7 Conn. inmates challenging death penalty

SOMERS, Conn. (AP) — Connecticut death row inmates who have sued the state to get their sentences overturned argue that race and geographic bias played a part in their prosecution.

Seven of the 11 men on Connecticut's death row are plaintiffs. They claim their penalty was arbitrary and discriminatory.

Their lawsuit went to trial Wednesday at the Northern Correctional Institution in Somers.

Chief State's Attorney Kevin Kane, the first witness, said while he was the New London state's attorney from the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s he relied on state law and court rulings in prosecuting death penalty cases. He says there were no written policies on doing so.

The inmates cite a study that concluded that minorities accused of murdering white victims are three times more likely to receive a death sentence as defendants in white-on-white murder cases.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

5 Conn. inmates challenging death penalty

ROCKVILLE, Conn. (AP) — Connecticut's top prosecutor testified Wednesday the state had no written policies on when to seek the death penalty but that state law provided enough guidance.

Chief State's Attorney Kevin Kane was the first witness to take the stand in a trial involving five death row inmates who say prosecutors' decision-making process in death penalty cases has been arbitrary and fraught with racial and geographical biases. The inmates are suing the state and seeking to have their death sentences overturned.

Connecticut repealed the death penalty earlier this year, but only for future capital crimes. There are presently 11 inmates on the state's death row.

Lawyers for the inmates asked Kane about how he decided to seek the death penalty when he prosecuted cases in the New London Judicial District from 1986 to 2006, including the last 11 years as the district's head prosecutor. State's attorneys in Connecticut's 13 judicial districts are independent officials responsible for all criminal cases in their regions, while the chief state's attorney is essentially an administrative position.

Attorneys Richard Reeve and David Golub suggested in their questioning that the state's attorneys used different processes for determining when to seek the death penalty, which they say created an arbitrary system.

"The state's attorneys have the obligation to find out if they're using the same criteria," Golub told Judge Samuel Sferrazza. "Otherwise you have a standardless system."

Kane said he did talk informally with prosecutors in other districts about death penalty cases. He acknowledged there were no written state policies on when to seek the death penalty, but said state law provided guidance.

"I believe the same guidelines were followed by everybody," Kane said.

Kane said there were death penalty-eligible cases in which he decided to reduce the charges due to a variety of factors, including the strength of the state's case and the presence of mitigating factors for the defendant.

"I believe I had discretion to do that," Kane said about deciding to not purse the death penalty in some capital cases.

All 13 state's attorneys and some former prosecutors had been expected to testify at the trial. But inmates' lawyers and government attorneys reached a deal Wednesday that will spare 25 witnesses from testifying, including the state's attorneys.

The trial was adjourned to Tuesday because of the deal, in which prosecutors agreed that the state had no written policies or standards on when to seek the death penalty or when to reduce capital charges to lesser crimes.

Prosecutors also agreed to stipulate that there were no formal discussions among prosecutors statewide about criteria for seeking the death penalty and that each state's attorney in each judicial district made decisions in death penalty cases based on criteria they thought were appropriate.

The trial is being held in a prisoners' common room in the middle of a vacant housing unit at Northern Correctional Institution in Somers, while the media watched a video feed in a courtroom in Rockville Superior Court about 15 miles away.

The death row inmates wore yellow prison suits Wednesday and sat handcuffed in white plastic chairs at tables. Some sat with their lawyers and some didn't. In front of the inmates is a row of tables for prosecutors and inmates' lawyers, and in front of that is another row of tables for the judge, judicial staff and witnesses.

The trial is expected to run for another week or so.

The key evidence for the inmates is a study by Stanford University professor John Donahue, who reviewed the nearly 4,700 murders in Connecticut from 1973 to 2007.

Donahue said he found that minority defendants who murder white victims are three times as likely to receive a death sentence as white defendants who murder white victims. He also found that minority defendants who commit death penalty-eligible murders of white victims are six times as likely to receive a death sentence as minority defendants who commit death penalty-eligible murders of minority victims.

The study, commissioned by the chief public defender's office, also concluded that Connecticut's capital punishment system included geographic biases. Donahue is expected to testify next week.

State prosecutors disagree with the study's findings. They hired their own expert who reviewed death penalty cases and disputed much of the Donahue report.

The inmates involved in the lawsuit include killers condemned before 2008: Sedrick Cobb, Daniel Webb, Richard Reynolds, Robert Breton, and Todd Rizzo.

Of the 11 men on death row, six are black, four are white and one is Hispanic. Of their 15 victims, 10 were white, four were black and one was Hispanic.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

UN joins calls for Iraq death penalty moratorium

The United Nations mission in Iraq on Friday joined a recent wave of calls for Baghdad to implement a moratorium on its use of the death penalty after the country executed 26 people this week.

The UN Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) statement, which warned of more executions in the coming days, came after calls for a suspension from Britain, the European Union and rights group Amnesty International after Iraq carried out 21 executions on Monday, and then five more on Wednesday.

"UNAMI notes with concern that Iraq has once again implemented the death penalty," the statement said. "UNAMI reiterates its call on the government of Iraq to consider a moratorium on the implementation of all death sentences."

It warned that unidentified "sources have indicated that more executions may be carried out in the coming days."

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, expressed shock earlier this year at the number of executions, criticising the lack of transparency in court proceedings and calling for an immediate suspension of the death penalty.

British junior foreign minister Alistair Burt in a statement on Thursday called on Baghdad "to introduce a moratorium on the use of the death penalty, with a view to its abolition."

And London-based Amnesty International said on the same day that Iraq should stop its use of the death penalty and commute all death sentences, describing the executions as a "significant and worrying increase compared to the previous year."

EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton made similar calls in a statement on Wednesday.

Iraq executed 21 people, including three women and one Saudi national, on Monday, and five more people, including a Syrian national, on Wednesday, a justice ministry spokesman said.

The 26 executions this week brought to at least 96 the number of people executed in Iraq this year, compared to 68 executions throughout 2011.

The country has carried out several other mass executions this year, including one in which 14 people were put to death on February 7, and another in which 17 were executed on January 31.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Jury gives death penalty in Pa. torture killing

GREENSBURG, Pa. (AP) — A man who pleaded guilty to murder in the torture killing of a mentally disabled woman held captive in a dingy western Pennsylvania apartment has been given the death penalty.

A Westmoreland County jury announced its verdict Thursday against 22-year-old Melvin Knight.

A prosecutor had said Knight deserved the death penalty because his crimes were depraved. A defense attorney had argued Knight's relatively young age and his lack of a prior criminal record were reasons the jury should give him life in prison for what happened at the apartment in Greensburg, east of Pittsburgh.

Pennsylvania has executed three people since the U.S. Supreme Court restored the death penalty in 1976. All chose to end their appeals. The last person executed was a man who murdered two women. He was executed in 1999.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Tucson gunman Loughner pleads guilty to rampage, spared death penalty

TUCSON, Arizona (Reuters) - A 23-year-old man pleaded guilty on Tuesday to killing six people and wounding 13 others, including then-U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords, in an Arizona shooting rampage last year and will be spared the death penalty in exchange.

Jared Loughner entered his guilty pleas in federal court in Tucson shortly after U.S. District Judge Larry Burns ruled that he was mentally competent to stand trial following over a year of treatment at a prison psychiatric hospital.

"I plead guilty," Loughner, dressed in a khaki prison jumpsuit with his hair trimmed short, said to each of the 19 counts read in court by Burns.

He was calm throughout the hearing and appeared to be following the proceedings closely, leaning forward slightly in his chair.

The plea deal calls for Loughner to be sentenced to seven consecutive life prison terms without the possibility of parole, sparing him the death penalty. A sentencing hearing was set for November 15.

Giffords, then a U.S. lawmaker from Arizona who was seen as a rising star in the Democratic Party, was meeting constituents at a Tucson supermarket on January 8 last year when she was shot through the head at close range.

She survived with severe injuries that left her with broken speech and a marked limp. But six other people were killed including U.S. District Judge John Roll and 9-year-old Christina-Taylor Green.

The 19 counts Loughner pleaded guilty to include murder, attempted murder and the attempted assassination of Giffords. Federal prosecutors had originally charged Loughner with 49 criminal counts and agreed to dismiss 30 of them.

During an exchange with the judge before formally entering his plea, Loughner admitted going to the "Congress On Your Corner" event hosted by Giffords armed with a loaded Glock 19 pistol and 60 additional rounds of ammunition with plans to kill the congresswoman.

He also admitted shooting other people there with the intention to kill them because they had attended the event.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said that in deciding against pursuing the death penalty, he took into consideration the views of victims and their families as well as the recommendations of prosecutors.

"It is my hope that this decision will allow the Tucson community, and the nation, to continue the healing process free of what would likely be extended trial and pre-trial proceedings that would not have a certain outcome," he said in a statement.

GIFFORDS SATISFIED WITH PLEA DEAL

Mark Kelly, Giffords' husband, said in a statement before the hearing that the couple had been in touch with prosecutors and were satisfied with the plea agreement.

"The pain and loss caused by the events of January 8, 2011 are incalculable. Avoiding a trial will allow us - and we hope the whole southern Arizona community - to continue with our recovery and move forward with our lives," Kelly said.

Giffords resigned from Congress in January to focus on her recovery. Her former aide, Ron Barber, who was also wounded in the shooting spree, won a special election to fill her seat in June and will face re-election in November to serve a full two-year term.

"It is important to me that this individual will never be in the position to harm anyone ever again," Barber, who attended the court hearing, said following the plea.

Giffords did not attend the hearing.

Loughner was determined unfit to stand trial in May 2011 after he disrupted court proceedings and was dragged out of the courtroom. Court-appointed experts said he suffered from schizophrenia, disordered thinking and delusions.

He has since been held at a U.S. Bureau of Prisons psychiatric hospital in Springfield, Missouri, where he has been medicated to treat psychosis and restore his fitness to face proceedings in his prosecution.

During the mental competency portion of the hearing, prison psychiatrist Christina Pietz testified that in July, Loughner had expressed remorse for the shooting and especially for Christina-Taylor Green's death.

Susan Hileman, who was shot alongside Green after bringing the child to the event to learn about the political process, said the plea has not brought her a sense of closure.

"There's never closure because Christina is never going to ring my doorbell again," she told reporters outside the courtroom.

(Additional reporting by Alex Dobuzinskis, Steve Gorman and Dan Whitcomb; Writing by Dan Whitcomb; Editing by Cynthia Johnston and Xavier Briand)

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Assange's mother fears death penalty for him in US

The mother of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who is lobbying Ecuador to grant him asylum, says she is worried her son could face execution if extradited to the United States.

Christine Assange met Wednesday with President Rafael Correa, who is considering whether to grant political asylum to Assange.

The Australian campaigner took refuge in the Ecuadoran embassy in London in mid-June to avoid extradition to Sweden.

Swedish investigators want Assange to answer questions about allegations of rape and sexual assault made by two women in August 2010 after WikiLeaks began releasing classified US documents.

"I feel as a mother that he is not capable of the charges -- not even the charges, the allegations against him," his mother said in an interview with AFP at the Carondelet presidential palace after she met with Correa.

"There is absolutely no doubt that this is a political persecution, by the Swedish prosecutors and the police, with interference of the government," she said.

Christine Assange echoed her son's fears that Sweden would extradite him to the United States to face charges for releasing masses of US military and diplomatic documents into the public domain.

"The US government feels that it can seek to try my son for espionage, and possibly executing him simply for doing the job of a good investigative journalist, which is telling the truth about power," she said.

The United States has opened a criminal investigation into the leaks and is prosecuting US army private Bradley Manning in a military court. But it has not said whether it intends to bring charges against Assange as well.

Assange's mother declined to discuss the substance of her conversation with Correa, but she is counting on his sympathy.

"The president, and his ministers, are very knowledgeable intelligent and compassionate people, genuinely so, and they have a good understanding of the case," she said.

"It's not a secret that the president and his foreign minister believe this case to be political," she added.

Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino has said that Ecuador will respond to Assange's request on August 12, after the London Olympics.

"The important thing is for Julian to be assured that Ecuador is considering his request with great responsibility," Correa told Assange's mother during their hour-long meeting.

Correa said his country has a "great humanist tradition and respect for human rights."

He added that he respects Britain, Sweden, and the people of the United States, and that the matter bears consultation, but that, ultimately, "Ecuador does not negotiate over its sovereignty."

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Colorado shooting: Suspect is charged, no word on death penalty

James Holmes had his second court appearance Monday, as prosecutors formally filed the charges against him.

Mr. Holmes, accused of opening fire in an Aurora, Colo., movie theater this month, killing 12 people and injuring 58, was charged with 142 counts, including 24 counts of first-degree murder, 116 counts of attempted murder, one count of possession of an explosive device, and one count of a sentence enhancer for a crime of violence.

He was charged twice for each of individuals killed. Colorado has several different classes of murder charges. One set of the charges refers to the fact that Holmes allegedly shot after deliberation. The second set accuses him of killing “under circumstances evidencing an attitude of universal malice manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life generally."

IN PICTURES: Aurora, Colo. shooting aftermath

Holmes also waived his right to a preliminary hearing within 35 days.

The judge, William Sylvester, set a date for a preliminary hearing on Nov. 12. The next court hearing in the case will be Aug. 9, when the court will address a motion filed by several media outlets to unseal records in the case. A court order has kept virtually all case documents sealed, and a gag order has limited what attorneys, police officers, and others can say about the case.

Holmes made his first court appearance a week ago; this time, cameras and electronic equipment were barred from the room.

The charges were hardly a surprise, since Holmes’s involvement in the shooting, and the nature of the crimes, seem clear. At this point, most of the speculation centers on whether Colorado prosecutors will seek the death penalty for Holmes, and whether his defense team will be able to mount an insanity defense.

Capital punishment in Colorado exists, though it’s seldom used. In the past 45 years, one person has been executed in the state: Gary Lee Davis, in 1997, for rape and murder. (Between 1972 and 1984, the state had no death penalty.) Three people now sit on death row.

But it also seems likely that prosecutors will seek the death penalty in Holmes’s case.

“If James Holmes isn’t executed,” former Denver prosecutor Craig Silverman told Reuters last week, “Colorado may as well throw away its death penalty law.”

To qualify for the death penalty, Colorado law says, one of 17 aggravating factors must be present in addition to first-degree murder.

Holmes “satisfies many of them,” says Sam Kamin, a law professor at Denver University. The factors include killing multiple people, killing in an especially heinous or cruel way, lying in wait for the victim, and creating a grave risk of death for one or more people in addition to the victim.

“What we don’t know yet, and can’t know, is what the case for mitigation will be,” adds Professor Kamin. The murders and aggravating factors will have to be balanced against that case – most likely centered on Holmes’s mental state, he says.

Conflicting reports have emerged in the past 10 days about Holmes’s mental state, and what information about the attack he may have mailed to a University of Denver psychiatrist.

Court papers last week confirmed that Holmes was seeing a psychiatrist, Lynne Fenton, at the university, but it’s unclear what she was treating him for. News outlets also claimed that Holmes had mailed a package to Dr. Fenton that contained a sort of journal describing plans for the attacks in detail.

However, prosecutors have said that much of the reported information was inaccurate, though they have confirmed that the notebook exists. It’s unclear exactly what the notebook contains, and when the package was received – whether it had been sitting in the mailroom since July 12, as Fox News originally reported, or whether it arrived there the Monday after the shooting.

Holmes’s defense team has filed a motion seeking to determine whether prosecutors or police were responsible for leaking information about the package to media. That had been expected to be discussed at Monday’s court hearing, but was postponed.

Evidence already appears to exist that the shooting was premeditated and that Holmes spent months planning it. In particular, authorities say that Holmes began buying bullets and ballistic gear online four months ago, and bought four weapons at Colorado stores in May and June.

Such planning may make an insanity defense more difficult to prove. Ultimately, though, the success of such a defense in Colorado would rest on whether Holmes’s lawyers can prove that he was unable to tell right from wrong when he committed the attack.

“We don’t know what was going on inside the mind of what is clearly a disturbed individual,” says Kamin, adding that prosecutors will need to show that Holmes is sane enough to stand trial and was sane enough at the time of the crime to be held accountable for it. They will also need to address any possible mitigating factors in his past.

“The evidence of [Holmes’s] involvement is without question,” Kamin says. “The case is going to ultimately come down to the mental state of this defendant.”

IN PICTURES: Aurora, Colo. shooting aftermath

Related stories

Read this story at csmonitor.com

Become a part of the Monitor community

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Iran Has Its Own Way of Dealing with Bank Fraud: The Death Penalty

If toothless federal regulations is your pet cause, look to Iran for inspiration: It just sentenced four bankers involved in a billion-dollar financial scandal to death. On Monday, an Iranian court dished out sentences in the country's biggest bank-fraud scandal to date: The embezzlement of $2.6 billion. Besides the four death sentences, 39 people were tried, two people were sent to life in prison and the others received jail sentences of up to 25 years. By comparison, Bernie Madoff, who defrauded investors of more than 20 times that amount, will live to see another day and not a single top finance exec has faced U.S. criminal charges since the economic collapse began. While Wall Street critics in this country aren't literally blood thirsty, it's a bold crackdown on financial malfeasance nonetheless. But before you start lobbying for Mahmoud Ahmedinejad as the next Securities and Exchange Commission chairman, there are a few things about this case you should know.

RELATED: Goldman Sachs Flack Turns HuffPo Blogger

For one, it's kind of sketchy, and probably involves collusion with Iranian government officials at some level. As Al Jazeera points out, there are continued allegation that the embezzlement scheme was carried out by people "close to the political elite" or with their tacit approval. "The case has been politically awkward for Iran's leadership as it aims to show it is tough on corruption and raised questions about whether the government's privatisation drive has largely benefited friends of the political elite," writes Al Jazeera. "The man described by Iranian media as the mastermind of the scheme, businessman Amir Mansoor Khosravi, is said to have forged letters of credit from Iran's Bank Saderat to fund dozens of companies and buy a state-owned steel factory." The former head of Iran's state-owned Bank Melli, resigned over the scandal and skipped town for Toronto, where he owns a $3 million home.

RELATED: Hedge Fund Wants to Use Twitter to Predict Stock Moves

Another aspect of this case that should be familiar to American audiences is the lack of prosecution of top level executives. As The Guardian reports, allegations are rife that the judiciary only cracked down on low-level conspirators in the fraud, leaving senior officials and executives unscathed. "Many other banking officials are outside of prison right now. Why are you able to put us on trial and have nothing to do with them?" said an unnamed steel company official, a defendant in the case, according to Iran's Fars news agency.  

RELATED: Would Getting Rid of Ratings Agencies Make Us Safer?

Thirdly, it appears the harsh sentencing has more to do with political pressure than following the letter of the law. As The New York Times' Christine Hauser reports, Ahmedinejad's political opponents have been hammering him on this scandal, which plays well given Iran's sky high inflation, heavy international sanctions and overall dreadful economic outlook. "The case had political significance for ... Ahmadinejad, whose conservative opponents in Parliament tried to tie his chief of staff, Esfandiar Rahim Mashai, and other associates to the main suspect, Amir-Mansour Khosravi, a businessman who owns at least 35 companies," she writes. "Mr. Mohseni-Ejei has said that Mr. Khosravi confessed while in custody and started cooperating with the authorities. The other suspects were not named, but have been said to include managers of bank branches, and a number of clerks who were accused of accepting bribes. Fars quoted Mr. Mohseni-Ejei as saying that the other sentences that were handed down included prison terms of 10 and 20 years, as well as lighter sentences." Obviously Iran isn't a beacon of court room justice: Transparency International ranked Iran 120 out of 183 countries in 2011. But it's certainly a spectacle to see at least some bankers get nailed on fraud charges. 

RELATED: Financial Reform--Soon to Become the Next Health Care Reform?

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

U.S. Resident Could Face Death Penalty in Sudan

I spoke with Nancy Williams Dawod, whose husband, Rudwan Dawod, could face the death penalty in Sudan. He's a permanent U.S. resident and in a Sudanese jail facing charges including involvement in a terrorist organization.

I met Rudwan a few years ago via the non-profit Sudan Sunrise. He's worked with the organization to build schools and churches in his home country. (An organization I have also supported.)

Nancy and Rudwan met in Africa, on the first day of her first trip to the continent. And I asked her to respond to the accusation that her husband is involved in a terror group.

Watch the interview here:

As I mentioned in the interview the Sudanese Embassy released a statement to ABC News. The embassy would not speak about Rudwan's case, but did comment on the protests in Sudan. Here is the full statement from Seif Yasin, the Press and Information Counselor at the Embassy:

"Concerning the sporadic protests witnessed in the country, it is important to note first that Sudan affirms and protects the right of the citizens to demonstrate as they wish, provided that the rules and regulations in place are observed, as they are principally meant to ensure public order and safety.

It is during this delicate process of facilitating self-expression and maintaining public order on which some opportunists capitalize to inspire violence and chaos or smear Sudan's image. Fair observers will note how easily things can get out of hand in such settings if the laws that regulate such an affair are not adhered to, be it in Sudan or the United States. The world has witnessed plenty of such disasters. Occupy wall Street protests are a case in point, where numerous arrests were made by the New York Police. While we cannot comment on any one specific case, if any arrests do occur in Sudan, the detained individuals will most certainly have a fair and just trial in court.

Moreover, these protests, though by no means comparable to the ones elsewhere in the world might very well reflect the genuine grievances of a few, relating to economy and job opportunities. And indeed the Government recognizes this and has been aggressively moving to tackle these same economic adversities that the entire world is today challenged with. But in this process, order must prevail, not chaos."

Also Read

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Trustees: PSU told 'death penalty' was possibility

The Penn State Board of Trustees says the harsh sanctions levied against its football program were not as bad as a multiyear "death penalty" the NCAA had considered.

The board met Wednesday night along with President Rodney Erickson. A spokesman for Erickson had earlier said the powerhouse program faced a potential four-year ban on playing football. The trustees say Erickson confirmed that.

The school had come under scrutiny for how it handled the child molestation suspicions against former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky.

College sports' governing body on Monday handed down a $60 million fine, imposed a four-year bowl game ban, reduced football scholarships and negated 111 wins under former coach Joe Paterno.

The potential four-year ban was first reported by ESPN.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.