hoek is being held in Madison without bond.

The intent is to have the trial remain in Moody County in Judge Gregory Stoltenberg’s courtroom.

South Dakota currently houses just 1 death row inmate, Briley Piper, at the State Penitentiary. There have been no executions in the state since 2019.

The last person executed in South Dakota was Charles Rhines, who was given a lethal injection in Sioux Falls on Nov. 4, 2019, for the murder of Donnivan Schaeffer.

The 1st known execution in the territory remains the most infamous: Jack McCall was hanged at Yankton on March 1, 1877, for shooting Wild Bill Hickok in Deadwood.

(source: moodycountyenteerprise.com)

NEW MEXICO:

The 15th Anniversary of Death Penalty Repeal in New Mexico: Conversation with Cathy Ansheles and Viki Harrison

This week marks the 15th anniversary of the repeal of the death penalty in New Mexico. On March 18th, 2009, Governor Bill Richardson signed the repeal act (HB2085), ending the death penalty in the state. The bill came into force on July 1st, 2009. New Mexico followed New Jersey to become the second state in the 21st Century to end capital punishment through legislative means.

In honor of this anniversary and Women’s History Month, DPIC Data Fellow Lukasz Niparko interviewed two women who were at the forefront of this legislative and societal change in the Land of Enchantment, as New Mexico is called: Cathy Ansheles, the former Executive Director of the New Mexico Criminal Defense Lawyers Association and the 1st coordinator of the New Mexico Coalition to Repeal the Death Penalty, and Viki Harrison, current Director of the Constitutional Convention and Protecting Dissent Programs with Common Cause, who at the time of repeal served as the Executive Director of NM Repeal—leading the successful campaign to abolish capital punishment in New Mexico.

Following the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Gregg v. Georgia (1976), New Mexico passed the Capital Felony Sentencing Act that reinstated capital punishment. Between July 1st, 1979, and December 31st, 2007, there were 211 death penalty cases filed in New Mexico with 15 people sentenced to death and only 1 execution. The 1 person executed, Terry Clark, had waived his appeals. Out of the remaining 14 death-sentenced prisoners, 1 died before his appeal was resolved, 5 had their sentences commuted by then-Governor Toney Anaya in 1986, 5 cases were overturned on direct appeal, and 2 were overturned after later appeals.

The repeal of capital punishment in New Mexico was not retroactive, leaving 2 persons on death row: Robert Ray Fry and Timothy Allen. Their sentences were later reduced to life in prison by the New Mexico Supreme Court on June 28, 2019. Back in 1975, New Mexico was a trailblazer when it excluded juveniles from death penalty eligibility, but it was the last among US states to adopt a sentence of life without parole, an alternative to the death penalty proven to reduce death sentences.

The advocates emphasized the importance of working with a broad coalition to pass the repeal bill. Ms. Ansheles said, “You need to match up and connect the storyteller with a person who is interested… in some cases, it might be a law enforcement officer. It might be the mother of somebody who’s been murdered, …an exonerated person, … or a religious person. But I think it is having all those stories, diverse stories, and storytellers on hand, so that you can match it up with the person that needs to hear it.” Ms. Harrison noted that repeal did not bring about any negative consequences in the state: “When I talk to people—most people did not even know we ever had the death penalty. I mean, it just literally left people’s minds. After repeal, we have not seen a surge in crime. We have not seen any negative effects.”

At the time of repeal, New Mexico was the 15th state to end the death penalty; today there are 23 states without the death penalty and 6 with a gubernatorial hold on executions. Learn more by visiting DPIC’s State by State info.

Below are lightly edited highlights of our conversations with Viki Harrison and Cathy Ansheles, also joined by Bill Stanton, a retired mitigation specialist and Cathy’s husband.

DPIC: Please tell us a bit about yourself and your involvement in the movement to repeal the death penalty in New Mexico.

Cathy: Prior to moving to New Mexico, I had worked in Alabama against the death penalty. I worked with people on death row and with their families; did community organizing and education about the issue and some work at the legislature in Montgomery as well. Later, while working at the Rothstein Donatelli law firm in Santa Fe on the Duran prison conditions case, I became connected with people who’d been fighting the death penalty in New Mexico for years, which eventually led to my becoming the Coalition’s first coordinator.

Viki: I have been doing nonprofit work for a few decades. And prior to becoming the Executive Director of NM Repeal back in 2008, I had worked in New Mexico for 15 years doing animal rights work. I literally saw an ad in the newspaper with a job opening for this. I looked into the death penalty, did some research, and thought, you know, this is the time, this is a state where we do not ever use it. The last time we executed somebody was because he gave up all his appeals. That is how I decided to join it.

Bill: I was converted to the position of opposing the death penalty also in Alabama, probably over the course of a couple of days in 1978, when I went to Montgomery and started working at the Southern Poverty Law Center. A friend just gave me some stuff to read and when I found out what the facts were about the death penalty, and that our legal representation was often so awful for people accused in death penalty cases—this mobilized me to act.

DPIC: Where were you on March 18th, 2009, when the announcement was made about the death penalty repeal in New Mexico?

Cathy: It was late in the evening on the last day that the Governor could sign the bill and I was at the State Capitol. I ran into Rep. Gail Chasey (our repeal bill sponsor) who said the Governor had just called her and Viki up to his office and we really did n0t know what his decision would be. Once the news started circulating, we were stunned and thrilled, walking around the Capitol hugging and grinning. And then we walked down from the Capitol to a local Santa Fe hotel bar and restaurant and began a spontaneous celebration that included many of the people who had testified over the years.

DPIC: What was the path that led to 2009?

Cathy: When Bill and I first moved to New Mexico, we asked around to see who was doing death penalty abolition work, because we had been involved in this when we were in Alabama. We volunteered with a group called the Committee to Stop Executions, and then formed the Coalition to Repeal the Death Penalty which became statewide. One of the very first people we contacted was Patrick Tyrrell, the Executive Director of the New Mexico Association of Social Workers. Other initial members of the Coalition’s initial steering committee included Ruth Hoffman, with Lutheran Governmental Ministries; Michelle Giger, a murder victim’s family member from Albuquerque a criminal justice professor at Highlands University [in Las Vegas, NM]; and some other social workers and members of the Catholic Church and other faith groups. A lot of time and work was put into making it a broad coalition that represented people from diverse organizations and perspectives. Bill helped coordinate the full-page ad campaign in our 2 major newspapers where people from various cities across the state signed on. That was quite significant in the early days—people seeing other people’s names, and it grew into a lot of old school grassroots organizing—going around to small towns and connecting with different folks at churches, civic groups, schools, community organizations, etc.

When we had our very first legislative interim committee hearing (around 1997 or 1998), we initially just requested a bill to simply study the death penalty. Rep. Chasey and another legislator said they preferred introducing a bill to abolish the death penalty straight away. And we were like, ‘whoa…’ From there, it was different tools that we had to use—we had to learn more about legislative strategy, and recruit more people who were familiar with the politics for making that sort of change happen. Fortunately, we had excellent people who could do this.

Bill: We recruited people from diverse walks of life and one of the most effective was a former New Mexico State police officer. We also had some former corrections employees who were involved, and we worked a lot with victims’ family members.

DPIC: What were the key arguments for and against the repeal of the death penalty? Were there any arguments that were unique to New Mexico?

Viki: We had been around for 12 years. We had victim family members who had been fighting with us. And so, I walked into a great coalition that was ready to do the work and had been doing the work. There had been a little bit of a split off—we were the last state to implement life without parole. [Governor] Bill Richardson was going to work for President Obama. Initially, Richardson had been supporting the death penalty. We met with every legislator, we did media, we talked to people all over the world. I mean, this was the second opportunity to legislatively abolish the death penalty in this country in the modern era [after New Jersey]. We had people in practically every country in the world that were interested and wanted to help. And then, in January [of 2009], Richardson got into some trouble and was no longer poised for the Commerce Secretary [job]. So, we had to go to plan B, which we were ready for!

We were able to change his mind with facts, data and hearts and minds. We all have power. Our power is our voice, our legislators, especially state and local legislators. We have a lot of access to them. Your senator and your representative are in your community. You can meet with them; you can talk to them. I will never forget when I was a college student and I went to a talk by one of my members of Congress, Senator Jeff Bingaman. This is back when we actually wrote letters. And I asked him, ‘Why would I write you a letter?’ And he said, ‘Every time I get a letter, I multiply it by 10,000. Because I know if one person takes the time to send me a letter—10,000 people are thinking about it.’ That changed the course of how I look at advocacy: my voice times 10,000.

We made sure that the people Governor Richardson cared about reached out to him. When he was courting the film industry in New Mexico, we had film stars to call him and say, sign this bill. We had the religious communities on him constantly. I mean, the Archbishop Michael Sheehan was a huge ally of ours as was Bishop Ricardo Ramírez in Las Cruces. Rabbi Joseph R. Black in Albuquerque was outstanding. We were in the media constantly. We did polling that showed the majority of New Mexicans did not support the death penalty. They supported life without parole, they supported restitution to victims’ families. Then, our New Mexico Legislature introduced the bill sponsored by Representative Gail Chasey.

Cathy and Bill: The Catholic Church is very prominent in the state of New Mexico, which was really helpful. A lot of different Catholic leaders were very involved over the years leading up to repeal. It was also important to have the voices of victims’ family members and law enforcement. One of the major things that happened on the national scene that had an effect all over the country and in New Mexico was Illinois and their discoveries of people wrongly convicted on death row. New Mexico has its own stories of people who were wrongfully convicted, e.g., The Vagos Bikers, who were wrongfully accused of murdering 26-year-old college student Richard Velten. One of the things we did early on was to organize a panel at the law school with some of the key players who had been involved in the defense and the prosecution of The Bikers case. And that got media coverage, as well as a lot of people who attended and heard some first-hand accounts of how the system did not work. That was four people exonerated just in New Mexico during the mid 1970’s.

DPIC: How have victim families been considered or addressed in the debate around the death penalty and its repeal?

Viki: I think the biggest reason they support us is because they do not want someone else to be murdered, because they know what that family is going to go through. Also, the murder victim family members have to go through appeals [of a prisoner]. I think that that is why murder victim family members are important to this work—because they matter, their voices matter. You have to be incredibly ethical in the way you organize with murder victim family members, you do not use them, you do not tokenize them. You have to have space for them to decompress. It is hard to talk about this stuff. You have to protect them, and you have to support them.

DPIC: What is the long-lasting impact (if any) of repealing capital punishment on New Mexico, its people, and its criminal justice system?

Viki: Before Terry Clark asked to be executed, we had not used the death penalty in New Mexico for almost 50 years. When I talk to people—most people do not even know we ever had the death penalty. I mean, it just literally left people’s minds. After repeal, we have not seen a surge in crime. We have not seen any negative effects. And I think the positive effects are that people, at this point, just assume we have never had it. I do not think anybody misses it.

Bill: For people like us it makes us feel good to live in a state that is not consumed with this kind of demagoguery that often goes on around the death penalty. These 15 years have shown that society has not gone to hell. And people have not engaged in indiscriminate killing sprees because they knew they would not face the death penalty.

Cathy: I also think that there’s less hateful language in the media. There is less vengeance that is splashed on the front of a newspaper or on television. Every year when March 18th comes around, I feel like ‘yes, one more year under our belt’; ‘yes, this is going to become institutionalized’. And then, the Dobbs v. Jackson decision came down. And I realize there is not a magic number of years that will guarantee repeal will stay. So, while I am not quite as convinced as I used to be that each year makes it more permanent, I am hopeful that it is more permanent, and 15 years without a death penalty in New Mexico is definitely something to celebrate.

DPIC: What has been your further involvement with criminal justice system reform after 2009?

Cathy: The Coalition stayed involved, both at the legislature and at a grassroots level of working with families of murder victims in finding ways for them to get compensation and in helping to advocate for bills that served victims and family members. Personally, I am retired and have been for several years. And one of the things that I am passionate about doing is being on the board of the New Mexico Prison and Jail Project. We keep an eye on what is going on in jails and prisons, especially in terms of mental health and medical care and file lawsuits as a way to bring about change in those systems.

DPIC: What piece of advice would you give to people interested in advocating for criminal justice reform?

Cathy: I think one of the things that I learned is that there is not just one answer. For a state or a legislature or a community, you need to know a lot of stories and know people who can tell their stories, different stories. And then you need to match up and connect the storyteller with a person who is interested, or hopefully interested who needs persuading. In some cases, it might be a law enforcement officer, in other situations a decision-maker needs to hear from the mother of somebody who has been murdered, or an exoneree or a religious leader. I think it is critical having all those diverse stories and storytellers on hand, so that you can connect them with the policymaker or leader who needs to hear that particular story.

Viki: I tell people to get everyone involved. Ask everybody, get everyone involved, and redefine what a win is – sometimes it is just getting a committee hearing that year. You can be setting yourself up for lots of heartache because these issues are really heavy and folks’ lives are literally hanging in the balance. For us it took 12 years. It was not overnight. It also is a matter of conversations. You can talk to your friends and your cousins and your neighbors. Polling just a month ago shows that we do not listen to anybody but friends or family. That means we are super powerful. We are more powerful than legislators and our friends and family are listening to you more than anybody else.

How are we going to celebrate this 15th anniversary?

Viki: It is going to be more with friends and former allies. We did a big celebration for the 10th. And I told Gail Chasey, I would do it again for the 20th. So, for the 15th it is going to be lighting a candle remembering Governor Bill Richardson, who we unfortunately lost since our last celebration. We have lost too many important people in our coalition, and each anniversary, I like to honor and remember their important work to make New Mexico an abolition state.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

IDAHO:

Bryan Kohberger Lawyer Makes Death Penalty Intervention

The lawyer representing Bryan Kohberger—who stands accused of murdering 4 University of Idaho students in 2022—is trying to limit which criminals qualify for the death penalty.

Anne Taylor, chief of the Kootenai County Public Defender's Office, urged Idaho lawmakers not to pass a bill that would expand which defendants are eligible for capital punishment. The bill is seeking to make sexual crimes committed against children under the age of 12 punishable by death. Taylor has said the state would struggle to process an increase in capital punishment cases, according to the Idaho Statesman newspaper.

Her client is accused of killing four University of Idaho students who were stabbed to death in the early hours of November 13, 2022. The victims—Kaylee Goncalves, 21, Madison Mogen, 21, Xana Kernodle, 20, and Ethan Chapin, 20—were killed at a shared student house in the college town of Moscow.

Criminology PhD student Kohberger, 28, who studied at nearby Washington State University was arrested at the end of December at his parents' home in Albrightsville, Pennsylvania. Now aged 29, he stands accused of 4 counts of 1st-degree murder and 1 count of felony burglary and prosecutors are seeking the death penalty. Kohberger has continued to maintain his innocence.

His lead attorney, Taylor, appeared before an Idaho Senate committee last week to argue against proposals to expand the death penalty criteria in the state. The bill, sponsored by Republican Rep. Bruce Skaug, passed in the House before it came up for a Senate committee hearing Friday.

Taylor told the committee: "These are not cases that are quick to be resolved. If it remains a death penalty case, it can take years to get to trial and get to a sentencing phase in that case[...] Idaho is not staffed or prepared for this."

Florida adopted a similar law last year although it looks set to face potential legal challenges over whether it is constitutional. The U.S. Supreme Court has previously ruled against such bills.

Taylor was joined by four other state public defenders, and the Senate committee voted down the bill, preventing its advance to a full Senate vote. Skaug told the Statesman he may look at amending the bill and trying to pass it again in the future.

Newsweek has reached out to Skaug and Taylor by email seeking further information and comment.

Meanwhile, work on Kohberger's case continues, and he must reveal whether he has an alibi by next month. A date for his trial has yet to be set.

(source: newsweek.com)

GLOBAL:

Record number of people executed for drug offences in 2023----In its annual report, Harm Reduction International says at least 467 drug-related executions took place last year.

At least 467 people were executed for drug offences in 2023, a new record, according to Harm Reduction International (HRI), an NGO that has been tracking the use of the death penalty for drugs since 2007.

“Despite not accounting for the dozens, if not hundreds, of executions believed to have taken place in China, Vietnam, and North Korea, the 467 executions that took place in 2023 represent a 44% increase from 2022,” HRI said in its report, which was released on Tuesday.

Drug executions made up about 42 percent of all known death sentences carried out around the world last year, it added.

HRI said it had confirmed drug-related executions in countries including Iran, Kuwait and Singapore. China treats death penalty data as a state secret and secrecy surrounds the punishment in countries including Vietnam and North Korea.

“Information gaps on death sentences persist, meaning many (if not most) death sentences imposed in 2023 remain unknown,” the report said. “Most notably, no accurate figure can be provided for China, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia and Thailand. These countries are all believed to regularly impose a significant number of death sentences for drug offences.”

International law prohibits the use of the death penalty for crimes that are not intentional and of “the most serious” nature. The United Nations has stressed that drug offences do not meet that threshold.

Singapore has drawn international criticism after resuming the use of the death penalty in March 2022, following a two-year hiatus during the pandemic.

Some 11 executions, carried out by hanging, took place that year, and at least 16 people had been hanged as of November 2023, according to Human Rights Watch.

Among those executed was Saridewi Djamani, a Singaporean woman who was convicted of drug trafficking in 2018. She was the first woman to be executed in the city-state for almost 20 years.

“Singapore reversed the COVID-19 hiatus on executions, kicking its death row machinery into overdrive,” Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch said in the organisation’s annual report. “The government’s reinvigorated use of the death penalty merely highlighted its disregard for human rights protections and the inherent cruelty of capital punishment.”

Some countries have moved to reform their death penalty regimes in recent years with Malaysia ending the mandatory death sentence, including for drugs, and Pakistan removing the death penalty from the list of punishments that can be imposed for certain violations of its Control of Narcotics Substances Act.

Still, in other countries, defendants continued to be sentenced to death for drug offences.

HRI said such confirmed sentences last year increased by more than 20 percent from 2022. About 1/2 of those were passed by courts in Vietnam and a quarter in Indonesia.

At the end of 2023, some 34 countries continued to retain the death penalty for drug crimes.

In Singapore, there are just over 50 people on death row with all but 2 convicted of drug offences, according to the Transformative Justice Collective, a Singapore-based NGO that campaigns against the death penalty.

On February 28, Singapore hanged Bangladeshi national Ahmed Salim. He was the 1st person convicted of murder to be hanged in the city-state since 2019.

“Capital punishment is used only for the most serious crimes in Singapore that cause grave harm to the victim, or to society,” the Singapore Police Force said in a statement.

(source: aljazeera.com)

GUYANA:

UN Rights body told Guyanese nationals will decide on death penalty

Guyana has told the United Nations Human Rights Committee that its citizens will decide on the issue of the death penalty, even as there are no plans by the government to boost the capacity to execute anyone under the current laws.

Governance Minister, Gail Teixeira said a similar process was undertaken between 1999- 2001 and the popular view was that the death penalty should remain on the books.

“So, there is no view in Guyana right now that we go back to executions of any kind and so it is a ad hoc or informal moratorium that we have maintained from 1997 to now,” she told the UNHRC during her virtual address.

“To further strengthen our argument, the government has put no heads of prison service, no heads of the Ministry of Home Affairs, put any investments of funds into developing any capacity to execute anyone,” she added.

Guyana has not carried out an execution since 1997 and political and legal observers said that although the death penalty has not been removed from the Constitution or the statute, the matter will have to go back to Parliament.

Guyana and other Caribbean countries have come under pressure from several international agencies, including the International Commission against the Death Penalty, to abolish the death penalty that they consider to be cruel and inhumane punishment.

In 2022, The Guyana Court of Appeal refused to strike down the death penalty as unconstitutional.

During her appearance, Teixeira told the UNHRC that Georgetown could not at the moment implement Public Disclosure and Whistleblowers laws.

“We are unable to, at this point, to activate the Public Disclosure and Whistleblower Act because there are genuine problems of implementation,” she said, noting however that witnesses are offered “safe haven” protection by police.

With regards to the implementation of the now repealed State Assets Recovery Act (SARA) following the closure of the agency in 2020, Teixeira said that “monolithic” body “had to be repaired” because its head could have become the Chief Immigration Officer, Police Commissioner, Director of Public Prosecutions among others.

Instead, she said government was relying on the Guyana Police Force’s Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU), Customs Anti-Narcotics Unit of the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Director of Public Prosecutions through strengthening of the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering of Financing Terrorism Act (AML/CFT) “to have a modern confiscation framework inclusive of an asset recovery fund as well as asset sharing arrangements domestically and internationally”.

She said an AML/CFT amendment in 2023 provides for civil forfeiture. She said a number of assets had been confiscated under the new legislative regime.

On the issue of no investigation into alleged corruption by Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo, the governance minister said no one had lodged a police complaint about the claims that had been made in a US Vice News report.

“There is no follow-up on it because there was no police report made by Vice News or anybody else and so the police cannot investigate without some form of report or complaint,” she told the UN Human Rights Committee, adding that Jagdeo had publicly responded to those allegations in media that had carried the issue.

(source: caribbean.loopnews.com)

CAMEROON:

DR Congo’s Lifting of Moratorium on Death Penalty “a step backwards”: Cardinal Ambongo

The decision by the government of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) to lift a 2003 ban on the death penalty is retrogressive, the Local Ordinary of the country’s Kinshasa Archdiocese, Fridolin Cardinal Ambongo, has said.

In a statement issued March 13, DRC’s Justice Minister, Rose Mutombo announced the lifting of the two-decade-old moratorium on the death penalty in the Central African nation.

Minister Mutombo has been quoted as saying that “acts of treachery or espionage have taken a toll on the population and the Republic”, and that the restoration of the death penalty is to “rid our country’s army of traitors… and curb the upsurge in acts of terrorism and urban banditry resulting in death.”

In a March 17 interview with the French-language Catholic television channel, KTO, Cardinal Ambongo faulted the Minister’s pronouncements, saying he finds it “abnormal that a government that claims to be responsible could take such a decision.”

“This is a step backwards! I don't think that a responsible government can raise such an option to punish people who are called traitors,” he said, adding, “First of all, on the notion of traitors, we must first agree on what that means. And when I look at the reality here in the Congo, the great traitors to the country are precisely those in power.”

When those in power “don't serve the interests of the people, they are the ones we have to start considering as traitors, because they don't assume the roles for which they have been entrusted, that is, service to the population,” the Congolese member of the Order of Friars Minor Capuchin (OFM Cap) said.

“I wouldn't want us to take advantage of a vague notion of traitors to settle political scores,” the Local Ordinary of Kinshasa, who doubles as the President of the Symposium of Episcopal Conference of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM) warned.

With the lifting of the moratorium in DRC, the death penalty is to be carried out following any judicial conviction for offenses that include criminal conspiracy, treason, espionage, participation in armed gangs, participation in an uprising, crimes against humanity, military conspiracy, and rebellion, among others.

In the March 17 interview with KTO, Cardinal Ambongo also addressed a number of topical issues in his country including violence in the Eastern Province, and the Church’s stance on political and social issues.

“I always say the Catholic Church, and especially the Cardinal, is not neutral. Jesus Christ was not neutral,” he said, and added, “The political class would like to see the Catholic Church, and especially the Cardinal of the Congo, maintain an attitude of neutrality with regard to their actions.”

The Congolese Cardinal, who has been a member of Pope Francis’ Council of Cardinals (C9) since his appointment in October 2020 and reappointment in March 2023 went on to clarify the position of the Church against oppressors, seeking justice for the oppressed and marginalized.

“But if the Catholic Church comes to this, it's because the Church has taken a stand for the powerful against the little ones. But we have taken up the option of accompanying our people in their quest for a little more dignity,” he said, and added, “Naturally, our words, our stance, irritate those who make the people suffer.”

Reflecting on the violence in the Eastern part of the country, the Archbishop Kinshasa highlighted bad governance and the influence of western countries as some of the reasons behind the security challenge.

He said, “There's an internal cause; what we call bad governance on the part of the Congolese themselves, because we can ask ourselves why this is only happening in the Congo and not elsewhere.”

“From independence to the present day, we have the impression that the Congolese man, the Congolese human being, has never been at the heart of the concerns of our leaders,” Cardinal Ambongo further said, lamenting bad governance.

Another reason behind the violence in the Eastern part of DRC, he said, “is a sort of combination of economic interests. Big oil, forestry and mining companies want to operate in the Congo, but they sometimes use neighbouring countries, hence the current anger in the Congo towards Rwanda.”

“The majority of the population is the victim of all this violence, and we have some absolutely terrible accounts of the violence taking place in the country,” Cardinal Ambongo lamented.

(source: Jude Atemanke is a Cameroonian journalist with a passion for Catholic Church communication. He holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and Mass Communication from the University of Buea in Cameroon. Currently, Jude serves as a journalist for ACI Africa---aciafrica.org)

VIETNAM:

Prosecutors seek death penalty for mastermind of Vietnam's largest financial scam

Vietnamese prosecutors called on Tuesday for the death penalty to be handed to Truong My Lan, the mastermind of the Southeast Asian nation's largest financial fraud on record, state media said.

Lan, the chairwoman of real estate developer Van Thinh Phat Holdings Group, faces a trial in the economic hub of Ho Chi Minh City on accusations of leading a scam that caused damages of US$20 billion, or about 4.9 % of Vietnam's gross domestic product.

The trial, expected to run until the end of April, is part of a campaign against graft that the leader of the ruling Communist Party, Nguyen Phu Trong, has pledged for years to stamp out, although with few tangible results.

"Lan didn't plead guilty and didn't show remorse," the Thanh Nien newspaper cited the prosecutors as saying, while demanding the death penalty on the charge of embezzlement.

"The consequences are extremely serious and irreparable, and therefore, there must be a strict punishment for Truong My Lan and remove her from the society," it added.

A lawyer for Lan was not immediately available for comment on Tuesday.

Lan and her accomplices are accused of siphoning off more than 304 trillion dong (US$12.46 billion) from Saigon Joint Stock Commercial Bank (SCB), which she effectively controlled through dozens of proxies, investigators say.

Prosecutors have also accused the group of causing damages to the to the tune of a further 193 trillion dong, more than 129 trillion dong of which consists of accumulated interest on the loans they took.

That carried total financial damages in the case to 498 trillion dong (US$20 billion), the report said.

From early 2018 through October 2022, when the state bailed out SCB after a run on its deposits, Lan appropriated large sums by arranging unlawful loans to shell companies, investigators say.

She is accused of bribing officials to ignore her activities, including paying an alleged US$5.2 million to a senior central bank inspector, the investigators said.

3 independent auditing firms had committed violations in the SCB case, lawmaker Pham Van Hoa said on Monday, without identifying them, the government said.

The remark came in a question to Finance Minister Ho Duc Phoc, the government statement added.

Phoc faulted auditing in some recent criminal cases, adding that "intentional collusion and violations" by auditors had not been ruled out.

Top global firms, such as Ernst & Young and KPMG, did not flag concerns about the bank in their audits, public documents show.

(source: Reuters)

PAKISTAN:

Pakistani court awards death penalty to female students for killing teacher on blasphemy charge----The seminary girls slaughtered their teacher over 'blasphemy in dream'

A court in Pakistan awarded the death penalty to 2 seminary students for killing a teacher over alleged blasphemy. Additional Sessions Judge-II Mohammad Jameel announced the capital punishment for seminary students, Razia Hanifa, Ayesha Nauman, and also awarded life imprisonment to another for brutally killing their young teacher.

The heinous incident was held in mid-2022 when seminary girls killed a teacher after seeing her in dream in which she found out about alleged blasphemy committed by the slain.

The judge further announced a fine of Rs20lac each on convicts, and slapped Rs10lac fine on the 3rd girl who was given life term.

The female students are from Jamia Islamia Falah Al-Banat in Anjumabad, Dera-Multan Road, who attacked teacher named Safoora with a stick at the seminary's gate before slitting her throat.

The students claimed they came to know about the teacher's blasphemy in a dream.

The issue of blasphemy is a sensitive topic in Asian nation. Incidents related to blasphemy can provoke strong reactions and emotions, often leading to serious consequences.

(source: en.dailypakistan.com)

****************

From Plato’s ‘The Cave’ to the 21st century lawful execution of criminal convicts, even children----Work goes on in Pakistan and other places to bring about God’s kin-dom as envisioned in Matthew 25

In an ongoing series of prison-related stories from around the world, this article will take us to Pakistan, one of the several countries in the Indian Subcontinent of South Asia located between the Himalayas in the north and the Indian Ocean to the south.

Culturally, historically, and geographically, this subcontinent is characterized by its rich diversity in languages, religions, cultures and traditions. In size, Pakistan, an Islamic country, is twice as large and holds 6 times the population of California.

The focal point of the article is a friend and legal advocate, Sarmad Ali, a lawyer at the high court in Pakistan who valiantly has dedicated his life to prison issues and especially to the fight against the execution of children in his country. In exploring issues as traumatic as child execution still practiced in a few countries around the world, it seems appropriate to consult with main world religions and the voices of ancient philosophy on the moral and religious issues of such practices, well aware that religion has clearly demonstrated its potential to enlighten its followers to a higher level of spiritual understanding. Sadly, it has also proved its dangerous ability to lead to spiritual darkness and doom.

Combined, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam represent more than 1/2 of the world population. They have much in common, with Judaism as the oldest monotheistic religion, dating back more than 3,000 years, and with Christianity emerging from Judaism in the 1st century CE based upon the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. Islam originated in the 7th century CE in the Arabian Peninsula with the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad. Like Jews and Christians, Muslims believe in one God and consider Muhammad to be the final prophet in a line of prophets that includes figures like Abraham, Moses and Jesus.

These three religions have mixed views on the issue of death penalty and how it is practiced in various countries. A recent count shows that 91 countries have outlawed the death penalty including Canada, Australia, and all of Europe (except Belarus), while 38 countries still practice the death penalty, including Pakistan and the United States.

‘The state cannot give life and cannot take it away’ — Archbishop Desmond Tutu

The even more controversial issue of Pakistani child executions relates to special religious blasphemy laws against the prophet Mohammed, which can carry severe penalties, including death. This is a complex and controversial topic, and these laws have been criticized by many human rights organizations and activists for their potential for abusing and infringing upon freedom of speech and religion.

In Islam, one of the fundamental attributes of Allah is mercy. The Quran repeatedly emphasizes the mercy of Allah and encourages believers to show mercy and compassion to others. However, the application of this principle in legal systems, including blasphemy laws, is subject to interpretation and cultural context. Some argue that the imposition of severe penalties for blasphemy may not align with the mercy and compassion emphasized in Islamic teachings. They may argue that forgiveness and education would be more in line with the spirit of Islam. Others may argue that blasphemy laws are necessary to protect the sanctity of religious beliefs and prevent social unrest. They may view the enforcement of such laws as a way to uphold religious values and maintain social cohesion.

These are issues which are on the daily agenda for Sarmad Ali and his staff in the law firm he founded, Legal Awareness Watch (LAW), which works tirelessly for justice from its base in Lahore, Pakistan.

In Plato’s allegory, “The Cave,” prisoners are chained inside a cave, facing a wall, unable to see the outside world. They perceive only shadows cast by objects passing in front of a fire behind them. One prisoner escapes and discovers the true nature of reality outside the cave; he is enlightened. Sadly, when he returns with the good news, the reaction of his fellow prisoner is one of disbelief, mockery, and rejection, and maybe threats of death. Even 2,000 years after Plato told this story about human potential, we still prefer the low road.

With Pakistan, the United States and other counties still holding on to the right to execute fellow humans, it may be time jointly to listen to the numerous humanitarian organizations advocate against the death penalty worldwide, citing ethical, moral, and practical reasons. The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has raised its voice on many occasions to end capital punishment in the United States, including the 221st General Assembly (2014).

With much of the world on the brink of chaos, it seems time to take the spiritual interfaith high road and start with this memorable quote from Jesus: “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” According to the biblical account, Jesus spoke these words while he was being crucified. Despite immense suffering, Jesus asked for forgiveness for those who were responsible for his crucifixion, including the Roman soldiers and those who had condemned him. This statement is often interpreted as an expression of Jesus’ boundless compassion, mercy, and willingness to forgive even his persecutors.

In Matthew 25:31-46, Jesus commands his followers to visit and care for imprisoned people. From the same biblical source we have this moving quote: “Let the children come to me, and do not stop them, for it is to such as these that the kingdom of heaven belongs.” This statement reflects Jesus’ welcoming and inclusive attitude toward children, emphasizing their importance and worthiness of receiving his love and blessing. It conveys the idea that children are valued members of society and are fully accepted and embraced by God. Additionally, it highlights the innocence, humility, and trust that characterize childlike faith, qualities that Jesus encourages his followers to emulate in their relationship with God.

In 2022, Pakistan’s National Commission on the Rights of Child said there are 1.5 million street children in Pakistan, and that number is rising. Sarmad Ali and his team are working tirelessly to save some of them.

(source: The Rev. Dr. Hans Hallundbaek, a minister in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), is a co-founder of both Rehabilitation through the Arts and the Interfaith Prison Partnership, an outreach of Hudson River Presbytery----presbyterianmission.org)

INDIA:

SC lays down guideline in heinous multiple murder cases

(see: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/sc-lays-down-guideline-in-heinous-multiple-murder-cases/articleshow/108633293.cms)

THAILAND:

Death sentence for drug convicts is not acceptable:

(see: https://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/2761503/death-sentence-for-drug-convicts-is-not-acceptable)

SAUDI ARABIA:

Repressive draft penal code shatters illusions of progress and reform

A leaked draft of Saudi Arabia’s first written penal code falls woefully short of universal human rights standards and exposes the hypocrisy behind Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman’s promises to position his government as progressive and inclusive, said Amnesty International in a new report launched today. Saudi Arabia’s authorities have not shared the draft penal code for consultation with independent civil society, but a number of Saudi Arabian legal experts have confirmed the authenticity of the leaked draft.

The report, Manifesto for repression, analyses the leaked draft code revealing how instead of improving the country’s abysmal human rights record as part of the Crown Prince’s reformist agenda, it contravenes international law and codifies existing repressive practices into written law. The draft code criminalizes the rights to freedom of expression, thought and religion and fails to protect the right to freedom of peaceful assembly. It criminalizes “illegitimate” consensual sexual relations, homosexuality and abortion and fails to protect women and girls from gender-based violence. The draft also codifies use of the death penalty as one of the primary punishments and continues to permit corporal punishments such as flogging. The report also highlights recent cases of repression of dissidents, illustrating the dangers of adopting the draft as is.

“The absence of a written penal code has long bred systemic violations and injustice in Saudi Arabia. A 1st written penal code could be a crucial opportunity for Saudi Arabia’s authorities to transform their abusive criminal justice system into one that respects human rights. However, our analysis of the leaked draft code reveals it is essentially a manifesto for repression that would entrench human rights violations and suppress freedoms,” said Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General.

“As it stands, the draft code shatters the illusion that the Crown Prince is pursuing a truly reformist agenda. Saudi Arabia is at a critical juncture: with a draft penal code currently under legislative review, the authorities still have a chance to demonstrate to the world that their pledges of reform are more than empty promises. They must urgently consult with independent civil society experts and amend the draft code to ensure it is aligned with international standards and reevaluate existing laws to uphold human rights.”

Alongside its report, Amnesty International is also launching a global campaign today to demand the release of individuals unjustly imprisoned or sentenced to death for exercising their rights to freedom of expression as part of the authorities’ repressive crackdown.

“Amnesty International’s global campaign seeks to build international pressure for human rights reforms by unmasking the grim truth behind Saudi Arabia’s attempts to launder its international image. The campaign will highlight shocking cases of those unjustly imprisoned or facing the death penalty simply for peacefully expressing their views. We will expose the chilling consequences of the country’s repressive crackdown and raise pressure on key allies of Saudi Arabia to push for genuine reform,” said Agnès Callamard.

The draft penal code – first leaked online in July 2022 – has been drafted with secrecy and is being reviewed without allowing for dialogue with independent civil society and experts. Saudi Arabia’s authorities have not shared the draft penal code with independent civil society experts and nor have they published the draft. However, a number of Saudi legal experts, including a member of the bar association and two Saudi law firms publicly shared and commented on the 2022 draft, confirming its authenticity.

As it stands, the draft code shatters the illusion that the Crown Prince is pursuing a truly reformist agenda.--Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International

The organization wrote to Saudi Arabia’s Council of Ministers and the Saudi Arabian Human Rights Commission to share Amnesty International’s analysis along with questions about the draft penal code. On 4 February, the Saudi Human Rights Commission responded denying the draft’s authenticity and stating that a draft code is currently undergoing legislative review. Amnesty International invites the Saudi authorities to publish the latest version of the draft for independent civil society feedback.

Amnesty International’s report analyses the 116-page leaked draft penal code, scrutinizing its alignment with international human rights law and its potential to perpetuate existing human rights abuses. The report draws on a decade of human rights documentation of the Saudi authorities’ crackdown on the rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly, use of torture and other ill-treatment and the death penalty, as well as interviews with experts familiar with Saudi Arabia’s legislative landscape.

Amnesty International notes that the draft penal code only covers discretionary crimes (ta’zir crimes), for which punishments are not specified in sharia law, and does not codify crimes that have fixed punishments under sharia (known as hadd or qisas crimes), continuing to grant judges wide discretion in determining whether the evidentiary threshold is met.

Freedoms criminalized

Over the past decade, Saudi Arabian authorities have severely restricted freedom of expression, targeting a large number of dissenting voices—from human rights defenders to journalists and including clerics and women’s rights activists—through incarceration, exile, or conditional releases which include travel bans. The authorities have used counterterrorism and anti-cybercrime provisions to silence critical expression and independent thought. In one harrowing case, Salma al-Shehab, a PhD student and mother of two, is now serving 27 years in prison for supporting women’s rights on X (formerly Twitter).

In an ongoing case, Manahel al-Otaibi, a fitness instructor, blogger and human rights defender who has been forcibly disappeared since November 2023 awaits trial before the Specialized Criminal Court, Saudi Arabia’s notorious counter-terror court, for posting photos of herself without the abaya (a traditional robe) and for content protesting Saudi Arabia’s repressive male guardianship laws.

The draft penal code would reinforce these repressive measures by criminalizing defamation, insults and questioning the judiciary under vague terms, risking further infringement on individual freedoms and perpetuating the crackdown on dissent.

Our analysis of the leaked draft code reveals it is essentially a manifesto for repression that would entrench human rights violations and suppress freedoms.--Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International

The draft penal code also criminalizes “illegitimate” consensual sexual relations, consensual sexual relations between two men, committing “indecent behaviour” and “imitat[ing] another sex through his dress and appearance”. Such provisions would allow for the persecution and harassment of members of the LGBTI community. While Amnesty International has documented cases of individuals being convicted for these acts, these prosecutions and the sentences were at the discretion of the judge and are not codified as criminal acts in existing Saudi legislation. The sentences associated with these acts in the draft penal code are more severe than the sentences currently meted out by judges today.

In the absence of a penal code in Saudi Arabia, judges currently use their interpretation of Islamic law (sharia) and jurisprudence to determine what constitutes a crime and to impose punishments. Such practices allow judges wide discretion in adjudicating cases and leave crimes and punishments vaguely defined, in violation of international human rights law.

Draft code perpetuates gender-based violence

For years, women and girls in Saudi Arabia have faced rampant discrimination, in law and practice, with inadequate domestic legislation to shield them from gender-based violence. Alarmingly, the draft code does not allow for the criminal prosecution of individuals who commit acts in the name of “honor”, which could include assault or murder. This new provision would effectively grant abusers immunity in flagrant violation of international law.

The draft law also provides an overly broad and vague definition of harassment and fails to recognize marital rape as a crime.

Codifying use of the death penalty

Despite Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman’s promises to limit capital punishment to the most severe crimes as dictated by sharia there has been a horrifying surge in executions under his rule, including one of the largest mass executions in recent decades of 81 people in March 2022.

Saudi Arabia’s draft Penal Code codifies the death penalty as a primary punishment for a spectrum of crimes, ranging from murder to rape to non-violent offenses like apostasy and blasphemy, in violation of international law. The draft code allows child offenders to be executed for certain crimes and sets the age of criminal responsibility at a shockingly low 7 years. The Committee on the Rights of the Child, which Saudi Arabia is a state party to, recommends that the minimum age of criminal responsibility be no lower than 12 years.

The draft code also continues to allow regressive corporal punishments, which could include flogging and amputation of hands, for crimes such as adultery and theft. Corporal punishments are a form of torture and other ill-treatment and are prohibited under international law.

“It is vital that the UN Human Rights Council establishes a mechanism to monitor Saudi Arabia’s human rights situation so that the Saudi authorities cannot continue to cover up the dire reality of their repression by buying the world’s silence and peddling an image of progress and glamour to the world with their expensive PR machine,” said Agnès Callamard.

(source: Amnesty International)

MARCH 19,2024:

PENNSYLVANIA:

“Death penalty could be appropriate in this case,” Bradford County DA provides more information into Springfield Twp homicide

The death penalty is an option for those involved in a homicide case in Bradford County the district attorney said on Monday after the death and dismemberment of a man in early March.

According to the Bradford County District Attorney, Richard Wilson, on Monday, March 18, The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania could pursue the death penalty for Ronda Parker and Terry Parker if the proper aggravating circumstances were found in the killing death of Michael Pruitt.

“Pennsylvania law does allow for the death penalty,” Wilson said during the conference, “the death penalty is something that would be, potentially, based on the allegations you may have read in the police criminal complaint and affidavit of probable cause, the death penalty could be appropriate in this case,” he said.

3 arrested; human remains found and identified in Bradford County killing

Wilson added that a single aggravating circumstance is needed to require the justification of the death penalty under Pennsylvania law.

Wilson said that since a 1-year-old child was allegedly present in the room when Pruitt was killed, that could be an aggravating circumstance to justify the death penalty.

A decision has not been made on whether the death penalty will be pursued or not, with Wilson saying he has to value all of the factors before making a decision. Wilson clarified that the decision is expected to come after the preliminary hearing but before the formal arraignment.

During the news conference, it was learned that Ronda Parker and Terry Parker are still legally married, but separated and that one of the two, or both, have some form of criminal history, but this was not explained in detail by Wilson.

Wilson said that as of now there are no signs of drug use other than what was admitted in the affidavit by Summer Heil claiming she was high on meth at the time of the dismemberment.

Information was brought up regarding Pruitt and the allegations that he exposed himself to Ronda Parker’s children with Lieutenant Derek Felman saying that this is something that state police are investigating.

Felman said that actions reported against Pruitt have not been previously reported on at any other time to any law enforcement agency or Childline.

Police reiterated that on Monday, March 11, troopers were made aware that a death had taken place at a residence on Sawyer Road in Springfield Township and after a day of investigation, Terry Parker, Ronda Parker, and Summer Heil were all taken into custody by the afternoon for the killing of Michael Pruitt.

Wilson said the 3 are expected to appear in Troy for their preliminary hearing on March 27, at 2 p.m.

(source: WETM news)

*****************

Bradford County DA: Death penalty on the table in shooting death in Springfield Township

More facts need to be established, but Bradford County's district attorney said he is considering pursuing a death penalty case against 2 people charged in the March 8 shooting death of a man in Springfield Township.

Pennsylvania State Police at Towanda last week charged Terry Parker, 46, of Harrisburg, and Ronda Parker, 48, of Columbia Cross Roads, with criminal homicide, abuse of a corpse and tampering with physical evidence in the killing of 40-year-old Michael Pruitt.

The Parkers are married but separated, officials said.

A 3rd suspect, 36-year-old Summer Heil, of Harrisburg, was charged with abuse of a corpse and tampering with physical evidence, authorities said.

Police say Pruitt, whose permanent address was unknown, was lured to a residence at 1404 Sawyer Road in Springfield Township on March 8, shot and killed, his body placed in the trunk of a car, and later cut up and burned.

District Attorney Richard Wilson joined state police officials at a news conference Monday at the Bradford County Courthouse in Towanda to update the public on the investigation.

"Pennsylvania law allows for the death penalty if there are 'aggravating circumstances,'" Wilson said. "There was a 1-year-old child present at the time of death. That could be considered an aggravating circumstance."

Wilson pointed out in Pennsylvania, criminal homicide is a catch-all charge that covers multiple crimes, from manslaughter through 1st-degree murder.

As the investigation into the case continues, it's very likely charges against Ronda and Terry Parker will be upgraded, Wilson said.

What we know about the death of Michael Pruitt

Terry Parker shot Pruitt multiple times in the early morning hours inside a house at 1404 Sawyer Road in Springfield Township, according to the criminal complaint.

The complaint alleges Pruitt was first shot in the kitchen and then shot 3 more times after running down a hallway and into a bedroom.

Investigators said Terry Parker told witnesses he had a body in the trunk of his car Saturday near his house in Harrisburg.

The body was allegedly brought back to the Sawyer Road area, cut up and burned in the early morning hours, the complaint alleges.

State police were alerted to the crime early March 11 by a series of text messages among the suspects discussing the killing and disposal of Pruitt's body.

State police Lt. Derek Felsman praised investigators and other personnel who "within the next 11 critical hours" had all three suspects in custody.

Possible motives for the killing

The suspects told state police investigators Terry Parker wanted to kill Pruitt because he had been "sexually inappropriate" with Parker's young daughters, according to the criminal complaint.

While she was interrogated, Ronda Parker also stated Terry was jealous of Pruitt's relationship with her.

Heil told investigators she was worried Parker was going to kill the victim because he was so angry when he learned about the incident with the children.

If there was any kind of inappropriate sexual activity, there were no reports made to police or child protective agencies, state police officials said. Those allegations are part of the ongoing investigation, Felsman said.

What happens next

A preliminary hearing is scheduled for March 27 in Magisterial District Court in Troy, Wilson said.

However, it's unlikely that hearing will take place, he added.

As the investigation continues and more information is gathered, there will likely be the need for a larger facility, and future proceedings will probably take place in Bradford County Court, Wilson said.

Each of the suspects have retained lawyers, he said. All three are incarcerated without bail at the Bradford County Correctional Facility.

(source: Elmira Star-Gazette)

NORTH CAROLINA:

Death penalty sought against former NC nurse charged with murders

Prosecutors are set to seek the death penalty against a former nurse at the Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center who is accused of killing 2 patients and attempting to kill a 3rd.

Johnathan Howard Hayes was in Forsyth Superior Court on Wednesday during a Rule 24 hearing, which is where a judge decides if someone can face capital punishment.

Ex-nurse said he ‘guessed he did it’ after 2 given lethal doses of insulin, Winston-Salem warrants allege

Speaking during a news conference in Oct. 2022 after Hayes was arrested, District Attorney Jim O’Neill described Hayes as a rogue nurse acting alone.

Hayes is accused of killing 2 patients by giving them lethal doses of insulin.

Prosecutors believe the death penalty is warranted in the case since the crimes are especially heinous and cruel.

Background

Johnathan Hayes is accused of killing 2 women and attempting to kill another between Dec. 2021 and Jan. 2022 while he worked at the Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center.

Warrants state that in March 2022, detectives met with staff from Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist, where they told detectives about what they believed were suspicious circumstances around the deaths of 2 patients.

(source: WGHP news)

GEORGIA----impending execution

As Georgia Prepares to Execute Willie Pye, a Deceased Lawyer’s Incompetence Looms----Stephen Cooper, the author, a public defender turned death penalty abolitionist, argues that the impending execution of a Georgia man highlights systemic flaws in the justice system...

It is hard to imagine a man much more marginalized than Willie Pye, who Georgia plans to execute on Mar. 20. Undeniably, the 1993 murder that landed him on death row was heinous. But as his death march nears, it bears considering whether the converging histories of poverty and abuse that defined his youth, paired with his known intellectual disability, should have militated against a sentence of death and in favor of life imprisonment. The problem is: egregiously ineffective counsel at Pye’s mid-1990s trial left the jury with none of this context. And this week, we will wait to see whether the ineffectiveness of his trial attorney will determine Pye’s ultimate fate, or whether we as a society have evolved to the extent of being able to offer criminal defendants a fair trial.

Pye was tried and convicted of the capital murder of his ex-partner, Alicia Lynn Yarbrough, between May and June 1996. At the time, he was represented by a court-appointed attorney, Johnny B. Mostiler, who was simultaneously representing thousands of other criminal defendants, including four other defendants facing capital punishment, according to 2021 court documents. In addition to being overworked by anyone’s standards, ample evidence has emerged over the year of Mostiler’s deeply racist worldview.

It is in this context that Mostiler overlooked a mountain of readily available mitigating evidence in Pye’s case — evidence described by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2021 as follows: “The evidence trial counsel failed to investigate and present ‘adds up to a mitigation case that bears no relation to the few naked pleas for mercy actually put before the jury.’”

This evidence shows Pye suffered egregious economic and emotional deprivation as well as beyond-the-pale physical and mental suffering in his childhood, which court papers describe in terms so bleak, so bereft of love, stability, and normalcy, Charles Dickens’s Oliver Twist would bawl to hear them, Pye lived in an uninhabitable dwelling where he existed in the margins of human existence — even by poor Georgia standards — with no schooling, heat or air conditioning, and never enough to eat.

Undoubtedly, the crimes at the heart of Pye’s case were indefensible. But ahead of any death penalty deliberation, a jury must be given a full picture of a person’s life before they can determine a just sentence.

Alabama’s Equal Justice Initiative — spearheaded by legendary lawyer Bryan Stevenson — publishes a manual to assist capital defense attorneys. that manual makes clear that the main thing standing between the life and death of a condemned client is the amount of effort expended by their lawyer. As I’ve argued elsewhere and maintain to this day: This is a terrifying reality, and an unconscionable responsibility for any lawyer to bear — one of many reasons why the United States should abolish the death penalty immediately. With Mostiler serving as his lawyer, the barrier between Willie Pye and execution was thinner than the top layer of crust on a just-baked pecan pie, but flakier and more susceptible to falling apart.

As described above, Mostiler’s case load was so unwieldy that even if he had wanted to, he would not have had the time and labor resources required to properly investigate and and rebut the state’s case for the death penalty.

5 years after Pye was sentenced to death, in December 2001, Alan Berlow writing for The American Prospect in a tellingly titled piece, “Requiem for a Public Defender,” described a day when 50 men and women, predominately Black — who were scheduled to be tried at the Spalding County Courthouse in Griffin, Georgia — were waiting to talk to Mostiler: “a heavyset lawyer with a silver beard, a handlebar mustache, and wire-rimmed glasses … his hands sparkling with 6 gold, diamond, and onyx rings, his wrists with 3 gold bracelets.”

Berlow continued, “The 53-year-old attorney, who died of a massive heart attack on April 1, was perhaps the archetype of what many public defenders refer to as ‘meet’em, greet’em, and plead’em’ lawyers: attorneys who dispense with huge numbers of cases in a minimal amount of time.”

The above description taken together with Mostiler’s shameful history of racist sentiments paints a bleak picture of Pye’s trial rights.

Court documents from a 2006 ineffective counsel case against Mostiler reveal testimony that the trial lawyer on multiple occasions used egregiously offensive racial slurs to describe clients who he believed “deserve[d]” the death penalty or “the chair.”

. In April 2021, the 11th Circuit Court found that Pye’s death sentence should be reconsidered in the framework of the mitigating evidence. But six months later, the same court determined en banc that in fact, federal courts should defer to the state court’s determination that “Mostiler’s failure to further investigate Pye’s difficult childhood and present this mitigating evidence at sentencing wasn’t prejudicial.” This latter decision hinged in part on Georgia’s statutory requirement that capital punishment can only be imposed by unanimous jury decision, and that a finding of prejudice requires a finding of “a substantial likelihood that at least one juror would have voted against the death penalty.”

I would argue that any reasonable, empathetic person would have been swayed by a true and proper recounting of Pye’s upbringing. As former US Poet Laureate Rita Dove so poignantly explained: “[E]very person contains a story that, if told well, would resonate within us no matter how strange or unfamiliar the circumstances, bound as we are by the instincts and yearnings of human existence.”

Supreme Court Justice William Brennan famously observed “[It] is tempting to pretend that minorities on death row share a fate in no way connected to our own, that our treatment of them sounds no echoes beyond the chambers in which they die. Such an illusion is ultimately corrosive, for the reverberations of injustice are not so easily confined.” And as evidenced by the impending execution of Willie Pye, “the way in which we choose those who will die reveals the depth of moral commitment among the living.”

If Georgia moves forward with executing Willie Pye, please let there be no talk of morality, of fairness, of justice. Because there is none to be found here.

(source: Commentary; Stephen Cooper is a former D.C. public defender who worked as an assistant federal public defender in Alabama between 2012 and 2015----jurist.org)

********************

3 jurors who convicted condemned Georgia prisoner don’t want him executed

3 of the 9 surviving jurors who convicted Willie James Pye of the 1993 rape and murder of his former girlfriend are pleading with Georgia’s Board of Pardons and Paroles to spare his life.

“I want the board to know I do not want Mr. Pye to be executed,” one woman wrote. “I would like Mr. Pye to live out the rest of his life in prison.”

Another juror wrote that Pye’s trial attorney did a poor job defending him.

“At the time, many of the jurors felt his attorney did an inadequate job of defending him at trial,” she wrote. “It was a serious case but (Pye’s lawyer) could not have cared less.”

The Board of Pardons and Paroles will hold a closed-door clemency hearing Tuesday ahead of Wednesday’s scheduled execution. The board decides clemency cases; the governor has no say.

Pye, 59, was convicted of shooting, raping and killing Alicia Lynn Yarbrough, with whom he had a sporadic romantic relationship, in November 1993 in Spalding County. He was indicted on charges of malice murder, felony murder, kidnapping with bodily injury, armed robbery, burglary, rape and aggravated sodomy on Feb. 7, 1994. Trial began on May 28, 1996.

He was convicted of rape, malice murder, kidnapping and other charges on June 6, 1996. The next day, the jury recommended a death sentence.

Pye is intellectually disabled and was represented at trial by a “racist, overworked public defender” who “shrugged off any meaningful investment in the case,” his attorneys wrote in arguing for his death sentence to be commuted.

At the time, the Spalding County public defender, who has since died, also represented “thousands of other people,” including four additional capital defendants, filings allege. Pye’s attorneys contend that lawyer only spent about 150 hours preparing for for his client’s trial and that he failed to bring up certain details about Pye’s troubled upbringing during the sentencing phase.

Pye’s execution would be the first in Georgia in more than four years following an agreement between the state Attorney General’s Office and attorneys representing those on death row that halted lethal injections during the pandemic.

The emailed agreement gave three conditions that must be met before executions would resume: the statewide judicial emergency in place at the time had to be lifted, normal visitation would resume at state prisons and the COVID-19 vaccine would be “readily available to all members of the public.”

On Monday, members of the Georgians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty gathered outside the parole board building downtown seeking clemency for Pye.

Executive Director Cathy Harmon-Christian said the group turned in hundreds of signatures and some letters from across the globe asking the parole board to spare Pye’s life.

”The goal of the petition is for the parole board to hear there are a lot of people who want them to give mercy to Willie Pye,” Harmon-Christian said.

She said the legal system failed Pye and acknowledged that the parole board is likely his last chance to get off death row.

”Mr. Pye has a heartbeat, he lives among us. He has the right to life,” she said. “We believe the state does not have the right to kill Mr. Pye in our name.”

The anti-death penalty organization plans to hold vigils across the state on Wednesday, including one outside the gates of the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification State Prison in Jackson, where Pye is set to be executed.

After being convicted, Pye unsuccessfully appealed his death sentence multiple times in state and federal court. His attempt to have the U.S. Supreme Court hear his case was denied in October, clearing the way for his execution.

Pye’s clemency application contains letters from several close family members, including Pye’s siblings and a niece who received a full scholarship to law school.

“From my early childhood visits to my current adulthood visits, Uncle Will has always been interested in what’s going on in my life,” his niece wrote. “He beamed with pride every time I came to visit.”

She said her uncle brags about her at the prison every chance he gets.

“Other inmates would see me and say, ‘You’re Pye’s niece (that’s) in law school, huh? He talks about you all the time.’”

If executed, Pye will be the 54th inmate put to death by lethal injection in Georgia. There are 36 men and one woman on death row in Georgia.

(source: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution)

*******************

Georgia man set to be executed

Condemned murderer Willie James Pye, scheduled for execution by lethal injection at 7 p.m. on March 20 at Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison in Jackson, has requested his last meal.

Pye, 59, was sentenced to death for the 1993 murder of Alicia Lynn Yarborough, his former girlfriend.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976, Georgia has executed 75 men and 1 woman. If executed, Pye will be the 54th inmate put to death by lethal injection. Presently, there are 36 men and 1 woman under a death sentence in Georgia.

Georgia last carried out an execution in January 2020. In April 2021, the state attorney general’s office reached an agreement with attorneys for death row prisoners to suspend executions for a certain group of prisoners and to establish conditions under which they could resume.

The Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles has scheduled a clemency meeting for March 19 for Pye. During the meeting, board members will listen to testimony both for and against granting clemency for Pye.

(source: FOX News)

********************

Atlanta Spa Shooting Suspect Awaits Fate as Death Penalty Trial Stalls in Legal Limbo

It's been a lengthy 3 years since the tragic Atlanta spa shootings that claimed the lives of 4 Asian women, and the accused gunman's fate is still up in the air.

Robert Aaron Long remains in a legal limbo as the anticipated death penalty trial in Fulton County has yet to be scheduled, according to WABE. Long, who already pleaded guilty to separate charges and was sentenced to life without parole, pleaded not guilty to the charges he faces in Fulton County, including hate crime designations.

Serving his life sentence handed down in Cherokee County for the March 2021 shootings, Long, now 24, stands at the center of a fraught legal argument.

His attorneys from the Georgia Public Defender Council have attempted various legal maneuvers.

These have included efforts to remove the death penalty consideration based on Long's age when the crimes were committed, as well as challenges to the grand jury's demographics and requesting media exclusion from proceedings.

In Fulton County, the prosecution is pushing hard to see Long receive the ultimate punishment, hopeful that evidence showing Long drove 30 miles to continue his heinous spree along Piedmont Road in Atlanta will solidify their case.

They're ready to prosecute for the deaths of Yong Ae Yue, Soon Chung Park, Suncha Kim, and Hyun Jung Grant at Gold Spa and Aromatherapy Spa.

However, a congested court docket complicated by the COVID-19 pandemic and the involvement of Chief Judge Ural Glanville, engrossed in a high-stakes case against Atlanta rapper Young Thug, have both contributed to delaying the start of Long's trial.

The Georgia Public Defender Council, tasked with Long's defense, did not respond to requests for input on these ongoing issues.

While the judicial gears grind slowly forward, Long finds himself housed at the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison, a facility that's no stranger to state executions. Time will tell whether it will serve as the ultimate setting for Long's punishment, but for now, the wheels of justice remain mired in procedural delays and legal complexities.

(source: hoodline.com)

FLORIDA:

Judge considering motion to move Patrick McDowell's death penalty trial out of Nassau County----Patrick McDowell pleaded guilty in March 2023 to fatally shooting Nassau County Sheriff's Deputy Joshua Moyers during a 2021 traffic stop.

No decision was made in a Nassau County courtroom on Monday regarding a motion filed by the defense for Patrick McDowell, the man who pleaded guilty to fatally shooting Nassau County Sheriff's Deputy Joshua Moyers during a 2021 traffic stop.

The defense's motion called for a move of venue in McDowell's death penalty trial, citing issues finding an unbiased jury.

On Monday, a defense attorney argued that a fair jury in Nassau County could not be selected because local media coverage and prior knowledge of the case had tainted the public's opinion of McDowell and would impact his right to a fair trial.

The defense used data obtained through a public opinion survey, which surveyed 200 potential jurors in Nassau County, to argue for a move of venue.

A trial consultant who conducted the survey said the main purpose was to identify the number of people in the jury pool who know about the case, have a bias towards the defendant and have specific knowledge about the case that could have a prejudicial impact on a potential sentence.

Of those who answered that they knew about the case, 83% believed McDowell was guilty of murder.

Additionally, 50% answered that McDowell should get the death penalty when compared to only 23% who supported a life sentence.

"Media exposure develops case-specific knowledge, case-specific knowledge is tied to impressions of the defendant and those impressions are tied to views used towards the appropriate sentence in this case," said Bryan Edelman, a trial consultant who conducted the survey.

Edelman said he believes there is a "high risk" that McDowell's fair trial rights were undermined after reviewing survey results.

"Our survey underscores the fact that there are a large percentage of persons in this county that have a fixed opinion that Patrick McDowell should receive the death penalty, and I think more importantly, that a large number of persons believe that Mr. McDowell would have a difficult time, an uphill battle, that he should receive life without patrol," McDowell's attorney said.

The state argued the survey is not viable to decide on a move of venue.

"I believe this type of survey is flawed, particularly when it's only 200 prospective jurors in a county that is far more populous than just a couple hundred people," said a state prosecutor.

The state argued that the motion for a change of venue should only be considered if jury selection is unsuccessful.

"Throughout the course of that process, if the defense asked the court to reconsider the change of venue motion because it's becoming apparent that we cannot select the required number of jurors and alternates to try this case, then that is the appropriate time for the court to take up this motion," a state prosecutor said.

A judge didn't decide on the motion during Monday's hearing, saying the decision is "not an easy issue."

The judge said a decision could be made at the earliest by the end of the day on Tuesday.

A status conference was set for March 28. Jury selection is set to begin in early April. ******************

Man sentenced to death for murder of prison guard fights death penalty

A former professional boxer who killed a stranger at a St. Petersburg Strip Club and then killed a prison guard while serving the sentence for that crime is now trying to fight the death penalty.

Dwight Eaglin is set to appear in a Charlotte County courtroom Monday. He’s hoping to block prosecutors from keeping former felons off a jury in his new trial. The 48-year-old is getting a new trial for the killing of the guard because his 2006 death sentence was not unanimous.

Florida law at the time allowed non-unanimous decisions. Current law requires one in death penalty cases.

Florida voters approve a ballot initiative in 2018 allowing felons to vote and serve on juries, but the legislature quickly voted they must pay off fines or fees before the rights are restored.

Eaglin’s hearing is set for 10:30 a.m.

(source: WWSB news)

ALABAMA:

In 2024, executions ‘in the heart of Dixie’ still rely on Jim Crow

On Jan. 25, Alabama’s governor approved killing Kenneth Smith by nitrogen gas — something the United Nations said ”will likely violate the prohibition on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment” in violation of International Human Rights Law.

Alabama’s use of an experimental method of execution is an outrage. But what is more outrageous is that “in the heart of Dixie,” Alabama is still executing people using laws linked to racism.

Kenneth Smith wasn’t sentenced to death by a jury as required by the U.S. Constitution but by a judge, a practice outlawed even in Alabama. His jury voted 11 to 1 for life in prison, yet he was executed anyway.  

In 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled judicial overrides unconstitutional. In 2017, Alabama’s governor signed legislation banning judicial overrides. Yet Alabama still has 30 people set to be executed based on this outlawed and unconstitutional practice. That’s 30 individuals whose juries, based on all the evidence, chose to spare their lives.

Alabama’s death penalty laws are indefensible, not only because they are unconstitutional but because they are based on an 1870 Jim Crow law allowing non-unanimous death verdicts. Moreover, judicial overrides affect Black defendants almost twice as frequently as white ones.

Of the 30 people on Alabama’s death row sentenced by judicial overrides, 19 — or 63.33 percent — are Black. That’s twice the rate of whites and nearly 4 times their presence in Alabama’s population.

Even more disturbing, Alabama’s Equal Justice Initiative found that “while judicial overrides accounted for 7 % of death sentences in the nonelection year of 1997, in the election year of 2008, they accounted for 30 %.”

Of the 19 Black people currently on death row in Alabama due to judicial override, all but one were sentenced by white judges. All judges were either running for reelection at the time or did run in the next election. 

In Alabama, getting tough on criminals, particularly if they are Black, still seems to be a political art form.  One of the 19 Black men sentenced to die is Rocky Myers. Myers was convicted based on the testimony of a key witness who has since recanted his testimony. Based on IQ tests, Myers has intellectual disabilities. Furthermore, his jury voted 9 to 1 for life without parole. The trial judge nevertheless ordered him to be executed. 

National statistics also implicate racism in prosecutorial discretion as to who is charged for capital murder. 

A report by the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) shows that since 1976, nationwide, 1 person on death row has been exonerated for every 8.3 executed. We’ve been getting it wrong about 12 % of the time. 

Even worse, exonerations, the DPIC found, are “overwhelmingly the product of police or prosecutorial misconduct or the presentation of knowingly false testimony.” Of those exonerated for prosecutorial misconduct, 87 % are Black.

As a former governor of Alabama, I had a chance to commute the sentence of Freddie Lee Wright. I didn’t. Now, 24 years later, evidence has dribbled out that convinces me that Wright was guilty, but not of capital murder. I believe that he was wrongfully charged, wrongfully prosecuted, and wrongfully executed on March 3, 2000.

There are other death row convictions that should haunt current Alabama leaders. 

Take Toforest Johnson, for example, a Black man whose conviction was based on the testimony of a woman who was later paid $5,000 for that testimony. Ten alibi witnesses place him across town at the time of the murder. Both the prosecutor who convicted Johnson in 1998 and the current elected District Attorney have called for a new trial, but shamefully, Johnson remains on Alabama’s death row.

In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled that it takes a unanimous verdict to convict someone of a capital crime warranting death. The court highlighted the racist underpinnings of non-unanimous verdicts, a Jim Crow practice dating back to the 1870s. Whites apparently didn’t have a problem with unanimous jury verdicts until freed slaves were made citizens and could serve on juries. A vote by a single Black juror could prevent them from sentencing a Black man to death. 

Even though the 2020 Supreme Court ruling didn’t explicitly extend to the sentencing phase, all states ended the practice, except for Alabama. 

Alabama has 115 people, 54 of whom are Black, sentenced to death by this legal relic of Jim Crow. Regardless of one’s view on the death penalty, we should all agree that the process should be moral and constitutional. We should also agree that executions shouldn’t be based on racist relics of our shameful past, like non-unanimous juries and judicial overrides.

Tragically, that’s not the case.

(source: Opinion; Don Siegelman served as Alabama’s 1st progressive and last Democratic governor, from 1999 to 2003. He is an author and a lawyer focused on the criminal justice system----thehill.com)

*****************

Marco Perez officially sentenced to death

Over one month after a jury recommended death for convicted cop killer Marco Antonio Perez, Mobile County Circuit Judge Ben Brooks affirmed the sentence Monday morning, officially making the 24-year-old the youngest person on Alabama’s death row.

Perez was convicted by a Mobile County jury on Feb. 8 of capital murder of Mobile Police officer Sean Tuder on Jan. 20, 2019. The following day, the same jury sentenced Perez to death by a vote of 11 jurors for the death penalty and one vote for life imprisonment without parole.

Due to a law passed in 2017, juries can now render a death penalty verdict with judges unable to overturn the decision. Because of this change, a sentencing investigation report had to be conducted before Perez could officially be placed on death row, which led to the need for Monday’s sentencing hearing.

On Monday — prior to sentencing Perez to death — Brooks heard testimony from Mobile Police Chief Paul Prine, Tuder’s wife Krissy May and other family members, each of whom spoke about how the late officer’s death affected them in the years since.

An emotional Prine took to the podium first, giving a statement recounting a situation where he was shot while on-duty in 2001. He said while he was fortunate enough to recover from his injuries and go home to his family, Tuder did not get that chance due to Perez’s choices.

“As I lay there on the pavement clinging to life, I wasn’t concerned with myself. I was concerned with my kids and wife’s lives,” Prine said. “I got to go home to my family. Sean never got to go home to his.”

On what would have been their seventh wedding anniversary to the day, Tuder’s wife Krissy May told Brooks she continues to struggle with her late husband’s death.

“The actions by one person on one day changed my life forever,” May said. “I never thought at [the age of] 31, I would wake up on a Sunday married and go to sleep a widow.”

For the 1st time over the course of legal proceedings, Sean’s brother Chris Tuder made his feelings known in a public setting. Chris wrote a statement that was read aloud by Special District Attorney Ashley Rich as he was overcome with emotion during the moment.

Chris Tuder said the grief he felt over his brother’s death caused him to move to North Carolina in an attempt to distance himself from the incident. At certain times, Chris said in his statement he contemplated suicide and even asked his wife at one point to check him into a mental health facility.

While he and his family eventually moved back to Florida to be with his parents — and later welcomed the birth of their son whom they named after Sean — Chris said he still struggles to escape the reality his brother is gone.

“My mind doesn’t shut off and I have nightmares,” the statement read. “I get so angry and I don’t understand why or how someone can kill someone in cold blood like that or why it happened to us.”

After hearing approximately one hour of testimony from the prosecution’s side, Perez’s lead defense attorney Dennis Knizley did not call any witnesses to testify on his client’s behalf. Perez also declined to give a comment when given the opportunity.

Brooks then affirmed the jury’s sentence, permanently sending Perez to William C. Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore, where he will remain on death row until his execution.

Sean’s mother, Noreen Tuder, told reporters after the sentencing she was pleased with the outcome of the trial and expressed her gratitude to Rich and the prosecution for fighting for her son.

“It’s been devastating and it’s been a long, long process,” Tuder said. “You never want to bury your child. The actual sentencing was hard for me, but I think God took care of that and justice was served.”

Monday’s proceedings were mostly a formality, as Brooks wasn’t able to alter the decision. However, it served as a final moment for Tuder’s loved ones to address Perez, while being in the same room.

Mobile County District Attorney Keith Blackwood said the decision to put on witnesses to give testimony was solely based on their right to do so under Alabama law.

“Victims have the right to speak at these sentencing hearings about how these crimes impacted their family and we did that,” Blackwood said. “Today, justice was served. The death penalty is reserved for the worst-of-the-worst and Marco Perez certainly fits that bill.”

Perez is also facing other charges, ranging from assault to possession of prison contraband. However, whether or not he will be prosecuted for those, or transported to and from Atmore remains to be determined, Blackwood said.

Perez’s defense attorney Dennis Knizley said his team elected not to bring any witnesses to give testimony on Monday because there was nothing that could have been done to change the jury’s decision.

Moving forward, Knizley said the plan is to appeal the death sentence and conviction. However, given the length of the legal process and the typical waiting period for those on death row, Knizley acknowledged the long road ahead of all parties involved.

“There’s a number of things, both pretrial and during the trial, that we think would raise substantial issues on appeal,” Knizley said. “Unfortunately with this being a death penalty case, it could be decades before this is ultimately resolved in the appellate system.”

(source: lagniappemobile.com)

*****************

Judge formally imposes death penalty on Theodore man who gunned down Mobile cop----He was convicted for the murder of Mobile police officer Sean Tuder.

Marco Antonio Perez on Monday formally became a condemned man for the murder of a police officer, although a jury already had determined his fate.

Under state law, the jury’s sentencing decision in February in the capital murder case was binding. That made Monday’s hearing a formality, although no less emotional.

Mobile County Circuit Judge Ben Brooks heard from Officer Sean Tuder’s mother, widow and cousin, along with Police Chief Paul Prine. Uniformed police officers filled several rows on one side of the courtroom, while members of the Mobile County Sheriff’s Office special operations unit sate on the other side.

Tuder’s widow, Krissy, recalled the day the couple married 7 years ago.

“I am so glad I have that memory,” she told the judge. “Unfortunately, not even 2 years later, I experienced the worst day of my life.”

She added: “I’m a shadow of the fun-loving, goofy person I once was, but she died, too.”

Perez was just 19 years old when he left his Theodore home and spent several weeks on the run after skipping out on a pretrial conference in federal court, where he had been brought up on a gun charge. Tuder was at home on Jan. 20, 2019, when he got a tip that Perez was at the Peach Place Inn apartments off of Jeff Hamilton Road.

Tuder arranged for a friend of Perez to message him through the Snapchat application and tell him that her uncle would come and pick him up. Perez was in the parking lot when Tuder pulled up in his private car, dressed in civilian clothes. The 2 scuffled, and then Perez drew a gun he had stolen days earlier and shot the officer to death.

Prosecutor Ashley Rich, who personally handled the case when she was district attorney and kept it even after she left office, told Brooks that execution is just.

“The death penalty is justice in this case because of the way Marco Perez chose to live his life,” she said.

Rich said that life has included assaults and other crimes in Mobile County Metro Jail even after he had been charged with capital murder.

Perez declined to make a statement in court on Monday, and the defense chose not to present any witnesses.

“The state chose to put some people in to testify, and it’s up to them what they want to do, but this is a court of law, and there was nothing to be decided today,” defense attorney Dennis Knizley said outside the courtroom. “So there was no reason for us to or anyone else for that matter to put on anyone.”

Perez faces additional criminal charges, including 4 theft-related charges and a charge of breaking and entering a vehicle. Those were charges listed in the capital murder indictment related to alleged conduct in the weeks before the shooting. Those charges were not tried during the murder trial. Perez also has several pending charges for incidents that occurred while he was locked up in Mobile County Metro Jail awaiting trial.

The judge set a status hearing on those charges for July. Rich said the Mobile County District Attorney’s Office would make a formal plea bargain offer in writing.

Tuder’s mother, Noreen Tuder, told the judge that she cannot describe how much her son meant to her.

“He was the light of my world. … He was our miracle child,” she said. “We weren’t supposed to be able to have children.”

Tuder testified that she knew her 31-year-old son and his wife were planning to start a family and misunderstood her daughter-in-law when she called with the terrible news that Sunday evening. She said she thought Krissy was calling to say she was going to have a boy.

“No, you don’t understand, they got our boy,” she recalled her daughter-in-law saying.

Tuder said she struggles to come to terms with Perez’s decisions that day.

“I don’t understand why he executed my son the way he did,” she said.

After Monday’s hearing, Tuder said she believes justice has been done and expressed gratitude toward the Mobile community.

“You never want to bury your child,” she said. “But the people of Mobile stepped up for us unbelievably, and they still continue to do so. And I love the people of Mobile, and I want to say thank you.”

Prine, the police chief, recalled his own near brush with death when someone shot hm in the line of duty in October 2001.

“As I lay there that night, clinging to life, I was not concerned with my life,” he said.

Instead, Prine said, he was worried about his family and was grateful he eventually made it back to them.

“Sean never got to go home,” he said.

During the hearing, Rich played footage from Tuder’s body camera from an unrelated incident on a different day. He had just made an arrest and realized the man was in distress. The video shows Tuder uncuffing him and driving him to get food and something to drink.

“Sean was passionate about his job loved helping others. … We can all learn from Sean the lesson of putting other people first,” Rich said.

Mobile County District Attorney Keith Blackwood acknowledged that Brooks could not change the sentencing decision of the jury even if he wanted to. But he added that putting on witnesses is about more than persuading the judge.

“The state put on witnesses because we have the right to do that,” he said. “Victims have the right under the Victims Rights Act to speak at these sentencing hearings, to talk about how the crime impacted their family, and we did that. … Today, justice was done. Marco Perez received the death penalty, as he deserved. The death penalty is reserved for the worst of the worst, and Marco Perez certainly fits that bill.”

(source: WALA news)

OHIO:

Convicted cop killer continues to file motions with hopes of throwing out death penalty

Convicted cop killer Odraye Jones isn’t wasting his time while incarcerated at the Ashtabula County jail.

Jones, 47, and now known as Alik Allah U Akbar, has filed 18 motions so far with six ruled on and a few that the state responded to but they haven’t been heard in court yet.

Many of Jones’ arguments have been previously ruled on, but he continues to appeal. One example is his repeated motions to dismiss his case.

In January, he argued that once his death penalty was overturned by an appellate court, that he’s not convicted and, therefore, his motions to dismiss are relevant.

Ashtabula County Common Pleas Judge David Schroeder disagreed.

“Everything has been through [appeals] at federal and state courts,” Schroeder said. “Your issues were dealt with several times.”

Jones was only 21 when he was sentenced to death in May 1998 by a jury in the November 1997 fatal shooting of Ashtabula Police officer William D. Glover Jr., 30, who was chasing Jones, a robbery suspect on West 41st Street in Ashtabula.

Since his conviction, Jones has been on death row.

A resentencing trial came about after his death sentence was revoked in 2022 by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The court found testimony of a clinical psychologist, called to testify by Jones’ defense attorneys, contained racist statements.

Jones has since called his original attorneys “clowns” who didn’t defend him properly. Consequently, he repeatedly asked to represent himself in this new resentencing phase of trial.

The new sentencing is slated for May 20 in Ashtabula County Common Pleas Judge David Schroeder’s courtroom.

In October, Schroeder ruled Jones could represent himself, but under certain conditions, including he respects the decorum of the court and comply with procedure and rules of evidence.

One of Jones’ motions, to be moved from the state penitentiary to the county jail, was granted on March 6 by Senior Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Solomon Oliver Jr., according to court records.

However, further proceedings in the case have since been stayed, pending the appeal to the Ohio 11th District Court of Appeals regarding Oliver’s recent federal ruling vacating Jones’ sentence, yet denying Jones’ request to bar the state from seeking the death penalty, according to court records.

(source: starbeacon.com)

OKLAHOMA----impending execution

Oklahoma death row inmate pleads his case before scheduled execution

Michael Smith, set to be put to death in Oklahoma in less than 3 weeks, is proclaiming his innocence.

The Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board denied clemency for Smith on March 6.

Smith spent 15 minutes pleading his clemency case Wednesday.

According to Attorney General Gentner Drummond, Smith was convicted of murdering 40-year-old Janet Moore and 24-year-old Sharath Pulluru in two separate incidents on February 22, 2002.

Smith was convicted after confessing to the killings but claims he was high on drugs when he told investigators he killed Pulluru then burned the body.

In a phone interview with News 4, Smith says, he’s innocent even offering words to the families of the victims. Smith told News 4, ” despite the conviction there are numerous inconsistencies and irregularities in my case, from representation issues in my trial and questionable interrogation process. Just that I’m sorry for their loss, and I’m not the person that killed their family members.”

Smith is scheduled to be executed Thursday, April 4, 2024.

(source: KFOR news)

UTAH:

Utah Prisoners’ Request for Information Thwarted by New Legislation Increasing Secrecy in Execution Procedures

On February 16, 2024, Utah Governor Spencer Cox signed Senate Bill 109, Corrections Modifications, into law, “amend[ing] provisions related to the [Utah] Department of Corrections.” S.B. 109, described as an “uncontroversial” legislative measure, was belatedly amended to include a provision preventing the public disclosure of “identifying information” about individuals involved in carrying out executions, the procurement of drugs and supplies needed for executions, and any identifying information about those involved in the manufacturing or producing of the drugs and supplies. The new secrecy provision will now make it almost impossible for members of the public or prisoners to learn critical details about the execution process.

S.B. 109 was introduced in the Utah legislature in early January by Senator Derrin Owens. At the initial House Law Enforcement and Criminal Committee Hearing, along with Executive Director of Utah Department of Corrections (UDC) Brian Redd, he told committee members that the bill would “help improve retention and recruitment, better supervise people on parole, and help people be more successful when they reenter the community and to reduce the number of people who return to prison.” 2 weeks after the bill’s introduction, an amendment was introduced “without any discussion, debate, or public comment,” and added the secrecy provision to Utah Code 64-13-27. Importantly, the language of this amendment prevents the release of information even when ordered by a court “through discovery or other judicial processes or orders; and may not be introduced as evidence in civil proceeding, criminal proceeding, an agency proceeding, or any other administrative or judicial proceeding.”

The new legislation is the latest chapter in a year-long effort by Utah death-sentenced prisoners to obtain information about execution methods from the UDC. In March 2023, counsel for several prisoners filed information requests with UDC seeking information regarding the state’s efforts to acquire lethal injection drugs. These attorneys were quickly told by UDC that it did not have any “responsive documents” to their requests. Counsel submitted an additional information request in September 2023, again requesting information related to UDC’s efforts to obtain drugs for executions. UDC took nearly two months to reply, during which time the Third Judicial District Court for Salt Lake City, Utah held oral arguments in UDC’s request to dismiss a lawsuit about the information request. At the hearing, UDC officials told the court that counsel could obtain the requested information under the Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA). In November 2023, UDC released “limited information that indicated it was inquiring with the Drug Enforcement Agency about the legality of obtaining Pentobarbital for use during executions.” The information released at this time dates back to 2011, a disclosure at odds with previous official statements that responsive documents did not exist.

After receiving this information, counsel for the Utah prisoners requested that UDC turn over additional information pertaining to drug manufacturing and procurement. Counsel resubmitted a GRAMA request in December 2023, and nearly two months later, were again told that there were no additional responsive records. On February 14, 2024, counsel refiled the GRAMA request seeking updated information on Utah’s efforts to acquire lethal injection drugs. With Governor Cox’s signing of this legislation, UDC denied counsel’s request for new information, citing the language of the newly amended and signed legislation as reason for the denial.

Counsel for the prisoners now allege that Utah “purposefully withheld the release of existing, responsive documents in order to wait out the amendment to GRAMA to avoid disclosing crucial information about the state’s search for drugs,” they said in a recent motion. “Utah’s attempt to conceal the drugs intended for Plaintiffs’ execution is constitutionally intolerable.”

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

IDAHO:

Unknown costs, legal challenges: Idaho bill to expand death penalty dies after testimony

An effort to expand capital punishment in Idaho died when a bill that sought to make lewd acts with children under age 12 qualify for the death penalty failed to earn enough support for a Senate floor vote. The bill’s sponsor pledged to try again next year.

House Bill 515 aimed to make Idaho at least the 2nd state to adopt a law that made those convicted of certain sex crimes against preteen kids eligible for the death penalty. Florida passed a similar law last year.

The Idaho bill’s co-sponsors, Reps. Bruce Skaug, R-Nampa, and Josh Tanner, R-Eagle, acknowledged that such a law is unconstitutional. But they hoped to pass it anyway with a goal of appealing it to the U.S. Supreme Court to consider changing decades of precedent that prohibit capital punishment for cases when a victim was not killed.

“In my opinion, they got this case wrong,” Tanner said Friday while presenting the bill to a Senate committee. “But there will be legal battles with this going forward. … When we see this, I guarantee you every single person would look back and go, ‘That crime deserves that punishment.’ ”

The bill overwhelmingly passed in the House last month. But the Republican-heavy Senate committee voted it down after an hour-long hearing that included testimony from supporters and opponents.

“We will review the bill for possible amendments and likely bring it back next year,” Skaug, a personal injury attorney and former Ada County deputy prosecutor, told the Idaho Statesman in a text message.

Critics fear costs to Idaho

Spurred on by public defenders from across the state who testified against the bill, lawmakers took issue with the costs expected with its passage. The bill’s sponsors had identified “no known fiscal impact,” though Anthony Geddes, Ada County chief public defender, stated in reality it could cost the state millions of dollars a year — excluding the lengthy appeals fight that state would need to undertake in attempts to make the proposed law constitutional.

“I want this body to understand the tremendous financial impact that this bill will have,” Geddes told the committee. “It’s a price that we are not prepared to pay.”

Across Idaho, only 13 attorneys are qualified to lead the defense in a death penalty case, which currently only occurs with first-degree murder convictions and aggravating factors found by the jury. If the bill passed, hundreds of Idaho defendants each year could face the death penalty and require qualified defense attorneys, the group of public defenders told lawmakers.

“This is a massive lift that would really blow up our agency,” said Erik Lehtinen, interim director of the Idaho State Appellate Public Defender’s Office. “This is very specialized work. There aren’t that many people that do it. … So we just don’t have the attorneys for it.”

The Idaho Prosecuting Attorneys Association, the group that represents the state’s 44 prosecuting attorneys offices and the Idaho attorney general’s office, did not respond to emailed requests from the Statesman.

The attorney general’s office declined to comment on the bill. It remains unclear whether any lawmakers requested a legal opinion of the bill, which Attorney General Raúl Labrador is required to provide if asked under Idaho law.

“Our office has a policy of not issuing written opinions to legislators on pending litigation or proposed legislation that is likely to result in constitutional litigation,” Dan Estes, Labrador’s spokesperson, told the Idaho Capital Sun in a statement last week. “A formal written opinion identifying constitutional concerns in pending legislation can and will undermine our state’s ability to defend it later should it become law and subsequently be challenged in court.”

Skaug previously told the Statesman that Labrador “had no input” on the bill or its drafting.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Idaho, which opposes the death penalty, came out against the bill.

Death sentence would deter crime, supporters say

Tanner and supporters noted Friday that a potential death sentence in the proposed law would deter people from committing sex crimes against children under 12 years old.

“I think it’s a powerful message to send nationwide,” said former veteran Los Angeles police officer Robert Gillis, who now heads a crime legislation advocacy group called Idaho Tough On Crime. “We’ll never know what the benefit was of having the potential of a death penalty, but it may have been the message that saved one — and one is everything.”

Studies have repeatedly shown that murder rates are similar in U.S. states with capital punishment as those without it, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. The Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit does not take a position for or against the death penalty.

Deborah Denno is a criminal law professor at Fordham University in New York City and one of the nation’s leading experts on the death penalty. She also questioned the claim that capital punishment acts as a deterrent to prevent crimes from happening.

“Certainly we know that rules and laws are deterrents, and I would imagine if we didn’t have any penalties for people killing each other, the homicide rate would come up,” she said in a phone interview with the Statesman. “But I just don’t think people think that way. You’re attributing an awful lot of rationality — particularly with a crime against a child where perhaps they have very little control over themselves — to impulse acts where they’re not thinking about the punishment. They’re just thinking of gratifying themselves.”

Supporters said the proposed law would not dramatically expand Idaho’s death row, which today counts 8 prisoners. Prosecutors would use their discretion and only pursue death sentences for the worst cases of sex crimes against children under 12, they said.

“Taking the life of another merits the death penalty in Idaho, and I don’t know if this maybe is even worse,” said Sen. Todd Lakey, R-Nampa, who supported the bill. “I think the extremely heinous nature of this crime merits that penalty.”

Senate Assistant Majority Leader Abby Lee, R-Fruitland, banded with a committee majority to hold the bill from advancing to the floor for a vote.

“I care deeply that justice is done and that it is not overturned,” she said. “If a death sentence is pursued, I want to make sure that the victim isn’t promised something that we can’t deliver.”

(source: idahostatesman.com)

CALIFORNIA:

California speeds plans to empty San Quentin's death row

California is accelerating its efforts to empty San Quentin's death row with plans to transfer the last 457 condemned men to other state prisons by summer.

The move comes 5 years after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an executive order that imposed a moratorium on the death penalty and closed the prison's execution chamber. It coincides with his broader initiative to transform San Quentin into a Scandinavian-style prison with a focus on rehabilitation, education and job training.

The condemned prisoners will be rehoused in the general population across two dozen high-security state prisons, where they will gain access to a broader range of rehabilitative programming and treatment services, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The changes do not modify their sentences or convictions.

The plan unveiled Monday builds on a pilot program that experimented with the transfer of 104 death row prisoners between January 2020 and 2022. An additional 70 people on death row have been moved from the legendary men's facility in Marin County over the last month, CDCR said. The 20 condemned women incarcerated at the Central California Women's Facility in Chowchilla will remain there, but have been rehoused in the general population.

The changes align, in part, with Proposition 66, a statewide ballot measure approved in 2016 that allows for condemned prisoners to be housed in institutions other than San Quentin, requiring them to work and pay 70% of their income to victims.

“This transfer enables death-sentenced people to pay court-ordered restitution through work programs. Participants are placed in institutions with an electrified secured perimeter while still integrating with the general population,” CDCR Secretary Jeffrey Macomber said in a prepared statement.

But a primary aim of Proposition 66 was to speed up executions by setting time limits on legal challenges and expanding the pool of attorneys authorized to represent defendants sentenced to death. In that same election, voters defeated a rival measure that would have repealed capital punishment.

By contrast, Newsom vowed in 2019, when announcing his death penalty moratorium, that no California prisoner would be executed while he is in office because of his belief that capital punishment is at its core discriminatory and unjust.

Even before Newsom's moratorium, executions had been on hold in California for years amid litigation over whether the state's lethal injection process constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. California's last execution was in 2006. There are 644 condemned people in California's prisons.

Last year, Newsom announced plans to overhaul San Quentin, California's oldest prison, into a more rehabilitative facility with job training, substance-use and mental health programs as well as expanded academic classes, a model of incarceration more common in Scandinavian countries.

But death row prisoners will not be incorporated into the re-envisioned San Quentin. Outside of death row, the facility does not have the necessary security measures, including a "lethal electrified fence," to rehouse high-security prisoners into its general population.

Newsom proposed $380 million last year to jump-start the San Quentin overhaul and set up an advisory council to implement his vision. But, faced with a looming state budget deficit topping $37 billion, lawmakers in both political parties, as well as the Legislature's nonpartisan financial advisors, have raised questions about the scope and timing.

The Legislative Analyst's Office recently recommended closing five prisons to reduce criminal justice spending, in addition to the two state prisons the Newsom administration has already closed. Meanwhile, the San Quentin advisory council in January recommended redirecting some of the money dedicated to the revamp into renovations that would more immediately improve living conditions at the prison.

(source: Los Angeles Times)

****************

Calif. to transfer hundreds of death row inmates out of San Quentin----The move is in line with Gov. Gavin Newsom’s opposition to the death penalty.

California plans to transfer over 450 death row inmates currently housed in San Quentin to other prisons over the coming months.

Monday, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) announced the transfer plan, coming 5 years after Gov. Gavin Newsom placed a moratorium on the death penalty.

The backstory: In 2016 voters approved Proposition 66, which requires death-sentenced inmates to work to pay restitution to their victims.

Proposition 66 also allowed prisoners sentenced to death to be housed in other prisons besides San Quentin.

The big picture: Last month the CDCR began transferring death-sentenced inmates to other prisons, with 70 inmates transferred already.

There have also been 20 inmates in the Central California Women’s Facility relocated to the general population.

In total, there are 644 people with condemned sentences within state prisons.

The move comes after a pilot program conducted from 2020-2022 transferred 104 death-sentenced inmates from San Quentin to other facilities. State of play: The Condemned Inmate Transfer Program assigns death row prisoners to different security levels based on their behavior and the risk they pose to others.

CDCR is moving toward a behavior-based system where prisoners are housed according to their individual case factors, as reviewed by the Institution Classification Committee.

All death row inmates will be transferred to an institution that at least has a Level II security level and a lethal electrified fence. They will be designated as “close custody” for at least five years, as well, which provides the highest security level while allowing them to be integrated into the general population.

What they’re saying: “This transfer enables death-sentenced people to pay court-ordered restitution through work programs. Participants are placed in institutions with an electrified secured perimeter while still integrating with the general population,” said Secretary Jeffrey Macomber.

(source: Daniel Gligich is a senior reporter for The San Joaquin Valley Sun)

*****************

Chilling tales of world’s most brutal death row prison – including the inmate who unwittingly built his OWN gas chamber----One prisoner's death was so traumatic that executions were paused for 25 years

INFESTED with rats, leaking ceilings and prisoners kept alone for 23 hours in 'sardine can' cells - welcome to life in the world's most notorious death row priosn.

San Quentin, north of San Francisco, has housed some of American's most notorious criminals and is the state's only death row for male inmates - the largest in the US.

But that's set to change as Governor Gavin Newsom is turning California's oldest prison into a rehabilitation centre.

He announced last year he will be taking the death chamber away and moving the 533 criminals on death row to standard prisons across California.

These prisoners will still spend the rest of their lives in jail - and could still be killed if a future governor reinstates the death penalty.

The conditions of San Quentin - which staged its first execution in 1893 - have been described as shocking by inmates and their family. It's famed for its green execution chamber, which emits a red light when a person is being executed, visible from the nearby highway.

Meanwhile family members are forced to walk by the entrance to the prison's execution chamber every time they visit.

Here we take a look a look at the gruesome history of San Quentin - including the times executions went badly wrong.

Thanks to San Quentin’s green room of death - and infamous inmates like cult leader Charles Manson - the prison is widely known as one of the USA’s most violent and restrictive jails.

Prisoners are reportedly kept alone for 23 hours a day in a 4ft (1.2m) by 9ft (2.7m) cell, which inmates have said feels like a “sardine can”.

When Ramon Rogers arrived at San Quentin in 1996, he claimed there was rain leaking through the ceiling and mice and rats scurrying everywhere, as well as flocks of bird which "defecated all over the place".

"It was a gross environment," he told the BBC.

Keith Doolin, a former long-distance truck driver convicted of murder, has spent the last 28 years in San Quentin.

His mother Donna Larsen, who drives a 9-hour round trip once a month to visit her son, said she was stunned by how unclean the prison was the first time she visited.

"It had a stench to it," she told the BBC. "Sometimes Keith's clothing smells mouldy when we visit.

"To know that your loved one is living in that made me sick."

Since 1996 San Quentin has executed inmates using lethal injection - but it previously, along with nearby Folsom Prison, opted for hanging.

Professional burglar Dallas Egan chose to be hanged after he robbed $100,000 from a jewellery store and shot a witness dead in 1932.

“I can think of nothing better than the drop through the gallows,” he apparently told the judge. “I’m a criminal at heart, and I want to be hanged.”

His wish was granted, and on the morning of his execution, he was given a hearty breakfast and allowed to smoke a cigar, as well as swig a few shots of whiskey.

As prison officials handcuffed him and led him to the gallows, he is said to have danced the entire way there.

One prison guard - a hangman at San Quentin for 5 years - suffered greatly from having to kill so many people.

Amos Lunt became Chief Deputy Warden for San Quentin in 1894 and oversaw the executions of around 24 men in his first 2 years alone.

When he was replaced by Frank Arbogast in 1899, Lunt apparently warned him: “They are after me. There are several under the bed now… it’s only a matter of time until they get me.”

He started working as a regular guard instead, but began hallucinating - seeing things and hearing strange voices.

A year later he was committed to the California State Asylum in Napa - where he eventually killed himself.

From 1938 gas was the prison’s weapon of choice - but when it was tested first on a live animal, it didn't go to plan.

Prior to the 1st prisoner, a pig was put in the chamber. Shockingly it took more than 35 minutes to succumb to the gas - despite manufacturers boasting it would kill in 15 seconds.

But that didn’t stop it being how they killed inmates for almost six decades.

Prisoner 'built own gas chamber'

Serving time for burglary, Alfred Wells was a prisoner on San Quentin’s regular prison block in the 1930s when he was ordered to help construct the execution chamber.

He was terrified of it, telling another inmate while installing it: “That’s the closest I ever want to come to the gas chamber.”

When Wells was eventually released from prison on parole, he began dating his half-sister - much to the disgust of his family.

It sparked a family feud so fierce that Wells ended up killing his half-brother and two other women, and was sent back to San Quentin - this time to death row - when he was convicted.

In 1942, Wells was killed in the very gas chamber he'd helped build less than a decade before.

Executions 'no longer biggest killer' at death row prison

William Bonin, known as the Freeway Killer, became the 1st person to die from lethal injection in 1996.

The serial killer, who raped, tortured, and murdered at least 21 young men and boys between May 1979 and June 1980, enjoyed pizza and ice cream for his final meal, while watching the game show Jeopardy.

In 2006 the prison was criticised for inhumanely injecting inmates.

One district judge accused the prison for allowing lags to writhe in pain as they died due to a lack of staff training and the poorly lit gas chamber used for injections.

In 2008, San Quentin opened a new $853,000 death chamber at the prison - but it will never be used.

Executions stopped for 25 years

The lead-up to one inmate Aaron Mitchell’s execution was so fraught that California paused killings for 25 years afterwards.

Mitchell was convicted of killing a police officer in central California in the 1960s and sent to San Quentin to be executed in April 1967.

However, the day before he was due to be killed, he attempted to cut his wrists with a piece of metal he’d smuggled into his cell, while yelling, “I am the 2nd coming of Jesus” and “I am the son of God.”

Prison guards and doctors rushed in to save him and calm him down, but hours later Mitchell stripped off his clothes, re-opened his wounds and continued chanting about Jesus.

Covid contagion at San Quentin

In 2021 the prison was accused of letting Covid-19 run rampant throughout the cramped and overpacked prison. One inmate Kerry Rudd told Mother Jones: “It’s like a horror movie when you’re watching like a monster inch its way towards you and you haven’t no way out, you have nowhere to run. Us being locked in here, it’s like we’re watching this virus get steadily closer to us and there’s nothing we can do.” Another prisoner John Mattox was transferred to San Quentin while showing signs of Covid. 2 days after Mattox arrived he was tested, but only found out he was positive five days later and placed in a filthy isolation cell. He recalled that the cell was “filthy and an officer took water with bleach and doused the walls and mattress and left without giving me a towel to wipe up”.

Despite psychiatrists saying he was having a mental breakdown and shouldn’t be executed, Mitchell was still taken to be executed in the gas chamber the next day, with his last words being: “I am Jesus Christ.”

Afterwards the state questioned whether his defence at trial should have shown he was mentally ill. It paused executions afterwards, trying to find a better solution for the future.

There were no further executions in California until 1992, when Robert Alton Harris was gassed to death for the 1978 murders of two teenage boys in San Diego.

Longest-serving inmate

San Quentin’s longest-serving inmate is Douglas Stankenwitz, who has been incarcerated for 46 years.

Stankenwitz, along with 3 others, carjacked 21-year-old Theresa Graybeal and then shot her at point-blank range, leaving her for dead - while she was simply out buying dog food.

One of the other assailants was given just five years for the crime, another was given 12, while the third - a minor - was granted immunity in exchange for his testimony.

But it was Stankenwitz who was handed the death sentence - despite claiming he wasn’t the one who actually killed Theresa.

By 2012, new information on the case seemed to back this up, and an appeals court cut down his sentence to life without parole.

He’s still housed at San Quentin, and has said he has only felt grass under his feet five times throughout his sentence. He’s still holding out hope for parole one day.

(source: the-sun.com)

USA:

Evidence Does Not Support the Use of the Death Penalty----Capital punishment must come to an end. It does not deter crime, is not humane and has no moral or medical basis

It is long past time to abolish the death penalty in the U.S.

Capital punishment was halted in the U.S. in 1972 but reinstated in 1976, and since then, nearly 1,600 people have been executed. To whose gain? Study after study shows that the death penalty does not deter crime, puts innocent people to death, is racially biased, and is cruel and inhumane. It is state-sanctioned homicide, wholly ineffective, often botched, and a much more expensive punishment than life imprisonment. There is no ethical, scientifically supported, medically acceptable or morally justifiable way to carry it out.

The recent execution of Kenneth Eugene Smith demonstrates this barbarity. After a failed attempt at lethal injection by prison officials seemingly inexperienced in the placement of an IV, the state of Alabama killed Smith in January using nitrogen gas. The Alabama attorney general claimed that this method of execution was fast and humane, despite no supporting evidence. Eyewitnesses recounted that Smith thrashed during the nitrogen administration and took more than 20 minutes to die.

Opposition to the death penalty is growing among the American public, and the Biden administration must follow through on its promise to end this horror. The Department of Justice must heed its own admission that the death penalty doesn’t stop crime, and our legislators must continue to take up the issue on the congressional floor. The few states that still condemn people to death must follow the lead of states that have considered the evidence and rejected capital punishment.

Programs such as the Innocence Project have shown, over and over, that innocent people have been sentenced to death. Since 1973 nearly 200 people on death row have been exonerated, based on appeals, the reopening of cases, and the entrance of new and sometimes previously suppressed evidence. People have recanted testimony, and supposedly airtight cases have been poked full of evidentiary holes.

Through the death penalty, the criminal justice system has killed at least 20 people now believed to have been innocent and uncounted others whose cases have not been reexamined. Too many of these victims have been Black or Hispanic. This is not justice. These are state-sanctioned hate crimes.

Using rigorous statistical and experimental control methods, both economics and criminal justice studies have consistently found that there is no evidence for deterrence of violent crimes in states that allow capital punishment. One such study, a 2009 paper by criminology researchers at the University of Dallas, outlines experimental and statistical flaws in econometrics-based death penalty studies that claim to find a correlated reduction in violent crime. The death penalty does not stop people from killing. Executions don’t make us safer.

The methods used to kill prisoners are inhumane. Electrocution fails, causing significant pain and suffering. Joel Zivot, an anesthesiologist who criticizes the use of medicines in carrying out the death penalty, has found (at the request of lawyers of death row inmates) that the lungs of prisoners who were killed by lethal injection were often heavy with fluid and froth that suggested they were struggling to breathe and felt like they were drowning. Nitrogen gas is used in some veterinary euthanasia, but based in part on the behavior of rats in its presence, it is “unacceptable” for mammals, according to the American Veterinary Medical Association. This means that Smith, as his lawyers claimed in efforts to stop his execution, became a human subject in an immoral experiment.

Courts have often decided, against the abundant evidence, that these killings are constitutional and do not fall under the “cruel and unusual punishment” clause of the 8th Amendment or, in Smith’s appeal, both the 8th Amendment and the due process protection clause of the 14th amendment.

A small number of prosecutors and judges in a few states, mostly in the South, are responsible for most of the death sentences being handed down in the U.S. today. It’s a power they should not be able to wield. Smith was sentenced to life in prison by a jury before the judge in his case overruled the jury and gave him the death sentence.

A furious urge for vengeance against those who have done wrong—or those we think have done wrong—is the biggest motivation for the death penalty. But this desire for violent retribution is the very impulse that our criminal justice system is made to check, not abet. Elected officials need to reform this aspect of our justice system at both the state and federal levels. Capital punishment does not stop crime and mocks both justice and humanity. The death penalty in the U.S. must come to an end.

(source: Editors, Scientific American Magazine Vol 330 Issue 4)

GUYANA:

Citizens will decide on whether death penalty remains in place in Guyana -Teixeira tells UN Human Rights body

Minister of Governance, Gail Teixeira told the United Nations Human Rights Committee this morning that the citizens of Guyana will decide on the way forward regarding the death penalty, even as she said there are no plans by the Government to boost the capacity to execute anyone under the current laws.

Guyana appeared before the UN Human Rights Commission today and in responding to questions in relation to the death penalty, Minister Teixeira stated that although the death penalty remains in the country’s constitution, the way forward will be decided by Constitutional reform.

She said a similar process was undertaken between 1999- 2001 and the popular view was that the death penalty should remain on the books, although it remains unused.

“So, there is no view in Guyana right now that we go back to executions of any kind and so it is a ad hoc or informal moratorium that we have maintained from 1997 to now. To further strengthen our argument, the government has put no Heads of prison service, no Heads of the Ministry of Home Affairs, put any investments of funds into developing any capacity to execute anyone,” Minister Teixeria told the meeting.

Although the death penalty has not been removed from the Constitution or the statute, the matter will have to go back to Parliament. Guyana has not executed a death penalty warrant since 1997.

Over the past 8 years, several International agencies including the International Commission against the Death Penalty, have been urging the Guyana Government to abolish the death penalty completely, since Guyana remains the only country in South America to uphold the death as a penalty for certain crimes.

In 2022, The Guyana Court of Appeal refused to strike down the death penalty as unconstitutional.

(source: newssourcegy.com)

NIGERIA:

5 bag death sentence over murder of vigilante commander in Rivers

A Rivers State High Court sitting in Port Harcourt on Monday convicted and sentenced 5 people to death by hanging or or lethal injection until they are confirmed dead for the murder of one Umezuruike Alex.

Those convicted and sentenced to death are: Okechuwu Orji from the Atali community in Obio-Akpor, Igwe Promise, Iheanyi Igwe Morrison Igwe all from Omudioga in Emohua Local Government Area and Goodness Monday from Akwa Ibom.

They were found guilty of 10 counts charge of conspiracy, cultism, murder and illegal possession of firearms.

The trial Judge, Justice Sika Aprioku in his judgment, discharge and acquitted the sixth defendant in the suit, Alex Deiwe.

Justice Aprioku held that the prosecution counsel, Essien Edet proved his case against the other five convicts on charges of conspiracy, cultism, illegal possession of firearms and murder.

The court also held that the convicts did not only murder the Umezuruike Alex who was OSPAC commander in Omudioga community, but were also involved in kidnapping and other criminal activities in parts of the state before their arrest and commencement of prosecution.

Speaking to Journalists outside the courtroom, the prosecution counsel, Essien Edet, who is the Officer in charge of legal annex , Rivers State Police command, expressed happiness over the judgment which he described as justice well served and will also serve as deterrent to others who are involved in such crimes.

It will be recalled that the late Omudioga OSPAC commander, Umezuruike AlexL was in the year, 2021, killed, beheaded while other parts of his body were dismembered by cultists for fighting against criminals in the area.

(source: pmnewsnigeria.com)

TAIWAN:

Thousands support death penalty for child abusers

More than 25,000 people have endorsed a proposal calling for a blanket death penalty for child abusers, after a one-year-old boy died allegedly from abuse while in foster care.

The proposal, posted by a person called Lu I-shan on the government-administered Public Policy Online Participation Network Platform, states that people who abuse children and cause physical harm to them should be subject to heavier criminal punishment, while those whose abuse leads to children’s death should be sentenced to death without exception.

As of yesterday evening, the proposal had received support from 25,320 people, surpassing the threshold required for an official response from the Ministry of Justice.

While most supported the proposal, some said that child abusers should be lynched first then put to death the same way the Singaporean government has done.

Justice ministry officials are obligated to respond by May 14.

Minister of Justice Tsai Ching-hsiang yesterday told reporters that the Criminal Code has already stipulated that a person who attempts to take the life of another could be sentenced to death.

Circumstances in each case would have to be reviewed to determine whether the alleged offenders had murderous intent, Tsai said.

“We can discuss all the opinions from the private sector in a more rational manner once relevant bills are in the legislative process,” he said.

Tsai was asked about the debate scheduled at the Constitutional Court on April 23 over whether the death penalty should be abolished. Some are concerned the court could rule in favor of ending the death penalty with a majority of legal experts supporting it.

“The ministry’s position is that we follow the laws. As long as death penalty is still the law of the land, we will enforce it after a verdict is finalized and all the remedial procedures are completed,” the ministry said.

(source: taipeitimes.com)

****************

Taiwan constitutional court declines death row inmates' appeal for review----Court says appeal not filed within timeframe required by law

Taiwan’s constitutional court has declined to review an additional appeal lodged by 37 death row inmates on the grounds that it was submitted too late.

The 37 condemned inmates filed the appeal on Feb. 27, which was in addition to an already lodged appeal that the constitutional court will review beginning April 23, per CNA. The supplementary appeal sought to argue that certain provisions in the Code of Criminal Procedure and Taiwan’s regulations for carrying out executions should be subject to constitutional review.

The court rejected the supplementary appeal on Monday (March 18), considering it was not submitted within the timeframes laid out in the Constitutional Court Procedure Act. The act states that appeals must either be submitted before the act was passed, or within six months of its passing – a deadline the inmates did not meet.

The group of 37 death row inmates includes Wang Hsin-fu, a man who the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty says is innocent of the crime for which he was sentenced to death.

(source: taiwannews.com.tw)

MALAYSIA:

Drugs: Man’s death sentence commuted----Galam was ordered to serve the imprisonment sentence from the date of his arrest.

A 68-year-old man’s death sentence for drug trafficking was commuted to 30 years jail by the Court of Appeal, Monday.

Justices Datuk Supang Lian, Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah and Datuk Wong Kian Kheong, unanimously, allowed Galam Akang’s appeal.

Galam was ordered to serve the imprisonment sentence from the date of his arrest.

Assigned counsel Datuk Ram Singh, representing Galam, informed the court that the representation to the Attorney General’s Chambers had been accepted.

******************

Murder: Death sentence stays for Filipino----The charge was framed under Section 302 of the Penal Code.

A 52-year-old paperless Filipino failed in his appeal against his death sentence for murdering his acquaintance in Lahad Datu six years ago. A 3-member bench comprising Justices Datuk Supang Lian, Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah and Datuk Wong Kian Kheong, unanimously dismissed the appeal by Robin Radjaini Saih @ Amjan Patta and affirmed the death sentence imposed on him by the High Court.

Robin was on April 28, 2021 sentenced to death by the Tawau High Court after he was found guilty and convicted of murdering Fazrin Ibrahim, 30, with a machete on April 24, 2018, between 1.20pm and 1.40pm, at the entrance leading to Taman Warisan in Lahad Datu.

The charge was framed under Section 302 of the Penal Code.

The exceptional nature of the case warrants the death sentence be maintained, said Supang when dismissing Robin’s appeal.

Section 302 of the Penal Code carries a sentence of either the death penalty or imprisonment for not less than 30 years but not exceeding 40 years, and if not sentenced to death, shall be punished with whipping of not less than 12 strokes for male convicts below 50 years of age.

Robin was represented by counsel Darmin Achok while Deputy Public Prosecutor Sarulatha Paramavathar appeared for the prosecution as respondent.

(source for both: dailyexpress.com.my)

PAKISTAN:

Pakistan's WhatsApp death sentence case spotlights blasphemy law----Man sentenced to death for blasphemy via WhatsApp----Blasphemy law is often misused, rights campaigners say

Pakistan's sentencing of a 22-year-old to death for images he sent on WhatsApp has renewed concerns about the country's use of strict blasphemy laws to crack down on social media posts.

Rights groups say blasphemy laws in the Muslim-majority country are often used to intimidate religious minorities and settle personal scores - warning that artificial intelligence (AI) tools can be used to create deepfakes to entrap people.

Just accusing someone of the crime can lead to mob justice. Last year, angry Muslims burnt churches and houses in a Christian settlement, and in a separate incident, a man was beaten to death after being accused of blasphemy.

Here are some details about the latest case, the law and why human rights groups and tech analysts are concerned.

What happened in the WhatsApp case?

In March this year, a judge sentenced 22-year-old law student Junaid Munir to death for sharing derogatory pictures and videos of the Prophet Mohammad over WhatsApp. A 17-year-old co-accused was given a life sentence.

Both of the accused denied wrongdoing.

Munir's father, who said his son had been falsely accused by relatives due to a long-running family dispute, said an appeal had been launched over his son's conviction.

A senior official at Pakistan's Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), which investigated the case, said social media users should heed the country's blasphemy law.

"If we are using social media, we should conduct ourselves properly," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to speak to the media.

What does Pakistan's blasphemy law say?

Under the law, the death penalty or life imprisonment can be used to punish anyone convicted of making "derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of the Holy Prophet either spoken or written, or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo or insinuation, directly or indirectly".

Although no one has ever been executed for blasphemy in Pakistan, convictions are common, though most are overturned on appeal. However, mobs have lynched dozens of people before their cases were even brought to trial.

Hundreds of people languish in prison on remand after being accused of blasphemy because judges often put off trials, fearing retribution if they are seen as being too lenient, campaigners say.

Last year, at least 329 people were accused of blasphemy in Pakistan, the Lahore-based Centre for Social Justice said.

Why are rights groups worried?

Rights groups say there is evidence that blasphemy laws are increasingly being used to prosecute people for social media comments.

Junaid was also charged under cybercrime legislation - the 2016 Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), the latest in a string of online blasphemy cases.

A court in 2022 sentenced a woman to death for sending blasphemous messages on WhatsApp and Facebook.

"It is absolutely terrifying how technology can and is being used to weaponise this law further," said Saroop Ijaz, the Pakistan representative for Human Rights Watch (HRW).

HRW said expanding blasphemy provisions to social media was an "invitation for witch hunts", and urged Pakistan to repeal the law rather than extend its scope online.

The FIA official said blasphemy complaints were always investigated thoroughly.

"We investigate them threadbare to ensure there is not a shred of doubt, or that the complainant is not using it as a tool for vendetta," the official said. Pakistan's religious right has consistently blocked attempts to reform or repeal the law. Authorities have said the law actually shields people accused of blasphemy, arguing that repealing it would give Islamists a license to kill.

Farieha Aziz, co-founder of digital rights advocacy group Bolo Bhi, said parts of the PECA legislation were routinely used against journalists, academics and political workers.

The biggest worry, however, is the increasing trend of accounts being hacked or impersonated, which had the potential to fatally incite popular anger under false pretences, she said.

Nighat Dad, who heads the Digital Rights Foundation, said police needed the advanced forensic tools and resources to verify blasphemy online, given the rise of deepfakes and AI-generated content.

"This is a very dangerous trend, especially in a country like Pakistan, where blasphemy is such a sensitive issue," said Dad.

(source: context.news)

BANGLADESH:

Court: Those who consider economy to be a plaything deserve death penalty----9 given life imprisonment in Hallmark scam case; Other accused get various jail terms

A Dhaka court, while delivering its judgement in case over the Hallmark scandal has said culprits who consider deposits, the banking system and the economy to be a plaything should be given with the death penalty.

Judge Md Abul Kashem of Dhaka's Special Judge Court 1 made these remarks before announcing the verdict in 1 of the 11 cases of loan corruption involving Tk4,000 crore of Sonali Bank in the Hallmark scandal.

Although the judge believed that the culprit behind the scandal deserved a punishment like the death penalty, since the maximum penalty under the relevant law is life imprisonment, those directly involved received life in jail.

The court sentenced 9 individuals, including Hallmark Managing Director Tanvir Mahmud and his wife, the chairman of the institution, Jasmine Islam, to life imprisonment.

Additionally, the court ordered Tanvir and Jasmine to pay a fine of Tk5 crore each. In the same case, under another fraud charge, they were also sentenced to 5 years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Tk25 lakh each.

The court also sentenced other accused in the case to various jail terms.

(source: dhakatribune.com)

VIETNAM----female faces death penalty

Prosecutors seek death penalty for mastermind of Vietnam's largest financial scam

Vietnamese prosecutors called on Tuesday for the death penalty to be handed to Truong My Lan, the mastermind of the Southeast Asian nation's largest financial fraud on record, state media said.

Lan, the chairwoman of real estate developer Van Thinh Phat Holdings Group, faces a trial in the economic hub of Ho Chi Minh City on accusations of leading a scam that caused damages of $20 billion, or about 4.9% of Vietnam's gross domestic product.

The trial, expected to run until the end of April, is part of a campaign against graft that the leader of the ruling Communist Party, Nguyen Phu Trong, has pledged for years to stamp out, although with few tangible results.

"Lan didn't plead guilty and didn't show remorse," the Thanh Nien newspaper cited the prosecutors as saying, while demanding the death penalty on the charge of embezzlement.

"The consequences are extremely serious and irreparable, and therefore, there must be a strict punishment for Truong My Lan and remove her from the society," it added.

A lawyer for Lan was not immediately available for comment on Tuesday.

Lan and her accomplices are accused of siphoning off more than 304 trillion dong ($12.46 billion) from Saigon Joint Stock Commercial Bank (SCB), which she effectively controlled through dozens of proxies, investigators say.

Prosecutors have also accused the group of causing damages to the to the tune of a further 193 trillion dong, more than 129 trillion dong of which consists of accumulated interest on the loans they took.

That carried total financial damages in the case to 498 trillion dong ($20 billion), the report said.

From early 2018 through October 2022, when the state bailed out SCB after a run on its deposits, Lan appropriated large sums by arranging unlawful loans to shell companies, investigators say.

She is accused of bribing officials to ignore her activities, including paying an alleged $5.2 million to a senior central bank inspector, the investigators said.

3 independent auditing firms had committed violations in the SCB case, lawmaker Pham Van Hoa said on Monday, without identifying them, the government said.

The remark came in a question to Finance Minister Ho Duc Phoc, the government statement added.

Phoc faulted auditing in some recent criminal cases, adding that "intentional collusion and violations" by auditors had not been ruled out.

Top global firms, such as Ernst & Young and KPMG, did not flag concerns about the bank in their audits, public documents show.

(source: Reuters)

CHINA:

The murder of a teenager by 13-year-olds sparks debate in China over punishments----A tragedy in Hebei is the first case to be tried under 2020 rules that lowered the minimum age for criminal responsibility to 12. Both the victim and the perpetrators are children of internal migrants, "left behind" with their grandparents in rural areas.

How to deal with three 13-year-olds who killed one of their classmates in a violent act of bullying has sparked heated discussions in China, pitting advocates of tough punishment regardless of age against people who favour youth rehabilitation.

The incident that set off the debate occurred in Handan Prefecture, Hebei province, where police arrested three teenagers in connection with the death of one of their classmates on 10 March.

The victim's remains were found buried in an abandoned vegetable garden, focusing attention on the problem of bullying in schools across the country.

All 3 accused are under 14, which raises questions about the law when it applies to juvenile offenders.

In 2020, the People's Republic of China amended its Criminal Code, lowering the age of responsibility for murder and grievous bodily harm by two years, from 14 years.

Under Chinese law, anyone aged 12 and 14 can now be prosecuted, although only with the approval of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, China’s highest national agency responsible for legal prosecution and prosecutorial investigation in China.

This is not isolated. In the United States, most states do not have a minimum age for criminal responsibility, while in others the limit is 10 years, like the United Kingdom. In France, a child under the age of 13 cannot be held criminally liable.

The sad story from Handan could become the first case under China’s tougher rules, imposed as a deterrent against the very young.

The case also raises questions about education in Chinese society, because both the victim and his peers are so-called left-behind children, left to live with their grandparents in rural areas while their migrant parents work in the country's large cities.

Handan's case has sparked a wave of outrage on popular Chinese social media like Weibo and Douyin.

The Global Times, an English-language newspaper linked to the Chinese Communist Party, today reported more than a billion views on Weibo about the teenage murder, generating more than 120,000 discussions.

Despite the accused’s young age, many commentators call for severe penalties, including some who want to see the death penalty enforced.

The Global Times also waded into the issue, by presenting the opposing views of 2 Beijing lawyers.

One, Liu Changsong, from the Mugong law firm, argues that public opinion should remain rational vis-à-vis such events. “The primary focus in juvenile delinquency should be on education, with punishment serving as a secondary measure,” he said.

Conversely, Meng Bo, from the Jingsh Law Firm, believes that deterring and reducing crimes among teens require harsh punishment to create a safer, healthier, and more civilised environment for minors.

(source: asianews.it)

IRAN:

Nobel winner urges world to turn the screw on Iran over rights abuses

Jailed Iranian Nobel Peace Prize winner Narges Mohammadi on Monday called on countries to increase pressure on Tehran over its "egregious" human rights abuses.

Mohammadi, 51, won the 2023 award for her campaign for human rights in Iran which has seen her spend much of the last two decades in and out of prison.

"The people of Iran are enduring systematic, widespread and institutionalised human rights violations," she told a UN Human Rights Council session on Iran, in a message read out on her behalf.

"With the recent surge in protests and the Woman, Life, Freedom movement, repression has escalated targeting not only political dissidents but also women, religious minorities and ethnic groups," she said.

"The UN and human rights organisations worldwide must exert systematic and comprehensive pressure on the Islamic republic, holding it accountable for its egregious violations of human rights."

Mohammadi is detained in Tehran's Evin prison and her message was read out by the non-governmental organisation Together Against the Death Penalty.

Executions spike

The Nobel laureate urged the council to renew the mandate of Javaid Rehman, the council's special rapporteur on rights in Iran, and also of an independent international fact-finding mission investigating the deadly crackdown on protests that erupted in 2022.

Both mandates are due to end next month. Tehran does not engage with either.

"I remain very concerned at the ongoing executions and spike in death penalty sentences observed," Rehman said as he presented his latest report to the rights council.

"At least 834 people were executed in 2023 -- a 43-percent increase compared to 2022."

In jail, Mohammadi, "suffers from severe health issues, including serious heart and lung conditions, placing her health at great risk", he added.

Responding to Rehman, Tehran's representative Somayeh Karimdoost said the report was "not factual nor is it professional", let alone fair or reflective of Iran's "constant progress in promotion and protection of human rights".

Iran was rocked by widespread demonstrations sparked by the September 2022 death of Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old Iranian Kurd who had been arrested for allegedly violating the strict dress rule for women based on Islamic sharia law.

In its report on the crackdown, the fact-finding mission said many of the violations uncovered "amount to crimes against humanity -- specifically those of murder, imprisonment, torture, rape and other forms of sexual violence, persecution, enforced disappearance and other inhumane acts".

The mission's chair Sara Hossain told a press conference that Tehran had failed to recognise the protests and had also tried to "silence all those who are still seeking justice".

- 'Intimidate, abuse, imprison'

Kazem Gharibabadi, head of Iran's High Council for Human Rights, said the mission had a "glaring lack of independence and impartiality", and sought to "obfuscate and distort the realities".

A long line of diplomats took the floor to decry events in Iran.

"16 of the 24 women executed worldwide in 2022 were executed in Iran," noted France's ambassador Jerome Bonnafont.

US ambassador Michele Taylor said Iran continued to "intimidate, abuse and imprison" rights activists, journalists, lawyers, religious minorities, cultural figures and political dissidents.

Representatives of countries including Russia, China, and North Korea came to Tehran's defence.

As the session went ahead, about 50 people demonstrated outside the UN building, calling on the organisation to act against Iran.

(source: france24.com)

****************

Scale of Iran rights abuses slammed at UN

Several countries Monday condemned the extent of human rights violations in Iran during a UN meeting, denouncing the sharp increase in death sentences and executions.

A handful of nations, including Russia, China and Cuba, however, offered Tehran some support during sessions at the Human Rights Council putting Iran's record under the microscope.

"I remain very concerned at the ongoing executions and spike in death penalty sentences observed," said Javaid Rehman, the council's special rapporteur on the rights situation in Iran.

"At least 834 people were executed in 2023 -- a 43-percent increase compared to 2022," he said, as he presented his latest report to the council, the UN's top rights body.

Several countries shared his views, urging Iran to impose a moratorium on executions at the very least.

"France is very concerned by the alarming increase in the number of death sentences and executions," said the French ambassador Jerome Bonnafont.

"16 of the 24 women executed worldwide in 2022 were executed in Iran, and at least 22 women were executed in Iran in 2023 -- the highest number since 2013," he added.

US ambassador Michele Taylor said Iran continued to "intimidate, abuse and imprison" rights activists, journalists, lawyers, religious minorities, cultural figures and political dissidents.

"Many detainees have reported that authorities use torture, sexual and gender-based violence and threats of violence to extract confessions that have been used as the basis for death sentences," Taylor said.

Her comments echoed those voiced by others including the European Union, Britain, the Nordic and Baltic countries and some South American states such as Argentina.

However, Washington's remarks triggered an interjection from Tehran's representative Somayeh Karimdoost.

"We are deeply concerned by the inflammatory and provocative language used," she said.

In replying to Rehman's speech, she said his report was "not factual nor is it professional", let alone fair or reflective of Iran's "constant progress in promotion and protection of human rights".

Russia, Belarus, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea and Syria shared support for Tehran, as did China, which said appointing such country-specific special rapporteurs without the consent of the countries concerned would only lead to "confrontations and antagonism".

(source: al-monitor.com)

*****************

Rights Violations in Iran May Be Crimes Against Humanity, UN Investigators Find

Iran’s violent repression of peaceful protests and widespread, systematic violations of human rights could, in many cases, amount to crimes against humanity, according to a U.N. fact-finding mission.

The 3-member team on the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Iran, in its first report to the U.N. Human Rights Council, accuses the Iranian government of a litany of crimes in connection with the protests that erupted following the death in custody of Mahsa Amini on September 16, 2022.

The mission, which was established two months later to investigate the crackdown on the protests, accuses Iranian authorities of “egregious human rights violations.”

They include unlawful deaths, extra-judicial executions, arbitrary arrests, rape, sexual violence, and enforced disappearances.

The chair of the mission, Bangladeshi lawyer Sara Hossain, who also presented the report, said these acts were conducted in the context of a “widespread and systematic attack against women and girls,” and others expressing support for human rights.

“Some of these serious violations of human rights thus rose to the level of crimes against humanity, including murder, torture, rape, and gender persecution, intersecting with ethnicity and religion,” she said.

Regarding 22-year-old Amini, whose death in custody of the so-called morality police sparked the nationwide protests, Hossain said “Our investigation established that her death was unlawful and caused by physical violence in the custody of the state authorities.”

The mission found that the use of disproportionate force on peaceful protests, including firearms and assault rifles by Iran’s security forces resulted in 551 deaths “among them at least 49 women and 68 children.”

Hossain said security forces carried out mass arbitrary arrests of protesters, many of whom were sent to unofficial detention facilities run by the Ministry of Intelligence and the Revolutionary Guards.

She said witnesses have described conditions under which detainees were held as inhumane, with many subjected to prolonged solitary confinement, and deprived of any contact with families and lawyers.

“To punish, humiliate or extract a confession from them, detainees were often subjected to sexual and gender-based violence, including gang rape and rape with an object, as well as beatings, flogging, or electric shocks in acts that constitute torture,” she said, adding that children also were subjected “to extrajudicial killings, torture, rape and held in detention along with adults.”

Hossain added that at least nine young men were arbitrarily executed, following a flawed prosecution “creating terror among other protesters.” By January this year, she said at least 26 other death sentences were pronounced by Iranian courts.

Iran dismisses report as ‘charade’

Kazem Gharib Abadi, secretary-general of Iran’s High Council for Human Rights, was scathing in his response to the report of the “so-called fact-finding mission,” which was formed “owing to the lobbying as well as political wheeling and dealing of certain countries,” principally the United States, Germany, England, France, and Canada.

He said the mission’s report “has been marred by a glaring lack of independence and impartiality.” Calling it a “political charade,” he said the report omits all reference to his government’s investigation of the protests.

He said the events in Iran last year “did not constitute peaceful gatherings, but rather evolved into orchestrated riots characterized by extensive injuries to law enforcement personnel and substantial damage to both private and public property.”

A complementary report submitted to the U.N. council by Javaid Rehman, special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iran, paints a chilling picture of a repressive regime that rules its people by coercion and fear.

“I remain very concerned at the on-going executions and spike in death penalty sentences,” said Rehman. “At least 834 people were executed in 2023, a 43 percent increase compared to 2022.”

Rehman noted more than half of these executions were for drug-related charges. He said children continue to be executed in Iran, with at least one child execution reported last year.

Additionally, at least 22 women were executed in 2023, making this “one of the highest rates of women executions recorded in the country.”

He expressed deep concern about the disproportionately high number of ethnic and religious minorities executed by the government for drug or security-related crimes.

In his report, Rehman documents cases of arbitrary arrests and allegations of torture and ill-treatment in detention. He describes the government’s suppression of freedom of expression and peaceful assembly and efforts to stifle opposition voices through “the harassment, intimidation, targeting, arrests and imprisonment of human rights defenders, lawyers, journalists, and trade union activists.”

Rehman condemned the government’s continued disdain of women’s rights, noting that authorities have “with complete impunity, unlawfully killed at least 48 women and 68 children and injured, violated, and brutalized a very large number of women and girls during the ‘Women, Life, Freedom’ movement.”

He said he has received “extremely concerning reports that rape, torture, and other forms of sexual violence were weaponized in order to inflict punishment on these peaceful protesters.”

Iran’s human rights counselor at its permanent mission in Geneva, Somayyeh Karimdoust lambasted the rapporteur’s report as “fabricated and distorted.”

She said the report is not factual, nor is it professional, “let alone being reasonably fair and fairly balanced and reflective of Iran’s constant progress in promotion and protection of human rights… It is absolutely one-sided and misleading.”

The mandates of both the fact-finding mission and that of the rapporteur on human rights in Iran come up for renewal at this Council session.

Karimdoust was clear about where she stood on this matter.

“A monitoring mechanism on Iran’s human rights is unwarranted and lacks legitimate ground, is not fair and is not justified,” she said.

(source: voanews.com)

MARCH 18, 2024:

GEORGIA----impending execution

Georgia Parole Board to consider reducing death penalty for man set to be executed this month

The State Board of Pardons and Paroles will hold a clemency meeting for a man who will be executed this month.

Officials said the State Board of Pardons and Paroles will meet on March 19 to hear testimony for or against clemency for Willie James Pye, a man convicted of brutally murdering his ex-girlfriend.

Pye’s execution is scheduled for March 20 at 7 p.m. at the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison in Jackson.

If granted clemency, Pye’s sentence would be reduced from the death sentence to a life sentence with or without the possibility of parole. Only the Parole Board can grant executive clemency to a condemned inmate in Georgia.

Pye was convicted of malice murder, kidnapping with bodily injury, armed robbery, burglary and rape in the 1992 murder of his ex-girlfriend, Alicia Lynn Yarbrough. He was given the death penalty for malice murder in 1996.

Since being convicted, Pye has tried multiple times to appeal his conviction, however the Georgia Supreme Court denied each appeal.

This will be the 1st execution the state of Georgia has performed since Jan. 2020, when Donnie Lance was put to death by lethal injection for the 1997 murders of his ex-wife and her boyfriend in Jackson County.

(source: WSB radio news)

ALABAMA:

Jury to hear closing arguments Monday in 2nd trial of trio charged in Rome sisters murder

The Cherokee County Courthouse in Centre, Alabama, is the site of the 2nd of 3 trials in the murder of 2 Rome sisters in 2020. Closing arguments in the death-penalty trial of Devin Lashawn Watts begin Monday.

An Alabama jury will hear closing arguments Monday in the murder trial of Devin Lashawn Watts, the 2nd of 3 men charged in the murder of 2 Rome sisters in May 2020.

Watts is facing the death penalty in Cherokee County, Alabama. He is accused of participating in the killing of Armuchee High student Vanita Richardson and her sister Truvenia Campbell and disposing of their bodies off the Rome bypass near Grizzard Park.

District Attorney Summer M. Summerford is scheduled to present closing arguments in front of Alabama Ninth Circuit Court Judge Jeremy S. Taylor.

Watts, Desmond Lavonta Brown and Christopher Pullen are accused of shooting the sisters after Brown believed one of the sisters stole his wallet during a birthday party at his residence. The missing wallet was later found by Brown's mother in the home.

The women’s bodies, with bags tied over their heads, were found on May 13, 2020, by a Georgia Department of Transportation work crew inspecting the bypass bridge near the Etowah River.

According to testimony presented in court, on May 12, 2020, Brown, Watts and Pullen invited the girls to accompany them as they did a quick drug deal in Alabama. However, prosecutors said it was a ruse to get the girls in the car and coerce them into giving back the wallet.

Pullen testified during Brown's murder trial in November that the sisters were pulled from the car in an Alabama field and Brown then grabbed Campbell's purse.

“It’s OK, we’re not going to hurt you,” Pullen testified he heard one of the men say. “And then I heard the sound of a pistol slide as it was cocked."

Pullen testified that Brown shot Campbell when she jerked her purse back. Richardson handed over her purse, but she also was shot, though Pullen said he did not see who fired the gun.

The trio then drove away, but returned about 15 minutes later and placed the bodies in the trunk of Brown’s car and put plastic bags over their heads.

Brown was convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole.

(source: northwestgeorgianews.com)

SOUTH DAKOTA:

Death penalty sought for man accused of killing Moody County chief deputy

South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley has announced that the state has filed its notice to seek the death penalty in the 1st Degree Murder case against Joseph Gene Hoek of Sioux Falls for the Feb. 2 death of Moody County Chief Deputy Sheriff Ken Prorok.

“This is a decision that is never taken lightly,” said Attorney General Jackley. “Based upon the aggravating circumstances of this case, we believe it is appropriate.”

Hoek has been charged with 1st Degree Murder and Aggravated Eluding.

During a court hearing Wednesday in Moody County Circuit Court, Attorney General Jackley provided written notice to the court on the state’s intention to seek the death penalty if a jury finds the defendant guilty of 1st Degree Murder. The Attorney General cited 2 of the statutory aggravating circumstances, where at least one is required to seek the death penalty.

*** That Hoek committed 1st Degree Murder while Chief Deputy Prorok was engaged in the performance of his official duties; and,

*** That Hoek committed 1st Degree Murder for the purpose of avoiding, interfering with, or preventing a lawful arrest of Hoek.

“If a jury finds the defendant guilty of 1st Degree Murder, it will be the state’s intention to offer evidence to the jury that will prove that 1 or both of these aggravating circumstances have been met,” said Attorney General Jackley.

The next court appearance is 11:00 a.m. June 20, 2024, at the Moody County Courthouse in Flandreau. The defendant has pleaded not guilty and is presumed innocent under the U.S. Constitution.

(source: capjournal.com)

COLORADO:

New bill in Colorado legislature could take away 1st degree murder suspect's right to bail----Colorado bill seeks to eliminate right to bail for certain capital offenders

A new bill with bipartisan support is making its way through the Colorado legislature. The bill would put a resolution on the ballot in November for voters to decide if 1st-degree murder suspects would not be eligible for bail.

The state used to have this policy in place, but in 2020, when the death penalty was abolished in the state so was this bail policy. Those 11News spoke with say they are trying to reverse this decision and bring back bail for capital offenses.

“What does resolution and Bill does is put it back to where it has always been where if you have been charged with 1st-degree murder, you will not be eligible for bond,” House majority leader Monica Duncan (D) said.

A bill moving its way through the Colorado government if passed will lead to a resolution you will be seeing on your November ballot. Currently, in the state of Colorado, 1st-degree murder suspects have the right to have their bail set by a judge.

One example. Nicholas Jordan is accused of shooting and killing 2 people in a UCCS dorm room. He is facing two first-degree murder charges and is currently in the El Paso County Jail with a five-million-dollar bond.

“It’s important that we know as a community that these defendants are in jail and not eligible for bond. Most of these crimes can be heinous crimes and it’s really important to know that our communities are safe,” Duran said.

Fourth judicial district attorney Michael Allen says this bill would do more to protect victims and their families of capital offenses.

“We’re talking about the worst of the worst offenders. Let’s deal with these folks that are committing the most atrocious horrific offenses in our community statewide let’s make sure we can hold those folks without bond,” Allen said.

The bill will be brought forward in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee next Monday, March 25th.

(source: KKTV news)

IDAHO:

'I TURNED MYSELF OVER TO SATAN'----Idaho’s 1st lethal injection execution happened 30 years ago. A look back at it and other death penalty cases.----Keith Wells of Pocatello was the first man in Idaho to die by lethal injection. This year marks 30 years since his death.

Keith Wells lay on a table at the Idaho Maximum Security Institution in Boise 21 months after being sentenced to death by 4th District Judge Gerald Schroeder.

It was 12:40 a.m. on Thursday, Jan. 6, 1994. The 31-year-old Pocatello man was moments away from being the first convicted killer in Idaho to die by lethal injection.

Though Wells had been in and out of jail nearly his entire adult life for 30 different drug-related thefts and assaults, it was his Oct. 1991 conviction for beating to death with a baseball bat two people in a Boise tavern the previous December that landed him on death row.

Efforts were made to appeal the judge’s decision, but Wells demanded the execution take place. He had tried to kill himself in jail shortly after his conviction and did not want to spend the rest of his life in a concrete cell.

He confessed to the 1990 murders of John Justad, 23, and Brandi Rains, 20, without remorse 2 weeks earlier, according to the Associated Press. But during his final hours, which he spent with Chaplain Jack Risner of the Mount Hood Christian Center in Oregon, he called KTVB anchorwoman Dee Sarton and apologized to the victims’ families.

“I would like to ask for their forgiveness because it just happened,” Wells said, according to Sarton. “I am very sorry.”

Wells, who’d grown up as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, told reporters he was obeying God by offering the apology.

He’d visited with his wife, Cindy, and other members of his family for several hours on Tuesday and spoke with his wife again for about two hours the next day.

Cindy told the AP she and her husband had made their peace in their final meeting. A court order authorizing the visit required Wells to be fully restrained because he’d grabbed his wife by the throat sometime during his imprisonment.

“Keith and I know we’ll meet again. That’s why we can let him go,” Cindy told reporters as she held her 6-year-old daughter, Tabitha, on her lap after her final visit with Wells.

As the execution was about to begin, Wells reportedly looked at the 17 witnesses in attendance and smiled before looking at the ceiling. Some of the witnesses that day included his parents, Paul and Loral (who have since passed away), multiple siblings and his wife.

Wells said nothing in those final moments, but he “blinked and swallowed several times after the injections, took a deep breath after about two minutes and (went) to sleep.”

He was declared dead at 12:50 a.m.

More than 2 weeks after the failed execution of Thomas Creech — who would’ve been the state’s 30th man to be executed (no women have been executed in Idaho) — we thought it was worth looking back at previous death penalty cases. This year marks the 30th anniversary of Wells’ death by lethal injection, but Idaho’s first executions date back even further and were handled differently.

History of executions in Idaho

Idaho has carried out 29 executions since 1864. Death by hanging was the state’s method of execution until 1957.

3 of Idaho’s first executions happened on the same day. David Howard, Chris Lowery and Jim Romaine were hanged at the same time for murder and burglary in Nez Perce County on March 4, 1864. Other than that, almost no details about the first set of executions in Idaho exist.

The 2nd execution happened in Ada County on January 24, 1868. Anthony McBride, a 24-year-old soldier, was hanged after being convicted of the murder of a Chinese man on the Payette River.

McBride reportedly claimed it was an accident and tried to justify the killing by saying he was shooting at an animal.

3 doctors visited McBride to rule out insanity after he also tried to use that as part of his defense. The appeal didn’t work, and McBride was executed.

Raymond Snowden, who is referred to in one article as Idaho’s Jack the Ripper, was the last man to die by hanging in the Gem State. He was executed on Oct. 18, 1957. The murder he committed “was particularly brutal and incredibly heinous” and some consider him the most infamous killer in state history as a result.

Snowden apparently stabbed a woman — identified as Cora Dean, a mother of two — outside a bar in Garden City. He slashed her throat and stabbed her more than 30 times with a pocket knife on Sept. 22, 1956.

He’d been bar hopping and encountered Dean at his last stop in Garden City. She’d been drinking as well and was intoxicated at the time of her death, according to court records.

“It’s thought that she rejected sexual advances by Snowden before he killed her. Snowden claimed he hit Cora Dean and she, in turn, kicked him,” the article says.

Dean’s body was discovered by a paperboy the next day. Snowden was arrested at Hannifin’s Cigar Store in Boise. He is believed to have entered the shop to use the restroom and wash the blood off his hands after hiding the knife in a sewer drain in front of the business.

During an interrogation that lasted at least 8 hours, he initially denied knowing anything about the crime before eventually confessing. “Authorities described Snowden as a ‘sex psychopath’ and alluded to additional grisly details of Dean’s murder they did not wish to disclose until Snowden’s trial. An autopsy revealed that Snowden inflicted sexualized cuts on Dean’s body,” an article about the case says.

He pleaded guilty on Oct. 18 after initially pleading not guilty 13 days earlier. A court convicted him of 1st-degree murder and sentenced him to death.

At that time, prisoners on death row were housed in the Old Idaho State Penitentiary in Boise.

A news clipping from the Idaho Statesman says Snowden ate lobster for his last meal, which he didn’t finish.

The warden reported the condemned man “in good spirits” moments before his death.

He was led to the gallows just after midnight. The warden said Snowden was “outwardly calm and ‘stood up very well.'”

“Asked by the warden if he had anything to say before the trap was sprung, Snowden replied: ‘I can’t put into words what I want to say,'” the Statesman said.

He was hanged at 12:05 a.m. and Snowden was declared dead at 12:20 a.m. His family chose not to claim his body so he was buried in the cemetery behind the penitentiary.

Rethinking the death penalty

Years after Snowden’s death, the death penalty was temporarily suspended in the U.S.

In 1972, a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case put a moratorium on executions over concerns about inconsistencies in how they were carried out. There were also concerns about possible violations of the eighth amendment, which protects against cruel and unusual punishment.

Gregg v. Georgia, a supreme court case in 1976, played a role in getting the death penalty reinstated. It established limitations to prevent it from being used excessively and defined ways it could be applied that didn’t violate the eighth amendment.

Idaho introduced lethal injection as an alternate method of execution in 1978.

“The punishment of death shall be inflicted by continuous, intravenous administration of a lethal quantity of a substance or substances approved by the director of the Idaho Department of Correction until death is pronounced by a coroner or a deputy coroner,” the bill said.

Today, Idaho is one of 27 states that has an active capital punishment law. Last year, a bill allowing prisoner execution by firing squad was signed into law.

Wells’ death by lethal injection in 1994 became the state’s 1st execution in 36 years.

A senseless killing for a man with a long criminal record

In an interview with the Associated Press days before his death, Wells said he’d toyed with alcohol and cigarettes at age 4 and was smoking pot at age 10.

Court records cited “fighting and truancy back to his grade school years,” according to the paper.

By ninth grade, Wells had a drug habit that cost him $200 a month for amphetamines and marijuana. He was stealing regularly to pay for drugs, including stealing money and household items from family and friends.

An AP article covering Wells’ execution has a quote from him saying he killed the people in the bar that night because “it was time for them to die.”

Though he hadn’t targeted them specifically, he told police he was under pressure for being on parole for other crimes and was exhausted from walking around that day.

“It was more like a predator on the prowl for prey,” Wells said. “When I left home that night, I knew that someone was going to die.”

The initial report about the murder said robbery may have been a motive because “the assailant … grabbed cash from the bar and fled out the back door.” The amount of money was not reported.

Police believed only one person was involved in the murder and there was evidence Justad, a customer at the bar, tried to defend himself.

The AP reported Justad worked for a local beer distributor at that time and had just been discharged from the Idaho National Guard. Rains, who was the bartender, was engaged to be married.

In a 2011 interview with KTVB, Justad’s sister, Jan Englund, recalled what happened that night. She said her brother was helping Rains close the bar. Wells came in, followed him down the hall and beat him in the back of the head as he was standing in front of the bathroom. Wells then killed Rains because she saw what happened, she said.

Englund requested to be in the room for Wells’ execution but was denied.

Englund said Justad was the youngest sibling and the only boy in her family. He was “very sweet” and “would have done anything for anybody,” she said.

“(Justad) was just starting his life out,” Englund told KTVB last year. “He was getting ready to move in with a roommate. I just had a baby. He was all excited about that. He came over all the time to see him. It was just such a loss because he was so young. It was so violent and so abrupt. You wonder if he would’ve gotten married, how many kids he would have, typical things. He was such a nice, nice young man.”

EastIdahoNews.com has been unsuccessful at getting in touch with Wells’ family members, but in news reports at the time, they said he had a good heart, despite his long criminal history.

They didn’t condone his behavior, though a sister, Cherie Fehringer — who passed away in 2004 — had some doubts about the facts presented in the case. She believed her brother had an accomplice because there was DNA evidence under the fingernails of the victims that did not match Keith’s.

Wells’ life could have been different if the system had intervened years earlier and treated him for his addictions, family members said.

Wells expressed a much different point of view in an interview with the Idaho Statesman, saying no one could have helped him.

“I wasn’t willing to listen to anyone,” Wells is reported to have said. “I was so hateful that I had turned myself over to Satan, sort of, ‘Satan, do with me what you will.’ Talk like that gets you put in a nut house.”

(source: eastidahonews.com)

CALIFORNIA:

A year after Half Moon Bay massacre, farmworkers focus on living conditions

A year after the massacre in Half Moon Bay, grassroots organizers in San Mateo County on Sunday hosted what they billed as the 1st meeting of its kind to focus on the plight of farmworkers.

1 year after a deadly shooting rampage at 2 Half Moon Bay mushroom farms highlighted the poor living conditions of many California farmworkers, grassroots organizers in San Mateo County on Sunday hosted what they billed as the 1st “convention” of its kind focused on their plight.

The nonprofits Coastside Hope and Puente de la Costa Sur convened dozens of community organizations, county agencies and more than 200 farmworkers at Pescadero High School “to voice their concerns and seek solutions” regarding housing, clean water, healthcare and labor conditions, according to organizer Rudy Espinoza.

During one of the main panels, female farmworkers shared stories about harassment and immigration issues, Espinoza said. They also discussed financial practices, given that many undocumented farmworkers cannot access wages paid into Social Security.

The convention comes more than one year after Chunli Zhao, 67, allegedly used a legally purchased semiautomatic handgun to shoot 8 coworkers, killing 7 and injuring 1 in January, 2023. The 8 victims were Hispanic and Asian, and 3 were Mexican citizens, including the man who survived. All of the victims worked at 2 separate farms, where the shootings occurred in what authorities described as “workplace violence.”

Zhao, who has pleaded not guilty, could face life without parole or the death penalty if convicted as his case heads to trial.

Half Moon Bay marked the anniversary of the shootings in January with a panel of local leaders and a candlelight vigil.

Earlier this month, the federal government agreed to send San Mateo County $3 million to help build affordable housing for farmworkers. The money will be used to purchase up to 20 home units for farmworker housing and create a recreation space for residents, county officials said.

Addressing the attendees, keynote speaker José Hernández, a former astronaut, described his trajectory from farm work to space. As a child, Hernández helped his migrant farmworker parents and later studied as an engineer, becoming an astronaut at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston, where he flew on the 128th space shuttle mission aboard the Discovery.

“We have to sacrifice so that the next generation has it better,” Hernández told attendees.

Organizers hope to convene other farmworker-led events and forums about worker conditions, signaling, Espinoza said, “a new chapter in the struggle for farmworker rights.”

(source: San Francisco Chronicle)

USA:

Will Millennials Abolish the Death Penalty?

Growing up in Texas during the '80s and '90s, capital punishment was a mundane part of life. Turn on the 5 o'clock news and, if there was a scheduled execution that evening, you'd hear about it just as plainly as you would a road closure or incoming low pressure system. Teenagers would giggle if the lights flickered, musing if someone was "riding the lightning." Even through the '90s and '00s, Texas's kids experienced similar sentiments. "I never gave it a second thought," says Nan Tolson, a 28-year old Lone Star native raised outside of Dallas. "We executed people that did horrible things and that was that - that was the punishment."

I won't speak for any other state, but the death penalty was as much a part of Texas culture as tacos and football. I say "was" because there is a quiet groundswell of support for abolishing execution, not just in Texas, but across the country. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, public support for the death penalty has been declining over the last 25 years and is now nearing record lows.

"One of the biggest myths about the death penalty is that it's an effective deterrent for crime, but there is no conclusive evidence for that. If we're worried about the crime aspect of keeping people safe, then the death penalty should not be a part of that equation because it doesn't," says Tolson, whose impressive political career has led her through the Office of the Texas Governor communications shop where she rose high enough in the ranks to achieve deputy press secretary. Currently, Tolson is the director of Texas Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty.

There is a microcosm where capital punishment is actually an incentive: prison. Last year I had lunch with Ron Wright, a man wrongfully convicted of first degree murder in 2013; he was exonerated in 2016 after the Florida Supreme Court overturned the conviction due to official misconduct and lack of evidence. Wright stated that life without parole is a more powerful sentence because execution means the prisoner has a finish line, an "out" of their punishment. Guards have to be even more vigilant around a prisoner sentenced to life without parole because killing an officer carries the death penalty, and dying is easier than living in prison.

If capital punishment isn't directly reducing the crime rate, why do we insist on keeping it? According to Tolson, after all of the myths and issues surrounding the death penalty are stripped away, we are left with a procedure driven by emotion. "As a limited government conservative, I am deeply uncomfortable with the government exacting revenge in my name." She goes on to say that, as a Christian, she thinks the ability to take a life is not something that should lie with the state in the first place. As a conservative Catholic myself, when I consider how many things the government gets wrong (health care, the mail, the border, spending, the list goes on), it's difficult to believe the system is competent enough to determine who lives and who dies. The popularity and use of capital punishment have rapidly declined as the innocence issue has gained attention. The remaining question is how many innocent lives are worth sacrificing to preserve this punishment.----Death Penalty Information Center, Policy Center, Innocence

Legal changes to the criminal justice system are herculean efforts, even at the state level, so it's unlikely that anything sweeping will occur in the very near future. What is interesting to think about are the millennials born between 1984 and 1999 who will one day fill capitol and congressional buildings as the dominating generation, and what their policy priorities will be. In true millennial fashion, their growing distrust of the death penalty is diametrically opposed to their shrieks for abortion on demand, so anyone invested in this issue will simply have to wait and see which way things go.

If there is any hint at what is to come, it lies with Richard Glossip's United States Supreme Court appeal. Glossip has been on Oklahoma's death row for 26 years for a murder he was convicted of but someone else has admitted to. The state admits errors and supports Glossip's movement for a new trial, but the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals rejected the joint request and ordered the execution to proceed. This case will be a watershed moment for capital punishment in the U.S., and one that will emotionally and mentally impact millennials for the rest of their lives. Gen Xers will recall Terri Schiavo; Boomers, Brown v. Board of Education. Monumental decisions like these don't leave us.

"My parents were supportive of the death penalty until I started caring about it. They have never thought about it.l They thought it was just thing thing that we did and kept us safe and it made sense," says Tolson. "Once I started doing more research and learning more about it, I would have conversations with them. They are still staunch conservatives who are now staunchly against the death penalty because they heard me, a conservative, talking about it and framing it within our shared values."

(source: Ashley McCully, pjmedia.com)

DR CONGO:

Worry over death sentence resumption in DRC

THERE is opposition to the reinstatement of the death sentence by the government of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

It has emerged that the administration in the volatile Central African country wants to resume executions, after a hiatus of two decades, in a bid to combat armed groups and gang violence.

Tigere Chagutah, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for East and Southern Africa, said the decision to reinstate executions was a gross injustice for people sentenced to death in the DRC and shows a callous disregard for the right to life.

“It is a huge step backwards for the country and a further sign that the Tshisekedi administration is backtracking on its commitment to respect human rights.”

President Felix Tshisekedi’s government is battling a rebellion that is mostly ravaging eastern Congo.

Chagutah said whether those who have been sentenced to death are in the national army or police, in armed groups or have been involved in gang violence, everyone has a right to life and for that right to be protected.

“This heartless decision will endanger the lives of hundreds of people who have been sentenced to death, including those who were put on death row following unfair trials and politically motivated charges.”

DRC’s justice system is denounced as inefficient and ineffective.

Tshisekedi has been quoted as describing it as “sick.”

“The government’s appalling move means many innocent people are now at risk of execution,” Chagutah said.

“This is even more alarming given the ongoing crackdown on political opponents, human rights activists and journalists.”

Amnesty views the death penalty as the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.

“The government of the DRC must immediately halt any plans to resume executions and establish an official moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty.”

The last known executions in DRC took place in 2003.

(source: cajnewsafrica.com)

MALAYSIA:

Death sentence commuted for ex-cop who killed toddler, babysitter----Federal Court also orders Nahar Abu Bakar to be caned 24 times, the maximum allowed under the law.

A former policeman, convicted for the murder of a two-year-old boy and his babysitter nearly 20 years ago, saw the Federal Court commute his death sentence to a 40-year jail term today.

A 3-member bench chaired by Justice Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal also ordered Nahar Abu Bakar, 48, to be caned 24 times for the offences, the maximum number of strokes allowed under the law.

Harmindar, who sat with Justices Nordin Hassan and Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil, also ordered Nahar to receive 12 strokes of the rotan for the murder of Nurosama Shohimi, the daughter of former Klang Umno division secretary Shohimi Shafie.

He was also ordered to serve another 40-year jail term and 12 strokes of the rotan for the murder of the toddler’s babysitter, Siti Rohana Baharom, 34.

The bench ordered that the jail terms run concurrently.

Nahar’s death sentence was originally affirmed by the Federal Court in 2015.

It came before the apex court again today following the abolition of the mandatory death penalty by Parliament last year. The case was brought under the Revision of the Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023.

Nahar, previously attached to the Kampung Baru police station in Manjung, Perak, committed the murders at Siti Rohana’s low-cost flat in Bandar Baru Klang in Selangor at 1pm on Dec 30, 2003. Deputy public prosecutor Parvin Hameedah Natchiar pressed for the death sentence to be maintained, or in the alternative for Nahar to be jailed between 35 and 40 years due to the gruesome nature of the murders.

Lawyer Richard Ho, however, urged the court to impose a minimum 30 years’ jail as Nahar was suffering from a communicable disease.

‘Depressed after wife left him’

In another case, the same bench sentenced former security guard P Vellertore to 38 years jail for the murder of his 3 children about 20 years ago.

Vellertore, 63, was spared the rotan as the punishment can only be meted out to men aged 50 and below.

The Federal Court had in 2012 affirmed his death penalty but the Johor Pardons Board commuted it to a natural life imprisonment in 2015.

He committed the crime on his children – Rudraa Kumar, 6, Keseprata, 5, and Harini, 3 – by strangling them at their home in Taman Muhibbah, Kulai, between 10.30am and 3.30pm on Nov 20, 2004.

Parvin submitted that a 40-year jail term ought to be imposed on grounds of public interest, but counsel KA Ramu asked for leniency, saying the crimes were committed as Vellertore was in a state of depression after his wife left him.

“He has spent 20 years in jail and is remorseful. He should be allowed to turn over a new leaf,” he said.

(source: freemalaysiatoday.com)

TAIWAN:

Over 20,000 signatures in support of death penalty for fatal child abuse

Justice Minister Cai Qing-xiang is calling for rational discussions in child abuse cases.

A proposal on the "Public Policy Participation Platform," which advocates for the sole death penalty for those who cause death through child abuse, has gathered 24,000 signatures.

It was put forward after the caregiver of a 1-year-old boy allegedly abused him to death, causing a massive outcry.

As the number of signatures has crossed the threshold of 20-thousand, the Justice Ministry must respond before May 14th according to the rules.

Cai says today that the Criminal Code already allows for the death penalty for murder; however, whether child abuse itself constitutes an intention to kill depends on the circumstances of each case.

He says the general public can join rational discussions after the proposed amendments to the Criminal Code enters the legislative process.

(source: icrt.com.tw)

INDIA:

Odisha govt seeks state HC’s confirmation on death sentence to 5 in murder case----The 5 accused were awarded capital punishment by a trial court for killing ex-block chairman and Congress leader Ramachandra Behera, in 2019.

The state government has approached the Orissa High Court for confirmation of the capital punishment awarded to Sanjeev Kumar Prusty, Ajit Kumar Prusty, Aruna Prusty, Alekha Prusty and Purna Chandra Boitei of Keonjhar district, by a trial court for killing ex-block chairman and Congress leader Ramachandra Behera, in 2019.

Provisions of the law mandate the state government to seek the high court’s validation of death sentence by a trial court. Without the HC’s confirmation, capital punishment cannot be carried out.

On March 6, a sessions court in Anandapur convicted the 5 persons accused in the brutal murder case in Ghasipura area and awarded death sentence after finding it to be “a rarest of rare case”.

The accused were punished for killing Behera in the presence of his young daughter on March 25, 2019.

They had also chopped off one of the hands and lower limbs of the deceased and made public display of the body parts to terrorise the people.

The court of additional sessions judge, Anandapur on the basis of circumstantial, material and medico-legal evidence awarded capital punishment to the 5 persons. The trial court relied on the depositions of 52 witnesses presented by the prosecution.

The state government’s application for confirmation of the death sentence was registered as DSREF-1/2024 on March 11. But the high court is yet to assign a judge for the case.

(source: newindianexpress.com)

*******************

State Seeks Death Penalty For Convicts In Congress Leader's Murder Case

(see: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/cuttack/state-seeks-death-penalty-for-convicts-in-congress-leaders-murder-case/articleshow/108571487.cms)

PAKISTAN:

Christian charged even though another confesses----A Christian man has been in a Pakistani jail for 6 months on a blasphemy charge that carries a mandatory death sentence.

Even though someone else has confessed to being the guilty party, a Christian man has been in a Pakistani jail for 6 months on a blasphemy charge that carries a mandatory death sentence.

Zimran Asim, a Catholic and the father of a 3-year-old girl, was arrested Aug. 27, 2023, in the Chak No. 37 village in Punjab province for allegedly desecrating pages of the Quran and displaying “blasphemous” messages. The news services Christian Daily International and Morning Star News say Akash Masih, a 17-year-old neighbor, has confessed to 2 “blasphemy” incidents in July and August.

According to a relative, Zimran apparently was implicated because he had given Akash a ride to a business.

The 2 were charged under 4 sections of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws, one being Section 295-C (blaspheming Muhammad), which mandates a death penalty.

Zimran’s family has had to leave the village for security reasons, a relative told the news services.

Pakistan is No. 7 on Open Doors’ 2024 World Watch List of places most difficult to be a Christian.

(source: thealabamabaptist.org)

IRAN----executions

Public Executions in 2023----For 45 years, Iran has been one of the few countries to carry out executions in public spaces.

This is an extract from the 2023 Annual Report on the Death Penalty in Iran.

For 45 years, Iran has been one of the few countries to carry out executions in public spaces. Public executions have been repeatedly criticised by the international community and domestic civil society in Iran. Both the UN Secretary General and the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran have expressed concern about the continued practice of public executions. During Iran’s second UPR,[1] the government rejected recommendations aimed at ending public executions.[2] Criticism against the Islamic Republic’s practice of public executions has also been emphasised in the reports of the Special Rapporteur.[3]

Following massive media attention and international pressure in 2007-2008, then Head of Judiciary, Mahmoud Shahroudi issued an order calling for limitation in the use of public executions. Consequently, the number of public executions in 2008-2010 were relatively lower than the previous years. However, following the post-election protests of 2009, the number of public executions increased dramatically after 2010, reaching an annual average of 50 to 60 between 2011-2015. With increased international focus again, the number of public executions decreased to 33 in 2016, 31 in 2017 and then 13 in 2018 and 2019. Public executions dropped significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic, with 1 execution reported in 2020 and none in 2021. In 2022, two people were publicly hanged. The number more than tripled in 2023, with 7 public executions.

The number of public executions in 2020 was significantly lower due to COVID-19 pandemics restrictions, and no public executions were recorded in 2021. Since 2022, public executions have started rising, with numbers more than tripling in 2023 compared to 2022.

Rising number of public executions

In 2023, 7 men were hanged in public spaces across the country.

Soleiman Salamat was publicly hanged in Maragheh, East Azerbaijan province, for charges of efsad-fil-arz (corruption on earth) through “widespread corruption and prostitution” on 25 May 2023.[4]

An unnamed man was publicly hanged in a park beach in Bandar-e-Deylam, Khuzestan province, on 18 June 2023. He was sentenced to qisas for the murder of two policemen on 29 March 2022.[5]

Afghan nationals Mohammad Ramez Rashidi and Naeim Hashem Ghotali were publicly hanged in Shiraz for charges of efsad-fil-arz (corruption on earth) and baghy (armed rebellion) in the “Shahcheragh” case on 8 July 2023.[6]

Mohammad Ghaedi Nasab and Sadegh Mahmoudi Baram were publicly hanged for charges of moharebeh and efsad-fil-arz in Fouladshahr, Isfahan province, on 13 July 2023.[7]

Another unnamed man was publicly hanged in Najaf Abad, Isfahan on 28 December 2023. He had also been sentenced to qisas for the murder of a policeman.[8]

According to a survey commissioned by Iran Human Rights and the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty in 2020, more than 86% of the 20,000 participants living in Iran said that they are opposed to public executions.[9]

[1] A/HRC/DEC/28/108, https://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?si=A%2FHRC%2FDEC%2F28%2F108

[2]https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/lib-docs/HRBodies/UPR/Documents/Session20/IR/IranMatriceRecommendations.doc

[3] https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/country-reports/ahrc5267-situation-human-rights-islamic-republic-iran-report-special

[4] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/5943/

[5] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6003/

[6] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6042/

[7] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6054/

[8] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6438/

[9] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/4458/

****************

Execution of Ethnic Minorities in 2023----At least 167 Baluch minorities were executed, accounting for 20% of the total executions in 2023

This is an extract from the 2023 Annual Report on the Death Penalty in Iran.

ETHNIC MINORITIES

As this report and previous annual reports demonstrate, ethnic minorities in Iran are overrepresented in death penalty statistics. Furthermore, with 25 executions per million inhabitants, Sistan and Baluchistan province had the second highest number of executions per capita in 2023. According to the present report, 150 people were executed in the 4 ethnic provinces of West Azerbaijan, East Azerbaijan, Sistan and Baluchistan, and Kurdistan in 2023. This number was 130 in 2022, 62 in 2021 and 60 in 2020.

Because the execution of ethnic minorities are not implemented exclusively in their home provinces, it is difficult to specify the exact number of each ethnic minority groups’ execution. Furthermore, information about those executed does not always include their ethnicity. The execution of Baluch prisoners are in many cases carried out in prisons outside the Baluchistan region.

In 2023, more than 84% of the executions recorded by Iran Human Rights in East and West Azerbaijan, Kurdistan and Sistan and Baluchistan were not announced by the authorities.

Furthermore, the absolute majority of those executed for their political affiliation belong to ethnic groups, the Kurds in particular. An overview of Iran Human Rights reports between 2010-2023 shows that at least 154 people were executed for affiliation to banned political and armed groups. Of those, 76 (49%) were Kurdish, 45 (29%) were Baluch and 24 (16%) were Arab, with a majority of them being Sunni Muslims.

There are several possible reasons for the overrepresentation of ethnic groups in execution figures. One explanation might be that the authorities use more violence to create fear due to higher opposition amongst the population in those regions. During the nationwide protests following Jina (Mahsa) Amini’s state killing, Kurdish regions and Baluchistan were the areas with the longest-lasting protests, and almost 1/2 of all protesters killed on the streets were from Baluchistan, Kurdistan and other Kurdish towns in other provinces. The authorities targeted propaganda labelling its critics in the ethnic regions as separatists, as well as the presence of armed groups in those regions makes it easier for authorities to justify death sentences under the pretext of fighting terrorism and separatism. All this has led to less domestic and international sensitivity to the execution of people from ethnic regions, and thus, a lower political cost for the atrocities. Finally, with these regions already suffering from poor socio-economic conditions, local judicial offices also act more lawlessly and arbitrarily in the 4 ethnic provinces.

Execution of Baluch minorities

With 68 executions, Sistan and Baluchistan province had the second highest number of total executions, and with 25 executions per million inhabitants, it was the province with the 2nd-highest number of executions per capita in 2023. There are no official figures for the population of Baluch minorities in Iran, but different sources estimate the number to be between 1.5[1] and 4.8 million[2], accounting for 2-6% of Iran’s total population. However, research and monitoring by Iran Human Rights shows that in 2023, at least 167 Baluch prisoners were executed, accounting for 20% of all recorded executions in Iran. 110 of the 167 executions took place in prisons outside Sistan and Baluchistan province. The gross overrepresentation of Baluch people in the execution figures in Iran has elicited reactions from rights groups and the international community.[3]

[1] https://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2013/sep/03/iran-minorities-2-ethnic-diversity

[2] https://unpo.org/members/7922

[3] UN Experts Alarmed Over Execution of Baluch Minority Prisoners: https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/02/1083772

(source for both: iranhr.net)

MARCH 17, 2024:

TEXAS:

Death penalty was no deterrent to Jason Thornburg’s talk of Bible, ‘sacrifice’ ---- Execution is not a deterrent

Jason Thornburg was indicted in December for the deaths of 3 people found burning in a Fort Worth dumpster. (May 17, 3A, “Man charged with killing, dismembering 3 faces death penalty”)

The prosecutor says this is the exact type of case in which we seek the death penalty. According to the arrest warrant affidavit, the accused told police detectives that he had in-depth knowledge of the Bible and believed he was being called to commit sacrifices.

Although a judge has ordered a psychological evaluation, this is another case where the death penalty does not serve its intended purpose. If deterrence is our goal, we have failed to achieve it.

Putting a murderer in prison or a state hospital for the mentally ill for life removes that person from society. It is morally wrong for anyone — an individual or the government — to kill under any circumstances.

- Wesley Church, Fort Worth

(source: Letter to the Editor, Ft. Worth Star-Telegram)

INDIANA:

Dejaune Anderson, mother of boy found in suitcase, arrested in California

Detectives with the Indiana State Police (ISP) have arrested Dejaune Anderson, mother of Cairo Jordan, the boy found dead in a suitcase in southern Indiana.

ISP says on March 14, U.S. Marshalls located and arrested Dejuane L. Anderson in Arcadia, California, which is a suburb of Los Angeles. Authorities arrested Anderson on a warrant out of Washington County, Indiana. Police say the warrant, issued in October of 2022, listed the charges as Murder, Neglect of a Dependent Resulting in Death and Obstruction of Justice.

ISP says earlier in the week, ISP detective Matt Busick in Sellersburg received information from a concerned citizen, which led to physically locating Anderson in California. ISP Detectives then worked with U.S. Marshalls in California, who were able to identify and arrest Anderson as she attempted to board a public transit train. Officers say detectives from the Sellersburg ISP post are currently enroute to California to continue the investigation.

ISP notes this investigation began in April of 2022 when a man hunting for mushrooms located a suitcase in a heavily wooded area in rural Washington County. The suitcase contained the body of 5-year-old Cairo Jordan, who was unidentified at the time of the discovery.

(source: WEHT news)

CALIFORNIA:

San Quentin begins prison reform - but not for those on death row----Keith Doolin and his mother, Donna Larsen, are worried about his transfer to another California prison

California is transferring everyone on death row at San Quentin prison to other places, as it tries to reinvent the state's most notorious facility as a rehabilitation centre.

Many in this group will now have new freedoms. But they are also asking why they've been excluded from the reform - and whether they'll be safe in new prisons.

Keith Doolin still remembers the day in 2019 when workers came to dismantle one of the United States' most infamous death chambers.

He was in his cell at San Quentin prison on the north side of San Francisco Bay, watching live footage on television showing an execution chair - where 194 people had been put to death - carried away after more than 80 years of use. The green gas chamber being taken apart was just several hundred feet from where he sat.

A former long-distance truck driver convicted of murder, Doolin has spent nearly 23 hours a day for the last 28 years in a tiny cell. He long worried he would one day be shackled to a mint-green chair and executed.

But in the last few years, California has been moving fast with some plans for prison reform. Governor Gavin Newsom's decision to deconstruct the death chamber - and also place a moratorium on the death penalty in the state - was a watershed moment for Doolin.

"He [Newsom] was sending the message: 'Look, it might take a while, but things are going to change'."

Mr Newsom is now seeking more changes at San Quentin, which currently has the nation's largest death row. The governor announced last year that he planned to transform the state's oldest prison into a rehabilitation centre.

He will close the prison's death row unit and move Doolin and the other 532 death row inhabitants to standard prisons across the state in the coming months (70 have been moved already).

Doolin and his neighbours will still have death sentences - meaning they will spend the rest of their lives in prison. For some, the threat of execution still looms large, as a future governor could reinstate the state's death penalty.

6 people on death row who spoke to the BBC over the phone shared mixed feelings about their move. Some were elated by the opportunity to live closer to family and step outside their cells without handcuffs, while others were terrified at the prospect of starting over after decades living alone in a cell.

Rats, birds and handcuffs: Life on death row

Built in 1852, San Quentin is California's oldest prison and the state's only facility for incarcerated males who have been sentenced to death. Since 1893, 422 people have been executed there, including by gas, hanging or lethal injection.

Family members walk by the entrance to the prison's execution chamber every time they visit their loved ones, said Doolin's mother, Donna Larsen, who drives a 9-hour round trip once a month to visit her son.

The execution chamber would emit a green light that turned red as a person was being executed, a sight visible to Californians driving by on the highway, she said. This green room of death - and infamous inmates such as cult leader Charles Manson - have brought international notoriety to San Quentin, featured in podcasts, television shows and films.

When Ramon Rogers arrived at the prison in 1996, rain leaked through the ceiling of the death row unit, and mice and rats would run rampant. But the biggest pests, he said, were the birds.

"They started defecating all over the place - all over the railings," he said. "It was a gross environment."

Since then, life on death row has remained restrictive and, at times, hazardous.

An outbreak of Covid-19 during the height of the pandemic killed at least 12 death row inmates - part of a wider coronavirus surge at the prison that infected 75% of the population.

Ms Larsen - Doolin's mother - said she was shocked by how dirty the prison was the 1st time she visited.

"It had a stench to it," she said. "Sometimes Keith's clothing smells mouldy when we visit. To know that your loved one is living in that made me sick."

People housed in San Quentin's death row are kept alone for most of the day in a roughly 4 foot (1.2m) by 9 foot (2.7m) cell, a space that Doolin said feels like a "sardine can".

The 51-year-old was sentenced to death in 1996 for killing 2 sex workers and shooting 4 others.

Doolin has maintained his innocence, and a California attorney has alleged that he has information learned while working on another case that could potentially exonerate him. But the lawyer, David Mugridge, told the BBC that he could not share the details due to attorney-client privilege.

Doolin and others living on death row are required to wear handcuffs at all times when outside their cells, which officers have to unlock with metal keys after strip-searching them.

"Our daily life confinement is based on going from one box to another," said another inmate, Tony, who declined to share his last name for privacy reasons.

Death row inmates are offered little access to rehabilitative programmes except for some college courses and jobs such as cleaning showers.

Ending death row

In March 2019, Governor Newsom issued an executive order that halted the death penalty in the state and ordered the dismantling of the gas chamber in San Quentin.

Mr Newsom's move did not alter any incarcerated individuals' sentences, though he said that he might later consider commuting death row sentences.

While the state had not actually performed an execution since 2006, Mr Newsom argued the death penalty system had been "by all measures, a failure" that was unfairly applied to people of colour and people with mental illness.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center, black people comprise 34% of California's death row, but only 6% of the state's population.

Since 1973, 7 people on death row in the state have been exonerated.

Preparing for bigger changes, Mr Newsom announced a 2-year pilot programme in 2020 to transfer around 100 volunteers from San Quentin's death row to other prisons, the 1st move in his bigger plan to eventually move all the inmates out, to more than 20 other prisons that meet security requirements.

Correll Thomas left San Quentin with the pilot programme in 2021 after being on death row since 1999.

But at Centinela prison, in Imperial, California, settling in was a struggle. "They didn't want to give us [rehabilitation] programs," he said. "We had to pretty much fight for everything."

Correll Thomas was happy to have the chance to leave San Quentin death row

Other prisoners and staff appeared frightened of his death row status, said Thomas, who added that with time, some at the prison grew to accept him.

Ramon Rogers, the inmate who first arrived at San Quentin in 1986 when birds and rats had overrun the facility, said the move was welcome.

"I didn't care where they sent me, I just knew anywhere else would be better," he said.

Now at the Richard Donovan Correctional Facility in San Diego, Rogers, 64, has been able to enrol not just in rehabilitation programmes but also college.

The greatest relief, he said, came from not having to wear handcuffs around the clock outside his cell for the 1st time in decades.

"Sometimes, I'm amazed at what I'm allowed to do here that I would never be able to do on death row."

Starting over

But some advocates say not enough support is being offered as these inmates make a drastic transition. There is a "huge difference" between the people on death row who chose to leave and those being forced to move now, said Gavrilah Wells, a volunteer with human rights group Amnesty International.

"I'm so worried about the safety and the human rights of so many people being involuntarily transferred," she said. "The massive endeavour of rapidly moving 550 people to unknown prisons, with unknown cultures specific to each facility, raises serious concerns."

Ms Wells and other advocates say moving the death row population, which includes many who are sick and elderly, poses great challenges. The oldest person in San Quentin's death row is 93.

"It's not the same as just transferring any person in prison," said Natasha Minsker, a policy adviser for non-profit Smart Justice California.

Advocates worry about those being moved far away from their lawyers and family members, and how they will adjust after decades living alone in a cell.

"These guys have never lived with anyone but themselves," Tony said. "They're going to have to learn how to do things all over again."

Doolin is anxious about avoiding conflict as he interacts with more people than ever before, including prison guards.

"It's extremely stressful," he said. "I'm forced to start all over again like my 1st day in prison."

Ms Larsen, Doolin's mother, said she and others suggested programmes to offer support to their incarcerated loved ones as they made the transition, but the prison turned them down.

'We still have humanity'

For several death row inhabitants, the anxieties of a new environment are outweighed by the prospect of breaking free from a dismal life in San Quentin.

"For some people, it's a godsend," Tony said. "They want to leave this oppression."

But for others, the departure from San Quentin before its estimated $360m (£282m) upgrade has only served as a reminder of their inferior status as condemned people. Mr Newsom has said the goal is to transform the prison into a college campus-like setting, modelled on Scandinavian correctional facilities that focus on rehabilitation.

In response to a question from the BBC on how people on death row fit into the state's larger plans for prison reform, Mr Newsom's office said he was committed to "addressing failings in our criminal justice system - including the discriminatory nature of the death penalty system".

Mr Newsom's office did not elaborate on why people on death row could not participate in the San Quentin project, but touted the closure of death row and his moratorium on the death penalty.

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation said all the death row inmates had to be moved because San Quentin did not have the "required lethal electrified fence". It did not respond when asked why that had been okay up to this point. It also did not respond to questions about support being offered to transfers.

Darrell Lomax, one of the men in San Quentin, said: "It's not what they're doing. It's the way they're doing it... Why are we being moved so they can make room for a rehabilitation program that doesn't even serve us?"

The arrangement sends the "unfortunate" message that one of the biggest prison reform projects in the US can't include people sentenced to death, Ms Minsker said.

Tony believes some in California are still not ready to reckon with the status - and future - of those sentenced to death, even in a state that is not executing people.

"There's a notion that because we're here, it's the end of the road," he said. "But we still have humanity in this place. I don't think our humanity has been seen enough."

(source: BBC News)

SOUTH AFRICA:

‘Azapo will not oppose death penalty referendum’

The Azanian People’s Organisation (Azapo) would not stand in the way of a referendum that seeks to have the death penalty reinstated considering the skyrocketing brutal killing of “our people”, and the escalating entrenched culture of izinkabi contract killings, Azapo president Nelvis Qekema said in an exclusive interview with Sunday World.

“We do not want to rule out the possibility of having an appreciation of why so many people and organisations in our country want capital punishment reinstated, despite what the constitution might say about its unconstitutionality.

“We understand the people’s frustration and desperation about the high rate of violent crime in our country, and so resorting to seeking retribution as a form of justice for the brutality in which innocent babies and girls and older defenceless women are massacred is understandable.

(source: sundayworld.co.za)

PAKISTAN:

Man sentenced to death for murder

A murder convict was sentenced to death while his two accomplices were imprisoned for life on Saturday for murdering a man in May 2021 within the limits of Pindigheb police station.

As per the FIR, the prime suspect, Aqil Khan, along with Abdul Razaq and his brother Mohammad Safdar, killed Mazhar Ali over some enmity in the Gandakas area and fled away.

Later, police arrested them from their hideout, and during the trial, the prosecution produced substantial evidence against the accused suspects, which verified their involvement in the murder of Mazhar Ali.

Subsequently, the Additional Session Judge, Pindigheb Qammar Zaman Bhatti, awarded death penalty to Aqil Khan while serving life imprisonment to Abdul Razaq and Mohmmad Safdar. The judge also imposed fines on convicts.

Meanwhile, Attock Police arrested 2 proclaimed offenders (POs) wanted in 2 different cases on Saturday.

(source: dawn.com)

IRAN----executions

Foreign and Dual Nationals Executed in 2023

This is an extract from the 2023 Annual Report on the Death Penalty in Iran.

FOREIGN CITIZENS

Afghans constitute the largest group of non-Iranian execution and death row cases in Iranian prisons. In 2021, no execution of Afghan nationals was recorded until September, when 5 men were executed in the space of 35 days. On 10 October 2021, Iran Human Rights expressed its concern that the Taliban takeover in August had facilitated the execution of Afghan nationals.[1] That number more than tripled in 2022, with 16 Afghan nationals executed, including a juvenile offender and a woman. In 2023, the number of Afghan nationals rose to 25 people, with two publicly executed.

There is no public information available about the number of Afghan nationals on death row in Iranian prisons, but the numbers are believed to be high, particularly in prisons in the eastern part of the country. In June 2023, a spokesperson for the Taliban told the media that “the death sentences of 200 Afghan citizens which had recently been issued in Iran, have been commuted to imprisonment and they have been returned to Afghanistan.”[2] In July 2023, informed sources told IHRNGO that around 250-300 prisoners are held in the foreign ward of Isfahan Central Prison, the majority of whom are Afghan and Pakistani nationals and on death row for drug-related charges. An Afghan national named Jalal Amanedin, who is currently on death row for drug-related charges with his uncle Shafi Amanedin, was 17 years old at the time of arrest.[3]

It is important to note that Afghan executions are not normally announced by authorities and they do not have a family network or lawyers who can raise awareness about their situation. As such, their number may be higher than those we have been able to verify.

FOREIGN CITIZENS EXECUTED IN 2023:

Mirajan Mohammadi was secretly executed for drug-related charges in Roudan Prison on 9 January 2023.[4] Yousef Jomeh Hossein was executed for drug-related charges in Shiraz Central Prison on 5 April 2023.[5] A man only identified as Saeed was executed for murder in Rajai Shahr Prison on 8 May 2023.[6] Two unidentified men were executed for murder in Ghezelhesar Prison on 10 May 2023.[7] Najaf Soleiman Reshad was executed for murder charges in Khorramabad Central Prison on 18 May 2023.[8] Mohammad Ramez Rashidi and Naeim Hashem Ghotali were publicly hanged in Shiraz for charges of efsad-fil-arz and baghy in the “Shahcheragh” case on 8 July 2023.[9] Jahedollah Marouf was executed for qisas or drug-related charges in Isfahan Central prison on 15 July 2023.[10] Mohammad Arbab was executed for drug-related charges in Zabol Prison on 30 July 2023.[11] Assadollah Amini was executed for drug-related charges in Zabol Prison on 31 July 2023.[12] Massoud Eshaghi was executed for drug-related charges in Zabol Prison on 1 August 2023.[13] An unidentified man was executed for drug-related charges in Kerman Central Prison on 7 August 2023.[14] Sobhan Eftekharedin was executed for murder charges in Aligudarz Prison on 27 August 2023.[15] An unidentified man was executed for unknown charges in Kerman Central Prison on 9 October 2023.[16] Nazir Mohammad Tajik and Nour Mohammad Barbari were executed for murder in Ghezelhesar Prison on 11 October 2023.[17] Sadegh Tajik was executed for murder in Ghezelhesar Prison on 1 November 2023.[18] Reza Arbabzehi was executed for murder in Zahedan Central Prison on 11 November 2023.[19] Nazir Mohammad was executed for drug-related charges in Ghezelhesar Prison on 15 November 2023.[20] A man only identified as Arsalan was executed for murder charges in Ghezelhesar Prison on 15 November 2023.[21] A man only identified as Jamil was executed for murder charges in Shiraz Central prison on 14 December 2023.[22] Abdollah Zamani was executed for drug-related charges in Ghezelhesar Prison on 19 December 2023.[23] Two unidentified men were executed for unknown charges in Karaj Penitentiary on 23 December 2023.[24]

DUAL-NATIONALS

Iran does not recognise dual nationality and thus denies consular access to dual citizens. It also uses imprisoned dual nationals and foreign nationals as bargaining chips in political and economic negotiations with the West. In April 2019, then Iran Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif declared that he had the authority to exchange Iranian-Americans imprisoned in Iran with the US, an admission that these prisoners are being used as political hostages.[25] As well as arresting foreign and dual-nationals to use as pawns in their hostage diplomacy, 3 dissidents were kidnapped from neighbouring countries with assistance from an international drug-cartel and transferred to Iran; Ruhollah Zam from Iraq in October 2019, Jamshid Sharmahd from the United Arab Emirates in July 2020 and Habib Asyoud from Turkey in October 2020. Of the 3, only 1 is still on death row. Ruhollah Zam was executed in December 2020[26] and Habib Asyoud was executed in 2023.[27] There are currently 2 dual citizens on death row in Iran, Ahmadreza Djalali[28] and Jamshid Sharmahd.[29]

DUAL-NATIONALS EXECUTED IN 2023:

Alireza Akbari

Alireza Akbari was an Iranian-British national and former senior Ministry of Defence employee who was sentenced to death for charges of efsad-fil-arz through espionage. He was executed at an unspecified location on 14 January 2023.[30]

Habib Asyoud

Habib Asyoud (Chaab) was an Iranian-Swedish national and Arab minority who was kidnapped from Turkey in October 2020[31]and sentenced to death for charges of “efsad-fil-arz through forming, administrating and leading a group called the Arab Struggle Movement for the Liberation of Ahwaz, and planning and implementing terrorist operations, and destruction of public property carried out through various operations.”[32] Habib’s public trial lacked all fair trial standards. He was executed at an unspecified location on 6 May 2023.[33]

[1] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/4917/

[2] https://www.parsine.com/???-?????-106/825449-??????-????-?????-???????

[3] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6059/

[4] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/5704/

[5] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/5802/

[6] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/5802/

[7] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/5802/

[8] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/5919/

[9] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6042/

[10] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6059/

[11] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6106/

[12] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6106/

[13] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6111/

[14] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6132/

[15] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6173/

[16] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6225/

[17] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6235/

[18] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6281/

[19] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6304/

[20] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6316/

[21] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6318/

[22] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6402/

[23] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6414/

[24] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6447/

[25] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/24/world/middleeast/iran-zarif-prisoner-exchange.html

[26] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/4527/

[27] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/5874/

[28] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/5217/

[29] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/5738/

[30] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/5700/

[31] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/4485/

[32] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/5773/

[33] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/5874/

(source: iranhr.net)

MARCH 16, 2024:

NORTH CAROLINA:

Prosecutors pursuing death penalty sentence against former Atrium Health WFBH nurse, DA says----Johnathan Hayes is charged with attempted murder and two felony murder counts after multiple Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist patients died in early 2022.

The Forsyth County District Attorney's Office confirms prosecutors are pursuing a death penalty sentence against former Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist nurse Johnathan Hayes.

Hayes was a nurse in the Intensive Care Unit at Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist when investigators charged him with 1 count of attempted murder and 2 felony murder charges.

Investigators claimed that 2 patients, Gwen Crawford and Vicky Lingerfelt both died in the ICU after experiencing an episode of hypoglycemia (low blood sugar).

Search warrants said both women were given over 100 units of insulin which attributed to their deaths, both were ruled homicides.

Search warrants claimed surveillance video captured Hayes taking insulin from a medication room but Hayes said he threw the medications away in a sharps container.

Warrants went on to claim that Hayes did not follow the hospital's “dual verification” method properly before giving certain medications, including insulin.

(source: WFMY news)

****************

Prosecutors to seek death penalty against former nurse charged with murders in Winston-Salem at the Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center

Prosecutors are set to seek the death penalty against a former nurse at the Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center who is accused of killing 2 patients and attempting to kill a 3rd.

Johnathan Howard Hayes was in Forsyth Superior Court on Wednesday during a Rule 24 hearing, which is where a judge decides if someone can face capital punishment.

Speaking during a news conference in Oct. 2022 after Hayes was arrested, District Attorney Jim O’Neill described Hayes as a rogue nurse acting alone.

Hayes is accused of killing 2 patients by giving them lethal doses of insulin.

Prosecutors believe the death penalty is warranted in the case since the crimes are especially heinous and cruel.

Background

Johnathan Hayes is accused of killing 2 women and attempting to kill another between Dec. 2021 and Jan. 2022 while he worked at the Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center.

Warrants state that in March 2022, detectives met with staff from Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist, where they told detectives about what they believed were suspicious circumstances around the deaths of two patients.

The death of Gwen Crawford

Gwen Crawford died in intensive care on Jan. 8, 2022, after a hypoglycemic episode on Jan. 5, 2022. Warrants state that her blood was drawn and doctors verified that she had been given over 100 units of insulin.

“Medical professionals present at this meeting could offer no explanation as to why anyone would administer such a high dosage of insulin to a patient,” warrants said.

Victim’s family speaks out after former Winston-Salem nurse charged with murder

The morning of Crawford’s episode, Hayes drew up 12 units of insulin for Crawford, which is “generally accepted” as being the highest dose of insulin given to an average patient by nursing staff, despite notes from the prior shift indicating her blood sugar had been normal and Crawford having not needed external insulin since Dec. 31, 2021.

“Medical professionals present at this meeting could offer no explanation as to why anyone would administer such a high dosage of insulin to a patient,” warrants said.

He was seen on camera taking a full vial of insulin, 300 doses, from the medicine room. When asked about the amount of insulin, he claimed he “wasted” the vial, disposing of it in the sharps container. Surveillance did not corroborate Hayes’ claim.

He made a written statement at the time acknowledging that he “may have accidentally given Crawford insulin that was meant for another patient.”

The death of Vicky Lingerfelt

Vicky Lingerfelt was a patient in January 2022, and she had a hypoglycemic episode on Jan. 22, 2022, dying on Jan. 28, 2022. When her blood was drawn, a doctor verified that her death resulted from the application of over 100 units of insulin. Lingerfelt was not diabetic and had no orders to receive insulin for any reason.

While Hayes was not the primary nurse for Lingerfelt on that day, he helped move her to a new bed earlier in the day.

Civil lawsuit filed in alleged killings of patients at Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist

Lingerfelt’s hypoglycemic episode happened while her primary nurse was on lunch.

Hayes was seen on video again removing a full vial of insulin from the medication room, documenting that he needs 12 units for a different patient, and hours after her event he allegedly accessed her medical chart, which he would have no reason to do.

The assault of Pamela Little

On April 12, 2022, detectives were made aware of a third patient who suffered a hypoglycemic episode, Pamela Little.

Her episode was on Dec. 1, 2021. She was under the care of Hayes at the time of her episode, and warrants state that he pulled insulin for Little but noted in the chart that the insulin was not provided. However, she suffered a hypoglycemic episode within hours.

She was moved out of the hospital.

Detectives spoke with Little on May 3, 2022, about the episode. She confirmed that she was a type 1 diabetic, and she only knew of one time she had received insulin at the hospital, from a female nurse, but that she normally didn’t take insulin. She told detectives that she was “scared of a male nurse because he was sneaky.” She said she saw him two times before her attack and said she saw him put a white pill in her IV line, but he removed it when another nurse came into the room.

Little did not recall the name but gave a description that approximately matched Hayes.

Little passed away 2 days after speaking with detectives, on May 5, 2022.

Hospital investigation

“Further investigation by hospital staff generated the following information about Johnathan Hayes and his usage of insulin within Atrium Health Wake Forest facilities,” according to the warrants.

Hayes was found to be the top insulin dispenser in the facility by 7 times the facility average, and the highest user of insulin by any employee over three months and there were discrepancies over Hayes’s record keeping.

“It was explained to detectives that insulin is a ‘high alert’ medication, thus prompting additional steps to monitor its use,” warrants said. “It was further explained that in a ‘high alert’ medication, it is requested that the administering professional draw the medication and have the type of medication and the dosage amount verified by another nursing professional. This is known as the dual verification process implemented by hospital administration.”

Detectives were told that Hates had properly documented “high-alert” medication but improperly documented it in one instance.

“This demonstrates that Johnathan Hayes is aware of how to properly document the use of these ‘high-alert’ medications, as well as his willingness to not properly document their usage.”

He allegedly said that Crawford was “very sick” and “needed to go.”

Hayes’s employment records showed that his resume stated he had worked, in the past 20 years, at Baptist Hospital, Novant Health, High Point Regional Hospital, Moses Cone Wesley Long Hospital, Iredell Memorial/Davis Regional Hospital and UNC Wayne Memorial Hospital among others.

Hayes interview

Detectives interviewed Hayes, who said that he did not remember giving Crawford insulin, as she didn’t need any. He allegedly said that Crawford was “very sick” and “needed to go,” but said later he meant she needed to be transferred to the ICU. He said he drew up the insulin for Crawford before checking records that indicated she didn’t need it and would have “wasted” the insulin as a result. Hayes claimed most nurses pull medications for patients without checking to see if they’re needed and claimed he did not know he was supposed to use “dual verification,” which contradicts his proper use of documentation in the past.

He told detectives that “he had never given the wrong patient medication in his 20-year career. Johnathan Hayes also stated that he did not remember taking out full vials of insulin on each of these dates but stated that he had been shown a video of doing so by Risk Management.”

When he was told that 100 dosage units were given to Crawford, he responded that it was “an incredible amount” that would have had to have been administered intentionally. He denied that he injected Crawford and Lingerfelt with insulin.

Hayes also said that “it would be extremely rare that a nurse would access medical records of a patient not under their care,” denying that he accessed Lingerfelt’s records the day she had her emergency and then claimed he “may have checked to see if she ‘needed a bag’” when confronted with evidence that he had in fact accessed the records.

The warrants claim that Hayes said, “If it would make it right for these people and their families to have someone to pin it on, he could live with that.”

Then he claimed that Lingerfelt’s sister had caused her episode as they had allegedly been arguing that day. Lingerfelt’s sister works as a nurse practitioner near Lake Norman.

“Hayes stated he would not have killed somebody and he would not have tried to kill somebody,” but when asked about those two patients he allegedly said, “I guess I gave it to her, that would make sense.”

Then when pressed to tell the truth, he allegedly said that if it “made it right, then he did it” and that he “guessed he did it.”

The warrants claim that Hayes said that, “if it would make it right for these people and their families to have someone to pin it on, he could live with that.”

Electronics seized

While reviewing electronic devices seized from Hayes’s home, he had texted his wife a message on March 2, 2021, that he’d sent his own fecal matter to get analyzed under a patient’s name to “see if he had worms.” He didn’t.

He also sent a picture of a dead man to his wife, saying he wanted to say goodbye to his “old friend who passed away that morning” on April 4, 2021.

On Dec. 1, 2021, he sent a picture of a patient’s penis, saying he was a “dirty mess” and commenting on the patient’s smell.

There were also pictures of 25 patients’ hospital wristbands found on his phone.

A rehire eligibility request for Novant Health, dated Feb. 23, 2022, was found on his computer, and there was a condition of employment notice for Novant Health dated March 9, 2022. He had worked there from 2018 to 2020 and said he left because of a “misunderstanding” about education hours and time-clock issues, and he claimed he “had trouble scanning medications on time.”

Warrants were issued on Oct. 25, 2022, after both victims were exhumed and medical examiners noted the manner of death for both women was homicide. Hayes was charged with two counts of murder and one count of attempted murder.

Lawsuit

A class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of the estate of Crawford and other victims in relation to the alleged crimes committed by Hayes at Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist.

The lawsuit is being filed by Lanier Law Group, P.A.

The class action lawsuit alleges that there were “red flags” that should have alerted the hospital administration that Hayes was giving more insulin to patients than any other employees at the hospital.

It further alleges that Hayes was not following hospital policies for “high alert” medication and that he was terminated from his previous employment for not handling medication properly.

The lawsuit accuses the hospital and Atrium Health of failing to properly supervise Hayes and failing to perform “audits to ensure patient safety” and alleges that patients were killed as a result.

(source: WGHP news)

GEORGIA----impending execution

Georgia Parole Board to consider reducing death penalty for man set to be executed this month

The State Board of Pardons and Paroles will hold a clemency meeting for a man who will be executed this month.

Officials said the State Board of Pardons and Paroles will meet on March 19 to hear testimony for or against clemency for Willie James Pye, a man convicted of brutally murdering his ex-girlfriend.

Pye’s execution is scheduled for March 20 at 7 p.m. at the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison in Jackson.

If granted clemency, Pye’s sentence would be reduced from the death sentence to a life sentence with or without the possibility of parole. Only the Parole Board can grant executive clemency to a condemned inmate in Georgia.

Pye was convicted of malice murder, kidnapping with bodily injury, armed robbery, burglary and rape in the 1992 murder of his ex-girlfriend, Alicia Lynn Yarbrough. He was given the death penalty for malice murder in 1996.

Since being convicted, Pye has tried multiple times to appeal his conviction, however the Georgia Supreme Court denied each appeal.

This will be the 1st execution the state of Georgia has performed since Jan. 2020, when Donnie Lance was put to death by lethal injection for the 1997 murders of his ex-wife and her boyfriend in Jackson County.

(source: WDB tv news)

******************

The Georgia Parole Board to consider clemency for Willie Pye

The State Board of Pardons and Paroles will conduct a clemency meeting March 19, 2024, for condemned inmate Willie James Pye.

An execution order from the Spalding County Superior court opened a time period of March 20, 2024, to March 27, 2024, for the Georgia Department of Corrections to carry out the execution of Pye. The execution is scheduled for March 20 at 7 p.m. at the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison in Jackson.

At the March 19th meeting, the Georgia Parole Board members will hear testimony for or against clemency for Pye. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 9 a.m.

Following the meeting, the Board may commute the death sentence to a life sentence with or without the possibility of parole, issue a stay or deny clemency. In Georgia, only the Parole Board may grant executive clemency to a condemned inmate.

Pye was convicted of malice murder, kidnapping with bodily injury, armed robbery, burglary, and rape in the 1993 killing of Alicia Yarbrough. He was given the death penalty for malice murder following a June 1996 trial.

The Georgia Parole Board meeting will be held at the Board’s central office located at 2 Martin Luther King, Jr., Drive, S.E., Atlanta, Georgia, 30334. It is anticipated that the meeting will be closed as authorized by O.C.G.A. § 50-14-3 (a)(2). No public comment will be taken at this meeting and no other business will be conducted.

A photo opportunity will be afforded to the media prior to the meeting being closed. After being cleared by building security on the plaza level, media should check in with credentials by 8:45 a.m. in the Board’s public reception office, West Tower 4th Floor, Room 430. Media may wait at a designated location until the conclusion of the meeting to interview those appearing before the Board, if they so choose to grant interviews.

For more information contact steve.hayes@pap.ga.gov or 404-657-9450.

(source: pap.georgia.gov)

********************

Willie Pye Given Georgia Execution Date of March 20, 2024

Willie PyeWillie Pye is scheduled to be executed at 7 pm local time on Wednesday, March 20, 2024, at the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison in Jackson, Georgia. 59-year-old Willie is convicted of murdering 21-year-old Alicia Lynn Yarbrough on November 16, 1993, in Spaulding County, Georgia. For the last 27 years, Willie has been on Georgia’s death row.

Willie had a difficult childhood. He was frequently abused and neglected and often lived in poverty. Willie did poorly in school and attended irregularly. He stopped attending school before the end of junior high. Willie previously served time on burglary charges, being released in 1990.

Willie Pye and Alicia Yarbrough had been in an on-again/off-again relationship. By November 16, 1993, they were no longer together and Alicia was living with another man, Charles Puckett. Pye and 2 accomplices decided to rob Puckett because they heard he had recently come into some money. Pye also disliked Puckett, because Pye believed Puckett had signed a birth certificate for a child that Pye believed he fathered.

Before going to a party, Pye and his 2 friends bought a gun. The trio left the part shortly before midnight and walked to Puckett’s house. They observed that Alicia and her baby were the only ones at home. Pye attempted to enter through a window. Alicia saw him and began screaming. Pye then rushed to the front door and broke into the house. After entering, he held Alicia at gunpoint.

The men searched the home but did not find the money. Instead, they took Alicia’s ring and necklace and forced her to come with them, leaving the baby home alone. They went to a nearby motel, where Pye checked in using a false name. At the motel, the 3 men took turns raping Alicia, who was still being held at gunpoint. Before leaving the motel, the men attempted to wipe down their fingerprints.

They drove Alicia to an abandoned area. Pye forced Alicia out of the car and made her lie face down in the dirt. He then shot her three times, killing her. While driving away, Pye threw evidence, such as gloves, masks, and the gun, out the car window.

Alicia’s body was discovered a few hours later. Police were also able to quickly locate the evidence thrown from the car window. Police spoke with Pye later that day and he insisted he had not seen Alicia for at least the last two weeks. However, one of Pye’s accomplices confessed and later testified against Pye.

Pye was tried by a jury and found guilty. He was then sentenced to death.

If Pye’s execution is carried out, it will be the 1st execution in Georgia since the state halted executions due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Pray for peace for the family of Alicia Yarbrough. Pray for strength for the family of Willie Pye. Please pray that if Willie is innocent, lacks the competency to be executed, or should not be executed for any other reason, that evidence will be presented before his execution. Please pray that Willie finds peace through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

(source: theforgivenessfoundation.org)

*********************

A GEORGIA MAN WILL BE THE FIRST POST-PANDEMIC EXECUTION----The execution will take place this month.

An execution of a prisoner is being planned in Georgia, which would be the 1st one taking place since the coronavirus pandemic halted the procedure of using lethal injections.

According to the Associated Press, on March 20, 59-year-old Willie James Pye is scheduled to be put to death after being convicted of murder and other crimes after killing his former girlfriend, Alicia Lynn Yarbrough, in November 1993. This execution would be the 1st performed since January 2020. The state attorney general’s office agreed with attorneys who represented death row prisoners to hold off executions for a particular group of prisoners and to establish conditions under which they could resume. This was done in April 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The agreement made between the attorneys and the state stipulated that executions would not take place until 6 months after three prearranged conditions had been met. Those conditions were: “the expiration of the state’s COVID-19 judicial emergency, the resumption of normal visitation at state prisons, and the availability of a COVID vaccine ‘to all members of the public.'”

These conditions only applied to prisoners on death row whose appeals requests were denied by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals while the judicial emergency was in place. The agreement was to continue through August 1, 2022, or one year from the date on which the aforementioned conditions were met—whichever was later.

Last month, on Feb. 28, the day before the state got an execution order for Pye, his attorneys filed a motion for him to join the litigation over the agreement. The lawyers claimed that the visitation and COVID-19 vaccine requirements had not yet been fulfilled.

“We are beyond shocked and outraged by the fact that, in the midst of settlement discussions, the Attorney General’s office was simultaneously acting to pursue the execution of Willie Pye, one of our clients included in those talks, and doing so without informing us or the Court,” said Nathan Potek, an attorney for the death row prisoners for the Federal Defender Program.

The 11th Circuit denied Pye’s appeal in March 2023, nearly two years after the judicial emergency ended. The state said the agreement was “expressly limited to a small subgroup of death-eligible inmates.” Since he is not included in that group, he is not exempt from execution while the litigation over the agreement is pending, the state says.

Pye’s attorneys also filed a new lawsuit accusing the state of violating the contract. On March 11, another federal lawsuit was filed saying that the state unconstitutionally created two classes of death row prisoners: those who are covered by the agreement’s protections and those who are not.

(source: blackenterprise.com)

**********************

Death penalty trial for accused Atlanta spa shooter in limbo

3 years after 4 women of Asian descent were shot and killed at spas in Fulton County, it remains unclear when the suspect will face his death penalty trial.

Robert Aaron Long pleaded guilty to killing 4 people at Young’s Asian Massage in Cherokee County on March 16, 2021 and was given a life sentence without parole for each one.

However, the now-24-year-old pleaded not guilty in Fulton County, where District Attorney Fani Willis is pursuing the death penalty and hate crime charges.

Prosecutors say Long drove about 30 miles from Cherokee County to Piedmont Road in Atlanta to continue his shooting spree.

Yong Ae Yue, 63, Soon Chung Park, 74, Suncha Kim, 69, and Hyun Jung Grant, 51, were all later shot and killed at Gold Spa and Aromatherapy Spa.

Long’s defense attorneys with the Georgia Public Defender Council have filed dozens of motions over the years on his behalf, including some that push for his death penalty consideration to be taken off the table because of his age.

They have also challenged the composition of the Fulton County Grand Jury that indicted Long and asked for the media to be kept out of the courtroom, but those motions have been unsuccessful.

Chief Judge Ural Glanville, who presides over Long’s case, has been tied up in the high-profile racketeering case against Atlanta rapper Young Thug.

Long’s death penalty trial has also faced delays due to the court backlog caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Long’s defense lawyers did not respond to a request for comment.

According to online records, Long is being held at the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison in Jackson, which also holds the state execution chamber.

(source: WABE news)

FLORIDA:

‘Winning at All Costs’: Miami Prosecutor Allegedly Offered Conjugal Visits to Jail Informants In Exchange for Testimony In Death Penalty Case, Resigns Amid Claims

A long-serving prosecutor in Miami has stepped down after a judge found evidence that state investigators tampered with witnesses in a death penalty case against a gang leader who was sentenced to death for a quadruple murder 2 decades ago.

Michael Von Zamft, who prosecuted numerous high-profile criminal cases in Miami’s 11th Judicial Circuit for nearly three decades, allegedly granted special privileges such as conjugal visits to jailhouse informants in exchange for their testimony.

The veteran prosecutor resigned this week after Miami-Dade County Circuit Judge Andrea Ricker Wolfson disqualified him and another prosecutor, Stephen Mitchell, from the resentencing trial of convicted murderer Corey Smith, the former boss of Liberty City’s John Doe gang, which plied Miami’s predominantly Black neighborhoods with crack cocaine throughout the late 1990s.

Wolfson made the stunning ruling following a lengthy hearing in which Smith’s defense team presented new evidence in an attempt to secure a new trial for Smith and remove the Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office from the case due to “egregious misconduct.”

Witnesses claimed they were regularly given food, drinks, and cigarettes, as well as private visits with sexual partners, court documents said.

At least 1 witness had a sentence reduced in exchange for bogus testimony, the judge found.

“During the hearing, it became apparent there was a serious issue regarding possible witness testimony manipulation by the Assistant State Attorneys on this case — not only in the past, but also in the present,” Wolfson said, according to The Miami Herald.

Mitchell was dismissed from the case because he argued that there had been no unethical conduct, suggesting that he shared Von Zamft’s “philosophy of winning at all costs,” the judge said.

Joshua Hubner, another state prosecutor who helped bring the case against Smith, resigned in February.

Despite the findings in the 15-page ruling, Wolfson rejected claims by Smith’s lawyers that there was a wider pattern of misconduct that should disqualify the State Attorney’s Office from continuing the prosecution against the convicted killer.

Defense attorneys also suggested that an untold number of other criminal cases were likely affected.

Still, Wolfson denied the motion to remove the State Attorney’s Office even though she discovered ample evidence of witness tampering and “severe recklessness” by the 2 prosecutors.

In light of the new findings, Wolfson could still vacate Smith’s convictions and grant a new trial, but so far, she has not indicated she would do that.

In 1999, Smith was convicted in federal court of drug and firearm charges.

A year later, a Miami-Dade grand jury indicted Smith and 7 others on 17 counts related to organized crime.

Several years later, Smith was sent to death row following his 2004 conviction for the slayings of 4 people. At the time, the conviction was seen as a major triumph against gang activity in South Florida after extensive federal and state investigations.

During the trial, heavily armed guards protected the courtroom, and Smith was fitted each day with electroshock restraints around his waist to prevent him from escaping, reports said.

Smith was originally sentenced to death for two of the killings based on the recommendation of most of the jury members.

However, in 2017, a change in state law required a unanimous decision from the jury for death sentences in capital punishment cases. Because of this change, Smith’s death sentence was overturned, prompting new legal proceedings to officially convert Smith’s sentence to life in prison without parole.

Years later, inmates who served as informants in Smith’s case claimed they received special favors, such as conjugal visits, when they were brought to the Miami Police Department’s Homicide Unit to align their statements against Smith, the judge said.

The most serious accusations against Von Zamft surfaced from recordings of his conversations with an inmate, which were made in anticipation of Smith’s resentencing trial.

On the tapes, Von Zamft can be heard setting up meetings between several inmates in an effort to square their testimonies, while Smith’s lawyers were never told about the jailhouse meetings, as required by law in criminal prosecutions.

“The allegations in this claim are like a rabbit hole in Alice in Wonderland,” the judge wrote in the order. “The prosecutors in this case have lost sight of their responsibility, and justice demands their disqualification.”

The judge also called attention to a phone call from 2022 in which Von Zamft talked about dismissing a female witness whose version of events had changed over time, indicating that if the informant didn’t stick to her original story, Von Zamft would find a way to prevent her from taking the stand and would read her previous testimony in court himself.

“On television, Perry Mason, defense attorney extraordinaire, always managed to find the smoking gun at the end of every episode,” the judge wrote in reference to the call. “In real life, this happens very rarely. It happened here.”

Legal experts noted that the admonishment from the judge was rare and suggested that if defense lawyers had engaged in similar conduct, they would likely face obstruction charges, highlighting a disparity in consequences for misconduct.

Another prosecutor from the case, Bronwyn Miller, was later appointed as a judge in Miami-Dade County Court and currently serves on the Third District Court of Appeal in Florida.

Last week, State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle said she accepted Von Zamft’s resignation after nearly 30 years of working together, while she reiterated her commitment to ensuring that all prosecutors in her office lawfully seek “truth and justice” with “honesty, integrity, and professionalism.”

It was unclear whether Rundle would impose any further disciplinary actions against the prosecutors or if she would refer the case to the Florida Bar.

“I will ask my top litigators to examine every aspect of this case and determine the best path forward,” Rundle said in a statement that also affirmed the death penalty conviction in Smith’s case. “We are also the voice of the murder victims who cannot speak for themselves.”

(source: Atlanta Black Star)

OHIO:

In Cleveland Prosecutor’s Office, a Long Trail of Death Sentences and Wrongful Convictions----Michael O’Malley, up for reelection next week, has worked to keep people on death row, amid dysfunction in his conviction review unit and a threat that executions may resume.

Cuyahoga County, home to Cleveland, Ohio, once led the nation in death sentences. In 2018 and 2019, Cuyahoga County prosecutors sent 5 people to death row, more than anywhere else in the country during that time. Prosecuting Attorney Michael O’Malley, a Democrat who took office in 2016 and is running for reelection next week, defended his decision to repeatedly seek the death penalty and said it was warranted because those cases were particularly brutal.

“We don’t invite these type of crimes in our community,” O’Malley told cleveland.com at the end of 2019. “But when they happen, the citizens of our community have made clear that they want the option [of capital punishment].”

But O’Malley says his position on the death penalty has changed since then, and his office hasn’t produced a new death sentence since around the time he made headlines for his zealousness for the punishment. In recent months, while campaigning for his third term in office against a progressive challenger, O’Malley has said he would limit his use of the death penalty.

“My feelings have certainly evolved; I do a lot of self-reflection as the prosecutor,” he said during a debate moderated by the Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association in February. “But I can tell you this: If we have a mass shooting with mass casualties? My guess is you’d probably see it again.”

O’Malley, however, still uses the threat of this punishment to win plea deals. In November of last year, his office filed and then dropped capital murder charges against a man who pleaded to life in prison.

O’Malley’s local critics have denounced his resistance to examining wrongful convictions, amid unrest and dysfunction in his office’s unit that’s meant to assess innocence claims. O’Malley has contested prisoners’ attempts to prove their innocence and has opposed new trials for at least two men on death row despite evidence of their innocence; one of those men, Melvin Bonnell, has a pending execution date. In several cases, he retried people despite evidence showing they were not responsible for the crimes that sent them to prison. In another, he fought against compensation for a man who wrongfully spent decades on death row.

“There is a pattern of stonewalling the grant of relief in innocence cases, rather than fulfilling the prosecution’s duty to do justice,” said Robert Dunham, a death penalty attorney and former executive director of the nonpartisan Death Penalty Information Center. “If Michael O’Malley has had a change of heart and is rethinking his approach to death penalty cases, one of the most important things to do would be to take a look at the cases that are already in the system.”

O’Malley’s evolution on the death penalty occurred during a pause in executions in Ohio that has stretched on for more than five years due to shortages of lethal injection drugs and reprieves granted by Republican Governor Mike DeWine. His shift also follows support for the death penalty dipping to record lows within his own party.

But the possibility that executions may resume looms over the state. The state has executions scheduled as soon as October and December this year. And Republican lawmakers are attempting to restart executions in Ohio with legislation that would authorize the use of nitrogen to suffocate prisoners to death, a method first used by Alabama in January. If Ohio’s unofficial moratorium were to end, prosecuting attorneys in the state would play a critical role in which executions proceed, as they’d be responsible for requesting execution dates in the state.

Twenty-two prisoners from Cuyahoga County are awaiting execution, about a fifth of all people on Ohio’s death row. Four people from the county are already scheduled for execution through 2027.

Bolts sent O’Malley a list of detailed questions about his approach to the death penalty and wrongful convictions. A spokesperson wrote in an email that he was unavailable until April, after his primary election, and encouraged Bolts to talk with him then.

O’Malley’s challenger in the March 19 Democratic primary is Matthew Ahn, a former public defender and visiting professor at Cleveland State University of Law who told Bolts he would never seek the death penalty, citing data showing that it does not reduce murder rates and costs taxpayers more money than sentencing someone to life in prison.

Ahn also criticized O’Malley’s office over what he calls a history of ignoring evidence of wrongful convictions. “An office that doesn’t take wrongful convictions seriously is not an office that’s built for justice,” Ahn said.

O’Malley’s critics point to the case of Anthony Apanovitch, who was freed from death row 6 months before O’Malley took over in 2016 after DNA evidence led a judge to overturn his conviction of raping and murdering 33-year-old Mary Ann Flynn in 1984, and order a new trial.

Former Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Tim McGinty had challenged the judge’s decision, arguing that Apanovitch should not have been freed because of a procedural mistake; under Ohio law, the defense has to request DNA testing in order for it to be used in a post-conviction appeal, but in Apanovitch’s case, prosecutors had secretly ordered the testing without his lawyers’ knowledge. The Ohio Supreme Court agreed with prosecutors and in 2018 Apanovitch was sent back to death row, more than 2 years after lower courts had freed him; in its opinion, the court acknowledged that its decision might seem “unduly formalistic or unfair.” After he was elected prosecutor, O’Malley continued to oppose Apanovitch’s efforts to win a new trial, arguing that he doesn’t think Apanovitch is innocent.

Apanovitch’s lawyers say that he should be retried so a jury can properly consider 2 key pieces of DNA evidence in the case: a swab taken from Flynn’s mouth and another taken from her vagina. Once the defense found out about the state’s testing, they ordered their own. A defense expert found that the swab taken from Flynn’s vagina contained DNA that did not belong to Apanovitch, an assertion that the state’s expert has not contested and formed the basis for his 2016 release. While the state claimed the other swab, from Flynn’s mouth, contained DNA fitting Apanovitch’s profile, a defense expert said it did not in fact show Flynn’s DNA—raising questions about whether it was contaminated and came from Flynn in the first place. O’Malley has cited the oral swab as evidence of Apanovitch’s guilt and opposed bringing it back into court for further scrutiny.

Apanovitch has exhausted his appeals at the state level and his case is now in federal court. Dale Baich, a former federal public defender who has represented Apanovitch since 1991, said O’Malley could still take action by filing a motion asking for the case to be retried. He could also move to vacate the conviction.

“He has the discretion and the authority to go into court to correct this injustice,” Baich told Bolts.

When asked about the case, Ahn, O’Malley’s challenger in the March 19 primary, declined to comment, saying that it would be inappropriate to speak on specific cases.

In another case, O’Malley argued that Joseph D’Ambrosio, who spent two decades on death row, was not wrongfully convicted despite a judge finding that prosecutors hid exonerating evidence that contradicted their narrative and withheld information showing that key witnesses were unreliable. D’Ambrosio had sued Ohio for wrongful imprisonment and sought compensation for his time behind bars after a judge overturned his conviction and death sentence in 2010. But O’Malley stood in the way of D’Ambrosio winning compensation by opposing his claim that he was wrongfully convicted until the Ohio Attorney General’s Office asked him to drop it. Even then, O’Malley maintained that he should not be compensated. “Should people who are not innocent get money?” he told the Associated Press in June 2021. 2 months later, the state ultimately agreed to pay D’Ambrosio $1 million.

As of 2021, Cuyahoga County had sent 6 people to death row who were later exonerated; only Cook County (Chicago) and Philadelphia County have seen more death row exonerations. 34 more people have been found to be wrongfully convicted in Cuyahoga County since 1989, according to the National Registry of Exonerations.

Making it more difficult for people to prove their innocence, the conviction integrity unit in O’Malley’s office in charge of investigating those claims has been accused of failing to properly review cases.

Ron Adrine, a retired judge, began working with the unit in 2018 as a member of an independent five-member advisory board that was tasked with reviewing cases and making recommendations for which needed action from prosecutors. Adrine said he came out of retirement to join that board because he thought it would be a good opportunity to reverse injustices. He expected that it would meet regularly to decide when problematic convictions needed attention from prosecutors.

“What happened though, was that we did not meet regularly,” Adrine told Bolts. “And when we did meet, we only reviewed a very few number of cases.”

According to Adrine, the board reviewed less than 10 cases during his first 2 years on it and did not convene or analyze a single case from 2020 to 2022. In November 2022, Adrine plus the other 4 members of the conviction integrity unit’s external board all resigned, writing in a letter to O’Malley that they were troubled by the unit’s inactivity. They wrote that an internal panel at the prosecutor’s office responsible for first examining cases then deciding whether to funnel them to the advisory board had not met in 2 years.

“We are forced to conclude that the [conviction integrity unit] does not function in the manner we anticipated when we agreed to serve,” read the letter.

Even when the external panel that Adrine sat on had the opportunity to work on a case, O’Malley’s office did not always listen to its recommendation. For example, Adrine and his colleagues spent 14 months investigating the case of Octavius Williams, who was convicted of attempted murder and sentenced to 15 years in prison in 2011. They found that Williams’ brother confessed to the crime numerous times and recommended a full exoneration.

But O’Malley disagreed and refused to declare Williams innocent. “I think in this particular case, we did the best we could. I think we did what was right… I’ve also learned that there is a growth industry of attorneys who are trying to harvest wrongful conviction claims,” Adrine told Cleveland Scene in 2020.

O’Malley agreed to allow Williams out on supervised release while awaiting the outcome of his appeal, yet he still fought to send him back to prison. Last month, a state appellate court vacated Williams’ conviction and ordered a new trial. Judge Kathleen Ann Keough wrote that the evidence clearing Williams was so overwhelming that O’Malley should not seek to convict him again.

O’Malley hasn’t publicly stated whether he intends to retry Williams. To date, he has retried at least three men whose convictions were vacated because of exonerating evidence, Isaiah Andrews, Kenny Phillips, and Mark Sutton. All 3 were then acquitted during their retrials.

Adrine said that even when his panel flagged evidence that made them question a conviction, prosecutors still sometimes failed to share that information with defendants. “There were cases where we thought that there was some exculpatory evidence, it should have been given to defense counsel, and it appeared that there was some failure to get that evidence into the proper hands in a timely fashion,” he said.

Asked whether prosecutors were hiding exculpatory evidence that his panel flagged from people who are still in prison, Adrine said he was not permitted to disclose more details about his work for the office. “I can only say to you, that we were concerned about that as an issue,” he said.

On the campaign trail, Ahn has accused O’Malley of dismantling the conviction integrity unit. If elected, he plans to bring back to the external board and add a formerly incarcerated person as a member. In response, O’Malley has said the unit is operating effectively. At a debate last month, he claimed his office is more effective in helping people overturn wrongful convictions than the Ohio Innocence Project, an initiative powered by lawyers working at the University of Cincinnati.

Mark Godsey, director of the Ohio Innocence Project, disputed that claim and slammed O’Malley’s history on handling innocence cases. The Ohio Innocence Project represented Andrews and Sutton, 2 of the men whom O’Malley unsuccessfully prosecuted again after their exoneration. “They turned into family,” Sutton has said of the organization.

“On wrongful convictions, O’Malley started off strong, but then went downhill quickly,” Godsey, who’s also a professor of law at the University of Cincinnati, told Bolts. “There are prosecutors in that office who are trying to do the right thing, but it seems like O’Malley himself is not one of them.”

The winner of the Democratic primary will face Republican candidate Anthony Alto in November, though Cuyahoga County leans heavily Democratic. In January, the Cuyahoga County Democratic Party declined to endorse O’Malley or Ahn at a party meeting, which local media described as a snub for the incumbent.

O’Malley has received an endorsement from state Senator Nickie Antonio, a Democrat who is sponsoring a bill to abolish the death penalty in Ohio. The legislation, currently in committee, also has several Republican sponsors, and Antonio is optimistic about its chances. She says the effort to end capital punishment has become more urgent with the looming nitrogen bill.

Antonio told Bolts she has spoken with O’Malley about showing restraint with the death penalty. “He definitely hears from me when I disagree with something,” she said. “I’m going to keep working on trying to get him to really shift his opinion on the death penalty for sure.”

(source: boltsmag.org)

NIGERIA:

Osun lawmaker demands death penalty for corruption

The member representing Oriade State Constituency in the Osun State House of Assembly, Mr. Kanmi Ajibola, has written the leadership of the National Assembly demanding that death penalty be made a punishment for corruption.

Ajibola, in his 5-page letter addressed to the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas, copies of which were obtained in Osogbo on Friday, said the level of corruption in the country has made it necessary to introduce capital punishment into Nigeria’s anti-graft laws.

The former Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association, Ilesa Branch, who lamented the huge resources the country has lost to corruption, said if such monies had been properly utilised, Nigeria would not be struggling with infrastructure deficit.

Citing Sections 4(1) and (3) of the Constitution, the lawyer said it was within the purview of the National Assembly to make laws that would help the country halt corrupt practices among its citizens.

He declared that the anti-corruption laws and Acts in their existing forms in Nigeria are not result-oriented, hence the need for the introduction of capital punishment.

The letter partly read, “As a human rights activist, I should not be thinking of a capital punishment to curb or drastically minimise corruption in Nigeria, but for the fact that the acts of the few leaders that are corrupt are leading to the death of their innocent subjects, I think this is the only way and the hard way.

“It is an axiomatic fact that f this stealing spree continually persists unchecked, the country will ultimately end up in an untimely grave. To prevent the sudden and untimely death of Nigeria, the 1999 Constitution has empowered the National Assembly with this responsibility to make laws for the peace, order and good government of the federation.

“At this very moment, before corruption kills Nigeria, it is desirable that Nigeria moves faster to kill corruption. The incumbent leadership of the National Assembly can be the Moses and Musa of the present Nigerian generation by removing the country out of death trap of corruption and its killing venom.

“Due to the non-availability of effective laws to checkmate corruption the way it should be properly checked, there are loss of peace, order, good governance and good government in the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

“That Nigeria may continue to live, there is a compelling need for the prevailing public corruption to be curbed and controlled by capital punishment in our laws.

“Within the 30 days of the receipt of this letter, I plead with the National Assembly to perform this public duty to save Nigeria by introducing penalty clause of capital punishment into our Anti-Corruption Laws and Acts.”

(source: punchng.com)

***************

Osun lawmaker seeks death penalty for corrupt politicians

The lawmaker representing Oriade State Constituency in the Osun State House of Assembly, Kanmi Ajibola, is seeking an amendment to the Nigeria’s anti-corruption laws to include death penalty for individuals guilty of graft.

This was contained in a letter to the leadership of the National Assembly seen by journalists on Friday.

Ajibola, in his 5-page letter addressed to the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas, noted that the level of corruption in the country has made it necessary to introduce capital punishment into Nigeria’s anti-graft laws.

He decried the huge resources the country has lost to corruption, said if such monies had been properly utilised, Nigeria would not be struggling with infrastructure deficit.

Citing Sections 4(1) and (3) of the Constitution, the lawmaker said it was within the purview of the National Assembly to make laws that would help the country halt corrupt practices among its citizens.

He declared that the anti-corruption laws and Acts in their existing forms in Nigeria are not result-oriented, hence the need for the introduction of capital punishment.

The letter partly read: “As a human rights activist, I should not be thinking of a capital punishment to curb or drastically minimise corruption in Nigeria, but for the fact that the acts of the few leaders that are corrupt are leading to the death of their innocent subjects, I think this is the only way and the hard way.

“It is an axiomatic fact that if this stealing spree continually persists unchecked, the country will ultimately end up in an untimely grave. To prevent the sudden and untimely death of Nigeria, the 1999 Constitution has empowered the National Assembly with this responsibility to make laws for the peace, order and good government of the federation.

“At this very moment, before corruption kills Nigeria, it is desirable that Nigeria moves faster to kill corruption. The incumbent leadership of the National Assembly can be the Moses and Musa of the present Nigerian generation by removing the country out of death trap of corruption and its killing venom.

“Due to the non-availability of effective laws to checkmate corruption the way it should be properly checked, there are loss of peace, order, good governance and good government in the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

“That Nigeria may continue to live, there is a compelling need for the prevailing public corruption to be curbed and controlled by capital punishment in our laws.

“Within the 30 days of the receipt of this letter, I plead with the National Assembly to perform this public duty to save Nigeria by introducing penalty clause of capital punishment into our Anti-Corruption Laws and Acts.”

(source: politicsnigeria.com)

DR CONGO:

Reinstating executions shows a callous disregard for human rights

Responding to the news that the Democratic Republic of Congo’s government wants to resume executions, after a hiatus of 2 decades, in a bid to combat armed groups and gang violence, Tigere Chagutah, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for East and Southern Africa, said:

“The government’s decision to reinstate executions is a gross injustice for people sentenced to death in the Democratic Republic of Congo and shows a callous disregard for the right to life. It is a huge step backwards for the country and a further sign that the Tshisekedi administration is backtracking on its commitment to respect human rights.

“Whether those who have been sentenced to death are in the national army or police, in armed groups or have been involved in gang violence, everyone has a right to life and for that right to be protected. This heartless decision will endanger the lives of hundreds of people who have been sentenced to death, including those who were put on death row following unfair trials and politically motivated charges.

“With an inefficient and ineffective justice system, which President Tshisekedi has himself described as ‘sick’, the government’s appalling move means many innocent people are now at risk of execution. This is even more alarming given the ongoing crackdown on political opponents, human rights activists and journalists.

“The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. The government of the DRC must immediately halt any plans to resume executions and establish an official moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty.”

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception – regardless of who is accused, the nature or circumstances of the crime, guilt or innocence or method of execution.

BACKGROUND

The last known executions in DRC took place in 2003.

On 13 March 2024, the DRC’s Minister of Justice formally notified the judicial authorities of the government’s decision to resume executions for a series of crimes. The government justified its decision by the need to combat “treason” within the army at a time when the DRC is facing an escalation of armed conflicts, notably with the resurgence of the armed group Mouvement du 23 Mars (M23) supported by Rwanda, and the need to put an end to deadly gang violence in several cities, including the capital Kinshasa.

The Congolese justice system is plagued by numerous problems, and trials rarely meet fair trial standards as documented by Amnesty International and other organizations.

President Tshisekedi himself has on several occasions complained publicly about the malfunctioning of the justice system in the DRC, including by describing it as “sick” earlier this year.

(source: Amnesty International)

********************

DRC Reinstates Death Penalty

The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has reinstated the death penalty after banning it 21 years ago, in 2003. The DRC’s Justice Ministry released a statement that claimed the ban on the death penalty was allowing those accused of espionage and treason to escape “proper punishment.”

The ministry said the penalty will only be applied to those involved in armed gangs, insurrection, criminal conspiracies, treason, and war crimes. The ministry further added, however, that such qualifications will be applied to those within the DRC’s military as well, including rebels and anyone who defects to hostile groups.

The primary target of the death penalty being reinstated appears to be those involved in any of the eastern DRC’s over 120 different armed groups. The government noted the particular surge of violence in the east, which has been ongoing for approximately 30 years.

Of those armed groups, the DRC’s M23 Rebels have proven to be the most prominent. The reinstatement of the death penalty comes almost two months after combat resumed between the DRC’s military and the M23, after the DRC attempted to launch an offensive against the group with their new allies of the Southern African Development Community (SADC).

The offensive backfired, and the M23 has seized a number of key territories in their counter attacks, and has threatened several more. The renewed conflict has displaced tens of thousands more people, and is threatening to completely isolate Goma, a city of two million and the provincial capital of the North Kivu province.

The M23 has allegedly been supported by Rwanda since their initial rebellion in 2012. The alleged Rwandan support is likely a strong factor as to why they have managed to seize so much territory in the last two months, with Rwanda providing extensive support to them, Last month, the UN claimed to have spotted a Rwandan surface to air missile system within the M23’s territory after it fired upon one of their observation drones.

Opposition to the Death Penalty

Several M23 leaders have offered condemnations towards the reinstatement. Bertrand Bisimwa, the head of the M23, stated “in a context where political speeches and actions identify the traitor, the infiltrator, and the spy with a facial appearance, a spoken language and an ethnicity, this decision is none other than a legal act of legalization of ethnic cleansing currently underway.”

Bisimwa further added that the death penalty “violates the right to life of the human being.” The M23 claims that the government carries out persecutions against the regions ethnic Tutsi population, and further claims that the reinstatement of the death penalty is a part of that.

Several human rights groups have also condemned the move, referring to it as a “step backwards” for the country.

Amnesty International’s eastern and southern Africa regional director stated the “government’s decision to reinstate executions is a gross injustice for people sentenced to death in the DRC and shows a callous disregard for the right to life.”

(source: theatlasnews.co)

******************

Congo reinstates death penalty after over 2 decades amid fight with militants

Decades of conflict have plagued the eastern Congo, with over 120 armed factions vying for territory, control, and occasionally even for the defense of their towns

According to a statement made on Friday by the justice ministry, Congo has lifted a moratorium on the death sentence that was in place for more than two decades as the country’s authorities work to reduce violence and terrorist attacks.

According to the statement, which was released earlier this week, the 2003 prohibition let people who were charged with treason and espionage escape punishment.

Decades of conflict have plagued the eastern Congo, with over 120 armed factions vying for territory, control, and occasionally even for the defense of their towns.

(source: firstpost.com)

JAPAN:

Inside Japan’s secret death chambers where the very worst criminals are executed

Japanese true crime fans have been given a rare opportunity to view one of the country’s few remaining execution chambers, where the country’s worst criminals are put to death.

From the outside, the Tokyo Detention House in Katsushika City looks like a normal office block- but deep within its walls lies a secretive chamber where executions take place.

Inside the nondescript building, which is surrounded by a low wire fence, criminals on death row are taken to a morbidly empty room and made to stand in the middle of a red square.

As they are led to their fate, convicts pass a small gold statue of Kannon, a Buddhist goddess associated with mercy.

They then stand facing a viewing platform in another room, which is separated by a window, and are executed by hanging.

Medics then confirm their death and wipe the body down in a last sterile act.

Prisoners are often told of their fate only hours before their execution, meaning families and lawyers are often left in the dark until after the execution has taken place.

Witnesses of the hangings have also told of their horror as they watch officers pull the mechanical levers to drop prisoners, blindfolded and hooded to muffle their screams, through the floor into a chamber below.

Japan and the US are the only two nations in the G7 block to still dish out the controversial death sentence.

Death Penalty Information Centre, a US-based think tank, said Japan didn’t carry out any executions last year, although three new death sentences were imposed.

However, human rights campaigners fear executions may be starting to make a comeback after 21-year-old Yuki Endo, who murdered the parents of a girl after she rejected him, was sentenced to death in January 2024.

Yuki was just 19 when he stabbed the girl’s parents, attacked and injured her sister with a machete and burned the house down, making him the first person in Japan to be given death penalty for a crime committed between the ages of 18 and 19, the MailOnline reported.

The most recent executed prisoner was Tomohiro Kato in 2022, who killed seven people in 2008 by driving a truck into a crowd at the Akihabara shopping district.

Why are Japan’s executions so secretive?

Japan’s death penalty law requires that the executions must follow ‘utmost secrecy’, according to the Death Penalty Information Centre.

Convicts typically find out about their execution on the morning it takes place, a local newspaper wrote, citing lawyer Yoshikuni Noguchi who once witnessed an execution.

After the announcement, the convict is moved to a special room and monitored by security officers.

Families are supposed to be told about the execution, but according to the UN and campaigners this isn’t always the case.

Lawyer Noguchi recounted the execution, describing in detail how with one pull of the lever, the body of the inmate was dropped through the hatch.

He had to grab the rope to stop it from shaking.

The experience impacted him deeply, with those around him saying he looked pale.

He later resigned from his role as a prison officer.

One of the most infamous convicts executed at Tokyo Detention House is cult leader Shoko Asahara, 63, real name Chizuo Matsumoto.

After founding the Aum Shinrikyo cult in 1984, he attracted loyal supporters into his bizarre ideology and world of rituals, such as drinking bathwater and wearing electrical caps for synchronised brain waves.

But behind the scenes, the cult was stockpiling weapons, and on March 20, 1995, Asahara and his worshippers released sarin nerve gas into the busy Tokyo subway.

The attack killed 13 people.

Asahara was eventually convicted of having killed 27 people in 13 murders and other assaults and kidnappings during six years of trying to build his twisted, alternative empire.

Following his failed appeals for his release, the mass murderer was hanged on July 6, 2018 with 6 other cult members.

Amnesty International feared that the appointment of Fumio Kishida as Japan’s Prime Minister in 2021 showed the country’s ‘lack of respect for right to life’.

Currently, Japan has 106 inmates on death row, Death Penalty Information Centre said.

Critics of capital punishment like Amnesty argue that death penalty is unacceptable, saying it denies human rights and it is irreversible and mistakes can happen.

Amnesty also claimed it does little to deter crime and it is used in countries with problematic human rights record like China, Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Across the world, 55 countries have death penalty but 23 of those had not used it for ten years, according to Amnesty’s latest figures.

(source: metro.co.uk)

THAILAND:

British man faces possible death penalty after being accused of selling cocaine and ecstasy to tourists in Thailand----Thai police claim Charly Garcia from London used Telegram to deal drugs; He was arrested after allegedly selling narcotics to an undercover police officer

A Briton living in Thailand on a student visa is facing the death penalty having been arrested on suspicion of selling cocaine and ecstasy, local media reports.

According to Viral Media Press Production, Charly Garcia, 48, from London was using Telegram to deal narcotics when police in Chiang Mai received a tip-off

An undercover police officer, it was reported, arranged to meet Garcia in a cannabis shop on March 12 seeking to buy cocaine, ketamine, magic mushrooms, LSD and ecstasy with a street value of £2,400.

Once he received the cash, Thai police stormed the room and arrested Garcia.

They took him to his room at the Mountain View Condominium in the Chang Phueak subdistrict, where they reportedly found 408 grams of cocaine, 595 grams of magic mushrooms, and 160 pills of Diazepam and Alprazolam.

13 grams of LSD, 9.8 grams of MDMA, and ecstasy tablets was also among the alleged haul.

Garcia was later paraded in front of the drugs haul for photographs before he was questioned at Mueang Chiang Mai Police Station.

Police Major General Thawatchai Pongwiwattanachai, commander of the Chiang Mai Provincial Police, said Garcia admitted selling narcotics, which he claimed to have bought from another tourist for £17,500.

He is also alleged to have told police that he paid almost 50p a gram for magic mushrooms.

Police Major General Thawatchai said: 'The suspect claimed it was his 1st time selling narcotics, but we didn't believe him because our investigation revealed he has a history of selling narcotics in Bangkok.

'He had entered Thailand on a student visa, which we believe was a ruse to allow him to stay in the country selling drugs. He didn't study language like he was supposed to. He only studied drugs.

'We are investigating further as he was uncooperative and refused to provide the password for his phone.

Police Major General Thawatchai Pongwiwattanachai, commander of the Chiang Mai Provincial Police, said Garcia admitted selling narcotics, which he claimed to have bought from another tourist for £17,500

Police Major General Thawatchai Pongwiwattanachai, commander of the Chiang Mai Provincial Police, said Garcia admitted selling narcotics, which he claimed to have bought from another tourist for £17,500

'We intend to examine the Telegram application to uncover his drug network and take legal action against his suppliers and customers.'

According to reports, Thai police said Garcia has been charged with possessing drugs with intent to supply.

Thai law allows the execution of convicted drug dealers or life imprisonment.

A simple case of possession without any intent to supply can lead to a 10-year jail term.

Local media said Garcia is the 3rd British tourist arrested for alleged drug dealing in recent weeks - with all now facing lengthy spells in the country's notorious prisons.

Backpacker and new father Andrew Brett, 36, was detained for reportedly distributing cocaine and LSD on Koh Tao island on February 29. He may face life imprisonment or the death penalty based on Thailand's Narcotics Act.

While another British man, Peter Hull, 44, was arrested at his home on Koh Samui island on March 1. Alarmed neighbours said his strange and violent behaviour had led them to call the police.

A raid of his room allegedly found cocaine and ecstasy. Police have warned that he could face a severe prison sentence or deportation.

The arrests come amid a wider crackdown on foreigners behaving badly in the Southeast Asian country, that was sparked earlier this month by the arrest of Swiss businessman Urs Beat Fehr, 45, for kicking a Thai doctor who was sitting on his beachfront garden steps in Phuket.

Officers in that region alone have arrested at least 40 foreigners in the days since and ministers have warned 'guests in the country' to follow the local laws.

The spate of drug arrests pushed the government's Department of Medical Services (DMS) to warn of the dangers of 'death stamps', pieces of blotting paper infused with lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), which are being sold at parties.

Deputy Director-General Pairoj Surattanawanich said the drugs can lead to severe mental health issues.

MailOnline has approached the Foreign and Commonwealth Office for a comment.

(source: dailymail.co.uk)

INDONESIA:

Brit gran Lindsay Sandiford on death row for 10 years last chance to escape firing squad----Lindsay Sandiford, 67, has been languishing on death row in Indonesia for more than 10 years after being caught trying to smuggle £1.6million of cocaine into the country

Lindsay Sandiford, a grandma on death row for 10 years for drug smuggling, has one final chance to escape firing squad. She's been in an Indonesian prison since 2013 for trying to bring a huge amount of cocaine into Bali.

Now, because Indonesia is changing its laws, she could get out of the death penalty.

Other prisoners say Lindsay has hope now. They even showed a surprising photo of her teaching knitting to others in jail.

A friend inside said that Lindsay, who is 67, gets treated well and is known as the "grandmother" in prison and is given steak dinners to enjoy.

Due to her good behaviour over the last 10 years, her death sentence might be changed to life in prison this January. If this happens, the hope is her lawyers might try to get her back to the UK, where she could be set free because she's already spent so much time locked up in Indonesia, reports the Mirror.

One prisoner shared: "There is hope that she can go home. If she can get through to 2025 then she thinks she may be able to avoid the death penalty."

British people who look after her have also started visiting more, from four times a year to once a month.

Tonight, Felicity Gerry KC, a big human rights lawyer who met Lindsay in 2015, says she should be brought back to Britain.

She stated: "Indonesia is taking an important step in recognising the need to commute the sentences of those subject to the death penalty, especially women. Lindsay co-operated with the authorities and explained levels of coercion that should have at least mitigated her position."

"The Government should be taking active steps to ­facilitate her return to the UK, either to serve a sentence near her family or to consider her release."

The Mirror managed to get into Kerobokan jail in Bali, where Sandiford spends each day waiting to be taken from her rat-filled cell to Nusa Kambangan also known as Execution Island. The legal secretary, from Cheltenham, Glos, is the only inmate on death row.

It's said she had given up all hope of an appeal that would reverse her sentence, until now.

A photo of Sandiford in prison shows other prisoners paying close attention as she teaches them how to knit. Her cellmate, an Indonesian jailed for corruption who has spent two years with the gran, said: "She is the grandmother of the prison, the Queen.MO< "She is the only one who can order steak from the prison cafe. She has it medium-rare, normally once a week. Everyone loves her, she teaches people how to knit, she hosts regular classes, and shows them how to look after themselves. No date has been set for the execution. She is scared of dying but she has accepted it."

But other prisoners say Sandiford is "foul-mouthed, antagonistic" and makes her cellmates want to leave. A former cellmate said: "Lindsay is aggressively protective of herself. That's the way she has learned to cope. She spends 99% of her time in her room. They have activities, like nail painting or hair styling, but Lindsay does none of them. There was a Ukrainian girl who was put in her cell, but the girl requested to move."

"The way I read her is that she's trying to survive. She started getting privileges, so all the girls slept on the floor but she got a mattress. And then she got cooking utensils because she didn't like the prison food. Lindsay has a sweet tooth, she likes 70% dark chocolate.

"She'd be brought chocolate and fresh vegetables from supporters. I think the prison recognised that she's not a young woman, and she came from the West. But being in Kerobokan is very difficult. If you go in as a smart person, you come out half as smart. There's nothing to fire the neutrons while you're in jail."

After her arrest in 2012 with the class A drugs, Sandiford said drug bosses threatened her son to make her do it. She changed her story when she found out she could face the death penalty for drug trafficking.

Sandiford told the police that she was asked to transport the drugs by Julian Ponder. Although she agreed to help the police catch Ponder, a British antique dealer, she was subsequently charged.

The court in Bali sent her to prison for more than the 15 years which prosecutors had suggested, as they believed she harmed tourism and drug prevention efforts.

Ponder, who was 43 years old and from Brighton, avoided charges of smuggling but was found guilty of possessing 23g of cocaine - a crime that could result in a lifetime in jail. Despite prosecutors in Bali pushing for a seven-year sentence, he was jailed for 6 years and given a fine of £65,000.

His lawyer, Arie Budiman Soenardi, revealed that he wouldn't recommend his client challenge the sentence, commenting: "The sentence is quite light, not far from what the prosecutors aimed for."

A spokesperson from the Foreign Office shared this evening: "We are supporting a British woman detained in Bali and are in contact with her family and the Indonesian authorities."

(source: express.co.uk)

SINGAPORE:

Singaporeans protest death penalty in rare demonstration

Hundreds of protesters in tightly controlled Singapore staged a rare demonstration against the death penalty Sunday as fears grow the city-state is set to carry out a wave of hangings, reports AFP. Authorities last week conducted the country’s 1st execution since 2019 when they hanged a drug trafficker. Several other death row convicts recently had appeals rejected.

Organisers said about 400 people joined the demonstration at “Speakers’ Corner” in a downtown park, the only place in the city-state where protests are allowed without prior police approval.

They held signs reading “Capital punishment does not make us safer”, and “Don’t kill in our names”, and chanted slogans against the death penalty.

“Capital Punishment is a brutal system that makes brutes of us all,” Kirsten Han, a prominent local activist, said in an address to the crowd.

“Instead of pushing us to address inequalities and exploitative and oppressive systems that leave people marginalised and unsupported, it makes us the worst version of ourselves.”

Protests are unusual in Singapore, which frequently faces criticism for curbing civil liberties.

Aside from in “Speakers’ Corner”, it is illegal for even one person to stage a demonstration without a police permit.

Abdul Kahar Othman, a 68-year-old Singaporean drug trafficker, was hanged Wednesday despite appeals for clemency from the United Nations and rights groups.

Next in line to be executed could be Nagaenthran K. Dharmalingam, a mentally disabled Malaysian convicted of heroin trafficking who lost his final appeal last week.

His case has attracted a storm of criticism, including from the European Union and British billionaire Richard Branson.

Three other men sentenced to death for drugs offences had their appeals rejected earlier in March.

Prosperous but socially conservative Singapore has some of the world’s toughest drugs laws, and has faced mounting calls from rights groups to abandon the death penalty.

Authorities insist that capital punishment remains an effective deterrent against drug trafficking and has helped to keep the city-state one of the safest places in Asia.

(source: daily-sun.com)

IRAN----executions

Executions for Murder Charges in 2023----At least 857 prisoners sentenced to death for murder charges were forgiven by the families of the murder victims per qisas laws.

This is an extract from the 2023 Annual Report on the Death Penalty in Iran.

As murder is specifically punished under qisas laws, the IPC does not explicitly state that convicted murderers are subject to the death penalty but rather to qisas, or “retribution-in-kind”. The law effectively puts the responsibility for executions for murder in the hands of the victim’s family or next of kin. Qisas death sentences are also imposed for juvenile offenders as, according to Sharia, the age of criminal responsibility for girls is 9 and for boys 15 lunar years. Furthermore, the death penalty is generally subject to discriminatory application based on gender, ethnicity and religion.[1], [2]

In addition to the inequality of citizens before the law, there are countless reports of violations of due process in qisas cases. Examples include the use of torture to extract confessions, summary trials without sufficient time to conduct independent investigation of the evidence and ineffective counsel.

EXECUTED FOR MURDER CHARGES IN 2023:

The 282 qisas executions in 2023 include a variety of cases, including two protesters, all of which involve defendants being denied their rights to due process and a fair trial. The execution of juvenile offenders and women can be found in “Execution Categories” on page 81 of the report.

HAMED MOUSAVI

Hamed Mousavi was 19 when he was arrested for the accidental murder of his wife. He had thought there were no bullets in the rifle when he pointed it at his wife. “I was in love with my wife, it was a joke and I never wanted to lose my wife.” He was transferred from the youth ward and executed in Ardabil Central Prison on 4 May 2023.[3]

SAEED NAJAFI

Saeed Najafi was arrested for murder in 2018 and subjected to torture for 4 months in police custody. “He said he confessed under torture and was under medical care as a result of the torture,” an informed source told IHRNGO. Saeed was 28 years old when he was executed in Kermanshah Central Prison on 17 May 2023.[4]

HEMEN MOSTAFAYI

Hemen Mostafayi, a 33-year-old Kurdish man, was arrested in 2013 and subjected to months of severe torture to force self-incriminating confessions to the murder of an IRGC officer. He had previously been transferred for execution in December 2020 which was postponed due to backlash. Hemen was executed in Sanandaj Central Prison on 21 June 2023.[5]

MEHDI BABOLI-BAHMAEI

Mehdi Baboli-Bahmaei was arrested and sentenced to qisas for a death caused by a car accident. He was executed in Sepidar Prison in Ahvaz on 1 August 2023.[6]

SHOURESH MOROVATI

Shouresh (Gholamreza) Morovati was arrested for a murder committed during an armed robbery in 2009 and sentenced to qisas. He had escaped prison during the unrest at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, due to the authorities’ failure to take effective measures in prisons. Upon rearrest, he was subjected to months of torture in the Sanandaj detention centre, the signs of which were still on his body when he was executed in Sanandaj Central Prison on 22 August 2023.[7]

QISAS EXECUTIONS SINCE 2010

According to data gathered by Iran Human Rights, at least 2,431 qisas executions were carried out between 2010 and 2023. The diagram below shows the trend of qisas executions during this period.

The number of qisas executions, which was relatively low between 2010 and 2012, increased dramatically in 2013 and has remained at a high level since. This coincides with growing international criticism of Iran’s drug-related executions. In 2023, at least 282 people were subjected to qisas executions.

RAJAI SHAHR (GOHARDASHT) PRISON CLOSURE

Formerly known as Gohardasht Prison, Rajai Shahr Prison was not only the site of thousands of political executions in the bloody decade of the 1980s and thereafter, but has been specifically the qisas capital in the last eight years. In April 2023, Ejei announced the closure of the prison, with evacuation set to begin in July. According to informed IHRNGO sources, “Prison authorities told the prisoners that the prison had been sold for 10,000 billion tomans (€200 million) without naming the buyer and would soon be evacuated.” The closure is part of the intentional and systematic efforts by Islamic Republic authorities to erase all traces of the crimes they have committed at the prison throughout their years in power, particularly that of the 1988 prison massacre. The closure and planned demolition took place after a Swedish court sentenced Hamid Noury to life imprisonment for his role in the 1988 Massacre of political prisoners in Gohardasht Prison.[8] The last executions at the prison took place on 12 July 2023.[9] Following its closure, most prisoners were transferred to Ghezelhesar Prison and executions for the Tehran/Alborz area were moved to Karaj Penitentiary and Ghezelhesar Prison. The latter, which is also scheduled to be closed, was the prison with the highest number of executions (85) in 2023. The most number of qisas executions were carried out in Alborz/Tehran provinces in 2023 (35 in Ghezelhesar Prison, 21 in Rajai Shahr Prison, 7 in Karaj Penitentiary).

BLOOD MONEY (DIYA) OR FORGIVENESS INSTEAD OF DEATH PENALTY IN QISAS CASES

According to the IPC, murder is punished by qisas, where the victim’s next of kin can demand a retribution death sentence. But they can also demand diya (blood money) instead of retribution or can simply grant forgiveness. The Head of Judiciary sets an annual indicative amount for diya based on inflation and other considerations, but the victim’s family can choose their own amount. They can demand a lower or higher amount than the judiciary’s indicative number but crucially, no upper limit is set. The diya indicative amounts, which are determined every March, were set at 900 million tomans (€18,000) for a Muslim man and 450 million tomans (€9,000) for a Muslim woman in March 2022. The amount set by families is usually higher than the indicative amount and even the indicative amount is higher than what most families can afford.

Iran Human Rights has collected forgiveness reports since 2015. According to the reports gathered in the past nine years, the families of murder victims who chose forgiveness or diya for murder convicts outnumber those who chose the death penalty.

For the sake of simplicity, we will use the term forgiveness in the following section, regardless of whether there has been a demand for diya or not.

As with execution numbers, not all forgiveness cases are reported by the Iranian media. Based on reports by the Iranian media and, to a lesser extent, through its own network inside Iran, Iran Human Rights has identified 857 forgiveness cases, compared to 624 cases in 2022, 705 cases in 2021 and 662 cases in 2020.

As in the previous 6 years, the forgiveness cases outnumbered those of implemented qisas executions in 2023. The actual numbers for both forgiveness and qisas death sentences are believed to be higher. IHRNGO estimates that the number of forgiveness cases might be several times higher than the numbers presented in this report.

The increasing trend of forgiveness in Iran correlates with a survey conducted for Iran Human Rights and the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty (WCADP) in September 2020, which found that the majority of people prefer alternative punishments to the qisas death penalty for murder victims.[10] Iranian authorities assert that qisas is the right of the plaintiff (the victim’s family/next of kin) and that most qisas executions take place upon the plaintiff’s request. However, when questioned about their preferred punishment if an immediate family member was murdered, only 21.5% of respondents chose qisas, while more than 50% preferred alternative punishments such as imprisonment.

A comparison of the number of implemented qisas death sentences and forgiveness cases in 2023.

The diagram above shows the monthly breakdown of implemented qisas death sentences compared to forgiveness cases. Forgiveness cases outnumber those of qisas executions throughout the year.

QISAS AND FORGIVENESS: GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION

In 2023, Iran Human Rights recorded forgiveness cases in all 31 provinces in Iran. In comparison, qisas death sentences were reported in 26 of the provinces. Qisas executions only outnumbered forgiveness cases in 4 provinces and in one, the numbers were equal.

The number of qisas executions were higher than forgiveness in only four provinces, while the forgiveness numbers were higher than qisas executions in the rest of the provinces except one where they were equal. The number of forgiveness cases in Khuzestan was around 22 times higher than the qisas numbers.

[1] IHR and ECPM, Annual Report on the Death Penalty in Iran - 2013, p. 11, https://www.ecpm.org/app/uploads/2022/08/Rapport-Iran-2013.pdf

[2] See page XX of this report.

[3] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/5860/

[4] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/5936/

[5] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6009/

[6] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6119/

[7] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6163/

[8] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6130/

[9] Fatemeh Yousefabadi and two unidentified men were executed on 12 July: https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6051/ and https://iranhr.net/en/articles/6056/

[10] https://iranhr.net/en/articles/4458/

(source: iranhr.net)

MARCH 15, 2024:

NORTH CAROLINA:

North Carolina Racial Justice Act Hearing Concludes in Hasson Bacote Case

On Friday, March 8th, a Johnston County trial court concluded a historic hearing regarding the claims of Hasson Bacote, a death-sentenced prisoner in North Carolina, that racial discrimination in jury selection played a role in his 2009 capital sentencing. The case, which is being reviewed pursuant to North Carolina’s 2009 Racial Justice Act (RJA), could have implications for more than 100 other death row prisoners who have pending claims under the Act.

The evidence presented by Mr. Bacote’s legal team during 2 weeks of testimony showed a clear and persistent pattern of racial bias in jury selection. They argued that racial bias has historically denied people of color the opportunity to serve on capital juries and led to a disproportionate number of extreme sentences for Black men, including Mr. Bacote.

In connection with the litigation, North Carolina disclosed 680,000 documents pertaining to data on capital punishment since 1980, including information on jury selection. The data show that potential Black jurors were four times more likely to be eliminated from a jury pool in Johnston County and ten times more likely to be eliminated by former District Attorney Gregory Butler, the prosecutor in Mr. Bacote’s case.

Henderson Hill, one of Mr. Bacote’s lawyers, argued that the racism in North Carolina’s death penalty was “so clear, its blinding.” “We have white prosecutors standing in front of overwhelmingly white juries comparing Black defendants facing the death penalty to animals – ‘mad dogs,’ ‘hyenas,’ ‘predators of the African plain,’” he said.

Mr. Butler denied the allegations that race played any role in Mr. Bacote’s case. “And, no, I was not calling them animals. There was no racial intent on my part whatsoever,” he said.

The RJA was passed by North Carolina in 2009, allowing persons sentenced to death to challenge their sentences based on the role race played in their sentencing and jury selection. Then, in 2013, the Act was fully repealed under Governor Pat McCroy.

The repeal was a response to the reaction of some North Carolina legislators, who complained that the RJA was an indirect way to abolish the death penalty in the state and caused delays in executions. The legislature’s initial attempt to repeal it in 2011 was vetoed by the then-Governor Bev Perdue. But cases that had already been filed under the RJA prior to the repeal, including that of Mr. Bacote, continue to proceed.

Serving on a jury is a fundamental constitutional right of United States citizens. Nonetheless, racial disparities in jury selections are not endemic to North Carolina. For many decades, and across the U.S., Black people were denied the right to serve on juries. The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Batson v. Kentucky (1986) confirmed that racial discrimination in jury selection is illegal, but the practice has continued.

Mr. Bacote is represented by the Center for Death Penalty Litigation, the ACLU’s Capital Punishment Project, the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund, and North Carolina Attorney Jay Ferguson.

Superior Court Judge Wayland J. Sermons, Jr. is expected to issue his ruling in Mr. Bacote’s case later this Spring.

SOURCES

North Carolina Racial Justice Act, 2009 N.C. Sess. Laws 464 (cod­i­fied as amend­ed at N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 15A-2010 to 15A-2012); An Act to Amend the Racial Justice Act, 2012 N.C. Sess. Laws 136 (amend­ing N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 15A-2010 to 15A-2012); An Act to Repeal the Racial Justice Act, 2013 N.C. Sess. Laws 154 (repeal­ing N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 15A-2010 to 15A-2012).

Hill, C.S., Megan Byrne, Henderson, February 22, 2024. Challenging the Racist Death Penalty in North Carolina, ACLU. American Civil Liberties Union; Historic Hearing Challenging Racial Bias in North Carolina’s Death Penalty Concludes with Overwhelming Evidence of Discrimination in Capital Cases, March 8, 2024, American Civil Liberties Union; Historic Racial Justice Act hear­ing con­tin­ues in Johnston County with first-of-its-kind evi­dence, March 4, 2024, CBS17?.com; Lyons, K., March 8, 2024, Racial Justice Act hear­ing con­cludes — for now. NC Newsline; Lyons, K., 2024. Jury selec­tion, stereo­types exam­ined in Racial Justice Act hear­ing. NC Newsline; Racial Justice Act, n.d., The Center for Death Penalty Litigation; Hasson Bacote tri­al con­tin­ues Tuesday, March 4, 2024, WRAL?.com.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

*****************

Racial Justice Act re-sentencing hearing concludes

A billboard that welcomed people to Smithfield, a town in Johnston County, stood until the 1970s, “but the efforts to keep Black Johnstonians off juries continued,” said Henderson Hill, one of the attorneys for Hasson Bacote, a Black man sentenced to death in Johnston County in 2009.

Arguments have ended in a Johnston County judicial proceeding that will have significant implications for about 120 people on North Carolina’s death row.

For 2 weeks, attorneys for Hasson Bacote, a Black man sentenced to death in Johnston County in 2009, have put the death penalty on trial. They built their case around 680,000 documents turned over in discovery, which an attorney called “the most comprehensive discovery provided by the state on jury selection issues in North Carolina.”

They questioned Assistant District Attorney Gregory Butler, who prosecuted Bacote, about his closing arguments in two cases where he called Black defendants “thugs” and “predators on the African plain.” And they presented evidence showing that Black prospective jurors were more than 2.5 times more likely to be struck from a jury pool statewide, four times more likely to be struck from a jury pool in Johnston County and 10 times more likely to be struck in cases tried by Butler.

“We have white prosecutors standing in front of overwhelmingly white juries comparing Black defendants facing the death penalty to animals – ‘mad dogs,’ ‘hyenas,’ ‘predators of the African plain,’” said Henderson Hill of Charlotte, senior counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. “The racism in North Carolina’s application of the death penalty is so clear it’s blinding.”

Bacote’s is the lead case testing the Racial Justice Act, a landmark state law that was in effect from 2009 to 2013 and that gives people sentenced to death an opportunity to be resentenced to life in prison without parole if they can prove racial discrimination played a role in their case. That means how Bacote’s case is handled will set the stage for how other judges deal with the other roughly 120 pending Racial Justice Act claims.

Superior Court Judge Wayland J. Sermons, Jr. has not yet issued a ruling. In the coming weeks, after the attorneys receive certified transcripts of the arguments, Sermons will require lawyers for the state and Bacote’s legal team to submit, in writing, the case for why their side is right. Then they will return to the Johnston County courthouse for closing arguments, likely at least 6 weeks away.

(source: The Charlotte Post)

GEORGIA:

Georgia Court Case Tests the Limits of Execution Secrecy in the United States

Georgia plans to put Willie James Pye to death on March 20, in the state’s 1st execution since January 2020. The state wants to hide as much of that event as possible and, in so doing, to push the limits of execution secrecy in this country.

Its plan is a bold departure from the history of American executions. In that history, the public and the press traditionally have been welcomed as spectators.

Secrecy of the kind that Georgia law now allows rightly invites suspicion. What is it that Georgia doesn’t want the press to witness and the public to know, and why does it want to restrict what the press can see and hear when it puts Pye to death?

That question is at the heart of a lawsuit filed on March 8 in the Superior Court of Fulton County by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of The Appeal, a “nonprofit news organization dedicated to exposing how the U.S. criminal legal system fails to keep people safe and perpetuates harm.” The suit claims that Georga’s lethal injection protocol, with its severe restrictions on press access, violates the First Amendment of the United States Constitution as well as the Georgia Constitution.

It asks the court to declare that the imposition of “restrictions on media witnesses’ visual and auditory access to the execution process” is unlawful and to stop the state from carrying out any executions until it removes the restrictions on that access.

This case tests the limits of execution secrecy. The court should grant The Appeal’s request and insist that if Georgia wants to execute anyone, it must respect the public’s right to know and the right of the press to cover any execution fully and completely.

Of course, Georgia is not the only death penalty state which now treats executions as if they were private affairs and severely limits what the public can know about them. Execution secrecy laws began to appear in the 1990s, mandating secrecy about the identity of the executioner.

For example, in 1992, the Kentucky state legislature passed a statute that read, “The identity of an individual performing the services of executioner shall remain confidential and shall not be considered a public record.” But it would be another 2 decades, propelled by difficulties in securing lethal injection drugs, before laws like Kentucky’s became the norm in other death penalty states.

Since 2010, 14 states have enacted laws that extend and intensify secrecy surrounding executions. Those laws have varying degrees of specificity, but all prohibit the disclosure of the identity of the executioner and others directly involved in carrying out executions.

They also cover crucial details about the drugs themselves, including in some instances the type of drugs used in executions, details about the drugs’ makeup, information about the drug cocktail or combination and how it was developed, and the identities of lethal injection drug suppliers.

Idaho’s secrecy law, which was passed in February 2022, makes the identities of “[a]ny person or entity who compounds, synthesizes, tests, sells, supplies, manufactures, stores, transports, procures, dispenses, or prescribes the chemicals or substances for use in an execution or that provides the medical supplies or medical equipment for the execution process” confidential and inadmissible as evidence in court.”

As my collaborators Theo Dassin, Aidan Orr and I wrote in 2023, “Of the death penalty states that have carried out lethal injection executions since 2010, all withheld some information about the execution process.” As the suit brought by The Appeal notes, Georgia prohibits any witness from seeing or hearing what is done in the two hours leading up to an execution, including preparation of the drugs and the execution equipment.

It permits only a single media witness “to visually observe the final preparatory steps taken before the lethal injection is administered.” Georgia further limits access during the time in which the condemned is being prepared for execution.

It prevents any media witness from having audio access to this part of the execution process so that the press cannot hear what is being said while members of the execution team try to insert an IV.

The suit notes that if a problem arises with the administration of the lethal injection drugs, media witnesses have no audio access to communications concerning these problems because state officials turn off the microphone in the execution chamber. “If the condemned prisoner show signs of life after the lethal injection drugs are administered (media witnesses) cannot see what if any additional chemicals are being injected,” and they cannot hear how old condemned reacts or what execution team members say as the execution unfolds.

Limiting access to the sights and sounds of an execution as it unfolds serves no legitimate state interest. The state of Georgia, the suit alleges, has acted in an arbitrary way in deciding “what portions of the execution process…[it] will allow media witnesses to see and hear.”

This action denies the public “access to observe-both by sight and sound-the entire government proceeding.” As the Death Penalty Information Center notes, laws like Georgia’s leave “the public to speculate as to why it took prison personnel extended periods of time to set the IV lines in a number of recent executions.”

Audio censorship, the DPIC says, “masks the sounds witnesses can hear during the process, leaving the public to wonder whether a prisoner is gasping versus snoring, gurgling versus choking, or verbally expressing pain during the execution process.”

Georgia’s plan exposes the shame that now attaches to the practice of state killing. Today, the New York Times rightly observes, “Capital punishment does not operate in the land of reason or logic; it operates in a perpetual state of secrecy and shame.”

The Superior Court of Fulton County has a chance to lift the secrecy if not end of shame of Georgia’s plan to kill Willie James Pye.

(source: Commentary;Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College. Views expressed do not represent Amherst College----verdict.justia.com)

****************

Georgia's execution of Willie Pye is racist, classless immorality

With the arrival, in late January of this year, in Alabama, of a gruesome new method of executing death row prisoners by gassing them with nitrogen — producing a prolonged writhing, thrashing, gasping, and convulsing death on the execution gurney — in addition to the litany of lethal injection botches that occur in the U.S. with regularity, like in Idaho at the end of February, good people in this country, people who know the difference between right and wrong, hardly need additional evidence to be convinced of the death penalty’s immorality.

Nevertheless, while it hasn’t executed anyone in over 4 years, Georgia’s determined to get back into the killing business starting with Willie Pye, an undisputedly low-intellectual functioning, borderline-to-actually intellectually disabled, abjectly poor, Black man. Pye was convicted of horrifically kidnapping, robbing, raping, and murdering his former girlfriend 3 decades ago. The Associated Press’s Kate Brumback reports, “The execution is scheduled for March 20 at 7 p.m., after the judge set an execution window between noon that day and noon on March 27.”

Brumback notes Pye’s appellate lawyers argue Pye’s trial lawyer didn’t adequately investigate and present available mitigation evidence at Pye’s sentencing showing Pye’s “childhood was characterized by poverty, abuse and neglect. They also argued that he suffered from frontal-lobe brain damage, potentially caused by fetal alcohol syndrome, that harmed his ability to plan and control his impulses.” And procedurally, Brumback explains: “A federal judge rejected those claims, but a 3-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with Pye’s lawyers in April 2021. But then the case was reheard by the full federal appeals court, which overturned the panel ruling in October 2022.”

Obscured by this terse albeit accurate distillation of the salient legal proceedings in Pye’s case’s thirty-year legal odyssey are several shocking and uncontested facts and circumstances that should cause all Americans to vociferously oppose Pye’s execution. And beyond that, beyond acknowledging that executing Pye would be mercilessly unjust, the reoccurring existence of the same bleak phenomena in Pye’s case in the overwhelming majority of death penalty cases — structural racism, crushing poverty, child abuse and neglect, and terrifically bad lawyering — highlights, in crystalline fashion, the immorality of capital punishment in America. Indeed, Pye’s case is a poster child for death penalty abolition.

Judge Jill Pryor, who authored the opinion granting Pye relief from execution in 2021 — and a scathing dissent from the later majority opinion of the full 11th Circuit that reinstated Pye’s death sentence — provides, through her decisions, a portal by which the terrible realities of state executions in Georgia and how they impact the poorest Black people the most, and why, can be seen. While Pryor has published a massive amount of writing distilling the injustices in Pye’s case, and why Pye cannot be executed consistent with any fair determination of justice — writing worthy of every humanitarian and serious legal observer’s time and consideration — these are, in my opinion, some of her strongest, most salient points:

Pye’s appointed attorney, Johnny Mostilier, was representing thousands of other people at the time he was representing Pye — including four other capital murder defendants.

Because Mostilier couldn’t and didn’t expend enough time and effort investigating and otherwise preparing to present mitigating evidence to rebut the state’s case for the death penalty, Pye’s jury never heard “Pye was raised in abject poverty by parents who managed to feed and clothe their 10 children by the slimmest of margins. The family lived in a kind of poverty rarely witnessed in the United States, occupying a small four-room house with makeshift walls to separate the sleeping areas and no indoor plumbing or central heating.”

The jury never heard about the extreme neglect Pye suffered as a child and how he rarely attended school, had enough food, proper clothing, and adult supervision, and how, in general, his alcoholic, emotionally and physically abusive mother “struggled as the sole provider for her 6 children.”

When Pye was born his mother’s husband, also a drunkard, “was incarcerated and working on a chain gang,” but when he got out he returned home where he physically and emotionally terrorized his entire family — especially Pye, for whom he reserved his worst criticisms, tirades, and violent beatings.

Judge Pryor concluded what any feeling person would: “the reality for Mr. Pye is that he experienced the unthinkable as an infant, child, and adolescent.” And “[e]ven in the face of the aggravated crime Mr. Pye committed and the aggravating evidence presented,” it is reasonably probable “at least one juror would have voted for a sentence less than death had the jury heard what we know now about Mr. Pye.”

Pye’s being executed now because Georgia’s grown tired of slumbering on capital punishment’s sideline. Seeking to rebound from its hiatus from state-sponsored killing, the “Peach State” is seemingly determined to descend into a deeper pit of evil by targeting for execution one of the most disadvantaged, discriminated upon, and profoundly damaged of her citizens, adding to what I characterized elsewhere, as “Georgia’s shameful record on executions.” All good people must oppose this.

(source: Stephen Cooper is a former D.C. public. defender who worked as an assistant federal public defender in Alabama between 2012 and 2015----Monntgomery Advertiser)

FLORIDA:

Death penalty case of John Doe gang leader in peril as judge disqualifies prosecutors----Lawyer for the reputed leader of a violent Liberty City drug gang in the 1990s calls for criminal investigation of Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office after judge finds misconduct

The lawyer for the reputed leader of a violent Liberty City drug gang in the 1990s called for criminal investigation of the Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office after a judge found misconduct.

In a rare order removing prosecutors from a death penalty case, a Miami-Dade circuit judge cited several instances of misconduct, but none as stunning as this: finding reasonable minds could conclude one of those prosecutors sent a cryptic message to a convicted killer to eliminate a witness.

That longtime senior prosecutor – Michael Von Zamft – resigned within hours of the judge handing down her order last week and has not responded to email and a voicemail seeking his comment.

While Judge Andrea Ricker Wolfson said she did not believe Von Zamft was relaying a desire to “eliminate” the witness when he told the jailed convicted murderer he might “find a way to make her unavailable,” “reasonable minds may reach a different conclusion based on the totality of the circumstances,” she wrote in her order.

Those circumstances include the state manipulating witnesses, improperly withholding relevant records from the defense, and trying to set up a jailhouse courtyard meeting between two witnesses and a third man with a history of helping prosecutors make cases against other inmates.

The developments come in the case of Corey Smith, sentenced to death for 2 of 4 murders he was convicted of committing or arranging in the 1990s as, prosecutors argued, the leader of the John Does, a violent drug gang based in Liberty City. Because the jury was not unanimous for death in 2005, he is being resentenced in accordance with more recent court decisions.

But Judge Wolfson is also considering a request to throw out his convictions and sentences, which would require the state to retry him more than 25 years after his arrest or drop the case entirely. In her disqualification order, she refers to evidence that she says would be relevant to that motion, as well.

Both the jailhouse meeting and the prospect of making a witness “unavailable” were discussed in the same August 2022 jail call, what the judge dubbed the “smoking gun” — a copy of which was obtained by the NBC6 Investigators.

Von Zamft took the call from Latravis Gallashaw, a partner of Smith in the John Does, who was also convicted of murder and drug trafficking in the case and has been seeking a reduction in his 70-year federal prison sentence based on his cooperation with prosecutors.

The newly uncooperative witness, Tricia Geter, was once Smith’s girlfriend, but she turned against him and was a key witness in the trial that resulted in his death sentences.

But when she started backing off that testimony, she testified last month, Von Zamft told her, “if she was dead, he would simply read her prior testimony into the record,” the judge recounted in her order.

Here is the exchange the judge cited:

Von Zamft: She gave full and complete testimony in the last trial.

Gallashaw: Yeah.

Von Zamft: If I call her and she refuses, then I will find a way to make her unavailable, and then I can read her whole testimony.

Gallashaw: You would want to do that?

Von Zamft: No. I don’t want to do it. I'd rather she testified and did a good job. But can I count on it? No.

The judge said the smoking gun call “totally and completely corroborates” Geter’s testimony.

“She had developed a fear or concern that Michael Von Zamft would prefer her to be dead, that his case and his ability to prosecute Corey Smith would be improved if she were out of the picture,” said Craig Whisenhunt, one of the defense attorneys who unearthed the new evidence that led to the disqualifications.

The order disqualifying Von Zamft, his co-counsel and a third prosecutor who resigned before he could be disqualified has shaken the Miami-Dade state attorney’s office and put Smith’s death penalty conviction in jeopardy.

Von Zamft obtained the state indictment against the John Does in 2000 and returning him to death row after resentencing was to be the cap of his 40-year legal career.

“He did in fact end his career with Corey Smith, but just not in the way he envisioned,” said Whisenhunt. He said the “misconduct included a heavy reliance on snitches and particularly where these snitches were either fed information or allowed to coordinate with other witnesses in order to establish their testimony.”

He is now calling for a criminal investigation of the matter, but the state attorney’s office has not responded to NBC6’s inquiry on whether it will ask the governor for an executive order assigning such an investigation to another state attorney.

In a press release noting the judge did not grant the defense request to disqualify her entire office, State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle wrote, “I will ask my top litigators to examine every aspect of this case and determine the best path forward. The 24-year-old case is massive, and it will take my team some time to ensure that we are proceeding in accordance with the law and with justice. Be assured that we will get the job done.”

Geter wasn’t the only witness Von Zamft was concerned about. He also discussed with Gallashaw another former John Does colleague, Demetrius Jones.

Judge Wolfson cited this passage from their phone call in her order:

Gallashaw: And you don’t know about rehabilitating Jones, huh?

Von Zamft: Which one?

Gallashaw: Jones. Meat Head.

Von Zamft: Yeah. His problem is - well, Jones, I've told you. His contradictory statements. I've asked to allow you, Jones and (a third inmate Von Zamft has used in other cases) to go to the, you know, courtyard together. I've asked them to do that, but Corrections has not agreed.

Just trying to set up that meeting behind bars “reeks of the appearance of impropriety,” Judge Wolfson found, adding at one point in her order the state’s withholding of critical records from the defense was “at best … incompetence.”

Whisenhunt said it goes beyond mere incompetence.

“Manipulating testimony to pursue something that was untrue and to encourage someone to lie or mislead the court is not only a grievable offense as an attorney and reprehensible behavior, it is also in and of itself criminal conduct,” Whisenhunt said, citing laws against assisting someone in committing perjury.

In May 2022, Von Zamft himself accused Smith’s defense of that crime, called subornation of perjury, and launched a criminal investigation that forced two of Smith’s investigators off the case to avoid a potential conflict of interest as Von Zamft investigated them.

No charges ever resulted, but the Smith team argued losing the investigators prejudiced them due to what they called Von Zamft’s unfounded inquiry.

Now it is Von Zamft facing a similar accusation, though there is no indication any law enforcement is investigating him.

Attempts to reach the two other prosecutors involved have been unsuccessful.

As for Smith — who even if freed on the state convictions still faces 60 years in federal prison for drug trafficking — he “may not have been an angel,” said Whisenhunt, “but he wasn’t who they painted him to be and he was sentenced to die for things he didn’t have a hand in by this same state attorney and this same state attorney’s office.”

(source: nbcmiami.com)

ALABAMA:

Alabama legislator seeks to eliminate nitrogen gas executions

A group of lawmakers have filed legislation that would end executions by nitrogen gas as Alabama grapples with criticism stemming from the execution of Kenneth Eugene Smith in January.

HB 248, sponsored by Neil Rafferty, D-Birmingham, strikes language in the state’s capital punishment statute that makes any reference to nitrogen hypoxia as a method of execution.

“In states where the death penalty does exist, it shouldn’t be cruel, it shouldn’t be unusual (and) it definitely shouldn’t be experimental, like nitrogen hypoxia is,” Rafferty said in an interview on Wednesday. “There is a difference between execution and torture, and an experimental method that is not even used in veterinary medicine could certainly be interpreted that way.”

The bill faces long odds of passage in the Republican-controlled Legislature, which in 2018 authorized the use of nitrogen hypoxia amid problems obtaining drugs used in lethal injections.

The sponsor, Sen. Trip Pittman, Montrose, argued that should executions continue, then it should be done in the most humane way possible.

Death by nitrogen gas, Pittman said, would be more humane.

“I know in a pure nitrogen environment you pass out,” Pittman said in an interview in September. “It is instantaneous. You basically black out. There is no time for pain or anything else. In fact, nitrous oxide is a way of reducing pain for reducing surgeries.”

He likened the situation to the death of professional golfer Payne Stewart, whose plane lost cabin pressure in 1999 and those on board suffocated.

The Alabama Attorney General’s Office used that argument in their filings to plead with the court to permit them to carry through with the executions despite continued concerns from Smith’s attorney, Robert Grass, about the potential complications.

Critics doubted Pittman’s claims and said that executing people using nitrogen gas is more complicated.

“This is death by asphyxiation. This is choking someone to death with a gas,” said Dr. Joel Zivot, an anesthesiologist at Emory University Hospital, in an interview in September. “Why anyone would think that would be something pleasant or painless is really beyond my understanding.”

During Smith’s execution in January, he convulsed and gasped for air for at least 7 minutes.

“I think it is a valiant attempt to reintroduce a modicum of humanity to Alabama that will most likely fail,” said Lauren Faraino during an interview on Tuesday regarding the legislation, founder and director of The Woods Foundation.

She went on to say that “I don’t think that any of our politicians have the interest or the courage to reverse what can only be described as torture.”

Despite the criticism, the state plans to move forward with additional executions. The Alabama Attorney General’s Office last monthsubmitted a motion with the Alabama Supreme Court to execute Alan Eugene Miller by nitrogen gas, according to the Associated Press.

Mississippi and Oklahoma have both authorized nitrogen gas executions, though neither state has carried one out. Attorney General Steve Marshall, at a press conference a day after Smith’s execution, declared the method a success and encouraged other states to follow suit. Some have obliged, including Nebraska.

“At this time, I will continue to pursue the debate on LB 970 and the use of nitrogen hypoxia as a form of execution in Nebraska,” said Nebraska Sen. Loren Lippincott, R-Central City, who introduced the legislation, in a statement to the Reflector. “Given the outcome of the Alabama case, I am confident that this will be a highly debated bill in our state.”

He went on to say that “if given this option, I am certain that the Nebraska Department of Corrections will use this method to humanely give justice to victims’ families and our community.”

Louisiana recently passed legislation authorizing executions using nitrogen gas.

“I went to every state and saw what was legal, because I didn’t want to have a situation where I would be challenged legally for cruel and unusual punishment,” said Louisiana Rep. Nicholas Muscarello, R-Hammond. “It was effective in your state, and that is why I chose it.”

Muscarello largely sidestepped the question of whether the execution method is humane.

“I am more of a legal perspective on this, and I think the courts have said it was legal, and therefore, the method was chosen,” Muscarello said. “The victims had to go through pretty heinous acts themselves, so, at the end of the day, I wish we weren’t talking about this at all. I wish everybody were good people and good humans. Sometimes people do bad things, and I think it sends a message that if you do bad things, bad things will happen to you.”

That criticism continues, however.

“The questions and serious concerns about the use of nitrogen gas in executions remain unaddressed and are even more urgent given the obvious pain and distress that Mr. Smith experienced during his execution in January,” said Robin Maher, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center.

(source: Alabama Reflector)

*******************

Alabama Discovers There Is No 'Humane' Way To Execute Someone----Instead of searching for gentle execution methods, states should just stop killing prisoners.

After executing death row inmate Kenneth Eugene Smith by the controversial nitrogen hypoxia method in January, Alabama legislators have introduced a bill to ban the practice entirely. Ironically, nitrogen hypoxia—in which a prisoner is killed by being forced to breathe pure nitrogen—was originally introduced in Alabama as a supposedly more humane form of execution than lethal injection.

The Alabama Legislature passed a bill allowing the state to conduct executions by nitrogen hypoxia in 2018. At the time, the execution method was completely untested—a fact that caused it to quickly become controversial at the same time as Alabama death row inmates clamored to be killed using the hypothetical technique.

As lethal injection drugs have become increasingly difficult to obtain, alternate drug cocktails have led to a spate of grisly executions nationwide. Alabama in particular has conducted several botched executions in recent years, all stemming from prison officials' inability to correctly place an IV line for lethal injection drugs.

Smith, who had previously survived a botched lethal injection attempt, was killed by nitrogen hypoxia in January. Smith won the right to be executed by nitrogen hypoxia instead of lethal injection last year, though his lawyers reversed course in a last-minute attempt to save his life, arguing that nitrogen hypoxia would itself be overly cruel. He was the 1st known person to be killed by nitrogen hypoxia, and witnesses described how Smith "struggled against his restraints" and "shook and writhed on a gurney" as he was dying.

On February 27, state Rep. Neil Rafferty (D–Birmingham), introduced a bill to ban nitrogen hypoxia in Alabama—instead forcing a return to lethal injection in most cases. (Execution by electric chair is technically allowed in Alabama, but inmates are very unlikely to opt into it.)

The legislation, which isn't likely to pass, has been framed by many anti–death penalty advocates as an attempt to remove an inherently cruel execution method.

"I think [the bill] is a valiant attempt to reintroduce a modicum of humanity to Alabama that will most likely fail," Lauren Faraino, founder and director of The Woods Foundation, a criminal justice nonprofit, told the Alabama Reflector this week. "I don't think that any of our politicians have the interest or the courage to reverse what can only be described as torture."

But is it? While nitrogen hypoxia is clearly a terrible way to die, lethal injection executions are also famously cruel—the most popular drug cocktail is known to cause searing, burning pain before killing inmates. A world where death row prisoners are not able to opt into nitrogen hypoxia is not obviously one where Alabama is less cruel in how it executes inmates sentenced to die.

While horror at the gruesome nature of nitrogen hypoxia executions is understandable, the back-and-forth on the method—first hailed as more "humane" and then as cruel— shows an unfortunate truth: As it turns out, there's not really a gentle way to kill someone.

If Alabama legislators actually want to stop killing death row prisoners in hideous ways, then they should consider not killing them at all.

(source: Emma Camp, reason.com)

*****************

Opelika man denied bond after killing 1-year-old, officials say

1 of the 2 suspects accused of killing a 1-year-old in Opelika made a court appearance, Wed. March, 13. Seth Kendrick is charged with capital murder, along with the child’s mother, Dorothy Hight. In February, Opelika Police responded to 24th Street in reference to an unresponsive child.

When police arrived, they began CPR and transported the child to East Alabama Medical Center where he died.

Police say there were signs of abuse.

Kendrick was denied and both suspects preliminary hearings were postponed to late April. The district attorney is seeing the death penalty in the case.

(source: WTVM news)

LOUISIANA:

A journey from Louisiana’s death row to the art world

Gary Tyler was just a teenager when he landed on death row, wrongfully imprisoned for murder, in 1974. And it would be four decades before he left Angola State Penitentiary in Louisiana behind, beginning a new life as an artist and sharing the reality of his prison experience in evocative works of quilting and appliqué.

This article was produced by Capital & Main. It is co-published here with permission.

Now 65, Tyler was awarded the 2024 Frieze Los Angeles Impact Prize for that textile work, which will be on display at this week’s Frieze Los Angeles art fair through March 3. At the heart of that work is the trauma he both suffered and witnessed in his fellow inmates in his years at the penitentiary. His pieces are largely self-portraits and scenes from prison, and are dedicated to broadening the understanding of what life there is like.

He ended up there as the result of a protest against integration and busing that erupted outside Destrehan High School, where he was a sophomore. A 13-year-old white boy was shot and killed during the protest. And after Tyler, an African American, vocally defended a cousin who was being violently detained by state police, he was arrested, charged and ultimately convicted of the murder by an all-white jury when he was 16.

After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the state’s death penalty was unconstitutional, Tyler was ordered a new trial. He was recommended for parole three times by the Louisiana Board of Prisons, and became a national cause célèbre, covered by the New York Times and supported by Amnesty International. But he was denied each time. His attorneys finally landed an imperfect deal with Louisiana prosecutors: Tyler would be released if he pled guilty to manslaughter, a lesser charge with a penalty less than what he’d already served.

Tyler had embarked on a series of careers behind bars: He had learned graphic design, became a hospice volunteer to dying inmates, repaired wheelchairs and was president of the prison drama club for 28 years. He also learned to quilt, which became an outlet for his artistic expression that is now recognized around the art world. That artwork depicts his plight in fabric and understated colors: In one called “Defiant,” a prisoner stands with his wrists in chains, a look of grim pride on his face. Others show inmates laboring in a prison yard or peering between iron bars, with depictions of the occasional butterfly to represent freedom and transformation.

His Frieze Impact award comes with a $25,000 prize, given by the art fair in connection with Endeavor Impact and The Center for Art and Advocacy.

“I have no excuse to sit on this,” Tyler said, describing his mission as an artist. “I love doing traditional quilts, but I want to do something provocative. I want to do something that’s educational. I want to do something that’s enlightening to where people can really look and say, ‘Why?’”

This interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.

Capital & Main: When you were charged for the death of that boy, did you believe the truth would come out?

Gary Tyler: When you are a kid, you are very confused, because you simply got arrested for a nonlethal offense by protesting against the maltreatment of fellow students and yourself. I was a young person and confused [about] what was really happening. Of course, you think that it’s all gonna end. But in my case, it didn’t end until 4 decades later.

When you were convicted and sentenced, you were still a teenager?

I was a teenager. I was charged with 1st-degree murder, and I was convicted unanimously by an all-white jury. Automatically, I was given the death penalty. They set my execution date: May 1, 1976.

The quilt “Defiant” (1976, 2023) by Gary Tyler portrays a Black man in handcuffs in front of a radiant background.

When did you first think of yourself as an artist?

I had never thought of myself as an artist. When I was on death row, I noticed a guy making picture frames and jewelry boxes out of matchsticks and cigarette packs. I wanted to know how to do that, so the guy showed me. But I never thought that this would be a manifestation of my life later on. In prison, an artist is considered a hobby crafter … [who] earns a living by selling their artwork to the public and makes gifts for their families. They never look at themselves as artists.

But as I talk to people and they tell me, “Hey, Gary, you have a gift, and you were quite good at it when you were in prison. You can rank yourself as being an artist.” Reflecting on that, I agreed that I’m not a hobby crafter. I am an artist.

We recently did an article about a program called Jail Guitar Doors, which brings musical instruments and instruction into prisons. It seems that having a creative outlet can be crucial to someone in prison.

It also helps people to recognize latent talent, something that they never thought they had. I met guys that never thought that they could sing learn how to sing — guys learning how to play a guitar, a bass guitar and drums. Unfortunately, they wound up in a situation where they realized that, hey, I had something that probably could have been discovered earlier in life — before this terrible tragedy happened in their lives.

You chose to tell the story of your life through your artwork?

Yeah. And also the lives of others. The people that I befriended, people who have died in prison while I was there. People who I have taken care of as a hospice volunteer that have died. To show the humanity of prison life.

What was it about quilting that appealed to you?

Well, nothing, to be honest with you. [laughs] I thought it wasn’t a manly thing to be doing in prison, but being a hospice volunteer — prisoners wanted to know what we could do to financially support the program: “Let’s start making quilts to sell to the public.” And guys started making quilts. They asked me to help them out because they were falling behind.

Since I am a certified graphic artist, I learned a technique called appliqué, and I started applying that process into quilting. That’s where my imagery came about, and lo and behold, it was something that got many people’s attention.

What do people not realize about life in prison?

Sometimes you have these movies that give a false depiction about prison life. Prison is a world of its own. It is composed of people from all walks of life: The good, the bad and the ugly, but sometimes, people in prison are not what society depicts them to be. You have genuinely good people in prison despite the crime that they went to prison for. Everybody in prison is not a criminal just because a person committed a crime. There are people in prison that deserve a second chance.

What’s the most important thing to know about living on death row?

I don’t think any [inmate] can accept that someone wants to take their life from them. It was an uneasy feeling. It was surreal that this was happening. It was a whole lot for a young person my age. It took me some time to really grasp what was taking place. It was a living hell, to be honest with you.

Were there many others there who were also not guilty of what they were convicted of?

You can pick up the papers every day — well, not every day — and you see people who have been exonerated for crimes they didn’t commit 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago. It is just horrible how the criminal justice system operates.

“Unwavering", an artwork quilt by Gary Tyler, depicts a man behind prison bars

When you were finally released, were you able to use quilting right away to make a living?

No, when I got out, I had to restart my life all over. When I went to prison at 16 years old, I was a juvenile. I lived under the auspices of my parents, who paid the bills, who took care of me as their child. Now I no longer have them. I exited prison an elderly man. I was 57 years old, and then I found out that I’d have to work 10 years to even start receiving Social Security. All this time I’m thinking that if you reach a certain age, you automatically get Social Security. That’s if you worked in the system, had a job in life. But I was in prison all that time. Now I got to work 10 years to put something in.

That’s a tall order.

I’ll be 77 years old before I’m able to start drawing Social Security. So I had to concentrate on reacclimating, adjusting to life and doing the things that will give me a solid foundation that will help me sustain a living — a life out here in the free world.

People who knew me and the kind of artwork that I did, like quilting and drama, always reminded me, “Gary, people would appreciate your artwork more being out here than when you were in prison.” I was working to really get an anchor, get my life established. I got a studio and people heard about me, my artwork, and knew that I was a quilter. And miraculously, that was like a clarion call: I started getting fabric from people all over. People donated sewing machines.

What does it mean to you that the art world is paying attention to what you’re saying?

If my artwork is able to give people an understanding of what an individual goes through while in prison — that a person can be just as creative, can be just as productive than those who are not incarcerated, and come out somewhat normal and able to function — it definitely means a lot.

Since I am in the position that I am, I hope that it’s a reflection of the men and women in prison, that you don’t cease to be a human being while you’re in prison. You can be just as productive. You can be just as meaningful.

(source: Louisiana Illuminator)

OHIO:

Death Penalty Affirmed for Man Who Stabbed Housemates to Death

The Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed the death penalty for a man who stabbed his 2 Parma Heights housemates to death and concealed their bodies for weeks in trash bags hidden in the home.

The Supreme Court rejected the 24 legal arguments raised by Thomas E. Knuff Jr., including his claim that he only killed 1 of the 2 victims, and that killing was in self-defense. Knuff was convicted of the May 2017 murders of John Mann and Regina Capobianco.

Writing for the Court majority, Justice Joseph T. Deters stated that Knuff claimed he was innocent and the only remorse he expressed was that the victims were unable to receive proper burials.

“To the contrary, the evidence (other than Knuff’s self-serving account) strongly supports the jury's rejection of Knuff’s self-defense claim and its finding that he killed both Mann and Capobianco,” Justice Deters wrote.

Knuff received the death sentence based on 2 counts of aggravated murder. Each count carried a death penalty specification for acting in the course of conduct “for the purposeful killing of 2 or more persons.” He also received death specifications for committing the felonies of aggravated burglary and kidnapping.

Chief Justice Sharon L. Kennedy and Justices Patrick F. Fischer, R. Patrick DeWine, and Melody Stewart joined Justice Deters in the majority opinion.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Michael P. Donnelly agreed that the death penalty should be imposed based on Knuff’s murder convictions. However, he disagreed with the use of the felony murder specifications, stating that the Supreme Court is relying on past decisions that stretch the limits of the definitions of burglary and kidnapping. Those definitions allow “a burglary charge with almost any murder within four walls and kidnapping with almost any death that was not instantaneous,” he stated.

Justice Jennifer Brunner joined Justice Donnelly’s concurrence.

Released Inmate Briefly Resides With Friend and Former Girlfriend

Knuff, who was serving a 15-and-a-half-year prison term on a previous conviction, was scheduled to be released from prison in early April 2017. While in prison, he developed a romantic relationship with Alicia Stoner, an employee at the prison. Their relationship ended before his release, but she offered to pick him up when he got out. He declined, saying he arranged a ride with “John and his old lady.”

“John” was John Mann, a friend of Knuff’s who was living in Parma Heights. John’s “old lady” was Regina Capobianco. Knuff and Capobianco had a prior relationship.

Upon his release, Knuff moved into a Strongsville hotel room paid for by Stoner. On May 10, 2017, Marc Fisher, Knuff’s parole officer, learned Knuff was living at the hotel. But when Fisher discovered that the hotel manager had not seen Knuff for five days, Fisher confronted Knuff.

Knuff told Fisher he was living with Mann. That same day, Fisher spoke with Mann. Mann said he lived alone and had agreed to any unannounced home visits or warrantless searches. Fisher permitted Knuff to stay with Mann pending a home visit. He also sanctioned Knuff for lying about living at the hotel.

Mann was not living alone. Capobianco had been living with Mann for about a year. When Knuff moved in, Capobianco was engaging in prostitution, sometimes at Mann’s home. Because living with someone who is committing crimes could result in additional parole violation sanctions for Knuff, a conflict arose between Knuff and Capobianco.

On May 11, the day after being granted permission to live with Mann, Knuff asked Stoner for $80 to get Capobianco out of the house. Stoner sent the money around 8 p.m. and then tried to call and text Knuff repeatedly that night and through the following afternoon of May 12. But he did not respond. Knuff then called Stoner and told her she needed to get him, but he did not explain why. She picked him up at a bar.

Police Discover Hidden Bodies

Stoner saw that one of Knuff’s fingers was bandaged. He told her that drug dealers had visited Mann’s house because Capobianco owed them money. He said the dealers beat up Mann and took Mann’s car. Then a conversation between Mann and Capobianco escalated into a fight, and she stabbed Mann, Knuff said. Knuff claimed he injured his finger when Capobianco tried to stab him. He said he remembered stabbing Capobianco and then “blacking out.” Stoner urged Knuff to call an ambulance for his friends, but he responded, “No, they’re dead.”

Knuff told others different stories about how his hand got injured. On May 13, Knuff told his son, Tommy, there were 2 dead people at the house who had supposedly attacked Mann. When asked if he was responsible for those deaths, Knuff said he was.

2 days later, Tommy drove his father to a store to buy super-strength glue for his finger and large plastic garbage bags. A few days later, Knuff took his son’s vehicle without permission and broke into 2 Parma Heights businesses, where he took a cash register from one and cash from another.

The next day, an Ohio State Highway Patrol officer responded to a call and found Knuff walking back and forth along a highway, saying, “Just kill me, I don’t want to live anymore.”

Knuff told the officer he crashed his son’s vehicle and abandoned it. When the officer saw Knuff’s severely injured finger, he called for emergency medical transport. Because Knuff threatened self-harm, he was sent to a hospital for a psychiatric evaluation and to care for his injured finger. At the hospital, he told a nurse yet another version of how he injured his hand. This time, he said that a prostitute attacked and killed his roommate with a knife, and he cut his finger when the prostitute attacked him. He said he killed the prostitute in self-defense.

Meanwhile, Capobianco’s sister became worried after not hearing from her. She called Parma Heights police and told them that Capobianco had communicated with Knuff, a recently released prisoner. Capobianco was described as 4 feet, 11 inches tall and weighing about 125 pounds. Knuff and Mann were described as 5 feet, 11 inches tall.

Police searched Mann’s home after hearing complaints from the neighbors. Officers detected a strong odor and a large presence of flies but found no one inside the home.

Knuff was eventually arrested in late May 2017, and in mid-June, police returned to the home. One officer who read Capobianco’s height realized they might have missed finding her in the heavily cluttered home. A search of the bedrooms uncovered several garbage bags piled around a bed. Police found the decomposing bodies of Mann and Capobianco. Autopsies revealed that Mann had been stabbed 15 times and Capobianco stabbed 6 times.

Also, around that time, Stoner gave Parma Heights police a letter from Knuff to a friend, Robert Dlugo. Knuff offered to pay Dlugo to burn down Mann’s house. In the letter, he told Dlugo he had trash bags with clothes and paper in the back bedroom and that when those were discovered, his life would be over.

During several interviews with police, Knuff consistently claimed Capobianco stabbed Mann, and Knuff killed her in self-defense. Knuff said he was trying to get Capobianco to move out because he feared he would be returned to prison for violating his parole. Knuff also told the officers he cleaned up the crime scene out of fear that he might go to prison if found living in a home where two people were murdered.

Jury Recommended Death Sentence

Knuff was indicted on 21 counts, including 4 aggravated murder charges. He was also charged with aggravated robbery, aggravated burglary, kidnapping, and several other crimes. The jury found him guilty of all charges except the aggravated robbery of Mann and the four felony murder specifications based on aggravated robbery.

The jury recommended death sentences for both murders. In keeping with this recommendation, the trial judge sentenced Knuff to death on each count. The trial judge also sentenced Knuff to 37 years in prison for all the other crimes. Because the death penalty was imposed on Knuff, he was permitted to appeal directly to the Supreme Court, which considered Knuff’s 24 legal arguments against his convictions and sentences.

Defendant Challenges Evidence

Among his objections, Knuff claims the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office did not produce sufficient evidence to convict him of the murders and that the weight of the evidence did not support his convictions.

Justice Deters explained that a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence fails if “after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Knuff argued the prosecutor failed to prove the underlying offenses of aggravated burglary and kidnapping that were used to impose a felony murder death specification. Under R.C. 2911.11(A)(1), burglary includes trespassing into an occupied structure with the intent to commit a crime. Knuff argued that since he had permission to live in Mann’s home, he could not have committed burglary.

The majority opinion stated while one might initially have the owner’s consent to be on the premises, that person can become a trespasser when consent is withdrawn. Citing prior Court decisions, the opinion stated a jury can “infer from the facts that a victim terminated the accused’s privilege to remain after commencement of an assault.” The Court found the evidence was sufficient to convict Knuff of aggravated burglary.

Regarding kidnapping, Knuff argued that prosecutors failed to prove he restrained Mann and Capobianco. The Court noted that Knuff admitted he held Capobianco down while stabbing her. As to Mann, the prosecutor maintained that to “stab somebody 15 times, you have to restrain their liberty.”

A challenge to the weight of the evidence requires the reviewing court to find that “the jury clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed, and a new trial ordered.”

Rejecting Mann’s manifest weight challenge, the Court pointed to the autopsies as substantial support for the jury’s rejection of Knuff’s story that he killed Capobianco in self-defense after she killed Mann. The autopsies establish that Mann had downward stab wounds in his neck and score marks on the top of his skull along with other head wounds. The injuries support a claim that Mann and his killer were similar in stature. Capobianco was a foot shorter than Mann, but Knuff and Mann were relatively the same height. The jury could reasonably infer from this that Knuff—not Capobianco—stabbed Mann, the opinion stated. The autopsy also shows that Capobianco had two stab wounds to her back, which, the Court stated, tends to disprove Knuff’s claim that he acted in self-defense.

In addition to the autopsy evidence, the opinion noted that Knuff’s actions after the killing strongly suggested he was conscious of his guilt. He cut the bloodstained carpet into numerous pieces and put them in a garbage bag. Bloodstained mops were found in the kitchen. He admitted he tried to clean bloodstains off the wall, and he dragged the bodies into the bedroom and covered them. For the stated purpose of cutting up the bodies, he bought hacksaws. He also wrote to Dlugo, urging him to burn down the house.

In view of this evidence, “[t]his is not the rare case in which the jury lost its way and returned a verdict against the manifest weight of the evidence,” the Court stated.

After an independent review of the aggravating circumstances and the mitigating factors, the Court affirmed the death sentences and all the convictions.

Concurrence Questioned Sentence Based on Burglary, Kidnapping

In his concurrence, Justice Donnelly wrote that the state could pursue a death penalty specification for felony murder based on burglary or kidnapping when appropriate, but the “timing and circumstances” in Knuff’s case did not support it. Justice Donnelly noted that for one to commit burglary where the person resides, “then we have stretched the concept of burglary to its outermost limit, or maybe beyond.”

The concurrence stated it was inappropriate to use burglary as a basis for the death penalty for Knuff. The state only “technically satisfied” the legal definition of kidnapping, which prohibits moving a person or restraining a person’s liberty. Knuff did not restrain the victims apart from fatally attacking them, the concurrence concluded.

The concurrence otherwise agreed with the majority that the death penalty was appropriate for Knuff’s murder of Mann and Capobianco.

2019-1323. State v. Knuff, Slip Opinion No. 2024-Ohio-902.

(source: Court News Ohio)

********************

Death sentence upheld for Parma Heights man who stabbed roommates, tried to hire man to burn bodies

The Ohio Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the death sentence of a Parma Heights man who fatally stabbed his 2 roommates and tried to hire a man to burn their bodies in 2017.

Thomas Knuff Jr. was condemned to death row in 2019 after jurors found him guilty and recommended his execution for the murders of John Mann, 65, and Regina Capobianco, 50.

Justices on Thursday unanimously rejected Knuff’s claims that he walked in on Capobianco fatally stabbing Mann and stabbed her in self-defense when she turned the knife on him. Defense lawyers accused Parma Heights police of botching the investigation that, if done correctly, would have proven Knuff innocent.

Justice Joseph Deters, the former Hamilton Count prosecutor, wrote that evidence contradicts Knuff’s claims.

Mann had downward stab wounds in his chest and cuts on the top of his head. Because he was a foot taller than Capobianco, it was unlikely she would have been able to impose such wounds on him. And Capobianco had two stab wounds in her back, inconsistent with Knuff’s claims that he stabbed her while she was attacking him.

Chief Justice Sharon Kennedy and justices Patrick DeWine, Patrick Fischer and Melody Stewart joined Deters’ opinion.

Justice Michael Donnelly wrote in a concurring opinion that he agreed that Knuff’s death sentence fit the charges. But Donnelly wrote that he would have found there wasn’t enough evidence to prove that Knuff committed aggravated burglary or kidnapping, the basis for two of the four charges that left Knuff facing execution.

Justice Jennifer Brunner signed onto Donnelly’s concurring opinion.

Knuff, now 49, met Capobianco through an inmate-to-inmate pen-pal program while he was serving a 15-year prison sentence for aggravated robbery. He exchanged letters with her for several years. Knuff also had a relationship with a social worker at the prison, Alicia Stoner. When he was paroled in April 2017, Stoner paid for him to live in a Strongsville motel until he moved in with Mann and Capobianco, who had also recently been paroled.

The arrangement lasted less than a month.

The parole conditions for Knuff and Capobianco barred them from associating with convicted felons, so only one of them could stay with Mann. The three got into a heated argument that escalated until Knuff snapped and stabbed both Mann and Capobianco, prosecutors said at trial.

Capobianco was stabbed 6 times. Mann was stabbed 15 times.

Knuff then dragged the bodies into a bedroom and hid them under blankets for more than 2 months as he sought to conceal his deeds. He asked Stoner to take him to a hardware store where he bought hacksaws and stole an X-acto knife.

Knuff was initially arrested after he broke into two beauty salons. While he was in jail, he wrote a letter to a former prison associate and asked him to burn the bodies. Knuff wrote that “the most incriminating s--t” was in the bedroom -- a reference to the bodies -- and told the man to use kerosene because it “burns hotter.”

The man did not follow through on Knuff’s request, and police later went to the house after Capobianco’s family reported her missing. Officers found the badly decayed bodies.

Knuff said in an unsworn statement that he killed Capobianco in self-defense and that he sought to hide the deaths because he did not want to go to prison for a parole violation.

Knuff lashed out at prosecutors during the sentencing hearing in which he received the death penalty. He accused Assistant Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Anna Faraglia of lying during the trial and pledged that his appeals would expose those lies.

“I’m going to pursue every avenue to get the truth out,” Knuff said at the hearing.

(source: cleveland.com)

MISSOURI:

COULD THE DEATH PENALTY BE USED AGAINST SOMEONE CONVICTED OF CERTAIN SEX CRIMES?

The Missouri Senate is considering a bill that would allow the death penalty to be used against someone convicted of certain sex crimes. The bill from Sen. Mike Moon, R-Ash Grove, would allow the death penalty for those found guilty of 1st-degree statutory rape or 1st-degree sex trafficking of a child.

“When someone abuses a child and, especially with sexual abuse, this can change them for their whole lives and it can destroy a child’s psyche,” he told Missourinet. “There are times where a person is not properly sentenced.”

Using a recent example, Moon said that he thinks it’s “just” to consider the death penalty.

“The sentence was 295 years,” he said. “So, it was like 8 plus 30-year life sentences. What good is that where a person is incarcerated, which, yes, they should be off the streets, but they are provided housing, food, and they’re cared for for the rest of their life when they’ve committed a heinous act.”

Opponents called the proposal unconstitutional. Opponents of capital punishment grilled Moon during a committee meeting.

“If I remember the question accurately, they questioned, why would you want to kill the father? I said, well, I didn’t use this term, but I’ll use it now, the sperm donor isn’t necessarily the father,” said Moon. “The father is someone who loves and nurtures the child or the family. So, I didn’t think the question was appropriate.”

He admits, however, that the bill has an uphill battle and does not expect it to pass.

(source: missourinet.com)

SOUTH DAKOTA:

AG Jackley breaks down capital punishment decision and next steps in Joseph Hoek case

South Dakota Attorney General, Marty Jackley gave the state written notice in the case of Joseph Hoek of Sioux Falls who’s charged with the death of Moody County Chief Deputy Ken Prorok. Ultimately the state decided to seek capital punishment also known as the death penalty.

Jackley said that a lot of thought went into making this decision. He met with Prorok’s family and the Moody County Sheriff’s Office to take their thoughts and wishes into consideration.

During the hearing, it was made known to the public that the defendant has filed to receive a mental health evaluation and is set to meet with a psychiatrist later in the week. The evaluation will determine if Hoek is competent to stand for trial and the defense said they’ve reserved their right to an insanity pled, this led to the prosecution to reserve their right to a 2nd opinion.

“Ultimately it could change the plea of not guilty. He’s been given 90 days for that process,” Jackley said.

Jackley explained that depending on the results of Hoek’s evaluation will determine if he’ll utilize the proecution’s right to a 2nd opinion. He said that he would need to consult with the family and sheriff’s office again in the event of this taking place.

Following the hearing Sheriff of Moody County, Troy Wellman said that the support their office has received from the community has been overwhelming. He said they have also received condolences from across the country from law enforcement officers. All this support came in the forms of fundraisers, sentimental cards, and trinkets, and he said he was able to present the Prorok family with a special-made blanket in honor of the fallen sheriff.

“Deputy Prorock was in and of itself a true hero just the way he lived and who he was. The support that is upstairs is not only because of the lives he touched just being a chief deputy or a deputy but those are also lives he touched personally,” said Wellman.

The next hearing is scheduled for June 20th at the Moody County Courthouse at 11 a.m. At that hearing, they’ll present the results of Hoek’s mental health evaluation.

(source: KSFY news)

IDAHO:

Trial date set for Jeremy Best triple homicide case, death penalty sought

Jeremy Best, charged with three counts of 1st-degree murder for the death of his pregnant wife, unborn child and infant son, will stand trial next fall.

The jury trial will begin on September 15, 2025. District Judge Dane Watkins Jr. made the call during a status conference on Thursday via Zoom. Best appeared virtually from the Bonneville County Jail, where he has been held since he was arrested in December 2023. Best was declared fit to stand trial on Dec. 22, after proceedings had been delayed over his mental status. He entered a plea of not guilty on Jan. 3.

Teton County Prosecutor Bailey Smith filed a notice on Feb. 28 stating that she intends to seek the death penalty in the case.

“The state has received no such evidence, and found no mitigating circumstances that are sufficiently compelling to render imposition of the death penalty unjust in this case,” the notice says, according to East Idaho News.

The Jackson Hole News&Guide reported that Best’s defense, attorneys James Archibald and John Leslie Stosich, requested the first-degree charges be reconsidered, arguing that the murders were not “premeditated” or committed with “malice.”

In addition to the three murder charges, Best faces three enhancements for the use of deadly weapons in each crime. He will be tried for all three murders in Teton County, Idaho, despite the discovery of one victim in Bonneville County.

Kali Randall Best was found deceased at her home in Victor after Teton County Sheriff’s deputies responded to a hang-up 911 call on Nov. 30, 2023. Officers launched a search for Best and his 10-month-old son, Zeke. Best was found and arrested on Saturday, Dec. 2.

The next event in this case will be a pre-trial conference on Aug. 12, 2025.

(source: buckrail.com)

USA:

US faith leaders unite to protest at new execution methods

CLERGY and other faith leaders have joined protests in Louisiana against new legislation to expand the state’s methods of execution.

The state is proposing to bring back the electric chair, and introduce a new method, injection with nitrogen hypoxia, which deprives the body of oxygen. The state of Alabama was the first to use this method earlier last month. Critics called its use cruel and experimental.

States are exploring different methods of execution because the usual drugs are becoming difficult to obtain as pharmaceutical companies block their use in executions. Support for the death penalty is also declining in the United States.

Executions in Louisiana have been on hold for 14 years, and almost 60 people are on death row in the state.

A rally was held outside the State Capitol, in Baton Rouge, by Louisiana Interfaith Against Executions, on 28 February, International Death Penalty Abolition Day. Roman Catholic, Episcopalian, Baptist, Jewish, and Buddhist demonstrators took part. A former Bishop of New Jersey, the Rt Revd Joe Doss, said: “Because our faith tradition calls us to value human life and dignity, justice, compassion, mercy, and the common good, we are compelled to speak out and reaffirm our opposition to the death penalty.”

Rabbi Phil Kaplan, of Congregation Beth Israel, said: “As a rabbi and religious Jew, I am personally opposed to the death penalty as it is currently carried out in the United States. But, more urgently, I am deeply opposed to and troubled by the introduction of gassing as a method of execution, which unmistakably and immediately evokes for millions of American Jews horrific memories of the depravities our ancestors endured at the hands of Nazi Germany, when lethal gas was used to mass-murder our people.

“For these reasons and many others, we, as a civilised society, should not resurrect this barbaric method of execution.”

(source: churchtimes.co.uk)

***************

Women’s History Month Profile Series: Sarah Belal, Executive Director of Justice Project Pakistan

INTERNATIONAL MENTAL ILLNESS

This month, DPIC celebrates Women’s History Month with weekly profiles of notable women whose work has been significant in the modern death penalty era. The 2nd entry in this series is Sarah Belal, founder and executive director of Justice Project Pakistan (JPP), a nonprofit organization in Lahore, Pakistan.

Now a prominent international lawyer and human rights advocate, Sarah Belal says she was “thoroughly uninspired” by law school. It was not until her first visit to a Pakistani prison where “there were hundreds of people abandoned, forgotten and sentenced to die,” that she realized what she was called to do.

Ms. Belal’s inspiration for founding Justice Project Pakistan (JPP) began when she read a letter in the newspaper. It was from a man whose brother, a Pakistani father of 2, was sentenced to death for a crime he committed in self-defense, and he was begging for someone to help him. “Zulfiqar was my first client,” Ms. Belal recounted. “I just picked up the phone, called the newspaper’s office, and got his brother’s number. The next thing I knew, he was standing outside my door with a mountain of case files. That was 2009.” Now, Ms. Belal leads a dedicated staff of attorneys, mitigation specialists, investigators, and researchers who provide direct representation, train judges and lawyers, educate the public, and work toward systemic reform of the criminal justice system in Pakistan. Ms. Belal describes JPP as “a legal action non-profit organization that provides pro bono representation to the most vulnerable Pakistani prisoners facing harsh punishments in the courts of law and the court of public opinion.”

Since its founding, JPP has secured more than 40 stays of execution for Pakistanis, sentenced in both Pakistan and other countries. Many of JPP’s clients have severe mental illness, and JPP has invested considerable resources into training judges and lawyers about how mental illness affects criminal culpability. As Ms. Belal explains, JPP defends “people who are so mentally ill they don’t even know why they’re imprisoned. People with physical disabilities who cannot even stand or care for their own hygiene.” In 2021, JPP and Ms. Belal were instrumental in convincing the Pakistani Supreme Court to prohibit the execution of people with severe mental illness.

While they do not advocate for the abolition of the death penalty, Ms. Belal and her team work for criminal justice reforms and capital punishment practices in line with Quranic teachings and international law. JPP has also advocated for a moratorium on executions in Pakistan. According to Ms. Belal, “The Islamic standard for imposing the death penalty is so strict it must be only imposed in the rarest of rare cases. Pakistan, however, has the death penalty for 33 crimes. Our history and data show that it doesn’t work. We have huge problems in our criminal justice system that result in many people wrongfully convicted and hanged.”

Ms. Belal, a graduate of Smith College and the University of Oxford, has received prestigious awards such as the Franco-German Human Rights Prize, the National Human Rights Prize by the Federal Ministry of Human Rights, and the Echoing Green Global Fellowship.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

UNITED NATIONS:

Dear Colleagues,

I'm writing to inform you of 2 upcoming opportunities to share death penalty information with the UN Secretary General and to invite you to contribute to joint submissions. Please note that the deadlines are 31 March and 12 April. There is a word limit of 1500 words for each one.

1. The 1st call for inputs (deadline 31 March) is for a report to be presented at the September 2024 session of the Human Rights Council. The purpose of the report is: "to provide an update on developments since 1 July 2022 regarding the question of the death penalty and the implementation of the safeguards guaranteeing the protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, in particular persons under 18 years of age at the time of the offence, pregnant women and persons with mental or intellectual disabilities, and the human rights of children of parents sentenced to the death penalty or executed." For more information, read here: https://www.ohchr.org/en/calls-for-input/2024/call-inputs-secretary-generals-report-question-death-penalty-51st-session-hrc

2. The 2nd call for inputs (deadline 12 April) is for a report to be presented at the September 2024 session of the UN General Assembly. This report will focus on the biannual moratorium resolution at the General Assembly. The purpose of the report is: "to provide an update on developments since 15 December 2022 on the question of a moratorium on the use of the death penalty and other issues included in resolution 75/183 of the General Assembly, such as the provision of safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, including the right to apply for pardon or commutation; information, disaggregated by sex, age, nationality and race, and other applicable criteria, with regard to the use of the death penalty (e.g. the number of persons sentenced to death, the number of persons on death row and the number of executions carried out, the number of death sentences reversed or commuted on appeal or in which amnesty or pardon has been granted, and information on any scheduled execution); restrictions on the use of the death penalty; the reduction of the number of offences for which the death penalty may be imposed; the establishment of a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty; and experiences of States that have adopted a moratorium on the use of the death penalty or that have abolished it." For more information, read here: https://www.ohchr.org/en/calls-for-input/2024/call-inputs-secretary-generals-report-moratorium-use-death-penalty

You are welcome to submit your own responses to one or both of these calls for inputs. If you prefer to contribute to a joint submission for either or both, please contact me as soon as possible and The Advocates for Human Rights will help coordinate and consolidate information into collective responses to both calls for input. Please keep in mind the strict word limits. If your organization has a lot to say, you might want to make an individual submission.

Amy

Defending Human Rights Since 1983

(source: Amy Bergquist, Associate Program Director, International Justice Program----The Advocates for Human Rights)

KENYA:

Death penalty is vengeful and primitive: Makau Mutua

----Mutua contested the imposition of the sentence saying it contradicts the principles and legal philosophy enshrined in Kenya’s 2010 Constitution.

Former Chairperson of the Kenya Human Rights Commission, Makau Mutua, has criticized the sentencing of Joseph Irungu, popularly known as ‘Jowie’, to death for the 2018 murder of Monica Kimani.

Commenting on the matter on Thursday, Mutua asserted that the death penalty has no place in modern society and is contrary to Kenya’s Constitution.

While delivering the sentence on Wednesday, Justice Grace Nzioka indicated that the nature of the killing warranted the highest penalty.

She stated that Jowie was ineligible for rehabilitation as the crime was beyond restitution.

However, Mutua contested the imposition of the sentence saying it contradicts the principles and legal philosophy enshrined in Kenya’s 2010 Constitution.

“It’s [death penalty] jurisprudentially inconsistent with the logic, values, and legal philosophy that undergird Kenya’s 2010 Constitution,” he said.

He argued that regardless of the brutality of the crime, the death penalty remains morally, practically, and philosophically indefensible.

Mutua added that the death penalty does not bring back the victim or deter future killers.

He further added that the death penalty is “vengeful, primitive, and callous” and does not benefit society in any way.

“An eye for an eye makes the entire society blind,” he added.

Kenya is 1 of 22 African countries that still has the death penalty in its statutes, even though it hasn’t carried out any executions in more than three decades.

Kenya last effected the death sentence in 1987, when prison authorities hanged Hezekiah Ochuka after he was convicted of treason over the 1982 coup attempt.

Currently, 120 countries throughout the world, including 25 in Africa, have abolished the death penalty.

As a result, Kenya is categorized by the United Nations as being “abolitionist de facto,” which refers to a nation that has not executed a convict in at least 10 years.

Penal Code reform

A 2023 report released by the Kenya National Commission on Human Right (KNCHR) indicated that there are over 600 inmates in Kenya who are on death row.

The report dubbed “living with a death sentence in Kenya: prisoners experience of crime, punishment and death row,” launched in January 2023, states that many more prisoners have been sentenced to death in the past decades but have had their sentences commuted to life imprisonment.

In October 2023, Chief Justice Martha Koome presented two bills to Parliament, the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill 2023 and the Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) 2023 in a move to reform Kenya’s criminal justice system.

The proposed legislation aims to reduce sentences for individuals facing life imprisonment, particularly those convicted of capital offenses to 30 years.

Under the current Kenyan Penal Code, which was drafted in the 1930s, individuals found guilty of murder, robbery with violence, or treason can face the death penalty.

Further, the Bill seeks to cascade the offences of murder and robbery to ensure commensurate punishment for the different offences and to amend the provisions relating to mandatory death penalty in compliance with the judgements of the High Court on the prevailing human rights standards.

The Penal Code reform seeks to incorporate language that aligns with human rights standards, particularly concerning individuals with intellectual and psychosocial disabilities.

In the proposal, Koome is banking on Parliament to approve a change to Section 112A of the Penal Code in subsection (4) that replaces the word “manslaughter” with the words “2nd-degree murder.”

(source: Bruhan Makong is a dedicated journalist who reports on crime, human rights and global affairs----capitalfm.co.ke)

***************

Jowie Irungu Files Notice of Appeal Over Death Sentence

Joseph Irungu alias Jowie on Friday, March 15, filed a notice of appeal over the death sentence issued by the High Court. In a court document seen by Kenyans.co.ke, Jowie through his new lawyer Andrew Muge, noted that the appeal is against the conviction and sentence issued by Lady Justice Grace Nzioka.

He noted that he is ready to be present at the appeal hearing.

Previously, Jowie had hired Hassan Nandwa to defend his case.

"Take notice that Joseph Kuria appeals to the Court of Appeal against the decisions of the Honourable Lady Justice Grace Nzioka delivered in open court at Milimani, Nairobi on February 9, 2024, and in her written judgment dated February 9, 2024, whereby the Appellant was convicted of Murder and sentenced to death on March 13, 2024," read part of the document.

"The appeal is against the conviction and sentence. The Appellant intends to be present at the hearing of the appeal."

Jowie was found guilty of murdering businesswoman Monica Kimani in September 2018. While issuing the sentence this past week, Justice Nzioka issued the maximum penalty for the murder charge and handed Jowie the death penalty.

In her ruling, the Justice ruled that the prosecution had proven beyond reasonable doubt that Jowie killed Monica based on the evidence presented and the convict's character.

Shortly after the judgment, Jowie's lawyer noted that while they respected the court ruling, they disagreed with it.

"This unfortunate decision, as much as we disagree with the learned judge, there is a way out. We will appeal and we're hopeful that our appeal will be allowed when it comes.

"Otherwise, we respected the judge and her decision, and therefore we will head to the Court of Appeal when the time comes after the sentencing," the lawyer stated.

(source: kenyans.co.ke)

****************

Explained: Death sentence in Kenya

The sentencing of Joseph Irungu, alias Jowie, to death by the High Court has ignited a wave of reactions across the country.

The verdict, delivered by Justice Grace Nzioka on Wednesday, March 13, has sparked a debate about the legality of the death sentence.

“I have ordered that the first accused person, Joseph Kuria Irungu alias Jowie, shall suffer death as provided for the offence of murder under Section 204 of the Penal Code of Kenya,” Judge Nzioka ruled.

In her judgment, Nzioka cited overwhelming evidence against Jowie, leading to his conviction for the crime of murder.

Critics argue that although the Supreme Court of Kenya declared the mandatory nature of the death penalty unconstitutional in 2017, the accused persons still have the right to appeal their case.

According to Constitutional Lawyer Charles Kanjama, Jowie, just like any other Kenyan, has the right to appeal the ruling at the Court of Appeal.

“He can ask the court to assess the case afresh on the basis of facts or evidence, and the Court of Appeal can overturn the ruling,” says Kanjama

Professor Makau Mutua, also a lawyer, shared his thoughts on the death penalty saying, “It goes against the logic, values, and legal philosophy that undergird Kenya’s 2010 Constitution.”

“No court should ever impose such an irreversible penalty on any offender in Kenya, no matter the heinousness of the crime, or how despicable and depraved the felon,” Mutua added.

Former Law Society of Kenya (LSK) President Nelson Havi also weighed in on the matter, calling on the courts not to act in vain.

“No one has ever been hanged for a capital offense after Captain Hezekiah Ochuka. Just sentence them to 30 years’ imprisonment. Hardly anyone lives beyond that in jail,” wrote Havi on X.

National Assembly Minority Leader Opiyo Wandayi is sponsoring a bill to have the death sentence penalty abolished.

“My Bill seeks to abolish the death sentence altogether, and have it replaced with a life sentence,” he said.

Jowie was convicted for the murder of Monica Kimani, who was brutally killed on September 19, 2018, at her Lamuria Gardens apartment in Nairobi.

Justice Nzioka explained her decision to grant Jowie the death verdict despite the Supreme Court’s nullification.

“The only thing that case did was to declare that the mandatory nature of the death sentence is unconstitutional. It did not declare the death sentence unconstitutional,” said Nzioka.

Death sentence in Kenya

In December 2017, the Supreme Court of Kenya declared the mandatory death penalty unconstitutional.

This meant that the death penalty could still be rendered for murder but at the discretion of a judge. Since 2017, the courts have been rendering death sentences.

The execution was still set as the maximum penalty but was not to be the only penalty for murder.

According to research, there were 656 people recorded on death row in Kenya by the end of 2022, with a total of seventy-nine (79) death sentences handed down that year alone according to an Amnesty International report.

People convicted of murder, robbery with violence, attempted robbery with violence, or treason can be sentenced to death.

Since independence, some 280 convicts who were sentenced to death were executed in Kenya.

Hezekiah Ochuka was the last person to face the hangman’s noose. He was found guilty of treason for the 1982 attempted coup and was hanged at the Kamiti Maximum prison in July 1987.

Kenya has since not carried out any execution in more than 35 years.

Last year, the Court of Appeal curbed life imprisonment in Kenya at 30 years with the death sentence ending when the convict dies or when the President commutes to a life sentence.

Those on death row have 24-hour solitary security confinement with minimal time in the sun.

During their tenures, former Presidents Mwai Kibaki and Uhuru Kenyatta changed the sentences of all death row inmates to life imprisonment.

(source: standardmedia.co.ke)

DR CONGO:

DRC lifts death-penalty moratorium to execute those who work with M23 - or show cowardice

DRC has had a moratorium on death penalty executions since 2003, though death sentences continued to be handed down.

Now it plans to start executions again due to the war against M23 rebels in the east.

Traitors could be hanged, and so could those who show cowardice in the fight.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has resolved to lift a 21-year moratorium on death penalty executions as part of measures to stop its citizens, and serving military and police, from working with M23 rebels in the eastern part of the country.

During the moratorium, death penalty sentences were handed down, but no hangings took place.

On Wednesday, the First President of the High Military Court, the Auditor General of the National Army (FARDC), the Prosecutor General at the Court of Cassation, the President of the Council Superior of the Judiciary, and the President of the Constitutional Court attended a meeting addressed by Rose Mutombo Kiese, the Minister of Justice and Keeper of the Seals of the DRC.

It was during that meeting that Mutombo disclosed why the government was lifting the moratorium on executions. She said it was due to the instability in the eastern DRC that executions would go ahead because in some cases, locals were working with insurgents.

"During the last 30 years, the eastern part of our country has been plagued by recurring armed conflicts, often orchestrated by foreign states which for the circumstance, sometimes benefit from the complicity of some of our compatriots.

"These acts of treachery or espionage have exacted a heavy price from both the population and the republic given the immensity of the damage suffered," she said.

The DRC says, and much of the world accepts, that M23 is supported by Rwanda - a claim Rwanda rejects.

M23 claims to be working to protect civilians in the east.

While people are displaced during the conflict, the rebels allege that the FARDC and its allies such as the SADC force led by South Africa were shelling civilian populations.

After some operations, M23 announced through their social media channels that ordinary civilians could go about their day-to-day business.

It's a headache for Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of National Defence Jean-Pierre Bemba, who submitted the recommendations to continue executions.

Mutombo in her address, said the moratorium was being abused or taken for granted.

She said:

Unfortunately, this moratorium was in the eyes of all these offenders as a guarantee of impunity because, even when they have been irrevocably condemned capital punishment, they were assured that this sentence would never be carried out their place.

According to the resolution, for civilians, the execution would happen in situations such as association with criminals, treason, participation in armed bands, espionage, participation in an insurrectional movement and genocide.

For those in the army and police, the executions would be carried out under circumstances such as desertion to the enemy, cowardice, military conspiracy, disobedience, and refusal to march against the enemy.

(source: news24.com)

**************

Congo lifts moratorium on death penalty, justice ministry circular shows

Democratic Republic Congo has lifted a moratorium on the death penalty, citing treachery and espionage in recurring armed conflicts as the reason for allowing a resumption of executions, said a justice ministry circular seen by Reuters on Friday.

The central African country introduced the moratorium on the death penalty in early 2000. However, it has never been abolished.

Justice Minister Rose Mutombo wrote in the circular dated March 13 that the death penalty was reintroduced to rid the army of traitors and curb the resurgence of terrorism and banditry acts. The decision was adopted by a council of ministers on Feb. 9.

The death sentence can be imposed in cases of war crimes, crimes against humanity, espionage, rebellion and criminal conspiracy, the document showed.

2 provinces in the east of the country, North Kivu and Ituri, have been under a state of siege since 2021. In recent months, dozens of political opponents, businessmen, civil servants and soldiers have been arrested for colluding with the M23 rebellion and Rwanda.

The M23 is a Tutsi-led group that has intensified its campaign in eastern Congo this year. U.N. experts and Western powers such as the United States and France say that the group is backed by Rwanda, which Rwanda denies.

"In addition to being unconstitutional, the lifting of the moratorium... opens the door to summary executions in this country, where the defective functioning of the justice system is recognised by everyone," citizens' movement Lucha said on X.

Amnesty International said that this decision was a serious step backwards and a further sign of President Felix Tshisekedi administration's alarming backtracking on human rights.

(source: Reuters)

**************

Congolese satisfaction after the lifting of the moratorium on the death penalty

The Congolese express their agreement following the decision to lift the moratorium on capital punishment, now applicable in their country as part of the fight against impunity in cases of treason within the security services.

The Congolese express their satisfaction following the lifting of the moratorium on the death penalty, which will now be carried out in their country. This decision, they say, will put an end to impunity, especially within the ranks of the security forces and even in the administration, which includes many lost sons who have allowed themselves to betray their country. Ultimately, the goal is to put an end to the spiral of violence that has caused thousands of deaths in the DRC and the plundering of the natural resources of this country.

In the circular of March 13th from the Minister of Justice and Keeper of the Seals, Rose Mutombo Kiese, in execution of the Government's decision taken during the 124th ordinary meeting of the Council of Ministers on February 9th in relation with this lifting of the moratorium, it is specifically stated: "The death penalty will be enforced for criminal association, treason, espionage, participation in armed bands, participation in an insurrectional movement; crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes; desertion to the enemy, cowardice, military conspiracy, rebellion, refusal to obey; treason in times of war, sabotage committed with the intention to serve the interests of a foreign power, etc.

This death penalty, although handed down by the courts for many years, has not been carried out due to the moratorium on the execution of the capital punishment decreed by the Government since 2003, she explains.

(source: digitalcongo.net)

***********************************************