Rick Halperin
2018-07-10 13:19:43 UTC
July 19
TEXAS----impending execution
Urgent Action
SON OF MURDER VICTIM OPPOSES EXECUTION
Christopher Young is due to be executed in Texas on 17 July. He was 21 years
old at the time of the murder in 2004 for which he was sentenced to death.
The son of the murder victim supports clemency.
Write a letter, send an email, call, fax or tweet:
* Opposing the execution of Christopher Young and calling for his death
sentence to be commuted;
* Urging the authorities to recognize the cycle of violence illustrated here,
the positive efforts on death row made by Christopher Young, and the creation
of further victims that would occur if the execution goes ahead.
Friendly reminder: If you send an email, please create your own instead of
forwarding this one!
Contact the Board of Pardons by 13 July, 2018 and the Governor by 17 July,
2018:
Clemency Section, Board of Pardons and Paroles
8610 Shoal Creek Blvd.
Austin, Texas 78757-6814
USA
Fax: +1 512 467 0945
Email: bpp-***@tdcj.state.tx.us
Salutation: Dear Board Members
Governor Greg Abbott
Office of the Governor, P.O. Box 12428
Austin, Texas 78711-2428, USA
Fax: +1 512 463 1849
Email: https://gov.texas.gov/apps/contact/opinion.aspx
Salutation: Dear Governor
(source: Amnesty International USA)
************************
Texas death row inmates go high-tech in longshot bid for clemency
Death row inmate Christopher Young is using a video to boost his bid for
clemency as his July 17, 2018 execution date approaches. Young was convicted of
capital murder in the death of a San Antonio businessman.
When he watched the 1st video, he looked for remorse. When he watched the 2nd,
he found understanding. Then he watched the 3rd and the 4th, pressing play
again and again.
Seeing the footage only reinforced what Mitesh Patel already knew: He would
fight for the man who murdered his father 14 years earlier.
The killer - former San Antonio gang member Christopher Young - never claimed
he was innocent. He didn't argue it was self-defense. He still has pending
appeals. But with an execution looming on July 17, his best hope for reprieve
may lie in a 14-minute clemency video.
Young's rare tech-savvy submission to the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles is
a sign of the times. As courts transition into the digital age with online
records and e-filings, clemency proceedings, too, are moving into the 21st
century. Where 20 years ago a paper submission and calls to the governor were
the best options, today prisoners can garner support through Change.org
petitions, Facebook campaigns, emailed calls to action, and - as in Young's
case - painstakingly produced footage.
"A picture is worth a thousand words," said attorney Keith Hampton, who is not
representing Young. "So we take advantage of that."
A rarely used executive privilege, death row clemency offers an 11th-hour
reprieve to a lucky few prisoners slated for execution. In Texas, a written
petition - sometimes dozens of pages long - is carefully crafted by a legal
team and sent in hard copy to the parole board in Austin at least 21 days
before the scheduled death date.
Then, the 7 board members review the petition independently. One member may pay
a visit to the condemned. Others may talk to survivors and victims' families.
2 business days before the execution, they announce their decision. If it's a
yes, the plea lands on the governor's desk for the final decision. If it's a
no, mercy is off the table.
Room to be 'creative'
Throughout most of the Lone Star State's history, that's been the entirety of
the process. But with the rise of the internet, advocates, lawyers and even the
condemned men themselves are harnessing its power to beg for a 2nd chance at
life.
"The board has rules about clemency petition submissions and they're very bare
bones - and in those blank spaces, there's space to be creative," said Kathryn
Kase, a longtime defense attorney who previously headed up Texas Defender
Services.
In the early 2000s - in what likely was among the first video offerings -
attorney Jim Marcus submitted a VHS tape with his clemency petition for Thomas
Miller-El. He never found out if the board actually watched it, but in the end
the courts intervened and Miller-El got a stay based on racially tainted jury
selection practices in Dallas County.
Since then, other Texas prisoners - including death row inmates Paul Storey and
Scott Panetti - have released clemency videos publicly, sometimes even when
they weren't part of the official petition.
"Videos - particularly in clemency - are going to be the wave of the future,"
Hampton said.
But it's hard to say how often submissions like these pop up, as many pieces of
clemency submissions aren't public. What is public - as pointedly public as
possible - is the broader clemency campaign effort, which often includes a push
for supportive calls, letters and emails to the board or the governor.
In support of Young's efforts, for example, the Texas Coalition Against the
Death Penalty launched a Change.org petition including an embedded video and a
plea to "send a message" to the board and the governor. As of Monday morning,
more than 21,000 people had signed.
'A hard realization'
Young carjacked a woman at gunpoint in San Antonio in 2004, then headed to a
mini-mart and dry cleaners. He walked in, asked for prices, and then demanded
money.
Store owner Hasmukh "Hash" Patel pushed the panic button and ran, but Young
followed and shot him to death before fleeing. Police caught him later that
morning just a few miles away.
When a Bexar County judge pronounced his death sentence 2 years later, Young
heard a gasp from the crowd. His mother had fainted.
Whatever the toll on his family - and his victim's family - Young came to death
row angry and bitter. For almost a decade, he stayed mad at the world. Then, 5
years ago, something changed. The anger dissipated, replaced with remorse, he
told the Houston Chronicle in a death row interview.
He doesn't know what clicked or why he moved on. But today, he says, he's a
different person.
"I stopped blaming others for my situation and realized that I put myself
here," he said. "And that's a hard realization."
Los Angeles-based filmmaker Laurence Thrush first set his sights on Young's
case in 2014, when he started making a show about the prominent Houston-based
capital defense lawyer David Dow. The series fell through, but in the process,
Thrush met Young, 1 of Dow's clients. The 2 hit it off.
They stayed in touch, and at the start of this year, the pair teamed up to make
a film from death row.
"For me conceptually it was really interesting to see what he would make as a
filmmaker, this idea that we can really make things remotely," Thrush said,
"that he can tell me what to shoot and who to interview."
At that point, Young still had pending appeals. But then in March, he got an
execution date, and everything changed.
Putting the main film on hold, Thrush redirected his efforts, instead focusing
on a video aimed at saving the condemned man's life.
Does videos work?
The parole board doesn't have to give any insight into the reasoning behind its
decisions, so it's hard to say what will work or even to pinpoint what's been
persuasive in the past.
But videos do offer a few clear advantages.
For one, it's a way to shoehorn in more voices in states that limit the number
of witnesses allowed at live clemency hearings, said Laura Schaefer, an
attorney with the American Bar Association's Death Penalty Representation
Project.
But in Texas, the condemned doesn't get to talk to the entire board, so a video
is a way to make that happen. And footage can bolster broader clemency
campaigns with an emotional message.
"In terms of getting more public support," Schaefer said, "using a video is
going to help bring more people to the cause because they can see the person
speaking."
It's hard to say if it's effective, though; clemency is rarely granted. And it
could work the other way, too - if video can bolster the defense arguments, the
same strategy could help the state.
"There's nothing to stop district attorneys from doing the same thing," Hampton
said, "making videos saying, 'Here's the victims.'"
Looking for the good
When Gov. Greg Abbott granted a last-minute commutation to death row inmate
Bart Whitaker following a board recommendation earlier this year, it was the
1st time a Texas governor had shown such mercy in more than a decade.
The Fort Bend man's case stood out because the 1 survivor of the attack -
Whitaker's own father - begged Abbott to spare his son.
3 months ago, Young was in a very different position; the family of his victim
planned to watch the execution and did not support clemency. But then Thrush
reached out to Patel, showing up unannounced on his doorstep one day.
At first, Patel was hesitant. But then, he agreed to talk. And it was learning
of the video - and the fact Young showed remorse - that swayed him.
"I assumed he was a typical death row inmate with no remorse," Patel said. "But
learning that he's been a positive force in his daughter's life, that struck a
chord with me."
Maybe, Patel thought, Young could serve a better purpose in prison, sharing his
story of change and personal transformation. And maybe his daughters wouldn't
have to go through the same heartache Patel has for more than a decade without
a father.
So he decided to go to the board and advocate for Young's life for the sake for
his children.
"We'd rather see some good from all of this," Patel said. "His execution
doesn't change what he did 14 years ago. It doesn't bring my dad back."
(source: Houston Chronicle)
NEW HAMPSHIRE:
There's no reason for death penalty, by Charles Gibson
The death penalty is denounced by the United Nations, every country in Europe
(with the exceptions of Belarus and Russia) and every other New England state.
In fact, twice the N.H. House and Senate have voted to repeal the death
penalty, only to be vetoed by 2 New Hampshire governors. Why do the governors
force New Hampshire to remain an outlier on this moral issue?
Commenting on his recent decision, Gov. Chris Sununu claimed that "Abolishing
the death penalty in New Hampshire would send the wrong message to those who
would commit the most heinous offenses ... namely that New Hampshire is a place
where a person who commits an unthinkable crime is guaranteed leniency."
Given that in his own words, "the most heinous offense" is to carry out an
intention to kill, how is the state justified in replicating that offense. Not
to mention the bizarre claim that life imprisonment without parole constitutes
leniency!
Once again the repeal of the death penalty in New Hampshire has failed, and not
because there is any evidence that it curtails capital crimes. Studies show
that it does not. The decision to deny the repeal of the death penalty is the
result of a cynical political calculation.
Perhaps the governor's decision to isolate himself in his private office for
the signing of the veto reflects some awareness of the political strategizing
that must have motivated it. Conventionally, the large Executive Council
chamber is the site of such signings. These events are ordinarily open to the
public.
In this case, the office was crammed only with supporters, those police who do
support it, leaving no room for the general public, no room for the police who
oppose the death penalty, no room, even, for the parents of murdered children
who nonetheless oppose the death penalty.
We the people of New Hampshire, expect our governor to honor our moral stance
on a moral issue, and not to undercut it with cheap political calculations.
CHARLES GIBSON
55 Shaker Farm Road South
Marlborough
(source: Letter to the Editor, Keene Sentinel)
ALABAMA:
Trump's new Supreme Court justice could weigh death penalty dispute in first
days on the job
President Trump's new Supreme Court nominee could kick off their 1st week on
the job hearing arguments on a death penalty case. The court's public
information office on Monday released the calendar for arguments in the 1st
month of the court's new term starting in October.
On the 2nd day of the term, the justices are scheduled to hear a case
challenging whether a???state can execute a prisoner whose mental disability
leaves him with no memory that he committed murder or whether the death penalty
should be barred in this case by the Eighth Amendment's protections against
cruel and unusual punishment.
The case centers on Alabama death row inmate Vernon Madison, who suffers from
vascular dementia and memory loss after numerous severe strokes.
Madison was slated to be executed on Jan. 25, but the court agreed to stay his
execution.
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch said they would have
denied the request. It takes at least 5 justices to agree to a stay petition.
The court calendar release comes just hours before President Trump is expected
to announce his nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony
Kennedy.
The fight over the vacant seat is teed up to be a vicious and costly battle.
Outside conservative groups, including the Judicial Crisis Network, are
planning to spend a million dollars lobbying to get Trump's 2nd nominee
confirmed to the bench.
There's a lot a stake, as Trump's nominee could cement the court's conservative
majority for a generation.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell???(R-Ky.) has said he plans to hold a
confirmation vote on Trump's nominee this fall.
(source: thehill.com)
OHIO:
Appeal made to Supreme Court in Danny Lee Hill case
The Ohio Attorney General's Office has filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme
Court to intervene in the case of convicted murderer Danny Lee Hill, who, under
a lower court's decision, stands to be removed from Ohio's death row.
The request, sought by Trumbull County Prosecutor Dennis Watkins, is on an
early 2018 ruling by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals that overturns Hill's
sentence and orders him to be resentenced for the brutal murder of Raymond Fife
in September 1985. The lower court ruling could result in Hill, 51, being taken
off death row and resentenced to life in prison.
Monday was the deadline for the attorney general's office to petition the high
court.
A 3-judge panel of the circuit court ruled in February state court judges and
mental health experts who declared Hill is not intellectually disabled were
wrong, and there is clear evidence he is mentally disabled.
An appeal for the full circuit court to reconsider the panel's decision was
rejected in April.
Using cases that occurred after Hill's trial, the circuit court applied rulings
that did not exist when Hill was convicted to overturn the death penalty
conviction, according to attorney Eric E. Murphy, a lawyer with the state
attorney general.
"The Sixth Circuit improperly graded the state court's decision based on
materials that were unavailable to them," Murphy wrote in the petition.
Murphy noted the state court held 11 days worth of hearings during which 5
expert witnesses concluded Hill either was not mentally impaired or was faking
to prevent them to establish his mental capacity.
Watkins said the state's "brilliant" petition speaks well for the need of the
Supreme Court to review the case.
"The law requires federal courts to give deference to the judges of state
court," Watkins said. "The rulings of state court judges should be respected,
unless there there is unreasonable application of the facts."
"Danny Lee Hill was not retarded," Watkins said. "Hill committed the crime. He
went to the police station to seek the reward for evidence leading to arrest of
a suspect."
Hill, then 18, was sentenced to death for Fife's murder on Sept. 10, 1985. Fife
was attacked in a wooded area near Palmyra Road SW, beaten, sexually tortured,
strangled, set on fire and left for dead. He died 2 days later.
Co-defendant in the case, Timothy Combs, then 17, is serving multiple,
consecutive life sentences since he wasn't eligible for the death sentence as a
juvenile.
(source: Tribune Chronicle)
TENNESSEE:
Lethal injection on trial in Tennessee: Inmates, state debate whether drugs are
torture
As of January 2017, there were 63 inmates on death row in Tennessee. Executions
have been on hold pending a challenge by inmates to the single-dose drug
protocol.
Inmates condemned to die by the state have no right to a painless death.
But Tennessee cannot torture prisoners as they are executed.
The debate over whether the state's 3-drug lethal injection method will torture
a man to death is key to a trial set to begin Monday.
The consequences of the trial are very real: Bill Ray Irick, a 59-year-old Knox
County man convicted of the 1985 rape and murder of a 7-year-old girl, is
scheduled to die Aug. 9.
Lawyers for the Tennessee Department of Correction argue the drugs the state
plans to use do not amount to "unnecessary cruelty, terror, pain or disgrace,
such as being disemboweled in public, burned alive, beheaded."
The attorneys also argue death penalty opponents are to blame for any drug
problems because they pressured pharmaceutical companies into not providing
states with the drugs that kill most effectively.
"Inmates challenging a state's method of execution must meet a 'heavy burden'
... so much so that the Supreme Court has never invalidated a state's chosen
method of execution as cruel and unusual punishment," write attorneys for the
state, citing a 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling.
The state is relying on an unlicensed, out-of-state pharmacy to provide drugs
that may not function as intended, lawyers for death row inmates argue. Even if
the drugs do work as planned, there's a very high chance they result in immense
pain, similar to someone drowning or dying by sarin gas.
"(Prison officials) are causing death through poisoning. Poisoning causes
extreme pain and suffering. Using a paralytic during the poisoning causes
extreme terror and distress," write attorneys for the death row inmates.
Both sides established their arguments in documents filed with the court ahead
of Monday's start of trial.
In the past, Tennessee used a drug called pentobarbitol in lethal injections.
The Tennessee Supreme Court determined in 2017 that its use in executions is
constitutional.
However, the drug's manufacturers have largely stopped supplying it to
corrections systems around the country.
Instead, states turned to a 3 drug method. In theory, the 1st drug renders the
person unconscious; the 2nd drug stops their lungs; and the 3rd drug stops
their heart.
The effectiveness of the 1st drug, midazolam, is at the heart of the debate.
Attorneys for the state have a physician who will testify in court that the
drug effectively renders a person unable to feel the effects of the next 2
drugs.
Several physicians testifying for the death row inmates will state the drug
frequently does not prevent people from feeling pain. Additionally, attorneys
will show, through an analysis of autopsies of other inmates put to death using
midazolam, that the vast majority of them suffered immense pain during their
executions.
The midazolam obtained by the state will also be a form of the drug known as a
compound, or a pharmacy building a medication on its own.
Citing records since sealed by the court, attorneys for the death row inmates
say the people supplying the state with the compounded midazolam are not
licensed to supply such drugs in Tennessee. Attorneys for prison officials note
their suppliers have a pending application with the state.
Attorneys for both sides filed a flurry of motions in the weeks leading up to
trial. On July 5, the state announced it had changed information on 32 pages of
the 99-page lethal injection execution manual.
Those changes, largely in response to objections by attorneys for the death row
offenders, include:
Formally removing pentobarbital as an option for use by the state.
Explicitly stating prison officials may use compounded drugs.
Waiting two minutes after administering the midazolam before a prison official
checks if an inmate is conscious.
Spelling out how that official will check for consciousness: touching the
inmate's eyelids, calling out his or her name, and grabbing and twisting the
shoulder.
The case is before Davidson County Chancellor Ellen Hobbs, who is expected to
reach a decision before the end of July. Any ruling almost assuredly will be
appealed to the Tennessee Supreme Court.
Regardless of the ruling, attorneys for Irick will ask the Tennessee Supreme
Court for a stay of his execution while it reviews the appeal.
There is also a slight chance the state decides it must put Irick to death via
the electric chair. It can only do so if it formally determines it is unable to
obtain any one of the 3 drugs needed to carry out a lethal injection.
If that happens, Irick's attorneys would likely file a new lawsuit challenging
the method of electrocution.
(source: The Tennessean)
ARKANSAS:
Anti-death penalty resolution builds on church's advocacy in wake of Arkansas
executions
Arkansas;' decision to schedule 8 executions in 10 days last year drew intense
national scrutiny, sparked a sudden re-examination of the death penalty and
served as a catalyst to a resolution before the 79th General Convention seeking
to build on the Episcopal Church's longtime advocacy on the issue.
Resolution D077 was submitted by the Rev. Bob Davidson, a deputy from Colorado
and national chair of the Episcopal Peace Fellowship. It reaffirms the church's
position in favor of abolishing the death penalty, calls for all death row
inmates' sentences to be reduced, orders letters to that effect be sent to all
governors of states where the death penalty is legal and enlists bishops in
those states to take up greater advocacy.
Davidson, a member of the Social Justice and United States Policy Committee,
testified in favor of his resolution at the committee's open hearing on July 9.
He noted the Episcopal Church first took a stand in favor of abolishing the
death penalty in 1958.
"The Episcopal Peace Fellowship has continued to maintain this as one of its
strongest priorities, carrying the banner of the dignity and sanctity of life
for all persons," Davidson said. "This resolution gives teeth" to past General
Convention resolutions.
Davidson, in an interview with Episcopal News Service after the meeting,
explained how the resolution developed in reaction to the Arkansas executions
of April 2017. Episcopal Peace Fellowship was part of a network of faith-based
organizations and activists at the local level that mobilized prayer vigils,
social media campaigns and demonstrations in response to those executions.
Only 4 of the 8 scheduled executions were carried out, though the explanation
to Resolution D077 notes the death penalty remains legal in 31 states and more
than 3,000 inmates are awaiting execution in the United States.
Davidson told ENS this issue overlaps with the Episcopal Church's work on
racial reconciliation, given the disproportionate number of prisoners who are
black men.
"There's no more glaring symbol of racism in our country than to look on death
row and just look at the executions of black men in our country," Davidson
said.
The Rev. Allison Liles, executive director of Episcopal Peace Fellowship, also
spoke in favor of the resolution at the open hearing on July 9, emphasizing
cases of death row exonerations and singling out General Convention's host
state of Texas. The state has executed 552 people since the death penalty was
reinstated by the Supreme Court in 1976, far more than any other state,
according to the Death Penalty Information Center.
Liles also noted how this resolution goes beyond prior resolutions on the issue
to direct the secretary of General Convention to send letters to the governors
of death penalty states specifically seeking sentence reductions of those
condemned to death or case reviews for possible exonerations.
"We as human beings are more than our worst sin. We as human beings are capable
of redemption," Liles said. "The death penalty is failed, ineffective, it's
expensive and it's a policy that's defined by racial and economic bias.
"We've been speaking out against it for 60 years, and now we need to speak on
behalf of the people who are living on death row and encourage the governors to
commute their sentences to life in prison."
Marti Hunt, a deputy with the Diocese of New Hampshire, also testified in favor
of the resolution.
"We're calling on governors to step up," Hunt said. "A lot of them
self-identify as Christians, and we want them to recognize that they are
responsible for the lives of all the citizens in their jurisdictions."
Atlanta Bishop Robert Wright, speaking with ENS during a break in the committee
meeting, echoed Hunt's comments about appealing directly to governors' faith,
because a lot of politicians "use their Christianity when it's convenient
politically." Christianity speaks to the dignity of all humans, including those
behind bars, said Wright, a member of the committee who has been active in
advocating against the death penalty in Georgia.
"I'm glad that we are remembering our commitment as the Episcopal Church to
facilitate the abolition of the death penalty," Wright said when asked about
Resolution D077. "We need people to take that energy that was put into these
resolutions and take it back home."
(source: Episcopal News Service)
NEBRASKA----impending execution
Nebraska Catholic bishops oppose execution of death-row inmate
Encouraging an act of mercy and arguing it would not compromise justice,
Nebraska's 3 Catholic bishops said July 6 they oppose the scheduled execution
in August of death-row inmate Carey Dean Moore.
"As the Catholic bishops of Nebraska, we recognize that our society has a
pervasive culture of violence and death, which can only be transformed by a
counterculture of justice and mercy," said Archbishop George J. Lucas of Omaha
and Bishops James D. Conley of Lincoln and Joseph G. Hanefeldt of Grand Island.
"Each time we consider applying capital punishment, Nebraska has an opportunity
to respond to an act of violence with an act of mercy that does not endanger
public safety or compromise the demands of justice," they said in a statement
released by the Nebraska Catholic Conference.
"There is no doubt the state has the responsibility to administer just
punishment. However, given our modern prison system, the execution of Carey
Dean Moore is not necessary to fulfill justice and, for that reason, would
undermine respect for human life," the bishops said. "We continue to offer our
sincerest prayers for all victims and those affected by the heinous crimes of
Mr. Moore, and we pray for his conversion of heart."
The Nebraska Supreme Court issued a death warrant July 5 for Moore, who would
be the 1st inmate executed in 21 years in the state, and the 1st by lethal
injection. The execution would have to take place Aug. 14, the warrant said.
Moore, 60, has indicated he would not contest his execution. Convicted of
killing Omaha cab drivers Maynard Helgeland and Reuel Van Ness 5 days apart in
1979, he was sentenced to death in 1980. Courts have issued multiple stays over
the years preventing his scheduled execution, and he has served more time in
prison than any of Nebraska's 11 other death-row inmates.
The Nebraska Catholic Conference has long opposed use of the death penalty, and
the state's bishops urged and then backed lawmakers' 2015 ban on capital
punishment, including a successful override of Gov. Pete Ricketts" veto.
The bishops sought to persuade voters to retain the ban when a petition effort
put the issue on the ballot in November 2016. But Nebraskans voted 60.9 % to
39.1 % to repeal the ban.
(source: Associated Press)
NEVADA----impending execution//volunteer
Maker of execution drug wants to prevent Nevada from using it to kill Scott
Dozier this week
The maker of a sedative set for inclusion in a Nevada execution on Wednesday -
the state's 1st in 12 years - says it's exploring the possibility of legal
action to prevent the drug from being used to kill Scott Dozier.
American pharmaceutical company Alvogen, which makes the drug midazolam, says
on its website that it tries to prevent the medication from use in executions.
But the Nevada Department of Corrections announced last Tuesday that it was
adding midazolam to its 3-drug lethal injection combination after another drug
expired, and on Friday it distributed photos of the packaging with Alvogen
labels.
"Alvogen does not market, promote or condone the use of any of its approved
prescription drug products, including midazolam, for use in state sponsored
executions," spokesperson Halld???r Kristmannsson said in a statement. "To
avoid any improper, off label use of our products, Alvogen does not accept
direct orders from prison systems or departments of correction. Alvogen works
with our distributors and wholesalers to restrict any resale, either directly
or indirectly, of our midazolam product to any prison system or department of
correction."
Nevada prisons purchased execution drugs through wholesaler Cardinal Health,
which has previously said it works to fulfill manufacturer's wishes.
"As a wholesaler, we hold ourselves to the highest standards of accuracy and
safety and have robust controls in place," Cardinal Health spokesman Geoffrey
Basye said in November, when it was first revealed that the company was
supplying some of the drugs. "We follow every manufacturer's specific
instructions to ensure the safe distribution of their products."
Basye didn't immediately respond to a request for comment about the Alvogen
situation.
Midazolam has been used in other executions around the country, including some
that were prolonged and involved the inmates gasping for air. Alvogen said it
would work to prevent the midazolam from making its way into Dozier's
execution.
"With respect to the alleged intent of the State of Nevada Department of
Corrections to use our midazolam product in an execution, we are exploring all
potential avenues, including legal recourse, to prevent the improper use of our
product in this particular execution," Kristmannsson said on Sunday.
By Monday afternoon, corrections spokeswoman Brooke Santina said she hadn't
heard of any action from the company against her agency.
NDOC has previously declined to acquiesce to manufacturer's specifications
about drugs in executions. Pfizer asked the agency to return the drug diazepam
after it was revealed the drug would be used in Dozier's execution when it was
first scheduled last November, but the agency said at the time that it was
under no obligation to return a product it had purchased.
(source: The Nevada Independent)
*****************
Nevada set to conduct a rare execution
Scott Dozier isn't your typical death-row inmate. Raised in a comfortable
family, he had opportunity and, as they say today, privilege. But he fell into
a life of drugs that culminated in him decapitating 22-year-old Jeremiah Miller
during a 2002 meth collaboration in Las Vegas.
Dozier stuffed Miller's mutilated body in a suitcase and left it in an
off-Strip apartment dumpster. The odor alarmed a maintenance worker, who called
police. 4 years later, Dozier - who had previously been found guilty in Arizona
of 2nd-degree murder - was convicted in the Miller killing and sentenced to
die.
Nevada is 1 of 31 states that impose the death penalty, but the punishment is
rarely carried out. Since 1976 when the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed the
practice, Nevada has executed only a dozen men, the last more than 12 years
ago. Meanwhile, 85 people sit on the state's death row.
Dozier, now 47, is scheduled to become No. 13 on Wednesday. His execution by
lethal injection is set for 8 p.m. that evening at Ely State Prison.
The average time between conviction and execution is now more than 15 years,
according to the Death Penalty Information Center. The delays result from
endless legal motions that anti-death penalty groups file to slow the process.
But in October 2016, Dozier waived all his appeals and requested the state
carry out his sentence.
That didn't stop the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada from trying to
gum up the execution by challenging the combination of drugs the state will use
to kill Dozier. But even that obstacle has now been cleared - in May, the state
Supreme Court sanctioned Dozier's execution
The chances are now unlikely that anti-death penalty activists will be able to
alter Dozier's fate.
"With nobody asking that's in a position to ask, nothing's going to get done,"
a veteran defense attorney told the Review-Journal. "Dozier wants
state-assisted suicide, and because the state's willing to accommodate, this is
a vastly accelerated situation."
Of course, 1 man's "state-assisted suicide" is another man's justice. The death
penalty generates intense passions and strong principled arguments on both
sides of the debate. Once a relatively uncontroversial practice, opinion polls
show support for executions slipping significantly in recent decades. The
number of people put to death in the United States has fallen rapidly in recent
years from 98 in 1999 to just 12 so far in 2018.
But the Legislature and the voting booth, rather than the courts, remain the
proper venues for change. Until Nevada lawmakers or voters rethink the death
penalty, state officials should follow the law. It's worth noting in this case
that there is little doubt about guilt or innocence when it comes to Scott
Dozier.
"Life in prison isn't life," Dozier told the Review-Journal's David Ferraro.
"This isn't living, man. It's just surviving."
That's one way of looking at it. Jeremiah Miller may have a different opinion
were he alive to express it.
(source: Editorial, Las Vegas Review-Journal)
_______________________________________________
A service courtesy of Washburn University School of Law www.washburnlaw.edu
DeathPenalty mailing list
***@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Unsubscribe: http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/options/deathpenalty
TEXAS----impending execution
Urgent Action
SON OF MURDER VICTIM OPPOSES EXECUTION
Christopher Young is due to be executed in Texas on 17 July. He was 21 years
old at the time of the murder in 2004 for which he was sentenced to death.
The son of the murder victim supports clemency.
Write a letter, send an email, call, fax or tweet:
* Opposing the execution of Christopher Young and calling for his death
sentence to be commuted;
* Urging the authorities to recognize the cycle of violence illustrated here,
the positive efforts on death row made by Christopher Young, and the creation
of further victims that would occur if the execution goes ahead.
Friendly reminder: If you send an email, please create your own instead of
forwarding this one!
Contact the Board of Pardons by 13 July, 2018 and the Governor by 17 July,
2018:
Clemency Section, Board of Pardons and Paroles
8610 Shoal Creek Blvd.
Austin, Texas 78757-6814
USA
Fax: +1 512 467 0945
Email: bpp-***@tdcj.state.tx.us
Salutation: Dear Board Members
Governor Greg Abbott
Office of the Governor, P.O. Box 12428
Austin, Texas 78711-2428, USA
Fax: +1 512 463 1849
Email: https://gov.texas.gov/apps/contact/opinion.aspx
Salutation: Dear Governor
(source: Amnesty International USA)
************************
Texas death row inmates go high-tech in longshot bid for clemency
Death row inmate Christopher Young is using a video to boost his bid for
clemency as his July 17, 2018 execution date approaches. Young was convicted of
capital murder in the death of a San Antonio businessman.
When he watched the 1st video, he looked for remorse. When he watched the 2nd,
he found understanding. Then he watched the 3rd and the 4th, pressing play
again and again.
Seeing the footage only reinforced what Mitesh Patel already knew: He would
fight for the man who murdered his father 14 years earlier.
The killer - former San Antonio gang member Christopher Young - never claimed
he was innocent. He didn't argue it was self-defense. He still has pending
appeals. But with an execution looming on July 17, his best hope for reprieve
may lie in a 14-minute clemency video.
Young's rare tech-savvy submission to the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles is
a sign of the times. As courts transition into the digital age with online
records and e-filings, clemency proceedings, too, are moving into the 21st
century. Where 20 years ago a paper submission and calls to the governor were
the best options, today prisoners can garner support through Change.org
petitions, Facebook campaigns, emailed calls to action, and - as in Young's
case - painstakingly produced footage.
"A picture is worth a thousand words," said attorney Keith Hampton, who is not
representing Young. "So we take advantage of that."
A rarely used executive privilege, death row clemency offers an 11th-hour
reprieve to a lucky few prisoners slated for execution. In Texas, a written
petition - sometimes dozens of pages long - is carefully crafted by a legal
team and sent in hard copy to the parole board in Austin at least 21 days
before the scheduled death date.
Then, the 7 board members review the petition independently. One member may pay
a visit to the condemned. Others may talk to survivors and victims' families.
2 business days before the execution, they announce their decision. If it's a
yes, the plea lands on the governor's desk for the final decision. If it's a
no, mercy is off the table.
Room to be 'creative'
Throughout most of the Lone Star State's history, that's been the entirety of
the process. But with the rise of the internet, advocates, lawyers and even the
condemned men themselves are harnessing its power to beg for a 2nd chance at
life.
"The board has rules about clemency petition submissions and they're very bare
bones - and in those blank spaces, there's space to be creative," said Kathryn
Kase, a longtime defense attorney who previously headed up Texas Defender
Services.
In the early 2000s - in what likely was among the first video offerings -
attorney Jim Marcus submitted a VHS tape with his clemency petition for Thomas
Miller-El. He never found out if the board actually watched it, but in the end
the courts intervened and Miller-El got a stay based on racially tainted jury
selection practices in Dallas County.
Since then, other Texas prisoners - including death row inmates Paul Storey and
Scott Panetti - have released clemency videos publicly, sometimes even when
they weren't part of the official petition.
"Videos - particularly in clemency - are going to be the wave of the future,"
Hampton said.
But it's hard to say how often submissions like these pop up, as many pieces of
clemency submissions aren't public. What is public - as pointedly public as
possible - is the broader clemency campaign effort, which often includes a push
for supportive calls, letters and emails to the board or the governor.
In support of Young's efforts, for example, the Texas Coalition Against the
Death Penalty launched a Change.org petition including an embedded video and a
plea to "send a message" to the board and the governor. As of Monday morning,
more than 21,000 people had signed.
'A hard realization'
Young carjacked a woman at gunpoint in San Antonio in 2004, then headed to a
mini-mart and dry cleaners. He walked in, asked for prices, and then demanded
money.
Store owner Hasmukh "Hash" Patel pushed the panic button and ran, but Young
followed and shot him to death before fleeing. Police caught him later that
morning just a few miles away.
When a Bexar County judge pronounced his death sentence 2 years later, Young
heard a gasp from the crowd. His mother had fainted.
Whatever the toll on his family - and his victim's family - Young came to death
row angry and bitter. For almost a decade, he stayed mad at the world. Then, 5
years ago, something changed. The anger dissipated, replaced with remorse, he
told the Houston Chronicle in a death row interview.
He doesn't know what clicked or why he moved on. But today, he says, he's a
different person.
"I stopped blaming others for my situation and realized that I put myself
here," he said. "And that's a hard realization."
Los Angeles-based filmmaker Laurence Thrush first set his sights on Young's
case in 2014, when he started making a show about the prominent Houston-based
capital defense lawyer David Dow. The series fell through, but in the process,
Thrush met Young, 1 of Dow's clients. The 2 hit it off.
They stayed in touch, and at the start of this year, the pair teamed up to make
a film from death row.
"For me conceptually it was really interesting to see what he would make as a
filmmaker, this idea that we can really make things remotely," Thrush said,
"that he can tell me what to shoot and who to interview."
At that point, Young still had pending appeals. But then in March, he got an
execution date, and everything changed.
Putting the main film on hold, Thrush redirected his efforts, instead focusing
on a video aimed at saving the condemned man's life.
Does videos work?
The parole board doesn't have to give any insight into the reasoning behind its
decisions, so it's hard to say what will work or even to pinpoint what's been
persuasive in the past.
But videos do offer a few clear advantages.
For one, it's a way to shoehorn in more voices in states that limit the number
of witnesses allowed at live clemency hearings, said Laura Schaefer, an
attorney with the American Bar Association's Death Penalty Representation
Project.
But in Texas, the condemned doesn't get to talk to the entire board, so a video
is a way to make that happen. And footage can bolster broader clemency
campaigns with an emotional message.
"In terms of getting more public support," Schaefer said, "using a video is
going to help bring more people to the cause because they can see the person
speaking."
It's hard to say if it's effective, though; clemency is rarely granted. And it
could work the other way, too - if video can bolster the defense arguments, the
same strategy could help the state.
"There's nothing to stop district attorneys from doing the same thing," Hampton
said, "making videos saying, 'Here's the victims.'"
Looking for the good
When Gov. Greg Abbott granted a last-minute commutation to death row inmate
Bart Whitaker following a board recommendation earlier this year, it was the
1st time a Texas governor had shown such mercy in more than a decade.
The Fort Bend man's case stood out because the 1 survivor of the attack -
Whitaker's own father - begged Abbott to spare his son.
3 months ago, Young was in a very different position; the family of his victim
planned to watch the execution and did not support clemency. But then Thrush
reached out to Patel, showing up unannounced on his doorstep one day.
At first, Patel was hesitant. But then, he agreed to talk. And it was learning
of the video - and the fact Young showed remorse - that swayed him.
"I assumed he was a typical death row inmate with no remorse," Patel said. "But
learning that he's been a positive force in his daughter's life, that struck a
chord with me."
Maybe, Patel thought, Young could serve a better purpose in prison, sharing his
story of change and personal transformation. And maybe his daughters wouldn't
have to go through the same heartache Patel has for more than a decade without
a father.
So he decided to go to the board and advocate for Young's life for the sake for
his children.
"We'd rather see some good from all of this," Patel said. "His execution
doesn't change what he did 14 years ago. It doesn't bring my dad back."
(source: Houston Chronicle)
NEW HAMPSHIRE:
There's no reason for death penalty, by Charles Gibson
The death penalty is denounced by the United Nations, every country in Europe
(with the exceptions of Belarus and Russia) and every other New England state.
In fact, twice the N.H. House and Senate have voted to repeal the death
penalty, only to be vetoed by 2 New Hampshire governors. Why do the governors
force New Hampshire to remain an outlier on this moral issue?
Commenting on his recent decision, Gov. Chris Sununu claimed that "Abolishing
the death penalty in New Hampshire would send the wrong message to those who
would commit the most heinous offenses ... namely that New Hampshire is a place
where a person who commits an unthinkable crime is guaranteed leniency."
Given that in his own words, "the most heinous offense" is to carry out an
intention to kill, how is the state justified in replicating that offense. Not
to mention the bizarre claim that life imprisonment without parole constitutes
leniency!
Once again the repeal of the death penalty in New Hampshire has failed, and not
because there is any evidence that it curtails capital crimes. Studies show
that it does not. The decision to deny the repeal of the death penalty is the
result of a cynical political calculation.
Perhaps the governor's decision to isolate himself in his private office for
the signing of the veto reflects some awareness of the political strategizing
that must have motivated it. Conventionally, the large Executive Council
chamber is the site of such signings. These events are ordinarily open to the
public.
In this case, the office was crammed only with supporters, those police who do
support it, leaving no room for the general public, no room for the police who
oppose the death penalty, no room, even, for the parents of murdered children
who nonetheless oppose the death penalty.
We the people of New Hampshire, expect our governor to honor our moral stance
on a moral issue, and not to undercut it with cheap political calculations.
CHARLES GIBSON
55 Shaker Farm Road South
Marlborough
(source: Letter to the Editor, Keene Sentinel)
ALABAMA:
Trump's new Supreme Court justice could weigh death penalty dispute in first
days on the job
President Trump's new Supreme Court nominee could kick off their 1st week on
the job hearing arguments on a death penalty case. The court's public
information office on Monday released the calendar for arguments in the 1st
month of the court's new term starting in October.
On the 2nd day of the term, the justices are scheduled to hear a case
challenging whether a???state can execute a prisoner whose mental disability
leaves him with no memory that he committed murder or whether the death penalty
should be barred in this case by the Eighth Amendment's protections against
cruel and unusual punishment.
The case centers on Alabama death row inmate Vernon Madison, who suffers from
vascular dementia and memory loss after numerous severe strokes.
Madison was slated to be executed on Jan. 25, but the court agreed to stay his
execution.
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch said they would have
denied the request. It takes at least 5 justices to agree to a stay petition.
The court calendar release comes just hours before President Trump is expected
to announce his nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony
Kennedy.
The fight over the vacant seat is teed up to be a vicious and costly battle.
Outside conservative groups, including the Judicial Crisis Network, are
planning to spend a million dollars lobbying to get Trump's 2nd nominee
confirmed to the bench.
There's a lot a stake, as Trump's nominee could cement the court's conservative
majority for a generation.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell???(R-Ky.) has said he plans to hold a
confirmation vote on Trump's nominee this fall.
(source: thehill.com)
OHIO:
Appeal made to Supreme Court in Danny Lee Hill case
The Ohio Attorney General's Office has filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme
Court to intervene in the case of convicted murderer Danny Lee Hill, who, under
a lower court's decision, stands to be removed from Ohio's death row.
The request, sought by Trumbull County Prosecutor Dennis Watkins, is on an
early 2018 ruling by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals that overturns Hill's
sentence and orders him to be resentenced for the brutal murder of Raymond Fife
in September 1985. The lower court ruling could result in Hill, 51, being taken
off death row and resentenced to life in prison.
Monday was the deadline for the attorney general's office to petition the high
court.
A 3-judge panel of the circuit court ruled in February state court judges and
mental health experts who declared Hill is not intellectually disabled were
wrong, and there is clear evidence he is mentally disabled.
An appeal for the full circuit court to reconsider the panel's decision was
rejected in April.
Using cases that occurred after Hill's trial, the circuit court applied rulings
that did not exist when Hill was convicted to overturn the death penalty
conviction, according to attorney Eric E. Murphy, a lawyer with the state
attorney general.
"The Sixth Circuit improperly graded the state court's decision based on
materials that were unavailable to them," Murphy wrote in the petition.
Murphy noted the state court held 11 days worth of hearings during which 5
expert witnesses concluded Hill either was not mentally impaired or was faking
to prevent them to establish his mental capacity.
Watkins said the state's "brilliant" petition speaks well for the need of the
Supreme Court to review the case.
"The law requires federal courts to give deference to the judges of state
court," Watkins said. "The rulings of state court judges should be respected,
unless there there is unreasonable application of the facts."
"Danny Lee Hill was not retarded," Watkins said. "Hill committed the crime. He
went to the police station to seek the reward for evidence leading to arrest of
a suspect."
Hill, then 18, was sentenced to death for Fife's murder on Sept. 10, 1985. Fife
was attacked in a wooded area near Palmyra Road SW, beaten, sexually tortured,
strangled, set on fire and left for dead. He died 2 days later.
Co-defendant in the case, Timothy Combs, then 17, is serving multiple,
consecutive life sentences since he wasn't eligible for the death sentence as a
juvenile.
(source: Tribune Chronicle)
TENNESSEE:
Lethal injection on trial in Tennessee: Inmates, state debate whether drugs are
torture
As of January 2017, there were 63 inmates on death row in Tennessee. Executions
have been on hold pending a challenge by inmates to the single-dose drug
protocol.
Inmates condemned to die by the state have no right to a painless death.
But Tennessee cannot torture prisoners as they are executed.
The debate over whether the state's 3-drug lethal injection method will torture
a man to death is key to a trial set to begin Monday.
The consequences of the trial are very real: Bill Ray Irick, a 59-year-old Knox
County man convicted of the 1985 rape and murder of a 7-year-old girl, is
scheduled to die Aug. 9.
Lawyers for the Tennessee Department of Correction argue the drugs the state
plans to use do not amount to "unnecessary cruelty, terror, pain or disgrace,
such as being disemboweled in public, burned alive, beheaded."
The attorneys also argue death penalty opponents are to blame for any drug
problems because they pressured pharmaceutical companies into not providing
states with the drugs that kill most effectively.
"Inmates challenging a state's method of execution must meet a 'heavy burden'
... so much so that the Supreme Court has never invalidated a state's chosen
method of execution as cruel and unusual punishment," write attorneys for the
state, citing a 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling.
The state is relying on an unlicensed, out-of-state pharmacy to provide drugs
that may not function as intended, lawyers for death row inmates argue. Even if
the drugs do work as planned, there's a very high chance they result in immense
pain, similar to someone drowning or dying by sarin gas.
"(Prison officials) are causing death through poisoning. Poisoning causes
extreme pain and suffering. Using a paralytic during the poisoning causes
extreme terror and distress," write attorneys for the death row inmates.
Both sides established their arguments in documents filed with the court ahead
of Monday's start of trial.
In the past, Tennessee used a drug called pentobarbitol in lethal injections.
The Tennessee Supreme Court determined in 2017 that its use in executions is
constitutional.
However, the drug's manufacturers have largely stopped supplying it to
corrections systems around the country.
Instead, states turned to a 3 drug method. In theory, the 1st drug renders the
person unconscious; the 2nd drug stops their lungs; and the 3rd drug stops
their heart.
The effectiveness of the 1st drug, midazolam, is at the heart of the debate.
Attorneys for the state have a physician who will testify in court that the
drug effectively renders a person unable to feel the effects of the next 2
drugs.
Several physicians testifying for the death row inmates will state the drug
frequently does not prevent people from feeling pain. Additionally, attorneys
will show, through an analysis of autopsies of other inmates put to death using
midazolam, that the vast majority of them suffered immense pain during their
executions.
The midazolam obtained by the state will also be a form of the drug known as a
compound, or a pharmacy building a medication on its own.
Citing records since sealed by the court, attorneys for the death row inmates
say the people supplying the state with the compounded midazolam are not
licensed to supply such drugs in Tennessee. Attorneys for prison officials note
their suppliers have a pending application with the state.
Attorneys for both sides filed a flurry of motions in the weeks leading up to
trial. On July 5, the state announced it had changed information on 32 pages of
the 99-page lethal injection execution manual.
Those changes, largely in response to objections by attorneys for the death row
offenders, include:
Formally removing pentobarbital as an option for use by the state.
Explicitly stating prison officials may use compounded drugs.
Waiting two minutes after administering the midazolam before a prison official
checks if an inmate is conscious.
Spelling out how that official will check for consciousness: touching the
inmate's eyelids, calling out his or her name, and grabbing and twisting the
shoulder.
The case is before Davidson County Chancellor Ellen Hobbs, who is expected to
reach a decision before the end of July. Any ruling almost assuredly will be
appealed to the Tennessee Supreme Court.
Regardless of the ruling, attorneys for Irick will ask the Tennessee Supreme
Court for a stay of his execution while it reviews the appeal.
There is also a slight chance the state decides it must put Irick to death via
the electric chair. It can only do so if it formally determines it is unable to
obtain any one of the 3 drugs needed to carry out a lethal injection.
If that happens, Irick's attorneys would likely file a new lawsuit challenging
the method of electrocution.
(source: The Tennessean)
ARKANSAS:
Anti-death penalty resolution builds on church's advocacy in wake of Arkansas
executions
Arkansas;' decision to schedule 8 executions in 10 days last year drew intense
national scrutiny, sparked a sudden re-examination of the death penalty and
served as a catalyst to a resolution before the 79th General Convention seeking
to build on the Episcopal Church's longtime advocacy on the issue.
Resolution D077 was submitted by the Rev. Bob Davidson, a deputy from Colorado
and national chair of the Episcopal Peace Fellowship. It reaffirms the church's
position in favor of abolishing the death penalty, calls for all death row
inmates' sentences to be reduced, orders letters to that effect be sent to all
governors of states where the death penalty is legal and enlists bishops in
those states to take up greater advocacy.
Davidson, a member of the Social Justice and United States Policy Committee,
testified in favor of his resolution at the committee's open hearing on July 9.
He noted the Episcopal Church first took a stand in favor of abolishing the
death penalty in 1958.
"The Episcopal Peace Fellowship has continued to maintain this as one of its
strongest priorities, carrying the banner of the dignity and sanctity of life
for all persons," Davidson said. "This resolution gives teeth" to past General
Convention resolutions.
Davidson, in an interview with Episcopal News Service after the meeting,
explained how the resolution developed in reaction to the Arkansas executions
of April 2017. Episcopal Peace Fellowship was part of a network of faith-based
organizations and activists at the local level that mobilized prayer vigils,
social media campaigns and demonstrations in response to those executions.
Only 4 of the 8 scheduled executions were carried out, though the explanation
to Resolution D077 notes the death penalty remains legal in 31 states and more
than 3,000 inmates are awaiting execution in the United States.
Davidson told ENS this issue overlaps with the Episcopal Church's work on
racial reconciliation, given the disproportionate number of prisoners who are
black men.
"There's no more glaring symbol of racism in our country than to look on death
row and just look at the executions of black men in our country," Davidson
said.
The Rev. Allison Liles, executive director of Episcopal Peace Fellowship, also
spoke in favor of the resolution at the open hearing on July 9, emphasizing
cases of death row exonerations and singling out General Convention's host
state of Texas. The state has executed 552 people since the death penalty was
reinstated by the Supreme Court in 1976, far more than any other state,
according to the Death Penalty Information Center.
Liles also noted how this resolution goes beyond prior resolutions on the issue
to direct the secretary of General Convention to send letters to the governors
of death penalty states specifically seeking sentence reductions of those
condemned to death or case reviews for possible exonerations.
"We as human beings are more than our worst sin. We as human beings are capable
of redemption," Liles said. "The death penalty is failed, ineffective, it's
expensive and it's a policy that's defined by racial and economic bias.
"We've been speaking out against it for 60 years, and now we need to speak on
behalf of the people who are living on death row and encourage the governors to
commute their sentences to life in prison."
Marti Hunt, a deputy with the Diocese of New Hampshire, also testified in favor
of the resolution.
"We're calling on governors to step up," Hunt said. "A lot of them
self-identify as Christians, and we want them to recognize that they are
responsible for the lives of all the citizens in their jurisdictions."
Atlanta Bishop Robert Wright, speaking with ENS during a break in the committee
meeting, echoed Hunt's comments about appealing directly to governors' faith,
because a lot of politicians "use their Christianity when it's convenient
politically." Christianity speaks to the dignity of all humans, including those
behind bars, said Wright, a member of the committee who has been active in
advocating against the death penalty in Georgia.
"I'm glad that we are remembering our commitment as the Episcopal Church to
facilitate the abolition of the death penalty," Wright said when asked about
Resolution D077. "We need people to take that energy that was put into these
resolutions and take it back home."
(source: Episcopal News Service)
NEBRASKA----impending execution
Nebraska Catholic bishops oppose execution of death-row inmate
Encouraging an act of mercy and arguing it would not compromise justice,
Nebraska's 3 Catholic bishops said July 6 they oppose the scheduled execution
in August of death-row inmate Carey Dean Moore.
"As the Catholic bishops of Nebraska, we recognize that our society has a
pervasive culture of violence and death, which can only be transformed by a
counterculture of justice and mercy," said Archbishop George J. Lucas of Omaha
and Bishops James D. Conley of Lincoln and Joseph G. Hanefeldt of Grand Island.
"Each time we consider applying capital punishment, Nebraska has an opportunity
to respond to an act of violence with an act of mercy that does not endanger
public safety or compromise the demands of justice," they said in a statement
released by the Nebraska Catholic Conference.
"There is no doubt the state has the responsibility to administer just
punishment. However, given our modern prison system, the execution of Carey
Dean Moore is not necessary to fulfill justice and, for that reason, would
undermine respect for human life," the bishops said. "We continue to offer our
sincerest prayers for all victims and those affected by the heinous crimes of
Mr. Moore, and we pray for his conversion of heart."
The Nebraska Supreme Court issued a death warrant July 5 for Moore, who would
be the 1st inmate executed in 21 years in the state, and the 1st by lethal
injection. The execution would have to take place Aug. 14, the warrant said.
Moore, 60, has indicated he would not contest his execution. Convicted of
killing Omaha cab drivers Maynard Helgeland and Reuel Van Ness 5 days apart in
1979, he was sentenced to death in 1980. Courts have issued multiple stays over
the years preventing his scheduled execution, and he has served more time in
prison than any of Nebraska's 11 other death-row inmates.
The Nebraska Catholic Conference has long opposed use of the death penalty, and
the state's bishops urged and then backed lawmakers' 2015 ban on capital
punishment, including a successful override of Gov. Pete Ricketts" veto.
The bishops sought to persuade voters to retain the ban when a petition effort
put the issue on the ballot in November 2016. But Nebraskans voted 60.9 % to
39.1 % to repeal the ban.
(source: Associated Press)
NEVADA----impending execution//volunteer
Maker of execution drug wants to prevent Nevada from using it to kill Scott
Dozier this week
The maker of a sedative set for inclusion in a Nevada execution on Wednesday -
the state's 1st in 12 years - says it's exploring the possibility of legal
action to prevent the drug from being used to kill Scott Dozier.
American pharmaceutical company Alvogen, which makes the drug midazolam, says
on its website that it tries to prevent the medication from use in executions.
But the Nevada Department of Corrections announced last Tuesday that it was
adding midazolam to its 3-drug lethal injection combination after another drug
expired, and on Friday it distributed photos of the packaging with Alvogen
labels.
"Alvogen does not market, promote or condone the use of any of its approved
prescription drug products, including midazolam, for use in state sponsored
executions," spokesperson Halld???r Kristmannsson said in a statement. "To
avoid any improper, off label use of our products, Alvogen does not accept
direct orders from prison systems or departments of correction. Alvogen works
with our distributors and wholesalers to restrict any resale, either directly
or indirectly, of our midazolam product to any prison system or department of
correction."
Nevada prisons purchased execution drugs through wholesaler Cardinal Health,
which has previously said it works to fulfill manufacturer's wishes.
"As a wholesaler, we hold ourselves to the highest standards of accuracy and
safety and have robust controls in place," Cardinal Health spokesman Geoffrey
Basye said in November, when it was first revealed that the company was
supplying some of the drugs. "We follow every manufacturer's specific
instructions to ensure the safe distribution of their products."
Basye didn't immediately respond to a request for comment about the Alvogen
situation.
Midazolam has been used in other executions around the country, including some
that were prolonged and involved the inmates gasping for air. Alvogen said it
would work to prevent the midazolam from making its way into Dozier's
execution.
"With respect to the alleged intent of the State of Nevada Department of
Corrections to use our midazolam product in an execution, we are exploring all
potential avenues, including legal recourse, to prevent the improper use of our
product in this particular execution," Kristmannsson said on Sunday.
By Monday afternoon, corrections spokeswoman Brooke Santina said she hadn't
heard of any action from the company against her agency.
NDOC has previously declined to acquiesce to manufacturer's specifications
about drugs in executions. Pfizer asked the agency to return the drug diazepam
after it was revealed the drug would be used in Dozier's execution when it was
first scheduled last November, but the agency said at the time that it was
under no obligation to return a product it had purchased.
(source: The Nevada Independent)
*****************
Nevada set to conduct a rare execution
Scott Dozier isn't your typical death-row inmate. Raised in a comfortable
family, he had opportunity and, as they say today, privilege. But he fell into
a life of drugs that culminated in him decapitating 22-year-old Jeremiah Miller
during a 2002 meth collaboration in Las Vegas.
Dozier stuffed Miller's mutilated body in a suitcase and left it in an
off-Strip apartment dumpster. The odor alarmed a maintenance worker, who called
police. 4 years later, Dozier - who had previously been found guilty in Arizona
of 2nd-degree murder - was convicted in the Miller killing and sentenced to
die.
Nevada is 1 of 31 states that impose the death penalty, but the punishment is
rarely carried out. Since 1976 when the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed the
practice, Nevada has executed only a dozen men, the last more than 12 years
ago. Meanwhile, 85 people sit on the state's death row.
Dozier, now 47, is scheduled to become No. 13 on Wednesday. His execution by
lethal injection is set for 8 p.m. that evening at Ely State Prison.
The average time between conviction and execution is now more than 15 years,
according to the Death Penalty Information Center. The delays result from
endless legal motions that anti-death penalty groups file to slow the process.
But in October 2016, Dozier waived all his appeals and requested the state
carry out his sentence.
That didn't stop the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada from trying to
gum up the execution by challenging the combination of drugs the state will use
to kill Dozier. But even that obstacle has now been cleared - in May, the state
Supreme Court sanctioned Dozier's execution
The chances are now unlikely that anti-death penalty activists will be able to
alter Dozier's fate.
"With nobody asking that's in a position to ask, nothing's going to get done,"
a veteran defense attorney told the Review-Journal. "Dozier wants
state-assisted suicide, and because the state's willing to accommodate, this is
a vastly accelerated situation."
Of course, 1 man's "state-assisted suicide" is another man's justice. The death
penalty generates intense passions and strong principled arguments on both
sides of the debate. Once a relatively uncontroversial practice, opinion polls
show support for executions slipping significantly in recent decades. The
number of people put to death in the United States has fallen rapidly in recent
years from 98 in 1999 to just 12 so far in 2018.
But the Legislature and the voting booth, rather than the courts, remain the
proper venues for change. Until Nevada lawmakers or voters rethink the death
penalty, state officials should follow the law. It's worth noting in this case
that there is little doubt about guilt or innocence when it comes to Scott
Dozier.
"Life in prison isn't life," Dozier told the Review-Journal's David Ferraro.
"This isn't living, man. It's just surviving."
That's one way of looking at it. Jeremiah Miller may have a different opinion
were he alive to express it.
(source: Editorial, Las Vegas Review-Journal)
_______________________________________________
A service courtesy of Washburn University School of Law www.washburnlaw.edu
DeathPenalty mailing list
***@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Unsubscribe: http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/options/deathpenalty