Rick Halperin
2018-08-09 14:08:45 UTC
August 9
LOUISIANA:
Man sentenced to death for 1995 slaying of Metairie cab driver to get new trial
The stage is set for a man who was sentenced to death for the 1995 slaying of a
cab driver in Metairie to receive a new trial later this year.
Teddy Chester did not have adequate legal representation when he was convicted
for the killing, so he needed to be either retried or set free by Oct. 9, a
federal judge in New Orleans ruled on June 11.
Jefferson Parish District Attorney Paul Connick's office had until Friday to
appeal U.S. District Judge Susie Morgan's decision. But the office indicated
Wednesday that it will not exercise that option, according to both the agency
and Chester's attorney, Cecelia Kappel.
Kappel said her client is due at Gretna's 24th Judicial District Court on
Thursday for a preliminary hearing ahead of the new trial. She maintains
Chester's innocence, reiterating that convicted co-defendant Elbert Ratcliff
was the killer. Ratcliff is serving a life sentence without the possibility of
parole after exhausting his appeals.
"It's our position justice has been served and that this case should be
closed," said Kappel, with the Promise of Justice Initiative.
Connick's office declined to elaborate on how it may move forward with
Chester's case.
Chester, who lived in Kenner, was found guilty in 1997 of 1st-degree murder and
sent to death row for the killing of 34-year-old John Adams 2 days after
Christmas in 1995, when Chester was 18.
Authorities found Adams in his taxi on Calhoun Street in Metairie. He had been
shot once in the back of the head. His business cards were scattered around
him, and he had $300 in his pockets.
Fingerprints on the business cards led authorities to Ratcliff, who had fled
with Chester. Ratcliff was later convicted of 2nd-degree murder and sentenced
to life.
In turn, Ratcliff led investigators to Chester, with each of the men claiming
they had climbed into Adams' cab to try to sell him something when the other
man killed the victim to rob him.
Chester, now 40, pursued an appeal in Louisiana's state court system
reluctantly. He repeatedly expressed a desire to end his appellate efforts and
face execution before the state Supreme Court upheld his conviction in late
2016.
In extraordinary remarks, Supreme Court Justice Scott Crichton wrote that if it
were solely up to him, he would have granted Chester his wish.
But, with help from Kappel's team, Chester soon filed for what is known as
post-conviction relief in the federal court system, which sent the case to
Morgan.
According to Morgan's ruling, Chester's team of court-appointed attorneys
deprived him of his constitutional right to effective legal representation by
missing key opportunities during the trial to undermine the prosecution's
theory that Chester fired the gun that killed Adams.
A man named Anthony Curtis said he was driving down the street when he heard
Adams' shooting and saw Ratcliff emerge from the cab. Ratcliff, who had just
rummaged through the cab, tucked a gun in his waistband, Curtis said in filings
presented to Morgan.
But the defense team led by attorneys Graham da Ponte and Cesar Vazquez did not
call Curtis to testify about what he saw, which would likely have been
favorable to Chester's defense, Morgan said.
Furthermore, the defense didn't call a blood spatter expert to challenge the
state's theory that 2 drops of blood on Chester's cap proved he was the
shooter. A blood spatter expert consulted during the appellate process
testified that the blood on the cap actually supported Chester's claim that he
was a bystander and not the triggerman, Morgan noted.
The defense team also didn't challenge the prosecution's assertion that it had
used a DNA test to establish that the blood on the cap belonged to Adams. In
fact, the test showed it was possible but "highly unlikely" that Adams was the
source of the blood drops.
The defense team didn't call any witnesses during the trial. It called 1
witness during the sentencing phase: Darren Chester, whose testimony
essentially was that his brother Teddy didn't say anything to him about a
killing.
Da Ponte on Wednesday said she was pleased to learn Chester would get a new
trial. Vazquez couldn't be reached Wednesday.
The team that prosecuted Chester was led by Ronald Bodenheimer, who went on to
become a Jefferson Parish judge and later to serve time in federal prison
following a corruption scandal at the Gretna courthouse.
Bodenheimer on Wednesday said Vazquez and da Ponte were good attorneys and that
his devout Catholic faith made pursuing the death penalty against Chester a
difficult task.
"My whole career, I never sought the death penalty without talking to a priest
first," Bodenheimer said.
Former Judge Martha Sassone presided over Chester's trial.
(source: The Advocate)
TENNESSEE----impending execution
Death watch inmate gets new attorneys for appeal to federal courts, days before
execution date
Death watch inmate Billy Ray Irick is asking the U.S. Supreme court to delay
his execution and review the evidence in his murder conviction.
A new team of attorneys is claiming that Irick was severely mentally ill at the
time of his offense. They argue that executing a mentally ill person is cruel
and unusual punishment and violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the
U.S. Constitution.
Federal public defender Kelley J. Henry from Nashville is now representing
Irick before the U. S. Supreme Court.
Irick's motion for a new attorney to argue his case in federal court was
approved earlier Tuesday by a federal judge from the U.S. District Court of
Middle Tennessee.
Unless the Supreme Court intervenes to delay his execution, Irick is scheduled
to die at Riverbend Maximum Security Prison on Thursday at 7 p.m.
(source: WKRN news)
***********************************
Former Tennessee Supreme Court justice shares history of death penalty
Former Tennessee Supreme Court Justice Gary Wade says the decision to put
someone to death is not an easy one. The state carried out 4 executions during
his time in office. "I remember all 4 vividly," he said.
But upholding a death sentence does not come without moral conflict.
"I have concerns, as I think many other judges do," Judge Wade said. "And the
question in their own minds is whether they can continue to be fair and
impartial and impose the penalty of death even if their inner feelings suggest
otherwise."
The history of capital punishment in Tennessee dates back to 1796. The 1st
method of execution: by hanging. It wasn't until the 1900s when electrocution
became the law of the land for death penalty cases in Tennessee.
In 1986, convicted killer and child rapist Billy Ray Irick was ordered to be
put to death by this method, but it was during a period when death penalty was
not administered in the state.
"At that time, there were unusual delays in the middle district of Tennessee
and for whatever reason, many believe that the federal judge at that time
closest to Riverbend was opposed to the death penalty," Wade said.
Tennessee resumed capital punishment in 2000, and by then, lethal injection was
the new method of execution. It continues to be used today despite moral
challenges.
"It's always been upheld and more recently, the opinions suggest that a little
pain whether it's lethal injection or electrocution is not a basis in which to
find the penalty is cruel and unusual," Wade said.
The most recent state-ordered date with death was in 2009.
"In my view, the reason for the delay has been nothing more than the lack of
availability of the drug and that's become an increasing problem for states
that maintain the death penalty," Wade said.
And now, if all goes as planned, Billy Ray Irick will be the 1st person in
Tennessee to die by death penalty in nearly a decade, bringing justice to a
high profile case after 32 years.
"It sends the message of accountability," Wade said, "that should a jury return
a sentence of death, that it is likely to happen."
Irick is scheduled to be put to death Aug. 9 in Nashville at 8 p.m. Eastern
time.
(source; WATE news)
**********************************
First conservative TN Supreme Court in decades changed rule, paving way for
Irick execution
A Tennessee Supreme Court with a conservative-leaning majority for the 1st time
in decades took direct aim at death penalty opponents in its refusal to block
convicted killer Billy Ray Irick's scheduled execution.
The high court earlier this week turned aside Irick???s last-minute bid to
avoid death in the 1985 rape and murder of 7-year-old Paula Dyer in Knox County
via a challenge of the state Department of Correction lethal injection protocol
'Convincing drug companies'
In a footnote in a decision by a majority of Republican appointees, the high
court blamed "anti-death-penalty advocates" for robbing TDOC of sources of
supply for lethal injection drugs and creating legal battles as a result.
"It bears noting at this point that TDOC's revisions of its lethal injection
protocol since 2010 have been necessitated by the success anti-death-penalty
advocates have had in convincing drug companies not to provide certain drugs
for use in executions," the panel's majority opinion stated.
Stacy Rector, executive director of the Tennesseans Against the Death Penalty
advocacy group, said death penalty opponents she works with don't lobby drug
makers or suppliers.
"We don't do that," she said.
Instead, Rector said, they lobby voters and policymakers.
"Our focus is education," she said. "We think the whole policy is broken and
dysfunctional, and not working in Tennessee. Regardless of the method of
execution, we are working to end the death penalty as a policy, period."
Ideological shift
The make-up of the state Supreme Court changed in 2015 when Democratic
appointee Gary Wade stepped down as justice. That was the same year the high
court enacted a rule that the now conservative-leaning majority is using to bar
Irick from a reprieve.
The panel changed the rule without inviting public comment by approaching it as
an amendment. The change created a legal barrier for last-minute reprieves for
the condemned for matters that have nothing to do with whether they are guilty
or should be executed for their crime.
The condemned now must prove they can win an appeal of their "collateral" legal
argument using a "likelihood of success" standard, which mirrors current U.S.
Supreme Court case law and streamlines the appellate process for the condemned
in Tennessee.
"The present case is the first case presented to this Court governed by the
amended version of (the rule)," the majority wrote in its denial of the stay.
"Consequently, to obtain a stay at this time, Mr. Irick must establish a
likelihood of success, and he has failed to satisfy this standard."
Justice Sharon Lee was the lone dissenter in denying Irick, 59, a stay. She and
Justice Cornelia A. Clark are the sole Democratic appointees on the 5-judge
high court panel.
She conceded she was on the panel that approved the rule change. But she
accused the majority of a "rush to execution" and pushed for a brief delay - to
allow Irick to live long enough for a full appellate review of the lethal
injection drug protocol he and 32 other condemned inmates are challenging as
too painful to pass constitutional muster.
The majority pushed back.
"In fact, this suggestion is astonishing, actually, given that Mr. Irick was
convicted and sentenced 32 years ago and has obtained multiple stays over the
years," the majority wrote.
The majority opinion does not bear the name of the author and is supposed to
reflect the collective opinion of the 4 justices in the majority - Chief
Justice Jeffry S. Bivins and Justices Holly Kirby, Roger Page and Clark.
More powers, less precedent
The majority - with Lee often the sole dissenter - has been tilting in its
decisions and rulemaking toward drawing Tennessee law into line with U.S.
Supreme Court decisions and standards - even when the state's Constitution has
been interpreted by liberal-leaning Tennessee Supreme Court panels as providing
greater protections for the accused than its federal counterpart.
In the past 2 years, the high court has approved the limited use of a federal
exception for law enforcers who make mistakes in drafting or executing search
warrants, overturning the court's own decades-long precedent that afforded no
such break.
The court has broadened law enforcers' authority to carry out warrantless
searches and - as shown in Irick's case - raised the hurdle for the condemned
trying to outrun execution.
Veteran defense attorney Stephen Ross Johnson has watched high courts tilt - in
Tennessee and across the country - in recent years toward what he called a
reverse federalism.
"The modern trend is for state courts to adopt federal constitutional standards
in interpreting state constitutions and other legal standards," he said. "In
relatively recent times, Tennessee has followed suit."
Swinging pendulum?
Johnson said when the U.S. Supreme Court decades ago began tilting in its
rulings toward broader police powers and fewer protections for accused, state
supreme courts and state legislatures across the country beefed up protections
in their own laws.
"The pendulum has now swung the other way in Tennessee and elsewhere," he said
Wednesday. '... in an effort to have uniformity of law, many state courts are
reversing decades of their precedent and tacking to federal decisions.
"In my opinion, this trend is not a positive one, since it concentrates too
much power in too few decision makers - namely nine judges in Washington, DC -
and further removes the states from the individual laboratories of democracy
they were intended to be by our nation's founders," he said.
Irick is now under death watch. He is scheduled to be executed Thursday evening
in Nashville.
(source: Knoxville News Sentinel)
**************************************************
Death Penalty In Tennessee - The Cost To Us And A Solution
I am going to wade off into the deep waters of public discourse for the 1st
time. Favor me with a few moments.
Billy Ray Irrick is scheduled to die by the hand of the Tennessee state
government Thursday night August 9, 2018. There is much debate regarding this
case on a state and national level as well as others waiting in the wings for
the same fate.
For those of you who are unfamiliar with this case there is more information on
the 11alive website. Please, only read this if you have a strong stomach. I
studied it last night. I wish I hadn't, I did not sleep well.
In reading the information, if you are so inclined, you will see enough blame
to go around, poor decisions by the family of the child, less than stellar
living conditions, human suffering and yes, a tragic end to the life of a very
young girl. Ultimately though, Mr. Irrick is responsible as has been determined
repeatedly.
For over 30 years he has dodged the reaper, now his time is 'nigh. And still
there are those who fight for this person. The legal arguments in his defense
have ran the gamut from 'mental incompetence', poor upbringing, drug, and
alcohol addiction and finally in the world we live in today, the fear he will
suffer due to an ineffective mixture of drugs to be administered to him.
While I understand the Constitution and the prohibition of 'cruel and unusual
punishment' rule I do not understand the misplaced compassion for this person.
Yes, he is a human, Yes, he deserves careful debate in the court of law as to
his fate. But he has had all of that. And then some.
I'll not go into the old 'eye for an eye' chestnut, just too Old Testament for
me. What I will say is this: he has had more than his share of 'days in court',
he has been found and verified guilty time and again. His time has run out. Now
he must pay.
Be that right or wrong is irrelevant to my opinion here, what matters to me,
and should to you, whichever side you take is this simple thing. The relevance
of the debate over the drugs used to kill him. We are not talking about a short
rope and a tall tree here, but a lethal dose of drugs, some may say 'cobbled
together at the whim of a power that is'. That is fair enough. Suffering at the
end, whether you say, 'too bad' or 'oh no', matters not. Quite simply it
doesn't have to be. And I'll tell you why.
There is a much simpler solution, readily available to us in bulk. It is so
simple in fact I'm surprised others who are much smarter than me haven't
thought of it. It is staring us in the face.
Fentanyl.
Each year the state of Tennessee spends several millions of dollars combating
this drug, every year people die from it, each month it is seized in quantity,
not only in this state but others. It is everywhere. Each year some tens of
thousands of people die nationwide from it. It is deadly, it has a proven track
record.
It works.
So, put it to use.
Instead of the last-minute arguments over this drug mixture or that. Just
choose the obvious substance that has been proven beyond a doubt to absolutely,
without fail, work every time. It's just that easy. There has been an abundance
of it seized. It will be burned or disposed of somehow, so use it.
We are spending money hand over fist on interdiction, seizure, prosecution, and
Narcan. It's time we finally found a way to save money on both execution drugs
and lawsuits. I can't see anyone saying, 'It may not be effective!'. It is.
It's time.
Stop wasting money and use the best tool available.
Russ Donegan
(source: Opinion, The Chattanoogan)
NEBRASKA----impending execution
Drugmaker seeks to block Nebraska from using execution drugs
A German pharmaceutical company has filed a lawsuit to prevent Nebraska from
using lethal injection drugs next week in what would be the state's 1st
execution in more than 2 decades.
The federal lawsuit filed late Tuesday could delay the Aug. 14 execution of
Carey Dean Moore, who was sentenced to death for killing 2 Omaha cab drivers in
1979. The company, Fresenius Kabi, opposes the use of its drugs in executions
and alleges that the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services' supply of
potassium chloride was made by the company.
Moore has stopped fighting the state's efforts to execute him , leaving death
penalty opponents with no real options other than to hope a drug manufacturer
challenged the state's use of its products. In Nevada, a judge indefinitely
postponed an execution last month after drugmaker Alvogen filed a similar
lawsuit over one of its products.
Nebraska state officials have refused to identify the source of their drugs,
but Fresenius Kabi alleges the state's supply of the drug is stored in 30
milliliter vials. Fresenius Kabi said it's the only company that supplies
potassium chloride in vials that size. The company said it may also have
manufactured the state's supply of cisatracurium, and that Nebraska's use of
its drugs would damage its reputation and business relationships.
"While Fresenius Kabi takes no position on capital punishment, Fresenius Kabi
opposes the use of its products for this purpose and therefore does not sell
certain drugs to correctional facilities," company attorneys wrote in the
lawsuit.
The company said it only sells those products to wholesalers and distributors
who sign a contract agreeing not to supply the drugs to correctional
departments.
"These drugs, if manufactured by Fresenius Kabi, could only have been obtained
by (the corrections department) in contradiction and contravention of the
distribution contracts the company has in place and therefore through improper
or illegal means," the company said in the lawsuit.
In a statement, a spokeswoman for Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson said
the lethal injection drugs were purchased lawfully "and pursuant to the state
of Nebraska's duty to carry out lawful capital sentences."
A spokeswoman for the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services did not
immediately respond to a request for comment.
Nebraska has never carried out an execution by lethal injection, and the state
plans to use an untried combination of four drugs during Moore's scheduled
execution. The state's last execution, in 1997, used the electric chair, which
the Nebraska Supreme Court later declared unconstitutional.
Nebraska's current execution protocol calls for 4 drugs: the sedative diazepam,
commonly known as Valium, to render the inmate unconscious; fentanyl citrate, a
powerful synthetic opioid; cisatracurium besylate, which induces paralysis and
halts the inmate's breathing; and potassium chloride to stop the heart.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska, a leading death penalty
opponent, praised the company's intervention and chastised the state for
refusing to release documents identifying the supplier. State officials have
done so in the past without objection.
"While more states are turning away from the death penalty, Nebraska officials
are rushing to carry out an execution cloaked in secrecy with an untested
4-drug scheme that carries immeasurable risks for unnecessary pain and a
botched execution," said Danielle Conrad, the group's executive director.
The lawsuit is not Nebraska's 1st run-in with Fresenius Kabi. Last year, a
company spokesman told The Associated Press that state officials had obtained a
batch of its potassium chloride in 2015 because one of its distributors made a
mistake.
A company spokesman said at the time that Fresenius Kabi discovered the sale
through an internal audit and requested that the Department of Correctional
Services return the drugs, but state officials never did. Those drugs expired
in January 2017.
(source: Associated Press)
***************
Ex-public defender: Nebraska death row inmate's sentencing may have been
unconstitutional
Former public defender Robert Dunham thinks the sentencing of Nebraska's
longest-serving death row inmate, Carey Dean Moore, may not have been legal.
Dunham, who is the executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center,
says Nebraska's death penalty system is not like those in some states - judges
rather than juries decide whether a defendant should be sentenced to die - and
that could raise grounds for a constitutional challenge.
"In Nebraska, the sentencing is done by a 3-judge panel and the United States
Supreme Court has ruled that a defendant in a death penalty case has a
constitutional right to have a jury determine the facts that make him eligible
for the death penalty, and that didn't happen in his case," Dunham told Hill.TV
co-hosts Krystal Ball and Buck Sexton on "Rising."
Dunham is referring to the 2002 case Ring v. Arizona.
In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Arizona's capital sentencing
procedure violated the Sixth Amendment's jury trial guarantee by entrusting a
judge to find the factors necessary for imposing the death penalty.
But since Moore has not authorized his lawyers to attack this particular aspect
of the state's system, Dunham said, "it's probable that he was unconditionally
sentenced to death."
Moore has tried to challenge his death row sentence on multiple occasions, and
also tried to escape death row by attempting to swap clothes with his
then-incarcerated twin brother.
But the 60-year-old inmate has since accepted his punishment and has made it
clear to his lawyers that he doesn't want to fight his scheduled execution on
August 14.
Moore was sentenced to death for the murder of two Omaha cab drivers in 1979.
If the state follows through, it would mark the state's f1st execution in more
than 2 decades.
Nebraska, like many states, has been struggling with the financial and moral
obligations of the death penalty for some time. The Nebraska Legislator
overrode Gov. Pete Ricketts???s (R) veto and repealed the death penalty in
2015. But it was reinstated a year later after Ricketts personally bankrolled a
referendum to bring it back.
(source: thehill.com)
*****************
Ricketts: State will move forward with execution
Gov. Pete Ricketts on Wednesday said he expects the state's Department of
Corrections will carry out the execution of Nebraska's longest serving death
row inmate on schedule next week.
"I'm not aware of anything that will delay the execution," Ricketts said
Wednesday after acknowledging a lawsuit filed Tuesday by a pharmaceutical
company seeking to prevent Nebraska from using its drugs as part of a lethal
injection.
"Our plan is to continue to move forward," Ricketts added.
Carey Dean Moore, sentenced to death for the 1979 slayings of Omaha cab drivers
Reuel Van Ness Jr. and Maynard Helgeland, would be the 1st Nebraska inmate to
be executed since 1997.
Last week, Pope Francis changed the Catholic Church's stance on capital
punishment, calling it "inadmissible because it is an attack on the
inviolability and dignity of the person."
Protesters gathered outside of St. Margaret Mary Parish in Omaha, where
Ricketts is a parishioner, on Sunday, 12 days before Moore's scheduled
execution date of Aug. 14.
Ricketts said he wasn't bothered by the protests or the communication appealing
to his faith, saying he swore an oath to uphold the constitution and laws of
the Nebraska.
He also said he doesn't have any control over the decisions made by the church
or its officials, but that his "conscience is that we need to have capital
punishment in this state."
"There's a number of people expressing their difference of opinion with regard
to this, but the people of Nebraska have been very clear," the governor said.
A statewide referendum in 2016, funded in part by $300,000 of the governor's
personal money, reinstated the death penalty in Nebraska a year after the
Legislature had abolished it over a veto from Ricketts.
The repeal of the death penalty was rejected by a 61 to 39 percent margin,
which Ricketts called "absolute proof" of the state's will to protect citizens,
law enforcement and corrections officers and even other inmates.
"The people of Nebraska spoke loud and clear that they wanted to retain capital
punishment as part of our overall state laws to protect public safety,"
Ricketts said. "Our job is to carry that out."
(source: Lincoln Journal Star)
*********************
Son of Carey Dean Moore victim speaks ahead of scheduled execution
Steve Helgeland was 13 years-old when he was pulled out of his junior high
classroom and told his father had been murdered.
His father, Maynard Helgeland, was 1 of the 2 taxi cab drivers murdered by
Carey Dean Moore in August of 1979.
Steve Helgeland remembers arriving in Omaha and learning the news.
"One thing I recall vividly is the gurney with my dad's body on the news as
they wheeled it away," Helgeland said.
Helgeland says his father, an Air Force veteran, struggled for years with
alcoholism and depression.
At one point, he lost both his feet to frostbite after drunkenly passing out in
his cab.
But Helgeland says his father was starting to turn his life around when he was
shot several times by Moore who allegedly was looking for drug money.
"It was just a straight up act of evil," Helgeland said.
Nearly 4 decades have passed since, along with seven scheduled executions for
Moore which have failed to materialize.
Those years have been frustrating for Helgeland and his family.
He says it's "ridiculous" that the state hasn't taken action in the case.
Moore faces execution once again on Tuesday, but Helgeland thinks the result
will be the same as it's always been.
"I just don't have any faith in the state of Nebraska for making it happen," he
said. "They haven't been able to do it in 38 years."
Helgeland says time hasn't healed the pain of his father's murder.
He says he's angry and that he just wants that horrific chapter of his life to
finally be over, whether that be by Moore's execution or a decision to keep him
imprisoned for life.
Helgeland will be in Lincoln the day of Moore's execution, but says he doesn't
want to watch it.
"I don't have any interest in watching another human being die," he said. "It
won't provide me with any... closure as people like to say."
(source: KLKN TV news)
************************************
German drug maker claims US state illegally obtained its product for execution
German drug maker Fresenius Kabi is suing to halt a planned execution in
Nebraska, claiming the US state illegally obtained the company's drugs to use
for the lethal injection procedure.
Fresenius Kabi filed the lawsuit Tuesday evening, saying the state was planning
to use two of its drugs on August 14th to put to death convicted killer Carey
Dean Moore.
Moore is sentenced to death for the 1979 murder of 2 taxi drivers. He is not
contesting his execution order, but it could nevertheless be delayed by the
lawsuit.
If carried out, the execution would be Nebraska's 1st in 21 years and its 1st
ever lethal injection.
The state plans to use 4 drugs - the sedative Diazepam, the powerful narcotic
painkiller fentanyl citrate, the muscle relaxer cisatracurium and potassium
chloride, which stops the heart.
Fresenius Kabi believes it is the source of the latter 2 drugs and is asking a
federal judge to issue an order either temporarily or permanently blocking the
state from using the injectable medications.
"While Fresenius Kabi takes no position on capital punishment, Fresenius Kabi
opposes the use of its products for this purpose and therefore does not sell
certain drugs to correctional facilities," the company said in its civil
complaint.
"These drugs, if manufactured by Fresenius Kabi, could only have been obtained
by defendants in contradiction and contravention of the distribution contracts
the company has in place and therefore through improper or illegal means."
The drug maker claims that with state executions regarded negatively among the
majority of the European public, it could suffer "great reputational injury,"
if its drugs are used for capital punishment.
The state of Nebraska has released limited information about the drugs and has
not disclosed their source -- reflecting a general dilemma for US states that
continue to carry out the death penalty via lethal injection.
Injectable drugs have become harder to acquire amid public opposition and a
reluctance -- or outright hostility - among drug manufacturers to sell their
products to prisons for use in executions.
"Nebraska's lethal injection drugs were purchased lawfully and pursuant to the
State of Nebraska's duty to carry out lawful capital sentences," the state
attorney general's office said in a curt statement.
Last month, a similar lawsuit by drug maker Alvogen at least temporarily halted
an execution in Nevada.
(source: thelocal.de)
SOUTH DAKOTA----new execution date
Rodney Berget to be executed this fall for killing prison guard R.J. Johnson
Rodney Berget, 1 of 2 men convicted of murdering a South Dakota State
Penitentiary guard in 2011, is scheduled to be put to death this fall.
Attorney General Marty Jackley said Berget is slated to face execution by
lethal injection during the week of Oct. 28-Nov. 3, 2018. The exact date and
time will be announced by the penitentiary warden 48 hours before the
execution.
Berget, 55, pleaded guilty in 2012 to killing Ronald "R.J." Johnson in a failed
prison escape attempt in 2011 with fellow inmate Eric Robert. Berget was
scheduled to face execution in 2015, but his execution was stayed.
Robert was executed in 2012.
A 3rd inmate, Michael Nordman, was sentenced to life in prison for providing
plastic wrap and a pipe used to kill Johnson.
Berget's mental status and eligibility for capital punishment have played a
central role in delaying the court process. Berget in August 2016 appealed his
death penalty sentence, but in September 2016 asked to withdraw his appeal.
"I want this to be the last day I appear in court," Berget said in court in
September 2016.
Berget's attorney, Eric Schulte, disagreed with his client's decision to drop
the appeal. Schulte told the court he wanted to review Berget's functionality
and mental capacity to see if he was eligible for the death penalty.
Berget in 2017 sent a letter to the court saying he wants his death sentence to
be carried out because he was worried the death penalty will be repealed in
South Dakota, and he didn't want to spend the rest of his life "in a cage."
A judge ruled in February that Berget does not have an intellectual disability
and is eligible for his original death penalty sentence.
Delays are still a possibility in the case: issues or questions could be filed
- either from Berget's attorneys or questions from the Governor's Office, state
or federal judges - between now and October.
Jackley said he is confident in the timing of the warrant of execution. There
are no pending actions in the case, and the conviction and sentence have been
deemed appropriate by the trial judge, state Supreme Court and habeas court.
Jackley, who also prosecuted Robert's case and witnessed Robert's execution,
has been in communication with Johnson's family throughout the process and
consulted with them before issuing the warrant of execution.
"I've seen firsthand the struggles and challenges RJ Johnson's family - wife,
children and grandchildren - have gone through," Jackley said Wednesday. "It's
important to continue to move this case forward to help bring some level of
closure for RJ Johnson's family."
At a February hearing in Minnehaha County, Lynette Johnson, RJ Johnson's widow,
shared the anguish over her family's ordeal.
"It has been an emotional, torturous roller coaster," she said at the hearing.
"We just try to get through it the best that we know how."
(source: Sioux Falls Argus Leader)
************************
South Dakota sets execution for man in prison guard's death
A man who pleaded guilty to the 2011 killing of a South Dakota prison guard is
set to be executed in the fall, the state's attorney general said Wednesday.
Attorney General Marty Jackley said in a statement that Rodney Berget, 56, is
scheduled to be executed between Oct. 28 and Nov. 3. Jackley's office said the
warden of the state penitentiary will choose the specific time and date, which
will be announced within 48 hours of the execution.
Circuit Court Judge Bradley Zell issued a warrant of execution for Berget, who
would be the 1st person put to death in South Dakota in roughly 6 years.
"We will be ready to carry out the order of the court," Department of
Corrections Secretary Denny Kaemingk said in a statement.
Berget pleaded guilty in April 2012 to killing Ronald "R.J." Johnson in a
failed prison escape attempt in April 2011 along with fellow inmate Eric
Robert, who was executed in 2012.
An attorney for Berget wasn't immediately available to comment to The
Associated Press. Berget's mental status and death penalty eligibility have
played a key role in court delays.
Berget in 2016 appealed his death sentence, but later asked to withdraw the
appeal against the advice of his lawyers, the Argus Leader reported .
"I want this to be the last day I appear in court," Berget said at a September
2016 hearing.
The last execution in South Dakota was the lethal injection of Donald Moeller
on Oct. 30, 2012, for the killing of Becky O'Connell.
State Department of Corrections policy says lethal injections involve 1 to 3
drugs, depending on drug availability and the date of the prisoner's
conviction. State law makes a drug supplier confidential.
(source: Associated Press)
UTAH:
Funds authorized for defense of Ogden couple in death penalty case
Weber County commissioners have agreed to continue covering the cost of public
defenders for 2 Ogden parents charged with murdering their toddler in a
potential death penalty case.
The county's 3-member commission unanimously approved new contracts for the
attorneys at its Tuesday meeting, but not without some reluctance.
"This is frustrating," said Commissioner Jim Harvey. "People in the community
make horrible decisions each county taxpayer, their property tax, has to pay
for, because of state code. That bothers me."
A judge early in the case decided Brenda Emile, 23, and Miller Costello, 26,
could not afford to hire lawyers and appointed them public defenders. State law
requires the county to foot the bill.
But Weber's existing contracts with defense attorneys do not cover death
penalty cases, because of the vast amounts of time and work they can take, so a
new deal was needed, deputy Weber County attorney Bryan Baron told the board.
The contracts provided by the county show a lead attorney for each parent will
receive $170 per hour, and a second attorney will make $140 an hour. Attorney
fees for each defendant are capped at $100,000, or $70,000 if prosecutors
decide before a trial to no longer pursue a death penalty.
Baron said the total cost of the case is a "shot in the dark." But he reviewed
the cost of defense in nine other capital cases in Utah and found they cost an
average of $220,000 apiece, he said.
Weber County officials previously decided not to contribute to a statewide
defense fund that helps local government covers such costs because of the price
tag, Baron said Tuesday, but he didn't know the exact fee.
The new contracts will help inform the commission's decision when it next
considers whether to buy into a state indigent defense fund, but no immediate
decision has been made, Harvey said Wednesday.
Prosecutors have said they would seek the death penalty if the couple accused
of beating, burning and not feeding their daughter Angelina is convicted of a
charge of aggravated murder, a 1st-degree felony. The pair has pleaded not
guilty and is due back in court in Ogden Aug. 13.
(source: Deseret News)
NEVADA:
Nevada death-row inmate: 'Just get it done'
A Nevada death-row inmate whose execution has been postponed twice said a legal
fight over his fate is taking a tortuous toll on him and his family and he just
wants his sentence carried out.
The state should "just get it done, just do it effectively and stop fighting
about it," Scott Raymond Dozier told The Associated Press.
"I want to be really clear about this. This is my wish," Dozier said in a brief
telephone call from Ely State Prison. "They should stop punishing me and my
family for their inability to carry out the execution."
Dozier's comments Wednesday came a month after a judge in Las Vegas postponed
his execution at nearly the final hour.
Nevada law calls for capital punishment by lethal injection. But pharmaceutical
companies nationwide have objected to their medicines being used in executions.
On Thursday, a 3rd drug company is due to ask Clark County District Court Judge
Elizabeth Gonzalez to let it join with 2 other firms suing to block the use of
their products for a 3-drug lethal injection.
State Attorney General Adam Laxalt's office is expected to ask Clark County
District Court Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez on Thursday to reject the Sandoz Inc.
bid to join case.
State Deputy Solicitor General Jordan T. Smith has argued that the maker of a
muscle paralytic agent that officials plan to use as the 3rd drug didn't object
before Dozier's execution was postponed in November and is now jumping on a
public relations wave with drugmakers Alvogen and Hikma Pharmaceuticals.
Gonzalez last week allowed Hikma, a maker of the powerful opioid fentanyl, to
join Alvogen, producer of the sedative midazolam, in a lawsuit on a speedy
track toward a Sept. 10 hearing.
The companies say they publicly declared they didn't want their products used
in executions and allege that Nevada improperly obtained their drugs.
Nevada, which hasn't executed an inmate since 2006, has become a model of the
trouble that death penalty states have had in recent years obtaining drugs for
lethal injections.
Prison officials want to reschedule Dozier's execution for mid-November, and
are asking the Nevada Supreme Court to quickly consider and overturn Gonzalez's
temporary order not to use midazolam.
15 states are siding with Nevada before the state Supreme Court in a battle
pitting prominent pharmaceutical firms against more than 1/2 the 31 states in
the U.S. with the death penalty.
Dozier, 47, called the fight over his fate a legal "maelstrom."
He said he wants to go through with his lethal injection and he really doesn't
care if he feels pain. Critics have said he's seeking state-assisted suicide.
"I don't even really want to die," Dozier said, "but I'd rather die than spend
my life in prison."
The inmate said he was not contesting his convictions and sentences. But he
also denied committing the 2002 drug-related murders in Phoenix and Las Vegas
for which he was convicted and sentenced in 2007 to death.
"For the record, I'm asserting my innocence," Dozier said. But, "I'm not going
to be the guy in prison who is going to complain, 'This is an injustice.'
That's over. I had my chance."
(source: ajc.com)
USA:
Allowing death penalty is Catholic doctrine and cannot be overturned: 2
Catholic profs
2 U.S. Catholic professors who authored what many consider to be a rigorous
defense of Catholic teaching on capital punishment say that Pope Francis' new
teaching on the subject appears to be "contradicting scripture, tradition, and
all previous popes." And, he may be "committing a doctrinal error."
It's been a busy week for Edward Feser and Joseph Bessette, joint authors of By
Man Shall His Blood Be Shed: A Catholic Defense of Capital Punishment.
Published by Ignatius Press in May 2017, the work is a comprehensive guide to
the teaching of the Catholic Church on the death penalty. Thanks to Pope
Francis' surprise alteration to the Catechism of the Catholic Church last week,
both men are now in the spotlight.
Feser, an assistant professor of philosophy at Pasadena City College, told
LifeSiteNews that the new teaching, "like many of Pope Francis's doctrinal
statements, is obscure."
"On the one hand, the CDF letter announcing the change asserts that the new
teaching 'is not in contradiction' with previous teaching. On the other hand,
the pope is saying that the death penalty should never be used -- which goes
beyond John Paul II's teaching that it should be 'very rare' -- and Francis
justifies this claim on doctrinal grounds, rather than the prudential grounds
that John Paul appealed to," he said.
"Moreover, Pope Francis claims that the use of capital punishment conflicts
with 'the inviolability and dignity of the person,' which makes it sound like
it is intrinsically contrary to natural law. So, the actual substance of the
teaching seems to be that capital punishment is intrinsically wrong. If that is
what the pope is saying, then he is contradicting scripture, tradition, and all
previous popes, and is therefore committing a doctrinal error, which is
possible when popes do not speak ex-cathedra [from the chair]," he added.
To believe that the Church can contradict its doctrines, whether concerning
artificial contraception or capital punishment or other moral teachings, is
"not compatible with what the Church says about herself."
'We are defending the integrity of the Church'
Feser said that when their book came out, he and Joseph Bessette received a
torrent of personal attacks, criticism he calls "childish nonsense."
"We are defending the integrity of the Church," he said.
Feser pointed out that many defenders of the Church's perennial doctrine, like
the late Cardinal Avery Dulles and Cardinal Charles J. Chaput, are themselves
personally opposed to the death penalty. Nevertheless, they do not deny the
teaching.
"I't's so odd that so many people want to make it personal," the philosopher
said. "Just look at the arguments."
Feser sees Pope Francis's change to the catechism as highly problematic.
"As in other instances in the past 5 years, ambiguity is a factor," he said.
"But I think it is worse than that."
He notes that Cardinal Ladaria presented an introductory letter stating that
Francis's change is "not in contradiction with the prior teachings of the
Magisterium' but not explaining how it isn't a rupture. And if it is true that
capital punishment is inadmissible because it is "an attack on dignity", then
it follows, Feser said, that the Law of Moses was "an attack on dignity" and
that Pope John Paul II's assertion that capital punishment was legitimate in
rare circumstances was an "attack on dignity."
In Pope Francis's defense, the philosopher said that it was possible that the
pontiff was just not interested in doctrine. Feser was unsure this was a
defense, however, as "safeguard of doctrine is the pope's job." However, given
remarks Pope Francis made last October, when he said that capital punishment
was "per se contrary to the Gospel", the change to the catechism is "less bad
than what it looked like we were getting", Feser believes, as this earlier
formulation made it sound as if capital punishment were "intrinsically evil."
In terms of a truly authentic development on Church doctrine on capital
punishment, Feser argues Pope John Paul II took it as far as he could take it,
and moreover that he didn't take it as far as people think. Although many
people believe JP2 restricted it to only to prevent the direct endangerment of
the innocent, "if you actually read [Evangelium Vitae], it's not really there,"
the philosopher said. The perennial doctrine of the Church is that capital
punishment is legitimate also as a deterrent and as retributive justice.
"The only thing that can be done is recommending against [the death penalty] in
practice," Feser said. The principle, however, must remain.
He underscored that these are not just his "assertions."
"We analyse this in painstaking fashion in our book," Feser said and voiced
some frustration with how little his and Bessette's critics are willing to
engage with their arguments. They are not only unable to grasp the evidence,
not only that the Church has never decreed that capital punishment is
intrinsically evil, but that many social scientists do believe it has a
deterrent value. Feser said that it was "rash" and "irresponsible" for
Churchmen with no sociological expertise to "throw out bromides" about human
dignity. If the death penalty is a deterrent, then those who wish to abolish it
are "risking the lives of the innocent."
'Pro-life' is not a 'magic theological bullet'
Impatient of sentimentality and anti-intellectualism, Feser is similarly
dismissive of those who say that people who are against abortion but support
the death penalty aren't really pro-life.
"'Pro-life' is a modern American political slogan," Feser declared. "It has no
philosophical or theological content at all."
The word is not a "magic theological bullet," he stressed. He pointed out that
one could just as easily tell someone that they aren't "pro-freedom" because
they support the incarceration of people guilty of crimes. Scripture is very
clear that one can lose the right to life through murder; there is a difference
between protecting the right to life of the innocent and that of the guilty,
just as there is a difference between unjustly depriving the innocent of their
freedom and justly locking up the guilty in prison.
Feser was raised a Catholic, but his philosophical studies gradually led to
atheism. However, the history of philosophy, ancient and medieval, brought him
back to the faith.
The philosopher's interest in the death penalty was prompted by Pope John Paul
II. Feser had supported the use of capital punishment, both as an atheist and
as a Catholic, but he noticed that John Paul II's personal opposition was
changing people's perceptions of what the Church actually taught.
"I saw people being pushed to an extreme [abolitionist] position," Feser said.
He was troubled by what he saw as "an attack on the rationality and
consistency" of the Catholic Church, when it was that very rationality and
consistency that he admired. He had previously been looking for "wiggle-room"
on the teaching against artificial contraception, but had been impressed that
Paul VI had affirmed the teaching "when the whole world was against him."
"I was impressed by the sheer intransigence," he chuckled.
Feser's co-author Joseph Bessette, a professor of government and ethics at
Claremont McKenna College in California, told LifeSiteNews via email that he
first became interested in capital punishment while growing up in
Massachusetts, where it was a "hotly debated topic" in the 1950s and 1960s.
"Later, in the early 1980s I worked in the prosecutor's office in Chicago.
That's where I first learned from prosecutors of the gruesome details of the
relatively few murders that resulted in a death sentence," Bessette recalled.
When he began to teach a course on "Crime and Public Policy" in the early
1990s, Bessette devoted three weeks to the death penalty, but didn't pay close
attention to Church doctrines on the topic, as he knew the Church had "always
taught that the death penalty could be a legitimate punishment for heinous
crimes if necessary to secure public safety."
But a student's remark inspired him to take another look.
"One day a student in my course said, 'Well, I am a Catholic. So I am against
the death penalty.' I affirmed the Church's traditional teaching and then
sought to learn more about the Pope John Paul II's encyclical Evangelium Vitae
(1995) and the revision in the language in the Catechism between 1992 and
1997."
'The simple fact is that the death penalty saves lives'
Bessette believes that in revising the Catechism to state the death penalty is
"inadmissible", Pope Francis has attempted to "overturned" 2 millennia of
Church teaching.
"Moreover, by strongly implying that Catholics must support the abolition of
the death penalty, he has allied the Church with a public policy that would
undermine just punishment and cost the lives of innocent human beings," he
asserted. "The simple fact is that the death penalty saves lives."
Bessette says that he and Feser present a "large body of evidence" in their
book to support this conclusion.
"Unfortunately, Pope Francis and many Catholic clerics simply presume that
public safety would not be jeopardized if capital punishment were abolished,"
he continued.
He said he did not expect Catholic priests "no matter what their rank" to be
experts in criminal justice, and that unless a public policy is intrinsically
evil, it is up to citizens and government "to decide how best to promote the
common good."
"This is what the Church has always taught," Bessette stressed. "By falsely
claiming that the principles of Catholicism call for rejecting the death
penalty in all circumstances, the pope undermines the authority of the
Magisterium, preempts the proper authority of public officials, and jeopardizes
public safety and the common good."
In defense of those who seek to protect the unborn while supporting capital
punishment, Bessette said there was no contradiction.
"There is absolutely no inconsistency between being pro-life and pro-death
penalty," he said. "The Church has always taught that it is never licit to take
an innocent human life."
Bessette cited John Paul II, saying the pope affirmed this principle
unambiguously in Evangelium Vitae.
The late pontiff wrote: "[T]he commandment 'You shall not kill' has absolute
value when it refers to the innocent person. . . . [T]he absolute inviolability
of innocent human life is a moral truth clearly taught by Sacred Scripture,
constantly upheld in the Church's Tradition and consistently proposed by her
Magisterium... Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter
and his Successors, and in communion with the Bishops of the Catholic Church, I
confirm that the direct and voluntary killing of an innocent human being is
always gravely immoral (EV 57)"
"Similarly," Bessette added, "the current Catechism says, 'The inalienable
right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a
civil society and its legislation' ([CCCC] 2273)."
"Killing in self-defense or killing a vicious murderer has absolutely no
relationship to this prohibition of intentionally killing the innocent, and the
Church has always understood and taught this."
(source: lifesitenews.com)
_______________________________________________
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
LOUISIANA:
Man sentenced to death for 1995 slaying of Metairie cab driver to get new trial
The stage is set for a man who was sentenced to death for the 1995 slaying of a
cab driver in Metairie to receive a new trial later this year.
Teddy Chester did not have adequate legal representation when he was convicted
for the killing, so he needed to be either retried or set free by Oct. 9, a
federal judge in New Orleans ruled on June 11.
Jefferson Parish District Attorney Paul Connick's office had until Friday to
appeal U.S. District Judge Susie Morgan's decision. But the office indicated
Wednesday that it will not exercise that option, according to both the agency
and Chester's attorney, Cecelia Kappel.
Kappel said her client is due at Gretna's 24th Judicial District Court on
Thursday for a preliminary hearing ahead of the new trial. She maintains
Chester's innocence, reiterating that convicted co-defendant Elbert Ratcliff
was the killer. Ratcliff is serving a life sentence without the possibility of
parole after exhausting his appeals.
"It's our position justice has been served and that this case should be
closed," said Kappel, with the Promise of Justice Initiative.
Connick's office declined to elaborate on how it may move forward with
Chester's case.
Chester, who lived in Kenner, was found guilty in 1997 of 1st-degree murder and
sent to death row for the killing of 34-year-old John Adams 2 days after
Christmas in 1995, when Chester was 18.
Authorities found Adams in his taxi on Calhoun Street in Metairie. He had been
shot once in the back of the head. His business cards were scattered around
him, and he had $300 in his pockets.
Fingerprints on the business cards led authorities to Ratcliff, who had fled
with Chester. Ratcliff was later convicted of 2nd-degree murder and sentenced
to life.
In turn, Ratcliff led investigators to Chester, with each of the men claiming
they had climbed into Adams' cab to try to sell him something when the other
man killed the victim to rob him.
Chester, now 40, pursued an appeal in Louisiana's state court system
reluctantly. He repeatedly expressed a desire to end his appellate efforts and
face execution before the state Supreme Court upheld his conviction in late
2016.
In extraordinary remarks, Supreme Court Justice Scott Crichton wrote that if it
were solely up to him, he would have granted Chester his wish.
But, with help from Kappel's team, Chester soon filed for what is known as
post-conviction relief in the federal court system, which sent the case to
Morgan.
According to Morgan's ruling, Chester's team of court-appointed attorneys
deprived him of his constitutional right to effective legal representation by
missing key opportunities during the trial to undermine the prosecution's
theory that Chester fired the gun that killed Adams.
A man named Anthony Curtis said he was driving down the street when he heard
Adams' shooting and saw Ratcliff emerge from the cab. Ratcliff, who had just
rummaged through the cab, tucked a gun in his waistband, Curtis said in filings
presented to Morgan.
But the defense team led by attorneys Graham da Ponte and Cesar Vazquez did not
call Curtis to testify about what he saw, which would likely have been
favorable to Chester's defense, Morgan said.
Furthermore, the defense didn't call a blood spatter expert to challenge the
state's theory that 2 drops of blood on Chester's cap proved he was the
shooter. A blood spatter expert consulted during the appellate process
testified that the blood on the cap actually supported Chester's claim that he
was a bystander and not the triggerman, Morgan noted.
The defense team also didn't challenge the prosecution's assertion that it had
used a DNA test to establish that the blood on the cap belonged to Adams. In
fact, the test showed it was possible but "highly unlikely" that Adams was the
source of the blood drops.
The defense team didn't call any witnesses during the trial. It called 1
witness during the sentencing phase: Darren Chester, whose testimony
essentially was that his brother Teddy didn't say anything to him about a
killing.
Da Ponte on Wednesday said she was pleased to learn Chester would get a new
trial. Vazquez couldn't be reached Wednesday.
The team that prosecuted Chester was led by Ronald Bodenheimer, who went on to
become a Jefferson Parish judge and later to serve time in federal prison
following a corruption scandal at the Gretna courthouse.
Bodenheimer on Wednesday said Vazquez and da Ponte were good attorneys and that
his devout Catholic faith made pursuing the death penalty against Chester a
difficult task.
"My whole career, I never sought the death penalty without talking to a priest
first," Bodenheimer said.
Former Judge Martha Sassone presided over Chester's trial.
(source: The Advocate)
TENNESSEE----impending execution
Death watch inmate gets new attorneys for appeal to federal courts, days before
execution date
Death watch inmate Billy Ray Irick is asking the U.S. Supreme court to delay
his execution and review the evidence in his murder conviction.
A new team of attorneys is claiming that Irick was severely mentally ill at the
time of his offense. They argue that executing a mentally ill person is cruel
and unusual punishment and violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the
U.S. Constitution.
Federal public defender Kelley J. Henry from Nashville is now representing
Irick before the U. S. Supreme Court.
Irick's motion for a new attorney to argue his case in federal court was
approved earlier Tuesday by a federal judge from the U.S. District Court of
Middle Tennessee.
Unless the Supreme Court intervenes to delay his execution, Irick is scheduled
to die at Riverbend Maximum Security Prison on Thursday at 7 p.m.
(source: WKRN news)
***********************************
Former Tennessee Supreme Court justice shares history of death penalty
Former Tennessee Supreme Court Justice Gary Wade says the decision to put
someone to death is not an easy one. The state carried out 4 executions during
his time in office. "I remember all 4 vividly," he said.
But upholding a death sentence does not come without moral conflict.
"I have concerns, as I think many other judges do," Judge Wade said. "And the
question in their own minds is whether they can continue to be fair and
impartial and impose the penalty of death even if their inner feelings suggest
otherwise."
The history of capital punishment in Tennessee dates back to 1796. The 1st
method of execution: by hanging. It wasn't until the 1900s when electrocution
became the law of the land for death penalty cases in Tennessee.
In 1986, convicted killer and child rapist Billy Ray Irick was ordered to be
put to death by this method, but it was during a period when death penalty was
not administered in the state.
"At that time, there were unusual delays in the middle district of Tennessee
and for whatever reason, many believe that the federal judge at that time
closest to Riverbend was opposed to the death penalty," Wade said.
Tennessee resumed capital punishment in 2000, and by then, lethal injection was
the new method of execution. It continues to be used today despite moral
challenges.
"It's always been upheld and more recently, the opinions suggest that a little
pain whether it's lethal injection or electrocution is not a basis in which to
find the penalty is cruel and unusual," Wade said.
The most recent state-ordered date with death was in 2009.
"In my view, the reason for the delay has been nothing more than the lack of
availability of the drug and that's become an increasing problem for states
that maintain the death penalty," Wade said.
And now, if all goes as planned, Billy Ray Irick will be the 1st person in
Tennessee to die by death penalty in nearly a decade, bringing justice to a
high profile case after 32 years.
"It sends the message of accountability," Wade said, "that should a jury return
a sentence of death, that it is likely to happen."
Irick is scheduled to be put to death Aug. 9 in Nashville at 8 p.m. Eastern
time.
(source; WATE news)
**********************************
First conservative TN Supreme Court in decades changed rule, paving way for
Irick execution
A Tennessee Supreme Court with a conservative-leaning majority for the 1st time
in decades took direct aim at death penalty opponents in its refusal to block
convicted killer Billy Ray Irick's scheduled execution.
The high court earlier this week turned aside Irick???s last-minute bid to
avoid death in the 1985 rape and murder of 7-year-old Paula Dyer in Knox County
via a challenge of the state Department of Correction lethal injection protocol
'Convincing drug companies'
In a footnote in a decision by a majority of Republican appointees, the high
court blamed "anti-death-penalty advocates" for robbing TDOC of sources of
supply for lethal injection drugs and creating legal battles as a result.
"It bears noting at this point that TDOC's revisions of its lethal injection
protocol since 2010 have been necessitated by the success anti-death-penalty
advocates have had in convincing drug companies not to provide certain drugs
for use in executions," the panel's majority opinion stated.
Stacy Rector, executive director of the Tennesseans Against the Death Penalty
advocacy group, said death penalty opponents she works with don't lobby drug
makers or suppliers.
"We don't do that," she said.
Instead, Rector said, they lobby voters and policymakers.
"Our focus is education," she said. "We think the whole policy is broken and
dysfunctional, and not working in Tennessee. Regardless of the method of
execution, we are working to end the death penalty as a policy, period."
Ideological shift
The make-up of the state Supreme Court changed in 2015 when Democratic
appointee Gary Wade stepped down as justice. That was the same year the high
court enacted a rule that the now conservative-leaning majority is using to bar
Irick from a reprieve.
The panel changed the rule without inviting public comment by approaching it as
an amendment. The change created a legal barrier for last-minute reprieves for
the condemned for matters that have nothing to do with whether they are guilty
or should be executed for their crime.
The condemned now must prove they can win an appeal of their "collateral" legal
argument using a "likelihood of success" standard, which mirrors current U.S.
Supreme Court case law and streamlines the appellate process for the condemned
in Tennessee.
"The present case is the first case presented to this Court governed by the
amended version of (the rule)," the majority wrote in its denial of the stay.
"Consequently, to obtain a stay at this time, Mr. Irick must establish a
likelihood of success, and he has failed to satisfy this standard."
Justice Sharon Lee was the lone dissenter in denying Irick, 59, a stay. She and
Justice Cornelia A. Clark are the sole Democratic appointees on the 5-judge
high court panel.
She conceded she was on the panel that approved the rule change. But she
accused the majority of a "rush to execution" and pushed for a brief delay - to
allow Irick to live long enough for a full appellate review of the lethal
injection drug protocol he and 32 other condemned inmates are challenging as
too painful to pass constitutional muster.
The majority pushed back.
"In fact, this suggestion is astonishing, actually, given that Mr. Irick was
convicted and sentenced 32 years ago and has obtained multiple stays over the
years," the majority wrote.
The majority opinion does not bear the name of the author and is supposed to
reflect the collective opinion of the 4 justices in the majority - Chief
Justice Jeffry S. Bivins and Justices Holly Kirby, Roger Page and Clark.
More powers, less precedent
The majority - with Lee often the sole dissenter - has been tilting in its
decisions and rulemaking toward drawing Tennessee law into line with U.S.
Supreme Court decisions and standards - even when the state's Constitution has
been interpreted by liberal-leaning Tennessee Supreme Court panels as providing
greater protections for the accused than its federal counterpart.
In the past 2 years, the high court has approved the limited use of a federal
exception for law enforcers who make mistakes in drafting or executing search
warrants, overturning the court's own decades-long precedent that afforded no
such break.
The court has broadened law enforcers' authority to carry out warrantless
searches and - as shown in Irick's case - raised the hurdle for the condemned
trying to outrun execution.
Veteran defense attorney Stephen Ross Johnson has watched high courts tilt - in
Tennessee and across the country - in recent years toward what he called a
reverse federalism.
"The modern trend is for state courts to adopt federal constitutional standards
in interpreting state constitutions and other legal standards," he said. "In
relatively recent times, Tennessee has followed suit."
Swinging pendulum?
Johnson said when the U.S. Supreme Court decades ago began tilting in its
rulings toward broader police powers and fewer protections for accused, state
supreme courts and state legislatures across the country beefed up protections
in their own laws.
"The pendulum has now swung the other way in Tennessee and elsewhere," he said
Wednesday. '... in an effort to have uniformity of law, many state courts are
reversing decades of their precedent and tacking to federal decisions.
"In my opinion, this trend is not a positive one, since it concentrates too
much power in too few decision makers - namely nine judges in Washington, DC -
and further removes the states from the individual laboratories of democracy
they were intended to be by our nation's founders," he said.
Irick is now under death watch. He is scheduled to be executed Thursday evening
in Nashville.
(source: Knoxville News Sentinel)
**************************************************
Death Penalty In Tennessee - The Cost To Us And A Solution
I am going to wade off into the deep waters of public discourse for the 1st
time. Favor me with a few moments.
Billy Ray Irrick is scheduled to die by the hand of the Tennessee state
government Thursday night August 9, 2018. There is much debate regarding this
case on a state and national level as well as others waiting in the wings for
the same fate.
For those of you who are unfamiliar with this case there is more information on
the 11alive website. Please, only read this if you have a strong stomach. I
studied it last night. I wish I hadn't, I did not sleep well.
In reading the information, if you are so inclined, you will see enough blame
to go around, poor decisions by the family of the child, less than stellar
living conditions, human suffering and yes, a tragic end to the life of a very
young girl. Ultimately though, Mr. Irrick is responsible as has been determined
repeatedly.
For over 30 years he has dodged the reaper, now his time is 'nigh. And still
there are those who fight for this person. The legal arguments in his defense
have ran the gamut from 'mental incompetence', poor upbringing, drug, and
alcohol addiction and finally in the world we live in today, the fear he will
suffer due to an ineffective mixture of drugs to be administered to him.
While I understand the Constitution and the prohibition of 'cruel and unusual
punishment' rule I do not understand the misplaced compassion for this person.
Yes, he is a human, Yes, he deserves careful debate in the court of law as to
his fate. But he has had all of that. And then some.
I'll not go into the old 'eye for an eye' chestnut, just too Old Testament for
me. What I will say is this: he has had more than his share of 'days in court',
he has been found and verified guilty time and again. His time has run out. Now
he must pay.
Be that right or wrong is irrelevant to my opinion here, what matters to me,
and should to you, whichever side you take is this simple thing. The relevance
of the debate over the drugs used to kill him. We are not talking about a short
rope and a tall tree here, but a lethal dose of drugs, some may say 'cobbled
together at the whim of a power that is'. That is fair enough. Suffering at the
end, whether you say, 'too bad' or 'oh no', matters not. Quite simply it
doesn't have to be. And I'll tell you why.
There is a much simpler solution, readily available to us in bulk. It is so
simple in fact I'm surprised others who are much smarter than me haven't
thought of it. It is staring us in the face.
Fentanyl.
Each year the state of Tennessee spends several millions of dollars combating
this drug, every year people die from it, each month it is seized in quantity,
not only in this state but others. It is everywhere. Each year some tens of
thousands of people die nationwide from it. It is deadly, it has a proven track
record.
It works.
So, put it to use.
Instead of the last-minute arguments over this drug mixture or that. Just
choose the obvious substance that has been proven beyond a doubt to absolutely,
without fail, work every time. It's just that easy. There has been an abundance
of it seized. It will be burned or disposed of somehow, so use it.
We are spending money hand over fist on interdiction, seizure, prosecution, and
Narcan. It's time we finally found a way to save money on both execution drugs
and lawsuits. I can't see anyone saying, 'It may not be effective!'. It is.
It's time.
Stop wasting money and use the best tool available.
Russ Donegan
(source: Opinion, The Chattanoogan)
NEBRASKA----impending execution
Drugmaker seeks to block Nebraska from using execution drugs
A German pharmaceutical company has filed a lawsuit to prevent Nebraska from
using lethal injection drugs next week in what would be the state's 1st
execution in more than 2 decades.
The federal lawsuit filed late Tuesday could delay the Aug. 14 execution of
Carey Dean Moore, who was sentenced to death for killing 2 Omaha cab drivers in
1979. The company, Fresenius Kabi, opposes the use of its drugs in executions
and alleges that the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services' supply of
potassium chloride was made by the company.
Moore has stopped fighting the state's efforts to execute him , leaving death
penalty opponents with no real options other than to hope a drug manufacturer
challenged the state's use of its products. In Nevada, a judge indefinitely
postponed an execution last month after drugmaker Alvogen filed a similar
lawsuit over one of its products.
Nebraska state officials have refused to identify the source of their drugs,
but Fresenius Kabi alleges the state's supply of the drug is stored in 30
milliliter vials. Fresenius Kabi said it's the only company that supplies
potassium chloride in vials that size. The company said it may also have
manufactured the state's supply of cisatracurium, and that Nebraska's use of
its drugs would damage its reputation and business relationships.
"While Fresenius Kabi takes no position on capital punishment, Fresenius Kabi
opposes the use of its products for this purpose and therefore does not sell
certain drugs to correctional facilities," company attorneys wrote in the
lawsuit.
The company said it only sells those products to wholesalers and distributors
who sign a contract agreeing not to supply the drugs to correctional
departments.
"These drugs, if manufactured by Fresenius Kabi, could only have been obtained
by (the corrections department) in contradiction and contravention of the
distribution contracts the company has in place and therefore through improper
or illegal means," the company said in the lawsuit.
In a statement, a spokeswoman for Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson said
the lethal injection drugs were purchased lawfully "and pursuant to the state
of Nebraska's duty to carry out lawful capital sentences."
A spokeswoman for the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services did not
immediately respond to a request for comment.
Nebraska has never carried out an execution by lethal injection, and the state
plans to use an untried combination of four drugs during Moore's scheduled
execution. The state's last execution, in 1997, used the electric chair, which
the Nebraska Supreme Court later declared unconstitutional.
Nebraska's current execution protocol calls for 4 drugs: the sedative diazepam,
commonly known as Valium, to render the inmate unconscious; fentanyl citrate, a
powerful synthetic opioid; cisatracurium besylate, which induces paralysis and
halts the inmate's breathing; and potassium chloride to stop the heart.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska, a leading death penalty
opponent, praised the company's intervention and chastised the state for
refusing to release documents identifying the supplier. State officials have
done so in the past without objection.
"While more states are turning away from the death penalty, Nebraska officials
are rushing to carry out an execution cloaked in secrecy with an untested
4-drug scheme that carries immeasurable risks for unnecessary pain and a
botched execution," said Danielle Conrad, the group's executive director.
The lawsuit is not Nebraska's 1st run-in with Fresenius Kabi. Last year, a
company spokesman told The Associated Press that state officials had obtained a
batch of its potassium chloride in 2015 because one of its distributors made a
mistake.
A company spokesman said at the time that Fresenius Kabi discovered the sale
through an internal audit and requested that the Department of Correctional
Services return the drugs, but state officials never did. Those drugs expired
in January 2017.
(source: Associated Press)
***************
Ex-public defender: Nebraska death row inmate's sentencing may have been
unconstitutional
Former public defender Robert Dunham thinks the sentencing of Nebraska's
longest-serving death row inmate, Carey Dean Moore, may not have been legal.
Dunham, who is the executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center,
says Nebraska's death penalty system is not like those in some states - judges
rather than juries decide whether a defendant should be sentenced to die - and
that could raise grounds for a constitutional challenge.
"In Nebraska, the sentencing is done by a 3-judge panel and the United States
Supreme Court has ruled that a defendant in a death penalty case has a
constitutional right to have a jury determine the facts that make him eligible
for the death penalty, and that didn't happen in his case," Dunham told Hill.TV
co-hosts Krystal Ball and Buck Sexton on "Rising."
Dunham is referring to the 2002 case Ring v. Arizona.
In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Arizona's capital sentencing
procedure violated the Sixth Amendment's jury trial guarantee by entrusting a
judge to find the factors necessary for imposing the death penalty.
But since Moore has not authorized his lawyers to attack this particular aspect
of the state's system, Dunham said, "it's probable that he was unconditionally
sentenced to death."
Moore has tried to challenge his death row sentence on multiple occasions, and
also tried to escape death row by attempting to swap clothes with his
then-incarcerated twin brother.
But the 60-year-old inmate has since accepted his punishment and has made it
clear to his lawyers that he doesn't want to fight his scheduled execution on
August 14.
Moore was sentenced to death for the murder of two Omaha cab drivers in 1979.
If the state follows through, it would mark the state's f1st execution in more
than 2 decades.
Nebraska, like many states, has been struggling with the financial and moral
obligations of the death penalty for some time. The Nebraska Legislator
overrode Gov. Pete Ricketts???s (R) veto and repealed the death penalty in
2015. But it was reinstated a year later after Ricketts personally bankrolled a
referendum to bring it back.
(source: thehill.com)
*****************
Ricketts: State will move forward with execution
Gov. Pete Ricketts on Wednesday said he expects the state's Department of
Corrections will carry out the execution of Nebraska's longest serving death
row inmate on schedule next week.
"I'm not aware of anything that will delay the execution," Ricketts said
Wednesday after acknowledging a lawsuit filed Tuesday by a pharmaceutical
company seeking to prevent Nebraska from using its drugs as part of a lethal
injection.
"Our plan is to continue to move forward," Ricketts added.
Carey Dean Moore, sentenced to death for the 1979 slayings of Omaha cab drivers
Reuel Van Ness Jr. and Maynard Helgeland, would be the 1st Nebraska inmate to
be executed since 1997.
Last week, Pope Francis changed the Catholic Church's stance on capital
punishment, calling it "inadmissible because it is an attack on the
inviolability and dignity of the person."
Protesters gathered outside of St. Margaret Mary Parish in Omaha, where
Ricketts is a parishioner, on Sunday, 12 days before Moore's scheduled
execution date of Aug. 14.
Ricketts said he wasn't bothered by the protests or the communication appealing
to his faith, saying he swore an oath to uphold the constitution and laws of
the Nebraska.
He also said he doesn't have any control over the decisions made by the church
or its officials, but that his "conscience is that we need to have capital
punishment in this state."
"There's a number of people expressing their difference of opinion with regard
to this, but the people of Nebraska have been very clear," the governor said.
A statewide referendum in 2016, funded in part by $300,000 of the governor's
personal money, reinstated the death penalty in Nebraska a year after the
Legislature had abolished it over a veto from Ricketts.
The repeal of the death penalty was rejected by a 61 to 39 percent margin,
which Ricketts called "absolute proof" of the state's will to protect citizens,
law enforcement and corrections officers and even other inmates.
"The people of Nebraska spoke loud and clear that they wanted to retain capital
punishment as part of our overall state laws to protect public safety,"
Ricketts said. "Our job is to carry that out."
(source: Lincoln Journal Star)
*********************
Son of Carey Dean Moore victim speaks ahead of scheduled execution
Steve Helgeland was 13 years-old when he was pulled out of his junior high
classroom and told his father had been murdered.
His father, Maynard Helgeland, was 1 of the 2 taxi cab drivers murdered by
Carey Dean Moore in August of 1979.
Steve Helgeland remembers arriving in Omaha and learning the news.
"One thing I recall vividly is the gurney with my dad's body on the news as
they wheeled it away," Helgeland said.
Helgeland says his father, an Air Force veteran, struggled for years with
alcoholism and depression.
At one point, he lost both his feet to frostbite after drunkenly passing out in
his cab.
But Helgeland says his father was starting to turn his life around when he was
shot several times by Moore who allegedly was looking for drug money.
"It was just a straight up act of evil," Helgeland said.
Nearly 4 decades have passed since, along with seven scheduled executions for
Moore which have failed to materialize.
Those years have been frustrating for Helgeland and his family.
He says it's "ridiculous" that the state hasn't taken action in the case.
Moore faces execution once again on Tuesday, but Helgeland thinks the result
will be the same as it's always been.
"I just don't have any faith in the state of Nebraska for making it happen," he
said. "They haven't been able to do it in 38 years."
Helgeland says time hasn't healed the pain of his father's murder.
He says he's angry and that he just wants that horrific chapter of his life to
finally be over, whether that be by Moore's execution or a decision to keep him
imprisoned for life.
Helgeland will be in Lincoln the day of Moore's execution, but says he doesn't
want to watch it.
"I don't have any interest in watching another human being die," he said. "It
won't provide me with any... closure as people like to say."
(source: KLKN TV news)
************************************
German drug maker claims US state illegally obtained its product for execution
German drug maker Fresenius Kabi is suing to halt a planned execution in
Nebraska, claiming the US state illegally obtained the company's drugs to use
for the lethal injection procedure.
Fresenius Kabi filed the lawsuit Tuesday evening, saying the state was planning
to use two of its drugs on August 14th to put to death convicted killer Carey
Dean Moore.
Moore is sentenced to death for the 1979 murder of 2 taxi drivers. He is not
contesting his execution order, but it could nevertheless be delayed by the
lawsuit.
If carried out, the execution would be Nebraska's 1st in 21 years and its 1st
ever lethal injection.
The state plans to use 4 drugs - the sedative Diazepam, the powerful narcotic
painkiller fentanyl citrate, the muscle relaxer cisatracurium and potassium
chloride, which stops the heart.
Fresenius Kabi believes it is the source of the latter 2 drugs and is asking a
federal judge to issue an order either temporarily or permanently blocking the
state from using the injectable medications.
"While Fresenius Kabi takes no position on capital punishment, Fresenius Kabi
opposes the use of its products for this purpose and therefore does not sell
certain drugs to correctional facilities," the company said in its civil
complaint.
"These drugs, if manufactured by Fresenius Kabi, could only have been obtained
by defendants in contradiction and contravention of the distribution contracts
the company has in place and therefore through improper or illegal means."
The drug maker claims that with state executions regarded negatively among the
majority of the European public, it could suffer "great reputational injury,"
if its drugs are used for capital punishment.
The state of Nebraska has released limited information about the drugs and has
not disclosed their source -- reflecting a general dilemma for US states that
continue to carry out the death penalty via lethal injection.
Injectable drugs have become harder to acquire amid public opposition and a
reluctance -- or outright hostility - among drug manufacturers to sell their
products to prisons for use in executions.
"Nebraska's lethal injection drugs were purchased lawfully and pursuant to the
State of Nebraska's duty to carry out lawful capital sentences," the state
attorney general's office said in a curt statement.
Last month, a similar lawsuit by drug maker Alvogen at least temporarily halted
an execution in Nevada.
(source: thelocal.de)
SOUTH DAKOTA----new execution date
Rodney Berget to be executed this fall for killing prison guard R.J. Johnson
Rodney Berget, 1 of 2 men convicted of murdering a South Dakota State
Penitentiary guard in 2011, is scheduled to be put to death this fall.
Attorney General Marty Jackley said Berget is slated to face execution by
lethal injection during the week of Oct. 28-Nov. 3, 2018. The exact date and
time will be announced by the penitentiary warden 48 hours before the
execution.
Berget, 55, pleaded guilty in 2012 to killing Ronald "R.J." Johnson in a failed
prison escape attempt in 2011 with fellow inmate Eric Robert. Berget was
scheduled to face execution in 2015, but his execution was stayed.
Robert was executed in 2012.
A 3rd inmate, Michael Nordman, was sentenced to life in prison for providing
plastic wrap and a pipe used to kill Johnson.
Berget's mental status and eligibility for capital punishment have played a
central role in delaying the court process. Berget in August 2016 appealed his
death penalty sentence, but in September 2016 asked to withdraw his appeal.
"I want this to be the last day I appear in court," Berget said in court in
September 2016.
Berget's attorney, Eric Schulte, disagreed with his client's decision to drop
the appeal. Schulte told the court he wanted to review Berget's functionality
and mental capacity to see if he was eligible for the death penalty.
Berget in 2017 sent a letter to the court saying he wants his death sentence to
be carried out because he was worried the death penalty will be repealed in
South Dakota, and he didn't want to spend the rest of his life "in a cage."
A judge ruled in February that Berget does not have an intellectual disability
and is eligible for his original death penalty sentence.
Delays are still a possibility in the case: issues or questions could be filed
- either from Berget's attorneys or questions from the Governor's Office, state
or federal judges - between now and October.
Jackley said he is confident in the timing of the warrant of execution. There
are no pending actions in the case, and the conviction and sentence have been
deemed appropriate by the trial judge, state Supreme Court and habeas court.
Jackley, who also prosecuted Robert's case and witnessed Robert's execution,
has been in communication with Johnson's family throughout the process and
consulted with them before issuing the warrant of execution.
"I've seen firsthand the struggles and challenges RJ Johnson's family - wife,
children and grandchildren - have gone through," Jackley said Wednesday. "It's
important to continue to move this case forward to help bring some level of
closure for RJ Johnson's family."
At a February hearing in Minnehaha County, Lynette Johnson, RJ Johnson's widow,
shared the anguish over her family's ordeal.
"It has been an emotional, torturous roller coaster," she said at the hearing.
"We just try to get through it the best that we know how."
(source: Sioux Falls Argus Leader)
************************
South Dakota sets execution for man in prison guard's death
A man who pleaded guilty to the 2011 killing of a South Dakota prison guard is
set to be executed in the fall, the state's attorney general said Wednesday.
Attorney General Marty Jackley said in a statement that Rodney Berget, 56, is
scheduled to be executed between Oct. 28 and Nov. 3. Jackley's office said the
warden of the state penitentiary will choose the specific time and date, which
will be announced within 48 hours of the execution.
Circuit Court Judge Bradley Zell issued a warrant of execution for Berget, who
would be the 1st person put to death in South Dakota in roughly 6 years.
"We will be ready to carry out the order of the court," Department of
Corrections Secretary Denny Kaemingk said in a statement.
Berget pleaded guilty in April 2012 to killing Ronald "R.J." Johnson in a
failed prison escape attempt in April 2011 along with fellow inmate Eric
Robert, who was executed in 2012.
An attorney for Berget wasn't immediately available to comment to The
Associated Press. Berget's mental status and death penalty eligibility have
played a key role in court delays.
Berget in 2016 appealed his death sentence, but later asked to withdraw the
appeal against the advice of his lawyers, the Argus Leader reported .
"I want this to be the last day I appear in court," Berget said at a September
2016 hearing.
The last execution in South Dakota was the lethal injection of Donald Moeller
on Oct. 30, 2012, for the killing of Becky O'Connell.
State Department of Corrections policy says lethal injections involve 1 to 3
drugs, depending on drug availability and the date of the prisoner's
conviction. State law makes a drug supplier confidential.
(source: Associated Press)
UTAH:
Funds authorized for defense of Ogden couple in death penalty case
Weber County commissioners have agreed to continue covering the cost of public
defenders for 2 Ogden parents charged with murdering their toddler in a
potential death penalty case.
The county's 3-member commission unanimously approved new contracts for the
attorneys at its Tuesday meeting, but not without some reluctance.
"This is frustrating," said Commissioner Jim Harvey. "People in the community
make horrible decisions each county taxpayer, their property tax, has to pay
for, because of state code. That bothers me."
A judge early in the case decided Brenda Emile, 23, and Miller Costello, 26,
could not afford to hire lawyers and appointed them public defenders. State law
requires the county to foot the bill.
But Weber's existing contracts with defense attorneys do not cover death
penalty cases, because of the vast amounts of time and work they can take, so a
new deal was needed, deputy Weber County attorney Bryan Baron told the board.
The contracts provided by the county show a lead attorney for each parent will
receive $170 per hour, and a second attorney will make $140 an hour. Attorney
fees for each defendant are capped at $100,000, or $70,000 if prosecutors
decide before a trial to no longer pursue a death penalty.
Baron said the total cost of the case is a "shot in the dark." But he reviewed
the cost of defense in nine other capital cases in Utah and found they cost an
average of $220,000 apiece, he said.
Weber County officials previously decided not to contribute to a statewide
defense fund that helps local government covers such costs because of the price
tag, Baron said Tuesday, but he didn't know the exact fee.
The new contracts will help inform the commission's decision when it next
considers whether to buy into a state indigent defense fund, but no immediate
decision has been made, Harvey said Wednesday.
Prosecutors have said they would seek the death penalty if the couple accused
of beating, burning and not feeding their daughter Angelina is convicted of a
charge of aggravated murder, a 1st-degree felony. The pair has pleaded not
guilty and is due back in court in Ogden Aug. 13.
(source: Deseret News)
NEVADA:
Nevada death-row inmate: 'Just get it done'
A Nevada death-row inmate whose execution has been postponed twice said a legal
fight over his fate is taking a tortuous toll on him and his family and he just
wants his sentence carried out.
The state should "just get it done, just do it effectively and stop fighting
about it," Scott Raymond Dozier told The Associated Press.
"I want to be really clear about this. This is my wish," Dozier said in a brief
telephone call from Ely State Prison. "They should stop punishing me and my
family for their inability to carry out the execution."
Dozier's comments Wednesday came a month after a judge in Las Vegas postponed
his execution at nearly the final hour.
Nevada law calls for capital punishment by lethal injection. But pharmaceutical
companies nationwide have objected to their medicines being used in executions.
On Thursday, a 3rd drug company is due to ask Clark County District Court Judge
Elizabeth Gonzalez to let it join with 2 other firms suing to block the use of
their products for a 3-drug lethal injection.
State Attorney General Adam Laxalt's office is expected to ask Clark County
District Court Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez on Thursday to reject the Sandoz Inc.
bid to join case.
State Deputy Solicitor General Jordan T. Smith has argued that the maker of a
muscle paralytic agent that officials plan to use as the 3rd drug didn't object
before Dozier's execution was postponed in November and is now jumping on a
public relations wave with drugmakers Alvogen and Hikma Pharmaceuticals.
Gonzalez last week allowed Hikma, a maker of the powerful opioid fentanyl, to
join Alvogen, producer of the sedative midazolam, in a lawsuit on a speedy
track toward a Sept. 10 hearing.
The companies say they publicly declared they didn't want their products used
in executions and allege that Nevada improperly obtained their drugs.
Nevada, which hasn't executed an inmate since 2006, has become a model of the
trouble that death penalty states have had in recent years obtaining drugs for
lethal injections.
Prison officials want to reschedule Dozier's execution for mid-November, and
are asking the Nevada Supreme Court to quickly consider and overturn Gonzalez's
temporary order not to use midazolam.
15 states are siding with Nevada before the state Supreme Court in a battle
pitting prominent pharmaceutical firms against more than 1/2 the 31 states in
the U.S. with the death penalty.
Dozier, 47, called the fight over his fate a legal "maelstrom."
He said he wants to go through with his lethal injection and he really doesn't
care if he feels pain. Critics have said he's seeking state-assisted suicide.
"I don't even really want to die," Dozier said, "but I'd rather die than spend
my life in prison."
The inmate said he was not contesting his convictions and sentences. But he
also denied committing the 2002 drug-related murders in Phoenix and Las Vegas
for which he was convicted and sentenced in 2007 to death.
"For the record, I'm asserting my innocence," Dozier said. But, "I'm not going
to be the guy in prison who is going to complain, 'This is an injustice.'
That's over. I had my chance."
(source: ajc.com)
USA:
Allowing death penalty is Catholic doctrine and cannot be overturned: 2
Catholic profs
2 U.S. Catholic professors who authored what many consider to be a rigorous
defense of Catholic teaching on capital punishment say that Pope Francis' new
teaching on the subject appears to be "contradicting scripture, tradition, and
all previous popes." And, he may be "committing a doctrinal error."
It's been a busy week for Edward Feser and Joseph Bessette, joint authors of By
Man Shall His Blood Be Shed: A Catholic Defense of Capital Punishment.
Published by Ignatius Press in May 2017, the work is a comprehensive guide to
the teaching of the Catholic Church on the death penalty. Thanks to Pope
Francis' surprise alteration to the Catechism of the Catholic Church last week,
both men are now in the spotlight.
Feser, an assistant professor of philosophy at Pasadena City College, told
LifeSiteNews that the new teaching, "like many of Pope Francis's doctrinal
statements, is obscure."
"On the one hand, the CDF letter announcing the change asserts that the new
teaching 'is not in contradiction' with previous teaching. On the other hand,
the pope is saying that the death penalty should never be used -- which goes
beyond John Paul II's teaching that it should be 'very rare' -- and Francis
justifies this claim on doctrinal grounds, rather than the prudential grounds
that John Paul appealed to," he said.
"Moreover, Pope Francis claims that the use of capital punishment conflicts
with 'the inviolability and dignity of the person,' which makes it sound like
it is intrinsically contrary to natural law. So, the actual substance of the
teaching seems to be that capital punishment is intrinsically wrong. If that is
what the pope is saying, then he is contradicting scripture, tradition, and all
previous popes, and is therefore committing a doctrinal error, which is
possible when popes do not speak ex-cathedra [from the chair]," he added.
To believe that the Church can contradict its doctrines, whether concerning
artificial contraception or capital punishment or other moral teachings, is
"not compatible with what the Church says about herself."
'We are defending the integrity of the Church'
Feser said that when their book came out, he and Joseph Bessette received a
torrent of personal attacks, criticism he calls "childish nonsense."
"We are defending the integrity of the Church," he said.
Feser pointed out that many defenders of the Church's perennial doctrine, like
the late Cardinal Avery Dulles and Cardinal Charles J. Chaput, are themselves
personally opposed to the death penalty. Nevertheless, they do not deny the
teaching.
"I't's so odd that so many people want to make it personal," the philosopher
said. "Just look at the arguments."
Feser sees Pope Francis's change to the catechism as highly problematic.
"As in other instances in the past 5 years, ambiguity is a factor," he said.
"But I think it is worse than that."
He notes that Cardinal Ladaria presented an introductory letter stating that
Francis's change is "not in contradiction with the prior teachings of the
Magisterium' but not explaining how it isn't a rupture. And if it is true that
capital punishment is inadmissible because it is "an attack on dignity", then
it follows, Feser said, that the Law of Moses was "an attack on dignity" and
that Pope John Paul II's assertion that capital punishment was legitimate in
rare circumstances was an "attack on dignity."
In Pope Francis's defense, the philosopher said that it was possible that the
pontiff was just not interested in doctrine. Feser was unsure this was a
defense, however, as "safeguard of doctrine is the pope's job." However, given
remarks Pope Francis made last October, when he said that capital punishment
was "per se contrary to the Gospel", the change to the catechism is "less bad
than what it looked like we were getting", Feser believes, as this earlier
formulation made it sound as if capital punishment were "intrinsically evil."
In terms of a truly authentic development on Church doctrine on capital
punishment, Feser argues Pope John Paul II took it as far as he could take it,
and moreover that he didn't take it as far as people think. Although many
people believe JP2 restricted it to only to prevent the direct endangerment of
the innocent, "if you actually read [Evangelium Vitae], it's not really there,"
the philosopher said. The perennial doctrine of the Church is that capital
punishment is legitimate also as a deterrent and as retributive justice.
"The only thing that can be done is recommending against [the death penalty] in
practice," Feser said. The principle, however, must remain.
He underscored that these are not just his "assertions."
"We analyse this in painstaking fashion in our book," Feser said and voiced
some frustration with how little his and Bessette's critics are willing to
engage with their arguments. They are not only unable to grasp the evidence,
not only that the Church has never decreed that capital punishment is
intrinsically evil, but that many social scientists do believe it has a
deterrent value. Feser said that it was "rash" and "irresponsible" for
Churchmen with no sociological expertise to "throw out bromides" about human
dignity. If the death penalty is a deterrent, then those who wish to abolish it
are "risking the lives of the innocent."
'Pro-life' is not a 'magic theological bullet'
Impatient of sentimentality and anti-intellectualism, Feser is similarly
dismissive of those who say that people who are against abortion but support
the death penalty aren't really pro-life.
"'Pro-life' is a modern American political slogan," Feser declared. "It has no
philosophical or theological content at all."
The word is not a "magic theological bullet," he stressed. He pointed out that
one could just as easily tell someone that they aren't "pro-freedom" because
they support the incarceration of people guilty of crimes. Scripture is very
clear that one can lose the right to life through murder; there is a difference
between protecting the right to life of the innocent and that of the guilty,
just as there is a difference between unjustly depriving the innocent of their
freedom and justly locking up the guilty in prison.
Feser was raised a Catholic, but his philosophical studies gradually led to
atheism. However, the history of philosophy, ancient and medieval, brought him
back to the faith.
The philosopher's interest in the death penalty was prompted by Pope John Paul
II. Feser had supported the use of capital punishment, both as an atheist and
as a Catholic, but he noticed that John Paul II's personal opposition was
changing people's perceptions of what the Church actually taught.
"I saw people being pushed to an extreme [abolitionist] position," Feser said.
He was troubled by what he saw as "an attack on the rationality and
consistency" of the Catholic Church, when it was that very rationality and
consistency that he admired. He had previously been looking for "wiggle-room"
on the teaching against artificial contraception, but had been impressed that
Paul VI had affirmed the teaching "when the whole world was against him."
"I was impressed by the sheer intransigence," he chuckled.
Feser's co-author Joseph Bessette, a professor of government and ethics at
Claremont McKenna College in California, told LifeSiteNews via email that he
first became interested in capital punishment while growing up in
Massachusetts, where it was a "hotly debated topic" in the 1950s and 1960s.
"Later, in the early 1980s I worked in the prosecutor's office in Chicago.
That's where I first learned from prosecutors of the gruesome details of the
relatively few murders that resulted in a death sentence," Bessette recalled.
When he began to teach a course on "Crime and Public Policy" in the early
1990s, Bessette devoted three weeks to the death penalty, but didn't pay close
attention to Church doctrines on the topic, as he knew the Church had "always
taught that the death penalty could be a legitimate punishment for heinous
crimes if necessary to secure public safety."
But a student's remark inspired him to take another look.
"One day a student in my course said, 'Well, I am a Catholic. So I am against
the death penalty.' I affirmed the Church's traditional teaching and then
sought to learn more about the Pope John Paul II's encyclical Evangelium Vitae
(1995) and the revision in the language in the Catechism between 1992 and
1997."
'The simple fact is that the death penalty saves lives'
Bessette believes that in revising the Catechism to state the death penalty is
"inadmissible", Pope Francis has attempted to "overturned" 2 millennia of
Church teaching.
"Moreover, by strongly implying that Catholics must support the abolition of
the death penalty, he has allied the Church with a public policy that would
undermine just punishment and cost the lives of innocent human beings," he
asserted. "The simple fact is that the death penalty saves lives."
Bessette says that he and Feser present a "large body of evidence" in their
book to support this conclusion.
"Unfortunately, Pope Francis and many Catholic clerics simply presume that
public safety would not be jeopardized if capital punishment were abolished,"
he continued.
He said he did not expect Catholic priests "no matter what their rank" to be
experts in criminal justice, and that unless a public policy is intrinsically
evil, it is up to citizens and government "to decide how best to promote the
common good."
"This is what the Church has always taught," Bessette stressed. "By falsely
claiming that the principles of Catholicism call for rejecting the death
penalty in all circumstances, the pope undermines the authority of the
Magisterium, preempts the proper authority of public officials, and jeopardizes
public safety and the common good."
In defense of those who seek to protect the unborn while supporting capital
punishment, Bessette said there was no contradiction.
"There is absolutely no inconsistency between being pro-life and pro-death
penalty," he said. "The Church has always taught that it is never licit to take
an innocent human life."
Bessette cited John Paul II, saying the pope affirmed this principle
unambiguously in Evangelium Vitae.
The late pontiff wrote: "[T]he commandment 'You shall not kill' has absolute
value when it refers to the innocent person. . . . [T]he absolute inviolability
of innocent human life is a moral truth clearly taught by Sacred Scripture,
constantly upheld in the Church's Tradition and consistently proposed by her
Magisterium... Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter
and his Successors, and in communion with the Bishops of the Catholic Church, I
confirm that the direct and voluntary killing of an innocent human being is
always gravely immoral (EV 57)"
"Similarly," Bessette added, "the current Catechism says, 'The inalienable
right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a
civil society and its legislation' ([CCCC] 2273)."
"Killing in self-defense or killing a vicious murderer has absolutely no
relationship to this prohibition of intentionally killing the innocent, and the
Church has always understood and taught this."
(source: lifesitenews.com)
_______________________________________________
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