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

JANUARY 29, 2025:

TEXAS:

Death Penalty Documentary Nominated for Academy Award

Here is a link to the Documentary: https://www.paramountplus.com/movies/video/yleRLXv0XhC4i4xUEY1ZB_OycnkNM_1P/

I am Ready, Warden, a doc­u­men­tary about Texas death row pris­on­er John Henry Ramirez, was announced as a nom­i­nee for Best Documentary Short at the 2025 Academy Awards. The film tells the sto­ry of the days lead­ing up to Mr. Ramirez’s 2022 exe­cu­tion. It fea­tures inter­views with Mr. Ramirez and his son, Israel, as well as Nueces County District Attorney Mark Gonzalez, who oppos­es the death penal­ty and sought to halt Mr. Ramirez’s exe­cu­tion. It also cen­ters the expe­ri­ence of Aaron Castro, the son of Pablo Castro, who was killed by Mr. Ramirez.

Director Smriti Mundhra said she hoped the doc­u­men­tary would test ?“our capac­i­ty for for­give­ness and … redemp­tion.” Ms. Mundhra was inspired to cre­ate the film after read­ing cov­er­age of the case by jour­nal­ist Keri Blakinger. Ms. Blakinger said, ?“I knew that one of the things that attract­ed me to this case was the oppor­tu­ni­ty to explore the idea of redemp­tion in a case where the con­demned is unequiv­o­cal­ly guilty. A dis­pro­por­tion­ate amount of death row cov­er­age focus­es on inno­cence cas­es, even though I think cas­es where the con­demned is guilty raise much more nuanced moral quan­daries.” She was par­tic­u­lar­ly grate­ful for Mr. Castro’s par­tic­i­pa­tion, say­ing, ?“It gave us the chance to inter­ro­gate the death penalty’s promise of clo­sure in a way I’ve nev­er been able to in print.”

I am Ready, Warden is avail­able to stream on Paramount+.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

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

State seeking death penalty for man accused of killing young Tyler woman.

The Smith County District Attorney's Office announced Thursday it will seek the death penalty for a 20-year-old man accused of violently killing a young Tyler woman in September 2023.

Jamaurea Jermaine Britton, of Tyler, is charged with capital murder in the death of 18-year-old Dejah Hood. Documents show he admitted to beating Hood with a hammer, strangling and stabbing her before throwing her body into ravine behind the Hollytree Apartments in Tyler.

During a pre-trial hearing Thursday in the 114th District Court, the prosecution announced the DA's office filed a notice to seek the death sentence for Britton.

(source: inforney.com)

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

An update on death row inmate Robert Roberson and the death penalty

Texas death row inmate Robert Roberson managed to avoid lethal injection last year but it’s unclear if he will continue to escape the executioner in 2025. His attorney Gretchen Sween explains that Roberson’s status means he could be put back on the list of pending execution at any time despite the overwhelming evidence of his actual innocence and no crime was committed.

The new year could be a year of increased use of the death penalty across the United States which contrasts with how 2024 was a year that saw big gains in the effort to reduce executions.

On January 20, President Donald Trump signed an executive order aimed at reinstating and expanding the use of the federal death penalty. This directive instructs the attorney general to actively pursue capital punishment for crimes deemed sufficiently severe, with particular emphasis on cases involving the murder of law enforcement officers and capital offenses committed by individuals unlawfully present in the United States. The order also mandates efforts to ensure that states have adequate supplies of lethal injection drugs to carry out executions.

This move marks a significant shift from the previous administration's stance. In December 2024, President Joe Biden commuted the sentences of 37 federal death row inmates to life imprisonment, leaving only three individuals—Dylann Roof, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and Robert Bowers—remaining on federal death row. President Trump's executive order directs the Attorney General to evaluate the conditions of confinement for these commuted inmates and to explore the possibility of bringing state-level capital charges against them.

Additionally, the order calls for the Attorney General to seek the overruling of Supreme Court precedents that limit the authority of state and federal governments to impose capital punishment. Legal experts note that the order lacks specific details on implementation, leading to questions about how these directives will be carried out in practice.

This executive action underscores the administration's commitment to expanding the application of the death penalty in the United States.

Meanwhile, the world is seeing a close-up view of the death penalty in Texas in the documentary “I am Ready Warden.”

The 2025 Oscar-nominated short documentary tells the story of the execution of death row prisoner John Henry Ramirez. The film shows the days leading up to Ramirez’s 2022 execution. It features interviews with Ramirez and his son, Israel, as well as Nueces County District Attorney Mark Gonzalez, who opposes the death penalty and sought to halt Ramirez’s execution. It also provides a view of the experience of Aaron Castro, the son of Pablo Castro, who was murdered by Ramirez.

“I am Ready Warden” is available to stream on Paramount+.

Guests:

Gretchen Sween is the attorney for Texas death row inmate Robert Roberson.

Smriti Mundhra is the director of “I am Ready Warden.”

Michelle Pitcher is a staff writer at the Texas Observer and author of the article ‘How Innocent Do They Have to Be?’: Texas’ First Scheduled Execution of 2025 Raises Thorny Questions.”

Robert Dunham is the director of the Death Penalty Policy Project.

"The Source" is a live call-in program airing Mondays through Thursdays from 12-1 p.m. Leave a message before the program at (210) 615-8982. During the live show, call 833-877-8255, email thesource@tpr.org.

This interview will be recorded on Wednesday, January 29, 2025.

(source: Texas Public Radio)

**********

U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear Tarrant County death row case alleging prosecutors lied

Paul Storey has spent 14 years on death row for the murder of Jonas Cherry. His case has gained national attention.

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear a petition from a Tarrant County man on death row asking for a new punishment hearing after allegations that prosecutors lied during his trial.

Paul David Storey, 40, has been on death row since 2008. He was 1 of 2 men convicted of capital murder after killing mini golf course manager Jonas Cherry during a robbery 2 years prior. The other man, Mark Porter, pleaded guilty and got life in prison.

During Storey's trial, then-prosecutor Christy Jack told the jury Cherry's family wanted the death penalty for Storey — but his family denied ever wanting Storey to die for the crime.

In 2022, former Tarrant County District Attorney Sharen Wilson told the state’s highest criminal court Jack and co-prosecutor Robert Foran lied to the jury, and that Storey deserved a new punishment trial. Both have denied wrongdoing.

But in December, Wilson's successor — DA Phil Sorrells — walked back that office's support for Storey, asking the court to reject his appeal. In his brief, Sorrels said Storey has received due process and cited the Supreme Court's previous refusal to hear his case in 2022.

The latest petition, filed in October, was denied last week. Storey's attorney's had argued that the state confessed to wrongdoing and prosecutors’ attempts to make it right should be taken seriously. Mike Ware, an attorney for Storey, said they were exploring their options for next steps but declined to comment further.

Storey's initial execution date was set for April 2017 but the court granted a stay of execution to investigate whether the prosecution violated due process. The latest decision clears the way for his death, but it was not clear if or when the execution would be rescheduled.

Storey previously asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review his case in 2022, but that petition was also denied. Nonetheless, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote Storey's case was problematic.

"Prosecutors not only failed to disclose Cherry’s parents’ unwavering desire that Storey not be sentenced to death, but also misled the jury in summation to successfully secure a death sentence," she said.

(source: KERA news)

SOUTH CAROLINA----impending execution

ACLU of South Carolina challenges death penalty secrecy law----"We're challenging South Carolina's death penalty secrecy law. Here's why."

The American Civil Liberties Union of South Carolina has filed a federal lawsuit asking the court to remove a shroud of secrecy around South Carolina’s death penalty.

The new federal lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of the 2023 secrecy statute that forbids the publication of information about the procurement of lethal injection drugs, among other key information regarding the death penalty.

The lawsuit argues that the law bars public access to “a vast swath of information” — both current and historical — “related to execution-related drugs and/or equipment, including procurement; repairs and maintenance done after acquiring the drugs or equipment; protocols; risk mitigation measures; compliance with state and federal regulations; and cost.”

“Anti-death penalty advocates succeeded in persuading drug manufacturers and suppliers that their products shouldn’t be used in executions. Instead of engaging in the debate, South Carolina silenced those disfavored voices. That content- and viewpoint-based censorship violates the First Amendment,” said Meredith McPhail, Staff Attorney for the ACLU of South Carolina.

The legal team is also asking the court to issue a preliminary injunction, allowing the ACLU-SC to publish information about the death penalty that is currently censored by the Secrecy Statute. The named defendants are State Attorney General Alan Wilson and S.C. Department of Corrections Director Bryan Stirling.

Today’s legal complaint traces the history of executions in South Carolina, from public hangings in broad daylight to the cloistered proceedings of today's death chamber. Currently, the state offers condemned people the choice of being electrocuted, poisoned with lethal injection, or shot through the chest by a firing squad. No matter the method, the state now executes people in the evening in a small chamber at the Broad River Correctional Institution in Columbia.

Key elements of all 3 execution methods are now shrouded in secrecy under 2023’s Senate Bill 120, incorporated in S.C. Code of Laws Section 24-3-580.

South Carolina lawmakers began considering a death penalty secrecy statute after major pharmaceutical companies began refusing to sell drugs to U.S. states for the purpose of lethal injection. With the source of those drugs eliminated, South Carolina resorted to desperate measures. In 2010, it was revealed that South Carolina ordered sodium thiopental from a company operating out of a non-medical facility in England.

Eager to resume killing South Carolinians on Death Row, Gov. Henry McMaster and others promoted Senate Bill 120 as a way to hide the identity of compounding pharmacies or other companies willing to supply execution drugs and equipment to the state’s government. In his 2023 State of the State Address, McMaster emphasized that the purpose of the secrecy statute was to shield drugmakers’ identities “from anti-death penalty activists.” Backers of the bill added a criminal penalty to the statute to deter whistleblowers. Lawmakers passed the bill despite evidence that similar laws in other states had contributed to botched executions and failures of public oversight.

Today’s lawsuit argues that the South Carolina law chills political speech. Rather than persuade the public and pharmaceutical companies that it is moral to purchase poison for the purpose of executing South Carolinians, leading politicians have instead sought to suppress speech that they find inconvenient. To quote from today’s complaint:

“This ban not only further departs from the state’s history of making execution-related information publicly available but criminalizes the disclosure of this information by anyone for any reason. It thus silences the scientists, doctors, journalists, former correctional officials, lawyers, and citizens who have scrutinized the safety, efficacy, morality, and legality of South Carolina’s use of lethal injection.

“That approach is repugnant to the First Amendment. The Secrecy Statute serves an impermissible goal—to silence disfavored speech—by facially discriminating against speech based on its viewpoint and content and restricting the public’s right of access to information. The First Amendment permits none of that.”

In a separate case, ACLU-SC v. Stirling, the ACLU of South Carolina is challenging another element of South Carolina’s death penalty secrecy: The Department of Corrections’ all-out prohibition on news media interviews with incarcerated people. The ACLU-SC filed a petition for rehearing on December 27, highlighting the case of Marion Bowman Jr., whom the state is set to execute on January 31.

(source: aclusc.org)

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

Federal court denies motion to halt execution in Dorchester County killing

A federal district court denied a motion from a death row inmate to halt his execution which is set for Friday night.

Marion Bowman Jr., 44, filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to halt his execution over concerns about the secrecy surrounding the drugs used for lethal injection.

Court documents stated Bowman alleged his constitutional rights to procedural due process were violated by the state’s refusal to provide him with particular information about the drugs the state’s Department of Corrections has obtained to carry out the execution.

A federal judge denied the request, finding that Bowman was not deprived of due process since he was able to choose lethal injection as his method of execution earlier this month.

Bowman’s legal team has filed a notice of appeal for this decision.

He has been on death row since 2002 for his murder case of 21-year-old Kandee Martin. Martin was shot in the head and her body was found in the trunk of a car that had been burned in a rural area of Dorchester County.

Bowman is now set to be the 3rd inmate in South Carolina to be executed since the state resumed capital punishment.

Bowman had made his final appeal in December to the Supreme Court to stop his execution.NA----impending execution

(source: WCSC news)

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

SC inmate not entitled to know more about fatal drugs, judge rules

Other options are available for a death row inmate who claimed he has a right to know more about the drugs that will kill him, a federal judge decided Tuesday.

Marion Bowman’s attorneys indicated in a filing Tuesday that they intend to appeal the decision. With Bowman’s execution slated for Friday, the federal appeals court will have days to decide whether to delay the process long enough to hear him out.

Bowman, who chose to die by lethal injection, asked the court to require officials tell him more about the fatal drug. Specifically, Bowman’s attorneys want to know when and how the drugs were tested, when they expire and how the Department of Corrections stores them, they wrote in a petition.

Nearly everything about the drug used for executions — the sedative pentobarbital — is kept secret under a 2023 law that worked as intended by encouraging companies to sell to the state. Bowman has the right to verify the potency and purity of the drugs to be sure he won’t die a painful death, his attorneys argued.

Bowman’s arguments did not persuade U.S. District Judge Jacquelyn Austin, who came to a similar conclusion in a separate case ahead of the state’s first execution in over 13 years last September.

State law requires the prisons director to determine after a death warrant is issued whether each possible method of execution — lethal injection, firing squad and electrocution — is ready to use.

Nothing in state law requires the director to give any more information about the methods, Austin determined in turning down Bowman’s claims otherwise.

If Bowman didn’t feel that he had enough information about lethal injection, he could have chosen 1 of those other 2 methods by which to die, Austin wrote.

“He has been allowed to choose the execution method that he and his lawyers believe is best for him, using whatever criteria he preferred, based on the information available to him,” Austin wrote.

Bowman was sentenced to death in 2002 for killing an Orangeburg mother, stuffing her body in the trunk of her car and lighting it on fire. He is one of four inmates who could be executed in the coming months after the state restarted executions in September.

(source: South Carolina Daily Gazette)

FLORIDA:

Illegal immigrants who rape, murder children would get death penalty under Florida bill

New additions to a GOP bill in the Florida Legislature would require the death penalty for illegal immigrants convicted of capital crimes.

The additions would apply to the TRUMP Act, which aims to reform several areas of the state’s immigration policy in coordination with the new Trump administration.

House Speaker Daniel Perez, R-District 116, wrote in a release Tuesday that several changes were made to the bill after a discussion with the Trump administration.

“Last night, we requested and received technical assistance from the Trump Administration,” he wrote. “We made specific improvements to the TRUMP Act to further align state law with the renewed and expanded enforcement of federal immigration law under President Trump. Below you will find an outline of the enhancements we will incorporate on the Floor later today."

Under these changes, an illegal migrant convicted of a capital offense, such as murder or rape of a child, would receive a mandatory death penalty. Additionally, if an illegal migrant is a member of a gang and commits a crime, they would receive the maximum sentence allowed for their crime.

The new changes would also direct the State Immigration Enforcement Council to find ways to collaborate with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials regarding the deportation of non-citizens. Under this rule, local law enforcement would share information with ICE to “enforce federal immigration law and police transnational criminal organizations.”

The TRUMP Act would also expand a current prohibition on sanctuary jurisdictions by including fines and penalties for areas that give immigration officials the cold shoulder.

A program created through the bill would also earmark $25 million to offer bonuses to trained law enforcement officers that assist ICE task forces.

The changes come as ICE doubles down on its immigration enforcement efforts. Border czar Tom Homan addressed pushback to this plan in an appearance on ABC News Sunday, saying the Trump administration is upholding laws passed by Congress.

“Congress has a job to do,” Homan said. “We’re enforcing the laws that Congress enacted and a president signed. If they don’t like it, change the law.”

“The message needs to be clear, there’s consequence for entering our country illegally,” he added. “If we don’t show those consequences, we’re never going to fix the border problem.”

(source: KOMO news)

ALABAMA----impending execution

Alabama death row inmate asks for sedative ahead of nitrogen execution

Lawyers for an Alabama death row inmate set to die next week said there was a “simple, straightforward option” to guarantee the inmate doesn’t have excess pain during his nitrogen execution: To borrow a step from the state’s lethal injection execution process.

“What we’re talking about here isn’t medical, it’s execution,” said attorney Spencer Hahn during a federal court hearing in Montgomery on Tuesday morning. “Let’s use part of the lethal injection protocol and import it” to the nitrogen protocol.

Hahn’s ask came on behalf of Demetrius Terrence Frazier, who is set to die sometime within a 30-hour-period starting at midnight on Thursday, Feb. 6 and ending at 6 a.m. on Feb. 7. Frazier is set to die by inhaling pure nitrogen gas.

The hearing, which lasted several hours and concluded just before 2 p.m., focused on the psychological pain that a nitrogen execution may bring an inmate before he or she takes their last breaths.

“They’re remaining conscious longer than (the state’s medical expert) said they would,” said Hahn about the three inmates who have been executed in Alabama using nitrogen gas.

The Alabama Attorney General’s Office’s expert anesthesiologist, who works in Los Angeles, said a person who undergoes a nitrogen execution like Alabama’s would lose consciousness in under a minute.

“The facts on the ground don’t support that,” Hahn said.

“Something is going wrong… It’s not working that way.”

2 physicians testified virtually at the hearing—men who were engaged in a “battle of the experts,” as a different federal judge called the two opinions in a separate case. The witness for Frazier was a doctor who attended a prior Alabama nitrogen execution and said that inmate, Carey Grayson, made movements that showed he was conscious several minutes into the execution.

The state’s expert said it could be explained by unconscious movements.

After the testimony, U.S. District Judge Emily Marks questioned Frazier’s lawyers as to how his lawsuit challenging the state’s nitrogen execution method was different than a prior lawsuit from Grayson, who was executed in November and was also represented by the Federal Defenders Office. She also asked Frazier’s lawyers why the case—and so many other death row claims—was filed so close to his execution date.

Hahn said many clients are hesitant about filing lawsuits because they’re afraid to call attention to themselves; that the Alabama Attorney General’s Office will note who causes trouble. He said many are concerned that “if you lift your head up, you’ll lose it.” He added that Grayson and Frazier are different people, with different cases. And, he said, Grayson’s execution added another data point to challenge the protocol.

But in this case, Hahn said, there’s a simple way for the judge to rule. Frazier’s team is asking for “the opportunity to be unconscious when (Frazier) is subject to nitrogen,” said Hahn.

While Frazier could ask for a prison doctor to prescribe anxiety medicine, Hahn said that dose wouldn’t fix the problem. But 500 milligrams of midazolam—the first drug in the state’s lethal injection, three-drug cocktail—would.

Hahn added that the dosage, “according to (the state’s) expert,” would render a person unconscious.

The Alabama Attorney General’s Office argued Frazier’s lawyers haven’t showed he would experience “superadded pain” that would violate the Eighth Amendment against cruel and unusual punishment.

Dylan Mauldin, with the Solicitor General’s Office, said Frazier’s doctor cited no medical articles or supporting evidence to bolster his claims of psychological terror. And some psychological pain leading up to an execution, he added, was to be expected, and likely couldn’t be mitigated.

“There’s no way to get around that,” he said.

But Mauldin did not say the midazolam prior to the nitrogen was impossible. But, “there’s no reason to thinking knocking him out sooner” would reduce the fear, Mauldin said.

The judge said she would issue a ruling as soon as possible, and ended the hearing.

Frazier, 52, is to be put to death for the slaying of Pauline Brown, who was shot to death and raped in her Fountain Heights apartment more than 30 years ago. Frazier was also convicted in a separate killing in his home state of Michigan: The shooting death of a 14-year-old girl.

3 Alabama inmates were put to death in 2023 using nitrogen gas: Kenneth Smith, Alan Miller, and Grayson. So far, Alabama is the only state in the country to roll out nitrogen executions.

(source: al.com)

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

Federal judge hears request to block an upcoming nitrogen gas execution in Alabama----A federal judge has heard competing testimony over a request to block the nation's 4th execution using nitrogen gas

The state of Alabama urged a federal judge Tuesday to allow the nation's 4th execution with nitrogen gas to proceed next week, but a doctor who witnessed an earlier execution by the new method told the judge the inmate appeared to be in distress and awake minutes longer than officials predicted.

Alabama has carried out all 3 of the nation's executions using the gas and has set a Feb. 6 execution date for Demetrius Terrence Frazier, 52. But attorneys for Frazier, who was convicted of the 1991 rape and murder of a woman in Birmingham, sought the hearing asking the court to intervene.

Frazier’s attorneys urged the judge to block the execution unless the state makes changes to its protocol, such as giving the inmate the same sedative used at the start of lethal injections before the gas begins flowing. Separately Tuesday, Frazier's mother and death penalty opponents asked Michigan's governor to bring Frazier back there to finish a life sentence in the state for a separate murder conviction in the killing of a 14-year-old girl. Michigan has no death penalty.

Alabama's method involves placing a respirator gas mask over the face to replace breathable air with pure nitrogen gas, causing death by lack of oxygen. The state maintained Tuesday that the method brings swift death.

Dylan L. Mauldin, assistant solicitor general for Alabama, called Frazier’s legal maneuver a tactic to delay his execution and said the court should deny his request for a preliminary injunction. Mauldin noted the U.S. Supreme Court has never ruled the method unconstitutional.

Meanwhile, a lawyer for Frazier, argued that inmates executed with the gas appeared to be conscious for some minutes, instead of the 30 to 40 seconds he said the state predicted.

U.S. District Judge Emily Marks questioned Frazier’s attorney about why she should intervene when the courts have previously let nitrogen executions go forward.

“Something is going wrong. Every inmate who has been executed by nitrogen gas has exhibited signs of consciousness beyond the 40 seconds,” Spencer Hahn, an attorney for Frazier, responded.

Dr. Brian McAlary, an anesthesiologist who witnessed the November execution of Carey Dale Grayson, testified that he observed clear “evidence of distress” in the prisoner. He noted Grayson moved his head back and forth, had rapid eye movements and struggled against his restraints.

McAlary said he believed Grayson’s last voluntary movement occurred after about three minutes when he simultaneously raised both legs and held them in the air before letting them fall down. McAlary said he believed the movement was voluntary because “both legs were moved at exactly the same time, direction and distance.”

The testimony was the 1st time a medical doctor had testified about observations during a nitrogen execution. The court was previously given news accounts from journalists and the observations of prison staff.

Dr. Joseph Antognini, an anesthesiologist hired by the state as an expert witness, gave competing testimony that such movements did not necessarily indicate Grayson was conscious. Antognini did not witness Grayson’s execution.

“Movement can happen in the absence of pain,” Antognini said. He gave examples of instances when he saw patients move involuntarily during surgery while unconscious. But he acknowledged he had never seen movements like a double leg lift during surgery.

Frazier was in the courtroom throughout, shackled and taking notes in handcuffs on a legal pad.

Alabama Corrections Commissioner John Hamm testified that Grayson was combative at the start of his execution, cursing the warden and raising his middle fingers as he was strapped to the gurney. Hamm testified that he thought Grayson’s head movements were an effort to knock the mask loose.

Frazier's supporters had also argued he should be in a Michigan prison instead of Alabama's death row.

Frazier was first convicted in Michigan and sentenced to life in prison for the 1992 murder of a 14-year-old girl. Prosecutors said Frazier while in police custody in Michigan, confessed to raping and shooting Brown in Alabama after stealing about $80 from her purse. He was convicted in Alabama and given the death penalty. The then governors of Alabama and Michigan agreed in 2011 to place him on Alabama's death row.

Frazier's attorneys had filed a separate appeal to have him sent to Michigan to finish his life sentence there but dropped the request after Michigan’s attorney general wrote in a court filing that Michigan doesn't seek his return.

Death penalty opponents and Frazier’s mother made a last-minute plea to Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer to intervene and request that Frazier be sent back to Michigan.

“Please bring my son back to Michigan. Please don't let Alabama kill my son if you can stop it,” Carol Frazier wrote in the letter to Whitmer.

Whitmer’s office declined to comment.

(source: abcnews.go.com)

**********

Mother of murderer urges Gov. Whitmer to rescue son from Alabama’s death penalty----Michigan man faces execution in Alabama, mother seeks Whitmer intervention

Despite abolishing the death penalty in 1963, a Michigan prisoner is scheduled to be executed next week.

Demetrius Frazier, 52, originally from Detroit, is listed in Michigan Department of Corrections online records as serving a mandatory life sentence. But he’s not in Michigan.

Due to an unusual agreement between former Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder and then-Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley in 2011, Frazier, whom officials deem a “sexual predator,” has for the last 14 years been imprisoned on Alabama’s death row.

His mother, Carol Frazier, 69, of Taylor, held a press conference in Lansing Tuesday, Jan. 28 along with anti-death penalty advocates.

“We want him to come back to Michigan to finish his time here,” said Carol Frazier.

Since Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel in federal court filings said her office doesn’t want Frazier back, supporters are asking Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer to use her executive powers to save the twice-convicted murderer’s life.

Supporters claim Frazier’s Alabama transfer was improper and the governor should uphold the intent of Michigan’s constitutional ban on the death penalty.

Calling her son a “changed man,” the inmate’s mother intended to deliver Whitmer’s staff a handwritten letter and petitions said to contain thousands of signatures in Lansing. She hopes her son will live the rest of his life behind bars in Michigan, rather than die while strapped down inside an Alabama prison.

Advocates admit Frazier’s crimes were heinous, but oppose his execution on philosophical and legal grounds.

In 1993, a Michigan jury convicted Frazier on 2 counts 1st-degree criminal sexual assault in Detroit and the 1992 murder of 14-year-old Crystal Linda Kendrick, who police believe escaped a vacant house where Frazier intended to rape her in 1991.

Frazier chased her outside and fatally shot her in the head. A passing motorist found her naked body, according to a 1993 pre-sentence report included in new court filings.

MLive hasn’t been able to locate members of the victim’s family but the same pre-sentencing report said the family wanted Frazier sentenced to life in prison, “the electric chair” or “the same treatment” he gave Crystal.

Frazier was also convicted of breaking into a woman’s Detroit home armed with a knife on Sept. 1, 1991. Wearing a T-shirt with holes cut out for the eyes over his face, he raped the woman multiple times while multiple children were inside the home.

According to the Alabama Attorney General’s Office, at the time of his arrest in 1992 when he was 19, Frazier faced 15 counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, some that he’s never faced trial for.

During the Michigan investigation, Frazier revealed his responsibility in another crime, the sexual assault and murder of Pauline Brown in Alabama’s Jefferson County.

In November 1991, Frazier, according to court records, broke into Brown’s apartment. He searched the home for money and when he couldn’t find much, woke up Brown. He raped her at gunpoint, and then shot her in the head.

After he was convicted for his Michigan crimes, the Michigan Department of Corrections in 1994 temporarily transferred Frazier to Alabama’s custody to face trial for Brown’s killing. A jury found Frazier guilty and the judge sentenced him to death.

He was transferred back to Michigan until the 2011 agreement between state governors, at which time a private plane delivered Frazier back to Alabama. He’s remained there awaiting execution ever since.

Frazier is scheduled to be put to death within a 30-hour period that begins on Feb. 6 and extends into Feb. 7.

Frazier’s attorneys have put forth multiple arguments in their attempts to save Frazier’s life. Federal court filings claim the manner of execution -- administering nitrogen and depriving the body of oxygen -- is cruel and unusual.

Due in part to rising cost and complications linked to chemicals commonly used for lethal injection, Alabama joined several other states that allow nitrogen-induced execution.

Frazier’s attorneys also argue that the governors’ agreement was unlawful. Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy, whose office convicted Frazier, doesn’t recall being notified of the 2011 extradition plan.

“She was (recently) contacted by a lawyer on behalf of the defendant,” said Maria Miller, a spokesperson for Worthy. “She advised him that she thought that Gov. Whitmer would be the most appropriate person for this since the allegation is that a former governor wrongly extradited him to Alabama.”

Representatives for Whitmer’s and Nessel’s offices haven’t responded to requests for comment.

“We have current pending litigation regarding this case and will not be providing comment at this time,” said Michigan Department of Corrections spokesperson Jenni Riehle when asked about Frazier’s case and the agency’s policy on transferring prisoners to other state’s for execution.

“There is a week and 2 days to the execution date and there is enough time for Gov. Whitmer to issue an executive order,” said Abraham Bonowitz, an anti-death penalty advocate who’s helping coordinate efforts to save Frazier. “Everybody acknowledges that it’s a longshot.”

(source: mlive.com)

OHIO:

Bipartisan group of Ohio lawmakers offer new approach to repealing death penalty----The proposal would link capital punishment repeal with prohibitions on state funding for abortion or physician-assisted suicide

Ohio lawmakers from both chambers and both sides of the aisle announced a measure Tuesday that would abolish the death penalty and prohibit any state funding from supporting abortion services or physician-assisted suicide.

Ohio law already bars state funding from subsidizing abortion, and physician-assisted suicide isn’t legal in Ohio. But the sponsors described their three-part approach as a statement of values bridging the gap between 2 very different political outlooks. The proposal’s big tent approach to “pro-life” mirrors the Catholic church’s positioning on the idea, and representatives from the church were on hand to lend their support.

Sponsors placed their greatest emphasis on ending the death penalty, but outside groups are criticizing lawmakers for connecting three different policy questions and warning the bill could undermine access to abortion care.

State Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Loveland, described how she previously supported the death penalty when she served in the Ohio legislature 20 years ago. What changed her mind was a book written by former Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro. A few years ago, he co-wrote an op-ed with former Governor Bob Taft and former Attorney General Lee Fisher urging lawmakers to repeal the death penalty, explaining the punishment is expensive, ineffective, and unjust.

Schmidt framed her current stance as a question of human dignity.

“Abortion, the death penalty, and assisted suicide all undermine the commitment to human dignity,” she argued. “To be consistent with our pro-life principles, we must oppose all 3.

Schmidt argued that all 3 proposals support the affirmation of life.

“Our legislation will make sure that the state of Ohio does not fund death and preserves tax dollars for alternatives which promote life,” she argued. “Our commitment to protecting human life must be unwavering; prohibiting state funding for abortion, assisted suicide, and the death penalty creates a consistent, life-affirming ethic that upholds the dignity of life.”

Across the aisle, meanwhile, state Sen. Nickie Antonio, D-Lakewood, focused on practical resources.

“Abolishing the death penalty is pragmatic,” she argued. “According to the Ohio Legislative Service Commission, abolishing the practice could save the state between $128 and $384 million. Can you imagine what kinds of proactive policies we could do with that?”

Even as she insisted “the time to abolish Ohio’s death penalty is now — it has been for a long time,” she didn’t point to a particular ideal, but rather shifting political winds.

The new Trump administration wants to re-start capital punishment at the federal level and just last year lawmakers in Ohio proposed alternative methods to jumpstart executions.

“We stand here today, progressive Democrats and conservative Republican colleagues,” Antonio said. “We may use different language to explain where we stand on the spectrum of our beliefs, but we agree that there is a moral imperative to end the use of the death penalty in the state of Ohio.”

Schmidt and Antonio were joined by state Rep. Adam Mathews, R-Lebanon, and state Sens. Hearcel Craig, D-Columbus and Steve Huffman, R-Tipp City.

They’re still hammering out the final text of the legislation, although Mathews, in particular, noted they would draft it to ensure the proposal is not ‘severable’ — i.e. a court can’t remove one aspect of the legislation after the fact and leave the other provisions in effect.

Tough crowd

Although the measure’s sponsors indicated they’ve lined up several more lawmakers ready to sign on to their bill, they’ll face an uphill climb. Antonio backed a death penalty repeal with Huffman last session, and Schmidt sponsored companion legislation in the House. Neither bill cleared its committee.

Meanwhile, state Reps. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville, and Phil Plummer, R-Dayton, sponsored a bill last year allowing executions to go forward using a process known as nitrogen hypoxia.

“Well look, I mean, I fundamentally disagree with the premise,” Stewart said of the proposal eliminating the death penalty and blocking funding for abortion or physician-assisted suicide.

“I don’t think there’s support in the state,” he continued, “or certainly in the Republican caucus, for eliminating the death penalty.”

Stewart plans to reintroduce the nitrogen hypoxia bill, and like Antonio, he brought up the new presidential administration.

“This week, President Trump introduced an executive order that I think puts the federal government squarely in favor of the death penalty,” he argued, “not only at the federal level, but it actually directs the entire federal apparatus to support states in obtaining lethal injection drugs and in preserving laws that enable capital punishment in all the states.”

The proposal also got pushback from the Ohio chapters of the ACLU and Planned Parenthood.

Planned Parenthood Executive Director Lauren Blauvelt called the measure “anti-democratic” and argued it shows “how low out of touch politicians will go to taint popular legislation with abortion stigma.”

“The sad reality is that what should have been a focused effort to end the death penalty in Ohio devolved into yet another anti-abortion spectacle,” Blauvelt said. “We can end the death penalty without sacrificing the gains we made for reproductive freedom. While ending the death penalty in Ohio has been long overdue, conservative politicians have added unconstitutional abortion restrictions as a Trojan horse allowing our government to dictate our personal health care decisions.”

In a joint statement, ACLU of Ohio Legal Director Freda Levenson and Policy Director Jocelyn Rosnick blasted the bill for “manipulatively interweav(ing)” unrelated issues and expressed disappointment given what they see as progress building a coalition in opposition to the death penalty.

“Our organization has maintained an anti-death penalty stance since our founding,” they said, “but this ‘bait and switch’ bill is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, slyly designed to limit how public funds can be used for abortion care and coverage. Furthermore, supporting death with dignity is a longstanding ACLU principle.”

The sponsors insisted that nothing in their bill would violate the reproductive rights amendment approved by voters in 2023, but the ACLU isn’t so sure. In particular, they worry the blanket prohibition on state funding could wind up denying access to abortion medications.

“This proposed legislation violates the Ohio Constitution by deliberately undercutting the Reproductive Freedom Amendment,” they warned. “Should this bill pass, litigation is not off the table.”

(source: ohiocapitaljournal.com)

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

Bipartisan effort to end death penalty in Ohio returns

Democrats and Republicans in the Ohio Statehouse have again joined to try to stop the death penalty in the state.

Democratic Minority Leader Nickie Antonio, D-Lakewood, and Sen. Steve Huffman, R-Tipp City, announced Tuesday a plan to reintroduce legislation to abolish capital punishment and replace it with life without parole for capital crimes.

Ohio has not carried out a death sentence in more than 5 years. The death penalty was reinstated in the state in 1981.

From 1981 through the end of 2023, 336 people have received a combined 341 death sentences in Ohio. 56 of those have been carried out.

There are 119 inmates on death row.

“It is time for the state of Ohio to take the pragmatic and economically prudent step to abolish the death penalty,” Antonio said. “Capital punishment is impractical, unjust, inhumane, and erroneous. We stand together – progressive Democrats and conservative Republicans – seeking an end to executions in Ohio. The time to improve our flawed justice system is now.”

Republican Gov. Mike DeWine began a moratorium on Ohio executions in 2019 when he first took office and has said last year he did not expect any to take place throughout the end of his term in 2027.

In 2020, DeWine said the state could not get lethal injection drugs and told lawmakers they would have to find a different method to put inmates to death.

The state’s last execution came July 18, 2018, when Robert Van Hook was put to death by lethal injection for killing a man he met at a Cincinnati bar in 1985.

Similar legislation has been introduced in the Legislature for many years, gaining more bipartisan support each time. Huffman and Antonio introduced the same bill during the last session, but it received just 1 hearing.

Huffman said the death penalty should be abolished for moral and financial reasons.

“I am committed to preserving the dignity of all life until natural death,” Huffman said. “The fiscal and moral challenges associated with capital punishment are also the reason it needs to be abolished in the state of Ohio.”

Attorney General Dave Yost has consistently pushed back against efforts to eliminate the death penalty, issuing a report in September that pushed for its return.

As previously reported by The Center Square, Yost and Rep. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville, called for the resumption of carrying out death sentences after Alabama executed a man using nitrogen gas in late January 2024. That bill did not receive a hearing.

(source: WFMZ news)

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

Ohio lawmakers want to halt taxpayer funding of death penalty, abortion and assisted suicide----State lawmakers introduce bill to end death penalty

A bipartisan group of Ohio lawmakers is introducing a bill meant to stop the "funding of death" in the state — no more death penalty and no dollars for physician-assisted suicide or abortions.

This story contains details that may be disturbing and upsetting to some viewers and readers.

Time doesn’t always heal all wounds.

“I break down and cry," Rhonda Whitelock said. "It's been eight years and I still do this.”

It has never gotten easier for Whitelock, who continues to fight for her lifelong best friend, Suzanne Taylor — who was more like a sister.

"I have not forgotten my best friend; I have not forgotten her 2 daughters; I have not forgotten what happened," Whitelock said. "It's every day I relive it again."

She is waiting on the death penalty for George Brinkman, Jr.

He pleaded guilty to brutally murdering Taylor, 45, and her 2 daughters in North Royalton in 2017. The details of this case are important for the public to know, Whitelock said.

Brinkman took the family of 3 hostage and then slit the throat of Taylor in front of her children. He then smothered Taylor Pifer, 21, with a pillow and strangled Kylie Pifer, 18, with a phone cord.

After Brinkman killed the family of three, he drove to Stark County and shot and killed elderly couple Rogell and Roberta John.

But as the years go by, the spree murderer continues to sit on death row.

"If he was gone, I would feel some kind of relief — stop the nightmares," she told me.

We've spoken to Whitelock for years about her pleas to execute Brinkman.

There has been a pause on the death penalty in Ohio since Gov. Mike DeWine took office.

In 2020, DeWine declared lethal injection “no longer an option,” citing a federal judge’s ruling that the protocol could cause inmates “severe pain and needless suffering.”

Last year, he told reporters that no other capital punishment would happen while he is in charge.

"We will not as long as I am governor," DeWine said.

Now, a bipartisan group of lawmakers is trying to make that pause permanent.

"The state should not be subsidizing death," state Rep. Adam Mathews (R-Lebanon) said. "It should not be subsidizing ending human life, no matter the form, no matter the circumstance."

Mathews and state Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-Loveland) are the House sponsors of a not-yet-introduced piece of legislation that would ban any state funds from going toward the death penalty.

Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio (D-Lakewood), Senate Assistant Minority Leader Hearcel (D-Columbus) and Sen. Steve Huffman (R-Tipp City) joined them in leading the charge for the other chamber.

"It is my opinion that there's one being that should decide if you live or die — it's the Lord," Huffman said. "It should not be a judge or a prosecutor."

Antonio added that the punishment draws out the legal process for victims' families. She also fears that the wrong person may be convicted.

"It's been found to be expensive, impractical, unjust, inhumane and erroneous, as indicated by Ohio's 11 death row exonerates," the minority leader added.

It also disproportionately impacts people of color. Capital defendants charged with killing a white victim in Ohio are twice as likely to receive a death sentence as those charged with killing a Black person, Ohioans To Stop Executions found.

Plus, it is incredibly expensive for the state.

"As a Republican and a fiscal conservative — if you want to save money, say $20 to $30 million a year, you would vote to abolish the death penalty," Huffman told me back in 2023.

But the bill does more than just abolish capital punishment.

It would also prevent any state funding from going toward physician-assisted suicide and abortion access. Not only is assisted suicide illegal in Ohio, but taxpayer dollars already can’t go to either. Both Republican and Democratic sponsors say this wouldn’t impact reproductive healthcare.

"This is a compromise, right?" Antonio said. "My preference would have been to introduce the same bill that we've introduced for all these years. However, we were not possible to get a majority of our colleagues in the legislature to sign on to commit to voting for it."

Schmidt, one of the most vocal anti-abortion lawmakers, agreed that nothing new to change abortion policy would be added to their bill.

"Our bill does not change anyone's ability to have an abortion, but state dollars should never be used in that process," Schmidt said.

So why even add the abortion provision?

"I see this as a restating of values," Antonio said.

Still, House Democrats are wary — and so are abortion rights groups. The language of the bill is not out yet, so it is unclear what it will actually say.

"Obviously, we are going to oppose anything that undermines access to reproductive choice and freedom," House Minority Leader Allison Russo (D-Upper Arlington) said.

Other abortion rights advocates brought up the lack of trust they have in the sponsors since religion was a constant theme in the press conference. The Catholic Conference of Ohio spoke, and nearly all lawmakers brought up God and redemption in at least some way.

Whitelock, a Catholic, had a problem with this.

"We're supposed to keep Church and State separate — and our religious beliefs separate," Whitelock said.

But if she were to insert her beliefs, there is specifically the "eye for an eye" proverb in the Book of Leviticus.

"There's a lot of killing in the Bible," she added. "If they want to get [beliefs of redemption] in there, then maybe they should go back and read their Bible."

Lawmakers are asking for people to have compassion but Whitelock said this doesn't feel compassionate to victims and their loved ones.

"I'm not sure when the law stopped protecting victims and started protecting murderers," she said.

Members of House leadership have already responded, saying that they will fight to keep the death penalty as an option.

"Abolishment, it's never going to happen," Assistant Speaker Pro Tempore Phil Plummer (R-Dayton) said. "There has got to be a consequence to people's actions."

He plans to support a reintroduction of legislation to use nitrogen gas for the death penalty.

(source: news5cleveland.com)

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

Antonio, Huffman to Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Abolish the Death Penalty in Ohio

Today, Senate Democratic Leader Nickie J. Antonio (D-Lakewood) and state Senator Steve Huffman (R-Tipp City) participated in a press conference to announce they will be reintroducing legislation to abolish the death penalty in Ohio, replacing it with a sentence of life without parole for capital crimes.

“It is time for the state of Ohio to take the pragmatic and economically prudent step to abolish the death penalty,” said Antonio. “Capital punishment is impractical, unjust, inhumane, and erroneous. We stand together – progressive Democrats and conservative Republicans – seeking an end to executions in Ohio. The time to improve our flawed justice system is now.”

Ending the death penalty in Ohio has been pursued for decades and is supported by the majority of Ohioans. The punishment has been administered with disparities across racial and economic lines, failed as a deterrent to violent crime, and prolonged the victimization of murder victims’ families and loved ones through lengthy appeals processes. Additionally, a 2014 study found that at least 4.1% of death row inmates are likely innocent.

“I am committed to preserving the dignity of all life until natural death,” said Huffman. “The fiscal and moral challenges associated with capital punishment are also the reason it needs to be abolished in the state of Ohio.”

This version of the bill includes a bipartisan compromise with language that re-states existing law regarding Ohio’s prohibition on state funding of lethal injection drugs.

Watch the full press conference here, at: https://ohiochannel.org/video/press-conference-1-28-2025-introducing-legislation-prohibiting-state-funding-of-death-in-ohio

(source: ohiosenate.gov)

OKLAHOMA:

Oklahoma lawmakers will weigh death penalty moratorium, jail reforms

Oklahoma lawmakers are gearing up to debate a slate of criminal justice bills that could update the state’s correctional policies, change treatment expectations for incompetent defendants, restructure the parole board and pause the death penalty.

Rethinking long-established processes, the proposals aim to address some of the most pressing challenges brought to public focus over the past year. Here are issues to watch:

Death penalty

Senate Bill 601, authored by Sen. Dave Rader, R-Tulsa, pauses all pending executions, prevents the state from scheduling new execution dates and establishes a task force to review Oklahoma’s execution practices.

Made up of 5 members, the Death Penalty Reform Task Force would be responsible for determining whether the state is living up to reforms suggested in 2017.

All statutes related to the death penalty would be suspended until the act is repealed, at which time they would return to full force. However, the bill specifies that it does not vacate individual judgments in cases where a death sentence has been given.

A similar measure was proposed last year by Rep. Kevin McDugle, R-Broken Arrow, but it stalled on the House floor.

In Oklahoma, there are 32 people on death row. Last year, only Texas and Alabama outpaced the state’s number of executions.

Oklahoma jails

The “Oklahoma Jail Standards Act,” or Senate Bill 595 by Darrell Weaver, R-Moore, would mandate jails implement stricter security measures, improve medical care and enhance staff training.

The bill also requires the State Department of Health to review and approve jail construction and remodeling plans – a measure that would go into effect before the construction of the new Oklahoma County jail.

In December, the Oklahoma County jail failed a surprise health inspection. The ensuing report from the State Department of Health is only the latest installment in a long line of controversies for the 30-year-old detention center, which has failed countless inspections and earned the moniker “one of America’s deadliest jails.”

In June 2022, Oklahoma County voters approved a $260 million bond to fund a new jail, but along with an onslaught of controversy about where to build it, construction for the replacement facility is expected to cost at least $300 million more than anticipated.

Current plans put the new jail at a site in Del City, where construction of its accompanying Behavioral Care Center has already begun.

House Bill 1673, filed by Josh Cantrell, R-Kingston, would amend existing law by increasing the minimum distance between new correctional facilities and schools from 1,000 to 2,000 feet. The change doesn’t explicitly upset current construction plans but follows backlash from community members and local schools about the location.

Cantrell’s bill also mandates legislative approval for new or significantly expanded correctional facilities.

Competency restoration

Senate Bill 811, sponsored by Julie Daniels, R-Bartlesville, changes the state's approach to competency restoration for criminal defendants. It mandates that the Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services (ODMHSAS) develop and implement a pilot program to provide community-based competency restoration services, as ordered by the consent decree for Briggs V. Friesen.

Senate Bill 1089, by Sen. Paul Rosino, R-Oklahoma City, also alters competency determinations in criminal cases. It outlines procedures for handling individuals deemed incompetent but dangerous, particularly those accused of felonies or violent crimes. The bill mandates specific hearings, reporting requirements and conditions for release, emphasizing a standard of "clear and convincing evidence."

In a federal lawsuit against ODMHSAS, plaintiffs argued hundreds of people ruled incompetent to stand trial have been left in jails across Oklahoma for inordinate amounts of time.

Resolving the lawsuit has pitted prominent lawmakers Governor Kevin Stitt and Attorney General Gentner Drummond against each other, drawing out the settlement process.

Meanwhile, a bill from Justin Humphrey, R-Lane, proposes abolishing the ODMHSAS altogether. House Bill 1343 would mandate the transfer of all the department’s duties, powers, responsibilities and assets to the State Department of Corrections.

Pardon and Parole Board

Between June 2023 and June 2024, Oklahoma’s Pardon and Parole Board reviewed an average of 460 cases each month.

Sue Hinton, a retired journalism professor and advocate for people behind bars, said this large caseload hurts the people contending for release. She has attended almost every parole board meeting in the last five years.

“They will vote on each person. It takes less than 30 seconds,” Hinton said.

House Bill 1968 from Rep. Danny Williams, R-Seminole, would change the board's structure to address concerns from advocates like Hinton. The bill would transition board members from part-time to full-time state employees and raise their annual salary from $22,800 to $85,000.

The proposal would also allow the board to employ 2 alternate members, which could prevent delays when a sitting member resigns or can’t make it to a scheduled meeting.

This January, the Pardon and Parole Board worked through 2 months’ worth of cases because of successive board member resignations.

(source: KOSU news)

CALIFORNIA:

Man accused of killing witness in Vallejo could face death penalty, DA says

An Oxford-trained computer scientist could face the death penalty for allegedly killing an 82-year-old Vallejo landlord to prevent him from testifying in a murder case against his former tenants, according to the Solano County District Attorney’s Office.

Prosecutors allege in a complaint filed Monday that 22-year-old Maximilian Snyder was “lying in wait” for Curtis Lind before stabbing him outside his property around 2:18 p.m. Jan. 17 near Lemon and Third streets in Vallejo. The complaint charges Snyder, who made his 1st court appearance Tuesday afternoon, with first-degree murder with special circumstances. He is being held without bail at the Solano County Jail in Fairfield.

Although California’s death penalty has been dormant since Governor Gavin Newsom signed an executive order pausing state-ordered killings in March of 2019, prosecutors may still pursue capital punishment under the law.

“The defendant is death eligible at this point,” District Attorney Krishna Abrams wrote in an email to Open Vallejo Tuesday, adding that she will make a final decision after Snyder’s preliminary hearing.

Solano County District Attorney Krishna Abrams attends a press conference during National Crime Victims’ Rights Week on April 25, 2024 in Fairfield, Calif. (Geoffrey King / Open Vallejo) Public records show that Snyder applied for a marriage license in November in Washington with 21-year-old Teresa Youngblut, who federal authorities charged last week in connection with the Jan. 20 fatal shooting of Border Patrol Agent David Maland in Vermont.

The couple appears to sympathize with a fringe group based in the Bay Area known as the Zizians whose members have allegedly committed multiple violent or disruptive acts in recent years, according to court records, online posts, and interviews conducted by Open Vallejo with people familiar with the ideology and its adherents.

Snyder and Youngblut both attended Lakeside School, a private high school in Seattle. Snyder studied computer science at the University of Oxford, according to his LinkedIn profile, and in 2023 won $11,000 in an artificial intelligence research competition. Youngblut described herself on social media as a computer science student at the University of Washington.

In his 1st court appearance, Snyder wore a striped jail uniform and shackles. He glanced at a group of journalists documenting the hearing before sitting down beside his lawyer, Conor Trombetta, a Napa-based criminal defense attorney.

Trombetta told Judge Jeffrey Kauffman that he was appearing in court for another attorney, Amanda Bevins, who is traveling outside the country. Kauffman postponed Snyder’s arraignment until next Thursday when Bevins will be back in town. Bevins did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In April, Lind was scheduled to testify against a group of young tenants who allegedly stabbed him in November 2022, two days before they were set to be evicted from his property for failing to pay rent, according to court records. Lind was the sole eyewitness in the trial, according to prosecutors.

Suri Dao, who was living among friends in box trucks on the property, allegedly asked Lind to help with a water leak on the morning of Nov. 13, 2022, according to court records. But when Lind came down to help, Dao and another tenant, Emma Borhanian, allegedly attacked him with knives, stabbing him repeatedly. Another tenant, Alexander Leatham, impaled Lind with a sword through the chest, prosecutors allege.

Lind shot at his attackers, injuring Leatham and killing Borhanian. Court records show that Leatham and Dao have since been charged with the murder of their friend, Borhanian, and the attempted murder of Lind, along with an aggravated mayhem charge.

Posts on the online forum LessWrong.com allege that the 3 people involved in the 2022 stabbing are associated with Jack LaSota, who goes by Ziz and appears to be the inspiration for the fringe ideology built on a shared affinity for veganism and artificial intelligence theory, among other beliefs. Documents obtained by Open Vallejo indicate that LaSota lived on the Vallejo property with Leatham and Borhanian, among others.

LaSota, Leatham, Borhanian and another person were arrested in 2019 while protesting an event hosted by the Center for Applied Rationality, a nonprofit in Berkeley. The Zizian ideology appears to be a radical offshoot of Rationalism, a broader philosophical movement. During the Sonoma County incident, the protesters allegedly blocked attendees from exiting the venue while wearing robes and Guy Fawkes masks. The protesters filed a civil rights lawsuit alleging mistreatment in connection with their arrest.

Autumn Russell, who describes herself as a member of the broader Rationalist community, said in an interview Monday that she befriended Felix Bauckholt, who she knew as Ophelia, through their shared interest in rationalism.

Russell said Bauckholt, who worked in financial algorithmic trading in New York City, had expressed an idle, philosophical interest in the Zizian ideology before she abruptly disappeared, cutting off contact with friends and going dark online in the fall of 2023. Bauckholt was killed in the Vermont Border Patrol shootout last week in which Snyder’s partner, Youngblut, has been charged.

Russell said she never met Snyder in person but that he contacted several of her friends in an apparent attempt to recruit them into the ideology. In online posts, Snyder appeared to embrace Zizian ideas and beliefs, Russell said, noting he seemed obsessive and analytical.

“My initial reaction to him was very negative,” Russell said. “I never got anything else to contradict that.”

(source: openvallejo.org)

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

DA to seek death penalty in 2021 Vacaville double-murder case----Raymond M. Weber, 34, charged with 2 counts of 1st-degree murder and human trafficking

The Solano County District Attorney’s Office will seek the death penalty in the felony case against a 34-year-old Sacramento man charged with January 2021 killing of two women, one of them a minor, in Vacaville.

The Reporter learned of the DA’s decision Tuesday morning, when Chief Deputy Public Defender Tamani Taylor, who represents Raymond Michael Weber, referred to the decision during a trial-setting in Department 1.

Taylor also informed Superior Court Judge Jeffrey C. Kauffman that her client would represent himself during the penalty phase of the trial. If the jury finds Weber guilty as charged, the trial will proceed to the penalty phase, during which jurors review aggravating and mitigating evidence. Afterward, jurors must then return a verdict of either death or life in prison without the possibility of parole.

The judge, upon Taylor’s recommendation, appointed Fairfield attorney Robert Boyle as a “standby counsel” during the penalty phase. If needed, Boyle would act as an adviser available to step in and provide legal assistance, if needed, should Weber face a legal issue he cannot navigate on his own, without interfering with his right to self-representation.

A tall man at 6 feet 1 inch, Weber, shackled at the waist, clad in a striped jail jumpsuit, his black hair braided in several strands to the small of his back, listened quietly as the attorneys conferred with the judge and did not appear to register his emotions outwardly.

Kauffman then rescheduled the trial-setting, plus an order to show cause to AT&T Wireless, for 9 a.m. March 11 in the Justice Center in Fairfield.

The Weber case is notable not only because it’s charged as a double homicide but also because, investigators reported, he livestreamed some of crimes and their aftermath in a Vacaville apartment.

Court records show that, at one point, criminal proceedings against Weber were suspended for a time when his competency was questioned; however, Kauffman reinstated proceedings and determined there was enough evidence to hold him for further arraignment and trial.

A previously convicted felon, Weber is accused of shooting and killing Savannah Theberge, 27, who had ties to Utah and Georgia, and a 15-year-old girl from Elk Grove during the early hours of Jan. 30 in an apartment in the 500 block of Rocky Hill Road.

As previously reported, during a July 2023 preliminary hearing, Vacaville police officers testified that Weber was a human trafficker who used romance to recruit a victim and keep them in line with violence, likening the relationship to “modern-day slavery.”

Detective Steven Gunderson testified that he spoke with the mother of the slain teenager before she was killed, saying that she had earlier tried to stop the driver of a black sedan, whom she described as a “light-skinned African-American male with dreadlocks” of black and brown hair, from driving away with her daughter.

He said the girl’s cellphone was tracked to the Oxford Suites, a Rohnert Park hotel. Another investigator obtained a receipt from the hotel show that Theberge had registered using her credit card. Additionally, investigators obtained hotel surveillance video footage from Jan. 23, 2021, showing Weber standing outside the elevator, video from the early morning hours of Jan. 24 showing Weber and the girl, and more footage showing Theberge outside the hotel room.

Gunderson also said there was evidence that Theberge had checked into a Super 8 motel in Hayward on Jan. 24 and through Jan. 26. Deputy District Attorney Eric Charm, who is leading the prosecution, showed Gunderson still images from surveillance cameras showing Theberge at the Foothill Boulevard motel.

Earlier testimony included that of Makayla McCalebb, 19, a cousin of Weber, who told her mother that Weber was raping a young girl hours before he shot and killed her and Theberge.

McCalebb’s relationship with Weber changed suddenly when he accused her of giving a cell phone to the teenage girl on Jan. 29, angering him so much he began choking McCalebb, then 17, frightening her. She told Charm, “I knew something was terribly, terribly wrong.”

Vacaville Police Sgt. Erik Watts, Charm’s lead investigator during the hearing, testified that he was called to the Rocky Hill Veterans Apartments shortly after a 12:40 a.m. 911 call on Jan. 30.

Watts said his investigation revealed Weber had accused the two females of “turning on him,” and that he had paced around the apartment with a gun in his hand.

The sergeant confirmed that police responded to the apartment complex shortly after 12:40 a.m., when a woman reported that a man armed with a handgun was livestreaming from an apartment where two women, not moving, were lying on the floor.

Upon their arrival, police said the man, later identified as Weber, had barricaded himself inside. SWAT and Critical Incident Negotiation teams were deployed.

Negotiations were unsuccessful, neighbors were evacuated and flash bangs and CS gas — a powder that when mixed with a solvent becomes an aerosol in tear gas — were then discharged into the apartment. Officers found Weber hiding there and, following a brief struggle, shot him with a Taser to bring him under control. He was arrested at 8:32 a.m.

Besides 2 counts of 1st-degree murder, with enhancements, Weber is charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm, human trafficking, and human trafficking depriving personal liberty, also felonies with enhancements.

Judge Kauffman has noted that Weber was convicted in 2006 of assault with a firearm and in 2016 of unlawful possession of a controlled substance while armed, both in Sacramento and both felonies.

In the latest case, Weber also faces charges of domestic violence and making terrorist threats, and assault on a person with a semi-automatic firearm, cited in an out-of-county warrant.

(source: thereporter.com)

US MILITARY:

Appeals court weighs if U.S. can nix accused 9/11 plotters’ plea deal----If the Pentagon was ever to get courts’ leeway to withdraw a pledge not to seek the death penalty, the U.S. says, it should be for the alleged mastermind of the 2001 attacks.

Lawyers for the Justice Department on Tuesday implored a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., to allow the Pentagon to withdraw from a plea deal ruling out the death penalty for the accused mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, saying that if there were ever a case for courts to intervene, it was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s.

“I know that the standard is high. I know that this court has a lot of discretion about the appropriate circumstances. This is the case in which to do it,” Justice Department attorney Melissa Patterson argued.

Over nearly 24 years of litigation involving detainees brought before military tribunals since the terrorist attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people, those detained by the U.S. government have sought an extraordinary judicial order outside the normal course of litigation 31 times from the D.C. appeals court, Patterson said.

Mohammed’s was the 1st time the U.S. government had sought one, she said.

A 3-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia did not indicate how it might rule on the request from Lloyd Austin, who served as defense secretary under former president Joe Biden, to cancel a military court plea deal with Mohammed and two other 9/11 defendants just 2 days after it was signed on July 31.

The hearing represents the latest twist in the years-long saga to obtain justice for the 9/11 attacks and a reminder of the problems that have plagued the military commission system set up to try suspects at the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, since its inception.

The judges expressed deep skepticism over why Austin, who stepped down last week as President Donald Trump took office, waited until then to “pull the rug out” from years-long talks over a death-penalty demand — which Austin as the convening authority of the military war courts could have required up front — instead of tying up “all these courts in knots,” as U.S. Circuit Judge Patricia A. Millett put it.

“Secretary Austin here could have conditioned the convening authority’s ability to enter into a plea that took the death penalty off the table from the beginning,” U.S. Circuit Judge Neomi Rao said. “Explain why the writ is appropriate in these circumstances.”

Millett added, “The point here is whether the executive branch could have fixed this itself quite easily. And this wasn’t a surprise they didn’t see coming. … This is a control-with-the-executive-branch problem. I don’t know why it’s a judicial branch problem.”

While the deal for lifetime sentences has angered some victims’ families, Republican lawmakers and New York City’s firefighters union, other victim relatives support the deal. The judge in the Guantánamo case, Col. Matthew N. McCall, determined in November that Austin’s attempt to rescind the plea deals had come too late, because defendants had begun performing its requirements, a ruling upheld in December by a Pentagon appeals panel.

In early January, the Biden administration brought an 11th-hour appeal disputing whether the plea deals were valid, which was taken up by the D.C. Circuit — often regarded as the nation’s second-most-powerful appeals court — the night before Mohammed’s plea was to be entered.

Michel Paradis, a defense attorney for Mohammed and one other defendant, said signing the agreement “was the government’s responsibility to make.” However unhappy it might be over its possible lack of control or oversight, he argued, “It’s not the job of this court to delay a case that has already been delayed, arguably by 20 years, for reasons entirely of the government’s own making.”

Patterson argued that the defense secretary had ultimate authority over the tribunals, and the case was simply about whether Austin’s action “came two days too late.”

It was not immediately clear, eight days into Trump’s second term, whether the new administration will share its predecessor’s views about contesting the plea agreements. During his first term, Trump signed an executive order designed to keep the prison open indefinitely. He also once voiced a desire to add new inmates to the prison, which at its peak housed more than 700 men. Today, just 15 remain.

Trump’s new defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, began work at the Pentagon this week. A spokesman for Hegseth could not be immediately reached regarding the administration’s approach to the plea deal.

Critics of the military commission say that absent a plea deal, the 9/11 case, stuck in years of pretrial proceedings, is never likely to reach trial, in large part because of the government’s use of torture in the years after the terrorist attack.

Wells Dixon, a veteran Guantánamo defense attorney, noted that much of Tuesday’s discussion was spent on what rules might apply to a military commissions case, a fact he said highlighted the flawed nature of the “secondary system of justice” conceived to try those prisoners.

The hearing “was a painful reminder of how badly the U.S. government has botched the most important criminal case in our history,” he said.

In court on Tuesday, judges pored over the deal’s terms during more than 4 hours of arguments. At one point, Millett asked why it wasn’t final the moment it was inked, likening it to paying $500 in immediate exchange for a Taylor Swift concert ticket for a child who desperately wants to go.

But Millett and Rao also acknowledged the president’s authority over the military as delegated to the secretary defense. What if the president himself as the “ultimate prosecutorial authority” had said “ix-nay on these agreements as commander in chief”? Millett asked.

Rao, a Trump nominee, followed up later, saying, “That doesn’t mean the secretary can’t withdraw the delegation and act as the convening authority himself.”

Patterson argued that Austin let the plea talk process run its course, rather than risk being accused of prejudicing defendants by wielding “unlawful influence” over their cases.

But U.S. Circuit Judge Robert L. Wilkins, like Millett an Obama nominee, said that seemed like “really rolling the dice,” leaving the government facing its current predicament. “That doesn’t seem to me to be the way to run the railroad,” he said.

Wilkins probed whether the courts should let the pleas and sentences of the men go forward and require the government to appeal afterward to seek to vacate the pleas and go to trial.

Patterson said that it would add a “ballpark” three years of further litigation and risk the courts rejecting a government appeal because of the defendants’ constitutional rights against double jeopardy — being prosecuted twice for the same offense.

Rather than “the piling of asterisks upon asterisks here about this hypothetical route,” Patterson said, “we think the much more straightforward route is to stop the pleas from happening in the first place.”

If the circuit court rejects the government’s appeal, the Justice Department asked that Mohammed’s plea hearing be stayed so it could go to the Supreme Court.

(source: Washington Post)

NIGERIA:

Ogun Mulls Death Warrants For Condemned Criminals

Ogun State Government has said, it is considering signing the Death Warrants of condemned criminals sentenced by competent courts to serve as a deterrent to those who may want to commit heinous crimes in the state.

The State Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr. Oluwasina Ogungbade (SAN), made this known yesterday after inspecting inmates and facilities at the Correctional Centre, Ibara, Abeokuta.

The Attorney General, who was conducted around by officers of the Centre, expressed concern over the increase in criminal activities like ritual killings, kidnapping, cultism, and other heinous crimes in recent times in the state.

According to Mr. Ogungbade, the state government is ready to take the bull by the horns by implementing the law through signing the Death Warrants.

He observed that despite the proactive measures put in place by security agencies in tackling crimes, there appears to be an upsurge, particularly in ritual killings, adding that the government had identified the wrong perception that there would be no repercussions when some of these crimes are committed as the root cause.

“I can tell you that we are looking seriously at a means of sending a message that Ogun State is not a place where you can come and commit such serious crimes and get away with it.

“The law as of today, for example, states that a murder case attracts the death penalty and some other offenses. But if you look at it nationally, for a long time, there has been reluctance on the part of governments across the states, particularly since the advent of democratic rule, to sign Death Warrants. But I assure you that at this time, we are looking very seriously at following the law to its letter.

“It is part of the duty of the governor to sign Death Warrants, and I am certain that when he took that oath of office, he took it knowing full well the responsibilities that come with it. He is a governor who upholds the rule of law, so I can assure you that in deserving cases, he will not shy away from that constitutional duty.

“Though, I may not give a timeline, I can only say that in deserving cases, which we are looking at, it will happen.

“If somebody has gone through the process of a fair trial and has made use of all his appeals, we will begin to look seriously at implementing those judgments, hoping that it will serve as a deterrent to those who still intend to carry out such crimes. But in doing so, I can assure you that we will be systematic about it; we will not be reckless about it”, he assured.

He said the present administration has done a lot in terms of granting amnesty to those condemned to death by turning their death sentences into life imprisonment, reducing life imprisonment to a fixed term of imprisonment, as well as allowing punishment to serve as a deterrent.

The Commissioner attributed the upsurge in criminal activities to a total loss of value system and the support given to criminals by their relatives, saying this is in variance with the African belief system that abhors criminal behavior and seeks punishment for offenders.

“In times past, when people committed crimes, their family members were usually the ones who would even alert law enforcement. But what we have today is where the family comes together to shield people who have committed crimes. Unless there is a total reappraisal of our value system, we will continue to have this problem. We need to go back to the family”, he added.

The Attorney General said his visit to the Correctional Centre was to see the conditions of the inmates and the facilities, with a view to doing the needful to ensure that the centre worked the way it was designed and that the inmates were not made to go through excruciating suffering.

(source: aljazirahnews.com)

UNITED KINGDOM:

Majority of people say UK should bring back the death penalty, poll shows - with most support among millennials

A majority of people say the UK should bring back the death penalty, according to a new poll.

The support behind reintroducing capital punishment is mostly being driven by millennials - born in the late 1980s to mid 1990s - with 3 in 5 (58 %) backing the idea, with a quarter (27 %) against.

The survey, carried out by public opinion think tank More in Common, showed Britons backed the use of the death penalty for heinous crimes such as serial murder and deadly terrorist attacks.

Some 56 % were in favour of rapists facing capital punishment, too.

Public support had increased since More in Common last carried out the poll in autumn 2023 from 50 to 55 %, reported The Times.

The new poll was carried out after there were debates about whether it should be brought back following the sentencing of triple child-killer Axel Rudakubana.

The murderer avoided a whole life sentence as he was aged 17 when he carrier out his sick stabbing spree in which he killed little Bebe King, 6, Elsie Dot Stancombe, 7, and Alice da Silva Aguiar, 9.

Rudakubana, 18, began a 52-year sentence last week at one of Britain's most notorious prisons, Belmarsh in south-east London, where he was placed in isolation for his own safety.

He was convicted of murdering 3 girls and 10 counts of attempted murder.

Luke Tryl, executive director at More in Common, told The Times: 'If the terrible crimes committed in Southport trigger a national debate about the death penalty then the public's starting point will be one of support for its reintroduction.

'Overall, 55 % of Britons say the death penalty should be reintroduced for certain crimes — but asked about acts of terrorism or serial murder, support then rises even further to 70 %.

'While it seems unlikely this government will reopen the debate, it will have to work harder to convince people that existing sentences for terrorists and murders really are tough enough, and that killers like Axel Rudakubana will never be set free.'

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has been openly vocal about being against the death penalty.

During his career as a barrister he was called to the bar in several Caribbean countries where he defended convicts sentenced to death.

In 2018, while Brexit shadow secretary, flew to Taiwan to lobby against the punishment. He was previously director of The Death Penalty Project - a campaign group that provides free legal representation to individuals facing the death penalty.

A Downing Street spokesman said: 'The government has no plans to bring back capital punishment. Parliament abolished the death penalty more than 50 years ago, and in free votes has consistently voted against it being restored in recent decades.

'In 1998, parliament made clear in a free vote that it was opposed to the death penalty for all offences.'

The 1965 Murder Act abolished the death penalty for murder in the UK and it was abolished for all crimes in 1998. The last executions were by hanging and took place in 1964.

(source: dailymail.co.uk)

INDIA:

'Gaping holes': SC frees death row convict in Mumbai rape-murder

(see: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/gaping-holes-sc-frees-death-row-convict-in-mumbai-rape-murder/articleshow/117664389.cms)

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

Honour Killing: Man gets death penalty for double murder----Judge K Vivekananthan, of the special court for the trial of cases registered under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, pronounced the death penalty to prime accused K Vinoth Kumar, a daily wager.

A special court in Coimbatore on Wednesday awarded death sentence to a man for killing his 22-year-old brother and his 16-year-old girlfriend, in a case of honour killing in 2019.

Judge K Vivekananthan, of the special court for the trial of cases registered under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, pronounced the death penalty to prime accused K Vinoth Kumar, a daily wager.

The court, last week declared him guilty of double murder, while 3 other co-conspirators -- R Kanthavel, 26, S Iyappan, 36, and R Chinnaraj, 40, were acquitted for lack of evidence.

According to the prosecution, Kumar conceived and executed the murder of his brother K Kanagaraj, 22, from a Most Backward Community and his girlfriend Varshini Priya, belonging to a scheduled caste, after they got married, braving opposition.

Kumar was apprehensive that he may not find a bride if his brother married from the SC community. Due to Kumar’s objection to their marriage, Kanagaraj and the girl moved into a rented house at Vellipalayam near Mettupalayam on June 22, 2019.

On June 25, Kumar hacked his younger brother to death and left the girl critically injured at their rented house; she died later at the Coimbatore Medical College and Hospital. Kumar surrendered at the Mettupalayam police station.

(source: dtnext.in)

BANGLADESH:

Rupa murder: HC commutes death penalty of 3 convicts

The High Court (HC) has commuted the death sentences of 2 convicts to life imprisonment and reduced another's sentence to 7 years in the 2017 rape and murder case of Zakia Sultana Rupa, a Dhaka Ideal Law College student, on a running bus in Madhupur, Tangail.

The court reduced the death sentences of bus assistants Mohammad Shamim and Jahangir to life imprisonment and fined them Tk 1 lakh each.

Bus driver Habib Miah's death sentence was commuted to 7 years' imprisonment with a fine of Tk 20,000. Another convict, bus helper Akram, was exempted as he died in jail.

The verdict was delivered after reviewing the death reference and appeals filed by convicts. Deputy Attorney General M Masud Rana said the HC considered the convicts' young age and their long period in jail while reducing the sentences.

The state will move an appeal challenging the verdict before the Supreme Court's Appellate Division.

Rupa, 27, was raped and killed on a bus headed to Mymensingh by three assistants of the driver on August 25, 2017.

Her body was thrown out of the bus in an empty forest area on the Tangail-Mymensingh road.

(source: The Daily Star)

INDONESIA:

157 Indonesians Face Death Penalty in Saudi Arabia, Malaysia

As many as 157 Indonesian nationals are facing the death penalty abroad, said director of citizen protection at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Judha Nugraha, according to the latest figures as of January 2025.

"The majority are in Malaysia due to drug trafficking cases," said Judha when contacted on Tuesday, January 28, 2025.

Besides Malaysia, he said, the Indonesian death row convicts are also in Saudi Arabia. Some of the inmates abroad face death sentences as a result of murder-related charges.

The ministry said it is providing legal assistance to ensure the citizens’ rights are fulfilled. It is also offering diplomatic protection for criminal cases that have been finalized.

Coordinating Minister for Law, Human Rights, Immigration, and Corrections Yusril Ihza Mahendra said the government will be negotiating repatriation of Indonesian death row convicts in Malaysia and Saudi Arabia, after completing the process of transferring death row inmates to their home countries.

Yusril said the government also needs to complete the regulation on the transfer of prisoners and exchange of prisoners and negotiate with other countries about the policy of transferring prisoners.

After, the Indonesian government will start processing the Indonesian death row inmates abroad, especially those held in Saudi Arabia and Malaysia. "There are quite a lot of Indonesian citizens facing the death penalty there, but have yet to be executed,” he said.

On the death row inmates transfer mechanism, Yusril said the government must also discuss the matter with the inmates’ families.

Yusril affirmed that the state is required to protect its citizens regardless of “whatever the mistakes be, or whatever their ideologies are.”

(source: en.tempo.co)

PAKISTAN:

2 death row inmates pardoned hours before execution in Karachi

2 death row inmates at Karachi Central Jail were pardoned by the relatives of their victims just 24 hours before their scheduled execution.

The inmates, close friends convicted of murder in 2014, expressed profound remorse over their actions. One inmate recounted, “Our execution was scheduled, but just 24 hours before, a stay was granted as the victim’s family forgave us. We appeal to the President for clemency, as we deeply regret our actions.”

The inmate added that they were teenagers at the time of the crime—one aged 17 1/2 and the other 18—and have spent the last 19 years in prison. "Now that the victim’s family has forgiven us, why is the state still punishing us?”

Jail authorities provided insight into the transformation within Karachi Central Jail. Conditions in the facility were dire until 2017, marked by violence, drug use, and a lack of security. “Back then, many of our officers were martyred. In 2017, 2 high-profile inmates escaped, which led to a complete overhaul,” a senior official shared.

The official highlighted the jail's significant reforms, particularly in education. Inmates now have opportunities to pursue higher education, with many completing their intermediate and graduation studies annually.

This case has reignited discussions around the balance between justice and rehabilitation within Pakistan’s penal system.

(source: nation.com.pk)

JAPAN:

Ex-prison officer gives rare look behind the walls of an execution

A former correctional officer offered a rare first-hand account of the execution of a death row inmate he participated in more than a half a century ago and his thoughts at the time.

Now a lawyer, Yoshikuni Noguchi talked about his experiences as a correctional officer with The Asahi Shimbun and the somber duty of carrying out an execution.

Excerpts of the interview follow:

Question: You have publicized your experience of taking part in the carrying out of the death sentence. Although that experience occurred about half a century ago, I was surprised to learn that you said recently that you never talked about that experience with your family. Is that true?

Noguchi: Yes, it is. I have never spoken about it to my wife or son. The reason is that it was something I did not want to talk about. That is all.

If asked or if I felt there was a need, I have given lectures or agreed to be interviewed to talk about what I went through in the carrying out of the death sentence. For that reason, I believe my family naturally knows about what I talked about. But it has never come up in family conversation.

Q: In Japan, correctional officers at detention houses have mainly conducted the executions. But you are also the rare lawyer who formerly worked as a correctional officer, aren’t you?

A: Because I had an interest in bad behavior by juveniles, I entered the Justice Ministry after graduating from university because I wanted to become a teacher at a juvenile prison. But I was ordered to work at the Tokyo Detention House and I was very surprised when I was told to wear the uniform of a correctional officer when I arrived there. I thought that was not what I expected, but I was talked into taking on the duty.

Q: Were you aware when you first arrived at the detention house that among the duties of a correctional officer was the possibility of carrying out the death sentence?

A: I had no such awareness. As I worked, I gradually became vaguely aware.

Q: What do you mean by vaguely?

A: Not a single person that I worked with spoke about the death sentence. Although there was no ban on talking about it, there was a silent understanding to not talk about it.

But there were rare occasions when someone let slip a partial explanation. One time, a higher-ranking officer said, “Noguchi, the death sentence is a solemn thing.” But even then, I never imagined that I would ever be on hand for carrying out an execution.

Q: How did you become involved in carrying out the execution?

A: Toward the end of 1971 when I was in charge of administering one of the detention buildings, a superior told me, “There will be an execution tomorrow, so I want you to handle the death row inmate.” I could not say no to an order.

The death row inmate was transferred to the building I was in charge of and we kept a very strict inspection over him for 24 hours. The execution was scheduled for the next day. My duty was to ensure that the inmate was taken to the execution chamber.

Q: Does that mean that at the Tokyo Detention House of that time, the inmate was told about the execution a day ahead of time, not on the day of the execution?

A: Yes. On the afternoon the inmate was informed, his wife and relatives rushed to the detention house after receiving a telegram. I took the man to the visiting room. His wife held his hand and cried without saying anything. The man said, “All humans die, it is only a question of who comes first so please do not be sad.” The wife in the end only managed to get out the words, “Our son’s face has begun to resemble you.” To be honest, I had tears in my eyes.

The next morning, I took the man to the execution chamber. While my duty would normally have ended there, I stayed behind at the chamber out of my own volition.

Q: Why was that?

A: I felt that I was unable to save a person’s life and so I thought that I should witness the execution. The other correctional officers blindfolded the man and handcuffed him behind his back. I stood by as they took the man to where a rope was hanging from the ceiling.

There was a 1-meter square board where the man stood and a correctional officer placed the rope around the man’s neck. At that instant, a superior signaled the three correctional officers waiting on the other side of the plate glass window and the board opened with a loud bang. The man fell straight down. I unconsciously reached out to grab the rope.

Q: Why did you do that?

A: Because the rope was swinging so wildly as it recoiled from the man’s weight. When I looked down, the man’s head was just in front of my eyes. The medical officer waiting below opened the man’s shirt and applied a stethoscope. When I saw that his heart was still beating, I thought, “This person might be saved if we did something now.”

I had the realization that we were killing a person. While we were obeying the law and carrying out duties that we could not defy, what remained with me was the feeling that there was nothing I could do for the man as well as no saving grace.

Q: Didn’t you also at one time say that witnessing the execution left behind a sort of trauma?

A: The memory of the man’s heart beating did not disappear.

Q: Did you also feel the execution was solemn?

A: No, I did not think so.

Q: I understand one of the three correctional officers standing on the other side of the plate glass window was one of your subordinates. Is it really true that you never talked about that experience even once with that subordinate?

A: Yes. We did not even talk about what a difficult thing it had been. I only realized for the first time the subordinate had been ordered to be one of those involved in the execution when I saw his face on the other side of the window. Even though I was his superior, I was not told about that order.

There were levers to open the board on the floor of the execution chamber. They were to pull their levers simultaneously. This was meant to lessen the psychological burden by not making it clear whose lever led to the opening of the board.

Q: Even though it was such a trying experience, why did you talk in front of people about your experience at the execution?

A: That is because I felt the people have a right to know about how the executions are carried out as well as a moral obligation to know about it. I then thought that it was my obligation to talk about the experience.

After I became a lawyer after quitting the Justice Ministry, I began talking about that experience from about 40 years ago when I was asked to do so.

Q: What is the reason for your thinking that the people have an obligation to know?

A: Because even though the Constitution states that human life is the most important right, people are taking human life as provided for by the law.

Q: My impression is that you have not clarified your position on maintaining the death penalty. Are you in favor or opposed?

A: I cannot answer that. While I do have a personal opinion, I feel it would be presumptuous of me to state my view with a stance that would almost be like saying,“I am a human who knows about the death penalty” based on witnessing one execution.

Q: Article 36 of the Constitution bans cruel punishment while Article 18 bans involuntary servitude. Do you think hanging is cruel punishment? Doesn’t having correctional officers carry out an execution constitute involuntary servitude?

A: For the reasons I just stated, I cannot answer that. All I am doing is talking about what I saw and what I felt. The people who heard what I had to say should make their own judgments.

Q: Excuse me for being insistent, but will you explain to me the reason for not wanting to talk about your experience witnessing an execution with your family?

A: There is no major reason. But it is only because it was a trying experience.

Q: There are only a handful of former correctional officers who have come out to speak about their experiences like you have. What should be done to make it possible for more such officers to talk about their experiences?

A: Because the nature of the work involves taking human life, I feel it is not something that is easy to talk about. Under the current situation of the Justice Ministry not publicizing the actual situation surrounding executions, there is also a tendency for correctional officers who carry out their duties faithfully to be hesitant to talk about the actual situation. I believe there is a need for the Justice Ministry to first of all further publicize the situation to the people.

Q: You served as the head lawyer of the minor who was arrested (in 1997) on suspicion of being a serial killer in Kobe. Is there anything that added to your thinking about the death penalty based on that experience?

A: I am now talking as a lawyer, but he wanted to be punished with the death sentence. Even if the death penalty was used to intimidate such a person, I have doubts as to whether the sentence would have had any controlling effect. If I am asked then what should we do, I feel the answer is that the experience of being loved by others and to have that person feel there is meaning in his or her existence will serve in a wider meaning as a deterrent.

Q: It has been about 40 years since you first talked about your experience. Has there been a change in how Japanese society views the death penalty?

A: My gut feeling is that there has been no change. Actually, as a lawyer who has handled many juvenile crimes, I feel there has been a heightening of a tendency to seek out even stricter punishment in comparison to that time.

(source: The Asahi Shimbun)

THAILAND:

Thai senator’s ‘live executions’ proposal panned----Former human rights commission chief condemns ‘extreme’ response to drug problem

Senator Angkhana Neelapaijit on Wednesday condemned a suggestion by a colleague to broadcast live the executions of convicts as a way to combat the drug problem.

Ms Angkhana, a former head of the National Human Rights Commission, was among many who were taken aback by the remarks of Sen Amat Ayukhen, who suggested harsher penalties against drug dealers including more death sentences.

Mr Amat proposed creating a special court to handle drug-related cases to ensure rulings are handed down within three months. He suggested the death penalty be imposed more regularly and executions be broadcast live as a deterrent to drug crime.

Though dozens of prisoners have been sentenced to death for various offences, Thailand has not carried out an execution since June 2018, when a murderer was given a lethal injection. Prior to adopting lethal injection in 2003, Thailand used shooting as the method of execution.

Ms Angkhana said the proposals by Sen Amat would not serve as a deterrent but would instead undermine human dignity and condone violence. She said such broadcasts could expose people, especially the young, to violence, adding it would also violate the law against torture and enforced disappearances.

Tackling the drug problem effectively requires a systematic approach that includes a crackdown on major offenders, she said. She backed the government’s tough stance on drugs but noted that while the government must strictly enforce the law, it must also uphold human rights.

When asked if Mr Amat’s proposal reflected the Senate’s view, she said it was just his personal opinion, but the presence of several senators standing behind him when he made the remarks could give the impression they support it.

She also said the death penalty is not a simple process, and requires a court ruling, solid evidence, and a conviction for a serious crime.

“Comments like these may send a message that such extreme measures are acceptable. His proposal also contradicts Section 6 of the enforced disappearance law. But I think the senator didn’t seriously think about the implications,” she said.

On Tuesday Mr Amat acknowledged his proposal might seem harsh, but he said he believed firm action was necessary.

He made the proposal after hearing a briefing to the Senate by Sirisuk Yuenharn, deputy secretary-general of the Narcotics Control Board.

(source: bangkokpost.com)

IRAQ:

Iraq Dismantles International Drug Network, Sentences 9 Traffickers to Death----The council confirmed in an official statement that the security forces seized 186 kilograms of various types of drugs in their possession.

Iraq’s Supreme Judicial Council announced that the Central Criminal Court has sentenced 9 Iraqi drug traffickers to death after convicting them of smuggling and distributing illicit substances across the country.

The council confirmed in an official statement that the security forces seized 186 kilograms of various types of drugs in their possession, including Captagon, methamphetamine, and caffeine, which were intended for distribution.

Based on the available evidence, the court issued capital punishment under Article 27(1) of the Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Law, and all nine traffickers received death penalty.

In a related development, Iraq’s Counter-Terrorism Intelligence Agency in the southern province of Basra, revealed that it had dismantled an international drug trafficking network in a highly coordinated security operation. The operation led to arresting several individuals involved in smuggling and distributing narcotics.

One key suspect, a foreign national, was arrested while trying to enter Iraq from a neighboring country with crystal meth hidden inside his body. After his arrest, the suspect confessed that he planned to sell the drugs in Iraq and security forces launched a broader investigation, tracking down and detaining 2 more individuals involved in purchasing and distributing the drugs, and they were referred to the competent authorities for prosecution.

Drug-related arrests in Iraq have been rising in recent years. In 2023, 14,000 people were arrested on drug charges, compared to 17,000 in 2022. This increase reflects the growing problem of narcotics trafficking and abuse in the country.

With drug networks exploiting Iraq’s porous borders and ongoing security challenges, authorities have intensified counter-narcotics operations to curb trafficking and dismantle organized criminal syndicates fueling the crisis.

(source: kurdistan24.net)

IRAN----executions

1-Year Anniversary of No Death Penalty Tuesdays: "Strategic Campaign for Today and Our Future”

Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO); January 28, 2025: To mark the one-year anniversary of the “No Death Penalty” abolitionist movement, IHRNGO hosted a Space on X (Twitter) where human rights activists from inside and outside Iran discussed the movement.

Jailed human rights defender, Ahmadreza Haeri, who was one of the founding members of the campaign, sent a message from Ghezelhesar Prison which was read by Ghazal Abdollahi in the Space. He wrote: “When we started the ‘No Death Penalty Tuesdays’ campaign, in the back of mind, I thought we must one day reach a free, democratic and developed Iran that recognises and respects the rights of all its citizens, regardless of their identity, language, religion or beliefs. I believe deeply that ‘No Death Penalty’ is a strategic campaign for both today and our future. If we all agree on just this one principle of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and make the right to life an unbreakable red line, we can hope for a brighter future and transitional justice. We can ensure that our tomorrow will not fall back into tyranny after today’s struggles.”

Iran Human Rights Director, Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam welcomed Ahmadreza Haeri’s message and emphasised the importance of standing firm on the fundamental human rights principle of "No Death Penalty" under all circumstances and for any charge. He highlighted the importance of persistence and continuity in fighting for the abolition of the death penalty.

Amiry-Moghaddam also stressed the role of grassroots efforts against the death penalty, both inside and outside the country, in increasing the political cost of carrying out executions. He stated: "Those who rule Iran today are the same people who, in the 1980s, executed political prisoners en masse without trials. However, due to the high political costs resulting from public and international reactions, they can no longer repeat those crimes against political prisoners. Unfortunately, the execution of ordinary crimes defendants continues at a rapid pace because these executions don’t incite the same public backlash, and the government has normalised the execution of individuals accused of drug-related offences and murder. Society must not tolerate daily executions no matter what the charges are. One of the key impacts of the 'No Death Penalty Tuesdays' campaign could be making every single execution unbearable."

Maryam Hassani, the daughter of political prisoner Mehdi Hassani who is currently at risk of execution, joined the Space to speak about her father’s case and the consequential pain and suffering inflicted on her family. Mehdi Hassani and Behrouz Ehsani were taken from Evin Prison under false pretences to Ghezelhesar Prison. The two political prisoners are currently held in the pre-execution cells of Ghezelhesar and at grave risk of execution.

Some of the speakers included Mostafa Saber from the Global Campaign to Stop Executions, human rights activist Ghazal Abdollahi, Sholeh Pakravan, human rights activist and the mother of executed Reyhaneh Jabari, human rights defender Mojgan Keshavarz, Moein Khazaeli from Dadban, veteran journalist Ahmad Rafat.

About No Death Penalty Tuesdays

After bearing witness to months of weekly group executions in Karaj, the execution of several political prisoners in January 2024, and the crackdown of the protest by ordinary crimes death row prisoners, a group of brave political prisoners in Ghezelhesar Prison staged a protest which was also violently suppressed. The diverse group of political prisoners from different backgrounds and beliefs thus began a weekly hunger strike on 30th January that became known as “Black Tuesdays” and “No Death Penalty Tuesdays.” They chose Tuesdays for that is the day death row inmates are typically transferred to solitary confinement in preparation for the gallows in Ghezelhesar Prison.

In August 2024, 68 Iranian and international rights organisations from four continents signed a joint statement in support and solidarity with the "No Death Penalty Tuesdays" abolitionist movement in Iranian prisons and called for international support.

On 8 October 2024, ahead of the "World Day Against the Death Penalty" and during the 37th week of the prisoners’ hunger strike, a wide range of Iranian and international human rights activists participated in a 24-hour livestream organised by Iran Human Rights and the Global Campaign Against Executions in Iran. This event aimed to show solidarity with the prisoners' campaign and emphasise the collective effort needed to end executions and abolish the inhumane death penalty in Iran.

One year after it was established, prisoners in at least 34 prisons have joined the "No Death Penalty Tuesdays" movement. According to the campaign’s statement to mark the 52nd week, hunger strikes were carried out in the following prisons:

Evin Prison (Women's Ward, Wards 4 and 8), Ghezelhesar Prison (Units 3 and 4), Karaj Penitentiary (Central Prison), Greater Tehran Penitentiary, Khoreyn Varamin Prison, Arak Central Prison, Khorramabad Central Prison, Isfahan (Dastgerd) Central Prison, Asadabad Prison, Isfahan, Sheiban Prison, Ahvaz, Shiraz (Adel Abad) Central Prison (men and women’s wards) Nezam Prison, Shiraz, Bam Prison, Kahnuj Prison, Tabas Prison, Mashhad (Vakil Abad) Central Prison, Ghaemshahr Prison, Rasht Central Prison (men and women’s wards), Roudsar Prison, Ardabil Central Prison, Tabriz Central Prison, Urmia Central Prison, Salmas Prison, Khoy Prison, Naghdeh Prison, Saqqez Prison, Baneh Prison, Marivan Prison, Kamyaran Prison, Havigh Talesh Prison, Gilan, Jovin Prison, Khorasan Razavi, Borazjan Prison, Bushehr.

(source: iranhr.net)

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

The 53rd Week of the Hunger Strike by the “No to Execution Tuesdays” Campaign in Iran’s Prisons

On Tuesday, January 28, 2025, the 53rd week and the 1st week of the 2nd year of the “No to Execution Tuesdays” campaign will take place. On this day, political and non-political prisoners participating in the campaign across 34 prisons in Iran will be on hunger strike. In connection with this event, the campaign issued a statement that includes: “We begin the 2nd year of this campaign under conditions where, during the past Gregorian year, more than 1,000 prisoners were executed… The launch of the ‘No to Execution Tuesdays’ campaign last year came as the wave of executions had become so widespread and unprecedented globally that it could not be considered merely a coincidence or a strictly legal-judicial matter.”

—————-

The campaign’s statement is as follows:

January 28, 2025

The Second Year of the #No_to_Execution_Tuesdays Campaign

The 53rd Week of the Hunger Strike by the “No to Execution Tuesdays” Campaign in Iran’s Prisons

“Inauguration of the Second Year of the No to Execution Tuesdays Campaign: A Comprehensive, National, and International Campaign Against Executions”

We, the political and non-political prisoners in 34 prisons across all corners of chained Iran, begin the 2nd year of the No to Execution Tuesdays campaign on Tuesday, January 28, with renewed vigor. In the campaign’s 53rd Tuesday, we go on hunger strike, hoping that our voices from behind the thick prison walls join those of the women, men, and youth of Iran, contributing to the defense of human rights and the abolition of gallows.

We are beginning the 2nd year of this campaign at a time when, during the past Gregorian year, more than 1,000 prisoners were executed, and in Dey (December 21- January 19) alone, the number of executions exceeded 110.

Today, on the anniversary of this campaign, we are on hunger strike while, on Sunday, January 26, 2 political prisoners and members of the “No to Execution Tuesdays” campaign, Behrouz Ehsani and Mehdi Hasani, who had been sentenced to death, were violently transferred from Evin Prison to Qezel Hessar Prison. According to their lawyers, a request for a retrial in their cases was filed on Monday, January 27. However, based on information received by the campaign, these 2 political prisoners are now held in the secure ward of Unit 3 in Qezel Hessar Prison, a section designated for prisoners awaiting execution, and they are under imminent threat of execution.

Political prisoners in Qezel Hessar announced their first hunger strike on Tuesday, January 29, 2024, and have consistently maintained the Tuesday hunger strikes for the past year.

The launch of the ‘No to Execution Tuesdays’ campaign last year came as the wave of executions had become so widespread and unprecedented globally that it could not be considered merely a coincidence or a strictly legal-judicial matter.

At the start of the execution wave, an open plea was issued by ordinary prisoners facing death sentences, appealing to all prisoners and the people of Iran to assist in saving their lives and the lives of countless others on death row.

The No to Execution Tuesdays campaign began on the 7th day after the executions of the late Mohammad Qobadlou and Farhad Salimi, political and ideological prisoners in Qezel Hessar. The initial members of the campaign protested against these executions by starting hunger strikes.

This protest movement, now encompassing the majority of prisons in the country, has transcended prison walls and geographic borders thanks to the efforts of our compatriots inside and outside Iran. Numerous human rights organizations, activists, international institutions, and even political movements have expressed their support. Many media outlets and news agencies, in a responsible approach to human rights, publish the campaign’s statements and weekly reports to inform the public.

Professor Javaid Rehman (then the UN Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Iran) praised this campaign in a message. Similarly, Ms. Mai Sato (the current Special Rapporteur) referred to the No to Execution Tuesdays campaign in a video message (October 10) as “an unwavering commitment to justice and human rights that shines in the face of the regime’s oppressive actions.”

In Iran, the death penalty has ceased to be a legal punishment and has turned into a political tool for suppressing and exacting revenge on the people of Iran. This reality doubles our responsibility to confront repression, torture, and executions, and we hope to fulfill this duty. In the 53rd week, prisoners in 34 prisons are on hunger strike on Tuesday, January 28, 2025:

Qezel Hessar Prison (Units 2 and 4)

Evin Prison (Women’s Ward, Wards 4 & 8)

Karaj Central Prison

Khorramabad Prison

Mashhad Prison

Saqqez Prison

Naqadeh Prison

Khoy Prison

Tabriz Prison

Ardabil Prison

Qaemshahr Prison

Urmia Prison

Marivan Prison

Kamyaran Prison

Baneh Prison

Salmas Prison

Shiraz Nezam Prison

Lakan Rasht Prison (Men’s and Women’s Wards)

Greater Tehran Penitentiary

Asadabad Isfahan Prison

Bam Prison

Arak Prison

Sheyban Ahvaz Prison

Kahnuj Prison

Dastgerd Prison, Isfahan

Tabas Prison

Khourin Varamin Prison

Roodsar Prison

Sepidar Ahvaz Prison

Ramhormoz Prison

Haviq Talesh Prison

Adelabad Prison, Shiraz (Men’s and Women’s Wards)

Borazjan Prison

Joveyn Prison

(source: iran-hrm.com)

***********

Iran executes 3 men for drug-related charges in Karaj

Iran executed Farhad Fardini, Farzad Mirzaei and Samad Hashemi, who had previously been sentenced to death on drug-related charges, in Ghezel Hesar Prison in Karaj, Alborz Province, on 26 January.

Fardini, 35, Mirzaei, 45, and Hashemi, 45, all from the city of Harsin in Kermanshah Province, were arrested in November 2017 in a joint drug trafficking case and subsequently sentenced to death.

The 3 men were transferred to solitary confinement on 24 January in preparation for their executions.

(source: kurdistanhumanrights.org)

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

3 Prisoners Executed in Adelabad Prison, Shiraz

In the early hours of Wednesday, January 29, 2025, the death sentences of 3 prisoners convicted of non-political offenses were carried out at Adelabad Prison in Shiraz.

According to HRANA, the news agency of the Human Rights Activists in Iran, the executed individuals have been identified as:

Hamid Fanaei (resident of Marvdasht)

Amir Fanaei (resident of Marvdasht)

Ali Heidari (resident of Shiraz)

HRANA has confirmed that these 3 prisoners had been sentenced to death by judicial authorities for non-political offenses.

As of the time of this report, prison officials and relevant authorities have not publicly announced these executions. In 2024, judicial authorities or domestic media in Iran officially announced only 6% of executions, underscoring a deeply troubling lack of transparency in the country’s legal and judicial processes.

According to HRANA’s data, Adelabad Prison in Shiraz carried out 85 executions in 2024, marking a 73% increase compared to the previous year. This places it as the 2nd most active prison for executions in Iran.

(source: en-hrana.org)

JANUARY 28, 2025:

TEXAS:

Texas House Member Files Bill to Raise Minimum Death Penalty Age to 21----Moody stated that some recent studies show the human brain isn’t fully developed until age 25.

State Rep. Joe Moody (D-El Paso) filed a bill that would alter the Texas penal code by raising the age to receive the death penalty from 18 to 21.

House Bill (HB) 2055, filed by Moody 10 days after the start of the 89th Texas Legislature, states that Section 8.07 of the Texas penal code shall be altered from, “No person may, in any case, be punished by death for an offense committed while the person was younger than 18 years,” to “an offense committed while the person was younger than 21 years.”

In a case where the State of Texas is not seeking the death penalty but has determined the individual to be guilty of a capital felony, Moody’s bill would edit the Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s lifelong sentencing from “if the individual committed the offense when younger than 18 years of age,” to “younger than 21 years of age.” Similarly, HB 2055 would alter “life without parole” sentencing from being restricted to crimes committed while age 18 and above to age 21 and above.

In a trial where Texas is seeking penalization in the form of a death sentence, HB 2055 says that “prospective jurors shall be informed that a sentence of life imprisonment without or death is mandatory on conviction of capital felony.”

HB 2055 would not affect any final convictions that are effective before or on September 1, 2025, but would be applied to criminal action pending on or after that date.

“Our justice system must always balance accountability with mercy, and it must be as smart as it is tough,” Moody told The Texan on Friday.

“Brain science has evolved significantly in recent years, with some studies showing that the brain isn’t fully developed until age 25.”

HB 2055 has only been filed and is yet to have been referred to a committee as assignments have not yet been made.

Moody concluded, “A young person just isn’t the same as an older person in terms of criminal responsibility, and we need to take that into account when we talk about the ultimate penalty, which is what HB 2055 is all about.”

(source: thetexan.news)

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

Texas executions decline, but death penalty system remains flawed----Robert Roberson’s case is reason enough for pause.

For many years, this page has been raising concerns about flaws in Texas’ death penalty system, and the risk that we as citizens of this great state have of being party to the execution of the innocent.

Whether someone favors the death penalty or not, no one can rightly accept a system that risks such a terrible thing.

Thankfully, for any number of reasons, the use of the death penalty has been in steady decline in Texas. We wrote in 2016 how executions had slowed from a high of 40 in 2000 to a low of seven that year.

The Texas Tribune reported last week that the population of death row and the number of executions carried out continues to decline. Last year, the state carried out four executions. In 2023, it was eight. And in 2022, it was five, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

Yet, despite these low numbers, Texas’ use of the death penalty continues to raise profound questions of guilt or innocence.

Right now, the most pressing case is that of Robert Roberson III, whose death sentence was postponed through the heroic 11th-hour work of state Reps. Jeff Leach and Joe Moody. Roberson’s devoted legal team has demonstrated to both Republicans and Democrats that there is at least some reason to doubt Roberson’s conviction in the death of his daughter Nikki.

Roberson’s case is not the only recent death penalty case where credible doubt about innocence and guilt has been raised. Melissa Lucio was declared “actually innocent” last year for the 2008 conviction in the death of her two-year-old daughter.

There are simply too many such cases since the state’s resumption of the death penalty in 1982 not to ask for a pause in carrying out continued executions while the system is reviewed.

Roberson’s case alone cries for reconsideration. Many who believed in Roberson’s guilt are now convinced of his innocence, including the lead investigator in the case. We have examined the facts of the case closely with an open mind and cannot say with any confidence whether Roberson is guilty or innocent. We believe that any fair-minded person who undertook the same review would come to the same conclusion.

If the doubt in Roberson’s case is not sufficient to ensure he isn’t executed, how can we have confidence in this system at all? We believe Texas prosecutors, judges and juries have intuited that this is a flawed system and that is a reason for the decreased number of executions.

If so, let’s say that collectively and ask ourselves the hard questions that must be asked before we take another life.

(source: Dallas Morning News editorials are written by the paper's Editorial Board and serve as the voice and view of the paper)

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

Prosecution, defense ask judge to further delay possible trial in Walmart mass shooting case

A trial date in the 2019 Walmart mass shooting could be pushed back by months under a motion filed Monday by defense attorneys and prosecutors.

The agreed motion seeks to suspend any pretrial hearings until after the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals rules on an issue related to 3 orders issued by the judge in the case, 409th District Judge Sam Medrano.

Judges are not required to grant agreed motions from parties in cases, but they usually do. Medrano had not ruled on the motion as of Monday afternoon.

A scheduling order issued in September by Medrano outlined a series of pretrial hearings that could have led to a trial sometime in early 2026, almost 7 years after the shooting. But that schedule already became moot when the 1st planned hearing, on Jan. 13, was canceled because Medrano was still hearing defense and prosecution motions from the fall and winter of 2024.

District Attorney James Montoya, who took office Jan. 1 after defeating appointed incumbent Bill Hicks in the November general election, also still must decide whether to continue to seek the death penalty against Patrick Crusius, the man accused of killing 23 people and wounding 22 others in a racism-inspired rampage at the Cielo Vista Walmart on Aug. 3, 2019.

The previous 3 district attorneys – Jaime Esparza, Yvonne Rosales and Hicks – favored pursuing the death penalty. Montoya also said at the beginning of the 2024 campaign that he supported seeking the death penalty but modified his stance over the year, saying at the end of the campaign that he needed to review evidence in the case once he took office before making a decision.

The motion filed Monday to suspend pretrial activity involves a motion filed by Hicks regarding three “ex parte” motions Medrano filed with knowledge of defense lawyers but not prosecutors.

Defense lawyers said the orders in 2021 and 2023 involved directives to preserve videos of Crusius’ detention, prevent jailers from providing prosecutors with information about their visits with Crusius, and for medical treatment.

Hicks sought a writ of mandamus in October from the 8th Court of Appeals to order Medrano to make the motions public. The 8th Court of Appeals granted the writ of mandamus in December and ordered Medrano to vacate the orders, but did not order them made public.

Defense lawyers in late December appealed the 8th Court decision to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the state’s highest criminal court, which quickly blocked the lower appellate court ruling while it considered the case.

The agreed motion filed Monday by the prosecution and defense asks that Medrano delay all pretrial activity until the Court of Criminal Appeals makes a decision on the mandamus action.

“To avoid any conflict with the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals, to assist this court in decisions to be made on pending and future matters, and for judicial economy, the parties request that this court forgo the scheduling of further pretrial proceedings in this court until mandamus proceedings in the Court of Criminal Appeals have been concluded,” said the motion, which was signed by defense lawyers and the District Attorney’s Office.

Prosecutors and defense lawyers are prohibited from discussing the case with the media under a gag order Medrano issued in 2022.

When the Court of Criminal Appeals might rule is unclear, but it’s likely to take months at a minimum. The court hasn’t yet set deadlines for briefs from the defense and prosecution, and hasn’t scheduled oral arguments.

Crusius, now 26, of Allen, Texas, is being held in the El Paso County Jail while awaiting trial on state charges of capital murder and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

He pleaded guilty in 2023 to federal hate crimes and weapons charges after the U.S. Department of Justice decided not to seek the death penalty. He admitted in his plea that he was the gunman at the Walmart and that he authored a screed before the shooting that said the attack was intended to “stop the Hispanic invasion of Texas.”

Crusius was sentenced to 90 consecutive life terms in federal prison, which carries no possibility of parole. U.S. District Judge David Guaderrama recommended that Crusius serve his sentence in the nation’s most secure prison – the so-called “supermax” prison in Colorado – but the federal Bureau of Prisons is not bound by that recommendation.

(source: elpasomatters.org)

SOUTH CAROLINA----impending execution

Life on South Carolina death row: months of ‘barbaric’ isolation before execution----Marion Bowman Jr has been caged in a tiny ‘execution watch’ cell since September, waiting to be killed: ‘I won’t let the prison turn me into an animal’

For 135 days, Marion Bowman Jr has been locked in a solitary cell narrower than his arm span, cut off from nearly all human interaction, counting down the days until the state of South Carolina executes him.

The 44-year-old is scheduled to be killed by lethal injection on Friday, the 3rd man on South Carolina death row to be executed in rapid succession as the state aggressively revives capital punishment. The cases have sparked outrage over concerns about wrongful convictions, the racist application of the death penalty and the painful, drawn-out method of killing.

As the state resumes killings following a 13-year-pause, the men on death row and their advocates are raising alarms about the brutal conditions they endure once placed on “execution watch”, forced into nearly 24/7 isolation for months on end as their scheduled execution nears.

“Inhumane is an understatement,” said Bowman in a recent conversation with his lawyer, which was summarized for the Guardian. He has been singing spirituals and reciting scripture to himself, and re-reading notes other men have written him as they suffered the same conditions before their executions. One note reminded him, “Don’t let the prison turn you into the animal they think that you are, the monster they think you are … We are not what the state portrayed us to be. We are kind, caring, loving people, and it’s a shame the world can’t see that.”

‘All of a sudden, I’m something other’

Bowman has been incarcerated for 24 years, convicted of the 2001 killing of 21-year-old Kandee Martin, a childhood friend. He has maintained his innocence. The primary witnesses implicating Bowman were two men also charged in the crime, who testified in exchange for reduced sentences. A 3rd witness had separate pending charges by the same prosecutors, which were subsequently dropped, his attorneys say.

Bowman’s lawyers have sought to overturn the conviction, arguing the state withheld evidence impugning the witnesses, including a memo outlining a claim that one of the witnesses confessed to the shooting. They’ve also argued Bowman had ineffective counsel “infected by his own racism”; his trial attorney repeatedly referred to the victim as a “little white girl” and Bowman as a “man” (even though he was younger at age 20) and told his client he should plead guilty because a jury would “see a Black male v a white female victim” and convict him.

“I was not guilty and would not say I did something I didn’t do,” Bowman said in a recent statement.

On death row for the majority of his life, Bowman has endured by writing poetry and staying as connected as possible to friends and family, including a granddaughter he was able to hold for the first time last week.. Bonding with those imprisoned alongside him, through Bible studies, prayer groups, and games, has been vital.

Typically, men on South Carolina death row live in single cells with a bed, desk and locker. They can eat meals in a communal area and do group recreation, including handball. But when the state declares that defendants have exhausted their appeals, it can place them on “execution status”, removing their few basic privileges.

In September, Bowman was transferred to this placement, also called execution watch, moved to an isolated cell, with policy dictating he would “not be allowed to associate with other inmates at anytime”. He is locked behind two doors – an outer one with a window that guards can peer through and an inner one of bars. There’s a slot with a tray that slides in and out with meals, which must be eaten alone. If he wants a toilet brush to clean, it goes on the same tray as his food, said Boyd Young, his lawyer and friend of 15 years.

There’s no desk. He had to give up many possessions, but what he was allowed to keep all sits on the floor – clothes, food, towels, an antenna television that plays a few local channels. The only place he can sit is his steel bunk. At 6ft 4in, he can touch both cell walls at the same time. He never has privacy as a guard is consistently watching him, making him reluctant to wash his body by hand. At times, the lights have been on 24/7.

He is supposed to get one-hour recreation time five days a week, but it is inconsistent, and when he does go out, he exercises alone in a cage resembling a dog kennel enclosure.

Young can now only visit him behind glass, with Bowman wearing leg shackles, a belly chain and handcuffs. When Bowman walks through the facility, a guard holds onto him with an attached dog leash. Even though he has no physical contact – his lawyers can’t even directly hand him paperwork to sign – he is subject to a full-body strip-search when leaving and returning to his cell.

Before execution watch, he was often called upon to help staff. “Now, I’m put behind these two doors, being led around on a leash whereas the day before, I was your friend helping you out. All of a sudden, I’m something other,” Bowman said, according to Young.

South Carolina bans media interviews with incarcerated people, a policy the ACLU has challenged.

You’re taking draconian and barbaric steps to keep somebody from ending their own life, so you can execute them. I can’t wrap my brain around that----Dr Janis Whitlock

While in isolation, Bowman has reflected on how the men of death row take care of each other when they aren’t kept apart – remembering birthdays, helping people prepare for difficult family conversations, sharing commissary items, offering grief support: “These people have helped me survive this – people who never would’ve gotten together on the outside, who are so different, but still have so much humanity in common. Some say they never had a friend until they came here. There’s no such thing as unredeemable.”

When he now has brief moments to communicate with others in passing, “I tell them to keep their heads up”, he said. “They are going to be left to grieve me, but I need to make sure they continue to have the courage for their own fight.”

‘The greatest degree of cruelty’

South Carolina ceased executions in 2011 when pharmaceutical companies stopped supplying lethal injection drugs amid public pressure. But in 2023, legislators passed a law to keep the identity of suppliers secret, allowing the prison to obtain pentobarbital, a sedative.

In August, the state supreme court said executions could proceed with at least 35 days between each killing and announced the first 6 defendants to be targeted. 2 were killed last year, and Bowman is next on the list.

Execution watch was hard on Richard Moore, who was killed in November, in part because it was his 3rd time being there after 2 previous execution dates were postponed, said Dr Janis Whitlock, a psychologist and Cornell research scientist emerita. She evaluated him in 2015 and stayed in contact over the years.

“He said it was ironic and a sign of humanity’s lack of evolution that the greatest degree of cruelty he ever experienced in the system was the weeks before he was slated to die,” she said, noting the men are constantly surveilled for signs of suicidality. “You’re taking draconian and barbaric steps to keep somebody from ending their own life, so you can execute them. I can’t wrap my brain around that.”

Chronic isolation and lack of movement can lead to muscle atrophy, gastrointestinal problems, a compromised immune system, changes in brain function, difficulty controlling emotions, psychosis, irritability, rage and severe depression, Whitlock added: “These conditions are used to torture people. Guards talk about the potential for a violent, dysregulated person, but you’ve created these conditions.”

Compounding the suffering on execution watch is that they have also been losing their friends one by one while isolated. Moore was a father figure to Bowman: “He credits Mo [Moore] with having raised him. Mo taught him how to do time, encouraged him to read and play chess and taught him not to worry about the stuff you can’t control,” said Young.

Knowing the day you will be killed is agonizing, but facing that alone in a tiny cell for weeks or months on end is unfathomable, said Lindsey Vann, an attorney for Moore and Bowman: “To be locked in that room, it’s like you’re thrown away even before the execution date.”

‘People have invested a lot in him’

While on execution watch, Bowman had to choose his method of death: lethal injection, firing squad or electrocution. He didn’t want to subject any staff to the trauma of shooting him, so he chose lethal injection, which seemed the least painful option, Young said.

His attorneys, however, have asked for the execution to be halted due to concerns about this method, noting that in last year’s execution, Moore required two large sedative doses. An anesthesiologist who reviewed his autopsy found fluid in the lungs suggesting it appeared likely Moore “consciously experienced feelings of drowning and suffocation during the 23 minutes that it took to bring about his death”.

The state’s attorneys responded: “If Bowman’s concerns about lethal injection were genuine, he could have elected another method.” The state has also argued in recent filings that his appeals were exhausted and that lawyers were recycling arguments already litigated.

Chrysti Shain, corrections spokesperson, declined to answer specific questions about execution watch conditions, saying, “Our security protocols are in place for a reason.”

Young said Bowman had become a close friend, reminding him not to forget his wedding anniversary and sending his children drawings they could color: “He tries to remember that people have invested a lot in him by staying in contact and just caring … All Marion ever wanted was an attorney who listened and believed him.”

On a recent visit, Bowman gave Young letters he had received from others before their executions, one two decades old that read, “I really enjoyed being your neighbor and friend. You’re a great guy … and I’ll miss you for sure.” Another read:

There were days in here that I thought I would never make it, moments where I was filled with so much doubt. No matter how I sought to encourage myself, I failed. At times, fear seemed to consume me. Anger boiled below the surface and tears glistened in my eyes. Nothing could comfort me. I found no solace in tomorrow. The day our paths crossed, I felt renewed comfort, a sort of peace in not what’s said, but just your presence.

God has truly given me a gift in your friendship … your smile, the glow in your eyes, the compassion in your words. Tomorrow holds no promises, but today, I take comfort in your friendship. I thank God continuously for you. Thank you for being my friend.

(source: The Guardian)

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

Who Is Marion Bowman? 1st US Inmate To Be Executed This Year

South Carolina death row inmate Marion Bowman is scheduled to be killed by lethal injection on Friday in the 1st execution of the year in the U.S.

Why It Matters

The death penalty is a legal form of punishment in 27 states.

A poll taken by Gallup in October of last year found that 53 % of Americans favor the death penalty, but the number varies across generations. Less than 1/2 of millennial and Gen Z adults support the punishment.

What To Know

Friday's execution will be the 1st in the state following a pause over the Christmas holiday.

Who is Marion Bowman?

Bowman, now 44, was convicted of murder and 3rd-degree arson in 2002. He was accused of fatally shooting Kandee Martin, who he had met in high school.

When Bowman was 20, he encountered 21-year-old Martin and a group of her friends. Bowman's sister said he asked Martin to pay back a debt that was owed, and when Martin asked him to wait until she was finished with a conversation, he said, "that b**** be dead by dark."

What Happened to Kandee Martin?

Martin drove her car to meet up with Bowman later that evening. He and his cousin James Tywan Gadson got into the car and went to a remote area Bowman had located.

After they got out of the car, Bowman took out a gun and fired 3 shots, despite Martin allegedly asking him to spare her life since she had a child.

Martin's body was left in the woods at first, but Bowman later returned and put her body in the trunk of her car, which he then set on fire.

The next day, firefighters responded to a report of a burning car. After putting out the fire, they found Martin's remains. Bowman was arrested that same day after his DNA was found on her body.

Bowman continues to claim innocence and has attempted to appeal his conviction multiple times.

In a request to stay the execution, Bowman's current attorneys argued that he did not have a fair trial because his original legal team had a bias against Black people.

Bowman's legal team has also raised questions about the drug used for lethal injection.

An anesthesiologist who reviewed the autopsy records of Richard Moore, the last inmate executed in the state, said that fluid found in the lungs make it appear that Moore "consciously experienced feelings of drowning and suffocation during the 23 minutes that it took to bring about his death."

Another anesthesiologist said fluid is often found in the lungs following the administration of a lethal injection.

The state argued that Bowman had the opportunity to choose death by firing squad or electric chair, and he opted for lethal injection.

How Many People Are on Death Row?

As of January 1, there were 2,092 death row inmates in the U.S. There are 30 in the state of South Carolina.

California has the most inmates on death row at 601. California Governor Gavin Newsom placed a hold on executions in 2019.

What People Are Saying

The state, in court filings: "If Bowman's concerns about lethal injection were genuine, he could have elected another method."

Bowman, in a statement released by the Western District of North Carolina Office of the Federal Public Defender: "I am so sorry for Kandee and her family, but I did not do it. Her family has suffered a loss that [cannot] be undone. They have been through trials, and appeals, but they have never heard the truth from me. I know this won't bring them satisfaction, but this is my truth."

What Happens Next

Bowman's execution is expected to take place at the Broad River Correctional Facility in Columbia. South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster has the authority to stay an execution, but he has not done so since executions were reinstated in 2024.

(source: newsweek.com)

FLORIDA:

Florida Supreme Court February oral arguments

Oral arguments will be held on February 5-6 beginning at 9:00 a.m. each day. Several capital cases are on the Court’s schedule.

The Florida Supreme Court will hold 2 days of oral argument for the month of February. Oral arguments will be held on December 5-6 beginning at 9:00 a.m. each day. Several capital cases are on the Court’s schedule.

February 5----Zieler v. State

On February 5, beginning at 10:00 a.m., the Court will hear argument in Zieler v. State. Joseph Zieler was sentenced to death in 2023 following a jury's recommendation for death by a vote of 10-2. He was one of the first people sentenced under Florida's 2023 capital sentencing statute. This is his direct appeal.

February 6----Woodbury v. State; Woodbury v. Sec’y, Dep’t of Corrs.

On February 6, beginning at 10:10 a.m., the Court will hear argument in Michael Woodbury's case. Woodbury was sentenced to death for crimes that occurred in 2017. This is Woodbury's initial postconviction and petition for writ of habeas corpus.

(source: fladeathpenalty.substack.com)

ALABAMA----impending execution

Michigan will not wade into Alabama death row case

Officials in Michigan will not oppose Demetrius Frazier’s execution that Gov. Kay Ivey scheduled for next Thursday using nitrogen gas.

Attorneys for Demetrius Terrence Frazier, scheduled to be executed on Feb. 6 for the 1991 rape and murder of Pauline Brown, had argued that he should be remanded to the custody of Michigan prison authorities, where he was serving a life sentence for the murder of 14-year-old Crystal Kendrick before being transferred to Alabama in 2011.

But in a court filing last week, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel said the court could not compel Michigan to extradite Frazier.

“While Michigan takes no position on the imposition of the death penalty in this case, Michigan does not seek to return Frazier to a Michigan correctional facility,” the filing stated.

Frazier’s attorneys likened Nessel’s argument to one that former Alabama Attorney General Jeff Sessions made in the 2018 case of Moody vs. Holman in which a person on Alabama’s death row sought to stop his scheduled execution because he was supposed to be in federal custody and not imprisoned within the Alabama DOC.

Messages seeking comment were left with Nessel’s office and the office of Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer office on Monday.

By refusing to take custody of Frazier, Frazier’s attorneys wrote, Michigan and Frazier “will make history: he will be the first prisoner executed while in the state of Michigan’s custody.”

Frazier’s attorneys alleged that the 2011 agreement that led to Frazier’s transfer to Alabama, negotiated by Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder and Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley, is unlawful.

“The executive agreement violates the due process clause because it was done with the intent to deprive Mr. Frazier of his Fourteenth Amendment right to life and without lawful authority,” Frazier’s attorneys allege in the lawsuit.

They also state that “Michigan law requires Mr. Frazier to serve his life sentences in ‘a state correctional facility or a county jail.’”

Frazier, 52, is currently incarcerated at Holman Correctional Facility’s death row after a jury convicted him of capital murder for his role in the 1991 rape and murder of Pauline Brown, 40.

Court documents state that Frazier broke into Brown’s apartment seeking to rob the location. He then found Brown who was in the apartment, threatened her with a gun and sexually assaulted her before killing her.

This lawsuit is separate from the one that Frazier filed in federal district court in the U.S. Middle District of Alabama alleging that the nitrogen gas protocol the state plans to use violates his Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment.

Detroit police apprehended Frazier, then 19 in March 1992. A Michigan jury convicted him of the murder of 14-year-old Kendrick in 1993 and sentenced him to life in prison. He was convicted of Brown’s murder in 1996. Alabama at the time requested Michigan to keep Frazier in custody, where he remained until being transferred to Alabama in 2011.

“Frazier’s petition alleges claims that are not cognizable in federal habeas because they concern only state law and otherwise rest on the exclusive powers of states as independent sovereigns,” the Michigan Attorney General’s Office stated in its filing. “The petition is also untimely, and Frazier has not exhausted his claims in the state courts of either Alabama or Michigan before bringing his habeas petition to this Court.”

The court has yet to rule on this case.

Alabama executed 6 people in 2024, 3 by nitrogen gas. Michigan abolished the death penalty in 1847, and its state constitution expressly forbids capital punishment.

(source: alabamareflector.com)

OHIO:

Ohio death penalty may be reintroduced at Statehouse

President Donald Trump wants to “restore the death penalty” through an executive order he signed earlier this week.

“The death penalty is not effective,” Executive Director of Death Penalty Action Abraham Bonowitz said. “That’s the thing.”

“It should be rare, but it should be preserved, and it should be available,” Ohio Rep. Brian Stewart (R-Ashville) said.

Whether the death penalty should be eliminated has been the topic of debate for more than a decade at the Ohio Statehouse and Ohio Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio (D-Lakewood) has been behind the effort to abolish it for several years.

Now in play is also an effort to authorize the use of nitrogen hypoxia for executions in Ohio, an effort being championed by Stewart.

“I think that the death penalty should be an available sentence for the most heinous murders amongst us,” he said. “I think President Trump’s executive order acknowledges that. People understand, inmates understand, that capital punishment is the most severe punishment that we have.”

“It’s morally reprehensible,” Antonio said. “We should have advanced as a society to believe and be better than the worst criminals that we have sitting on death row right now.”

There are currently 3 people on federal death row. As far as states go, there are 9 that executed prisoners last year, 3 holding their 1st executions in more than a decade. 23 states do not allow the death penalty, and states like Ohio have it, but have not carried out an execution in years.

“It boils down to fewer than 1% of the people who are death eligible, who could be executed actually getting that death sentence and staying on death row to the point of either dying there or being executed,” Bonowitz said.

Antonio said while she plans to reintroduce her bill to abolish the death penalty, and is working to find a middle ground, she is worried that the executive order from Trump may change the dialogue a bit.

“Certainly, it’s concerning,” she said. “At the same time, I believe the majority of people in Ohio and in the country have flipped how they feel about the death penalty. The reality is that the manufacturers of those medications were created to save lives, not to execute people. The majority of the manufacturers have denied use of their drugs for executions.”

Antonio said she has been working on this issue for many reasons, but there is one that stands out to her most.

“Part of the reason why I’ve worked so hard to try to end the death penalty, a whole host of reasons,” Antonio said. “At the top of the list is we get it wrong. There are people on death row right now who may or may not be guilty of the crime that they were committed, convicted of. If there’s one person whose innocent on death row, we should all be concerned about that.”

On the other side, Stewart said capital punishment is a good deterrent, and in some cases is the best justice.

“It should be rare, but it should be available. I don’t think anybody really buys that life without parole is the same as capital punishment,” he said. “If that were the case, you would see people who have life without the possibility of parole lining up to say, ‘No, no. I would prefer to be executed instead.’ You never see that.”

“We believe that the ultimate punishment should be throwing away the key, which is death by incarceration,” Bonowitz said. “Life without parole is a misnomer because it’s no life. You want to order a pizza? Walk barefoot on grass? Make love to your partner? Forget it. That’s never going to happen again.”

Both Antonio and Stewart plan to reintroduce their bills. Stewart said he thinks leadership will be more receptive to his legislation this general assembly.

“We believe the bill has a good chance to pass,” Stewart said. “We have more time in this general assembly. I think that leadership is more friendly to the bill that we’ve had in the two years past and so we are going to bring the debate back again and see where the caucus stands.”

Antonio said she will have something for lawmakers to consider these next 2 years too.

“I will be reintroducing something,” she said. “We’re trying to figure out if there’s, if there’s a way forward where there’s agreements on both sides of the aisle for something this time. I’m not quite sure if we’ll be able to do that or not but I will definitely be introducing an end again to the death penalty as I have before.”

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine has not authorized a single execution during his time as governor. Ohio has more than 100 inmates on death row, but DeWine cites a difficulty getting the appropriate drugs as his reason for halting executions. He did not have any new comment on the topic on Thursday.

(source: WCMH news)

ARIZONA:

Federal Appeals Court Allows Arizona to Limit Victim Contact

Victims' Families Arizona

On January 23, 2025, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals lift­ed an injunc­tion enjoin­ing the enforce­ment of an Arizona statute, Victim Contact Limits, which pro­hibits crim­i­nal defense teams from con­tact­ing crime vic­tims and their fam­i­ly mem­bers direct­ly. The restric­tions are found in Arizona’s Victim Rights Implementation Act (Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13- 4433(B)) and also apply to death penal­ty cas­es. The deci­sion means that pris­on­ers and their lawyers may no longer engage direct­ly with vic­tims and their fam­i­lies for an exchange of infor­ma­tion or dis­cus­sion about the appro­pri­ate­ness of a sentence

. The ACLU, on behalf of Arizona Attorneys for Criminal Justice, filed a fed­er­al chal­lenge to the statute in 2017, argu­ing the law vio­lat­ed First Amendment free speech. After an ini­tial defeat in fed­er­al dis­trict court (sub­se­quent­ly over­ruled by a 9th Circuit pan­el in 2021) the suit suc­ceed­ed in 2022 in secur­ing an injunc­tion against the law’s enforce­ment. Arizona appealed the rul­ing, and last week anoth­er 9th Circuit pan­el unan­i­mous­ly reversed the dis­trict court’s rul­ing. Jared Keenan, an attor­ney for the ACLU who rep­re­sents the defense lawyers, told the Arizona Daily Star that a new law­suit is being contemplated.

“[T]he views of sur­vivors are one of the pri­ma­ry fac­tors in whether pros­e­cu­tors seek a death sen­tence. … And that means if fam­i­ly mem­bers drop their sup­port for exe­cu­tion, the defen­dant is more like­ly to be able to get nego­ti­ate with pros­e­cu­tors for a plea deal for life in prison.”

Capital Media Services, quot­ing Jared Keenan, ACLU attor­ney rep­re­sent­ing plain­tiffs fight­ing the Arizona Victim Contact Limits.

At the 2022 hear­ing chal­leng­ing the statute, cap­i­tal defense attor­neys explained that their con­tact with vic­tim fam­i­lies often involves ?“shar­ing infor­ma­tion about the crim­i­nal legal sys­tem, for instance explain­ing to vic­tims that the death penal­ty process takes years and involves con­tin­ued con­tact with the legal sys­tem that can be retrau­ma­tiz­ing.” Other defense attor­neys share their beliefs about jus­tice and pun­ish­ment with vic­tims, inves­ti­gate offens­es, gath­er mit­i­ga­tion evi­dence in death penal­ty cas­es, and answer vic­tims’ ques­tions about the defen­dant, the case, and the legal system.

Victim’s fam­i­lies do not uni­form­ly sup­port cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment for those found respon­si­ble for the death of their loved ones. When they do not, this fact can be a pow­er­ful argu­ment in favor of clemen­cy. When for­mer President Biden com­mut­ed the sen­tences of 37 of the 40 inmates on fed­er­al death row, he was crit­i­cized by Rev. Sharon Risher for leav­ing Dylan Roof out of the com­mu­ta­tion. Rev. Risher’s moth­er, Ethel Lee Lance, and two cousins were killed by Mr. Roof, who opened fire on Black parish­ioners at a Charleston, S.C. church in 2015. Rev. Risher called Biden’s deci­sion to exclude Mr. Roof "unfair” to vic­tims’ fam­i­lies, con­tin­u­ing, "I need you to under­stand that when you put a killer on death row, the fam­i­lies are left to be hostages for the years and years of appeals that will con­tin­ue to come.”

Arizona is not the only state to restrict vic­tim con­tact. Last year, Louisiana enact­ed HB 734, which pro­hibits death-sen­tenced pris­on­ers and their fam­i­ly, friends, and legal rep­re­sen­ta­tives, or any­one pur­port­ing to rep­re­sent the "inter­ests” of the pris­on­er, from direct­ly con­tact­ing any victim’s fam­i­ly mem­ber in con­nec­tion with clemen­cy pro­ceed­ings. All con­tact now must be arranged through a victim’s ser­vice coor­di­na­tor appoint­ed by the state, and any­one who vio­lates this pro­vi­sion may be "fined not more than 5 thou­sand dol­lars, [and] impris­oned for not more than 3 years, with or with­out hard labor, or both.” This leg­is­la­tion appears to be a response to the coor­di­nat­ed mass clemen­cy cam­paign that Governor Landry bit­ter­ly opposed dur­ing 2023 when he was still Louisiana’s Attorney General.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

USA:

Trump's Death Penalty Order a Challenge to the 8th Amendment

The 1st Trump administration carried out more executions than any president in at least a century. Shortly after being sworn in for a 2nd time, President Donald Trump signed an order to expand the death penalty.

It should come as no surprise that a 2nd Trump Department of Justice will seek capital punishment more often under his administration. That would be a clear break from the prior administration.

Former President Joe Biden declared a moratorium on executions when he took office. He campaigned in 2020 on ending the federal death penalty. Legislation proposing to end state-sponsored death failed to gain any traction in Congress during the Biden administration.

During his final days in office, Biden thwarted Trump's plan to resume executions by commuting the death sentences of 37 of the 40 men on federal death row.

Biden knew what was coming. Under the 1st Trump administration, the federal government carried out 13 executions in a little more than 6 months following a 17-year pause.

The federal executions of 2020 included: the 1st federal execution in 57 years for a crime committed in a state that had abolished the death penalty; executions carried out against the wishes of the victims' families; and the first lame-duck executions in more than a century.

After losing his bid for reelection, Trump oversaw 6 executions during the presidential transition period, more than any other administration in the history of the United States. Prior to 2020, the federal government carried out only three executions in the modern era of the death penalty. This time around, Trump will have only 3 inmates to choose from on death row, and it is unlikely that any federal death sentence imposed during his tenure will be eligible for execution before he leaves office.

In the past, the U.S. attorney general had wide latitude in deciding whether to seek the death penalty in individual cases. Trump's order instructs the office to pursue federal jurisdiction and seek the death penalty, "regardless of other factors," for people who murder a law enforcement officer or who are in the country illegally and commit a capital crime.

More troubling is the portion of Trump's order that addresses the 37 men whose death sentences were commuted to life without parole. The order provides, "[T]he Attorney General shall take all lawful and appropriate action to ensure that these offenders [commuted persons] are imprisoned in conditions consistent with the monstrosity of their crimes and the threats they pose."

Is Trump suggesting torture or something akin to it — like feeding inmates bread and water and locking them in tiny, unsanitary cells without interaction with others; no exercise; no contact with the outside world?<>P> Miriam Gohara, a clinical professor of law at Yale Law School, told The Marshall Project the president's order raises legal concerns. "The punishment is being incarcerated. The punishment is not the condition of confinement. That's not legal," she said.

"The Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment," Robin Maher, the executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, told NPR. "There are limitations, both under the Constitution and international standards, that prohibit keeping people in torturous conditions."

"Are they going to intentionally put some sort of atmosphere in place that is intolerable?" added Gohara. "I can't imagine that is actually something that they could carry out. On the other hand, I don't want to underestimate them either."

Professor Gohara is right. Don't underestimate Trump. The U.S. Constitution may not be enough to constrain the new Department of Justice. On Day 1, Trump also declared that he wants to eliminate "birthright citizenship," a sacrosanct constitutional right adopted more than 150 years ago and delineated in the 14th Amendment.

How about the 22nd Amendment's limitation on presidential terms? With President Trump, everything is on the table.

(source: Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett, Kelly & George P.C. His book "The Executioner's Toll, 2010" was released by McFarland Publishing----creators.com)

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

The Death Penalty Does Not Make Us Safer----Witness to Innocence Responds to President Trump's Executive Order on the Death Penalty, and Organizations from throughout the US and the World Sign-on in Solidarity

President Trump’s Executive Order on the Death Penalty makes our criminal justice system more dangerous. As exonerated death row survivors of Witness to Innocence, we know first-hand that the death penalty does not make us safer. We are just some of the 200 people in the United States who have been wrongfully convicted, sentenced to die on death row, and later exonerated. More people like us currently sit on death rows throughout the country. It happened to us, and it could happen to anyone. The Death Penalty Information Center’s data shows that “for every 8 people executed in the United States, one person wrongfully condemned to death has been exonerated.” We cannot accept government- sanctioned killing in a system that gets it wrong that often.

The executive order ignores this fact and other years of evidence and research, as well as growing public opposition to the death penalty:

The death penalty does not improve public safety or prevent violence. There is no evidence of a reduction in violence because of the death penalty.

The death penalty does not deter crime. States who retain the penalty and have the highest rates of execution do not have lower rates of violent crime. *

The death penalty is disproportionately used to punish people of color, the poor, and those with mental illnesses.

The death penalty drains public dollars without making communities safer. The money would be better spent, and we would all be safer if that money were used for proven violence prevention programs.

Many different experts have identified serious problems with the use of lethal injection drugs.

Opposition to the death penalty knows no political or faith boundaries – support for its abolition is bipartisan and comes from a variety of religious groups.

As an organization led-by and supporting people who were harmed by a broken system that sends innocent people to die, we stand opposed to President Trump’s Executive Order on the Death Penalty. The death penalty did not make us safer, nor did it make the victims of the crimes for which we were wrongfully convicted, their loved ones, or communities safer. The United States is in the shameful position of being one of the few developed nations to still carry out this cruel and ineffective practice. Let’s instead use our resources for programs that have been proven to reduce violence and make our communities safer.

(source: Witness to Innocence)

***********

Trump’s Death Penalty Executive Order Could Violate Immigrants’ Human Rights----The steady decline in executions in the United States could see a reversal with President Trump seeking the expansion of capital punishment.

President Donald Trump has signed 11 executive orders related to immigration, which combined with his inaugural speech, send a clear message about heavy immigration enforcement to come.

Documented has been going through the details of each executive order from the White House, and talked to experts to understand what these may mean for our communities. Of the 11 executive orders, one is headlined “restoring the death penalty.”

The steady decline in executions in the United States could see a reversal with President Trump seeking the expansion of capital punishment with an executive order that explicitly targets immigrants who are charged with a capital offense.

With non-citizen inmates having their international rights to consular notification violated on a routine basis, Trump’s executive order puts them in an even more vulnerable position.

How does this executive order affect immigrants?

Trump has empowered the U.S. Attorney General to seek the death penalty in two additional instances — if anyone murders a law enforcement officer and if an “alien illegally present in this country” is convicted of a capital offense, such as murder. Other capital crimes that can incur the death penalty include large-scale drug trafficking, treason, and espionage.

Currently, only 3 inmates in federal prisons sit on death row, with the vast majority of death row inmates – over 2,000 – in state prisons. But that soon could change as the executive order vows to expand federal death row.

Before leaving office, President Biden commuted the sentence for 37 inmates on federal death row and during his presidency his administration halted all federal excusations. The Trump administration seeks to reverse the previous administration’s policy by vowing to seek the death penalty in every capital case involving an undocumented immigrant.

Additionally, the Executive Order also empowers the U.S. Attorney General to support efforts by state prosecutors who are seeking the death penalty. Historically, the Supreme Court of the United States has limited the authority of state and federal governments to impose capital punishment in some cases, such as the execution of minors and people with intellectual disabilities. If a state prosecutor wishes to challenge the Supreme Court by seeking the death penalty of a minor, for example, the president’s executive order empowers the U.S. Attorney General to support that effort.

Immigrants are more likely to be sentenced to death

Across the U.S., there are about 2,250 inmates on death row. Less than 5% of those are foreign nationals: 103 are on death row, with 68 being nationals of Latin American countries.

According to Mark Warren, a human rights researcher with the Death Penalty Information Center, although immigrants are less likely to commit serious criminal offenses than U.S.-born citizens, some research suggests that immigrant defendants charged with murder disproportionately face the death penalty.

“There is some data to indicate that foreign nationals facing potential capital charges are more likely to go to a death penalty trial,” Warren explained.

One study conducted by the Death Penalty Information Center found that more than 80% of intel­lec­tu­al­ly dis­abled defen­dants sen­tenced to death are per­sons of col­or and for­eign nation­als.

A study by the University of Nebraska found that white jurors were more likely to sentence someone to death if they were Latino than if they were white.

Immigrants’ rights to consular notifications are regularly violated

Of the 140 cases Warren documented of foreign nationals on death row in 2024, only 3 received consulate notifications. The 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR) requires that host countries provide consular notification and access by host countries to foreign nationals who are arrested or detained. When a foreign national is arrested, having access to their nation’s consulate is vital as the consulate can inform them of their rights, assist with legal help and notify their family.

Yet, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, of the 34 immigrants who have been executed in the United States since 1976, only one was informed of their rights under the Vienna Convention. Many immigrants are not aware of that right nor are they informed of it by law enforcement.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights both found that the United States is violating inter­na­tion­al law in death sen­tence cases involving for­eign­ nationals by fail­ing to com­ply with the terms of the treaty.

“It’s so rare that there has been compliance with the treaty obligations that it’s almost insignificant,” said Warren.

What’s most troubling to Warren about Trump’s executive order is the provision that allows the Attorney General to seek the death penalty for every capital case involving an “alien illegally present in this country.”

As the Justice Department Manual is currently written, when considering the death penalty for a capital crime for a non-citizen, the Attorney General can take into account whether a Vienna Convention violation in the case of a foreign defendant has occurred.

Warren said that the executive order could mean that the Justice Department Manual will no longer have to take that into account.

“Immigrants are more vulnerable just as any American abroad would be who is facing serious charges and possible capital punishment because they are not familiar with the justice system, they may not speak the language, they are far from home,” he said.

“So it becomes almost a foregone conclusion that most foreign nationals facing a capital crime are more likely to be sentenced to death.”

(source: Amir Khafagy, documentedny.com)

NIGERIA:

MetroMan sentenced to death for stabbing friend over phone charger

A High Court in Bauchi State has sentenced Usman Abdullahi to death by hanging for the murder of Zaidu Adamu Kofar Dumi following an argument over a phone charger.

The judgment, delivered by Justice Sa’ad Muhammad Sambuwal of High Court No. 9, found Abdullahi guilty of grievous harm and culpable homicide, offences contrary to Sections 239 and 221 of the Penal Code.

The prosecution, led by Barrister Abubakar Ahmed Kobi from the State Ministry of Justice, informed the court that on May 12, 2021, the defendant had a disagreement with Zaidu Adamu and his friend, Ziya’u Abdulhadi, over a phone charger.

During the altercation, Abdullahi was said to have used a knife to stab Zaidu multiple times.

Zaidu was rushed to the Specialist Hospital Bauchi, where he was pronounced dead by medical personnel.

The trial commenced on December 30, 2021, with the prosecution charging the defendant on 2 counts: causing grievous hurt and culpable homicide. The court heard that the victim was stabbed in the stomach, neck, and other parts of his body.

The defence counsel, Barrister Naziru Umar, presented 2 witnesses and pleaded for leniency on behalf of his client.

After reviewing the submissions from both parties, Justice Sambuwal ruled: “I hereby convict Usman Abdullahi for the offence of culpable homicide punishable by death. You shall be hanged by the neck until you die, in accordance with Section 221 of the Penal Code.

“For the offence of grievous hurt, you are sentenced to 5 years in correctional service, as stipulated under Section 239 of the Penal Code.”

(source: dailypost.ng)

BELGIUM/DR CONGO:

Belgium Recalls DR Congo Envoy Over Claimed Coup Plotter's Death Sentence

Belgium on Monday recalled its ambassador to the Democratic Republic of Congo in a spat over a Belgian citizen on death row for allegedly orchestrating an abortive coup in the central African country.

Jean-Jacques Wondo, a military expert working with the Congolese intelligence service, was 1 of 37 people sentenced to death over what the DRC's army says was a foiled coup attempt in May 2024.

He is considered by the DRC military justice system to be the brains behind the bid, in which armed men attacked a minister's home before heading to the offices of President Felix Tshisekedi.

Following a 4 1/2-month-long wait after his initial verdict in September, Wondo's death sentence was upheld on appeal on Monday.

Blasting a "manifest lack of credible evidence", Brussels pulled its envoy from its former colonial possession and also summoned the DRC's ambassador to Belgium in response.

"This death sentence against our compatriot cannot be taken lightly. It will have consequences for our bilateral relations, which we will examine," Belgium's foreign ministry said.

Ahead of the September trial, Wondo told AFP that he hoped to be acquitted and that he was suffering a "difficult ordeal".

Death sentences were also handed down to a Briton and a Canadian, all naturalised Congolese like Wondo, as well as 3 US citizens.

Expressing concern for his health following his 8-month incarceration, Wondo's family and friends said Monday that his treatment was an "injustice".

Several human rights organisations have called for the death sentences to be commuted to life imprisonment.

In March, the DRC government lifted a moratorium on the death penalty that had been in force since 2003.

It said this was to target soldiers accused of treason, with the Congolese army locked in battle with armed fighters backed by the Rwandan army in its troubled east.

(source: Agence France-Presse)

CHINA:

2 men sentenced to death over separate deadly knife attacks in China

2 men have been sentenced to death for separate deadly stabbings in China.

1 man killed a 10-year-old child outside a school, while another man died after shielding a mother and child from attack on a bus.

The killing of the child raised concerns about China's patriotic education system and relations with Japanese nationals.

A man has been sentenced to death for killing a Japanese boy in China, Japan's Kyodo news agency has reported, citing Japanese ambassador to China, Kenji Kanasugi.

The boy, a 10-year-old Japanese national born to a Japanese father and a Chinese mother, was stabbed on his way to school on a morning in September last year. He died the following day.

The assailant, identified by Chinese authorities as a 44-year-old man surnamed Zhong, was formally arrested in late November on suspicion of murder, Kyodo had reported.

The attack took place on the anniversary of an incident in 1931 that triggered war between China and Japan, a sensitive date at a time when diplomatic relations are in danger of deteriorating.

The incident in the southern Chinese city of Shenzhen last year sparked debate about the country's patriotic education practises.

Kyodo said on Friday Chinese authorities described the case as an accidental and isolated incident, without giving motives.

It was second such incident near Japanese educational centres in China last year.

In June, a man attacked a bus used by a Japanese school in the eastern city of Suzhou, resulting in the death of a Chinese national who tried to shield a Japanese mother and her child from the assailant.

A court in Suzhou sentenced that assailant to death on Thursday, Kyodo reported.

2 other men were executed last week for "revenge against society" crimes in China.

Fan Weiqu, 62, rammed his car into a crowd outside a sports stadium in the southern city of Zhuhai in November, killing at least 35 people, was executed on Monday.

Xu Jiajin killed 8 people and injured 17 others in a stabbing attack at his vocational school in the eastern city of Wuxi.

(source: abc.net.au)

JAPAN:

KyoAni arson suspect's death penalty finalized after appeal dropped

A death penalty handed down on Shinji Aoba, the suspect in the 2019 deadly arson attack on a Kyoto Animation studio, has been finalized after the defendant dropped his appeal, sources said Tuesday.

On July 18, 2019, Aoba, now 46, poured gasoline at the No. 1 studio of the animation powerhouse, better known as KyoAni, in the city of Kyoto, and set it alight, causing the deaths of 36 people and injuring 32 others. Aoba himself suffered severe burns all over his body.

After intensive treatment, Aoba survived and was indicted after being discharged from hospital.

In January last year, the Kyoto District Court sentenced him to death, finding him competent to accept criminal responsibility. The defense for Aoba filed an appeal following the ruling.

(source: japantimes.co.jp)

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

Confirmed Death Penalty For Kyoto Animation Arsonist----Shinji Aoba's appeal withdrawal seals judgment after tragic incident claiming 36 lives.

On January 28, 2025, the severe repercussions of the Kyoto Animation arson fire were made final as the death penalty for Shinji Aoba was confirmed. This verdict follows Aoba's arson attack on July 18, 2019, which led to the tragic deaths of 36 employees and left another 32 individuals with serious injuries. The event is notable not just for its devastating human cost but also as one of the deadliest arson attacks in Japan’s recent history.

Aoba, aged 46, had initially been sentenced to death by the Kyoto District Court, which declared him fully competent to endure trial and directly linked his actions to his expressed belief of having had his work plagiarized by the studio. Remarks made during the trial highlighted this mindset. Aoba stated, ‘I didn’t think so many people would die. I think I’ve gone too far now,’ illustrating the gravity of his remorse and realization of the consequences of his actions.

The Kyoto Animation incident, where employees were attacked with petrol before the studio was ignited, captured international attention due to both the scale of loss and the emotional impact of the case. It significantly shook Japan’s animation industry, notorious for its cultural successes and community bonds.

The trial began with extensive arguments surrounding Aoba's mental condition during the crime. The defense sought to portray Aoba as delusional, arguing he was incapable of appreciating the severity of his actions due to significant mental health issues, including delusional disorder, which they claimed resulted from long-standing grievances against the studio.

On the contrary, the prosecution asserted Aoba’s actions were premeditated and driven by vengeful motives rooted deeply in his own perceptions of betrayal. The district court’s decision highlighted, ‘The precious lives of 36 people were taken, which is simply too serious and tragic,’ emphasizing the court’s sentiment on the severity of the offense.

With Aoba’s recent withdrawal of his appeal on January 27, the court's death sentence has been finalized, evoking mixed reactions across Japan. Many victims’ families expressed deep sorrow at the event’s inevitable conclusion. A father of one victim poignantly noted, ‘One person’s life cannot compensate for the losses of 36 lives; this should never happen again,’ indicating the collective grief surrounding the incident and the feeling of inadequacy when attempting to measure loss.

Understanding the broader effects of Aoba’s actions and the court's ruling, legal experts note the unique nature of death penalty cases, wherein the defendant's appeal withdrawal can sometimes be contested by legal representatives. Historical precedents exist where mental state claims have been leveraged to challenge the validity of such withdrawals, maintaining community interest concerning Aoba’s final ruling.

The finality of this verdict sends seismic ripples through Japan’s arts community and the nation as a whole, igniting discussions about safety and support for those within the creative industries. Advocates stress the importance of examining not just Aoba's actions but also the systems surrounding mental health care and support mechanisms available to individuals who feel isolated or threatened.

Since the event, community memorials and discussions have sought to honor the lost lives. Many urge for heightened awareness and preventive strategies to deter future horrific acts. The sentiment resonates as both victims' families and the public call for action to prevent recurrence of such tragedies.

While the case reached its legal climax, the emotional and societal scars serve as reminders of the lives permanently altered by Aoba's violent actions. Shinji Aoba's death penalty may symbolize closure for some, yet it raises challenging questions about justice, mental health, and the adequate measures needed to safeguard future communities against senseless violence.

(source: evrimagaci.org)

PAKISTAN:

Mentally ill Christian jailed for alleged blasphemy in Pakistan----Around 100 Christian families in Sahiwal, Punjab province, are given police protection after the arrest

The family of a mentally challenged Christian youth is worried for his life after he was jailed on alleged blasphemy charges in Pakistan’s Punjab province.

Farhan Masih, 28, was arrested on Jan. 26 from his house in a village in Sahiwal after a local farmer, Muhammad Bilal Khan, complained of blasphemy to police.

“I was going to water my crops when Farhan came and started speaking absurdities,” he stated in his complaint.

Khan alleged that the Christian youth told him that “the holy personages of your religion are false” and that he did not want to live among Muslims because “they belong to inferior status.”

Masih was put under judicial remand in Central Jail Sahiwal on Jan. 27, confirmed Bashir Ahmad, the assistant sub-inspector of the local police station at Ghalla Mandi in Sahiwal.

Police had provided security to the New Revival Church in Masih’s village, which has around 100 Christian families living among the majority Muslims.

“The situation is peaceful in the village,” Ahmad told UCA News.

Masih’s younger sister, Anam Javed, said Masih had quit his job as a male nurse in 2023 and loitered around in the village aimlessly.

“He has been addicted to drugs for the past several years and speaks nonsense, even claiming to speak to god,” she told UCA News on Jan. 28.

Javed, a teacher at a Church-run school, said she’d planned to get him treated for his addiction.

“We’ve done everything we could… But now, we are worried for his life,” she said.

The sister said Masih has been falsely accused of blasphemy— “a crime he couldn’t even comprehend given his condition.”

Javed said her brother was “very vulnerable” with “no means to defend himself.”

According to Pastor Munir Masih Bhatti of the New Revival Church, the villagers often complained about Masih's lousy behavior and said: “He even passed derogatory remarks against Jesus.”

The situation in the village since the arrest was tense, the pastor said.

Blasphemy is a sensitive charge in Muslim-majority Pakistan, where even a mere allegation can ignite public outrage and sometimes result in mob violence.

Blaspheming against Islam and the Prophet Muhammad is a crime punishable by death under Pakistani laws.

Hundreds of people have been accused and jailed for alleged blasphemy, and some were handed the death penalty. However, no one has been executed so far.

Joseph Jansen, chairman of the rights group Voice for Justice, visited Masih’s family on Jan. 28.

Everyone in the village was aware that both Masih and his younger brother were mentally unstable, he said.

“But no preliminary investigation was done by the superintendent of police when receiving a complaint against an unstable individual. It’s a serious lacuna in the case,” Jansen added.

According to the Lahore-based advocacy group Center for Social Justice, 343 blasphemy cases were filed in the Muslim-majority country last year. These include 19 Christians, 5 of them females.

(source: ucanews.com)

IRAQ:

Iraq sentences 3 to death for cocaine trafficking

On Tuesday, an Iraqi criminal court issued death sentences for 3 individuals convicted of drug trafficking.

The Supreme Judicial Council stated, “The convicted individuals were found in possession of 24.7 kilograms of cocaine, intended for trafficking and sale among users.”

The three sentences were reportedly handed down by the Basra Criminal Court under Article 27, First Section, of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Law No. 50 of 2017, along with Articles 47, 48, and 49 of the Penal Code.

Iraq’s Drug Issue

Iraq has grappled with a worsening drug problem in recent years, attributed to a mix of geographic, social, and political factors. Its location, bordering countries with drug production and trafficking networks, has positioned it as a critical transit point for narcotics smuggling.

Drugs such as methamphetamines, heroin, and cannabis are frequently transported through Iraq, targeting both local consumption and international markets.

The country’s fight against drug trafficking has made significant progress despite mounting challenges, with numerous local and international drug networks dismantled in 2023, 2024, and 2025, a senior official told our agency.

In 2023, over 7,000 individuals were sentenced for drug-related crimes, with penalties ranging from life imprisonment to the death penalty. In 2024, 14,438 individuals were arrested on charges related to drug trafficking, promotion, and personal use, with 8,930 convicted by the judiciary.

(source: shafaq.com)

SAUDI ARABIA----execution

Man executed after convicted on terror charges----Convict charged with attacking security forces, funding terrorist acts

Saudi Arabia said Tuesday it had executed a citizen convicted on terror charges including attacking security forces.

The kingdom’s Interior Ministry said the convict, identified as Ali bin Abdul Jalil bin Mansour, had perpetrated several terrorist crimes. He had attacked security men, shot at them several times with the intention of killing them, financed terrorist operations through money laundry and sold arms.

He was arrested, interrogated and charged with perpetrating the crimes, the ministry added.

He was referred to a specialised court that sentenced him to death. The ruling was later upheld and approved by a royal decree.

The execution was carried out Tuesday in the Eastern Province, the ministry said.

Saudi Arabia applies the death penalty against convicts in cases of murder, involvement in terrorism as well as drug smuggling and trafficking.

Last week, another Saudi man was executed for involvement in several terror acts.

The Interior Ministry said the convict, identified as Abdullah bin Ahmad, committed terrorist crimes, including joining a terrorist entity, travelling abroad to join a terrorist camp to train in manufacturing and using explosives. After returning to the kingdom, he began explosive making targeting security personnel, and financing terrorist acts.

Similarly, 2 Saudi men were executed in late November in Riyadh after they were convicted on terrorism charges. The Interior Ministry said both had perpetrated such acts as betraying their country, joining a terrorist entity and planning to carry out terrorist operations inside and outside the kingdom.

They also possessed weapons with the intention of mounting attacks and destabilising the country.

(source: gulfnews.com)

IRAN:

53rd Week of Hunger Strikes in 34 Prisons, Marking Year 2 of “No to Execution Tuesdays”

53rd Week of Prisoners’ Hunger Strike and the Beginning of the 2nd Year of the “No to Execution Tuesdays” Campaign Across 34 Prisons----A Broad National and International Campaign Against “Executions with Political Objectives” – 783 Executions during Pezeshkian’s Term

Support from 3,000 parliamentarians, mayors, religious and political figures from 78 countries for the “No to Execution” campaign in Iran.

Confidential judiciary documents reveal thousands of prisoners are on death row, and the number of inmates far exceeds prison capacity.

The “No to Execution Tuesdays” campaign, initiated by political prisoners in Qezelhessar Prison on January 29, 2024, in protest against the judiciary’s brutal executions and inhumane death sentences, marks its 53rd week today and enters its 2nd year. Over the past year, the campaign has evolved into a nationwide protest movement, expanding to 34 prisons across the country.

In addition to Qezelhessar Prison (Units 3 and 4), prisons such as Evin (women’s ward and wards 4 and 8), Greater Tehran Central Prison, Karaj Central Prison, Khorin Varamin Prison, Arak Prison, Khorramabad Prison, Isfahan’s Asadabad Prison, Isfahan’s Dastgerd Prison, Ahvaz’s Sheiban Prison, Shiraz Nezam Prison, Bam Prison, Kahnuj Prison, Tabas Prison, Mashhad Prison, Qaemshahr Prison, Rasht Lakan Prison (male and female wards), Rudsar Prison, Ardabil Prison, Tabriz Prison, Urmia Prison, Salmas Prison, Khoy Prison, Naqadeh Prison, Saqqez Prison, Baneh Prison, Marivan Prison, Kamyaran Prison, Haviq Talesh Prison, Adelabad Prison in Shiraz (women’s ward), Ahvaz Sepidar Prison, Ramhormoz Prison, Jovein Prison in Khorasan Razavi, and Borazjan Prison in Bushehr have joined this protest movement and participate in hunger strikes every Tuesday over the past 12 months.

Executions under Iran’s clerical regime are entirely political in nature and purpose. Ali Khamenei uses them as a tool to instill fear and prevent public protests and uprisings. Over the six months since Pezeshkian’s appointment, at least 783 prisoners have been executed.

More than 3,000 parliamentarians, mayors, and political, religious, and cultural figures from 78 countries have signed a joint statement urging the international community to take decisive action to halt executions in Iran. The statement notes: “Iranian authorities are using these executions for political purposes, seeking to instill fear and terror to prevent the potential outbreak of uprisings by the Iranian people. Thus, any execution carried out under the ruling theocracy should be recognized as political in nature. Unfortunately, on the global stage, the lack of response to ongoing suppression, massacres, and executions over previous decades has emboldened the clerical regime to persist in its suppression and torture, particularly through executions. … we endorse and support Maryam Rajavi’s call to end executions in Iran and her steadfast commitment to abolishing the death penalty, as outlined in her Ten-Point Plan for Iran’s future over the past 2 decades.”

In May and June 2022, the Security and Counterterrorism Committee of the NCRI (SNCRI) disclosed confidential documents of the Iran regime’s judiciary. According to these documents:

5,370 prisoners are on death row or sentenced to Qisas (retribution) in Iranian prisons. (SNCRI statement, 16 May 2022)

As of July 2020, the regime’s prison organization housed inmates in 267 prisons, detention centers, camps, and juvenile correction facilities. Additionally, the State Security Force (SSF) maintains 159 detention centers, and the Ministry of Intelligence operates 147 separate facilities, a total of 579 prisons and detention centers. These figures do not include the prisons under the IRGC’s control.

In 277 prisons, inmate numbers vastly exceed “nominal capacity.” For instance, Tabriz Prison has a “nominal capacity” of 1,500, but there are 2,600 beds and 3,788 inmates—2.5 times its nominal capacity. In a Sanandaj prison, the “nominal capacity” is 290, with 651 beds and 978 inmates—3.37 times the nominal capacity.

Many prisons are over 50 years old and severely dilapidated.

Approximately 600,000 people enter Iran’s prisons annually, affecting over 2 million family members who face significant challenges and problems.

Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, the President-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), described the ‘No to Execution Tuesdays’ campaign as a symbol of the determination and resilience of individuals who, even in captivity, refuse to remain silent in the face of oppression and have turned prisons into another arena of resistance and struggle. The international community must condition its relations with this regime on the cessation of executions and torture and hold its leaders accountable for crimes against humanity and genocide.”

Secretariat of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI)

(source: ncr-iran.org)

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

Shahriar Bayat, 64-Year-Old Death-Row Political Prisoner, Denied Medical Care Amid Supreme Court Case Review

Shahriar Bayat, a 64-year-old political prisoner on death row and held in Evin Prison, is suffering from numerous health problems, including prostate disease, gout, gastrointestinal issues, and colitis. Despite the severity of his condition, he has been denied access to specialized medical care and external treatment facilities. Meanwhile, his case remains under review by the Supreme Court.

According to information obtained by HRANA, Mr. Bayat’s health has significantly deteriorated. In addition to his existing ailments, he is experiencing gum sores caused by incomplete dental treatments. Despite his repeated requests, he has only been sent to the prison’s infirmary a handful of times, where officials have provided nothing more than non-specialized medications. Prison authorities continue to block his access to specialist consultations or transfers to outside medical centers. Moreover, medication provided by his family last week has yet to be delivered to him.

Elahe Bayat, Mr. Bayat’s daughter, confirmed this information to HRANA. She revealed that her father had been beaten on the head during interrogations, resulting in chronic headaches. She also expressed concern about his drastic weight loss, declining mental health, and the toll his medical conditions have taken on his well-being. Elahe further noted that while an appeal against her father’s death sentence has been submitted to the Supreme Court, no progress has been made. Authorities have claimed that cases are processed based on their registration numbers, leaving his case in limbo.

Background on Shahriar Bayat’s Arrest and Sentencing

Shahriar Bayat was arrested on September 25, 2022, during nationwide protests. Security forces detained him at his home in Shahriar and transferred him to the Greater Tehran Prison before moving him to Evin Prison.

On March 1, 2023, Branch 1 of the Revolutionary Court of Shahriar sentenced Mr. Bayat in his first case. He received:

1 year imprisonment for “propaganda against the regime,”

2 years imprisonment for “insulting the founder of the Islamic Republic and the Supreme Leader,”

5 years imprisonment for “assembly and collusion to commit crimes against national security,”

10 years imprisonment for “forming and managing illegal (virtual) groups to disrupt national security.”

This totaled 18 years of imprisonment, of which 10 years were enforceable. Following a request for sentence reduction, his prison term was reduced to 8 years and 6 months.

In late February 2023, in a separate case, the 13th Branch of the Criminal Court of Tehran Province, presided over by Saeed Sherafati and Ali Taghian, sentenced Mr. Bayat to death for blasphemy against the Prophet of Islam, insulting other Islamic figures, and desecrating Islamic sanctities through posts on social media. This verdict contradicted the earlier decision by a minority panel, which commuted Bayat’s sentence to 6 months in prison after he expressed remorse.

It is noteworthy that the Shahriar Public and Revolutionary Prosecutor’s Office had previously issued a non-prosecution order for Mr. Bayat on the same charge. However, following an appeal by the Shahriar Prosecutor’s Office, the case was reviewed by the Shahriar Revolutionary Court. Since the Revolutionary Court lacked jurisdiction over blasphemy charges, the case was referred to the Criminal Court of Tehran Province.

The issued rulings and the legal proceedings so far highlight significant ambiguities in Mr. Bayat’s case.

Shahriar Bayat is a retired employee, married, and a resident of Shahriar, Tehran province.

**********

3 Prisoners Moved to Solitary in Ghezel Hesar Prison for Execution

Sunday, January 26, 3 prisoners in Ghezel Hesar Prison in Karaj, who had previously been sentenced to death on murder charges, were transferred to solitary confinement in preparation for their execution.

The transfer of these prisoners was carried out as part of the process to implement their death sentences. Further details, including the identities of these individuals, are under investigation by HRANA.

According to data gathered by the Department of Statistics and Publication of Human Rights Activists, Ghezel Hesar Prison in Karaj witnessed the highest number of executions in 2024.

(source for both: en-hrana.org

***********

Amnesty International urges immediate action to halt execution of 2 political prisoners in Iran

2 Iranian political prisoners, Behrouz Ehsani (69) and Mehdi Hassani (48), face imminent execution following the upholding of their death sentences by the Iranian regime’s Supreme Court. Their forced transfer on January 26, 2025, from Evin to Ghezel Hesar prison—commonly used for executions—has heightened concerns about their fate. Amnesty International has urgently called on the Iranian regime to halt the executions and address allegations of torture and grossly unfair trials.

The death sentences for Ehsani and Hassani were initially issued on September 16, 2024, by the criminal judge Iman Afshari, head of Branch 26 of the regime’s so-called “Revolutionary Court” in Tehran. The charges included “rebellion against the state, enmity against God, spreading corruption on earth, membership in the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK), collecting classified information, conspiracy against national security, and illegal possession of firearms and ammunition.” These sentences were later upheld on January 7, 2025, by the mullahs’ regime’s Supreme Court.

The trial was plagued by due process violations, including denial of legal representation during the investigation phase, prolonged solitary confinement, and the use of forced confessions extracted under torture. Amnesty International reported, “They were tried jointly in a 5-minute trial session on 10 August 2024 in grossly unfair proceedings before Branch 26 of the Revolutionary Court in Tehran. Their torture allegations were not investigated.”

Amnesty International also quoted a letter by Behrouz Ehsani from prison: “After 22 months of uncertainty, they [the authorities] have now issued a death sentence against me without any evidence. We expect nothing else from this execution-driven system… People who seek freedom and democracy do not deserve execution. The silence of the international community emboldens this regime to carry out its executions.”

Amnesty International has called on global citizens and human rights defenders to pressure Iranian regime authorities to halt the executions, quash the prisoners’ sentences, and implement a moratorium on the death penalty. Both men have joined a broader resistance movement in Iran, including hunger strikes under the “No to Executions Tuesday” campaign, underscoring the growing desperation to combat state-sanctioned killings.

The use of the death penalty in Iran has escalated significantly in the past year. Amnesty International reports, “In 2023, Amnesty International recorded the executions of at least 853 people by the Iranian authorities, marking a 48% increase from 2022.” Revolutionary Courts, which are criticized for their lack of independence, continue to hand down arbitrary death sentences, primarily targeting dissidents, protesters, and ethnic minorities.

The international community must act now to protect the lives of Behrouz Ehsani and Mehdi Hassani, ensuring justice and accountability prevail over the cycle of repression and executions in Iran.

(source: english.mojahedin.org)

JANUARY 27, 2025:

SOUTH CAROLINA----impending execution

As South Carolina begins executions in 2025, who's the next person set to be put to death?

Executions of death row inmates are scheduled to resume this week in South Carolina.

According to a court order signed by the state’s Supreme Court, Marion Bowman, 44, is set to be executed on Jan. 31 at the Broad River Correctional Facility in Columbia. The court allowed for a pause in executions over the Christmas holiday.

On May 24, 2002, Bowman, of Branchville, was convicted of murder and 3rd-degree arson in the death of Kandee Martin. According to court documents, Bowman fatally shot Martin in Dorchester County in February 2001.

Bowman will be the 3rd man executed in South Carolina since late September. Richard Moore of Spartanburg was put to death on Nov. 1. Freddie “Khalil” Owens, of Greenville, was the 1st person executed in the state after a 13-year pause. He died on Sept. 20.

On Jan. 17, Bowman selected lethal injection as the execution method, according to court documents. Bowman has claimed innocence since his conviction.

He is represented by Columbia-based nonprofit law firm Justice 360.

According to a request for a stay in execution, Bowman's attorneys say his original legal team had a bias against Black people which prevented Bowman, who is Black, from receiving a fair trial. According to the request, a failure to stay Bowman's execution would "risk an unreliable and erroneous execution, which cannot be remedied after the fact."

Gov. Henry McMaster has the authority to stay an execution but has not since executions were reinstated.

After Bowman, a Greenville man, Brad Sigmon, is the next person set for execution. Sigmon was sentenced to death in 2002.

According to court documents, Sigmon had a romantic relationship with Rebecca Barbare for about three years. After the relationship ended, Sigmon broke into the home of her parents, David and Gladys Larke, killing them and kidnapping Barbare.

Sigmon planned to take Barbare to North Carolina, according to the documents. On the way, Barbare jumped out of Sigmon’s car and escaped. Sigmon shot Barbare several times as she fled, but she survived.

Law enforcement later tracked down and arrested Sigmon in Gatlinburg, Tenn. Sigmon admitted that he intended to kill Barbare and then commit suicide.

Sigmon's execution will come at least 35 days or 5 weeks after Bowman's execution date unless the state's high court determines the need for a longer interval.

(source: greenvilleonline.com)

FLORIDA:

Tracking Florida's Death Penalty----Veterans on Florida's Death Row, Part IV

This is Part IV of the latest series from Tracking Florida’s Death Penalty: Veterans on Florida’s Death Row, exploring information about veterans who are or have been on Florida's death row.

This is Part II of the latest series from Tracking Florida’s Death Penalty: Veterans on Florida’s Death Row.1 In case you missed it, Part I addressed the veterans who have been executed in the State of Florida; it is available here, at: https://fladeathpenalty.substack.com/p/veterans-on-floridas-death-row-part -- Part II addressed the veterans who died while on Florida’s death row; it is available here, at: https://fladeathpenalty.substack.com/p/veterans-on-floridas-death-row-part-c70 -- Part III addressed the 2 veterans who have been exonerated from Florida’s death row as well as the first part of the veterans currently on Florida’s death row; it is available here, at: https://fladeathpenalty.substack.com/p/veterans-on-floridas-death-row-part-1d8

Currently on Death Row

Several prisoners currently on Florida’s death row are U.S. military veterans. The list is in alphabetical order by last name and will be split into parts, as it is too long to be included in just one post. Part III covered A-J. This post covers K-P. The entire list of Florida’s death row prisoners can be found on the Department of Corrections website here, at: https://pubapps.fdc.myflorida.com/OffenderSearch/deathrowroster.aspx

Anton J. Krawczuk (Lee County)

Anton Krawczuk was sentenced to death for crimes that occurred on September 12, 1990, following a jury’s unanimous recommendation for death.2 The record states that Krawczuk served in the U.S. Marine Corps.

While serving in the Marines, Krawczuk was (1) disciplined for fighting and misusing military equipment, (2) was court martialed for being away without leave, and (3) served six months in military confinement. Krawczuk eventually received an administrative separation from his military service.3

Krawczuk is 65 years old.

Patrick McDowell (Nassau County)

Patrick McDowell was sentenced to death in July 2024 following a jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of 11-1. (Read more here.) McDowell’s military service was a focus of the mitigation the trial court considered at sentencing:

Moderate weight: While he was in high school, McDowell applied for, and was accepted into the U.S. Marine Corps Delayed Entry Program at a time when the United States was heavily engage din a ground war with Iraq and Marines were being killed.

Great weight: McDowell enlisted in the Marines in Florida in 2005 at a time when he knew the United States was still engaged in a ground war in Iraq. During his four-plus years in the Marines, McDowell worked hard and served his country and his unit with distinction, in the United States and abroad. He was promoted in rank to Sergeant, was selected as the Battalion Commander’s radio operator and Personal Security Detail in Jump Platoon and received outstanding performance evaluations and Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medals. He was respected as a mentor and teacher of junior Marines. He was honorably discharged.

Great weight: McDowell extended his enlistment in the Marines to deploy to a war zone in Iraq.

Great weight: While he was in Iraq, he was singularly responsible for communications between the Battalion Commander and the Battalion and all air support.

Moderate weight: McDowell returned from deployment in Iraq with symptoms of PTSD apparent to his family.1

Little weight: McDowell formed friendships with Michael Patrick Fowler and others on the Airsoft Team and was a good teammate, giving some members of that team advice about how to enter the military service. He also attended Florida State College in Jacksonville for two semesters to prepare for a job as a firefighter.

Moderate weight: McDowell returned to Iraq as one of the youngest employees of Triple Canopy, a private military contractor, at a time when terrorists and insurgents were still trying to kill Americans. At Forward Operating Base Delta, he worked in the Tactical Operations Center and also assisted at the Entry Point where he observed military casualties and children intentionally burned by their parents. He was present when the base received indirect fire.

Moderate weight: McDowell still suffers from PTSD as a result of his service to his country in the Iraq War - either during his service with the U.S. Marines or his service with Triple Canopy, or both. PTSD is a mental condition that requires treatment to reduce its impact on everyday life.2

McDowell is 38 years old.

Jury recommendation for death

McDowell sentenced to death

David Miller, Jr. (Duval County)

David Miller, Jr. was sentenced to death for crimes that occurred in 1997 following a jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of 7-5.4 The record indicates that Miller served in the U.S. Navy.

Miller is 65 years old.

Everett Miller (Osceola County)

Everett Miller was convicted of 1st-degree murder and sentenced to death for crimes that occurred in 2017 following the jury’s unanimous recommendation for death. On direct appeal, in February 2024, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed Miller’s convictions and sentences of death.5 The Court’s opinion indicates that Miller served as a Marine and later as a military contractor. According to witnesses at trial:

Miller was a very good Marine and person, was an imaging analyst before later becoming a targeteer, was involved in targeting strikes into Afghanistan where innocent people were occasionally killed, and had been deployed a few times, including to Afghanistan in 2013. One witness testified Miller had problems sleeping while in Afghanistan and, upon returning, occasionally had nightmares. Another witness acknowledged Miller's military records included a court martial from 1992 in which one of the charges was assault by waving a dangerous weapon. And one witness testified that Miller's decision to leave military contracting was primarily a financial one.6

According to his family members, Miller’s “demeanor changed after leaving the military.”7 He “became depressed and remorseful, was in a downward spiral, tried to get help from Veterans Affairs (VA), and was committed under the Baker Act due to an incident in which he was running around town in his underwear.”8

Miller is 53 years old.

Daniel Peterka (Okaloosa County)

Peterka was sentenced to death for crimes that occurred in 1989 following a jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of 8-4. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and sentence of death on direct appeal.

Peterka was discharged from the National Guard due to “illegal conduct.” On postconviction, Peterka argued that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to present his military service as mitigation. His attorney explained it was a tactical decision because he was concerned those on the jury would view his conduct as “besmirching the name of the military.” In determining that Peterka failed to establish prejudice, the Florida Supreme Court wrote:

Military service is not strong mitigation, especially when weighed against the CCP, avoid arrest, and under sentence of imprisonment aggravators.

Peterka is 57 years old.

Leroy Pooler (Palm Beach County)

Pooler was sentenced to death following a jury recommendation for death by a vote of 9-3. As nonstatutory mitigation at sentencing, the trial court found Pooler’s “honorable service in the military,” which the Court gave considerable weight. On direct appeal in 1997, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed Pooler’s conviction and sentence.

The Florida Supreme Court’s 2008 decision on postconviction further stated that “Pooler's military records revealed that he was charged with at least nineteen different offenses on fifteen different occasions between October 1969 and February 1971 and that he was court-martialed for several of these offenses.”

Pooler is 76 years old.

1--Due to the age of some records and the unavailability of some information, it is possible that the lists in this series are incomplete. If you know of a veteran who is not included on the lists in this series, please let me know. Also, for purposes of thoroughness, this series includes those who were discharged from the military.

2--Krawczuk v. State, 634 So. 2d 1070, 1072 (Fla. 1994).

3--Krawczuk v. Sec’y, Fla. Dep’t of Corrs., 873 F.3d 1273, 1279-80 (11th Cir. 2017).

4--Miller v. State, 926 So. 2d 1243, 1247 (Fla. 2006).

5--Miller v. State, 379 So. 3d 1109 (Fla. 2024).

6--Id. at 1117.

7--Id.

8--Id.

(source: fladeathpenalty.substack.com)

ALABAMA----de facto death penalty

Alabama prisoners dying at a rate 4 times the national average----Fewer people died inside the prisons than in 2023, when prisoners were 5 times as likely to die as the national average.

The Alabama Department of Corrections saw 277 incarcerated individuals die within prison walls in 2024, a rate 4 times the national average.

Eddie Burkhalter, a researcher for the Alabama Appleseed Center for Law and Justice, obtained the number through a records request as the nonprofit works toward building a database of Alabama prison deaths stretching back a decade.

The number of deaths is a drop from a record high of 325 deaths last year, which put the state at 5 times the national mortality rate for prison deaths.

Alabama’s prisoner mortality rate is 1,358 deaths per 100,000 people, compared with a national average across state prisons of 330 deaths per 100,000, according to the U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics.

“It’s a large number, but what’s even more telling is a record request response I got recently from the Alabama Department of Economic and Community Affairs, which collects in-custody data for the federal government,” Burkhalter said. “I asked for deaths from 2019 to now; in 2021, 118 people died in Alabama prisons. From 2021 to 2024, that’s a 134 % increase in deaths.”

The manners of death are not yet available for 2024, as Burkhalter said that information takes longer to pull together, but Appleseed has documented the manner of death for most of the 2023 cases.

“The trends we’re seeing are more overdose deaths, which are becoming more and more common a huge problem,” Burkhalter said. “There are a lot of natural deaths as well. Talking with other researchers, I’m learning that many times some of these natural deaths could actually be medical neglect cases where the person did not get the care they needed in a timely fashion and passed away. There are homicides and suicides as well, all preventable deaths. Those are all preventable deaths where people should be able to serve out their sentence.”

Burkhalter said each deceased individual’s data on length of sentencing may or may not end up being part of the database, but said the deaths include people sentenced to serve as little as one year in the prison system.

“It doesn’t matter how long you’ve been sentenced, any sentence could be a death sentence because ADOC is just not in control fully of these facilities,” Burkhalter said.

The Alabama Legislature and ADOC have taken some steps to try to address the lack of guards that has played a critical role in these issues, Burkhalter said, but have been unable to meet the target number of officers required under a federal lawsuit from the Department of Justice.

“(ADOC) is not going to meet the court order; they keep pushing back the deadline because they just can’t meet it,” Burkhalter said. “I mean, they’ve taken steps, ADOC and the Legislature, good steps to try to increase hiring—but it’s just not working. We’re losing officers; some of them are being arrested for crimes that are work-related. A lot of (contraband) is coming in through officers. To ADOC’s credit they’re catching some; but it’s not apparent whether those arrests are resulting in convictions. That’s something else we’re looking at, but it’s a really complicated problem.”

Burkhalter said there are some obvious actions that could help to reduce the number of deaths inside the prison system.

“We think ADOC should be ramping up security checkpoints. We’ve had attorneys and staff who have witnessed employees coming in not being checked at checkpoints,” Burkhalter said. “If you want people to stop dying from fentanyl in a max security prison, you stop people from bringing it in. Make the check-in look like a TSA checkpoint. Drug contraband is a huge business in Alabama prisons. People get killed over contraband. Weapons are brought in and sold. Increased security at those facilities would be a first good step and it’s something they could do.”

Prisoner classification is also a system that Burkhalter said needs fixing, as some of the individuals who could be a danger to others appear to be allowed back to mix with others who they could put in danger.

(source: al.com)

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

'Condoned Mr. Frazier's death': Alabama death row inmate to be 1st person executed while in Michigan's custody

Alabama death row inmate Demetrius Frazier is set to be the 1st person executed while in the custody of the state of Michigan.

Frazier's lawyers argued he actually belongs in Michigan, but the state replied that it does not want to take him back.

The United States District Court said the case was similar to a previous instance when then-United States Attorney General Jeff Sessions allowed the execution of Walter Leroy Moody, who was in the legal custody of the United States. At the time, he said that he did “not object to Alabama retaining custody of Mr. Moody for the purpose of carrying out the death sentence," according to court documents.

Michigan's Department of Corrections stated similar notions in the court documents.

"By disclaiming any interest in Mr. Frazier’s physical custody (while retaining legal custody) and relying on Moody, Director Washington and General Nessel have condoned Mr. Frazier’s death by nitrogen gas suffocation," the documents state.

Earlier this month, Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey authorized the nitrogen hypoxia execution of Frazier, who is set to die between the hours of 12 a.m. on Thursday, Feb. 6 and 6 a.m. on Friday, Feb. 7, by way of nitrogen hypoxia.

Alabama was the 1st in the nation to utilize the controversial execution method, described as a "human experiment" by some detractors, having done so a total of 3 times since January of 2024.

Attorneys for Frazier previously sued to block the state from carrying out his execution unless the state makes changes to the protocol. His lawyers argued the nitrogen gas causes “conscious suffocation” and that earlier nitrogen executions did not result in swift unconsciousness and death.

In early 1992, a then 19-year-old Frazier was arrested in Detroit, Michigan, where he was ultimately convicted of murder, first-degree criminal sexual conduct and armed robbery. Each charge came with a life sentence, according to court documents.

While in custody, he made statements referring to his role in the death of an Alabama woman and eventually confessed to the murder of Pauline Brown in Birmingham months prior.

Frazier was indicted by a Jefferson County grand jury for Brown's murder in November of 1993. Roughly two years later, Alabama was granted temporary custody of Frazier by the Michigan Department of Corrections so he could stand trial.

On June 5, 1996, Frazier was convicted of one count of Capital murder and one count of murder. 2 days later, the jury recommended the death sentence by a vote of 10-2.

Who has custody?

Frazier was soon returned to Michigan where he spent the next 15 years, but an executive agreement signed by then-governors Robert Bentley of Alabama and Rick Snyder of Michigan in 2011 would see him taken back to Alabama.

Frazier's attorneys argued that Bentley and Snyder's agreement caused him to be "held unlawfully in the physical custody of the wrong sovereign" and is "void, entered without lawful authority, and violates the IAD and the Due Process Clause."

According to the state's constitution, the governor of Michigan's ability to enter into agreements with other governments is limited and subject to "provisions of general law" unless "otherwise provided in this constitution.

As Michigan declared the death penalty unconstitutional in 1963, specifically declaring that "no law shall be enacted providing for the penalty of death, Frazier's attorneys claim that Gov. Snyder acted without lawful authority when signing him over to Alabama.

The lawsuit further argued that Frazier is still technically in legal custody of MDOC as state law requires him to serve out his sentences in-state.

Frazier's attorneys reached out to current Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer last November, imploring her to have him extradited back to the state, claiming that Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey would have "no choice" but to turn him over as compliance with the U.S. constitution's extradition clause is not discretionary.

According to the suit, a staff member for Governor Whitmer notified Mr. Frazier's counsel that she would not act on his request at that time.

An Alabama Department of Corrections Inmate Summary lists Frazier as "borrowed" from MDOC; MDOC's website still has him listed as a current prisoner.

(source: WVTM news)

IDAHO:

Idaho plans to bring back firing squad as ‘preferred method of execution’----An American state has made global headlines after launching plans to bring back a particularly violent execution method.

Idaho is bringing back the firing squad.

Lethal injection has been the legally specified method. But shortages of the necessary drugs and controversy surrounding their effectiveness have prompted the introduction of a new bill to the American state’s parliament.

If passed, it will become the only state in the Union to designate firing squads as its preferred method of execution.

And it’s a method not used in the US for more than a decade.

“This bill is not about whether the death penalty is good or bad,” Idaho Republican Representative Bruce Skaug stated.

“Our job is to carry it out in the most efficient manner under the bounds of our constitutional requirements.”

Idaho authorities were forced to halt the execution of 74-year-old serial killer Thomas Creech in February last year. Those tasked with carrying out his execution had been unable to find a suitable vein for an intravenous line to be inserted.

He had been sentenced to death for 5 murders, but claims to have killed 26 people.

A 2nd attempt in November was put on ice after a federal judge granted time to consider whether or not the basis for a new appeal had merit.

But the availability of the drug needed to carry out the sentence has also been an ongoing issue.

Idaho has been forced to delay the execution of convicted violent rapist and murderer Gerald Pizzuto after failing to obtain the drug in 2022.

“Going forward, we hope the state will stop pursuing death warrants before Idaho Correction officials know whether they can carry out executions,” Pizzuto’s lawyer, Deborah Czuba, said at the time.

Idaho’s Republicans agree.

Skaug told the Idaho Statesman news service his firing-squad bill was about offering “dignity for all”.

“It is retribution, for the families that lost someone to murder and the person that died from murder,” he said, adding that Idaho judges are required to weigh retribution as part of their sentencing process.

Problems surrounding the lethal injection method prompted Idaho Governor Brad Little to authorise the backup option of firing squads in March 2023. But a lack of suitable facilities has prevented this from being enacted.

About $A1.2 million has since been committed to remodelling the state’s existing execution chamber as a bulletproof facility. Work isn’t expected to be completed before 2026.

“It is the responsibility of the State of Idaho to follow the law and ensure that lawful criminal sentences are carried out,” Governor Little said.

On Wednesday, Representative Skaug introduced the bill to Idaho’s House Judiciary and Rules Committee. It turns the legal tables by stipulating lethal drugs must only be used if a firing squad is “unavailable”.

“I see this bill as being less problematic with appeals in the courts,” Skaug said.

“Essentially, if you don’t have the bullets, then you go to the pentobarbital.”

The committee unanimously voted to advance the bill to its public hearing phase.

Idaho had been using the drug pentobarbital for lethal injections. And despite fears of a shortage, the Department of Correction never ran out. Its most recent supply was purchased in October.

But reliability of supply is a serious concern for all US states using the lethal drug for executions.

Pharmaceutical manufacturers have been refusing to sell pentobarbital for that purpose. They state the drug was researched and developed to save lives – not take them.

And the effectiveness of lethal injection as a humane method of execution has also been called into question.

A study into 8776 executions between 1890 and 2010 found that more than 7 % of all lethal injections reportedly went wrong. This compares with 3 % for hangings and 2 % for electrocutions.

None of the 34 firing squad executions, however, were reported to have been botched.

A recent Department of Justice report ruled that “significant uncertainty” remains about whether lethal injection causes unnecessary pain and suffering. And that’s a breach of the Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution.

Those states that still apply the death penalty must now seek alternatives.

Some are rewiring their old electric chairs. And Alabama has turned to filling gas chambers with nitrogen.

While Idaho is the 1st state to return to designating firing squads as its first choice, it’s the 5th to make them available as a backup option – along with Mississippi, Oklahoma, Utah and South Carolina.

Idaho’s death row currently consists of 8 men and 1 woman. The last execution, however, took place in 2012. And that was just the 4th since 1976.

The last person to be executed by firing squad in the US was Utah prisoner Ronnie Lee Gardner, in 2010. He had been sentenced for killing an lawyer during an attempted escape while in court.

Gardner was tied to a chair, surrounded by sandbags and had a target pinned over his heart. 5 volunteer prison officers were given .30-caliber rifles to fire a single shot from an 8-meter distance. One rifle was randomly loaded with a blank cartridge.

Utah is the only state to have used firing squads in the past 50 years, according to the US Death Penalty Information Centre.

(source: news.com.au)

USA:

2024 was not a good year for death row inmates seeking mercy

On Dec. 19, Kevin Ray Underwood became the last person executed in 2024. Oklahoma put him to death for the 2006 murder of 10-year-old Jamie Rose Rolin.

6 days earlier, the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board met to consider Underwood’s request for clemency. He appeared via video conference and “apologized to Bolin’s family, his family, and those in the hearing room who had to listen to the details of the crime.”

Underwood told the board that he has “blocked out most of his memory of that day. ‘But when I do think about it, it causes me great pain.’”

His lawyers tried to save Underwood’s life by convincing the board that “he is a ‘profoundly ill man’ worthy of mercy.” They argued that his sentence should be commuted because of “the childhood trauma, undiagnosed autism spectrum disorder, bipolar disorder, PTSD, social phobia, and other mental health challenges he faced.”

Assistant Attorney General Aspen Layman, representing the state, branded their narrative a “‘revisionist history’ of Underwood’s past that was being used to justify mercy on his behalf.” Layman argued that Underwood “should be shown the same mercy he showed Bolin — none at all.”

“While we, as an enlightened society, can give grace to those struggling with mental illness,” he went on, “we can still expect them to refrain from planning the murder, rape, torture, and cannibalism of 10-year-old little girls.”

The board agreed and voted unanimously to deny clemency.

Underwood was not alone in losing his fight for mercy that year. Although former President Joe Biden made 2024 memorable for death row inmates by commuting the sentences of 37 federal inmates awaiting execution, and although exiting North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper (D) made headlines with a last-minute commutation of the sentences of 15 of his state’s 136 death row inmates, Underwood’s case was more typical.

But for Cooper’s action, 2024 would have been the 1st year since 2016 in which no state granted clemency to any inmate on death row.

In place after place, clemency boards and governors turned deaf ears to claims that miscarriages of justice, mental illness or rehabilitation justified mercy. If they are to have more success in the future, lawyers representing death row inmates will have to adapt new strategies and focus on educating clemency boards and governors about the special place of mercy in the death penalty system.

To put 2024 in context, we should note that over the last half century, it has never been easy for inmates on death row to get clemency. For example, in 2023, only one of them succeeded when Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R) pardoned John Huffington on the grounds that his “convictions were in error.”

In 2021, another year with just one capital clemency, only Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt (R) commuted the death sentence of Julius Jones based on “concerns about Jones’ age at the time of the offense and serious doubts as to his guilt.”

Since 1976, 365 death row inmates have received clemency at the state and federal levels. That may seem a sizable number, but as law professors Carol and Jordan Steiker note, “The modern era of American capital punishment … saw a stunning drop in the use of capital clemency, which had been a substantial and routine practice … even in states that used the death penalty the most.”

And, in the modern era, when governors did grant clemency to death row inmates, they often were, like Biden’s, mass clemencies issued as a step toward abolishing the death penalty in their states.

Examples include what New Mexico Gov. Tony Anaya (D) did in 1986 when he emptied his state’s death row by granting clemency to five men. New Mexico abolished the death penalty in 2009.

In January 2003, Illinois Gov. George Ryan (R) pardoned 4 people and commuted the sentences of 167 death row inmates. Illinois abolished the death penalty 8 years later.

Other mass commutations of death sentences occurred in New Jersey in 2007 and in Oregon in 2022. Both were quickly followed by the death penalty ending in those states.

Over the last 50 years, only about 1/3 of the clemencies granted have been based on individualized determinations. In those cases, executive officials “most often cite disproportionate sentencing, possible innocence, and mitigation factors such as intellectual disability or mental illness as reasons to grant clemency in capital cases.”

But none of that mattered in 2024 until Cooper’s 11th-hour decision.

Earlier in the year, it looked like Oklahoma would break the 2024 clemency drought when, in August, the Pardon and Parole Board voted 3-2 to recommend clemency for Emmanuel Littlejohn. His lawyers convinced them that Littlejohn had been treated unfairly because his co-defendant received life in prison without parole, whereas Littlejohn got a death sentence.

But Gov. Stitt was not persuaded. He explained why he did not follow the board’s recommendation: “A jury found him (Littlejohn) guilty and sentenced him to death. The decision was upheld by multiple judges. As a law-and-order governor, I have a hard time unilaterally overturning that decision.” Littlejohn was executed on Sept. 26.

Arguments about innocence and racial bias fared no better in motivating state officials to grant clemency this year.

Take the case of Marcellus Williams, about whom I wrote last August. Convicted in Missouri of the 1997 murder of Felicia Gayle, Williams’ conviction was “based on the testimony of two eyewitnesses who were paid for their testimony. No DNA evidence linked him to the crime.” If that was not bad enough, race played a role in jury selection, with the prosecutor striking six prospective Black jurors, leaving only one to serve.

Gov. Mike Parson (R) still denied clemency, justifying his decision by saying that Williams had “exhausted due process and every judicial avenue.” Williams was put to death in September.

Parson, like Stitt, confused what courts do in capital cases with what clemency allows governors to do.

The Steikers blame what they call “an unjustified complacency.” Judicial review, they suggest, should not “displace … the need for actors outside of the judiciary to reinforce the commitments of the (Supreme) Court’s death penalty jurisprudence.” Even former U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist, an ardent supporter of capital punishment, recognized that clemency was a “fail safe” in our “fallible” judicial system.

Ironically, the almost complete failure of governors to grant clemency in capital cases this year may reflect the progress abolitionists have made in changing public attitudes about the death penalty. That change has, in turn, made it harder for prosecutors in Oklahoma, Missouri and elsewhere to persuade juries to impose new death sentences.

As that has happened, officials in states that retain capital punishment have become more reluctant to give up on the death sentences they have already obtained. As this country gets closer to abolishing death as a punishment, that progress does not bode well for the inmates on death row who will ask to have their lives spared in 2025.

(source: Opinion; Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College----thehill.com)

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

Forgiveness and compassion on death row with Sr. Helen Prejean

This week at "The Nonviolent Jesus Podcast," I'm welcoming St. Joseph Sr. Helen Prejean, one of the world's most fearless advocates for peace, justice, nonviolence and the abolishment of the death penalty.

Best known as the author of Dead Man Walking, Sr. Helen has spent decades challenging a culture that claims Jesus in the name of violence while perpetuating systems of injustice like the death penalty.

In the episode, Sr. Helen pulls back the curtain on the myths surrounding the death penalty, sharing her insight into what the death penalty doesn't do — bring healing, deter crime or reflect the Gospel's call to love and forgiveness.

Sr. Helen explains the church's teaching on the death penalty and clemency, from Pope John Paul II in the 1970s to Pope Francis today. She describes how South Africa changed a culture of oppression through mercy and compassion and challenges us to ask: "How is Jesus being claimed in the name of violence by our culture?"

She shares personal experiences witnessing the execution of eight men on death row, and her interactions with the families of murder victims who have found forgiveness and compassion. Sr. Helen also speaks about the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

Forgiveness is a radical act of strength, Sr. Helen says. "If forgiving your enemy is not weakness, what is it?" she asks. The podcast, and future episodes, can be found here, at: https://rss.com/podcasts/the-nonviolent-jesus-podcast/

(source: National Catholic Reporter)

UNITED KINGDOM:

Kibworth councillor calls for death penalty for convicted Southport Killer Axel Rudakubana

A Harborough district councillor is calling for the death penalty to be reinstated following the conviction of triple murderer Axel Rudakubana.

Simon Whelband, Conservative councillor for the Kibworths in Harborough, says a national debate should be triggered after the 18-year-old was sentenced to 52 years in prison.

Rudakubana was found guilty of the brutal murder of 3 young children in Southport, the attempted murder of 10 others, and of producing ricin – a deadly poison – in his bedroom.

Cllr Whelband said: “He murdered 3 young children in cold blood and attempted kill 10 more. After his arrest he said: ‘I’m so glad those kids are dead… it makes me happy.’ He also produced the deadly poison ricin in his bedroom. He is a monster.

“The argument I hear most from people who don’t want the death penalty is that they are concerned about wrongful convictions. There is no doubt in this case – he is 100 per cent guilty of these heinous crimes.

“The average cost to keep a prisoner is £45,000 per year. He will be in prison for a minimum of 52 years, which will cost the taxpayer over £2 million to keep him in prison. This is unacceptable.

“In cases such as this – where the crimes are so barbaric and there is no doubt about guilt – then the death penalty should be brought in.

“We should start a national debate about the return of death penalty as I think the vast majority of people in this country would agree with me.”

Had he been 18 when he carried out the murders, Rudakubana would have received a whole life sentence.

(source: harboroughmail.co.uk)

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

Don’t bring back the death penalty for Axel Rudakubana

In response to the heinous crimes committed by Axel Rudakubana, who was sentenced to life with a minimum term of 52 years, the Reform UK MPs Rupert Lowe and Richard Tice led calls for a “national debate” on restoring the death penalty. Their colleague Lee Anderson went further, posting an image of a noose on X with the comment “this is what is required”. But to grant Anderson’s wish would fly in the face of a swelling global movement towards abolition, and would not only be wrong but in the end, I believe, deeply unpopular.

Both Labour and the Tories have long been committed to abolishing the death penalty worldwide, and Downing Street made clear that the Government had no intention of joining the debate demanded by Reform. However, its MPs’ position may well get support from some of the many expressing concern over the purported “leniency” of Rudakubana’s punishment. Mr Justice Goose imposed the harshest sentence the law allows for a person who commits an offence as a juvenile — Rudakubana had been nine days short of his 18th birthday — and pointed out he is unlikely ever to be released. Nevertheless, Lowe claimed that “exceptional circumstances” demand “exceptional punishments”.

Capital punishment was abolished in Britain for ordinary offences in 1969 following a four-year moratorium, and for the rare crimes of mutiny and treason in 1998. In 1999, the UK ratified Protocol 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Second Optional Protocol of the UN’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which means it could not restore the death penalty without denouncing them in their entirety. The last time Parliament debated capital punishment in 1998 MPs’ rejected it by a majority of 158, and despite the concerns over Rudakubana’s sentence, there is little sign of a groundswell in favour of bringing it back. Anderson’s tweet may have got 2.8 million impressions, but only 61,000 likes. Back in 2020, an online petition to restore capital punishment attracted just 12,691 signatures.

When Britain abolished capital punishment, it was in the global minority, but by the time it signed the relevant conventions 29 years later, there were 89 abolitionist nations. Today that figure stands at 128, a total joined just weeks ago by Zimbabwe, which in the past, was not known for its human rights record. Another 43 are what the UN terms “abolitionist de facto”, which means they have not executed anyone for at least 10 years.

One of the most compelling forces behind the shift in international attitudes has been increasing recognition of the potential for error. As they once were in Britain, where Timothy Evans was posthumously pardoned in 1966, 16 years after he was hanged for a murder committed by someone else, wrongfully convicted defendants have been sentenced to death and some have been executed in most retentionist countries. Possible innocence is not a feature of Rudakubana’s case, but where the death penalty remains in law, innocent people will be killed by the state, and it would be a moral disaster to allow his crimes to open the door to the wrongful judicial killing of other, future defendants.

The most common argument advanced by death penalty advocates is the claim that it is a unique and powerful deterrent — an appealing rationale in countries with high levels of violent crime, particularly following a heinous case. However, research in the US and elsewhere has not found any credible evidence to support this position.

Since Rudakubana was sentenced, some have suggested that at a time of fiscal restraint, the state should not bear the high cost of keeping prisoners incarcerated for the rest of their lives. It is grotesque and inappropriate to reduce a debate that involves profound issues about state power and the right to life to questions of cost, even if it were true that the death penalty might be cheaper than life in prison. However, in countries such as the US, which at least try to ensure procedural safeguards for those at risk of capital punishment and several ways to appeal, the death penalty costs more than life imprisonment. If Reform UK’s MPs wish to make this case, they will be on shaky ground.

The horror of Rudakubana’s crimes will not be forgotten. They were, as Mr Justice Goose made clear, “evil”. But to restore capital punishment would be an even greater evil, which unlike his crimes, we have the means to prevent.

(source: Professor Carolyn Hoyle is Director of the Death Penalty Research Unit, part of the University of Oxford’s Centre for Criminology at the Faculty of Law, and co-author of Reasons to Doubt, a study of wrongful convictions----unherd.com)

GREECE:

The Murder of Eleni Topaloudi and The Death Penalty

The last person executed in Greece was 27-year-old Vassilis Lymberis, shot by a firing squad on Crete for the murders of his estranged wife, his 2 ½-year-old daughter, 1-year-old son, and his mother in law by burning them alive in their house.

The wife survived long enough to tell police what had happened in a case that was so shocking and repulsive in Greece it was made into a movie, ‘The Satanic Night’, and apart from death penalty critics who think Hitler should have been spared, was justice.

Opponents of the death penalty say it is savage and uncivilized – burning children alive is too, of course – and Amnesty International has said that, “far from making society safer, the death penalty has been shown to have a brutalizing effect on society. State sanctioned killing only serves to endorse the use of force and to continue the cycle of violence.”

We’ll never really know of course, but the death penalty is certainly an unquantified deterrent because you can’t calculate how many people did not kill someone else because they didn’t want to be executed.

Greece abolished the death penalty in 1975 and there’s been plenty of gruesome killings since then that advocates of capital punishment believe warranted it should have been used, although justice could be wrought by putting the most heinous killers in solitary confinement supermax cement cells with no windows or furniture, no TV, no radio, no cell phones, no books, no paper, and no writing materials so that they can write their last wishes with the blood from their heads dashed against the walls.

You could argue that Babis Anagnostopoulos deserved the death penalty for smothering his 19-year-old wife Caroline Crouch in 2021 in their Athens home – with their baby in the room – for which he blamed imaginary home invaders. He also killed the family puppy.

He got a life sentence – which in Greece doesn’t mean staying in jail for life – and is likely to be released in 2050. Crouch will not be released from the death penalty he inflicted on her, but maybe when he gets out he can buy a puppy for a companion.

Which brings us to the case of the two cretins – not Cretans – Manolis Koukouras and Aleksandër Luca, who are poster boys for the death penalty but are free to wake up in jail each morning for another day of light while Eleni Topaloudi is not.

The 21-year-old university student was raped and beaten senseless by the two cowards on Rhodes in 2018 and then tossed into the sea to drown, her last words reportedly being that her father would get them for it.

Topaloudi’s body was found by the Coast Guard. At the trial of her rapists and murderers, the court heard how they lured her to one of their homes for rape and torture, for which they got a ‘life’ sentence plus an additional 15 years. Topaloudi got 21 years of life.

Prosecutor Aristotelia Doga rejected the defense’s proposal to consider mitigating factors and said the defendants deserved the same sentence for not showing remorse and accused them of “moral perversion.”

Under the current Greek penal code – the former ruling Looney Left SYRIZA watered down penalties for even violent crimes – a lifetime sentence is not a lifetime sentence despite 2019 laws enacting tougher penalties.

Not even the November 17 terrorists can be put to death for killing 23 people from 1975 to 2000, beginning with then-CIA Chief of Staff Richard Welch outside his home near the American Embassy in Athens, shot dead before his wife.

The terrorist group’s main hitman Dimitris Koufodinas, is serving 11 ‘life’ sentences for 11 murders and an array of other charges but was given furloughs from jail, little vacations, during which he went to some of the killing sites to point out where he did it. Terrorism tourism? How did Greece miss out on that. Someone should have saved some of the chalk lines showing where the victims died, including where body parts landed, but even Koufodinas doesn’t deserve to be executed, capital punishment opponents say.

It’s a nice philosophical debate unless it was someone you loved or in your family whose head was blown off across the street, and you can look for Koufodinas to be released in September 2027 when he’s eligible for parole from 11 ‘life sentences’. He wouldn’t be, of course, if he got the Lymberis Sentence, shot dead by a firing squad, which replaced the guillotine in Greece. But since he won’t be, why is he eligible for parole?

These are arguments for debates between supporters and opponents of the death penalty that can be live-streamed – death-streamed for the victims of murder – but the rejoicing of Koukouras and Luka over what they did is undebatable.

Topaloudi was beaten viciously with an iron tool to the head – her blood was found on a ceiling in their apartment – fracturing her skull and causing a brain hemorrhage. A coroner said she was somehow alive but drowned when thrown into the sea.

Topaloudi’s family was awarded €905,000 ($929,435) by a civil court against Luca – but not Koukouras because there wasn’t a stamp on a document. It will never be paid, nor will there be justice until they die the same way, unless a firing squad could be put together. Any Volunteers?

(source: Andy Dabilis, thenationalherald.com)

JAPAN:

Kyoto Animation Arson Case Verdict Draws Strong Reactions----The death penalty ruling reignites debate on justice and mental health issues.

On January 25, 2023, the Kyoto District Court delivered its long-anticipated verdict on the arson attack at Kyoto Animation, which resulted in the tragic loss of 36 lives. The court sentenced the defendant to death, marking the culmination of extensive legal proceedings stemming from the 2019 incident. This ruling has reignited discussions about the broader societal impact of the tragedy and the future of capital punishment laws within Japan.

The arson attack, which targeted the renowned animation studio, not only devastated the company but also sent shockwaves through Japan’s animation community and beyond. Fans and industry colleagues mourned the loss of creative talent and dedicated lives extinguished by the inferno instigated by the perpetrator, whose grievances against the studio remain shrouded in mystery. Reportedly, the assailant, driven by personal grievances, unleashed accelerants inside the studio, resulting not only in dire casualties but also irreversible damage to the animation legacy of Kyoto Animation.

The reaction to the verdict was met with mixed emotions, particularly from the family of the defendant. The father, expressing his deep pain surrounding the ruling, said, “I did not want my son to receive the death penalty.” This poignant statement captures the multi-faceted nature of grief, as he grapples with both his son’s actions and the consequences of their moral weight. Many observers have remarked on the duality of their feelings, where the victims’ families seek justice, yet some grapple with forgiveness and the pursuit of compassion for another family entangled within this tragedy.

Legal experts have weighed in on the case, noting the divide within public sentiment toward the death penalty. One noted, “I still oppose the death penalty, even after my son’s conviction,” bringing to light the complex layers of morality intertwined with legal justice. Discussions surrounding Japan’s varying perspectives on capital punishment are not new, but incidents like the Kyoto Animation case tend to reignite passionate debate across societies, straddling issues of deterrence versus rehabilitation.

Adding another dimension to the emotional fabric of this case are the voices of the local residents. A neighboring resident reflected, “This incident shook our entire community, and the pain is still fresh for many.” The impact of the arson continues to echo beyond just the immediate vicinity of Kyoto Animation, haunting those who lost loved ones and reminding the community of the fragility of life and the depths of human sorrow. Local vigils were held shortly after the verdict, as the community came together to honor the fallen, displaying both unity and shared grief.

The fact remains, this case has not only brought about immediate legal repercussions for the assailant but has also opened the floor to broader discussions about the nature of violence within society, the capabilities of mental health interventions, and the responsibilities of community members to support one another. Society must reckon with the underlying issues of mental distress and the need for compassionate resources available before individuals resort to unimaginable violence.

Looking forward, the legacy of the Kyoto Animation tragedy will likely remain indelible within the narrative of Japan’s criminal justice system. The deep emotional scars left by such violent acts compel supportive discussions surrounding what constitutes justice and healing. While some may express satisfaction at the verdict, others will continue to challenge the ethical principles surrounding the death penalty itself.

What is clear is the importance of these dialogues influenced by the tragedy and how society chooses to respond to the outcomes. The long-term effects of the Kyoto Animation arson case cannot be underestimated. This incident serves not only as a solemn reminder of loss but also as encouragement for conversations surrounding mental health, community protection, and the urgent need for societal change.

(source: evrimagaci.org)

MALAYSIA:

Rubber tapper to hang for Segamat double-murder

A rubber tapper was sentenced to death by the High Court here today for the murder of 2 elderly men in Segamat 6 years ago.P> Judge Suria Kumar Durairaj Johnson Paul handed down the verdict against Muhammad Huzairi Razali, 39, after finding him guilty under Section 302 of the Penal Code for murder.

The court ruled that the defendant failed to raise a reasonable doubt regarding the charges and did not meet the legal threshold to prove insanity.

"The court finds you guilty of murdering 2 individuals. As such, you are sentenced to death by hanging," the judge said.

He added that the defendant retains the right to appeal the decision in the Court of Appeal.

During the trial, 18 prosecution witnesses testified, including eyewitnesses who recounted the grisly July 12, 2019, double murder.

In the 1st charge, it was stated that Huzairi murdered Ku Cheng Liong, 71, at a coffee shop on Jalan Abdullah, Pekan Buloh Kasap, at 5.50pm.

The 2nd charge alleged that he killed Ng Wan Hong, 67, at a durian stall on Jalan Ibrahim, Pekan Buloh Kasap, at 6.03pm the same day.

Police investigations revealed that Huzairi first attacked Ku with a parang while he was drinking at the coffee shop, killing him instantly. Huzairi then went to the durian stall, where he stabbed Ng in the chest during a struggle. Ng succumbed to his injuries at the Buloh Kasap Health Clinic.

The prosecution, led by deputy public prosecutor Nur Aqiilah Ahmad Rofaei, established that Huzairi's actions were premeditated.

Defence counsel Mohd Radzi Yatiman represented the accused.

Huzairi now faces either the death penalty or life imprisonment with a minimum of 12 strokes of the cane if his sentence is commuted.

(source: nst.com.my)

INDIA:

RG Kar case: Calcutta High Court reserves verdict on maintainability of State plea for death penalty----The CBI, which has also filed an appeal in the matter, has questioned whether the State can filed an appeal since the case was investigated by the CBI.

The Calcutta High Court on Monday reserved judgment on whether the West Bengal government can maintain an appeal seeking the death penalty for Sanjay Roy, the man convicted by a trial court in the RG Kar rape and murder case.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has opposed the State's appeal since the CBI investigated the case and conducted its prosecution, not the State.

The CBI has also filed an appeal seeking the death penalty for Roy.

A Bench of Justices Debangsu Basak and Md Shabbar Rashidi today reserved judgment on the CBI's objections and on whether it should proceed with hearing the State's appeal on merits.

The CBI was represented today by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju. Advocate General Kishore Datta appeared for the State.

On January 20, a trial court sentenced Sanjay Roy to life imprisonment for the rape and murder of a resident doctor at Kolkata's RG Kar Medical College and Hospital.

The trial judge had refused to impose the death penalty, stating that the crime could not be classified as "rarest of rare", which is the test to impose capital punishment.

The State challenged this sentencing aspect of the trial court order by filing an appeal before the High Court. The CBI promptly registered its objection, arguing that the State's appeal is not maintainable.

During today's hearing, Advocate General (AG) Kishor Datta asserted that the State can still file an appeal, even if the CBI had taken over the investigation of the RG Kar case after a point.

The original first information report (FIR) registered by the State police in the matter is still in existence. Therefore, the State retains authority to file an appeal in this matter, highlighted the AG.

The CBI's counsel, ASG Raju countered that even if the State wanted to file an appeal, the case records were still with the CBI.

"The entire record is with CBI and not State. The High Court gave the order on August 13, 2024 ... Chargesheet was filed by CBI … Now they (State) are showing their interest … State won’t be able to assist," the ASG argued.

After hearing the rival submissions, the Court proceeded to reserve its verdict.

(source: barandbench.com)

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

RG Kar rape-murder: Calcutta HC reserves judgement on admission of death penalty appeals by West Bengal govt, CBI for accused Sanjay Roy

The Calcutta high court on Monday reserved its decision on whether to admit two separate appeals filed by the West Bengal government and the CBI, challenging a trial court's verdict that sentenced Sanjay Roy, the RG Kar hospital rape-murder convict, to life imprisonment without parole.

The division bench, led by Justice Debangsu Basak, heard arguments from both the state and the CBI, who claimed the January 20 judgment by the Sealdah sessions court was inadequate.

Both the CBI and the state government are seeking the death penalty for Roy, the sole convict in the case. The CBI argued that, as the investigation and prosecution agency, it has exclusive rights to challenge the trial court's sentence on the grounds of inadequacy. Meanwhile, the state government contended that it also has the authority to file an appeal in such cases.

Advocate general Kishore Dutta, representing the West Bengal government, began the day's proceedings, arguing for the state's right to appeal.

As per the court's earlier direction, both the victim’s parents and the convict were represented by their respective lawyers during the hearing.

Roy was sentenced to life imprisonment for the rape and murder of an on-duty doctor at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9, 2024. The sentence mandates imprisonment for the remainder of his life.

(source: timesofindia.indiatimes.com)

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

‘Not in favour of capital punishment’: Counsel of RG Kar victim’s family as Calcutta HC reserves order----'They have lost their daughter, they don’t want someone else to die. They want the supplementary chargesheet to be filed and other accused to get caught,' said the RG Kar victim’s parents’ counsel in the Calcutta High Court.

The Calcutta High Court on Monday concluded the hearing in the RG Kar rape and murder case regarding whether the application of the state for capital punishment for convict Sanjay Roy is admissible. The order has been reserved. Advocate General Kishore Dutta submitted to the division bench of Justice Debangsu Basak that the state has the jurisdiction to appeal for capital punishment while citing several Supreme Court cases.

The victim’s family, through their advocate Shamim Ahmed, submitted in court that they are not in favour of capital punishment for Roy.

The other counsel of the victim’s parents, Gargi Goswami, later told The Indian Express that they are satisified with the punishment to Roy.

“As per the instructions of the victims’ parents, they are satisfied with the quantum of punishment. They have lost their daughter, they don’t want someone else to die. They want the supplementary chargesheet to be filed and other accused to get caught. The parents are not satisfied by certain observations of the trial court… that is what we will raise in court,” the counsel said.

The victim’s parents who were present in court told reporters, “We have full faith in the Calcutta High Court. The state police and the CBI all have let us down… who do we go to now? Regarding capital punishment, we leave it to our legal counsel.”

On whether the state has the jurisdiction to appeal for capital punishment, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju submitted in court, “It is only the central government alone who can challenge the appeal. (The state) will not be able to assist the court in this matter.”

The ASG said that during the trial, the state government “had shown no interest” and that they are “now suddenly showing interest”.

“The entire record including the Case Diary is with the CBI… the state has no record. On August 13, the CBI was handed the case on the order of the Calcutta High Court. Whatever investigation was carried out by the state, the evidence was submitted to the CBI. The FIR was registered… by the CBI on the date of the order itself. The police were directed to hand over all the documents and evidence to the CBI… The state has had no say since the time (the case) was transferred to CBI. The state did not give an application for participation in the trial. Suddenly they are showing interest,” the ASG said.

The state has provided legal aid to convict Sanjoy Roy. Kaushik Gupta of the Calcutta High Court is representing him.

On Friday, the CBI moved the Calcutta High Court demanding the death penalty for convict Sanjoy Roy in the rape and murder of a junior doctor at the state-run RG Medical College and Hospital. The state government had also moved the court demanding for capital punishment.

On January 20, Additional Sessions Judge Anirban Das of Sealdah court had awarded Sanjoy Roy life imprisonment “until his last breath”.

Roy, a 35-year-old civic volunteer, was convicted under Sections 64 (punishment for rape), 66 (punishment for causing death or a persistent vegetative state to a woman), and 101 (1) (murder) in a ruling that came five months after the August 9 incident sparked outrage and triggered massive protests of doctors and citizens in West Bengal.

(source: indianexpress.com)

PHILIPPINES:

WRAP: 'Death by firing squad' proposal speaks to Filipinos’ frustration with corruption

Rep. Kyhmer Adan Olaso, a congressman from Zamboanga City whose other bills are on the welfare of caregivers and of media workers, was in the spotlight this week for reviving the perennial and seemingly popular proposal to put to death government officials proven to be corrupt.

Speaking to TeleRadyo Serbisyo on Saturday morning, Olaso said the death penalty would be a “permanent solution” to corruption, adding it has to be done by firing squad because lethal injection — the method used when the Philippines last executed a convict — would be too quick.

“They would not feel the pain,” he said, arguing that that would be a deterrent and a wake-up call to politicians.

NOT THE FIRST OR ONLY TO PROPOSE IT AT HOUSE

Neither the proposal nor the proposed method of execution are new. At the House of the 19th Congress alone, there are at least five bills seeking a return of the death penalty for various crimes.

At least 3 seek the death penalty for plunder and one — filled by Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante, a Baptist pastor and chair of the House rights committee — gives the choice of death by firing squad, hanging or lethal injection.

Putting the guilty to death will be a deterrent to crime, the bills all argue in their explanatory notes, with Abante adding God approves of the death penalty. Neither assertion is supported by scientific evidence.

The Commission on Human Rights has urged caution on the bill, saying corruption is a problem with "far-reaching and systemic consequences" that must be addressed by improving institutions and transparency and accountability mechanisms, as well as enforcement and prosecution.

"Such cruel punishment does not address the problem; instead, it obscures the need for systemic reforms and misdirects focus from preventative measures," it said this week.

NOT ALLOWED BY THE CONSTITUTION

The CHR also said in 2016, when the House approved on final reading a bill imposing the death penalty for drug related-crimes, that the crime rate in the Philippines increased by 15.3 percent in the 1990s despite the reimposition of the death penalty.

It added then, and again this week, that the 1987 Constitution, the 2006 Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines, and the country's commitment to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights bar the re-imposition of the death penalty.

Breaking its commitments to the ICCPR by reviving the death penalty would threaten the Philippines' reputation and could affect it in terms of foreign aid and in trade, Human Rights Watch researcher Carlos Conde told ABS-CBN News.

"[T]his will definitely have an impact on the Philippines if it wants, for example, to seek a seat at the Human Rights Council, the Security Council, or any UN body," he also said in an online exchange.

FRUSTRATED FILIPINOS

Olaso on Saturday stressed that he is a Catholic and is not bloodthirsty but shares Filipinos' frustrations with corruption, insisting "if you will not put this [penalty], it won’t stop."

He said the Philippines should take a page from China, where, he said, the single-party state has eliminated corruption because "their government is so strict."

He said that while the bill, if passed into law, will cover government officials down to the barangay level, will need to make an example of high-ranking officials to work. "If you do not commit a crime, then you will not be killed," he added, reminiscent of the Duterte administration's stance on its campaigns against drugs and crime, and an assertion that has been questioned at the House and at the International Criminal Court.

Although not necessarily indicative of public opinion, comments on social media suggest some degree of support for Olaso’s proposal.

Dr. Anthony Lawrence Borja, who has a PhD in Public Administration from Shanghai Jiao Tong University, called this "a manifestation of both sustained discontent over corruption tied with a ruthless sense of pragmatism."

Borja, an associate professor at De La Salle University's Department of Political Science and Development Studies, noted that these sentiments "also fed support for [Rodrigo Duterte's] drug war and other brutal anti-crime policies from other politicians."

He said that while Filipinos may consider corruption something that is a given, it still affects them enough to "throw their support behind such shortcuts."

Conde said apparent public support may be because “the easy-fix solutions, the shortcuts, are far less complicated” than the work needed to address corruption in government.

WHAT CAN BE DONE?

"It’s going to be long-term," Conde, a former journalist, said when asked how the Philippines can address corruption.

"Fix the justice system. Make sure that anti-corruption agencies and mechanisms are functioning and well-resourced and free from political pressure and influence," he said.

"CSOs and media also need to expose more corruption so the public knows exactly how bad the problem is," he also suggested.

The CHR meanwhile said that government should focus on the strict implementation of anti-corruption laws, increasing scrutiny of officials' finances and pushing full disclosure policies.

The Philippines does not have a Freedom of Information law and an FOI policy covering the executive branch is subject to numerous exceptions.

"These measures, coupled with vigilant monitoring and public participation, can build a culture of integrity and accountability in governance," it said.

Borja said the long-term solution to government corruption would require institutional reforms to help prosecute and punish graft and corruption as well as "ethical, cultural, and labor reforms" to deter public servants from engaging in graft and corruption.

"Should it include the death penalty? To be honest, I could not remove it from the picture as long as Filipinos hold a level of bloodlust towards such issues tied with the government’s need for legitimation," he said.

(source: abs-cbn.com)

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

Death penalty vs. corruption sparks debate in Pangasinan

House Bill No. 11211, also known as the "Death Penalty for Corruption Act," has sparked heated discussions across the country.

The proposed bill aims to punish corrupt government officials through execution by firing squad.

Pangasinenses are divided on the issue.

Political analyst, Prof. Mark Anthony Baliton, weighed in on the debate.

“If that will push through, that will be a threat to politicians, because corruption is the number one problem dito sa bansa natin being committed by our elected leaders,” Baliton said.

However, he questioned how the law would be implemented if passed.

“So, first and foremost, ibalik muna ang death penalty. And we will identify what kind of penalty will be imposed,” Baliton added.

The Commission on Human Rights (CHR), in an official statement, opposed the proposal, citing the absence of the death penalty in the Philippines since 2006.

“Such cruel punishment does not address the problem; instead, it obscures the need for systemic reforms and misdirects focus from preventative measures, such as strengthening accountability mechanisms and governance systems,” CHR said.

While corruption remains one of the Philippines' most pressing issues, the path to justice continues to divide opinions between punitive measures and systemic reforms.

(source: gmanetwork.com)

IRAN:

More than 150 Experts and NGOs Urge OHCHR to Halt Imminent Execution of Iranian Political Prisoners

A coalition of 152 prominent international experts and NGOs has urgently called on Volker Türk, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, to intervene in the case of Iranian political prisoners Behrouz Ehsani, 69, and Mehdi Hassani, 48. The 2 men, convicted after an unjust trial, were forcibly transferred earlier today from Evin Prison to Ghezel Hesar Prison, where most executions in Iran are carried out.

The letter emphasizes that this sudden transfer, coupled with the suspension of communication lines, suggests that Iranian authorities may be preparing for their secret execution. Ehsani and Hassani were sentenced to death by Branch 26 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court in September 2024, under charges including “rebellion,” “waging war against God,” and “membership in the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran (PMOI).” The convictions came amid credible reports of torture and without fair trial standards, violating Iran’s international human rights obligations.

The letter also highlights the broader context of the regime’s increasing use of executions as a tool of political repression, with around 1,000 prisoners executed in 2024 alone. Both Ehsani and Hassani were vocal advocates against the death penalty, participating in the “No to Execution Tuesdays” campaign, which has mobilized resistance within 34 prisons across the country.

The signatories urge Türk to condemn the planned executions, rally international pressure on Iran, and demand access to independent monitors to assess the conditions of political prisoners. The appeal stresses that the global community must act swiftly to prevent these executions, describing them as part of Iran’s systematic suppression of dissent.

“Time is of the essence,” the letter concludes, calling on the UN and global leaders to take decisive action against what they describe as “brazen violations of human rights.”

(source: ncr-iran.org)

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

Response of Iran’s Defiant Youth to the Clerical Regime’s Brutal Executions----Centers of repression and plunder, along with images of regime leaders and symbols of suppressive organs, were set ablaze in 35 operations across Tehran and 17 cities

In protest against the judiciary’s execution orders, including the response to 14 executions in the first 3 days of Bahman (January 20–22, 2025), 113 executions in Dey (December 21, 2024–January 21, 2025), and 775 executions during Massoud Pezeshkian’s presidency, defiant youth carried out 18 daring operations, setting fire to centers of repression and plunder in various cities.

Among these bold actions, a Basij base and 6 other centers of repression were set ablaze in Tehran, 3 Basij bases in Isfahan, a suppressive SSF (State Security Force) headquarters in Bam, two centers of governmental plunder in Mashhad and Arak, a center of repression and plunder in Eslamabad-e Gharb, the Basij base of the IRGC responsible for suppressing women in Talesh, a center of repression in Homayounshahr (Isfahan), a Basij base in Najafabad, and a center of plunder and repression in Hashtgerd.

In an additional 17 operations, defiant youth set fire to images and symbols of repression and plunder belonging to the regime. These included five banners of Qassem Soleimani and other regime leaders in Tehran, three banners of Qassem Soleimani in Mashhad, and nine banners of Khomeini, Khamenei, and Qassem Soleimani in the cities of Rasht, Ardakan, Qaemshahr, Bushehr, Kermanshah, Behshahr, Kazeroon, and Borazjan.

Secretariat of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI)

(source: ncri-org)

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

Political Prisoners Behrouz Ehsani and Mehdi Hassani at Imminent Risk of Execution

Political prisoners Behrouz Ehsani and Mehdi Hassani were transferred from Evin to an unknown location for their executions this morning. They were sentenced to death for charges of "moharebeh and baghy through membership of Mojahedin Organisation."

Warning of the danger of the imminent execution of Behrouz Ehsani and Mehdi Hassani and other death row prisoners accused of having ties to the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran (MEK), in the future, Iran Human Rights calls for an urgent response from the international community to save their lives.

IHRNGO Director, Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam said: “In recent days, officials of the Islamic Republic have linked the murders of Judges Moghisseh and Razini to MEK, paving the way for the execution of prisoners associated with the organisation. For this reason, the risk of these prisoners' execution is very serious. We call on the international community, human rights organisations, and the people of Iran to increase the political cost of these executions through their efforts."

According to information obtained by IHRNGO, political prisoners Behrouz Ehsani, 69, and Mehdi Hassani, 48, were transferred from Wards 4 and 8 of Evin Prison to an unknown location on 26 January 2025. The 2 men were arrested at the height of the “Woman, Life, Freedom” nationwide protests in 2022, and they were notified of their death sentences on the 2nd anniversary of the protests in September 2024.

An informed source told IHRNGO: “They were transferred to solitary confinement and are scheduled to be executed in the coming days.”

Behrouz and Mehdi were sentenced to death for charges of baghy (armed rebellion) and moharebeh (enmity against god) through “membership in Mojahedin Organisation and collecting classified information” by Branch 26 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court. They were notified that their sentence had been upheld by the Supreme Court in early January.

In a Twitter post, Behrouz Ehsani’s lawyer, Mostafa Nili wrote: “The retrial request for Behrouz Ehsani Eslamilu was registered last week and was referred to one of the Supreme Court branches yesterday, on Saturday. According to the Note to Article 478 of the Criminal Procedure Code, given the type of punishment, an order to suspend the execution of the sentence must be issued.”

It is crucial to note that the Islamic Republic has a history of carrying out execution sentences while appeals were still pending at the Supreme Court. Kurdish political prisoners Firuz Musalu and Heydar Ghorbani were two such cases in recent times.

According to Amnesty, they were subjected to torture and other ill-treatment, including prolonged solitary confinement, to force them to make self-incrimnating confessions. Their Revolutionary Court trial was also grossly unfair.

Behrouz and Mehdi were members of the “No Death Penalty Tuesdays” abolitionist campaign when they received the death penalty themselves in the 34th week of the campaign.

(source: iranhumanrights.com)

JANUARY 26, 2025:

FLORIDA:

Robert Bailey re-sentencing postponed

The winter storm of 2025 closed almost everything in Bay County including the court system.

One high-profile case that is now postponed is the re-sentencing of convicted murderer, Robert Bailey that was initially set to take place on Friday.

During spring Break 2005, Panama City Beach sergeant Kevin Kight attempted to arrest Robert Bailey for having an invalid driver’s license. Bailey then shot and killed Sergeant Kight.

A jury then found Bailey guilty and sentenced him to death with an 11-to-1 vote.

However, in 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Florida’s death penalty law unconstitutional because it did not require a unanimous jury decision.

The law changed again last year, allowing juries to recommend the death penalty by an 8-to-4 vote.

A 2nd jury also voted in favor of the death penalty, but the judge will ultimately do the sentencing.

(source: WJHG news)

CANADA:

TRUE CRIME: The final execution in Winnipeg that changed Canadian justice forever

Did you know that the last execution in Winnipeg took place on June 17, 1952, when William O’Connor was hanged at the Vaughan Street Jail? O’Connor was convicted of the brutal murder of 26-year-old Eunice Distefano in 1951, a crime that shocked the city and captured national attention.

Distefano, a young woman described by those who knew her as friendly and independent, had been walking home late one evening when she encountered O’Connor. Under the influence of alcohol, O’Connor attacked her in a fit of rage. Evidence presented at trial suggested that the attack was sudden and violent, with Distefano sustaining fatal injuries. Her body was discovered the next morning by a passerby in a secluded area, leading to a police investigation that quickly identified O’Connor as the prime suspect.

Witnesses came forward to place O’Connor near the scene of the crime on the night of the attack, and investigators uncovered physical evidence, including bloodstains, that tied him directly to the murder. His arrest followed swiftly, and the community closely followed the case as it unfolded in the courts. During the trial, prosecutors argued that the murder was intentional and premeditated, warranting the harshest penalty under the law. They presented a combination of forensic evidence and witness testimony to solidify their case. O’Connor’s defence centred on claims of mental instability and the effects of alcohol consumption, which they argued impaired his judgment and diminished his responsibility for the crime. A psychological evaluation was submitted, but the prosecution countered with expert testimony that O’Connor was fully aware of his actions and their consequences.

After deliberating for several hours, the jury returned a unanimous verdict of guilty for 1st-degree murder. The court sentenced O’Connor to death by hanging, setting the date for June 17, 1952. Efforts to appeal the verdict and seek clemency were unsuccessful, with Manitoba’s lieutenant governor ultimately signing the execution order. The execution took place at the historic Vaughan Street Jail, which had served as a site for carrying out capital punishment since the late 19th century. On the morning of his execution, O’Connor was led to the gallows in the presence of officials, law enforcement representatives, and members of the press. The hanging proceeded without incident, marking the final use of capital punishment in Winnipeg.

The case of William O’Connor became a focal point in ongoing debates about the death penalty, which was increasingly being questioned across Canada. Public opinion began to shift during the mid-20th century, with concerns about wrongful convictions, the morality of state-sanctioned executions, and the overall effectiveness of the death penalty in deterring crime. While executions continued elsewhere in Canada until 1962, the momentum to abolish capital punishment grew steadily, culminating in its removal for most crimes in 1976.

The Vaughan Street Jail, where O’Connor’s execution took place, is now a heritage site that draws visitors and historians intrigued by its dark past. Stories like O’Connor’s remain a significant part of Manitoba’s legal history, reflecting a time when justice was carried out in ways that are no longer part of Canadian society.

(source: winnipegsun.com)

SOUTH KOREA:

South Korea’s president charged with insurrection over declaration of martial law

South Korean prosecutors have indicted the suspended President Yoon Suk Yeol on insurrection charges over his brief declaration of martial law.

Yoon attempted to impose martial law in early December, a move that plunged the country into political turmoil and for many brought back painful memories of the country’s authoritarian past.

The president justified the declaration by accusing the main opposition party of sympathizing with North Korea and of anti-state activities but it was swiftly overturned by parliament.

Yoon – who denies wrongdoing – was then voted to be impeached by parliament and has been in custody since being arrested last week.

Prosecutors announced the charges on Sunday evening local time, making Yoon the first sitting president in the country’s history to be indicted.

“Based on the investigation so far, there are no grounds to consider any change to the arrest warrant issued against the president,” prosecutors said in a statement Sunday, adding that “sufficient evidence exists to substantiate the charges.”

During parliamentary hearings, Yoon’s commanders testified that they received direct orders to break down the doors of the parliament to “drag out” lawmakers sitting inside. Yoon has denied this.

Shortly after declaring martial law, Yoon allegedly told the first deputy director of the National Intelligence Service, Hong Jang-won, he should take the opportunity to “arrest” a list of 14 political and legal figures including the opposition leader and “clean everything up.”

Yoon allegedly said he would give the intelligence service authority to launch a counter-intelligence probe and “support it with funds, personnel unconditionally.”

Details were first revealed to reporters by lawmakers briefed about the conversation, and Hong confirmed to CNN the veracity of the content.

The move is the latest development in a political saga kicked off by the president’s martial law declaration.

Police outside the official residence of Yoon Suk Yeol, as authorities launch fresh attempt to detain South Korea's embattled president.

The embattled president had been holed up in his fortified residence for weeks surrounded by his Presidential Security Service team before his arrest.

The country’s Corruption Investigation Office for High-Ranking Officials (CIO) first attempted to detain him earlier this month, but it failed after an hours-long showdown in which soldiers and members of the presidential security detail blocked some 80 police and investigators from approaching the presidential compound.

The CIO was able to arrest Yoon on their second attempt, but Yoon has been refusing to cooperate with any of the CIO’s investigations.

Yoon’s party dismissed the indictment, calling the CIO’s investigation records “illegal.”

His lawyers said “the prosecution has committed a historic mistake” in a statement, claiming that Yoon’s declaration of martial law does not amount to an insurrection crime.

South Korea’s main opposition Democratic Party, however, welcomed the indictment and urged the court to hold Yoon “accountable for his violations of constitutional order and his trampling on democracy.”

With Sunday’s indictment, Yoon is now facing two trials: one over his impeachment case at the country’s Constitutional Court, which will determine his political fate - likely by spring -and decide whether he will be formally removed from the presidency or reinstated. The second is the criminal case of insurrection.

Yoon – who is a former prosecutor – could face life in jail or the death penalty if convicted of leading insurrection, although South Korea has not executed anyone in decades.

Under South Korean law, a sitting president has immunity from most criminal prosecutions, but the privilege does not extend to allegations of insurrection or treason.

Yoon’s former defense minister Kim Yong-hyun, some military commanders and police chiefs were also previously indicted following Yoon’s declaration of martial law.

(source: edition.cnn.com)

INDIA:

I'm against death penalty. Poor are hanged because they cannot afford good lawyers

(see: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/sunday-times/all-that-matters/sunil-kumar-gupta-im-against-death-penalty-poor-are-hanged-because-they-cannot-afford-good-lawyers/articleshow/117560259.cms)

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

Manoj Jarange begins indefinite fast for Maratha quota, demands death penalty for sarpanch's killers

(see: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/manoj-jarange-begins-indefinite-fast-for-maratha-quota-demands-death-penalty-for-sarpanchs-killers/articleshow/117555271.cms?from=mdr)

PAKISTAN:

Pakistani court sentences 4 people to death for blasphemy

A Pakistani court Saturday sentenced 4 people to death for blasphemy, allegedly because they posted sacrilegious material on social media about Islamic religious figures and the Quran. Their lawyer said appeal preparations are underway.

Under the country’s blasphemy laws, anyone found guilty of insulting Islam or its religious figures can be sentenced to death. Authorities have yet to carry out such a penalty, although the accusation of blasphemy and opposition to the law can incite mob violence or reprisals.

Judge Tariq Ayub in the city of Rawalpindi declared that blasphemy, disrespect to holy figures, and desecration of the Quran were unforgivable offenses and left no room for leniency.

Along with the death sentences, the judge imposed collective fines of 4.6 million rupees (around $16,500) and handed down jail terms to each of the four should a higher court overturn their death sentences.

The men’s lawyer, Manzoor Rahmani, criticized the court’s decision and investigating authorities’ lack of evidence.

“The doubts and uncertainties that arise in such cases are ignored by the courts, likely due to the fear of religious backlash and potential mob violence against the judge if the accused is acquitted,” said Rahmani. “We are preparing our appeals against the decision and will go to the High Court.”

Anti-blasphemy measures introduced in Pakistan in the 1980s made it illegal to insult Islam. Since then, people have been accused of insulting the religion, desecrating its texts, or writing offensive remarks on the walls of mosques. Critics of the law say it is used to settle personal disputes.

(source: Associated Press)

JANUARY 25, 2025:

TEXAS:

Texas Death Penalty Declining in Use — 2024 in Review

Innocence Race Texas

According to the Texas Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty’s annu­al Year in Review, Texas’ death row con­tin­ued to shrink in 2024, reflect­ing pros­e­cu­tors’ increas­ing reluc­tance to bring new cap­i­tal cas­es and juries’ grow­ing reluc­tance to sen­tence indi­vid­u­als to death. Texas juries imposed just s6new death sen­tences in 2024, mark­ing the 10th con­sec­u­tive year of sin­gle-dig­it death sen­tences. 5 of those 6 involved defen­dants of col­or, fol­low­ing anoth­er long-observed trend. In 1999, 25 years ago, there were 48 new death sen­tences. The sen­tences were geo­graph­i­cal­ly con­cen­trat­ed — 3 of the 6 came from Tarrant County, where all the defen­dants were peo­ple of col­or. Tarrant County has the 3rd-high­est num­ber of peo­ple sen­tenced to death in Texas since 1974, behind Harris and Dallas counties.

Texas’ con­tin­ued decline in new death sen­tences reflects a broad­er shift in pub­lic atti­tudes and pros­e­cu­to­r­i­al prac­tices in the death penal­ty states. Across the U.S., 26 new death sen­tences were imposed in 2024, mark­ing the 10th con­sec­u­tive year that less than 50 death sen­tences have been imposed nation­al­ly. According to the TCADP report, only 13 of Texas’ 254 coun­ties have had juries will­ing to vote for a death sen­tence over the past 5 years, and only juries in Harris and Tarrant coun­ties deliv­ered more than 1 death sen­tence dur­ing this peri­od: 1/3 of all death sen­tences in the state came from Harris and Tarrant Counties. Texas was among 4 states (plus Alabama, California, and Florida) respon­si­ble for 76% of new death sen­tences in the United States in 2024. Only 10 states– Alabama, Arizona, California, Florida, Idaho, Mississippi, Nevada, Ohio, Tennessee, and Texas– hand­ed down death sen­tences in 2024. The major­i­ty of U.S. states, 28, have now either abol­ished the death penal­ty or have paused exe­cu­tions by executive action.

As of December 19, 2024, 174 peo­ple remain on Texas’ death row, the small­est pop­u­la­tion since 1985. This is in line with a steady decline in recent years. The death row pop­u­la­tion in Texas dropped to under 200 inmates in 2022 for the 1st time in almost 3 decades. According to report­ing by the Texas Tribune, since 2020, for every per­son exe­cut­ed (24) near­ly as many indi­vid­u­als had their sen­tences reduc­tions or con­vic­tions over­turned (22). According to TCADP, 9 men also have died on death row before their exe­cu­tion date since 2020.

In 2024, Texas exe­cut­ed 5 indi­vid­u­als, 4 of whom were Black or Hispanic, under­scor­ing con­tin­ued con­cerns about the dis­pro­por­tion­ate impact of the death penal­ty on peo­ple of col­or. Harris County, a his­tor­i­cal­ly high-user of the death penal­ty, was respon­si­ble for 2 exe­cu­tions in 2024. Despite this, the num­ber of exe­cu­tions per year in Texas has remained below 10 since 2019. Harris County has exe­cut­ed 135 indi­vid­u­als since 1997, the most of any coun­ty in the United States; 2 of those exe­cu­tions took place in 2024.

“[Texas’ adop­tion of life sen­tences with­out parole as an option to cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment in 2005] has giv­en pros­e­cu­tors and juries more dis­cre­tion in terms of how they han­dle cap­i­tal cas­es” and so "the vast major­i­ty … [of] pros­e­cu­tors in Texas are not pur­su­ing the death penal­ty as a sentencing option.””

Kristin Houlé Cuellar, exec­u­tive direc­tor of the Texas Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty

The report also high­lights sev­er­al high-pro­file cas­es that under­score the fal­li­bil­i­ty of Texas’ death penal­ty sys­tem, includ­ing that of Melissa Lucio. Ms. Lucio, the only Hispanic woman on Texas’ death row, was con­vict­ed of killing her 2-year-old daugh­ter Mariah in 2007. New foren­sic find­ings sug­gest her daugh­ter died from an acci­den­tal fall, not inten­tion­al harm or abuse. In October 2024, Judge Arturo Nelson rec­om­mend­ed over­turn­ing her con­vic­tion after hear­ing expert tes­ti­mo­ny about the med­ical evi­dence and the cir­cum­stances sur­round­ing her inter­ro­ga­tion and found that Ms. Lucio "is actu­al­ly inno­cent; she did not kill her daugh­ter.” Ms. Lucio was inter­ro­gat­ed by police for 5 hours about Mariah’s death and assert­ed her inno­cence more than 100 times through­out the inter­ro­ga­tion. Ms. Lucio came with­in 2 days of being exe­cut­ed in April 2022, before the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ordered the tri­al court to con­sid­er mul­ti­ple claims bol­stered with new evi­dence that sup­port, she is inno­cent, and Mariah’s death was the result of an accident.

The high-pro­file case of Robert Roberson, who was sched­uled for exe­cu­tion in October 2024, drew sig­nif­i­cant nation­al atten­tion to inno­cence claims this past year. Mr. Roberson was grant­ed a stay of exe­cu­tion by the Texas Supreme Court after an unprece­dent­ed sub­poe­na from the Texas House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence. Ultimately the Texas Supreme Court ruled that the leg­is­la­ture could not issue sub­poe­nas to inter­vene in sched­uled exe­cu­tions. Mr. Roberson was con­vict­ed and sen­tenced to death in 2003 for the death of his daugh­ter, Nikki, who med­ical experts have since deter­mined died from severe viral and bac­te­r­i­al pneu­mo­nia that doc­tors failed to diag­nose, not from abuse or Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS). Mr. Roberson’s con­vic­tion relied large­ly on the now-debunked SBS hypoth­e­sis, which his attor­neys now argue is not sup­port­ed by mod­ern med­ical sci­ence. More than a dozen Texas leg­is­la­tors, includ­ing Republicans and Democrats, sub­mit­ted let­ters urg­ing the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles to inter­vene. Faith lead­ers, med­ical pro­fes­sion­als, and advo­cates against junk sci­ence also ral­lied to his defense, empha­siz­ing the urgent need to recon­sid­er con­vic­tions based on out­dat­ed foren­sic meth­ods. Mr. Roberson’s exe­cu­tion has not been resched­uled in the wake of the state Supreme Court deci­sion lift­ing his stay.

Texas cur­rent­ly has 4 exe­cu­tions sched­uled for 2025, not includ­ing Mr. Roberson.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

FLORIDA----impending execution

Judge refuses to block execution in Charlotte County double murder

With inmate James Ford scheduled to be put to death Feb. 13, a Charlotte County circuit judge Thursday rejected an argument that the execution should be blocked because Ford had the mental and developmental age of a 14-year-old when he murdered a couple in 1997.

The 22-page ruling by Circuit Judge Lisa Porter could be the first in a series of decisions as Ford’s attorneys try to prevent the execution. Gov. Ron DeSantis issued a death warrant on Jan. 10.

Ford was 36 years old when he murdered Greg and Kimberly Malnory at a Charlotte County sod farm, where Ford and Greg Malnory worked. But in a motion filed Saturday seeking a stay of execution and vacation of the death sentence, Ford’s attorneys pointed to a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision that prevents executing people under age 18 because of the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment. They argued the protection should apply to Ford because his “developmental age was much lower” than 36 at the time of the murders.

“The class of offenders subject to the death penalty should be narrowed again to preclude the execution of individuals with a mental and developmental age less than 18,” the motion said.

But Porter sided with arguments by the state Attorney General’s Office, concluding that Ford’s claim was “untimely, procedurally barred and without merit.”

She wrote that a judge in Ford’s 1999 trial included in the sentencing order that “it was proven that defendant’s developmental age was 14 years old.” Porter said it was “an undisputed fact going back to 1999” and was not “newly discovered” evidence that could justify blocking the execution.

Porter also wrote that Ford has never been diagnosed as intellectually disabled. The U.S. Supreme Court also has barred executing people with intellectual disabilities because it would violate the U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

“The argument that the death penalty is unconstitutional as applied to persons with a mental and developmental age of less than 18 is a legal issue, not a factual issue, for which defendant has provided no supporting case law,” Porter wrote.

Ford, now 64, would be the 1st inmate executed this year in Florida after 1 execution in 2024.

Porter’s ruling and other court documents said the murders occurred after Ford made plans to go fishing on a Sunday with the couple at the sod farm, which was in a remote area. The next day, April 7, 1997, another employee made what a Florida Supreme Court opinion described as a “gruesome discovery.”

The 2001 opinion said Greg Malnory was shot in the head, beaten and had his throat slit, while Kimberly Malnory was raped, beaten and shot. The couple also had a 22-month-old daughter, who was left in a car seat in their pickup truck for more than 18 hours after the murders, the opinion said.

Ford received two death sentences and has unsuccessfully pursued past appeals in state and federal courts.

(source: WGCU news)

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

WARRANT: Circuit court denies Ford's postconviction motion----James Ford's execution is scheduled for February 13. The circuit court entered has entered an Order denying Ford’s motion.

James Ford’s execution is scheduled for 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, February 13, 2025—the 1st for the State in 2025.

Ahead of his execution, Ford filed a 2-count successive motion for postconviction relief in the circuit court. (More here, at: https://fladeathpenalty.substack.com/p/warrant-ford-files-postconviction?r=248zyf&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email). The circuit court denied Ford’s request for an evidentiary hearing on his motion. (More here, at: https://fladeathpenalty.substack.com/p/warrant-circuit-court-denies-evidentiary?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email).

Late yesterday, the circuit court entered a 22-page Order denying Ford’s motion. (The motion was not publicly available until this afternoon.)

First, as to Ford’s claim that his death sentence is unconstitutional under Roper because of his mental age at the time of the crime, the circuit court determined that the claim is “untimely, was previously raised and explicitly abandoned by Defendant, and asserts no facts that can be considered ‘newly discovered.’” The court discusses that Ford was 36 at the time of the crime, but the evidence at trial established and the trial court found that his “developmental age was 14 . . . .” However, it was not determined that he is intellectually disabled to be ineligible for the death penalty under Atkins.

Second, as to Ford’s claim that his death sentence is unconstitutional due to the jury’s 11-1 jury recommendation for death, the court concluded that Ford was “simply attempting to re-argue'“ his previously denied Hurst claim “under the guise of there being ‘newly discovered’ case law, vis-a-vis, Erlinger.” The court found that the claim is procedurally barred and, otherwise, without merit. Therefore, the court denied relief.

The full Order can be accessed on the Florida Supreme Court docket here at: https://acis.flcourts.gov/portal/court/68f021c4-6a44-4735-9a76-5360b2e8af13/case/6653fb76-2b5f-4f66-aacb-254bd0d840b1?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email.

According to the Florida Supreme Court’s Scheduling Order (outlined here, at: https://fladeathpenalty.substack.com/p/warrant-background-on-james-fords?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email), Ford’s notice of appeal of the circuit court’s ruling and any habeas petition is due Monday at 9:00 a.m.

(source: fladeathpenalty@substack.com)

ALABAMA----impending execution

Alabama Gives Demetrius Frazier Execution Date of February 6, 2025

Demetrius Frazier is scheduled to be executed at 6 pm local time on Thursday, February 6, 2025, inside the execution chamber at the Holeman Correctional Facility near Atmore, Alabama. 52-year-old Demetrius is convicted of murdering 40-year-old Pauline Brown on November 27, 1991, in Birmingham, Alabama. For the last 28 years, Demetrius has resided on Alabama’s death row.

Demetrius was born in Detroit, Michigan and his mother was only 16 years old. Demetrius lacked male role models while growing up and did not know his father. Drugs were frequently around the home and his mother’s male friends were often violent and abusive. His family did not have much money and lived in condemned urban neighborhoods that were often violent. Demetrius did not do well in school, possibly due to head injuries sustained as a child and into his teenage years. Demetrius did eventually obtain his GED (General Equivalency Diploma).

In March 1992, Demetrius Frazier was arrested in Detroit, Michigan as a suspect in the attempted rape and murder of 14-year-old Crystal Kendrick, which occurred on March 8, 1992. Crystal was shot while attempting to escape from an abandoned house when Frazier was trying to rape her. After his arrest, Frazier was interrogated by a detective. During the interrogation, Frazier confessed to the murder of Pauline Brown in Alabama.

During the early morning hours of November 26, 1991, Frazier saw a light on in a ground-floor apartment at Fountain Heights Apartment complex. Frazier entered the apartment by removing a window screen. He intended to rob the apartment, however, after a quick search, he only found a few dollars. Upon hearing a television on in one of the bedrooms, Frazier entered the bedroom. Pauline Brown was asleep in the room. Frazier woke up Pauline, pointed a gun at her, and demanded money. She gave him $80 from her purse. Frazier then raped her at gunpoint while she begged him not to kill her. He demanded she stop begging and when she didn’t, he shot and killed her.

Frazier left the apartment and went across the street, fearing that someone had heard the gunshot. After observing for a few minutes, Frazier determined no one had heard the shot and returned to the apartment. He confirmed that Pauline was dead and searched the apartment for additional money. Frazier ate 2 bananas, left the apartment, and threw the murder weapon into a ditch.

Frazier was charged in Michigan for the murder of Crystal. He was also charged with raping eight other women. Before going on trial, Frazier attempted to have his confession to both murders thrown out, arguing a homicide detective tricked him into confessing after he fell in love with her. His argument was rejected and his confessions were permitted. Frazier was convicted on April 8, 1993, and, as Michigan does not have the death penalty, Frazier was sentenced to 2 terms of life in prison. For other crimes, he was sentenced to 60-90 years in prison.

After his Michigan sentencing, Frazier faced trial in Alabama. On June 5, 1996, he was convicted of Pauline’s murder. 2 days later, he was sentenced to death. He also received a sentence of life in prison for other charges against him.

Pray for peace for the families of Pauline Brown and Crystal Kendrick. Pray for peace for all affected by Demetrius Frazier’s crimes. Please pray for strength for the family of Demetrius. Please pray that if Demetrius is innocent, lacks the competency to be executed, or should not be executed for any other reason, that evidence is presented before his execution. Pray that Demetrius finds peace through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

(source: theforgivenessfoundation.org)

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

Lawyers for Michigan man on death row seek to halt execution with support from Gov. Whitmer----An organization against the death penalty, has started an online petition

A Michigan man on death row in Alabama is asking Governor Gretchen Whitmer for a lifeline.

Demetrius Terrence Frazier, 52, is scheduled to be executed Feb. 6 for the 1991 murder and rape of Pauline Brown in Birmingham, Alabama.

Frazier’s attorneys claim he should have never been extradited to Alabama and should be sent back to Michigan prison.

Frazier was serving a life sentence in Michigan for another crime when he was extradited to Alabama for the murder charge and sentenced to death.

Death Penalty Action, an organization against the death penalty, has been pleading Frazier’s case and started an online petition.

“A previous governor came up with some arrangement with the Alabama governor and transferred (Frazier) back down to Alabama, and we think that’s counter actually to Michigan policy,” Death Penalty Action Executive Director Abraham Bonowitz said.

Michigan outlawed the death penalty, which is why Bonowitz believes the state should not have agreed to extradite him to Alabama, where the death penalty is legal.

“We’re asking Governor Whitmer to order him back,” Bonowitz said. “Let him serve his time out in Michigan and uphold Michigan values.”

The Michigan Attorney General’s Office ruled that the extradition was legal.

“The question before our office was not on if we should intervene or not, but whether that transfer was appropriate and legal under Michigan law, which we determined it was. Outside of that, we do not intervene in other state’s criminal matters,” a spokesperson for Attorney General Dana Nessel said.

As Frazier’s team continued to pressure Governor Whitmer, a legal expert told Local 4 it was unlikely she would intervene.

“We don’t know right now whether this will be successful, but it doesn’t appear to be because on both sides, both in Michigan and in Alabama, both of the governments are saying we’re not seeing a valid legal argument here,” former US Attorney Matthew Schneider said. “So, it doesn’t look very promising in this case.”

(source: clickondetroit.com)

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

Alabama death row inmate’s lawyers drop effort to move him to Michigan

Lawyers for Demetrius Frazier, an Alabama inmate set to die in 2 weeks, said Friday they are no longer asking that he be sent back to a Michigan prison, where he could be spared from execution and serve the rest of his life sentences.

That’s after Michigan refused to take Frazier back.

But in refusing to do so, Frazier’s lawyers warned Michigan of the historical consequences of its decision to not seek and regain custody in their Friday court filing. By Michigan not asking for the return of the condemned man, Michigan could make history by having the first execution ever of one of it’s inmates.

Lawyers for Frazier, 52, asked a federal judge late Friday afternoon to dismiss their claim that Frazier should be transferred back to a Michigan lockup.

The lawyers had argued that a 2011 executive agreement between former Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley and former Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder, which allowed for Frazier to be brought to Alabama’s Death Row, was illegal.

But earlier this week, a lawyer for the Michigan Department of Corrections said the northern prison system didn’t want Frazier back.

“While Michigan takes no position on the imposition of the death penalty in this case, Michigan does not seek to return Frazier to a Michigan correctional facility,” the court filing from the Michigan prison system states.

On Friday, Frazier’s lawyers from the Federal Defenders for the Middle District of Alabama agreed the case could be dismissed, but said if Frazier is executed, it would be partially at the feet of Michigan for refusing to take him back.

By Michigan disclaiming any interest in bringing Frazier back, Frazier’s lawyers said Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and their client would make history: “He will be the first prisoner executed while in the State of Michigan’s custody,” the lawyers state in Friday’s dismissal.

Frazier’s lawyers noted that since it became a state Michigan hasn’t executed anyone and in 1846, that state became “the 1st government in the English-speaking world to abolish capital punishment for murder and lesser crimes.”

The lawyers also said Whitmer could still issue an executive order seeking his return.

Frazier has another pending lawsuit in federal court focusing on the state’s nitrogen gas execution process. There’s a hearing set for next week in that case.

Frazier is to be executed at the William C. Holman Correctional Facility, Atmore Alabama, sometime within a 30-hour-period starting at midnight on Thursday, Feb. 6 and ending at 6 a.m. on Feb. 7. Frazier is set to die by inhaling pure nitrogen gas.

He is to be put to death for the slaying of Pauline Brown, who was shot to death and raped in her Fountain Heights apartment in Birmingham, AL, more than 30 years ago. Frazier was also convicted in a separate killing in his home state of Michigan: The shooting death of a 14-year-old girl.

A court filing from the Alabama Attorney General’s Office on Wednesday called Frazier “a sexual predator.”

Frazier was arrested in Michigan in 1992, when he was 19 years old.

In November 1991, Frazier, according to court records, broke into Brown’s apartment. He searched the home for money and when he couldn’t find much, woke up Brown. He raped her at gunpoint, and then shot her in the head.

Following the shooting, Frazier left the apartment to see if anyone heard the shot. When he didn’t think anyone heard, he returned and ate a snack in the victim’s kitchen before fleeing the scene with less than $100.

A few months later, in 1992, court records say Frazier was in his home city of Detroit and took 14-year-old Crystal Kendrick into a vacant house, preparing to rape her at gunpoint. But as he undid his pants, court records show, the teen fled. Frazier went after her and shot her in the head.

He was arrested days later in Detroit. According to the Alabama Attorney General’s Office, at the time of his arrest Frazier had a slew of pending charges including 15 counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct.

During his talks with police in Michigan in 1992, he admitted to Brown’s slaying in Alabama.

Frazier was convicted in Michigan the next year for criminal sexual conduct, robbery, the teenager’s slaying. There, he was given 3 life sentences.

In 1995, Michigan authorities brought Frazier to Alabama, where he was tried for Brown’s killing, found guilty and sentenced to death. The Michigan authorities then brought him back north, where he was imprisoned.

But in 2011, then-Govs. Robert Bentley of Alabama and Rick Snyder of Michigan created an executive agreement to transfer Frazier to Alabama, according to documents signed by the governors and attached to Frazier’s lawsuit.

No explanation was provided in the documents as to why the transfer was initiated.

Before today’s voluntary dismissal, Frazier’s attorneys argued that executive agreement was unlawful, and asking the inmate to be sent back to Michigan. That state does not have the death penalty, and its state constitution banned it in 1963.

In their lawsuit, Frazier’s lawyers argued his “Michigan life sentences have not been commuted and he has not been pardoned.” And the northern state’s law says, according to Frazier’s lawyers, that an inmate like Frazier “shall not be eligible for custodial incarceration outside a state correctional facility or a county jail.”

On Wednesday, an attorney for the Michigan Department of Corrections asked the judge to dismiss Frazier’s case.

“While Michigan takes no position on the imposition of the death penalty in this case, Michigan does not seek to return Frazier to a Michigan correctional facility,” the court filing read.

Frazier cannot make the state take him back into custody, Michigan’s filing said. The inmate’s question about state custody, said Michigan lawyers, is one for state court and not federal court.

The lawyers said the executive agreement between Bentley and Snyder, which brought Frazier back to Alabama’s custody, “boils down to a priority-of-custody matter between sovereigns.”

Frazier “mistakenly relies on Michigan constitutional and statutory law” to bolster his case, said the Michigan lawyer. The state law “does not mean that no Michigan prisoner can ever be sent to another state, as Frazier avers,” said the court filing.

It called Frazier’s claim a “farfetched argument” and “decades too late.”

The Alabama Attorney General’s Office had also filed a request to the federal judge Wednesday asking him to dismiss the case. “Now, three weeks before his execution—and more than thirteen years after his return to Alabama— Frazier initiated the instant litigation challenging the legality of the agreement.”

“The only conclusion (the state) can draw is that this is yet another attempt to sandbag the State of Alabama with meritless litigation in an effort to stop an execution.”

The AG’s Office also argued that there was nothing wrong with the executive agreement and called the lawsuit a “blatant misuse of this Court to stop his execution.”

(source: al.com)

ARKANSAS:

De Queen Man Accused of Triple Murder to Stand Trial, Prosecutors Seek Death Penalty

A De Queen man accused of killing 3 family members is set to appear for a jury trial later this month, with prosecutors seeking the death penalty.

The trial for 25-year-old Hunter Chenoweth is scheduled to take place from January 21-28 in the Madison County Circuit Court, according to court records. Chenoweth faces three counts of capital murder in connection with the deaths of his mother, stepfather, and sister. The victims were found deceased on February 23, 2021, at a residence in Madison County, according to the Arkansas State Police.

The victims include Chenoweth’s 51-year-old mother, Tami Lynn Chenoweth; his 59-year-old stepfather, James Stanley McGhee; and his 26-year-old sister, Cheyenne Chenoweth.

Chenoweth was arrested on the night of the murders after authorities across the state began searching for a vehicle linked to the crime scene. Following a brief standoff with state troopers, during which he reportedly threatened officers while brandishing a rifle, Chenoweth was taken into custody without further incident.

In the lead-up to the trial, Chenoweth’s defense team filed a motion to prevent prosecutors from seeking the death penalty, arguing that the punishment would be “cruel and unusual.” However, the court ruled against the motion, meaning that if convicted, Chenoweth could face a death sentence.

Prosecutors have filed an amended notice in court confirming their intent to seek the death penalty if Chenoweth is convicted, citing aggravated circumstances in the case.

Additionally, a gag order has been imposed on the case, barring Chenoweth’s counsel, state prosecutors, law enforcement, and public officials from discussing the matter publicly or with the media.

Chenoweth is also facing a felony domestic battery charge in Washington County related to an incident in February 2020, in which he is accused of stabbing his stepfather. According to court records, the charge stems from that alleged altercation.

The upcoming trial in Madison County will determine whether Chenoweth will be held accountable for the triple homicide.

(source: southwestarkansasradio.com)

OKLAHOMA:

How Trump being back in the White House could lead to an execution in Oklahoma

A convicted murderer could face execution in Oklahoma this summer because of President Donald Trump's return to the White House.

John Fitzgerald Hanson, 60, is now serving a life sentence for federal crimes at the U.S. Penitentiary in Pollock, Louisiana.

On Thursday, Attorney General Gentner Drummond asked the Federal Bureau of Prisons to return Hanson to Oklahoma before March 20 for execution. "Justice must not be delayed any further," Drummond wrote in a letter.

The murderer, also known as George John Hanson, had been set for execution on Dec. 15, 2022, for a fatal shooting.

In his letter, Drummond complained "the Biden administration prevented the state from carrying out Inmate Hanson's sentence by refusing to comply with federal law and perform a timely transfer of the inmate upon request."

The AG told the bureau that one of Trump's first acts of his 2nd term was to counteract Joe Biden's "inexplicable interference" with state criminal judgments.

On his 1st day back in office Monday, Trump issued an executive order supporting the death penalty.

"It is the policy of the United States to ensure that the laws that authorize capital punishment are respected and faithfully implemented, and to counteract the politicians and judges who subvert the law by obstructing and preventing the execution of capital sentences," Trump stated in his order.

Drummond asked the bureau to comply with Trump's "righteous" order by transferring Hanson.

What did Hanson do?

Hanson faces execution for murdering retired banker Mary Agnes Bowles after kidnapping her from a Tulsa mall on Aug. 31, 1999. The victim was 77.

He and an accomplice had wanted her car for a robbery spree. Hanson shot her in a ditch near Owasso after the accomplice gunned down a dirt pit owner, Jerald Thurman, according to testimony at his trial.

The dirt pit owner had spotted them on his property. Hanson later confessed to a friend, saying, "Everything went bad."

Hanson was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for the dirt pit owner's murder.

He has spent most his time since the 1999 crime spree in federal prison for bank robbery and other federal crimes.

The Federal Bureau of Prisons in 2022 had told Oklahoma's attorney general at the time that transferring Hanson "for state execution is not in the public interest."

The denial came after a moratorium had been imposed on federal executions.

In a 2021 memo about the moratorium, Merrick Garland, then U.S. attorney general, wrote, "Serious concerns have been raised about the continued use of the death penalty across the country, including arbitrariness in its application, disparate impact on people of color, and the troubling number of exonerations."

In his executive order, Trump called for the death penalty to be pursued for all federal crimes "of a severity demanding its use." Trump criticized Biden in the order for the moratorium and for commuting the sentences in December of 37 of the 40 people on federal death row.

Drummond wants Hanson back before March 20 "so that he is eligible for the next execution date."

Executions in Oklahoma are now being scheduled about 90 days apart. Confessed killer Wendell Grissom faces execution March 20 at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester.

If returned, Hanson still could avoid execution if the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board recommends clemency, and Gov. Kevin Stitt agrees.

Death penalty opponents claim he suffers from major mental illnesses, brain damage and autism.

(source: The Oklahoman)

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

Oklahoma wants federal inmate transferred so he can be put to death

Oklahoma's top prosecutor asked the federal Bureau of Prisons to transfer an inmate to state custody so that he could be executed for his role in the kidnapping and killing of a 77-year-old woman in 1999.

Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond requested the transfer Thursday of inmate George John Hanson, citing President Donald Trump's sweeping executive order this week that directs the U.S. Department of Justice to more actively support the death penalty.

Hanson, 60, whose name in Oklahoma court records is listed as John Fitzgerald Hanson, was sentenced to death in Tulsa County, Oklahoma, after he was convicted of carjacking, kidnapping and killing Mary Bowles, 77, after he and an accomplice kidnapped the woman from a Tulsa shopping mall. Hanson also is serving a life sentence for several federal convictions, including being a career criminal, that predate his state death sentence.

Drummond's predecessor, John O'Connor, previously sought Hanson's transfer and sued the Bureau of Prisons in 2022 after it refused to turn over the inmate to state custody during President Joe Biden's administration. The agency's regional director at the time, Heriberto Tellez, said the transfer was not in the public interest, a decision Drummond called “appalling.”

A federal judge ultimately dismissed Oklahoma's case, ruling that the Bureau of Prisons director has broad discretion over whether to refuse a transfer request based on his determination of the public interest.

“The prior administration's refusal to transfer Inmate Hanson to state custody to finally carry out a decades-old death sentence is the epitome of subverting and obstructing the execution of a capital sentence,” Drummond wrote Thursday in his letter to Danon Colbert, the Bureau of Prisons' acting regional director.

Randilee Giamusso, a spokesperson for the Bureau of Prisons, declined to comment on Drummond's request.

“Based on privacy, safety, and security reasons, we do not comment on any inmate’s conditions of confinement, including transfers or reasons for transfers,” Giamusso wrote in an email to The Associated Press.

Oklahoma has put to death 15 inmates since resuming executions in October 2021 following a de facto moratorium that resulted from problematic lethal injections in 2014 and 2015. Its next execution is scheduled for March 20.

(source: Associated Press)

************* Oklahoma Attorney General requests prisoner transfer from Louisiana for execution Attorney General Gentner Drummond requested Friday that a prisoner on Oklahoma’s death row be transferred from federal prison in Louisiana so he can be executed. George John Hanson, 60, was convicted for the 1999 kidnapping and murder of 77-year-old Mary Bowles. Hanson kidnapped Bowles, a retired banker, from a Tulsa mall and later shot her to death at a dirt pit near Owasso. She was shot a total of nine times. A bystander, Jerald Max Thurman, who witnessed the murder, was killed by Hanson’s accomplice, Victor Cornell Miller. Hanson received a life sentence without parole for his role in that slaying. Drummond asked that Hanson be transferred to the Lexington Assessment and Reception Center before March 20 so that he is eligible for the next available execution date. “The prior administration’s refusal to transfer Inmate Hanson to state custody to finally carry out a decades-old death sentence is the epitome of subverting and obstructing the execution of a capital sentence,” Drummond wrote in a letter. “As a result, I respectfully request that you comply with federal law and President Trump’s righteous order by transferring Inmate Hanson to state custody.” Hanson was previously scheduled for execution in Oklahoma in 2022 but the Federal Bureau of Prisons denied Oklahoma’s request to transfer. Hanson is currently in federal prison in Louisiana serving a separate life sentence for a bank robbery, according to a news release. Drummond’s office said this request is prompted by an executive order from President Donald Trump on Monday instructing the implementation of capital punishment. (source: oklahomavoice.com)

IDAHO:

Legislator introduces bill to make firing squad main way of carrying out death penalty in Idaho

A Nampa legislator wants to make death by firing squad the primary way of administering the death penalty in Idaho.

Rep. Bruce Skaug, R-Nampa, introduced the legislation to the Idaho House Judiciary, Rules and Administration Committee on Tuesday. The committee voted to introduce the legislation, clearing the way for a public hearing before the committee at a later date.

Lethal injection is the primary way of administering the death penalty in Idaho. Death by firing squad became legal in Idaho in 2022, when Skaug successfully sponsored House Bill 186 and Gov. Brad Little signed it into law, citing challenges in obtaining lethal injection drugs.

During the 2022 legislative session, the Idaho Legislature passed House Bill 658, which gives the suppliers and manufacturers of lethal injection chemicals confidentiality. That law, which Little signed in March 2022, also prevents that confidential information from being disclosed in court filings, the Sun previously reported.

Skaug said his new bill would not take effect until July 2026 to give the Idaho Department of Correction time to refurbish a facility for firing squad purposes. It would have no fiscal impact to the state’s budget, Skaug said, because the 2022 legislation already appropriated $750,000 to the Department of Correction to refurbish the facility.

“This bill is not about whether the death penalty is good or bad …” Skaug told the committee. “Our job is to make sure to carry out the most efficient manner under the bounds of the Constitution.”

There are 9 people on death row in Idaho, according to the Idaho Department of Correction’s website.

(source: dailymontanan.com)

NEVADA:

Death penalty trial over 2016 Las Vegas killing ends in hung jury

A death penalty trial ended in a hung jury on Thursday, with the judge declaring a mistrial for a man accused of killing and dismembering his wife’s ex-lover more than 8 years ago.

Anthony Newton, 37, was facing the death penalty in the slaying of Ulyses Cesar Molina, of Las Vegas, whose body was found dismembered on Dec. 28, 2016.

Thursday marked the second time a mistrial has been declared for Newton, although this is the first time the case had made it to jury deliberations.

Chief Deputy District Attorney Pamela Weckerly said that prosecutors would push for a 3rd trial.

The jury foreperson indicated Thursday that at least one juror believed that further deliberations would be “pointless.” The panel began deliberating Tuesday afternoon then continued all day Wednesday and into Thursday morning.

“At this point the jury as to all counts is unable to come to any type of verdict,” said District Judge Jacqueline Bluth.

The 1st mistrial in the case happened in November because a witness told jurors that Newton had previously been in prison, court records show.

Killing happened after affair, prosecutors say

Newton was facing charges of murder, conspiracy to commit murder, conspiracy to commit kidnapping, kidnapping with a deadly weapon, conspiracy to commit robbery and robbery with a deadly weapon.

Prosecutors accused Newton of killing Molina with the help of his brother-in-law, George Malaperdas, after an affair Molina had with Newton’s wife.

Malaperdas and another woman, Kelsea Wray Glass, were also charged in connection with the killing. Glass was also romantically involved with both Newton and Molina, according to an arrest report. Malaperdas told police that Wray “set up Molina and called him to the apartment where Newton was waiting,” the report said.

Both Malaperdas and Glass have pleaded guilty in the case, but the guilty pleas were filed under seal, court records show. The two are scheduled to appear for a sentencing hearing on Feb. 11.

In opening statements of the trial, Weckerly said that Newton told his brother-in-law to come to the apartment, and that when Malaperdas arrived, he helped Newton tie Molina up. Newton then “steps on Cesar’s neck until he dies,” Weckerly said.

Prosecutors alleged that Newton and Malaperdas took the body to another location, where they dismembered Molina before leaving his torso and legs in a suitcase in the desert.

In closing arguments, Weckerly said that police searched a home where they believed Molina had been dismembered and found a piece of Molina’s tissue in a large storage bin filled with bleach. The owner of that home, who considered himself Newton’s stepfather, also told police that Newton and another woman came to his home around the time that Molina was killed.

Human hand found in mailbox

Months later in April 2018, a woman living in Henderson found a human hand in her mailbox that police determined belonged to Molina. At the time the hand was discovered, Newton had been in custody at the Clark County Detention Center for months.

Weckerly told the jury during the trial’s opening statements that investigators could not answer how that hand ended up in the woman’s mailbox, according to court transcripts. Police also never found the location of Molina’s head.

“But what you will know and what will be abundantly clear is that the person that killed Cesar Molina was Anthony Newton,” Weckerly told the jury.

Defense attorney Josh Tomsheck has argued that forensic evidence did not prove that Newton or Molina was in the apartment where police said Molina was killed. He said that there is evidence the apartment was never cleaned, but police did not find Newton’s fingerprints or blood inside the apartment. He also told the jury in opening statements that police mishandled or didn’t properly test evidence.

In closing arguments, Tomsheck said that Malaperdas has changed his story about what he saw multiple times, and he cast doubt on witnesses’ testimony.

Hung juries rare in death penalty trials

“I am asking you to be the intelligent few that recognize that in a murder trial something of this importance, this weighty affair of life, that we don’t just accept something because someone says it,” Tomsheck said, according to court transcripts.

Tomsheck told the Review-Journal on Thursday that hung juries are statistically rare in death penalty trials. Prosecutors will decide whether to take the case to trial again, but Tomsheck said he wants to ensure that Newton “has the best defense possible, no matter how many times that takes.”

“We had a very attentive jury that clearly listened to all the evidence,” Tomsheck said after speaking with the jurors.

Newton remains in custody at the Clark County Detention Center without bail. Bluth scheduled another hearing in the case for Feb. 11.

(source: Las Vegas Review-Journal)

CALIFORNIA:

Court Approves Amendments to Policies and Payment Guidelines for Appointed Counsel in Capital Cases----The amendments account for developments relevant to the representation of capital inmates before the California Supreme Court, including the passage of Proposition 66, the Death Penalty Reform and Savings Act of 2016, and the enactment of the California Racial Justice Act of 2020.

The California Supreme Court on Wednesday approved amendments to the Supreme Court Policies Regarding Cases Arising from Judgments of Death and the Payment Guidelines for Counsel Appointed by the Supreme Court Representing Indigent Capital Appellants in California Courts & Guidelines for Fixed Fee Appointments, on Optional Basis, to Automatic Appeals and Capital Habeas Corpus Proceedings in California Courts.

The amendments account for developments relevant to the representation of capital inmates before the California Supreme Court, including the passage of Proposition 66, the Death Penalty Reform and Savings Act of 2016, and the enactment of the California Racial Justice Act of 2020.

The amended policies and payment guidelines, posted on the court’s website, will become effective on February 1, 2025.

(source: California Courts Newsroom)

USA----potential new federal death penalty case

Woman arrested in fatal shooting of Border Patrol agent in Vermont

A woman has been arrested in connection with the fatal shooting of US Border Patrol agent earlier this week on a highway in Vermont close to the US-Canadian border, the FBI office in Albany said Friday.

Teresa Youngblut, a 21-year-old Washington state resident, was charged with assault on a federal law enforcement officer, the FBI said. It is unclear whether Youngblut has retained legal representation.

US Border Patrol Agent David Maland, 44, was shot Monday afternoon during a traffic stop on Interstate 91 in Coventry, Vermont, and later died of his injuries, the Vermont State Police and the FBI said. Coventry is about 13 miles south of the Canadian border.

Maland was assigned to CBP’s Swanton Sector, which covers parts of Vermont, New York, and New Hampshire, a US Customs and Border Protection spokesperson previously told CNN.

The incident unfolded when Maland and several border patrol agents stopped Youngblut, who was driving a blue 2015 Toyota Prius with North Carolina plates, for an immigration inspection, according to court documents. The vehicle was registered to passenger Felix Baukholt, a German national who officials said appeared to have an expired US visa.

The traffic stop escalated into a shooting after Youngblut allegedly fired a handgun on at least one of the agents, according to the court documents. Maland and Baukholt were killed as a result of the shooting, while Youngblut was injured and taken to Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in New Hampshire for treatment.

Officials said Youngblut and Baukholt had been under “periodic surveillance” since January 14 after an employee at a Lyndonville, Vermont, hotel where the pair were staying called police concerned they “appeared to be dressed in all-black tactical style clothing with protective equipment.”

Hours before the shooting, investigators had followed Youngblut and Baukholt to a local Walmart where the pair appeared to have purchased two packages of aluminum foil. Upon returning to their car, Baukholt was seen using sheets of foil to wrap unidentifiable objects while seated in the passenger seat, according to court documents.

When FBI agents later searched the vehicle, they discovered the pair were traveling with multiple firearms, ammunition, handheld two-way radios and approximately a dozen electronic devices.

They also found an array of military-grade gear, including a ballistic helmet, night-vision goggles, and a tactical belt with holster, according to court documents.

The search also revealed an apparent journal belonging to Youngblut and documents containing identification, and utility, lease, travel, and lodging information pertaining to multiple states.

(source: CNN)

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

Former death row prisoners may be heading to ‘Alcatraz of the Rockies’

U.S. authorities are preparing to transfer former federal death row prisoners — currently held in Terre Haute — to a higher-security prison in Colorado.

Sometimes referred to as the “Alcatraz of the Rockies,” the officially named U.S. Penitentiary Florence Administrative Maximum Facility is considered America’s most secure prison.

Last month, former President Biden commuted the federal death sentences of 37 prisoners to life without parole. Most of them are currently at the federal prison in Terre Haute, which houses U.S. death row. On Wednesday, two days after President Trump returned to the White House, the prisoners began receiving notices detailing the bureau’s plans, according to messages to WFIU/WTIU News from 3 prisoners in Terre Haute.

Hours after taking the oath of office, Trump issued a series of executive orders including one outlining his administration’s approach to capital punishment.

Part of the order instructed officials at the U.S. Department of Justice to “evaluate the places of imprisonment and conditions of confinement for each of the 37 murderers whose Federal death sentences were commuted by President Biden, and the Attorney General shall take all lawful and appropriate action to ensure that these offenders are imprisoned in conditions consistent with the monstrosity of their crimes and the threats they pose.”

That order also instructed the attorney general to review the possibility of recharging those who received clemency with capital crimes at the state level.

In the weeks after Biden’s decision to commute their sentences, prisoners reported a flurry of activity as officials prepared to move them off death row.

Prisoners were applying to educational and other programs that weren’t previously available, due to their death sentences.

On Wednesday, however, prisoners began receiving notices that they were to be transferred to ADX Florence. The notices didn’t say when.

“Trump or the prison just told us all today that we will all be going to the super max prison since Trump gave that order yesterday,” James Roane, one of the longest-serving former death row prisoners in Terre Haute, wrote in a message Wednesday.

“It’s punishment for Biden giving us clemency,” Roane wrote.

A federal jury sentenced Roane to death in 1993 for his role in several drug-related murders, along with two codefendants, one of whom the former Trump administration executed in 2021. That administration carried out 12 other executions in Terre Haute.

Trump’s order included language critiquing former Attorney General Merrick Garland’s decision to place a moratorium on executions as well as Biden’s decision, on Dec. 23, to commute the sentences of most of those on federal death row.

“President Biden commuted the sentences of 37 of the 40 most vile and sadistic rapists, child molesters, and murderers on Federal death row: remorseless criminals who brutalized young children, strangled and drowned their victims, and hunted strangers for sport. He commuted their sentences even though the laws of our Nation have always protected victims by applying capital punishment to barbaric acts like theirs,” he wrote.

“These efforts to subvert and undermine capital punishment defy the laws of our nation, make a mockery of justice, and insult the victims of these horrible crimes. The Government’s most solemn responsibility is to protect its citizens from abhorrent acts, and my Administration will not tolerate efforts to stymie and eviscerate the laws that authorize capital punishment against those who commit horrible acts of violence against American citizens.”

Before Trump took office, prisoners said that they knew it was possible that some of them might end up at ADX Florence.

Prisoners convicted of certain classes of crimes, including violence against other prisoners or prison staff, expected to go there.

ADX Florence also has a “step-down” program for people held under tight security. It’s designed to prepare them to re-enter general population.

But Friday, prisoners said they received additional notices that made no mention of rehabilitative programs. Instead, they said, the notices referred to conditions designed to house the most dangerous prisoners in the federal system.

The notices that went out Friday said they would have a psychological evaluation for placement in a “Control Unit” at ADX Florence. Conditions in its “Control Unit” are unusually harsh: Communication with the outside world is limited even more than on death row, and prisoners generally can’t interact with one another.

“Not everyone here is child killer,” said Julius Robinson, one of the former death row prisoners, responding to the language in Trump's executive order. Robinson is among those who received notice of an impending move.

“He really should look at each case before he put everyone in the same box,” Robinson wrote of Trump, using an online messaging app.

Robinson was convicted of three drug-related murders in 2002.

Attorneys for Robinson, Roane and other prisoners who received notices about the move to ADX Florence didn’t return calls or reply to emails this week.

Citing privacy and security concerns, U.S. prison bureau officials declined to say where the prisoners were going or when.

“Those individuals whose death sentences were recently commuted to life without parole will be transferred to an institution commensurate with their respective safety, security, health, and programming needs,” an unnamed U.S prison bureau spokesperson wrote in a statement sent early Friday to WFIU/WTIU News.

“For privacy, safety, and security reasons, we cannot speak specifically to the circumstances relating to any incarcerated individual's designation or re-designation” to a federal institution, including the timing of such designations, according to the spokesperson.

As of Friday, U.S. Bureau of Prison records showed that most of the 37 prisoners originally sentenced to death were still in Terre Haute.

Bill Breeden, a retired Unitarian minister who serves as a spiritual advisor for one of the prisoners in Terre Haute, said he was trying to convince officials there to let him meet with that prisoner sooner than he had planned.

“I think he might try to kill himself,” Breeden said Friday.

(source: indianapublicmedia.org)

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

Republicans in 4 States Want to Charge Abortion Patients with Homicide----In 3 of the 4 states, you can receive the death penalty for homicide. This seems a little extra from the anti-abortion movement, whose laws are already killing people, with or without threatening capital punishment.

In several states that have banned abortion, Republican lawmakers are pushing to go further. Over this past month, 4 different states—South Carolina, North Dakota, Indiana, and Oklahoma—opened their legislative session with bills that would threaten abortion patients with homicide charges, according to both the Guardian, and Jessica Valenti’s newsletter, Abortion Everyday. In South Carolina, Oklahoma, and Indiana, homicide is punishable by the death penalty. To be clear: None of these bills have passed, nor do any of them explicitly advocate for the death penalty for abortion patients or providers. But for Jezebel’s 2025 reproductive rights forecast, the organization Pregnancy Justice warned that bills that implicitly and legally advocate for abortion patients to be killed will likely increase in anti-abortion legislatures. This pretty much flies in the face of everything the anti-abortion movement has claimed about wanting to protect women and only go after providers.

Dana Sussman, senior vice president at Pregnancy Justice, further told the Guardian that these bills are receiving surprisingly minimal outrage or media coverage. “That raises significant alarm—both that we’ve seen more than we have in the past in a single legislative session already, and that they’re not generating the level of outrage or attention or scrutiny that they have in years past.”

North Dakota’s bill, HB 1373, adds a new section to the existing criminal code to recognize embryos and fetuses as victims of assault and murder. The bill explicitly states that “‘Person’ includes an unborn child,” and would thus enshrine fetal personhood—an ideology that recognizes embryos and fetuses as people with citizenship rights at odds with the pregnant person’s—into state law.

South Carolina’s bill, H 3537, is called the South Carolina Prenatal Equal Protection Act—referring, of course, to equal protection for fetuses; the bill cites the 14th amendment of the Constitution to assert that embryos have citizenship and equal protection under the law, and those that are aborted are victims of homicide. South Carolina Republicans introduced a similar bill as recently as 2023 but it failed to receive a vote. In December, after state Rep. Rob Harris (R) pre-filed the bill, he assured the public that women who have “natural miscarriages” won’t be punished under his bill. But I shudder to think how the state will determine what is and isn’t a “natural miscarriage.”

Meanwhile, in Oklahoma, state Rep. Dusty Deevers—a notorious abortion “abolitionist“—introduced SB 456, the Abolition of Abortion Act. Abolition is a movement that seeks to end all abortion; many abortion “abolitionists” recognize people who have abortions as murderers who should face punishment. Some “abolitionists” advocate for the death penalty. “Equal protection legislation simply recognizes the basic truth that preborn image-bearers of God are equally valuable as born image-bearers of God and removes abortion as an exception in homicide laws, holding all individuals accountable under the same standard,” Deevers said of his bill.

Indiana’s bill, HB 1334, states that it “modifies the definition of ‘human being’ in the criminal code to include an unborn child.” The Foundation to Abolish Abortion praised the bill, introduced by co-author Rep. Lorissa Sweet, for combatting the “abortion genocide,” and thanked Sweet for being “on the political front lines of the fight against abortion.”

All 4 bills establish fetal personhood by recognizing that “killing” an embryo or fetus is the same as killing a person. Consequently, someone who has an abortion could face homicide charges and the threat of the death penalty. State legislatures have intermittently floated bills to classify abortion as homicide and/or threaten abortion patients with the death penalty for years now. But after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022 and states across the country enacted abortion bans, these bills started to become more common. In March 2023, 5 different states (Texas, Kentucky, South Carolina, Oklahoma, and Arkansas) simultaneously considered bills that sought to charge abortion patients with homicide. The bills received national attention but weren’t brought forth for votes; nevertheless, they seemed to be a warning shot. In May, the Texas Republican Party adopted a platform that called for abortion to be recognized as homicide under the state criminal code, effectively advocating for the death penalty for abortion patients. In Texas, not only is homicide punishable with the death penalty, but the state has carried out the highest number of executions across the country.

Over the last few months, ProPublica’s reporting has confirmed at least 5 different maternal deaths caused by abortion bans in Texas and Georgia. The limited, available data indicates the obvious: that abortion bans are driving up maternal mortality. Meanwhile, anti-abortion attorneys and state governments have spent the last nearly 3 years arguing in courts that women should be denied abortions even when they could die or lose a limb. Anti-abortion legislation has been associated with an increase in domestic violence homicides. Anti-abortion activists continue to threaten, harass, assault, and make abortion providers and patients fear for their lives.

Again, none of these proposed bills are in effect and no one who has an abortion in any state right now will face the death penalty. But the steady normalization of bills that legally recognize people who have abortions as murderers, even advocate that they should be killed, is terrifying. “The more of these kinds of bills that get introduced, people get numb to the idea of them, and they seem less and less radical,” Sussman told the Guardian. Regardless of whether these bills pass, the Overton window is clearly shifting, priming us to eventually accept what might seem unthinkable right now.

(source: jezebel.com)

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

Biden reprieve for death-row police officer ‘morally depraved’ – prosecutor----Michael McMahon condemns president for commuting death sentence given to Len Davis, 60, over 1994 murder

Joe Biden was hypocritical – and “blindsided” the victim’s daughter – when in December he commuted the death sentence given to a corrupt former police officer after he orchestrated the murder of a woman who filed a brutality complaint against him, according to the retired assistant US attorney whose job it was to prosecute the case.

In a guest column published on Friday by Louisiana’s Advocate newspaper, Michael McMahon said the clemency given to the ex-New Orleans policeman Len Davis was “morally depraved” – and not revealed to the family of Kim Groves, the slain woman, until virtually the last minute, all but violating US justice department policies designed to give victims’ loved ones a voice in such decisions.

“It is truly disappointing and shameful,” McMahon said. “I’m not being cynical; I’m being realistic.”

Many regard Groves’s killing as the reputational low point for the New Orleans police department, which since 2012 has been trying to achieve compliance on a reform pact – known as a consent decree – that the agency signed with the federal government after a civil rights investigation found decades of unconstitutional practices.

Groves had seen Davis pistol-whip a teenager in 1994, a year during which New Orleans registered its all-time high in killings: 424. She reported Davis to the police’s internal affairs division, and he was tipped off about Groves’s complaint within a day.

Davis subsequently arranged for a drug dealer to shoot Groves dead roughly a block away from her home. FBI phone taps aiming to expose Davis’s involvement in a protection racket ended up capturing evidence tying him to Groves’s killing, though agents were unable to prevent the mother of three from being killed.

McMahon, the prosecutor, later persuaded a federal jury to convict Davis of his role in Groves’s murder and to condemn him to death. But amid a labyrinthine appeals process, Davis was among 40 federal prisoners on death row as Biden prepared to leave office at the start of Donald Trump’s second presidency.

Biden on 23 December then commuted the death sentences of Davis and 36 others of those prisoners, changing their punishment to life imprisonment without parole. The only federal death row inmates exempted were convicted of terrorism or hate-motivated mass murder.

In his Advocate column, McMahon said he was unhappy that Groves’s younger daughter, Jasmine, only learned of Davis’s commutation the night before it was announced – “but after the decision had been made”. McMahon said he made that determination after personally speaking to Jasmine Groves, who told him that a member of the US attorney’s office in New Orleans called her only after the commutation, which was presented as “a fait accompli”.

McMahon said he believed that violated a justice department policy designed to afford “the family of any victim of an offense” being considered for clemency an opportunity to make “an oral presentation of reasonable duration”.

“Jasmine and her family were blindsided by Biden,” McMahon said. “The local US attorney’s office … tried to mollify her with the excuse that only ‘hate crimes’ were exempted from the commutations. Needless to say, she wasn’t impressed.”

McMahon also said he found it ironic that the crime for which Davis was convicted – civil rights murder – became eligible for the death penalty through a federal law that Biden himself championed when he was serving in the US Senate. Congress passed that law mere months before Groves’s murder.

Davis, 60, asked a judge to reinstate his death sentence after Biden’s commutation. According to McMahon, the maneuver demonstrated how Davis has been clinging to the “delusional belief” that an appellate court will eventually exonerate him as long as the specter of execution looms over him.

Yet, as McMahon wrote, “commutations and pardons do not depend on an inmate’s consent”.

“Davis’s rejection of the commutation does not mitigate in any way Biden’s hypocrisy,” added McMahon, 74, who retired in 2019. “I never gave up fighting for the justice the Groves family deserved. Biden’s misguided decision undid that work, now sparing the cop who orchestrated Kim’s murder from answering to the jury’s sentence.”

Jasmine Groves’s brother, Corey, was more forgiving of Biden in a brief conversation with the Guardian on the morning of 23 December. He said he has always wanted Davis to live as long as possible in prison rather than be executed ahead of his dying from natural causes, saying: “I think that’s worse than any death sentence.”

Family members of Groves received a $1.5m legal settlement from New Orleans city government in 2018 over her murder.

Meanwhile, three men who had been sent to prison for murder on falsified information that Davis supplied toward the end of his policing career were found to have been wrongfully convicted and freed in 2022.

(source: The Guardian)

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

Commutations Cement Biden's Legacy as a Champion of Justice and Racial Reconciliation

“American communities, disproportionately Black and Brown, have long borne the scars of the Drug War. Extreme and racist sentences for crack cocaine offenses tore apart families. Children grew up visiting their parents behind bars. Those parents are now elders, yearning to hold their grandchildren. Justice is served by allowing these individuals to return home. Their debt to society was long ago paid.” — Kara Gotsch, Executive Director of The Sentencing Project

Chief Justice John Marshall described a presidential grant of clemency as an "act of grace." The President's Constitutional power to grant pardons and reprieves descends from the “prerogative of mercy” of English law.

Few acts of clemency exemplify the ideals of grace and mercy more fully than President Biden's historic commutation of the sentences of almost 2,500 people convicted of nonviolent drug offenses.

It was the largest single-day commutation in American history, coming less than a month after another historic act of clemency, sparing the lives of 37 people sentenced to death in federal courts.

Together, these commutations have cemented President Biden's legacy as a champion of justice, civil rights, and racial reconciliation.

The commutations of drug sentences address a shortcoming in the First Step Act which the National Urban League has advocated for years to repair. Too many people have been incarcerated for too long based on outdated and racist sentencing laws. Black men especially have suffered under our current sentencing regime that still charges crack cocaine offenses 18 times more harshly than powder cocaine at the federal level.

The National Urban League and our partners in the civil rights community have worked tirelessly to close the gaps in our drug sentencing laws. In November, the leaders of the eight legacy civil rights organizations wrote a letter to President Biden asking to remedy the extensive harm done to Black and Brown communities caused by the War on Drugs through commutations, and he delivered.

Further, the death penalty has ensnared hundreds of innocent defendants. The National Urban League has long opposed the death penalty in all cases. The death penalty has proven to be wildly discriminatory in every aspect. This is true in the federal system, just as in the states.

In his commutation order, President Biden acknowledged the racially disparate impact of the death penalty and committed to ending it on the federal level. His Department of Justice paused executions, a welcome reprieve after the first Trump administration’s gruesome execution spree.

The cases of the 37 men whose lives were spared manifest all the profound flaws that inevitably mar the death penalty, including significant racial disparities. Black Americans are seven times more likely to be falsely convicted of serious crimes compared to white Americans. Among the 37 were those prosecuted by almost exclusively white attorneys and convicted by all-white juries, the intellectually disabled, seriously mentally ill or brain damaged, those who faced execution though they did not personally kill anyone, and those whose convictions or death sentences were secured through the use of misleading or unreliable scientific evidence.

President Biden is a man of faith, courage, and principle. His historic acts of grace and mercy manifest all of those qualities.

"President Biden has demonstrated one of the strongest commitments to racial justice in American history," Morial said. "Today’s historic decision will allow people to come home to their families sooner and give communities the opportunity to reunite and rebuild.

"We commend President Biden for his commitment to justice and equality even in his last days in office. As we prepare to enter a new era, today’s actions are a reminder of what real leadership looks like.”

(source: Marc H. Morial, President and CEO, National Urban League----nul.org)

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

The Death Penalty Does Not Make Us Safer; Statement By Witness to Innocence, on 24 January 2025----Witness to Innocence Responds to President Trump’s Executive Order on the Death Penalty, and Organizations from throughout the US and the World Sign-on in Solidarity

President Trump’s Executive Order on the Death Penalty makes our criminal justice system more dangerous. As exonerated death row survivors of Witness to Innocence, we know first-hand that the death penalty does not make us safer. We are just some of the 200 people in the United States who have been wrongfully convicted, sentenced to die on death row, and later exonerated. More people like us currently sit on death rows throughout the country. It happened to us, and it could happen to anyone. The Death Penalty Information Center’s data shows that “for every 8 people executed in the United States, one person wrongfully condemned to death has been exonerated.” We cannot accept government- sanctioned killing in a system that gets it wrong that often.

The executive order ignores this fact and other years of evidence and research, as well as growing public opposition to the death penalty:

The death penalty does not improve public safety or prevent violence. There is no evidence of a reduction in violence because of the death penalty.

The death penalty does not deter crime. States who retain the penalty and have the highest rates of execution do not have lower rates of violent crime. *

The death penalty is disproportionately used to punish people of color, the poor, and those with mental illnesses.

The death penalty drains public dollars without making communities safer. The money would be better spent, and we would all be safer if that money were used for proven violence prevention programs.

Many different experts have identified serious problems with the use of lethal injection drugs.

Opposition to the death penalty knows no political or faith boundaries – support for its abolition is bipartisan and comes from a variety of religious groups.

As an organization led-by and supporting people who were harmed by a broken system that sends innocent people to die, we stand opposed to President Trump’s Executive Order on the Death Penalty. The death penalty did not make us safer, nor did it make the victims of the crimes for which we were wrongfully convicted, their loved ones, or communities safer. The United States is in the shameful position of being one of the few developed nations to still carry out this cruel and ineffective practice. Let’s instead use our resources for programs that have been proven to reduce violence and make our communities safer.

*For further reference, the Death Penalty Policy Project analysis on public safety provides additional detail: DP3 Study: After 1,600 Executions, the Public and Police are Safer in States with No Death Penalty.

The death row exonerees of Witness to Innocence are living proof that our system is flawed and dangerous. Watch our videos to learn more, at: https://www.witnesstoinnocence.org/imlivingproof

Witness to Innocence, with the following US and Worldwide organizations that endorse this statement:

8th Amendment Project, Abolition of Death Penalty in Iraq, The Advocates for Human Rights, The American Constitution Society, Capital Punishment Justice Project, Cornell Center on the Death Penalty Worldwide – Cornell Law School, CrimeInfo, a member organization of Anti Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN), Death Penalty Action, Death Penalty Alternatives for Arizona, Death Penalty Focus,faith leaders of color coalition (flocc), FIACAT -Fédération internationale des ACAT – International Federation of ACATs, Georgians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (GFADP), Harm Reduction International, Italian Federation for Human Rights (FIDU), Kentucky Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, Kenya Human Rights Commission, Lawyers For Human Rights International, India, Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat,Le MRAP (Mouvement contre le Racisme et pour l’Amitié entre les Peuples), Ministry Against the Death Penalty, Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty, Parliamentarians for Global Action (PGA), Paul Rougeau Committee – Italy, Pennsylvanians Against the Death Penalty, Puertorrican Coalition Against the Death Penalty, Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty, Tennesseans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (TADP), Women Beyond Walls, Witness to Innocence

(source: worldcoalition.org)

UNITED KINGDOM:

Against the death penalty, even for Axel Rudakubana

Should the Southport killer swing? Lee Anderson thinks so. The Reform MP posted an image of a noose on X, with the words: ‘No apologies here. This is what is required!’ It’s not the first time Anderson has backed the return of the rope, and not the first time I’ve contended that he’s wrong, but there’s something I want to say before getting into the nitty gritty. Wanting Axel Rudakubana dead is a thoroughly mainstream and entirely understandable view. Among those who have children, I would go further and suggest that it is the natural response. On capital punishment, as on so much else, liberals think of ourselves as cool-headed rationalists, above the hot tempers and base bloodlust of the mob, but it is perfectly rational to believe that a child-killer should be executed, and, while we’re at it, what is so wrong about feeling angry and vengeful over the murder of children? These are normal instincts.

Normal, but difficult to turn into norms. I am opposed to the death penalty in all circumstances, a position that emerges from Catholic teaching on ‘the inescapable responsibility of choosing to be unconditionally pro-life’ and the principle that ‘not even a murderer loses his personal dignity’. But you can think there is a place for capital punishment on our statute books and still appreciate that Southport is the sort of case that makes for bad legislation. Those who would see Rudakubana hang point to the fact there is no doubt about his guilt: he admitted to the murders and even gloated about them in custody. Yet this is the very reason why it would be unwise to legislate a death penalty off the back of his crimes. The Southport murders were unlike most murders and a law drawn up with them in mind would extend to very different circumstances.

The campaign to abolish capital punishment was aided immeasurably by headline-grabbing causes celebre, such as Derek Bentley (hanged on the basis of joint enterprise) and Ruth Ellis (hanged for a crime of passion), but even a narrowly drawn death penalty statute could result in irreparable miscarriages of justice, rendering it vulnerable to public opinion and changing parliamentary arithmetic. A death penalty for child murder might satisfy justice in cases like Southport or the murders of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman, but it would also have seen Donna Anthony, Angela Cannings, and Sally Clark go to the gallows following wrongful conviction for murdering children who had in fact died from sudden infant death syndrome.

A more limited capital murder statute might restrict the death sentence to cases where the accused is convicted based on forensic evidence. Then again, Judith Ward was convicted of murder based on forensic evidence and spent 18 years inside until the Court of Appeal found the forensic evidence to have been hopelessly wrong. Yes, you might say, but forensic science has improved immeasurably since Ward’s conviction in 1974. It has, and yet between 1978 and 2024, 62 death row inmates in the United States have been exonerated on the grounds of ‘false or misleading forensic evidence’. Nor are forensics the only branch of evidence prone to human error. Consider the case of William Mills, sentenced to nine years for the armed robbery of a bank in Glasgow’s West End, on the strength of two police officers testifying that they had identified him from CCTV. The robber on the footage had his mouth covered by a scarf and his eyes by sunglasses. Mills was freed after a fresh investigation discovered evidence linking a convicted bank robber to the crime.

A narrower law still might require a confession to make a murderer eligible for a rendezvous with the modern Mr Pierrepoint. Such a law would have still meant execution for Stefan Kiszko, who spent 16 years in prison after confessing to the rape and murder of an 11-year-old girl. Kiszko’s conviction was later quashed and the real murderer eventually caught. The Kiszko case was particularly egregious: he had a mental age of seven, was allowed no solicitor, was falsely accused of exposing himself by four teenage girls who admitted they made it up ‘for a laugh’, and couldn’t have produced the DNA evidence left at the murder scene because he was impotent. Policing and criminal trials procedure have come a long way since then, but if we again look across the pond, we find 32 instances of death row inmates released on the basis of ‘false confession’.

Of course, you might be a ruthless utilitarian and reckon that stringing up a poor innocent bugger every now and then a price worth paying to exact retribution on the likes of Rudakubana. Still, you would have to contend with a British public that does not think in those terms. There is a reason miscarriage of justice stories have always shifted papers and made ratings hits of TV docudramas. Something deep in the British soul is horrified by the thought of the lone individual, falsely accused, at the mercy of the state, condemned to suffer a punishment they do not deserve. As long as this aspect of the British character remains, it wouldn’t matter if a thousand kid killers took a trip through the trapdoor: just one wrongfully hanged sod and the death sentence would soon be off to meet its Maker.

I think it foolhardy that anyone should want to give the state the power to kill its citizens

There are plenty of other considerations. Britain is no longer the same country it was when the last hangings were carried out in 1964. We are a multicultural society, one latterly steeped in American identity politics. It would not be long before the racial and ethnic composition of our condemned cells was pored over by solicitors and activists to level charges of racial bias. Barristers would urge juries to consider racial and other social justice factors to save their clients from the noose. And how many police officers would volunteer for armed duties knowing their lawful killing of a black or ethnic minority suspect could see them not only in the dock for murder but on trial for their life while rabble-rousing MPs, journalists and community leaders agitate for ‘justice’? I might be a hand-wringing liberal, but after the conduct of government and officialdom over the past decade, I think it foolhardy that anyone should want to give the state the power to kill its citizens and truly baffling that those clamouring the loudest for it are the very right-wingers most suspicious of the state’s intentions.

Its moral and ethical dimensions aside, the death penalty is too prone to error, too open to miscarriages of justice, and too vulnerable to sudden lurches in politics and public opinion to be a workable response to crimes like Southport. If the right wants to move the dial on penal policy, it should focus on how best to combine earlier intervention with an expansion in the use of custody and other forms of detention, with a particular emphasis on serious habitual offenders and those severally mentally ill people who demonstrate violent and aggressive tendencies. To achieve such a criminal justice revolution, and to insulate it from legal or policy challenge, the right would have to leave behind its basic boomer attitudes to incarceration, and all the various sadisms some reactionaries yearn to see visited upon offenders. To be a credible solution to violence and attended pathologies, an expanded prison estate would have to provide a safe, clean, healthy and productive environment for inmates. It wouldn’t be cheap. Lord knows it wouldn’t be popular. But it is a more viable answer than the death penalty.

(source: Stephen Daisley is a Spectator regular and a columnist for the Scottish Daily Mail----The Spectator)

INDONESIA:

Indonesia to Transfer Death Row Inmate Serge Atlaoui to France in February

The Indonesian government has agreed to transfer French citizen Serge Areski Atlaoui, who is on death row for a drug conviction, back to his home country on compassionate grounds, a senior official announced on Friday.

Atlaoui, who has been diagnosed with cancer, requested to undergo medical treatment in France. The transfer is scheduled for February 4.

"He is now in poor health and requires serious medical treatment," said Yusril Ihza Mahendra, Coordinating Minister for Legal, Immigration, Human Rights, and Correctional Affairs.

Atlaoui was initially sentenced to life imprisonment in June 2005 for his role as a "chemical expert" in a clandestine drug manufacturing operation in Tangerang, near Jakarta. However, in 2007, his appeal was rejected by the Supreme Court, which also upgraded his sentence from life imprisonment to the death penalty.

Following the Supreme Court’s verdict, Atlaoui was transferred to Nusakambangan Prison Island in Central Java, Indonesia’s high-security facility for death row inmates. His execution was initially scheduled for April 2015, but a last-minute legal challenge to then-President Joko Widodo’s refusal to grant clemency delayed the process. As a result, prosecutors removed him from the list of inmates scheduled for execution at that time.

In light of his deteriorating health, Atlaoui was later transferred to Salemba Prison in Jakarta to receive medical treatment.

"The Indonesian government considers this transfer a fair decision based on compassionate grounds and in accordance with existing regulations. It also follows a request from the French government," Yusril said.

This decision follows similar actions by the Indonesian government. Last month, another death row inmate, Mary Jane Veloso, was transferred to the Philippines after years of appeals from Manila. Additionally, five Australian citizens convicted of smuggling heroin in Bali were returned to Australia to serve their sentences under an agreement between the two governments.

(source: The Jakarta Globe)

PAKISTAN:

Pakistani court sentences 4 people to death for blasphemy----A Pakistani court has sentenced 4 people to death for blasphemy

A Pakistani court Saturday sentenced 4 people to death for blasphemy, allegedly because they posted sacrilegious material on social media about Islamic religious figures and the Quran. Their lawyer said appeal preparations are underway.

Under the country’s blasphemy laws, anyone found guilty of insulting Islam or its religious figures can be sentenced to death. Authorities have yet to carry out such a penalty, although the accusation of blasphemy and opposition to the law can incite mob violence or reprisals.

Judge Tariq Ayub in the city of Rawalpindi declared that blasphemy, disrespect to holy figures, and desecration of the Quran were unforgivable offenses and left no room for leniency.

Along with the death sentences, the judge imposed collective fines of 4.6 million rupees (around $16,500) and handed down jail terms to each of the four should a higher court overturn their death sentences.

The men’s lawyer, Manzoor Rahmani, criticized the court’s decision and investigating authorities’ lack of evidence.

“The doubts and uncertainties that arise in such cases are ignored by the courts, likely due to the fear of religious backlash and potential mob violence against the judge if the accused is acquitted,” said Rahmani. “We are preparing our appeals against the decision and will go to the High Court.”

Anti-blasphemy measures introduced in Pakistan in the 1980s made it illegal to insult Islam. Since then, people have been accused of insulting the religion, desecrating its texts, or writing offensive remarks on the walls of mosques. Critics of the law say it is used to settle personal disputes.

(source: abcnews.go.com)

IRAN----executions

At Least 14 Executions in Iran Within 3 Days

In the span of 3 days, at least 14 individuals were executed in various prisons across Iran. Below is a detailed report of these incidents, which highlight the ongoing and alarming rate of executions in the country.

Execution in Dastgerd Prison, Isfahan

On Monday, January 20, 2025, 38-year-old Saeed Deyani was executed in Dastgerd Prison, Isfahan. A married father of 2, Deyani was arrested 5 years ago on charges related to drug offenses and subsequently sentenced to death.

Execution in Borazjan Prison

In the early hours of Monday, January 20, 2025, Hojjat Shahriari was executed in Borazjan Prison. He had been convicted of murder and sentenced to death following what has been described as an unfair trial process.

Execution in Zanjan Prison

On Tuesday, January 21, 2025, Karim Faridi, a 40-year-old man from Zanjan, was executed in Zanjan Prison. Faridi had been arrested 4 years ago on murder charges and sentenced to death.

4 Executions in Yazd Prison

At dawn on Wednesday, January 22, 2025, 4 individuals were executed in Yazd Prison. One of the executed prisoners was identified as Ahmad Sasouli, a 28-year-old married man and father from Sasouli village in Zabol. Sasouli had been arrested 5 years ago for drug-related offenses. The identities and charges of the other 3 individuals remain unknown, but it was reported that the executions were carried out without notifying their families or allowing a final meeting.

3 Executions in Ghezel Hesar Prison, Karaj

Also on the morning of January 22, 2025, 3 prisoners were executed in Ghezel Hesar Prison, Karaj. 2 of the executed men were identified as Omid Besharatlou from Tehran and Javad Jaberi from Boumehen, both convicted of murder. The identity and charges of the third individual remain unknown.

2 Executions in Gorgan Prison

On Sunday, January 19, 2025, 2 individuals were executed in Gorgan Prison. They were identified as:

Bahram Valipour, 38, arrested 2 years ago for drug-related charges.

Hossein Farhadi, 35, a married father from Gorgan who was arrested 4 years ago on drug charges. Farhadi had been working as a gardener prior to his arrest.

Execution in Vakilabad Prison, Mashhad

On Monday, January 20, 2025, Aref Azizi was executed in Vakilabad Prison, Mashhad. Azizi had been arrested in 2019 on murder charges and sentenced to death.

2 Additional Executions in Mashhad and Qazvin Prisons

On Monday, January 20, 2025, 22 other executions were carried out:

Gholamreza Seyed-Mohammadi, in Vakilabad Prison, Mashhad, who was convicted of murder.

Ehsan Heydarali, in Qazvin Prison, who was also convicted of murder. Heydarali, a resident of Qazvin, was the son of Asghar Heydarali.

Concerns Over Due Process

Iran HRM has raised significant concerns over Iran’s use of the death penalty, particularly regarding the lack of fair trials and transparency in judicial proceedings. In many cases, prisoners and their families are denied the opportunity for a final visit or sufficient legal representation during the trial process.

Iran continues to carry out one of the highest rates of executions in the world, often targeting individuals accused of drug-related offenses or murder, despite calls from international bodies for a moratorium on the death penalty. These recent executions further underscore the need for international scrutiny and action regarding Iran’s human rights practices.

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

Amnesty International Issues Urgent Call to Halt Execution of 6 Men in Iran

Amnesty International has issued an urgent appeal to halt the impending execution of 6 men in Iran, a case previously covered in our reports. The 6 men—Abolhassan Montazer, 65, Akbar (Shahrokh) Daneshvarkar, 58, Babak Alipour, 33, Mohammad Taghavi Sangdehi, 58, Pouya Ghobadi, 31, and Vahid Bani Amerian, 32—are at imminent risk of execution following their October 2024 convictions by Branch 26 of the Revolutionary Court of Tehran on charges of “armed rebellion against the state” (baghi). Amnesty International describes the trial as grossly unfair, citing severe violations of due process and credible allegations of torture used to extract forced confessions.

Amnesty International Condemns Torture and Fair Trial Violations

In their urgent appeal, Amnesty International highlights the use of torture and other ill-treatment against the six men during their detention and interrogation in section 209 of Evin Prison, a facility controlled by the Ministry of Intelligence. Reports reveal that the men endured beatings, floggings, prolonged solitary confinement, denial of toilet access, and death threats at gunpoint.

Amnesty International’s findings align with our earlier reports, which documented how the men were denied access to lawyers from the time of arrest and saw their legal counsel for the first time during a single, two-hour trial session. Allegations of coerced confessions were brought to the court but dismissed without investigation. Amnesty International stresses that these gross violations undermine the integrity of the judicial process and render the convictions unreliable.

Health Concerns for Detainees Persist

The six men continue to be denied adequate healthcare despite serious medical needs. Abolhassan Montazer reportedly suffers from severe chest and lung pain that impacts his breathing, while Mohammad Taghavi Sangdehi was denied essential medication for gout during his interrogations. Amnesty International has reiterated its concern about the harsh detention conditions, including insufficient heating during the winter.

As previously reported, the men were accused of affiliation with the banned opposition group, the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI), which advocates for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic. Amnesty International has noted that authorities regularly target individuals with real or perceived ties to the PMOI, using derogatory language to vilify them.

Call to Action

Amnesty International is urging Iranian authorities to:

Immediately halt all plans to execute the 6 men, quash their convictions, and release them.

Ensure they have access to their families, lawyers, and necessary medical care.

Conduct independent investigations into allegations of torture and ill-treatment, holding perpetrators accountable in fair trials without resorting to the death penalty.

In addition, Amnesty International is calling for an official moratorium on executions in Iran with the ultimate aim of abolishing the death penalty.

(source for both: iran-hrm.com)

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

Global Concerns Over Regime’s Human Rights Violations Raised at UN Human Rights Council

On Friday, during the 48th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), representatives from various countries voiced serious concerns about the Iranian regime’s human rights record, highlighting issues such as the treatment of women, the use of the death penalty, and the repression of civil and political freedoms.

Spain expressed deep concern over the overall human rights situation in Iran, specifically calling for the abolition of the death penalty and an end to all forms of discrimination and repression against women.

Sweden raised the alarm about widespread human rights abuses in Iran, particularly against women and girls, and the extensive use of the death penalty, including for minors. The Swedish representative urged Tehran to cease arbitrary arrests and detentions, comply with Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and release all arbitrarily detained individuals.

Ukraine highlighted Iran’s support for aggression in Ukraine, emphasizing the continued use of Iranian drones to kill civilians and destroy infrastructure. These actions were described as violations of international humanitarian law, and Ukraine called on the regime to honor its international obligations, cooperate fully with fact-finding missions, and halt executions and human rights abuses.

The United Kingdom criticized the clerical regime’s failure to uphold its international human rights commitments, particularly condemning the violent enforcement of mandatory hijab laws, threats against human rights defenders and journalists, and discrimination against minorities.

Germany voiced grave concerns over the high execution rate in Iran, systemic gender discrimination, and lack of fair trials. The German representative called for the abolition of the death penalty, an end to gender-based discrimination, and protection of religious and ethnic minorities.

Estonia lamented Iran’s lack of cooperation with the UN’s independent fact-finding mission and expressed concern over widespread violence against women and girls as well as increasing restrictions on civil and political rights. France, Italy, Ireland, Finland, and Switzerland also joined in condemning the regime’s escalating human rights violations, including the rise in executions—particularly of minors—and the systemic oppression of women.

The session highlighted overwhelming global outrage at the Iranian regime’s brazen and persistent disregard for human rights, as well as its cynical use of the death penalty to silence dissent and perpetuate repression. Representatives demanded Iran engage with international bodies, enact substantive reforms, and fulfill its obligations under international law without further delay.

(source: ncr-iran.org)

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

Iran accuses EU of ‘meddling’ after parliament condemned death penalties

The Iranian Foreign Ministry on Saturday accused the European Parliament of "meddling in judicial processes" after it passed a resolution condemning the death penalties handed down to two Kurdish women.

“The judiciary of the Islamic Republic of Iran is a professional and independent body, and judicial processes in Iran are always based on law and conducted through fair trial procedures,” Marzieh Afkham, director of general human rights and women at Iran’s foreign ministry, shared in a statement.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran considers any foreign interference aimed at meddling in judicial processes and functions as contrary to the principles and rules of international law and rejects it,” she added.

Her comments were in reaction to a resolution passed in the European Parliament on Thursday condemning the death penalties for two Kurdish women in Iran, who the legislature said were denied fair trials.

Pakhshan Azizi was sentenced to death in June 2024 on charges of “armed rebellion,” accused of being a member of an armed Iranian Kurdish group. Wrisha (Varisheh) Moradi was sentenced to death by a Tehran court last November on charges of “armed insurrection.” She was accused of being a member of the armed group Free Life Party of Kurdistan (PJAK).

Their death sentences have drawn international criticism and sparked protests in Kurdish areas of western Iran (Rojhelat).

After the Woman Life Freedom (Jin Jiyan Azadi) protests of 2022, Iranian authorities have “intensified their use of the death penalty to instill fear among the population and tighten their grip on power,” especially targeting minority populations like Kurds and Baluchis, as well as women, according to Amnesty International.

(source: rudaw.net)

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

Drug-Related Charges: A Prisoner Executed in Arak Prison

On Sunday, January 19, a prisoner previously sentenced to death on drug-related charges was executed in Arak Prison.

The prisoner has been identified by HRANA as Abbas Mohammadi, 49, a resident of Kangavar.

Based on information obtained by HRANA, Mr. Mohammadi was arrested in 2020 on drug-related charges and later sentenced to death by the Revolutionary Court.

As of the time of this report, prison officials and relevant authorities have not announced or confirmed the execution.

According to data compiled by HRANA, 52.69% of all executions in Iran in 2024 were related to drug-related charges. Notably, only 6% of the executions were officially announced, highlighting a significant lack of transparency.

(source: en-hrana.org)

JANUARY 24, 2025:

TEXAS:

Why Texas Lawmakers Tried To Stop America's 1st 'Shaken Baby Syndrome' Execution----Robert Roberson was sentenced to death based on outdated and largely discredited scientific evidence.

Last fall, an extraordinary legal drama played out in Texas that shook the foundations of the death penalty in a state that still stands for hang-'em-high justice.

Hours before he was scheduled to become the 1st person in the country to be executed based on evidence of what used to be called "shaken baby syndrome," Texas death row inmate Robert Roberson was granted an unprecedented reprieve when a state House committee subpoenaed him to testify before it.

Roberson did not testify because the committee and the Texas Department of Corrections couldn't agree on the logistics. In November, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that a legislative subpoena couldn't halt the execution. When this issue went to press, a new execution date had not been set for Roberson. But the unusual legislative intervention and the high-stakes fight among the branches of Texas' government showed major, bipartisan doubts about the integrity of the death penalty.

Roberson was convicted and sentenced to death in 2003 for murdering his 2-year-old daughter. A jury convicted him based largely on expert findings of shaken baby syndrome, which is now called abusive head trauma (AHT). Roberson claimed his daughter, who had been in and out of the emergency room in recent days because of illness, had fallen out of bed. Doctors and prosecutors said Roberson's daughter died of brain trauma caused by whiplash.

The scientific consensus surrounding AHT has shifted considerably in the decades since Roberson's conviction. The classic trio of symptoms used to identify AHT at the time of Roberson's trial are now known to be caused by other possible conditions besides trauma. Roberson's attorneys argue that the forensic testimony at his original trial has been discredited both by advances in science and by previously unreleased autopsy records showing Roberson's daughter died of severe pneumonia.

Prosecutors and pediatric abuse specialists say there's broad scientific consensus around AHT, but innocence groups have convinced several state courts otherwise. According to the National Registry of Exonerations, at least 34 parents and caregivers in 18 states convicted based on AHT evidence have been exonerated. In 2022, a New Jersey trial court judge barred AHT evidence from a trial, writing that it's "an assumption packaged as a medical diagnosis, unsupported by any medical or scientific testing." A state appeals court upheld the ruling, writing that "the very basis of the theory has never been proven."

Texas prosecutors and Republican Gov. Greg Abbott argue that Roberson was convicted based on evidence of AHT and multiple blunt impacts. Roberson's supporters counter that Abbott and the state's narrative misrepresents the trial record—there were findings of only one impact site, consistent with Roberson's story that his daughter fell out of bed—and understates how essential the expert witness testimony on shaken baby syndrome was to his conviction.

"Everything that was presented to us was all about shaken baby syndrome," Terre Compton, one of the jurors who convicted and sentenced Roberson, testified before the Texas Legislature on October 21. "That was what our decision was based on. Nothing else was ever mentioned or presented to us to consider."

Texas lawmakers are interested in Roberson's case not just because of his innocence claims, but because they passed a law in 2013 that was supposed to give defendants who were convicted based on discredited forensic science an avenue for relief. To date, not one capital defendant has successfully used this so-called junk science writ to overturn a conviction. Texas lawmakers and legal experts say state courts are misinterpreting the law and applying higher standards to review than they ought to.

This summer the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA), the state's highest criminal court, dismissed Roberson's last-ditch round of petitions without considering them on the merits, even as it overturned a conviction in another AHT case that featured testimony from one of the same expert witnesses who appeared in Roberson's trial.

Part of the reason Abbott and the CCA are fighting so hard to see Roberson executed is that Texas is one of the states that imposes the death penalty the most. If moral and legal certainty in the death penalty can't survive in Texas, it won't survive much longer anywhere else. And for some state officials, that is a more worrying thought than the possibility of an innocent man being executed.

(source: reason.com)

OHIO:

Appeal dismissed for death row inmate convicted in Warren murder, kidnapping case----Martin, 40, was sentenced to death by Judge Andrew D. Logan in September 2014 after a jury found him guilty of aggravated murder, aggravated robbery, kidnapping and tampering with evidence.

The Ohio 11th District Court of Appeals affirmed the opinion of a Trumbull County Pleas judge who dismissed the petition for postconviction relief for death row inmate David Martin.

Martin, 40, was sentenced to death by Judge Andrew D. Logan in September 2014 after a jury found him guilty of aggravated murder, aggravated robbery, kidnapping and tampering with evidence.

He was convicted of the September 17, 2012 execution-style murder of Jeremy Cole, 21, during an attempted robbery in a Warren home.

The attack also saw 30-year-old Melissa Putnam being shot in the head and has since recovered from her wounds.

Martin was also convicted after being 1 of the 3 Trumbull County jail inmates responsible for taking a corrections officer hostage in April 2014 while he was awaiting trial.

In March 2022, Martin filed a petition asking Judge Logan to vacate his death sentence because of 4 alleged court errors in the trial and sentencing.

Martin's attorney also claimed at least 2 medical experts have determined he is intellectually disabled, which would make him ineligible for the death penalty.

In December 2023, the judge dismissed his petition.

Martin then appealed to the 11th District Court, which resulted in the decision on Tuesday, January 21.

11th District Judge Mary Jane Trapp wrote the judgement of the Common Pleas court affirmed, stating the four errors were without merit.

However, the appeals court took no position on the substantive merits of Martin's intellectual-disability claim.

Trapp was joined in this decision by Judge Eugene A. Lucci.

However, 11th District Judge Matt Lynch presented a dissenting opinion on the case.

Lynch wrote he would reverse the decision of the lower court on the grounds that "Martin satisfied the exception for untimely and/or successive postconviction petitions."

He continues, "Martin was unavoidably prevented, due to the ineffectiveness of trial counsel, from discovery of facts upon which it was necessary for him to rely in order to present his Atkins claim (intellectual-disability claim)."

Martin will remain on death row at the Ohio State Penitentiary in Youngstown.

(source: WFMJ news)

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

Ohio death penalty may be reintroduced at Statehouse

President Donald Trump wants to “restore the death penalty” through an executive order he signed earlier this week.

“The death penalty is not effective,” Executive Director of Death Penalty Action Abraham Bonowitz said. “That’s the thing.”

“It should be rare, but it should be preserved, and it should be available,” Ohio Rep. Brian Stewart (R-Ashville) said.

Whether the death penalty should be eliminated has been the topic of debate for more than a decade at the Ohio Statehouse and Ohio Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio (D-Lakewood) has been behind the effort to abolish it for several years.

Now in play is also an effort to authorize the use of nitrogen hypoxia for executions in Ohio, an effort being championed by Stewart.

“I think that the death penalty should be an available sentence for the most heinous murders amongst us,” he said. “I think President Trump’s executive order acknowledges that. People understand, inmates understand, that capital punishment is the most severe punishment that we have.”

“It’s morally reprehensible,” Antonio said. “We should have advanced as a society to believe and be better than the worst criminals that we have sitting on death row right now.”

There are currently 3 people on federal death row. As far as states go, there are 9 that executed prisoners last year, 3 holding their first executions in more than a decade. 23 states do not allow the death penalty, and states like Ohio have it, but have not carried out an execution in years.

“It boils down to fewer than 1% of the people who are death eligible, who could be executed actually getting that death sentence and staying on death row to the point of either dying there or being executed,” Bonowitz said.

Antonio said while she plans to reintroduce her bill to abolish the death penalty, and is working to find a middle ground, she is worried that the executive order from Trump may change the dialogue a bit.

“Certainly, it’s concerning,” she said. “At the same time, I believe the majority of people in Ohio and in the country have flipped how they feel about the death penalty. The reality is that the manufacturers of those medications were created to save lives, not to execute people. The majority of the manufacturers have denied use of their drugs for executions.”

Antonio said she has been working on this issue for many reasons, but there is one that stands out to her most.

“Part of the reason why I’ve worked so hard to try to end the death penalty, a whole host of reasons,” Antonio said. “At the top of the list is we get it wrong. There are people on death row right now who may or may not be guilty of the crime that they were committed, convicted of. If there’s one person whose innocent on death row, we should all be concerned about that.”

On the other side, Stewart said capital punishment is a good deterrent, and in some cases is the best justice.

“It should be rare, but it should be available. I don’t think anybody really buys that life without parole is the same as capital punishment,” he said. “If that were the case, you would see people who have life without the possibility of parole lining up to say, ‘No, no. I would prefer to be executed instead.’ You never see that.”

“We believe that the ultimate punishment should be throwing away the key, which is death by incarceration,” Bonowitz said. “Life without parole is a misnomer because it’s no life. You want to order a pizza? Walk barefoot on grass? Make love to your partner? Forget it. That’s never going to happen again.”

Both Antonio and Stewart plan to reintroduce their bills. Stewart said he thinks leadership will be more receptive to his legislation this general assembly.

“We believe the bill has a good chance to pass,” Stewart said. “We have more time in this general assembly. I think that leadership is more friendly to the bill that we’ve had in the two years past and so we are going to bring the debate back again and see where the caucus stands.”

Antonio said she will have something for lawmakers to consider these next 2 years too.

“I will be reintroducing something,” she said. “We’re trying to figure out if there’s, if there’s a way forward where there’s agreements on both sides of the aisle for something this time. I’m not quite sure if we’ll be able to do that or not but I will definitely be introducing an end again to the death penalty as I have before.”

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine has not authorized a single execution during his time as governor. Ohio has more than 100 inmates on death row, but DeWine cites a difficulty getting the appropriate drugs as his reason for halting executions. He did not have any new comment on the topic on Thursday.

(source: WCMH news)

MONTANA:

Death penalty bill moves forward in Legislature

Could the death penalty make a comeback in Montana?

It’s possible after today when House Bill 205 took a step forward. It was a close vote in a committee meeting, with 11 in favor and 9 opposed. With this, the bill will head to a floor debate.

The bill would allow the state to resume administering the death penalty. The bill aims to modify the state's lethal injection procedure by removing the requirement for an "ultra-fast-acting barbiturate," which has caused issues since a 2015 court ruling.

That ruling blocked the state from using pentobarbital, a drug it planned to use, as it didn't meet the "ultra-fast-acting" criteria. Due to challenges obtaining suitable drugs, HB 205 proposes using an intravenous injection of substances in a lethal quantity sufficient to cause death. Similar bills were considered in 2021 and 2023 but failed to pass both times.

“But to get into the specifics of how this is micromanaging a process,” said State Rep. Steven Kelly (R) Kalispell. “This smack of government inefficiency, frankly, so I will vote for this bill.”

Opponents said there’s no guarantee it won’t lead to cruel and unusual punishment. Other concerns included the cost.

“We know that death row cases cost a lot of money to our people. A lot,” said State Rep. Alanah Griffith (D) Big Sky. “And so, what I’m thinking about is does this make sense to our Montana voters? In my mind it doesn’t.”

According to the Death Penalty Information Center, the last execution in the state was in 2006. There are currently 2 inmates on death row in Montana.

(source: nbcmontana.com)

NEVADA:

Mistrial declared again in Las Vegas death penalty case as jury deadlocks

A Clark County District Court judge declared a mistrial Thursday after jurors announced they were deadlocked in deciding the outcome of a death penalty murder trial. It marks the 2nd mistrial in the state’s attempt to try Anthony Newton.

Newton is on trial for the brutal 2016 murder and dismemberment of Ulysis “Cesar” Molina, whose sister testified that her brother disappeared on Christmas 2016.

Newton and his brother-in-law, police and prosecutors say, stuffed Molina’s body in a suitcase, took it to a home in east Las Vegas and hacked up his torso. Newton later drove his remains to a vacant lot, doused it with gasoline and set it on fire, they said. Prosecutors believe Newton killed Molina because Molina slept with Newton’s then-wife while Newton was serving a prison sentence.

“I received a note from our foreperson … that the jury was deadlocked at this point and that no further deliberations would aid in this process in that there would be no movement,” Judge Jacqueline Bluth announced to the court.

As the hearing 9-minute hearing continued, Bluth questioned the jury foreperson to make sure that the jury was deadlocked on all six counts against Newton, including first-degree murder, robbery with a deadly weapon and kidnapping with a deadly weapon.

“So you’re hung on every single one of those because you couldn’t come to a unanimous decision?” Bluth asked the jury foreperson, who indicated that one juror had told the other jurors further deliberation would be “pointless.” The foreperson clarified that that particular juror would not change his mind.

The jury heard closing arguments Tuesday. The jury deliberated for approximately 2 full days before it announced its deadlock. Over a week of testimony, jurors heard from police as well as crime scene and DNA analysts who said they tied blood and other evidence to Newton. But Newton’s attorneys have said the state’s case was flawed.

At Thursday’s hearing, Bluth polled each juror to see if they agreed with the representations made by the foreperson, and they all answered in the affirmative.

“I can tell on your faces that there’s a lot of frustrations and I understand that,” Bluth said. “Sometimes this happens.”

Late last year, Bluth declared a mistrial because one witness who testified as a state’s witness made comments about Newton serving prison time. That testimony, she said at the urging of Newton’s lawyers, would make it impossible for Newton to receive a fair trial.

At Thursday’s hearing, Bluth said the attorneys would be back the morning of February 11 to discuss the next steps in Newton’s prosecution.

(source: KLAS news)

ARIZONA:P> Arizona pushes forward with execution plan as federal government abandons same drug----Law professor files brief arguing state’s pentobarbital protocol fails constitutional standards

Aaron Gunches was sentenced to death and he’s ready to die. The state is ready to accommodate him. So, what’s the problem?

Oxymoronic as it sounds, it still has to meet the Constitution’s demand to avoid cruel and unusual punishment.

And a Virginia law professor on Thursday filed a second “friend-of-the-court” brief asking the Arizona Supreme Court not to issue a death warrant for Gunches, who was sentenced to death for a 2002 murder and has asked the state to go forward with his execution, because the state’s plan to execute him doesn’t meet that constitutional standard.

Corinna Barrett Lain, who has a forthcoming book about the failures of execution by lethal injection, first attempted to file her brief Jan. 6, but it was rejected. Her motion cites mounting evidence that pentobarbital, the drug used in Arizona and other states for execution, kills by “flash pulmonary edema” — that is, by setting off a reaction that instantly fills the lungs with fluid and effectively drowns the prisoner long before he or she reaches a painless state of anesthesia.

The pain and suffocation and terror that likely ensue has been compared to the torture known as waterboarding.

Things have changed since Lain made her first attempt at stopping the execution, and that spurred her to file another.

“The court didn’t consider my first brief, but allowed me to resubmit on the question of its authority to not issue the warrant when the statutory requirements have been met,” Lain said. “And that’s a really important question. It also gets to the heart of my interest in this case. My interest is, and always has been, the rule of law. Someone needs to advocate for the basic legal and ethical precept that, when the state takes life in its citizen’s name, it still has to conduct the execution lawfully.”

On Jan. 15, outgoing U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland threw out the federal execution protocol using pentobarbital, arguing that it likely violated constitutional limits on pain and suffering.

But that isn’t stopping Arizona from pursuing Gunches’ execution, which could happen as soon as mid-March. Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes told ABC15 on Jan. 21 that, “We have procured the drugs necessary to carry out executions in Arizona. We are prepared to do that. We anticipate that we will be executing Aaron Gunches on March 18, if the Supreme Court approves the execution warrant.”

Whether that remains policy under President Donald Trump’s administration remains to be seen. On Jan. 20, he pledged that his administration would “take all necessary and lawful action to ensure that each state that allows capital punishment has a sufficient supply of drugs needed to carry out lethal injection.”

But what drugs? After a disastrous botched execution in 2014 in which 15 injections of a questionable drug cocktail took nearly two hours to kill a prisoner, a federal judge ruled that there were only two drugs that Arizona could use for execution: sodium thiopental and pentobarbital. Neither is readily available in the United States for use in executions.

Thiopental is an outdated anesthetic that is no longer manufactured in the U.S. And though former Trump AG Bill Barr exempted its execution use from FDA scrutiny, the European companies that make the drug are forbidden by law from selling it for use in executions.

Pentobarbital is also manufactured in Europe. And although it has clinical uses, European pharmaceutical companies will not sell it to corrections departments for the aforementioned reason. As a result, both the state and federal prison systems have relied on purchasing pentobarbital salt, the active pharmaceutical ingredient, and then contracting with compounding pharmacies to turn it into something that can be injected into prisoners’ veins.

David Duncan, a former federal judge magistrate who had been hired by Gov. Katie Hobbs to study the state’s execution protocol, told Arizona Mirror earlier this month that the state’s supply of pentobarbital sat in glass jars in a refrigerator in Florence, and he questioned whether it was still chemically active.

(Duncan was fired by Hobbs when it appeared that his evaluation of Arizona executions would be damning, and she and Mayes, in a changing political climate, had decided to resume executions, starting with Gunches.)

Then, a Tennessee-based federal public defender told Arizona Mirror that the state’s supply of pentobarbital salt came from Absolute Standards, a Connecticut company that was the only domestic producer of pentobarbital salt, and the same company that supplied the feds and other states with their supplies.

But Absolute Standards has publicly stated that it stopped producing pentobarbital salt in 2020 — the same year that appears on a heavily redacted invoice for Arizona’s supply. And the company managers told the federal defender that the salt had an expiration date of 2 1/2 years.

One pharmaceutical company that used to make pentobarbital salt says on its product page that the drug has a shelf life of 3 years.

None of that is deterring Mayes.

“Regarding former AG Garland’s comments on pentobarbital, Attorney General Mayes’ views have not changed and she is prepared to enforce the death penalty in accordance with Arizona law,” Richie Taylor, a spokesman for the AG’s Office, told the Mirror.

And he referred back to a Nov. 22 letter from Ryan Thornell, the director of Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry, to Hobbs in which he said that the department had conducted its own review of execution protocols and concluded that all problems were resolved and executions were ready to resume.

In that letter, Thornell wrote that his office had spoken to the Arizona Department of Public Safety “about the efficacy testing protocol” for the pentobarbital. That hasn’t been done historically, he said, until the court issues a death warrant — and until the drug is compounded for use in the execution.

He also noted that the corrections department had spoken with Absolute Standards about the drug supply and its shelf life, though he didn’t expound on what was learned other than to say it “aided our understanding of the direction from the previous administration surrounding the acquisition of the supply.”

Gunches is representing himself in his litigation, and his court-appointed advisory counsel did not respond to requests for comment. Gunches has been as adamant about not communicating with the media as he has been in his wish to die.

Lain started her new brief with an argument that she could indeed introduce her information directly to the Supreme Court, and that the court could decline issuing a death warrant.

She wasted little time making her case that Arizona’s execution protocols don’t meet the constitutional standards.

“The evidence is overwhelming that Arizona cannot lawfully carry out an execution by lethal injection at this time. Its pentobarbital protocol is sure or very likely to cause a tortuous death even in the best of circumstances, which is why the federal government has now abandoned its pentobarbital protocol,” she wrote. “And the circumstances here are far from optimal. The State is on the cusp of using an inexperienced, untrained team to inject likely expired drugs stored in unmarked mason jars, that were produced by a company that does not make drugs for human consumption, and that will be compounded by a pharmacy that the ADCRR itself has previously disavowed. All of that against a backdrop of terminating the independent review whose preliminary findings documented fatal flaws in the State’s lethal injection regime.”

And as for Trump’s statements about providing execution drugs, she said it “doesn’t speak to the heart of the issues in this case, which is that Arizona’s protocol is sure or very likely to lead to a torturous death.

“Some people oppose the death penalty, others support it, but just because a state has the death penalty doesn’t mean the government can do whatever it wants. Executions must be lawful,” she said. “That’s what’s at issue in this case. I don’t see any reason for confidence that the state can lawfully conduct an execution by lethal injection at this time. In fact, just the opposite is true.”

The court will likely issue a death warrant and set an execution date. Even if the drugs are expired, there’s little doubt they will kill him.

But will the execution be quick and painless? That’s an open question.

(source: azmirror.com)

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

Arizona’s Handling of Lethal Injection Drugs Raises Transparency and Viability Concerns

Lethal Injection Methods of Execution Secrecy Arizona

According to inves­tiga­tive report­ing from the AZ Mirror, the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation, & Reentry (ADCRR) is stor­ing the state’s sup­ply of pen­to­bar­bi­tal salt, the active ingre­di­ent used in a com­pound­ed form in lethal injec­tion exe­cu­tions, in 8 unmarked glass con­tain­ers in a prison refrig­er­a­tor, rais­ing doubts about the drugs’ authen­tic­i­ty and effi­ca­cy. ADCRR has refused to reveal how long it has been in pos­ses­sion of these jars, cit­ing state statutes that for­bid reveal­ing "the source of the exe­cu­tion chem­i­cals.” Arizona’s exe­cu­tion pro­to­col, revised in October 2024, states that “[i]f the chemical’s expi­ra­tion or beyond-use date states only a month and year (e.g., "June 2017”), then ADCRR will not use that chem­i­cal after the last day of the month spec­i­fied.” More than a dozen states, includ­ing Arizona, have passed secre­cy statutes that pre­vent the pub­lic from under­stand­ing how their tax dol­lars are being used to accom­plish exe­cu­tions. These laws make it increas­ing­ly dif­fi­cult to assess the reli­a­bil­i­ty of man­u­fac­tur­ers or the effi­ca­cy of the drugs, and release state offi­cials from answer­ing ques­tions about the pro­to­col, all of which increase the chances of a ?“botched” exe­cu­tion.

Problems are endem­ic to a method of exe­cu­tion [lethal injec­tion] that is com­pli­cat­ed and depen­dent on unre­li­able drugs and drug combinations.

An invoice from ADCRR records indi­cates that the drugs in its pos­ses­sion were pur­chased in October 2020, under the pre­vi­ous admin­is­tra­tion, and were used in three botched exe­cu­tions in 2022. Legal experts have raised con­cerns about the via­bil­i­ty of these drugs and whether they have expired. ?“I’m flab­ber­gast­ed that a med­ical doc­tor would draw any­thing from an unmarked con­tain­er and put it into peo­ple,” said retired Federal Magistrate David Duncan, who Governor Katie Hobbs appoint­ed to review the state’s lethal injec­tion pro­to­col in 2023. In November 2024, Gov. Hobbs fired Judge Duncan before he fin­ished his review. Judge Duncan report­ed being told by ADCRR per­son­nel that the pen­to­bar­bi­tal salt does not have an expi­ra­tion date. This direct­ly con­tra­dicts what oth­ers have been told. Federal defend­er Kelley Henry says that offi­cials at Absolute Standards, a com­pa­ny that has acknowl­edged man­u­fac­tur­ing pen­to­bar­bi­tal, told her that pen­to­bar­bi­tal salt is unsta­ble, should be refrig­er­at­ed, and has a shelf life of just two and half years. If that is true, pen­to­bar­bi­tal salt pur­chased in October 2020 would no longer be viable for use.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) analy­sis of pen­to­bar­bi­tal use in fed­er­al exe­cu­tions released in the last week of the Biden Administration describes pen­to­bar­bi­tal as ?“a bar­bi­tu­rate drug” that the FDA has approved for use in humans for seizures, insom­nia, or as an anes­thet­ic for surgery, but not "for the pur­pose of caus­ing death.” For more than a decade, depart­ments of cor­rec­tion across the U.S. have report­ed dif­fi­cul­ty acquir­ing many of the drugs tra­di­tion­al­ly used in lethal injec­tion exe­cu­tions. Many drug man­u­fac­tur­ers have pro­hib­it­ed sell­ing their prod­ucts for use in exe­cu­tions and oth­ers have stopped pro­duc­ing these drugs all togeth­er. This has forced some states to pur­chase pow­dered active phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal ingre­di­ent pen­to­bar­bi­tal in bulk and then use com­pound­ing phar­ma­cies to cre­ate an injectable solu­tion. The DOJ report notes that these “[c]ompounded drugs are not FDA approved, which means the agency does not ver­i­fy their safe­ty, effec­tive­ness or qual­i­ty before they are marketed.”

An Executive Order signed on President Trump’s 1st day in office calls on the Attorney General to "take all nec­es­sary and law­ful action to ensure that each state that allows cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment has a suf­fi­cient sup­ply of drugs need­ed to car­ry out lethal injection.”

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

USA:

Opinion: It’s now clear that America’s death penalty is dying one generation at a time

The Death Penalty Information Center’s recent annual report contained good news for those opposed to capital punishment. The number of new death sentences remained small by historical standards in 2024, at 26 nationwide, as did the number of executions, 25, and the number of people on death row, about 2,250. Public support for the death penalty, meanwhile, remained at a five-decade low, 53%.

But the report’s most important finding for the future of capital punishment concerns the stark generational differences of opinion on the death penalty. The center cited a recent Gallup poll illustrating that the way people think about death sentences now depends heavily on their age.

“Less than half of U.S. adults born after 1980 — those in the millennial and Generation Z birth cohorts — favor the death penalty,” Gallup noted. “At the same time, roughly six in 10 adults in older generations are in favor of such laws. 2 decades ago, there were no meaningful age differences in views of the death penalty.”

Support for capital punishment is declining from one generation to the next — from 62% among the so-called Silent Generation, people born before the end of World War II, to 42% in Gen Z, today’s youngest voters. This suggests the death penalty in the United States is dying one generation at a time.

This pattern has been widely noted and consistent for years. USA Today documented striking age-related differences in support for the death penalty more than a decade ago. A 2015 YouGov survey found that “young Americans are much more skeptical of the death penalty than their elders.”

What explains the capital punishment generation gap? For older generations, as University of Michigan law professors Samuel Gross and Pheobe Ellsworth noted in a 2001 paper, “Stories of grisly murders and the suffering families of the victims were more prevalent and more vividly described in the media than stories of unfair convictions.” But younger generations have grown up with more stories of arbitrariness, discrimination and error in America’s death penalty system.

Moreover, as fewer people are sentenced to death and executed each year — most of them in a shrinking number of states — the death penalty system looks ever more arbitrary and capricious.

This new script is exemplified by stories of death row inmates who have been freed by revelations of injustice and of others who were executed despite strong cases for exoneration. The Death Penalty Information Center noted the “significant media attention” surrounding “the milestone of 200 death row exonerations,” which the country reached in July when a California man was found to have been wrongfully convicted.

Younger generations’ exposure to America’s death penalty has come at a time when, as Gallup noted, “many states had moratoriums on the death penalty or repealed laws that allowed capital punishment … often motivated by cases in which death-row inmates were later found innocent.” That may explain why younger people, as the Death Penalty Information Center suggests, regard capital punishment as a “relic of another era.”

Writing about the way different generations come to see the world in different ways, the political theorist Michael Walzer has described what he calls a “gradual pedagogy” that is shaped and reshaped by experience. The reshaping of the way younger Americans think about capital punishment has led to a generational gap in attitudes that “has been widening every year for the past 20 years,” as the Death Penalty Information Center noted. This in itself may not bring the death penalty in the United States to an end in the near term, but it’s a reason to believe that it’s headed inexorably in that direction.

(source: Opinion; Austin Sarat is a professor of political science at Amherst College----Los Angeles Times)

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

LDF Condemns President Trump’s Executive Order Expanding the Federal Death Penalty

This week, President Trump issued an Executive Order titled “Restoring the Death Penalty and Protecting Public Safety,” which contains multiple provisions on the use of the federal death penalty. The order urges the U.S. Attorney General to pursue the death penalty for individuals who murder a law enforcement officer or for people who are unlawfully present in the United States and commit a capital offense. Further, it directs the U.S. Attorney General to seek action to overturn Supreme Court precedent, which limits the authority of state and federal governments to impose capital punishment, and it orders the U.S. Attorney General to evaluate and ensure the conditions of all 37 men who received capital commutations from President Biden are consistent “with the monstrosity of their crimes and the threats they pose.” President Trump’s executive order goes on to call on the U.S. Attorney General to take action to ensure that states have enough lethal injection drugs to carry out executions.

The order encourages the administration of the death penalty following a moratorium on federal executions under the Biden administration.

In response, Legal Defense Fund (LDF) President and Director-Counsel Janai Nelson issued the following statement:

“Following then-President Biden’s historic commutation of nearly the entirety of federal death row, President Trump has recommitted his administration to violent retribution in his resuscitation of the death penalty. This executive order is a deeply disturbing exercise in cruel and unusual punishment as it calls on government officials to make every effort to procure lethal injection drugs and to ensure monstrous confinement conditions for the 37 men whose death sentences were commuted by former President Biden. In many ways, this order is a presentiment of the inhumanity ahead. Rather than rehabilitation or legitimate means of preventing crime, President Trump is fixated on the power of violence.

“In the same week that he selectively pardoned and commuted the sentences of roughly 1,500 people connected to the overthrowing of our democratic process and whose actions contributed to the injury and death of law enforcement officers, President Trump is also now ordering the death penalty to be more fervently pursued for individuals who murder law enforcement officers – conveniently excluding the people whose sentences he commuted and pardoned that were willing to exercise violence against law enforcement to undermine democracy in his name.”

“The selective enforcement of the death penalty will never provide justice and neither will its expansion. The death penalty is a horrifying experiment rife with racial discrimination and misconduct that has led to an untold number of unjust deaths. There is no evidence it prevents crime or improves public safety. We will condemn capital punishment in every circumstance, as we have done since our inception.”

###

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

(source: naacpldf.org)

EUROPERAN UNION/DR CONGO:

EU Parliament calls for release of military expert sentenced to death in DRC

The European Parliament has called on the Congolese authorities to immediately release military expert Jean-Jacques Wondo, who was sentenced to death last year for his alleged involvement in a failed coup.

In a resolution adopted on Thursday, MEPs called for Wondo's death sentence to be overturned and for his immediate release. Wondo, an expert on security and military reform, was sentenced to death in September for being the alleged "mastermind" of a failed coup in May.

Wondo's health has since seriously deteriorated, according to his family. In a widely supported resolution, MEPs called for the Belgian-Congolese expert to be released and given access to medical care. They also called on the Congolese authorities to reinstate the moratorium on the death penalty and to take steps towards its complete abolition.

Appeal ruling on Friday

Around 60 of Wondo's relatives and supporters gathered in Brussels on Thursday afternoon ahead of the vote in Strasbourg on the resolution, which was adopted to their applause.

"As a family, we are delighted to see this European commitment"

"As a family, we are delighted to see this European commitment," said Wondo's brother-in-law, Joël Kandolo. "It will certainly have an impact on Jean-Jacques' psychological state, as he will feel even more supported," he said.

Wondo has appealed against his death sentence, and a verdict is expected on Friday. His supporters in Brussels said they hoped the resolution would ? have a political and diplomatic impact on the outcome of the appeal.

Torture and coercion

Wondo was convicted last year along with 36 other defendants by a military court in Kinshasa. "Mr Wondo's trial has been marked by torture, coercive sentences and violations of fundamental rights," said MEP Wouter Beke. "Despite his urgent medical needs, he is being denied the necessary care in prison".

"A fair trial and medical care are not favours, they are rights that belong to everyone"

"This is not just about Jean-Jacques Wondo, but about the fundamental values of universal justice and human rights that we defend," said Beke. "A fair trial and medical care are not favours, they are rights that belong to everyone. The reintroduction of the death penalty goes completely against this".

Stepping up pressure

For MEP Sara Matthieu, the case "symbolises a regime where political persecution, repression and intimidation are used to silence any criticism". She called on the Belgian authorities to step up pressure to free Wondo and protect him from political persecution.

"The prime minister said that Belgium feels very strongly about his fate"

On Wednesday, Belgian prime minister Alexander De Croo and DRC president Félix Tshisekedi spoke about the matter at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. De Croo urged Tshisekedi to ensure a fair trial for Wondo.

"The prime minister spoke about Wondo's fate and said that Belgium feels very strongly about his fate. We expect him to get a fair trial," said a spokesman for De Croo.

(source: belganewsagency.eu)

CHINA:

Chinese court sentences man to death for killing Japanese boy: Japan

A Chinese court sentenced a man to death on Friday for fatally stabbing a 10-year-old Japanese boy in Shenzhen last September, Japan's government said, a day after another court handed down the same penalty in a separate knife attack involving Japanese citizens.

At the first hearing on the case, the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court convicted the Chinese man of killing the boy in the Sept. 18 knife attack near a Japanese school in the southern city, Japanese Ambassador to China Kenji Kanasugi told reporters.

Zhong Changchun, 45, from Jiangxi Province, attacked the boy -- the son of a Japanese father and a Chinese mother -- after buying a knife to "draw online attention" through the assault, the envoy quoted the ruling as saying.

The accused told the hearing that he hoped to speak with the victim's family as well as the Japanese Embassy in China, but he did not say he had particularly targeted Japanese nationals, Kanasugi said.

Although the ruling made no mention of Japan, the ambassador vowed to keep taking measures to ensure the safety of Japanese citizens in China, such as recommending them not to speak Japanese loudly, while remaining cautious on politically "sensitive" anniversaries.

The hearing at the Shenzhen court was closed to the media. The boy's family as well as Yoshiko Kijima, Japan's consul general in Guangzhou, the capital of Guangdong Province, which also includes Shenzhen, attended the session.

The boy died a day after being stabbed while on his way to school.

The stabbing occurred on the 93rd anniversary of the Japanese bombing of a railroad track near Shenyang, which marked the start of the Manchurian Incident that led to Japan's invasion of northeastern China.

The incident sent shockwaves toward Japanese expat communities in China. Tokyo has repeatedly asked Beijing to ensure the safety of Japanese nationals living in the country.

About a dozen pupils at the Shenzhen Japanese school returned to Japan following the stabbing, according to a source familiar with the educational institution.

The Shenzhen ruling was handed down a day after a court sentenced a man to death over a knife attack near Shanghai last June that injured a Japanese mother and her child and killed a Chinese bus attendant who tried to protect them.

While there had been speculation that the assailant Zhou Jiasheng, 52, might have targeted Japanese nationals, the court in Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, made no mention of Japan in rendering the ruling.

(source: english.kyodonews.net)

INDIA:

Beant Singh assassination case: SC to hear on Monday Rajoana’s plea on commutation of death penalty----The Supreme Court is slated to hear on Monday a writ petition filed by Balwant Singh Rajoana, a death row convict in the 1995 assassination case of former Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh and others

The Supreme Court is slated to hear on Monday a writ petition filed by Balwant Singh Rajoana, a death row convict in the 1995 assassination case of former Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh and others, seeking commutation of his death penalty on the ground of over 12-year-long delay in deciding his mercy petition.

As per the causelist published on the website of the apex court, a Special Bench of Justices B.R. Gavai, P.K. Mishra and K.V. Viswanathan will resume hearing the matter on January 20. In an earlier hearing, the Justice Gavai-led Special Bench had granted the Union government four weeks more to decide Balwant Singh Rajoana’s mercy petition. It had agreed to defer till January 20 the hearing after Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, the second-highest law officer of the Centre, submitted that more inputs from agencies were needed, considering the “sensitivities” involved in the matter. In an order dictated in open court on November 18, the top court had requested President Droupadi Murmu to consider within 2 weeks the mercy petition filed on behalf of Balwant Singh Rajoana.

It had asked the Secretary to the President of India to place before President Murmu the mercy petition filed by Rajoana, clarifying that if Rajoana’s mercy petition is not decided within two weeks, it will proceed to consider his application for interim release. Within hours, the Supreme Court agreed to not upload its order after SG Mehta made an urgent mentioning before the Justice Gavai-led Bench. The law officer had requested that the order passed in his absence may not be signed and uploaded considering the sensitivities involved. Mehta added that the batch of files pertaining to Rajoana’s mercy petition remained with the Union Home Ministry and not the President’s Secretariat.

In May 2023, the Supreme Court had turned down Rajoana’s plea seeking commutation of his death penalty and had said, "It is within the domain of the Executive to take a call on such sensitive issues." It was noted that Rajoana himself never submitted any mercy petition and the alleged mercy petition of 2012, was filed by the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC). Disposing of the plea, the apex court had directed that the competent authority, in due course of time, would again as and when deemed necessary, deal with the mercy petition, and take a further decision. Former Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh, along with 16 others, lost their lives while a dozen others were injured in a bomb blast in August 1995.

Rajoana was arrested on January 27, 1996. Rajoana, along with eight others, who had hatched a conspiracy and had executed the bomb blast, were put to trial. In July 2007, the trial court convicted Rajoana along with co-accused Jagtar Singh Hawara, Gurmeet Singh, Lakhwinder Singh, Shamsher Singh and Nasib Singh. The petitioner along with co-accused Jagtar Singh Hawara was awarded the death sentence.

In death reference, the High Court vide judgment dated December 10, 2010, confirmed the conviction and sentence of the petitioner. However, while confirming the conviction of co-accused Jagtar Singh, it commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment. The other co-accused preferred to appeal before the top court. However, Rajoana did not file any appeal after the judgement of the High Court.

(source: sambadenglish.com)

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

State seeks death penalty for duo who killed minor in 2009 (see: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/goa/state-seeks-death-penalty-for-duo-who-killed-minor-in-2009/articleshow/117497093.cms) ************** 5 men sentenced to death for gang rape and murder of teenager in India

A court in India has sentenced 5 men to death for the gang rape and murder of a teenager as well as the killing of her father and toddler-aged niece.

The crime was committed in January 2021 when the men offered the girl and her family -- all members of a disadvantaged tribal community in the central state of Chhattisgarh -- lifts on their motorbikes while they were waiting for public transport.

They later clubbed the teenager's father to death as he attempted to stop the rape and killed her 3-year-old niece, public prosecutor Sunil Kumar Mishra told AFP.

The last victim was found unconscious by villagers several days later and died on her way to hospital.

3 men were found guilty of the rape and triple murder "and condemned to death," Mishra said on Thursday, the day after the sentence was published by the court.

A 6th man "was found guilty of association in crimes, but his involvement in rape was not proved, so he was sentenced to imprisonment for the remainder of his life for killings," he added.

India imposes the death penalty, although it is rarely carried out in practice.

An average of nearly 90 rapes a day were reported in 2022 in the country of 1.4 billion people, but activists say many more go unreported.

A court in the eastern city of Kolkata sentenced a man to life in prison this week after he was found guilty of raping and murdering a 31-year-old doctor last year. The family of the doctor broke into tears, saying they were "shocked" at the sentence and had hoped her murderer would be hanged.

The discovery of her bloodied body at a state-run hospital in August stoked nationwide anger and protests at the chronic issue of violence against women.

The gruesome nature of the attack drew comparisons with the 2012 gang rape and murder of a young woman on a Delhi bus, which also sparked weeks of nationwide protests. 4 men convicted of the bus attack were executed in March 2020.

Last week, more than 4 dozen men were arrested for the repeated sexual abuse of a teenager, who said around 60 men targeted her in the southern state of Kerala over several years.

The men accused of the attacks include a childhood friend of the girl, along with neighbors and family friends, police told CBS News' partner network, BBC News. There are at least 5 students from her college and former classmates from her school among the accused, according to Indian outlet The News Minute.

The alleged abuse came to light last month when a team of counselors working under a government program visited her house.

(source: CBS News)

INDONESIA/FRANCE:

Indonesia, France sign deal for transfer of Frenchman on death row

Indonesia and France on Friday signed an agreement for the repatriation of a Frenchman on death row since 2007 for alleged drug offences.

Serge Atlaoui, who was jailed in Indonesia in 2005, will return to France on 4 February, Law and Human Rights Minister Yusril Ihza Mahendra announced.

Atlaoui, a 51-year-old father of four, was arrested near Jakarta in 2005 in a secret laboratory capable of producing 100kg of ecstasy per week. He was working there as a chemist.

He was sentenced to death two years later – the only one of the nine arrested to receive the death sentence.

Atlaoui has long maintained his innocence, saying he thought he was working in an acrylics factory.

In 2015, Atlaoui was about to be executed with 7 other foreign prisoners but was granted a last-minute reprieve after Paris stepped up pressure. An Indonesian court then rejected his appeal against the death sentence, leaving him with no other legal options.

Yusril will sign the repatriation agreement with the French Minister of Justice Gerald Darmanin via video teleconference on Friday, said Yusril.

Atlaoui is suffering from an illness and receives weekly treatment at a hospital.

Paris submitted an official request for his transfer last month.

Indonesian court rejects French man's appeal against death sentence

Fate in France to be decided

France has agreed several terms proposed by Indonesia, Yusril said, including respecting the Indonesian court ruling over Atlaoui.

"After the transfer, all depends on the French government, whether they want to give him clemency or giving sentences according to the French law," he added.

Based on French law, the maximum punishment for a similar case is 30 years in jail.

In 2019, an Indonesian court commuted the death sentence for another Frenchman convicted of drug smuggling, to 19 years. The French foreign ministry had expressed its concern when he was convicted, reiterating France's opposition to the death penalty.

Indonesia has some of the world's toughest drug laws and has executed foreigners in the past.

At least 530 people were on death row in the Southeast Asian nation, mostly for drug-related crimes, according to data from rights group KontraS, citing official figures.

Indonesia's Immigration and Corrections Ministry said more than 90 foreigners were on death row, all on drug charges, as of early November.

In recent weeks it has released half a dozen high-profile detainees, including a Filipina mum on death row and the last 5 members of the so-called "Bali 9" drug ring.

(source: rfi.fr)

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

Indonesia, France agree to repatriate French death row convict Serge Atlaoui----French national Serge Atlaoui is set to return from Indonesia to France under a deal signed by the two countries after he spent nearly 20 years on death row. Atlaoui has maintained his innocence since his imprisonment in 2007 for alleged drug offences.

Indonesia and France signed an agreement Friday for the transfer of a Frenchman who has languished on death row since 2007 for alleged drug offences.

"What we signed today is an agreement between the two governments to transfer a French citizen under the name of Serge Atlaoui," Indonesia's senior law and human rights minister Yusril Ihza Mahendra told reporters.

The signing of the agreement, initially scheduled for Wednesday, was first postponed to Thursday for scheduling reasons and then again to Friday, according to a source close to the discussions.

Atlaoui could be transferred in late January or early February as the final details for his repatriation still needed to be agreed, the source added.

He is currently suffering from an illness in a Jakarta prison and receives weekly treatment at a hospital, raising the stakes of his transfer.

Paris submitted an official request for his transfer last month, and Atlaoui's fate upon his return to France could be announced on Friday.

Indonesia has in recent weeks released half a dozen high-profile detainees, including a Filipina mum on death row and the last 5 members of the so-called "Bali 9" drug ring.

Maintained innocence

Father-of-4 Atlaoui has maintained his innocence since his imprisonment, claiming that he was installing machinery in what he thought was an acrylics plant.

He was initially sentenced to life in prison, but the Supreme Court in 2007 increased the sentence to death on appeal.

Atlaoui was held on the island of Nusakambangan in Central Java, known as Indonesia's "Alcatraz", following the death sentence, but he was transferred to the city of Tangerang, west of Jakarta, in 2015 ahead of his appeal.

That year, he was due to be executed alongside eight other drug offenders who were killed but won a temporary reprieve after Paris stepped up pressure, with Indonesian authorities agreeing to let an outstanding appeal run its course.

Indonesia has some of the world's toughest drug laws and has executed foreigners in the past.

At least 530 people were on death row in the Southeast Asian nation, mostly for drug-related crimes, according to data from rights group KontraS, citing official figures.

According to Indonesia's Immigration and Corrections Ministry, more than 90 foreigners were on death row, all on drug charges, as of early November.

Last month, Filipina inmate Mary Jane Veloso tearfully reunited with her family after nearly 15 years on Indonesia's death row.

Despite ongoing negotiations for Atlaoui's transfer, the Indonesian government recently signalled that it will resume executions -- on hiatus since 2016 -- of drug convicts on death row.

(source: france24.com)

PHILIPPINES:

CHR opposes firing squad bill, asserts Philippine Constitution bars death penalty

The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) has strongly opposed the proposed House Bill 11211, which aims to impose the death penalty by firing squad on corrupt public officials.

In a recent press statement, the CHR reiterated that the Philippine Constitution prohibits the death penalty, which the country officially abolished in 2006.

Under House Bill 11211, or the Death Penalty for Corruption Act, the Sandiganbayan would sentence government officials convicted of corruption to execution by firing squad.

Zamboanga City First District Representative Khymer Adan Olaso, the bill’s proponent, has proposed that public executions take place at Luneta Park in Manila, a historic site where Spanish colonizers executed Filipino martyr and national hero Dr. Jose Rizal in 1896.

Olaso claimed that the bill is necessary for those who abuse the nation’s resources and has emphasized safeguards to prevent misuse of the law if enacted.

Although Olaso has yet to gain support from his colleagues, he hopes the House will prioritize the bill. If the bill does not pass during the 19th Congress, he plans to file a similar measure in the next Congress.

While the CHR acknowledges the severity of corruption and its far-reaching consequences, such as exacerbating inequality and eroding public institutions, it argues that the death penalty is neither a viable nor an effective solution.

The commission pointed out that the Philippines is a signatory to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which requires the country to maintain a permanent ban on the death penalty.

Reintroducing the death penalty, the CHR asserts, would violate both national law and the country’s international obligations.

Reforms

The Commission emphasized that effectively addressing corruption requires systemic reforms, consistent law enforcement, and robust transparency and accountability mechanisms, rather than the imposition of the death penalty.

Furthermore, it stressed that “the imposition of cruel punishment does not address the root cause of corruption; instead, it diverts attention from the urgent need for institutional reforms and preventive measures, such as strengthening governance systems and accountability structures.”

In addition, the CHR urged the government to focus on the strict enforcement of existing anti-corruption laws, enhance oversight of public officials’ financial activities, and promote policies that encourage full transparency and disclosure.

The CHR also called for the promotion of grassroots campaigns and digital initiatives that prioritize voter education.

“Grassroots campaigns and digital efforts should empower Filipinos to make informed decisions. Electing leaders of integrity fosters governance that prioritizes public welfare over personal gain,” the CHR concluded.

(source: brigadanews.ph)

IRAN----executions

127 Executions Since December 21, 774 Under Pezeshkian’s Tenure

Ali Khamenei, the wretched Vali-e Faqih of the mullahs’ regime, besieged by internal crises and facing deadly regional defeats, is increasingly resorting to the execution of defenseless prisoners in his fear of the people’s uprising. Each day, more Iranians are left in mourning, more children are orphaned, and more families are left without a breadwinner.

The number of recorded executions in the Iranian month of Dey reached at least 113. In the first 3 days of the Iranian month of Bahman, at least 14 prisoners were hanged, bringing the total number of executions in the 6 months since Pezeshkian took office to at least 774.

On Wednesday, January 22, the regime’s judiciary sent 7 prisoners to the gallows, including Javad Jaberi and Omid Besharatlu in Qezel Hesar, as well as Ahmad Sasouli, a 28-year-old Baluch compatriot, along with 3 other prisoners in Yazd. On the same day, a prisoner in Saveh was executed for the killing of Rasul Mahdavipour, the commander of the repressive State Security Force (SSF) in Zarand.

On Monday, January 20, 5 prisoners were hanged, including Aref Azizi and Gholamreza Seyed Mohammadkhani in Mashhad, Saeed Dayani in Isfahan, Hojat Shahriari in Borazjan, and Ehsan Heidarali in Qazvin. On Tuesday, January 21, Sardar Mohammad in Bandar Abbas and Karim Faridi in Zanjan were also executed.

Secretariat of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI)

(source: ncr-iran.org)

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

EU Parliament adopts resolution condemning Iran's use of death penalty

The European Parliament adopted a resolution on Thursday condemning what it called Iran's systematic human rights abuses, highlighting the use of the death penalty against Kurdish activists Pakhshan Azizi and Varisheh Moradi.

Azizi and Moradi were sentenced to death for “armed rebellion against the state” after what the resolution described as “unfair trials” involving “torture and solitary confinement.”

The European Parliament demanded their immediate and unconditional release, along with at least 56 other political prisoners on death row in Iran.

The resolution passed with overwhelming support, receiving 556 votes in favor, 6 against, and 42 abstentions.

(source: iranintl.com)

JANUARY 23, 2025:

TEXAS----impending execution She married death row inmate Steven Nelson in December. In 2 weeks, Texas will execute him.----"What their story shows is that redemption is possible, even in the most horrific of circumstances," Rev. Jeff Hood said of the couple.

When she began writing letters to a man on Texas’ death row, Noa Dubois had no intention of finding a husband.

Instead, the now-29-year-old was searching for someone who would understand her struggles from a place of experience.

“You know how you have friends who listen to you, but not really relate to you?” she asked. “I had friends who were listening to me and understanding me, but I needed people who were able to relate.”

She needed “a kind of interactive diary who didn't know anything about me,” she said.

Dubois, a French-Israeli dual citizen who grew up in Montpellier,France, is cool in demeanor and thoughtful in disposition — far from the stereotype that many have of a “death row” wife or partner. She's also a career-oriented video game producer.

But after several years of writing and calling the condemned man, she “started to love him unconditionally at the point where (it was) like, ‘Whatever you did do or will do, I still love you,’” she said in a Wednesday interview with the American-Statesman.

She was talking about her now-husband Steven Nelson, whom the state of Texas will execute Feb. 5 for his role in the 2011 North Texas murder of Arlington pastor Clint Dobson and beating of then-67-year-old church administrator Judy Elliot.

A jury in 2012 convicted Nelson of smothering Dobson to death with a plastic bag during a robbery carried out alongside two friends.

Nelson testified that he was the lookout during the theft and didn’t hurt the victims, and defense attorneys have continued to fight for a new trial for the 37-year-old inmate. Dubois believes he is innocent.

Dobson’s church, First Baptist (formerly Northpointe Baptist), has opposed efforts to overturn Nelson’s conviction and has supported his upcoming execution.

“As the Bible teaches us, God has placed the civil authority in our midst so that innocent people can live in freedom without fear and so that guilty offenders can be appropriately punished,” Dennis Wiles, the pastor of First Baptist, said in a statement issued after Nelson’s 2012 sentencing. The church did not respond to the Statesman’s request for comment.

In victim impact statements, Dobson’s widow and father-in-law have also condemned Nelson, who sold Dobson’s laptop, stole Elliot’s car and used the victims’ credit cards to make purchases at a nearby mall.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed his conviction and death sentence in 2015, making the chances of clemency infinitesimally small.

Regardless, Dubois and Rev. Jeff Hood, Nelson’s spiritual adviser, have for months urged the church in Arlington and the state of Texas to have mercy on Nelson.

Nelson showed signs of behavioral problems early on and was in and out of juvenile detention centers, but he continued to struggle. He also has said he was abused as a child, both physically and sexually. A psychiatric expert for the prosecution against him said he was likely beyond help by the age of 10.

In an interview, Hood challenged the idea that death is a just punishment for a person like Nelson, whose life before becoming involved with crime was rife with suffering and abuse for which no one atoned. He wants to broaden the conversation around capital punishment to include society’s culpability, not just the culpability of the offender.

“The most disturbing part of the death penalty is that it creates a self-righteousness in society that we are a society righteous enough to kill somebody,” said Hood, who opposes capital punishment. “The question should be, 'Where were we to begin with?'”

Hood also sharply criticized Dobson’s church, which he says has not responded to his and Dubois’ efforts to reach out. He believes the death penalty is “antithetical to the teachings of Jesus.”

“We're saying that love is not enough, redemption is not enough, hope is not enough” when we support the death penalty, he said.

Is Texas in a 'reckoning' over the death penalty?

Nelson's execution approaches on the heels of a blizzard of media attention and political advocacy on behalf of another Texas death row inmate, Robert Roberson. Roberson's claim to innocence in the death of his 2-year-old daughter drew rare bipartisan support and spurred a never-before-seen legal maneuver that bought him months to live.

Roberson, however, is still on death row, set to be the first man executed for a conviction involving "shaken baby syndrome."

Hood, who has traveled across the country to minister to men facing execution, knows the chances are near-zero that Nelson will be spared. Nonetheless, he said, Nelson’s story matters.

“The most disturbing part of the death penalty is that it creates a self-righteousness in society that we are a society righteous enough to kill somebody,” says the Rev. Jeff Hood.

“If you want to talk about a reckoning for the death penalty, you’re going to have to start with cases like Steven Nelson’s, not cases like Robbie Roberson’s,” he said. “If the only cases we're engaging with are innocence cases, then we don't have to talk about how we have failed as a society.”

Texans' appetite for the death penalty has decreased over the years, though a strong majority are in favor of it. Annual death sentences have dropped from 48 in 1999 to six in 2024. Per Texas Politics Project polls, nearly 70% of state voters supported capital punishment in October 2023, as compared to 78% in February 2010.

'I would swap places with you in a second'

Dubois and Nelson were married Dec. 4, nearly 4 years after she sent her first letter. She summons the date of that first exchange on memory: Feb. 1, 2020.

"I owe Steven the woman I am today, and there is no day that I'm going to wake up and not feel grateful for this man," she said.

The Los Angeles resident wasn’t interested in marriage for much of their relationship, wanting to avoid the label of “death row wife.” But then she learned that after Nelson’s death, only his family would be given access to his possessions and his remains.

Wanting to make sure her partner’s final wishes were carried out, Dubois decided to tie the knot.

She had already devoted herself to Nelson’s cause, creating a website called SaveSteven.com. Along with facts in his defense, the site notes he has spent more than 22 hours per day alone in a cell since 2012.

Dubois is still holding out hope that Nelson will be spared while preparing for his death. She moved to Livingston, about 200 miles east of Austin, in early January so she could more easily visit Nelson at Texas’ death row unit. In two weeks, she’ll travel about 40 miles west to Huntsville, where the state's execution chamber is housed, to be with him during his final moments, as will Hood. Nelson is set to die by lethal injection at 37 years old.

Asked what her life will be like after her husband is gone, she said, "It's going to be very hard."

"I always said to Steven, 'I would swap places with you in a second if I could,'" she said. "Because dying ends, but I have to live the next day with losing my partner ... the pain is also always going to be here."

During her interview with the Statesman, her dog Doron — a bull terrier named for the Hebrew word for “gift”— was by her side. She got the dog from the family of Nelson’s inmate friend, who happened to live in California and were looking to give their pet a new home.

Hood says he has seen Nelson change completely as a person as his love for Dubois has grown. Their connection, he said, is an example of the humanity we tend to forget when we condemn criminals to death.

“Doing everything that (Nelson) did, it's evil,” Hood said. “But … our desire to dehumanize and kill someone is quite evil as well. And you have this sort of conundrum, do you keep perpetuating evil by committing more evil, or do you figure out a way to stop it?"

Hood also believes Nelson did not kill Dobson, but he has said Nelson’s sale of the victim’s belongings and his failure to help them was “evil.”

“What's so beautiful about Noa and Steven’s story is that love found a way to stop this cycle of violence and evil in Stephen's life. I think that what their story shows is that redemption is possible, even in the most horrific of circumstances,” he said.

(source: Austin American-Statesman)

SOUTH CAROLINA----impending execution

Condemned inmate worried South Carolina needed 2 lethal injections doses at last execution

South Carolina’s latest execution should be halted so that lawyers for the condemned inmate can get more information about the drug used for lethal injection after the last prisoner put to death needed 2 massive doses of the sedative 11 minutes apart, the attorneys said in court papers.

An anesthesiologist who reviewed the autopsy records of Richard Moore, who was executed on Nov. 1, told the inmate’s lawyers that fluid found in the lungs make it appear that Moore “consciously experienced feelings of drowning and suffocation during the 23 minutes that it took to bring about his death.”

But another anesthesiologist who reviewed the records for the state said fluid is often found in the lungs of prisoners killed by lethal injection, and the accounts by witnesses and other evidence gave no indication Moore was conscious beyond 30 seconds after the pentobarbital was first administered.

Prison officials have not said why Moore needed a second massive dose of the sedative. A shield law keeps private the supplier and manufacturer of the drug, the people who carry out the execution and the method they use.

The state says that if Marion Bowman Jr. is so worried about dying by lethal injection on Jan. 31, it also offers a choice of the electric chair or death by a firing squad. “If Bowman’s concerns about lethal injection were genuine, he could have elected another method,” attorneys for the state wrote in court papers.

Bowman is scheduled to die Jan. 31. He was convicted of murder in the shooting of a friend whose burned body was found in the trunk of her burned-out car in Dorchester County in 2001. Much of the evidence against Bowman at his trial came from friends and family members who testified against him as part of plea deals.

Bowman has insisted he did not kill 21-year-old Kandee Martin. He did not testify at his trial, but he released a statement last month through his lawyer with his story about what happened around the time Martin was killed.

What could be Bowman’s final attempt to postpone his death sentence is in the federal lawsuit over the lethal injection drug. His lawyers want more information than the state gives, which is a sworn statement from the prison director that state agents tested the drug, found it was pure and stable pentobarbital and the single dose given should result in death.

Included in court papers asking for the delay are a summary of autopsy results for Moore. The other South Carolina inmate killed in 2024, Freddie Owens, asked that an autopsy not be performed for religious reasons.

The state told the pathologist doing Moore’s autopsy that he was given pentobarbital through an IV twice — once as the execution started and again 11 minutes later when he was killed Nov. 1.

South Carolina doesn’t release its protocol for lethal injection, but said its methods are similar to other states that use one dose of pentobarbital. In Georgia and Tennessee, only one 5 gram dose of the drug is scheduled for the start of the execution.

That should be a high enough dose to stop anyone’s breathing within a minute with no need for a second dose, said Dr. David B. Waisel, an anesthesiologist who has worked as a professor at Harvard and Yale universities.

Fluid was also found in Moore’s lungs and airway. Waisel wrote it is likely Moore felt feelings of drowning and suffocation for long periods before his death.

Last week the federal government announced it was rescinding its protocol for executions with pentobarbital after a government review raised concerns about the potential for “unnecessary pain and suffering.” But President Donald Trump signed an executive order shortly after taking office Monday that directs federal officials to take all steps to make sure executions are carried out.

In their response, lawyers for the governor’s office and prison system had their own anesthesiologist review the records.

All evidence from the descriptions of Moore’s death by witnesses indicates his breathing stopped in 2 or 3 minutes and he was unconscious, said Dr. Joseph F. Antognini, who taught anesthesiology at the University of California, Davis.

“Before becoming unconscious, the individual would not feel the sensations of pain, suffocation or air hunger,” Antognini wrote.

After that, the heart will have periodic, irregular beats for as long as 20 minutes before it stops. That cardiac activity that could be detected on a heart monitor might have led to the second dose of pentobarbital, Antognini said.

The state’s lawyers also pointed out Owens and Moore each had an attorney witness their deaths, and “neither lawyer ever claimed that either man showed any signs of pain during his execution.”

Bowman’s lawyers also want more time to study whether South Carolina’s lethal injection protocols take into account Bowman’s weight, listed as 389 pounds (176 kilograms) in prison records. It can be difficult to properly get an IV into a blood vessel and determine the dose of the drugs needed in people with obesity.

Antognini agreed it can be difficult. But he wrote “thousands of obese patients have surgery every day after the successful placement of an intravenous catheter.”

(source: The Associated Press)

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

Lawyers Seek to Halt South Carolina Execution Amid Drug Concerns

Lawyers for South Carolina death row inmate Marion Bowman Jr. are seeking to halt his impending execution, citing concerns about the drug used for lethal injection. This follows the recent execution of Richard Moore, who allegedly experienced prolonged suffocation sensations, needing 2 doses of pentobarbital. An anesthesiologist stated that fluid found in Moore's lungs suggests he felt "feelings of drowning and suffocation during the 23 minutes that it took to bring about his death."

The state has dismissed these concerns, arguing alternatives like the electric chair or firing squad are available. They contend that autopsy results aligning with an anesthesiologist's review indicate Moore was unconscious soon after the initial sedative was administered. South Carolina's shield law keeps details about the drug's supplier and execution process confidential, further complicating Bowman's legal appeal.

Bowman, convicted in the 2001 murder of Kandee Martin, maintains his innocence and did not testify during his trial. His defense argues the execution protocol might not account for Bowman's obesity, risking complications in the intravenous procedure and drug dosage. As Bowman's Jan. 31 execution approaches, his legal team presses for more transparency in drug details and execution methods. This legal challenge comes amid broader scrutiny of lethal injection practices, with the federal government recently revising its execution protocols due to concerns over unnecessary suffering.

(source: msn.com)

FLORIDA----impending execution

WARRANT: Circuit court denies evidentiary hearing on Ford's postconviction motion

James Ford's execution is scheduled for February 13. Yesterday, the circuit court denied Ford's request for an evidentiary hearing on his pending postconviction motion.

James Ford’s execution is scheduled for 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, February 13, 2025—the 1st for the State in 2025.

Consistent with the circuit court’s scheduling order, on Sunday, Ford filed a successive motion for postconviction relief in the circuit court. The State filed its response to Ford’s Motion on Monday. TFDP covered both here, at: https://fladeathpenalty.substack.com/p/warrant-ford-files-postconviction?r=248zyf&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Per the circuit court’s scheduling order, the Court held a Huff hearing yesterday morning. Ford requested an evidentiary hearing on his first claim regarding his mental age at the time of the crime.

Yesterday afternoon, the circuit court entered a 2-page Order denying Ford’s request. The court said that Ford’s motion “as to both claims can be resolved by a review of the record and prevailing case law.” Therefore, the court will not hold an evidentiary hearing on Ford’s motion. The court will rule on Ford’s Motion on January 24.

(source: fladleathpenalty@substack.com)

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

Prosecutors to seek death penalty for man charged in 2012 murder of teen in Miami----Adrian Oneal Grimes, 30, was arrested last month, almost exactly 12 years after the Dec. 22, 2012 killing of Bryan Herrera

Prosecutors will be seeking the death penalty for a man charged in the 2012 murder of a teen in Miami who was gunned down just days before Christmas.

Adrian Oneal Grimes, 30, was arrested last month, almost exactly 12 years after the Dec. 22, 2012 killing of Bryan Herrera.

Prosecutors announced Wednesday that a grand jury indicted Grimes on first-degree murder, armed robbery with a firearm and attempted armed robbery with a firearm in Herrera's death.

Grimes refused to appear in court for an arraignment Wednesday, but his attorney entered a not guilty plea on his behalf.

It was also learned Wednesday that prosecutors would be seeking the death penalty for Grimes.

Herrera was on the way to his friend's house to finish homework when he was gunned down in broad daylight at the intersection of Northwest 11th Avenue and 39th Street.

He was transported to Jackson Memorial Hospital’s Ryder Trauma Center but died shortly after.

Detectives investigated the shooting but it became a cold case as no arrest was made.

Police and Herrera's family made multiple public pleas for information but couldn't break the case until June of 2024, when an attorney contacted the Miami-Dade State Attorney's Office to say he had a client who had information about a murder that happened three days before Christmas in 2012.

According to an arrest warrant, the client said he was driving in the area at the time of the killing and saw Herrera and a man in a struggle with each other.

The witness said he tried to stop the struggle by mentioning how close they were to Christmas, and said, "Can't we just get along?" and that's when the teen replied by silently mouthing, "I'm being robbed," the warrant said.

The witness saw Grimes, who he knew from the neighborhood and for several years before, pointing a gun at the victim and decided not to intervene, the warrant said.

As he idled his car forward towards 38th Street, he saw the teen try to escape, and then heard a gunshot.

Grimes allegedly fled on a bicycle, while the witness drove to a house where a man was working on his lawn and asked to borrow his phone. The witness called 911 before leaving the scene.

Once he came forward, the witness told police that the man who killed Bryan Herrera had since lost an eye in an unrelated shooting, and was being held at the Federal Detention Center. The witness said he knew that because he himself was recently incarcerated at the same jail for a pending case where he is charged with distribution of 500 grams or more of cocaine.

After getting this information, police tracked down Grimes at that detention center.

Authorities told the witness that Miami Police and the State Attorney's Office would not be offering him any benefit in exchange for his cooperation, and he agreed, the warrant said.

Grimes is currently serving an almost 2-year sentence for a drug charge and had been set to be released in September of 2026.

(source: nbcmiami.com)

OKLAHOMA:

Supreme Court Grants Relief in Oklahoma Death Penalty Case

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday granted relief to Brenda Andrew, who was sentenced to death in Oklahoma after prosecutors introduced evidence about her sex life and her failings as a wife and mother. The Court ordered the federal appeals court to assess whether this “irrelevant evidence about [her] demeanor as a woman … deprive[d] her of a fundamentally fair trial.”

Brenda Andrew was convicted of capital murder after her husband was fatally shot in 2001. Ms. Andrew, who was shot in the arm during the incident, told police that two armed men committed the shooting. She explained that she and her husband were separated, and she was dating James Pavatt. He eventually confessed to committing the shooting with a friend and denied that Ms. Andrew was involved.

The State accused Ms. Andrew of conspiring with Mr. Pavatt to murder her husband. At trial, according to the Court’s per curiam decision, the prosecution “elicited testimony about Andrew’s sexual partners reaching back two decades; about the outfits she wore to dinner or during grocery runs; about the underwear she packed for vacation; and about how often she had sex in her car.” The prosecutor also displayed her thong underwear to jurors while urging them to convict her of capital murder.

Ms. Andrew was convicted and sentenced to death. On appeal, she argued that irrelevant evidence about extramarital affairs and how she dressed rendered her trial fundamentally unfair in violation of due process.

Even though the State agreed that most of the evidence was irrelevant—a dissenting judge wrote it had “no purpose other than to hammer home that Brenda Andrew is a bad wife, a bad mother, and a bad woman”—the state court denied relief.

Ms. Andrew sought relief in federal court, which may grant relief only if it finds the state court unreasonably applied “clearly established” Supreme Court precedent. Ms. Andrew argued the state court decision violated Payne v. Tennessee, a 1991 decision in which the Supreme Court made clear that the Due Process Clause provides relief when “evidence is introduced that is so unduly prejudicial that it renders the trial fundamentally unfair.”

But a divided Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals decided that Payne did not qualify as clearly established precedent. As a result, it refused to even consider how the jury was prejudiced against her when, as the dissent put it, the State portrayed her “as a scarlet woman, a modern Jezebel, sparking distrust based on her loose morals [and] plucking away any realistic chance that the jury would seriously consider her version of events.”

“That was wrong,” the Supreme Court wrote, explaining that in Payne and other decisions, the Court had made clear that “due process protects defendants from the introduction of evidence so prejudicial as to affect the fundamental fairness of their trials.”

Because the Tenth Circuit erroneously failed to recognize Payne as clearly established federal law, the Court summarily reversed. It remanded the case for the circuit court to evaluate whether—at the guilt or sentencing phase—“the trial court’s mistaken admission of irrelevant evidence was so ‘unduly prejudicial’ as to render her trial ‘fundamentally unfair.’”

Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, dissented.

(source: eji.org)

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

Supreme Court Asks Appeals Court To Determine If Prosecutorial Slut Shaming And Panty Waiving Makes Murder Trials Unfair----Yes. The answer should be yes.

The Supreme Court’s recent Death Penalty jurisprudence has been pretty dark: their decision to deny a stay of execution for Marcellus Williams is and will be a mark of shame on this country’s history. But, in an unexpected break from the Court’s live and let die approach to death row, they are giving an Oklahoma inmate a second bite at due process. EJI has coverage:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday granted relief to Brenda Andrew, who was sentenced to death in Oklahoma after prosecutors introduced evidence about her sex life and her failings as a wife and mother. The Court ordered the federal appeals court to assess whether this “irrelevant evidence about [her] demeanor as a woman … deprive[d] her of a fundamentally fair trial.”

The State accused Ms. Andrew of conspiring with Mr. Pavatt to murder her husband. At trial, according to the Court’s per curiam decision, the prosecution “elicited testimony about Andrew’s sexual partners reaching back 2 decades; about the outfits she wore to dinner or during grocery runs; about the underwear she packed for vacation; and about how often she had sex in her car.” The prosecutor also displayed her thong underwear to jurors while urging them to convict her of capital murder.

It would have been bad enough if the prosecution just referred to Ms. Andrew as a “slut puppy” throughout the trial (which they did), but parading around her underwear? How did that even play out in closing argument? “Were her finger prints on the murder weapon? No. But we did find these revealing Victoria’s Secret panties in one of her drawers. What other secrets might she be hiding?!”

Justices Thomas and Gorsuch were the only 2 Justices that dissented from the order. The bar is in hell, but a pat on the back for Kavanaugh not making that duo a trio.

(source: abovethelaw.com)

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

Death row inmate can pursue due process appeal over sex-life evidence admitted at trial, Supreme Court says

A death row inmate can pursue a claim that her Oklahoma trial was prejudiced by the introduction of evidence about her sex life, provocative clothing and thong underwear, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.

The Supreme Court ruled Jan. 21 in a per curiam opinion for Brenda Evers Andrew, who was convicted in the 2001 murder of her estranged husband, Rob Andrew. Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, dissented.

The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Denver had denied relief, concluding that precedent did not allow Andrew’s claim that prejudicial evidence at trial violated her right to due process under the 14th Amendment.

But the Supreme Court said the 10th Circuit wrongly concluded that precedent on prejudicial evidence was a “pronouncement,” rather than a “holding.”

The 1991 precedent, Payne v. Tennessee, had concerned victim impact evidence in criminal cases. The Supreme Court in Payne had refused to categorically ban such evidence because the 14th Amendment’s due process clause provides protection when the evidence is so prejudicial that it makes a trial fundamentally unfair.

The due process principle that Andrew cites was “indispensable to the decision in Payne,” which means that it was a holding, the Supreme Court said.

Andrew had claimed that 2 armed assailants had killed her husband in the garage of their home while also shooting her in the arm, causing a superficial wound. One of the perpetrators, it turned out, was Andrew’s boyfriend, an insurance agent who confessed that he had committed the murder with a friend. The insurance agent said Andrew wasn’t involved.

Prosecutors had claimed that Andrew conspired with the boyfriend to commit the murder, so that she could collect on her husband’s $800,000 life insurance policy, which had been bought from the boyfriend. Andrew and her boyfriend left for Mexico after the murder.

Prosecutors had introduced evidence about Andrew’s sexual partners over 2 decades, about her extramarital affairs, about how often that she had sex in her car, about the provocative outfits that she wore, and about the thong underwear that she packed for Mexico.

On remand, the 10th Circuit should consider whether the evidence about Andrew’s sex life and her purported failings as a mother made the trial fundamentally unfair, the Supreme Court said.

In dissent, Thomas argued that the majority had elevated to clearly established law “the broadest possible interpretation of a one-sentence aside in Payne v. Tennessee.” He also said evidence of Andrew’s guilt had been overwhelming.

Publications with coverage of the decision include NBC News, Law360, Reuters, Courthouse News Service and the New York Times.

(source: abajournal.com)

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

Supreme Court Makes Historic Decision That Clarence Thomas Disagrees With

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from a historic ruling on Tuesday in the case of an Oklahoma woman on death row for murder.

The Supreme Court overturned the court of appeals' opinion in the case, which found that there was no legal precedent addressing whether prejudicial evidence violates due process.

In a dissenting opinion joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, Thomas said the lower court followed the precedent set by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) of 1996.

Why It Matters

Thomas warns that the Court's decision could lead to the misapplication of AEDPA.

"We have instructed lower courts to avoid framing our precedents at too high a level of generality," Thomas said.

What To Know

The Supreme Court's decision marks the 1t time it has overturned a lower court's ruling for failing to find that a legal rule is clearly established under AEDPA, according to Thomas.

Who Is Brenda Andrew?

Brenda Andrew was convicted of capital murder in 2001 killing of her husband, Robert Andrew. Brenda told police that she was separated from her husband and dating James Pavatt.

Pavatt later confessed to committing the shooting with a friend. He said Brenda was not involved, but they were both charged with capital murder.

Brenda appealed her conviction, arguing that "irrelevant evidence," including that she had dressed provocatively at a restaurant and "had extramarital sexual affairs with two other men," violated Oklahoma law and the Federal Due Process Clause.

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals (OCCA) found that the admission of evidence was proper. A federal district court denied relief and a divided circuit court found that Andrew had failed to cite "clearly established federal law governing her claim."

"That was wrong," the Supreme Court said, pointing to the legal precedent established by Payne v. Tennessee.

The Court said that case established a precedent that when "evidence is introduced that is so unduly prejudicial that it renders the trial fundamentally unfair, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provides a mechanism for relief."

Does Oklahoma Still Have The Death Penalty?

The death penalty is a legal punishment in Oklahoma. The state has the highest number of executions per capita in the United States.

As of last month, 32 inmates were on death row in Oklahoma. Andrew is the only woman on death row in the state.

What Are The 27 States That Have The Death Penalty?

The death penalty is still permitted under law in Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Wyoming.

Governors have placed a hold on executions in California, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Oregon.

What People Are Saying

The Supreme Court, in its ruling: "At the time of the OCCA's decision, clearly established law provided that the Due Process Clause forbids the introduction of evidence so unduly prejudicial as to render a criminal trial fundamentally unfair."

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, in his dissent: "However, the Court turns this approach on its head, steamrolling settled AEDPA principles to set aside an entirely correct Tenth Circuit decision. I respectfully dissent."

What Happens Next

The Supreme Court vacated the lower court's judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

(source: newsweek.com)

IDAHO:

Idaho introduces bill to make death by firing squad main form of execution

Idaho could become the 1st state to use death by firing squad as its primary method of execution. Republican state Rep. Bruce Skaug introduced a bill Tuesday, Jan. 21, to change the state’s current law. Currently, firing squad execution is a backup option to lethal injection if the chemicals are unavailable.

Now, Skaug wants prisoners on Idaho’s 9-member death row to be shot, making lethal injection the secondary option. He said the firing squad method would have less economic impact on the state.

What are the issues with lethal injection?

Several states, including Idaho, have also had trouble getting drugs for lethal injections. The companies that make the drugs started barring them, saying they were meant to save lives, not take them.

Another issue with lethal injection is botched executions.

In February 2024, the Idaho Department of Corrections failed to execute prisoner Thomas Creech using lethal injection when prison officials couldn’t find a suitable vein for an IV. The execution was called off and Creech is still in prison.

Because of this incident, officials changed policy in October 2024, allowing the execution team to access a central vein, such as the chest or neck, rather than just a peripheral vein such as the arm or hand.

Who supports firing squad execution?

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is among those who claim firing squads are a more humane method of execution.

In 2017, she said, “In addition to being near instant, death by shooting may also be comparatively painless.”

What are the arguments against firing squad execution?

But in a 2019 federal case, prosecutors had statements from an anesthesiologist who said it’s not guaranteed to have a painless death by firing squad, adding that inmates could remain conscious for up to 10 seconds after being shot.

Critics also say killings by firing squad could be potentially traumatizing to victims’ relatives due to its violent nature.

4 other states in the U.S. with capital punishment have firing squads including Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah, but none have it as its lead option, which would make Idaho the 1st.

Utah was the last state to use a firing squad in an execution in 2010 when prisoners were allowed to choose their method of execution.

What happens next?

If the Idaho bill passes, the law won’t take effect until July 2026 because the Idaho Department of Corrections still needs to build a facility primarily used for firing squad executions.

If any executions happen before the bill is enacted, the state will use lethal injection.

(source: san.com)

ARIZONA:

Maricopa County prosecutors pursue death penalty against Paul Jon Thomas in pair of deaths

Maricopa prosecutors are pursuing the death penalty against a man accused of killing his ex-wife and another man last year.

Anna Marie Chavez, 44, and Anthony Tate, 49, were found dead on Jan. 5, 2024, near Encanto Boulevard and 39th Avenue, in west Phoenix.

Chavez's ex-husband, Paul Jon Thomas, was arrested in connection with the pair of deaths and faces 1st-degree murder charges in the killings.

Thomas was previously charged with stalking Chavez in August and September 2023, and documents stated Chavez had a reasonable fear of death. The suspect had been stalking the victim for months before she was killed.

Documents show Thomas caused Chavez mental, emotional and physical harm before she died, and police believe the homicide was premeditated.

The Maricopa County Attorney's Office filed a notice of intent to seek the death penalty for Thomas on Dec. 24, 2024. His trial is scheduled for July.

(source: azcentral.com)

USA:

We The People: Cruel and Unusual Punishment

The Eighth Amendment. What is cruel and unusual punishment? Who gets to define and decide its boundaries? And how did the Constitution's authors imagine it might change? Today on Throughline's We the People: the Eighth Amendment, the death penalty, and what cruel and unusual really means.

John Bessler, law professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law, and adjunct professor at the Georgetown University Law Center. Author of The Death Penalty's Denial of Fundamental Human Rights.

Carol Steiker, law professor at Harvard Law School and author of Courting Death: the Supreme Court and Capital Punishment.

To access bonus episodes and listen to Throughline sponsor-free, subscribe to Throughline+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org/throughline.

(source: npr.org)

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

Trump’s New Order to Expand the Death Penalty Misses Key Details----The order shows the president’s desire for more executions. But it’s unclear how the administration will carry out its plans, legal experts say.

Shortly after being sworn in, President Donald Trump signed an order to expand the death penalty, confirming a widespread expectation that the Department of Justice may seek capital punishment more often under his administration. The first Trump administration carried out more executions than any president in at least a century. But legal experts say the order is short on details about how the administration will carry out its plans in the face of legal and bureaucratic barriers.

“This executive order is lacking in so many important details that it’s hard to know exactly what’s intended by some of these statements. Much of it sounds more like campaign rhetoric than policy statements,” said Robin Maher, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a nonprofit organization that researches and analyzes the issue.

Pam Bondi, Trump’s nominee for attorney general, fought to maintain death sentences when she was attorney general in Florida.In the past, the U.S. attorney general has had wide latitude in deciding whether to seek the death penalty in individual cases. Trump’s order instructs the office to pursue federal jurisdiction and seek the death penalty, “regardless of other factors,” for people who murder a law enforcement officer or who are in the country illegally and commit a capital crime.

But Maher said it would be “unprecedented and contrary to established law” for prosecutors to seek a federal death sentence for every capital crime where the defendant is an undocumented immigrant.

Republicans in Congress and state legislatures have long sought to expand use of the death penalty for people who kill police. Under federal law, jurors can consider the targeting of law enforcement as an “aggravating factor” in deliberating over the death penalty when the victim is a federal agent, judge or corrections officer. Several U.S. senators recently introduced the Thin Blue Line Act, which would add local and state police officers, firefighters and other first responders to the law.

Miriam Gohara, a clinical professor of law at the Yale Law School, said the most striking piece of Trump’s order regarded the people who had their sentence commuted from death to life in prison. Before leaving office, Biden commuted the sentences of 37 people. Trump’s order said the attorney general should ensure that those people are “imprisoned in conditions consistent with the monstrosity of their crimes and the threats they pose.”

Gohara said that raises legal concerns. “The punishment is being incarcerated. The punishment is not the condition of confinement. That's not legal,” she said.

People in maximum-security facilities already face harsh conditions, like the use of solitary confinement. “Are they going to intentionally put some sort of atmosphere in place that is intolerable?” said Gohara. “I can't imagine that is actually something that they could carry out. On the other hand, I don't want to underestimate them either.”

Trump’s order also said officials will explore whether some of the people whose sentences were commuted can be charged in state courts and receive new death sentences that way. But Gohara was skeptical that prosecutors would spend precious resources on decades-old cases where the person was already in a federal prison for life.

While the Trump administration has no jurisdiction over state cases, the president’s order says the federal government will work to ensure that states can keep killing people on death row by helping local governments obtain drugs for lethal injection.Pharmaceutical companies have been refusing to supply corrections agencies with the deadly drugs, citing moral and business concerns. Some states have abandoned executions, while others have explored alternative ways to kill people, including firing squads and gas chambers.

?he order also instructs the attorney general to work to overthrow Supreme Court precedents that “lim­it the authority of state and fed­er­al gov­ern­ments to impose capital punishment.” The order does not reference specific cases, but this could be an allusion to Supreme Court rulings that limit the death penalty when the person convicted was under 18 at the time of the crime or has an intellectual disability. It could also refer to Supreme Court rulings that death sentences are inappropriate in cases where the victim does not lose their life. There have recently been efforts in states like Florida to allow capital punishment for the rape of a child.

While the order directs federal prosecutors to seek the death penalty more often, there is no guarantee that they will succeed in any individual case. Roughly 1/2 of Americans still support the death penalty in various polls, but a growing number reject it in individual cases when serving as jurors. The decline in support owes to a mix of interrelated factors: changing societal views on mental illness and intellectual disability, aggressive efforts by defense lawyers to present defendants’ childhoods as mitigating factors and reluctance by prosecutors to seek the punishment in the first place. Last year, 26 people were sentenced to death in state and federal courts across the country, compared with a peak of more than 300 a year in the mid-1990s, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

(source: Shannon Heffernan is a staff writer for The Marshall Project covering prison conditions, experiences of the incarcerated, their families and corrections officers, the federal Bureau of Prisons and the death penalty----The Marshall Project)

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

Trump targets Supreme Court precedents in new death penalty order----The president directed the attorney general to take “all appropriate action to seek the overruling” of high court precedents that limit executions.

The death penalty has long been a focus of Donald Trump’s “tough on crime” approach, which demands strict consequences for his non-supporters. It’s no surprise, then, that capital punishment features in one of his first presidential actions in his 2nd term.

That action came in an order titled “Restoring the Death Penalty and Protecting Public Safety.” Among other things, it seeks to overturn Supreme Court precedents that place legal limits on executions. That section of the order says:

Seeking The Overruling of Supreme Court Precedents That Hinder Capital Punishment. The Attorney General shall take all appropriate action to seek the overruling of Supreme Court precedents that limit the authority of State and Federal governments to impose capital punishment.

The order doesn’t specify which rulings, but some precedents that come to mind are those that limit executions of people with intellectual disabilities, juveniles and for non-homicide crimes. The now-retired Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was something of a swing vote on the court, authored 5-4 majority opinions enforcing those limits in cases earlier this century.

But his replacement by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s replacement of the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg, have cemented a majority that’s more inclined to side with the government in capital cases. That majority helped revive federal executions in Trump’s 1st term, green-lighting them as the Justice Department raced to the death chamber before Joe Biden, who ran on an anti-death penalty platform, took office in January 2021.

Just before he left office, Biden commuted most federal death row sentences to life in prison, making it more difficult for Trump to carry out another series of executions this time. On that note, Trump’s order also tells the attorney general to see if those 37 prisoners with commuted life terms can be charged with capital crimes on the state level as well, and to ensure in the meantime that they’re “imprisoned in conditions consistent with the monstrosity of their crimes and the threats they pose.”

As for trying to overturn death penalty precedents, time will tell what the court that overturned Roe v. Wade and helped Trump push through federal executions in his first term will do.

(source: msnbc.com)

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

Trump suggests state death penalty for those commuted by Biden. Is that possible?

Among the slew of executive orders signed by President Donald Trump on his 1st day in office, he signed one order calling to reinstate the death penalty for federal death row inmates.

However, only individuals remain on federal death row after former President Joe Biden commuted the death sentences of 37 people on Dec. 23 and instead sentenced them to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Trump attacked the move in his executive order on the death penalty, signed on Jan. 20, and asked the attorney general to “further evaluate whether these offenders can be charged with State capital crimes and shall recommend appropriate action to state and local authorities.”

Legal experts weighed in on whether or not the 37 inmates formerly on death row could be sentenced to death again. Federal death row The inmates whose sentences were commuted by Biden were instead sentenced to serve life in prison without the possibility of parole. Legal experts told McClatchy News that Trump cannot reverse this.

Article II of the Constitution gives the president the unlimited power to pardon people in federal cases. The Constitution, however, does not mention the ability to revoke a pardon. Additionally, the 37 people whose sentences were commuted could not be prosecuted a second time for the same federal offense, which would violate the double jeopardy clause, Sheri Lynn Johnson, the assistant director of the Cornell Death Penalty, told McClatchy News in a phone interview.

State death row In the executive order signed by Trump at the start of his second term, he calls on the attorney general to “further evaluate” whether or not the 37 death row inmates can be prosecuted at the state level. Hofstra law professor Eric Freedman told McClatchy News that “Biden’s order does not of its own force bar a state capital prosecution.”

John Blume, an attorney who has argued 8 cases in front of the Supreme Court and is director of the Cornell Death Penalty Project, said it is possible for some of the inmates to be sentenced to death for a state crime, but it is highly unlikely.

“In theory if they committed the crimes in a state that has the death penalty as a matter of state law, those states could seek the death penalty,” Blume told McClatchy News. “But, even in those jurisdictions many of the cases are old, the original state prosecutors are gone and I think it unlikely it will happen in any significant number of cases.”

27 states have the death penalty, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. However, the governors of California, Pennsylvania, Oregon and Ohio have put a hold on executions.

Although the inmates commuted from death row couldn’t be prosecuted for their crimes at the federal level again, they could be separately charged for a crime in the state where they committed the offense, Lynn Johnson said. However, legal experts say this isn’t likely to happen.

“It’s unlikely that state prosecutors would decide to seek state death sentences for any of the 37 people who have already been resentenced to life without the possibility of parole,” Robin Maher, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, told McClatchy News.

“I can’t imagine why any state prosecutor would divert resources that address the current needs of their community to instead pursue death sentences for decades-old crimes against people who do not pose any safety concerns.”

Freedman, who focuses on the death penalty at Hofstra, says not every one of the 37 federal inmates would have a viable case at the state level. Prosecution of a federal inmate at the state level would have to not violate a state’s double jeopardy laws and be within the statute of limitations, he said.

Though Trump is unable to put the commuted inmates back on death row, he did ask the attorney general in the order to “take all lawful and appropriate action to ensure that these offenders are imprisoned in conditions consistent with the monstrosity of their crimes and the threats they pose.”

(source: tri-cityherald.com)

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

‘So much of this seems vengeful’: alarm as Trump recommits to death penalty----President says he’ll help states execute people but experts skeptical of bold pledge to expand capital punishment

Donald Trump has signed an executive order committing to pursue federal death sentences and pledging to ensure that states have sufficient supplies of lethal injection drugs for executions.

The order promises that Trump’s attorney general will seek capital punishment for “all crimes of a severity demanding its use”, specifying that the US will seek the death penalty in every case involving murder of law enforcement and a capital crime committed by an undocumented person, “regardless of other factors”. Trump has also pledged to pursue the overruling of longstanding US supreme court precedents that limit the scope of capital punishment.

Experts say the order is filled with vague campaign rhetoric, and that some of the actions it promises could be unconstitutional, infringe on defendants’ rights and intrude on state laws and processes. Many of the broad pronouncements, if carried out by his attorney general, could face major legal challenges.

Despite the ambiguity of the president’s directive, it marks a stunning reversal of the policies of the Biden administration and comes at a time of significant, bipartisan opposition to capital punishment in the US, fueled by multiple recent executions and capital cases of people with credible innocence claims.

The order will be significantly stunted by one of Joe Biden’s final clemency actions – resentencing 37 out of 40 people on federal death row to life imprisonment without parole.

Trump’s 1st term was marked by 13 federal executions in rapid succession – more people put to death in the federal system than under the previous 10 presidents combined – and Biden’s grants saved dozens from an expected resurgence in state killings under Trump.

Trump’s order directs the attorney general to evaluate the prison placements of the 37 people resentenced by Biden “to ensure that these offenders are imprisoned in conditions consistent with the monstrosity of their crimes”. It also says the attorney general shall “evaluate whether these offenders can be charged with state capital crimes and shall recommend appropriate action to state and local authorities”.

Those pledges are dubious, experts said.

“The idea of going back to states where crimes were committed to see if states can prosecute capitally is probably unconstitutional in terms of double jeopardy,” said Abraham Bonowitz, executive director of Death Penalty Action, a group fighting to abolish capital punishment. “So much of this seems vengeful, not just about individual prisoners, but also just to poke back at President Biden’s commutations.”

The order is largely “bluster and grandstanding, because there’s really nothing new he can do”, said Bonowitz. “The real question is, does the rule of law continue to matter to the courts?”

Robin Maher, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, said it did not seem likely state prosecutors would choose to retry defendants commuted by Biden, given that they are already imprisoned for life with decades-old cases. Regarding the president’s commitment to place the 37 commuted people in prison environments that match the “monstrosity” of their convictions, “there is a constitutional limitation on his ability to put people in conditions that would be tortuous and inhumane,” she said.

Ruth Friedman, director of the Federal Capital Habeas Project, which represents death row defendants, said the US Bureau of Prisons has long decided prison placements based on a range of criteria, including defendants’ needs and safety concerns: “I have to assume they’ll continue to do their job. I don’t see why the president or attorney general would become part of that system.”

Supreme court precedent has long limited the scope of capital punishment, establishing that people cannot be executed for non-homicide offenses such as rape and that youth and people with certain intellectual disabilities are ineligible. Trump’s order does not specify rulings he would seek to overturn, but the messaging is aligned with a push by conservative legal groups to expand the death penalty, said Natasha Minsker, policy adviser with Smart Justice California, a criminal justice reform group.

Despite the ultra-conservative, pro-Trump bent of the supreme court, some justices have been aligned with former justice Anthony Kennedy, who authored several key decisions in favor of capital defendants, Minsker noted.

“Even though the practical impact of the executive order is close to zero, it’s still deeply concerning for an executive to throw his weight behind the death penalty given the many flaws with the system – and particularly an executive who has shown no regard for following the law or constitution and has been very vocal about his desire to go after political rivals,” Minsker said. “It’s a recipe for the worst kind of dictatorship.”

The notion of requiring the death penalty to be automatically pursued in certain classes of cases would violate well-settled constitutional law about defendants’ rights, said Cassandra Stubbs, director of the ACLU Capital Punishment Project.

The order’s pledges about influencing state cases was also unclear, said Stubbs, emphasizing that the federal government cannot control state-level prosecutions, which are the majority of criminal cases in the US: “It’s too early to know whether it’s just bluster or they are planning efforts that would likely be challenged as unlawful entanglement in state law and that would go beyond what the executive branch has authorization to do.”

Stubbs said she was also alarmed at the order’s language, noting that executions have been used since “before” the founding of the US: “Capital punishment was a major part of statutes for people helping enslaved people escape slavery. The fact that the practice is longstanding is not the strongest defense.”

The order does not specify how the attorney general would ensures states have “a sufficient supply of drugs needed to carry out lethal injection”. Nine states put people to death last year, including South Carolina, which revived executions after a 13-year pause caused by pharmaceutical companies no longer supplying lethal injection drugs due to public pressure. South Carolina and other states with leaders committed to capital punishment have continued executions in part by passing laws shielding the identities of suppliers.

“There is so much secrecy about the process of obtaining drugs for execution, so it’s really hard to know what the federal government would do to solve this,” said Maher. Major pharmaceutical corporations have already stopped selling their products to prisons for execution and the European Union has banned exporting these drugs to the US for capital punishment, she noted: “Unless the federal government plans to go into the pharmaceutical-making business, I’m not sure how that is going to be accomplished.”

The White House did not immediately respond to inquiries on Tuesday.

Trump’s efforts could be costly, Maher added: “For a president who says he’s looking to reduce government waste … the death penalty is one of the most expensive public policies.”

Bonowitz said he wished Biden had commuted everyone on death row, including those convicted of mass killings and hate crimes, whose death sentences were preserved.

“When it’s OK for the government to kill a terrorist, then soon it becomes OK for them to label some other crime as equally horrific and begin to execute people,” he said. “Is Donald Trump going to decide that someone countering the goals of this administration is a traitor or seditionist punishable by death? It seems like a stretch now, but that’s the path we’re on. And that’s one of the reasons why we believe the government can’t be trusted with the power to kill.”

(source: The Guardian)

ZIMBABWE:

Death penalty abolished in Zimbabwe: Leave it to God to decide on human life----The country becomes the 30th African nation to end capital punishment. Fr. Tryvis Moyo, Secretary-General of Zimbabwe's Catholic Bishops' Conference, argues that a change in "the understanding of the concept of justice" in the country has helped reach this decision.

In July 2005, 1 man was executed in Zimbabwe. Convicted of murder, he was hanged for his crime.

Just shy of 20 years later, this man will forever be the last person ever to be executed in the country. On December 31, 2024, President Emmerson Mnangagwa signed the Death Penalty Abolition Act – making Zimbabwe the 30th African nation to indefinitely end capital punishment.

A long road to abolition

Since Zimbabwe gained its independence from Great Britain in 1980, at least 79 people have been executed. But prior to this new Act, the country had two decades free of state executions, and the Secretary-General for the Zimbabwe Catholic Bishops’ Conference, Fr. Tryvis Moyo, argued this was due to a social change.

There was a “shift in terms of the understanding of the concept of justice,” he explained. During this time, at least 15 African countries, including Rwanda, Sierra Leone, and Zambia, abolished the death penalty.

Little by little, Zimbabwe moved towards joining its neighbors. It limited the application of the death sentence. For example, in 2013, the country’s new Constitution outlawed capital punishment for women and anyone under 21 and above 70.

Yet, it wasn’t until a number of factors aligned that the country officially became abolitionist.

Changing perspective

Fr. Moyo explained that some of the factors might have included Zimbabwe's being a signatory of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and a change in government. In 2017, the then-president, Robert Mugabe, was deposed, and Emmerson Mnangagwa—a man who had been given the death sentence during the war of independence in the 1960s —took power.

The Bishops’ Conference Secretary-General emphasized that “people in the country are getting a better appreciation of the sanctity of life and the systems of justice.” As a country where 85% of the population is Christian, Fr. Moyo described a growing awareness that there are many other forms of punishment beyond the death penalty, where the “sanctity of life has to be preserved.”

Leading by example

While Zimbabwe is not the first country on the African continent to abolish the death penalty, Fr. Moyo argued this decision will have an effect on the remaining nations who continue to support it.

“It’s fair to say our countries tend to copy from each other and to learn from each other,” the Secretary-General pointed out, “so I think it’s leading by example.”

He highlighted that signing the Death Penalty Abolition Act is an important statement on human rights as it was a move to preserve life. “With the death penalty, there were also mistakes being made with innocent people.”

Capital punishment was sometimes used as a weapon against those who, at a certain time, seemed “to have been on the wrong side of the law.”

A future of life

Moving forward, Fr. Moyo described the biggest challenge for most countries in abolishing the death penalty is an “understanding of justice and how we perceive the correctional institution.”

With capital punishment, there is no element of rehabilitation, which the Secretary-General said “gives citizens a second chance.” But shifting from the death penalty to rehabilitation requires a greater education around human rights, human dignity, and the sanctity of life.

It takes educating people on these elements to help them “understand that justice has many facets,” Fr. Moyo explained. The justice system should be centered on the rehabilitation of people and, after that, he advocated, leaving “it to God to decide on human life.”

(source: vaticannews.va)

NIGERIA:

OAU student killing: Appeal court upholds Adedoyin’s death sentence

The Court of Appeal sitting in Akure, the Ondo State capital has upheld the death sentence of a popular hotel owner, Dr Ramon Adedoyin, who was found guilty in the murder case of an ex-Master’s student of the Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Timothy Adegoke.

According to the court’s judgment on Thursday, the appellate court noted that the judgment by the Osun State High Court which sentenced Adedoyin to death stands.

The appeal court had reserved judgment on October 29, 2024

The judgment read in parts, “The judgment of the High Court of ?`?un State stands. Adedoyin’s appeal is dismissed in part. The Court of Appeal held that Adedoyin was properly convicted and sentenced to death.”

It further noted that the “Order of forfeiture of Hilton Hotel quashed and set aside. Order of education scholarship to children of Timothy Adegoke by Adedoyin and others quashed and set aside.”

Adegoke was found dead in November 2021 at Adedoyin’s Hilton Honours Hotel, Ile-Ife, where he (the deceased) had lodged.

On January 29, 2022, the late 37-year-old Master of Business Administration student was buried beside the house he built for his parents in the New Eruwa part of Eruwa town, the Ibarapa East Local Government Area of Oyo State.

He was mourned by family members, friends and beneficiaries.

His widow, Bolatito, wept uncontrollably and refused to leave the graveside despite pleas that she should step aside.

In March same year, Afeez Olaniyan, the Investigative Police Officer who undertook the first probe into Adegoke’s death, narrated how some defendants arraigned in connection with the deceased’s death, evacuated and dumped his (Adegoke’s) corpse in the bush.

Being led in evidence by the prosecution counsel, M. Omosun, during the continuation of the trial, Olaniyan said from the statement extracted from two of the staffers of the Hilton Hotels–Adeniyi Aderogba and Oyetunde Kazeem, after the death of the late Adegoke, his corpse was wrapped with a duvet, and taken out in a Hilux van driven by the son of the hotel owner, Roheem Adedoyin, to where it was dumped.

A consultant pathologist at the Osun State University Teaching Hospital, Osogbo, Dr Waheed Oluogun, said Adegoke’s death was caused by severe haemorrhage secondary to severe traumatic injury.

(source: punchng.com)

DR CONGO:

ALARMING INCREASE IN DEATH SENTENCES AS GOVERNMENT THREATENS TO RESUME EXECUTIONS

Amnesty International is deeply alarmed at the soaring number of death sentences imposed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), with at least 300 death sentences handed down by military courts since the government announced their intention in March 2024 to resume executions. This includes 25 soldiers accused of “fleeing the enemy” sentenced by a military court in the eastern city of Butembo, 26 people accused of being members of a Rwandan-backed armed group sentenced by military courts in the capital Kinshasa

Amnesty International is deeply alarmed at the soaring number of death sentences imposed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), with at least 300 death sentences handed down by military courts since the government announced their intention in March 2024 to resume executions.1 This includes 25 soldiers accused of “fleeing the enemy” sentenced by a military court in the eastern city of Butembo,2 26 people accused of being members of a Rwandan-backed armed group sentenced by military courts in the capital Kinshasa,3 37 individuals, including citizens from the USA, Canada, Belgium and the UK, accused of “attempting to overthrow the government”4, and more than 170 alleged members of gangs commonly known as “kuluna” in Kinshasa.5

The DRC authorities must immediately halt any plans to carry out executions and address the increasing use of death sentences, including by establishing an official moratorium on the use of the death penalty and taking concrete steps to advance the ongoing legislative process to fully abolish the death penalty. Amnesty International has not recorded any execution of a death sentence in the DRC since 2003. Since the March 2024 announcement, however, death sentences have increased ten folds compared to the 33 Amnesty recorded at the end of 2023.6

The DRC government justified its declared intention to resume executions by the need to combat “treason” within the army at a time when the DRC is facing an escalation of armed conflicts, particularly the resurgence of the armed group March 23 Movement (M23) supported by Rwanda, and the need to end deadly gang violence in several cities, including the capital Kinshasa. 7 This reflects the misconception that capital punishment is necessary to ensure national security and make people and communities safer. However, there is no convincing evidence that the death penalty has a unique deterrent effect.8

Governments that retain the death penalty often invoke this cruel punishment as a ‘quick fix’ to crime or other social ills, but its use is a symptom of a culture of violence that is rarely effective in addressing concerns over public security and crime.

1 Note circulaire n°002/MME/CAB/ ME/MIN/J&GS/2024 du 13 mars 2024 relative à la levée du moratoire sur l’exécution de la peine de mort en République démocratique du Congo (Circular No 002/MME/CAB/ ME/MIN/J&GS/2024 of 13 March 2024 on the lifting of the moratorium on execution of the death penalty in the Democratic Republic of the Congo),

https://www.peinedemort.org/document/12106/Note-Circulaire-relative-ala-levee-du-moratoire-sur-l-execution-de-la-peine-de-mort-en-Republique-democratique-du-Congo

2 Aljazeera, DRC tribunal sentences 25 soldiers to death for ‘fleeing the enemy’, 4 July 2024, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/7/4/dr-congosentences-25-soldiers-to-death-military

3 Aljazeera, DR Congo military court sentences 26 armed group members to death, 9 August 2024, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/8/9/drcongo-military-court-sentences-26-armed-group-members-to-death

4 Aljazeera, DR Congo military court sentences 37 to death in coup trial, 13 September 2024, DR Congo military court sentences 37 to death in coup trial

5 See Amnesty International, “DRC: President Tshisekedi must halt plans to carry out mass executions”, 7 January 2025, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/01/drc-president-tshisekedi-must-halt-plans-to-carry-out-mass-executions/

6 Amnesty International, Death sentences and executions in 2023, 29 May 2024, https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/act50/7952/2024/en/

7 Note circulaire n°002/MME/CAB/ ME/MIN/J&GS/2024 (previously cited).

8 Amnesty International, Not making us safer: Crime, public safety and the death penalty, 10 October 2013, https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/ACT51/002/2013/en/

Iternational law and standards have long established abolition as the goal for countries that retain the death penalty.9 The UN Human Rights Committee, the independent expert body tasked with the interpretation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to which the DRC is a party, has noted that the death penalty cannot be reconciled with full respect for the right to life.10 The Committee has further stressed that abolition of the death penalty is both desirable and necessary to enhance human dignity and human rights.11

Under international human rights law, States that have not yet abolished the death penalty can only apply it in a manner that is not arbitrary. The UN Human Rights Committee has clarified that this must be interpreted broadly to include elements of inappropriateness, injustice, lack of predictability and due process of law, as well as elements of reasonableness, necessity and proportionality.12

Amnesty International has previously expressed concern over numerous problems affecting the administration of justice in the DRC, including serious violations of the right to a fair trial.13 President Tshisekedi himself has on several occasions complained publicly about the malfunctioning of the country’s justice system, including describing it as “sick”.14 In particular, the authorities have continued to use military courts to try civilians and prosecute offenses that are not of a purely military nature.

Under international and regional human rights laws and standards, the use of military courts must be restricted to trying military personnel for breaches of military discipline.15 Military trials of civilians are problematic because the prosecutors and judges are serving members of the military and subject to its hierarchy and therefore lack independence and impartiality.16 Human rights mechanisms have categorically stated that military courts should not have the authority to impose the death penalty.17

The death penalty is the ultimate denial of human rights and violates the rights to life and to be free from torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as reflected in the development of international human rights law and standards and protected by treaties to which the DRC is a party to.18

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception, regardless of the nature or circumstances of the crime; guilt, innocence or other characteristics of the individual; or the method used by the state to carry out the execution.

9 Article 6(6) of the ICCPR.

10 UN Human Rights Committee, General comment No. 36 (2018) on article 6 ICCPR on the right to life, UN Doc. CCPR/C/GC/36, para.50.

11 UN Human Rights Committee, General comment No. 36 (2018), para. 50 (previously cited).

12 UN Human Rights Committee, General comment No. 36 (2018), para. 12 (previously cited).

13 Amnesty International, The State of the World’s Human Rights, 23 April 2024, para. 52,

https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/pol10/7200/2024/en/; Amnesty International, Fair Trial Manual (Second Edition), Chapter 29.4, 9 April 2014,

https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/pol30/002/2014/en/; and Amnesty International, DRC: Reinstating executions shows a callous disregard for human rights, 15 March 2024,

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/03/drc-reinstating-executions-shows-a-callous-disregardfor-human-rights/

14 Amnesty International, DRC: Reinstating executions shows a callous disregard for human rights (previously cited).

15 UN Human Rights Committee, General comment No. 36 (2018), para. 45 (previously cited); African Commission on Human and People’s Rights, Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa, 29 May 2003, https://achpr.au.int/index.php/en/node/879 ,

16 Amnesty International, Fair Trial Manual (Second Edition), Chapter 29.4, (previously cited).

17 UN Human Rights Committee, General comment No. 36 (2018).

18 The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 10 December 1948, https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/universal-declaration-of-human-rights/;

UN General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI), International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966,

https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-and-political-rights; General Assembly resolution 39/46, Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 10 December 1984, https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-against-torture-and-other-cruel-inhuman-or-degrading; and African Union, African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, 01 June 1981, https://au.int/en/treaties/african-charter-human-and-peoples-rights

In October, the UN General Assembly elected the DRC to become a member of the Human Rights Council for the term 2025-2027. In a statement to the Council, the DRC’s Deputy Speaker said that the National Assembly was working to avoid any abuse of the government's decision to resume executions.19 In order to fulfil this promise and its commitment to protect and promote human rights as a member of the Council, Amnesty International calls on President Tshisekedi to immediately, publicly and unambiguously halt any plans to execute people. The DRC authorities must urgently consider an official moratorium on the use of the death penalty pending the ongoing legislative process for its abolition.

19 Jean Claude Tshilumbayi, First Vice-President of the National Assembly, La RDC s’explique au Conseil des droits de l’homme sur la la levée du moratoire sur la peine de mort, 05/11/2024, https://actualite.cd/2024/11/06/la-rdc-sexplique-au-conseil-des-droits-de-lhomme-sur-la-la-levee-dumoratoire-sur-la#google_vignette

(source: Amnesty International)

BANGLADESH:

3 to walk gallows in Savar Jahid murder case

A court here today convicted and sentenced 3 people to death in a case lodged over the murder of one Jahid Hossain in Savar in 2013.

Judge Israt Jahan Munni of Dhaka 5th Additional District and Sessions Judge Court pronounced the judgment, also fining the convicts Taka 10,000 each.

The 3 death-row-convicts are Qazi Ahsan Takbir, Md Kazal and Lal Chan.

Of the 3 convicts, Md Kazal was produced before the court during the pronouncement of the judgment, and he was sent back to jail with a conviction warrant. Two other convicts were tried in absentia as they are yet to be arrested.

According to the case documents, Jahid Hossain had a long-standing enmity with the convicts. On July 17, 2013, convict Lal Chan took him to the Hijlapara area of Arapara in Savar and hacked him indiscriminately along with other killers. Jahid was rushed to Savar Enam Medical College Hospital, where he succumbed from his injuries.

Victim's father Md Anwar Hossain filed the case with Savar Model Police Station. Police on August 30, 2015, filed charge-sheet against 3 and the court on March 2, 2016, framed charges against them and initiated the trial officially.

The court today came up with the judgment after examining 15 of the total 16 witnesses on different hearing dates.

(source: bssnews.net)

CHINA----executions

China executes 2 mass murderers

In November, China suffered the deadliest mass murder in the past decade. 70 days later, on Monday, China executed the perpetrator, along with another killer responsible for a subsequent attack.

The speed of the verdict and punishment was applauded by Chinese netizens but drew criticism from legal analysts who argue that the killers' speedy executions will fail to prevent future crime.

Fan Weiqiu, 62, drove his car into crowds of people around Zhuhai Stadium in Guangdong province, killing 35 and injuring 43.

At his trial on December 27, Fan stated that he was motivated by his dissatisfaction with his divorce settlement. The court delivered his death sentence that same day, calling his motivations "extremely vile, [and] the nature of the crime extremely egregious."

Messages of support for Fan's execution were posted on Weibo. One user, named Dentist Wu Bin, commented that the criminal's death was "satisfying to everyone."

Another user from Hong Kong, called A Girl's Runaway Dream, wrote: "I support the verdict! Don't let these bad people remain to ring in the [lunar] new year. I hope the dead rest in peace, justice will never be late!"

Fat Brother Yang Li from Jiangsu echoed his fellow commenters, posting: "This is to be done quickly, seriously and severely. Close the case while it is still fresh in people's minds. To both give an explanation to the people, and also to effectively deter criminals."

Still, a small number of netizens expressed skepticism of the death penalty. Weibo user Shumu Yangshenwo in Hainan province posted: "When will it be possible for China to abolish the death penalty as a form of torture?"

Xu Jiajin, the other criminal executed on Monday, was convicted for the deaths of 8 people and the injuries of 17 others at his alma mater, a technical school in Wuxi. The 21-year-old returned to get revenge after failing his final exams and not receiving his graduation certificate.

Online communities circulated his suicide note in which Xu wrote, "I hope my death will push labor laws forward. Don't mistake me as a doormat, but some scores must always be settled."

Xu's execution followed a mere 66 days after his crime and sentencing. The turnaround of under three months from crime to punishment in the two cases has led some legal analysts to question the legitimacy of China's judicial system.

Ignatius Lee, a political and legal blogger with more than 79,000 followers on X, told VOA that the executions represent a "serious regression of the judicial system" in China. Even with conclusive evidence, the speed at which the trial and execution were conducted reveals the lack of error-correction procedures within the judiciary.

"Outside of satisfying the public's desire for revenge, this has no judicial merit," Lee said.

All public knowledge of the criminals and their motivations comes from police reports, which in a way “puts a gag on their mouths.”

The lack of transparency surrounding the trials and their verdicts, Lee said, makes it hard for the public to learn anything from the cases and to take measures to prevent their recurrence.

To Lee, the most common causes of such revenge crimes are legal injustice and failed petitions to government offices. The petition system, which allows ordinary Chinese citizens to express grievances to county governments, has a very low success rate and has led to instability, as long wait times force petitioners to go to extremes to express their dissatisfaction.

Wu Shaoping, a former Beijing human rights lawyer now living in New York, views these 2 murder cases as representative of the Chinese judiciary's failure to address root problems and prevent violence.

"In these two cases, the CCP is acting typically in that it has not disclosed [the motives] to the outside world, nor has it allowed the public to discuss them. It still wants to cover it up so that, because there is no way for people to explore this issue in depth, the root causes of the social problems cannot be found, and to find a cure [to prevent such crime]," Wu said.

China was considering reforms to the death penalty prior to President Xi Jinping's administration. Such reforms, which have not been readdressed under Xi's tenure, included transferring review power of death penalty verdicts to China's highest court to ensure that verdicts are fair, Wu said.

Wu argues that the motives of these 2 murderers and others before them stem from social or economic grievances. Discussing and addressing social issues, however, is a "off-limits zone to the Chinese Communist Party," he says, as party officials fear that addressing larger issues might undermine their rule.

Kevin Slaten, who manages Freedom House's China Dissent Monitor, said that the 2 murder cases underscored the legal system's political utility to China.

"From the CCP's perspective, these cases needed to progress quickly for 2 reasons. Slaten told VOA.

"First, to make the public believe that the government is promptly handling public security issues. Second, by closing these cases as earlier as possible, it seeks to more quickly end public discussion of the context behind their motives, which involves social problems in China, including the economic slowdown.”

China's legal system is marked by two extremes, Slaten added.

On one end, detained human rights activists have to wait for months and sometimes years before being brought to trial. On the other hand, Fan and Xu were taken into court immediately, with executions following not even three months after their crimes, he said.

(source: voanews.com)

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

Chinese court upholds death penalty for man convicted of trafficking children

A higher court on Tuesday upheld the death sentence for Wang Haowen, who was convicted of trafficking children.

The higher court in southwest China's Sichuan Province heard his appeal and decided to reject it, maintaining the original verdict. The ruling will be referred to the Supreme People's Court for final approval.

Court documents showed that Wang, either acting alone or in collaboration with accomplices, abducted 14 children from regions including Hubei and Sichuan and sold them in regions such as Shantou in Guangdong from 2001 to 2014.

In May 2024, an intermediate court in Sichuan sentenced Wang to death for child trafficking, stripped him of his political rights for life, and ordered the confiscation of all his personal assets. Wang appealed the decision after hearing the ruling.

(source: english.news.cn)

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

Man Sentenced to Death over Attack on Japanese in China

A Chinese district court on Thursday sentenced a man to death over an attack on 2 Japanese people that left a Chinese woman dead in Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, eastern China, last June, Japanese Foreign Ministry officials said.

The court in Suzhou did not mention Japan in either the first trial hearing or the ruling.

According to the ministry officials, the court said 52-year-old Zhou Jiasheng either killed or injured 3 people, including a child, because he was tired of living in debt, adding that his crime was extremely heinous.

The court concluded that capital punishment is appropriate, given the massive social impact of the incident.

On June 24, 2024, the Japanese woman and her child were injured by the man with a knife while they were waiting for a Japanese school bus at a bus stop. The Chinese woman, Hu Youping, who was a guide on the bus, was killed in the attack.

(source: nippon.com)

JAPAN:

Japan film reveals human face of exonerated killer Hakamata

When Chiaki Kasai set out to make a documentary about Iwao Hakamata, a Japanese man who was acquitted in a retrial of a 1966 quadruple murder case after spending more than four decades on death row, she hoped to tell the story of his life as a promising young boxer before his life was upended by tragedy.

It was a marked departure from the fascination with Hakamata as a presumed killer as a starting point, with the film describing a pugilist driven by ambitions of building a professional sporting career.

Sadly, the resilience he had in the ring could only be used as an asset in his fight against incarceration. He was recognized as the world's longest-serving death row inmate when new evidence won his release from prison in 2014.

"Fists and Prayers," directed by Kasai and released in October 2024 in Japan, also explores how the 88-year-old Hakamata created a spiritual world to comfort himself from the prospect of being sent to the gallows.

In 1966 when he was 30 years old, Hakamata, a retired professional boxer and live-in employee at a miso factory, was arrested for murdering the firm's senior managing director, his wife, and 2 of their children.

The victims were found dead from stab wounds at their house in Shizuoka Prefecture, which had been burned down.

Hakamata's lawyers say he was interrogated by police for a total of 430 hours over 23 days, and nearly 17 hours in at least 1 session, adding that a false confession was obtained after he was kicked, clubbed and denied water and access to a toilet.

He was indicted for murder, robbery, and arson. His mental state deteriorated over his interminable imprisonment, with signs of psychological strain manifesting from around 1980 when his death sentence was finalized.

Kasai, a 50-year-old former television reporter, first became acquainted with Hakamata's case in January 2002 when she was working on the Shizuoka prefectural police beat.

"The incident itself had all but been forgotten by the world," she recalled of the period from when Hakamata's first appeal for a retrial was denied almost a decade earlier by the Shizuoka District Court.

Once Kasai learned over 20 years ago that Hakamata had written letters to his family from behind bars, she knew that she had to hold and read them for herself as a way to engage physically with the man awaiting execution on death row.

She called his sister Hideko, now 91, and visited her at home a few days later where she was shown a pile of letters in a condition that made it clear they had been read many times. Handling them with care, she said, "They made me realize Mr. Hakamata is a real person."

She said the writings were kind, if somewhat naive, showing how much he cared for his family, but Kasai could hardly believe they were written by a man who could be executed any day.

Chiaki Kasai, who filmed a documentary about the life of Iwao Hakamata through his recent acquittal in a retrial over a 1966 quadruple murder case, holds up a poster of the film during an interview in Tokyo on Dec. 26, 2024. (Kyodo) Even though she was busy with her TV reporting career, she continued to see Hideko now and again to learn more about her brother as visiting the prison to talk with him in person was impossible.

The documentary includes the scene when Hakamata was released from the Tokyo Detention House in March 2014, capturing his very first moments of freedom after 47 years and seven months behind bars.

No one, including his sister, could have expected him to be released so suddenly given he was still considered guilty, Kasai said.

Last year, Hakamata's case became the fifth in postwar Japan in which a retiral resulted in an exoneration after the death penalty was handed down but not carried out, with all rulings finalized without an appeal by prosecutors. But his was the first in which a death row inmate was released before winning an acquittal, Kasai said.

Kasai was one of only a handful of passengers inside the van that drove Hakamata away after he was freed, recalling the moment when she met him for the first time, saying, "It was such a miracle. I never thought that I would see him alive."

Shortly afterward, she set her mind on creating a film about Hakamata, adding, "I had no choice but to start filming to make it something that could be passed down through generations." It was this decision that put her on a path to becoming a freelance filmmaker.

Kasai took the bulk of over 400 hours of video footage captured after Hakamata's release and condensed it down, capturing his daily life and casual conversations at his residence with his sister where they lived together.

"What I desired to show in the film was not anything about the incident itself but rather about Mr. Hakamata as a person," she said, referring to how the focus of the murder case often became the starting point for people to talk about his life.

Rather, she was determined to humanize Hakamata by focusing on the "precious" 30 years of life before his arrest, especially as a professional fighter coming up in his 20s.

Many in Japan's boxing community came out to vouch for Hakamata's innocence at the time of the accusations, speaking to the stoic nature of boxers who are used to rising from the canvas after being knocked down, says Shosei Nitta, who chairs the Iwao Hakamata support committee at the Japan Pro Boxing Associations.

Nitta suggested at a Tokyo press conference attended by Kasai that many could "empathize with the hardship and pain of a fellow fighter who, like in the ring, tries to overcome being knocked down."

When the film was screened last year for the first time overseas, in the United States, Kasai was moved by the audience who responded positively and even found humor in some scenes.

Many said they were riveted by Hakamata and the fictitious world he had created in which he referred to himself as "the omnipotent God," who had "absorbed" Iwao Hakamata and abolished the death penalty in Japan.

Mental health experts familiar with Hakamata's case but not featured in the film suggest his personality quirks were the result of his becoming institutionalized at the detention center.

In the editing of the film, Kasai felt it essential to highlight Hakamata's enduring sense of humor.

Simple communication between Hakamata and Hideko often caused laughter due to his sister's jokes and his charming behavior, such as tipping a doctor who had lectured him about his high blood sugar levels, then asking if he could have a glass of juice.

"Humor has the power of showing not only superficial laughter but also the strength and kindness of human beings," Kasai said.

Although Hakamata and his sister were forced to spend much of their time apart during a cruel and tragic time until his acquittal on Sept. 26 last year, they have maintained a positive and cheerful outlook.

"I also wanted to make everyone feel invigorated after watching their humorous scenes together," she said.

The film has been screened at theaters across Japan.

Kasai and her work won the Japan Documentary Film Award given by the Japan Council of the University of Pittsburgh and Screenshot Asia, with a selection committee saying it made them "think deeply about how severely capital punishment impacts people."

Kasai, who says Hakamata's case is what sparked her interest in Japan's often criticized criminal justice system, plans to continue documenting his life. "Making a film was not the goal. Because Mr. Hakamata is a surviving witness, I film him," she said.

Capital punishment in Japan, in her estimate, has all but been hidden from society, but she believes there should be more opportunities to start a debate about the contemporary use of the death penalty, saying, "I want the film to be a catalyst to think about it."

(source: english.kyodonews.net)

PAKISTAN:

IHC commutes death penalty of two convicts to life term in Osama Satti murder case

(see: https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2025/01/22/ihc-commutes-death-penalty-of-two-convicts-to-life-term-in-osama-satti-murder-case/)

INDIA:

Hanging in imbalance----Death sentence in the Sharon murder case has become polarising talking point. TNIE speaks to experts to assess the verdict

On Monday, the sensational ‘Sharon murder case’ reached a sensational culmination at the Neyyattinkara Additional Sessions Court. S S Greeshma, 24, the prime accused in the murder of 23-year-old Sharon Raj, was awarded the death sentence.

With this, Greeshma has become the youngest-ever woman death row prisoner in Kerala. The judgement, however, has polarised Kerala society. While some have celebrated the death penalty as justice served, others argue that the punishment is disproportionate and have called for the abolition of capital punishment.

Judge A M Basheer, who delivered the death sentence, agreed with the prosecution that it was one of the “rarest of the rare cases”. Though the case was built on circumstantial evidence, he stated Greeshma deserved capital punishment, relying on her digital footprint for the sentencing.

“In a metaphorical way of saying, the God in the cloud saved the data of crime,” the judge remarked.

Noting that many events pointed to premeditation, he described Sharon’s murder as “extremely brutal, gruesome, diabolical, and revolting”.

Greeshma and Sharon were in a relationship, which the former wished to end in 2022. Sharon, however, was allegedly unwilling to part ways. It was alleged that Greeshma initially gave Sharon mango juice mixed with heavy doses of paracetamol, which he refused to drink due to its bitter taste.

Later, on October 14, 2022, when Greeshma called Sharon over to her house, and allegedly offered him an ‘Ayurvedic tonic’. He started throwing up the same day. His condition deteriorated within 24 hours.

According to reports, he suffered irreversible damage to his liver, kidney and lungs after consuming the poisonous concoction, which was prepared by mixing paraquat, a herbicide, with the tonic. He died of multiple organ failure 11 days later.

The judge highlighted that the crime instilled fear and psychosis in the public. Reports quoted him as saying that Greeshma’s act “desecrated the sanctity of love, sending a disturbing message to society”.

“It gave a message that a lover cannot be trusted,” he stated.

“Being an attempt of murder earlier and murder later, after breaching trust and love, is a rarest of rare case and hence the convict must be given capital punishment.”

In India, the death penalty is awarded only in the ‘rarest of rare’ cases. However, the definition of ‘rarest of rare’ is often subject to varying interpretations.

In 1983, the Supreme Court judgement in Machhi Singh vs State of Punjab laid down specific criteria for this, such as the manner of murder, motives, and proportionality of the crime. Examples included multiple murders, or if the victim was a child, a helpless woman, an infirm or elderly person, or a public figure, etc.

According to a public prosecutor, who prefers to remain anonymous, the ‘crime test’ and ‘criminal test’ are essential in determining whether a murder qualifies as ‘rarest of rare’.

“Either the crime has to be so gruesome, or the accused should be a repeat offender who poses a danger to society and is unlikely to reform even after imprisonment,” he says.

TNIE speaks to experts about the case.

R Sreelekha IPS, former DGP

I am not against capital punishment in the ‘rarest of the rare’ cases, but I don’t believe the 24-year-old woman convicted of murder (Greeshma) deserves it. There are guidelines on when to award capital punishment. The RG Kar case called for the death sentence, but, surprisingly, it was not given. The Greeshma case verdict is being celebrated by many here at a time when there are efforts to bring back murder accused convicted in courts abroad. This shows the double standards of society here.

Rekha Raj, writer and activist

A developed country should never allow death penalty. What the state should do is provide a mechanism to reform such people. In recent times, some courts have been trying to please the masses, that’s not the court’s job. Justice is not about pleasing the crowd. I don’t think this verdict will stand scrutiny in higher courts. Yes, Sharon’s family is going through an incredible loss. However, does a death penalty actually give them justice? As a society, we should also discuss how to address the financial and socio-cultural angles in such crimes.

Adv Sandhya Raju George

In this case, the death penalty was imposed on circumstantial grounds and presumptions. There is no conclusive evidence. Greeshma’s relationship and premarital sexual intimacy with the deceased have been used to frame her as an evil woman. There was a strong assumption about the ‘unofficial’ marriage they had reportedly entered into. Mobile phone records have been interpreted to show her in a negative light. And it is particularly glaring when the judgement of the Kolkata R G Kar Hospital Rape case, a brutal rape and murder that resulted in nationwide protests, also came on the same day – a lower court judge restrained from capital punishment, stating the case did not qualify as the ‘rarest of the rare’.

K Jayakumar, former chief secretary

The relevance of capital punishment in a civilised society is what I would like to flag. I believe in reformative correctional measures. Every human, however heinous a criminal, should be given a chance to correct oneself. Our correctional methods should incorporate that mechanism, rather than resort to ‘an eye for an eye’ approach, which will only render the whole society blind. Nobody is born a criminal.

Kemal Pasha, former High Court justice

The number of death penalties has increased steeply in recent times. The murder has to be the ‘rarest of the rare’ to be awarded death sentence. That means a lesser alternative should be unquestionably foreclosed. And for that, there should be substantial facts supporting the case. Also, the accused should not be too young or too old. But in this case, the accused is a first-time offenderl. Ultimately, what was the motive? She wanted to break up, but he wouldn’t allow that. If you look at the judgment, it is mentioned that she had tried to end the relationship on the same day she gave him the concoction. Looking at earlier SC verdicts, this case can never be seen as ‘rarest of the rare’.

Adv J Sandhya

The principle of our criminal law is that life (life imprisonment) is a rule and death is an exception. This judgement is an antithesis of that. We can see that the court was swayed by the public sentiment and media trial. It appeared like playing to the gallery. Even those who support the judgement are saying that this verdict would be overturned in higher courts. However, the casual approach some courts have been taking towards death penalty of late is scary. This sets a bad trend. For some, nothing but capital punishment is acceptable for a case that has been through a media trial. The court shouldn’t succumb to public sentiment.

Rishiraj Singh IPS, former DGP

This talk against capital punishment is unwarranted. It’s not about being civilised or uncivilised, but more about the gravity of the crime. Look at the RG Kar case, and how there are conflicting opinions about the verdict. When the case is ‘rarest of the rare’, the verdict also has to be in accordance with that. All those who say it isn’t humane should be asked what if the victim were close to them. Would they still say the same? Also, the court must have considered the punishment as a deterrent to such crimes.

(source: newindianexpress.com)

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

DyCM Shinde seeks death penalty for those involved in sarpanch murder; says none will be spared

Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde on Wednesday said those involved in the sarpanch Santosh Deshmukh murder case will not be spared, and sought death sentence to the accused for the "heinous" crime.

Deshmukh, the sarpanch of Massajog village in Beed district, was abducted and tortured to death on December 9. Preliminary investigation indicated that he had tried to resist an extortion attempt targeting an energy company operating a windmill project in the area.

The murder case triggered a political slugfest as Walmik Karad, a close aide of NCP minister Dhananjay Munde, was arrested in the extortion case linked to the sarpanch murder case.

(source: ptinews.com)

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

Chhattisgarh gangrape-triple murder: Korba court hands death penalty to 5 who killed teen, her father and his niece----In a landmark judgment, a POCSO court in Korba sentenced 5 individuals to death and 1 to life imprisonment for the sexual assault and murder of a minor girl and her family members. The crime, deemed exceptionally disturbing, involved the 16-year-old victim’s employer and his accomplices.

In a landmark ruling, a POCSO court in Korba awarded death penalty to 5 individuals and life imprisonment to another for sexually assaulting a minor girl from the Korwa community in her father's presence, followed by the brutal killing of her father and young niece.

The victim, sustained serious injuries after being attacked with a stone by the accused after her rape, survived in the forest for four days until she was rescued but later succumbed during treatment, according to Special Public Prosecutor, POCSO, Sunil Mishra.

Additional sessions judge, SC/ST (POCSO), Korba, Dr Mamta Bhojwani, deemed the crime as exceptionally rare and disturbing, posing a societal threat.

"Even as I prayed for the death penalty for all the 6 accused, one of them identified as Umashankar Yadav, aged about 22-23, was sentenced to life imprisonment on medical grounds. According to the medical report of Yadav, he underwent an operation losing his private part following an accident and therefore his involvement in the rape was doubtful. However, his role in the conspiracy was established during the hearing. Therefore, Yadav was convicted under Section 302," the Special Public Prosecutor told TOI.

The primary accused, Santram Majhwa, aged about 45-46, employed the victim's family as daily wage workers, paying Rs 600 and 10 kg of rice monthly. Santram harboured inappropriate intentions towards the 16-year-old girl who was a member of the labourers’ family. The situation escalated when the girl's father announced their decision to cease working for Santram as he was unable to manage his family’s livelihood with such a meagre payment.

While the family was heading to the bus stand, Santram intercepted them, offering transport assistance. He summoned his associates Anil Kumar Sarthi, aged about 20-21, Pardesi Das, aged about 35-36, Anand Das, aged about 26-27, Abdul Jabbar alias Vicky, aged about 21-22, and Umashankar Yadav. They arranged motorcycles for transport. Santram, carrying the victim and her father, deliberately reduced speed, allowing his accomplices to advance.

Santram then stopped his motorcycle and committed the crime with the minor girl. He was soon joined by his other convicts.

The incident occurred in April 2021, at Kosgaimodgadha in Uprora jungles of Satrenga, Korba district. The perpetrators assaulted the girl before her father, who was killed when he resisted.

They also murdered the victim's 3-4-year-old niece.

The Special Judge imposed death sentences on 5 accused under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, while 1 received life imprisonment under Section 302 of the IPC, as stated by the Special Public Prosecutor.

(The victim's identity has not been revealed to protect her privacy as per Supreme Court directives on cases related to sexual assault)

(source: timesofindia.indiatimes.com)

PHILIPPINES:

Corrupt gov’t officials face firing squad under new bill----‘Corruption remains one of the gravest threats to the Philippines’ social, economic and political development’

The proposal to reinstate the death penalty is making a comeback, this time suggesting firing squad executions for public officials convicted of corruption.

House Bill 11211, or the Death Penalty for Corruption Act, proposes that public officials — whether elected or appointed — convicted by the Sandiganbayan of graft and corruption, malversation of public funds, or plunder be executed by firing squad.

Capital punishment shall be applied to members of the executive branch, including the President, legislative and judicial branches; those serving in constitutional commissions, government-owned and-controlled corporations, and other instrumentalities; as well as members of the police and military forces.

The bill, however, requires that the conviction or the ruling by the Sandiganbayan, the country’s anti-graft court, shall undergo legal remedies and must be upheld by the Supreme Court.

The bill’s proponent, Zamboanga Rep. Khymer Olaso, said the proposal was prompted by the continued prevalence of corruption in the country despite existing laws designed to combat the wrongdoing.

“Corruption remains one of the gravest threats to the Philippines’ social, economic, and political development. The misuse of public funds and the betrayal of public trust not only undermine the government’s legitimacy but also deprive millions of Filipinos of essential services, infrastructure, and opportunities for growth,” the bill reads.

The Philippines was the first Asian country to abolish the death penalty under the 1987 Constitution, but then President Fidel V. Ramos restored it in 1993 through Republic Act 7569.

13 years later, former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo scrapped capital punishment for the 2nd time by signing into law RA 9346, prohibiting the death penalty in the Philippines.

Former President Rodrigo Duterte made 2 attempts to revive the death penalty for heinous crimes related to drugs and plunder, but both efforts failed to gain support in Congress.

Olaso was not the first lawmaker to revive the push for the death penalty under the Marcos administration. Aside from his bill, there are four similar proposals filed in the present Congress. The measures, however, remain pending at the committee level.

Much like divorce, the reintroduction of the death penalty in this predominantly Catholic country remains a flashpoint between religious and progressive groups, with the former claiming it’s a grievous act against God.

(source: tribune.net.ph)

IRAN----executions

Women in Evin Prison Protest Executions with Hunger Strike

A group of women prisoners in Tehran's Evin Prison began a 2-day hunger strike on Tuesday to protest capital punishment in Iran.

The strike, scheduled for January 21-22, coincides with the 52nd week of the "No to Execution Tuesdays" campaign, a prisoner-led initiative against capital punishment in Iran.

Golrokh Iraee, a detained activist held in Evin since September 2024, announced the strike on social media.

She reported through her Instagram account that the women are also expressing solidarity with a broader strike in Kurdistan.

The protest spread to other facilities, with male prisoners in Shiraz's Adelabad Prison joining the hunger strike on Tuesday.

The United Nations Human Rights Office reported that the Islamic Republic executed 901 people in 2024, including 31 women.

Many of the women executed were convicted of murder while defending themselves or their family members from domestic violence, rape, or forced marriage.

While most executions were for drug-related offenses, the UN also reported that political dissidents and individuals connected to the 2022 protests were among those executed.

(source: iranwire.com)

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

Online Conference on the “No to Execution Tuesdays” Campaign

On Tuesday, January 21, 2025, Iran Human Rights Monitor hosted an online conference commemorating the 1st anniversary of the “No to Execution Tuesdays” hunger strikes in Iranian prisons. The event highlighted the rising execution rates in Iran and the resilience of political prisoners. It urged Western countries, especially European nations and institutions, to predicate their engagement with the Iranian regime on concrete human rights improvements, specifically demanding a halt to executions and the release of political prisoners.

Speakers included Herta Daubler-Gmelin, former German Minister of Justice; Ingrid Betancourt, former Colombian senator and presidential candidate; Tahar Boumedra, former Chief of the Human Rights Office of the UNAMI, and President of the NGO “Justice for the Victims of the 1988 Massacre in Iran” (JVMI); and Elisabetta Zamparutti, member of the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture and member of the board of the Italian NGO “Hands Off Cain”

The conference began with discussions on how the high number of executions in Iran reflects the regime’s fear of growing opposition and public discontent. Distinguished speakers emphasized that these executions are not merely punitive, but rather a strategic tool for suppressing dissent and maintaining the theocracy’s grip on power. In 2024 alone, Iran has witnessed a staggering 993 recorded executions, with 650 occurring during the presidency of Masoud Pezeshkian. This marks the highest execution rate in 30 years, including 32 women and 6 juveniles, underscoring a severe human rights crisis.

In her remarks, Mrs. Daubler-Gmelin renewed her support for the “No to Executions” campaigns and referred to the recent confirmation of the death sentences of two political prisoners for their affiliation with the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK), Iran’s principal democratic opposition group. She demanded, “Mehdi Hassani and Behrouz Ehsani to be immediately freed and taken off death row.” She emphasized, “Along with other political prisoners, they have brought the No to Executions Tuesdays to life.”

Tahar Boumedra highlighted that the execution spree in Iran violates international laws and treaties to which Iran is a party. He stated, “The mass executions in Iran are a political tool, violating the ICCPR. These actions may amount to crimes against humanity. We must demand accountability for the officials responsible for these atrocities in international courts.”

According to Elisabetta Zamparutti “1,000 executions are the pillar of the regime’s survival strategy. Today, I join the ‘No to Executions Tuesdays’ hunger strike in solidarity with Iran’s death row prisoners.” She stated that “being in death row in Iran is the darkest place in the world.”

Ingrid Betancourt paid tribute to political prisoner Saeed Masouri, one of the longest-held political prisoners in Iran, for his open letter, which was shared through video footage during the conference. She asked, “What does the peak of executions last year indicate? It’s not just that executions are a political instrument—they are a strategic tool, the only means of controlling the people.” She added, “Through fear, abuse of power, crime, and corruption, the regime reveals it has nothing left. A regime that must kill and imprison its citizens in massive numbers is a failed regime.” She emphasized, “We have to stop that regime from existing. We cannot continue to think that we can force, deter, or negotiate with them. This is a moment where the world must face the truth. We are confronting an evil regime that has to be stopped.”

Speakers noted that over the past 45 years, approximately 120,000 individuals have been executed for political reasons. The 1988 massacre, during which 30,000 political prisoners—predominantly supporters of the PMOI/MEK—were killed in just a few months, was highlighted as a pivotal moment in the regime’s brutal history.

Initiated by death row prisoners at Qezel-Hesar Prison on January 30, 2024, the “No to Execution Tuesdays” campaign has rapidly expanded to include over 34 prisons across Iran. Participants engage in hunger strikes every Tuesday to protest their unfair treatment and the harsh realities of life on death row, symbolically choosing Tuesday as their day of action. Despite violent crackdowns on protests, the resilience of political prisoners has garnered public support and amplified calls for justice.

On Human Rights Day, December 10, 2024, a significant global response emerged, with over 3,000 former world leaders, members of parliaments, human rights experts, and NGOs issuing a joint declaration stating.

The conference concluded with a strong call for the international community, particularly European nations, to condition their engagement with Iran on tangible human rights improvements. Speakers urged that diplomatic relations should be tied to the cessation of executions and the release of political prisoners, leveraging influence to advocate for justice.

The “No to Execution Tuesdays” campaign serves as a critical reminder of the ongoing struggle against political repression in Iran. The conference highlighted the urgent need for collective action from the international community to support the voices of those fighting for justice and human rights within the country. As the situation in Iran continues to evolve, the commitment to ending executions remains a vital call to action for all human rights advocates and organizations globally.

(source: iran-hrm.com)

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

Iran threatens Kurds protesting political prisoners’ death sentences: Watchdog

Iranian security forces have sent threatening messages to residents in the western Kurdish areas (Rojhelat) warning them against participating in the general strike called for by Kurdish opposition groups, a human rights watchdog reported on Wednesday.

“Therefore, in light of the call announced by the counter-revolutionary groups for strikes, gatherings, and acts of harassment, any presence or cooperation you make is considered to be in agreement with the terrorist group PJAK [Free Life Party of Kurdistan] and is subject to legal prosecution under Article 500 of the Islamic Penal Code,” the Hengaw Organization for Human Rights said, citing a text message sent to citizens by security forces.

On Monday, the Iranian Kurdish opposition groups called for a general strike in Rojhelat to condemn the Islamic republic's death sentences for political prisoners Pakhshan Azizi and Varisheh Moradi.

Both Azizi and Moradi have been sentenced to death for charges of “armed insurrection” and accused of being members of “terrorist groups”

On Wednesday, the semi-official Tasnim news agency, affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), said that there has been “no change” in Azizi’s looming execution.

Tasnim also accused Azizi’s lawyer - who is attempting to appeal her case - of being a member of PJAK.

Reports and footage from Hengaw show businesses and shops closed in the Kurdish cities of Mahabad, Sanandaj, Saqqez, Bukan, Divandarreh, and Kermanshah, with citizens heeding the call for a general strike by Kurdish opposition groups.

The groups who called for the general strike include the Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran (KDPI), Komala, the Free Life Party of Kurdistan (PJAK), and the Kurdistan Freedom Party (PAK).

(source: rudaw.net)

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

Iran judiciary says verdict still not final on singer Tataloo----After false reports he had been sentenced to death, Iran's judiciary has said that singer Tataloo's sentence has yet to be determined.

Iran's judiciary said Wednesday there has been "no definitive sentence" against popular singer Amir Hossein Maghsoudloo, known as Tataloo, days after local media reported he had been sentenced to death.

On Sunday, the reformist Etemad newspaper reported that the "Supreme Court accepted the prosecutor's objection" to a previous five-year jail term against Tataloo on charges of blasphemy.

"The case was reopened, and this time the defendant was sentenced to death for insulting the prophet," referring to Islam's Prophet Mohammed, the newspaper said.

It also said the verdict could be appealed.

"No definitive verdict has been issued yet," said judiciary spokesman Asghar Jahangir, asked at a press conference on Wednesday about the Tataloo case.

The 37-year-old singer performed as an underground musician and lived in Istanbul since 2018 before Turkish police handed him over to Iran in December 2023.

He has been in detention in Iran since then.

Tataloo's trial began in March 2024, and he was given a 10-year sentence on charges of promoting "prostitution", disseminating "propaganda" against the Islamic republic, and other "obscene content".

The heavily tattooed singer, known for combining rap, pop and R&B, was previously courted by conservative politicians including former president Ebrahim Raisi as a way of reaching out to young, liberal-minded Iranians.

In 2015, he published a song in support of Iran's nuclear programme that later unravelled in 2018 during the 1st US presidency of Donald Trump.

Tataloo was not the first popular singer to fall foul of the authorities in conservative Iran.

In December, 34-year-old rapper Toomaj Salehi was released from prison after being arrested in October 2022 for publicly backing demonstrations triggered by the death in custody of Iranian Kurdish woman Mahsa Amini.

(source: newarab.com)

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

Execution of 3 Prisoners in Zanjan, Borazjan, and Isfahan

On Monday and Tuesday, January 20 and 21, 3 prisoners were executed in Zanjan, Borazjan, and Isfahan on charges of murder and drug-related crimes.

According to HRANA, the news agency of Human Rights Activists in Iran, on Monday, a prisoner named Saeed Diani was executed in Dastgerd Prison, Isfahan, for drug-related charges.

On the same day, a prisoner named Hojat Shahriari was executed in Borazjan Prison, Bushehr province. A source told HRANA: “Mr. Shahriari had been arrested on charges of committing a murder motivated by ‘honor’ and was sentenced to death following an unfair judicial process.”

On Tuesday, another prisoner, Karim Faridi, was executed in Zanjan Prison on murder charges.

As of the time of this report, none of these executions have been officially announced by prison authorities or other relevant institutions.

In 2024, the Department of Statistics and Publication of Human Rights Activists in Iran documented 812 cases related to the right to life, including the sentencing of 214 individuals to death and the execution of 930 individuals. Among these, 4 executions were carried out in public. Of those executed, 818 were male, 26 were female, and 5 were juvenile offenders—individuals under 18 years old at the time of their alleged crimes.

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

Lawyer of Pakhshan Azizi: Execution Temporarily Halted

Maziar Tataei, a defense attorney, announced that the Supreme Court has approved the temporary suspension of the death sentence for Pakhshan Azizi, a political prisoner sentenced to execution.

In a statement, lawyer Maziar Tataei noted that during his follow-up at the Supreme Court for Azizi’s request for a retrial, the court branch handling the case agreed to suspend the execution in accordance with Note 478 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Previously, Amir Raisian, another lawyer for Pakhshan Azizi, reported that the Supreme Court had upheld Azizi’s death sentence, with Branch 39 dismissing the case’s numerous procedural flaws and confirming the sentence.

On July 24, Azizi was sentenced to death and 4 years in prison by Branch 26 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court, presided over by Judge Iman Afshari, on charges of “armed rebellion (baghi)” through alleged membership in dissident groups.

On August 4, 2023, Azizi, along with her 67-year-old father Aziz Azizi (a lymphoma patient), her sister Parshang (49), and her sister’s husband Hossein Abbasi (49), was arrested in Tehran. The arrests were carried out by approximately 20 armed agents who stopped their moving vehicle, searched them, and transferred them to The Ministry of Intelligence’s detention facility, known as Ward 209 of Evin Prison.

In protest against her family’s detention, Pakhshan began a hunger strike, which she ended after learning that her family members were released on bail after 2 weeks of solitary confinement. After being held in solitary confinement in Ward 209 for 3 months and 3 weeks, she was transferred to the women’s ward of Evin Prison on December 10, 2023.

Later, Aziz Azizi, Porshang Azizi, and Hossein Abbasi were sentenced to 1 year in prison each by Branch 26 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court, also under Judge Iman Afshari, for “assisting a criminal in escaping prosecution and conviction.” Their sentences were upheld by the Tehran Court of Appeals on September 27, and their appeal was forwarded to the Supreme Court.

A source close to Azizi’s family told HRANA:

“Pakhshan has no affiliations with any groups. She worked as a social worker for 10 years in refugee camps in Rojava. The groups she worked with were fighting against ISIS—an enemy of both the Islamic Republic and the Quds Force. There was no direct conflict between Pakhshan’s associates and Iranian forces, a fact clearly evident in her case.”

In mid-October 2024, during a protest by female prisoners in Evin following the execution of Reza Rasaei and a clash with prison guards, Azizi was accused of “assaulting an officer and disobedience” and was sentenced to 6 months in prison by the Criminal Court.

Also, in August, 2024, Azizi faced new accusations of “inciting unrest in prison” during the second round of the 2024 presidential election, brought before Branch 3 of the Evin Prosecutor’s Office.

A native of Mahabad, Azizi has a history of arrests and judicial encounters. In 2009, she was detained on charges of political activity and was released after 4 months on bail.

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

4 Prisoners Executed in Yazd Prison

On Wednesday, January 22, 2025, 4 prisoners previously sentenced to death on charges related to drug offenses were executed in Yazd Prison.

Haal Vsh has identified one of the prisoners as Ahmad Sasouli, approximately 28 years old and the father of one child, from and residing a village in Zabol County, Sistan and Baluchestan province.

Per the report, Mr. Sasouli was arrested 5 years ago in Ardakan, on drug-related charges. After a period of uncertainty, he was sentenced to death by the Revolutionary Court of Ardakan.

On Monday, January 20, he was transferred from Ardakan Prison to the quarantine section of Yazd Central Prison in preparation for his execution. His execution was carried out without a final visit with his family.

The identities and charges of the 3 other prisoners executed today have not been disclosed in the report.

As of the time of this report, prison authorities and relevant officials have not publicly announced the executions.

According to data compiled by HRANA, 52.69% of all executions in Iran in 2024 were related to drug-related charges. Notably, only 6% of the executions were officially announced, highlighting a significant lack of transparency.

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

Kurdistan Shopkeepers’ Strike; 7 Protesters Against Executions Arrested

Yesterday, January 22, 2025, amid a strike by shopkeepers across cities in Kurdistan Province protesting the death sentences of Varisheh Moradi and Pakhshan Azizi, seven citizens were arrested by security forces and taken to unknown locations.

According to HRANA, quoting Kolbar News, Soheila Mataei, previously arrested during the 2022 nationwide protests in Dehgolan, was detained for participating in the strikes. Additionally, six residents of Sanandaj—Amjad Geriakhiz, Naeem Doosti, Mohammad Seif-Panahi, Sina Rezaei, Mohammad Atlasi, and 33-year-old Omid Mohammadi—were arrested without judicial warrants for joining the strike.

As of this report, no information about the charges against these individuals has been released. Soheila Motaei has a history of arrests and legal confrontations due to her activism.

Yesterday, shopkeepers in various cities across Kurdistan, including Sanandaj, Saqqez, Divandarreh, and Marivan, went on strike, halting daily activities in protest against the death sentences of Varisheh Moradi and Pakhshan Azizi.

(source for all: en-hrana.org)

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

“No to Executions Tuesdays” Campaign Marks Its 1st Anniversary

On Tuesday, January 21, the “No to Executions Tuesdays” campaign reached its 1st anniversary. This heroic initiative, now in its 52nd week, has expanded to 34 prisons across Iran. Just last week, the women’s ward of Adelabad Prison in Shiraz joined the campaign.

Launched on January 29, 2024, by prisoners in Ghezel Hesar Prison, the “No to Executions Tuesdays” campaign emerged as a response to the Iranian regime’s excessive use of the death penalty.

Over the past year, the movement has garnered widespread support. In addition to spreading to prisons nationwide, more than 3,000 leaders, public figures, and global representatives have voiced their solidarity. Teacher unions in various provinces, despite facing intense security pressures, have courageously endorsed the campaign, chanting “No to Executions” during their weekly gatherings. Kurdish clerics in cities across Kurdistan have also publicly condemned executions.

In a statement marking the campaign’s 52nd week, organizers reiterated their core message:

“The campaign condemns all death sentences, regardless of the charges or beliefs of the prisoners, and once again asserts that the death penalty is inhumane and must be abolished. The despotic Iranian regime uses its self-serving ‘religious and legal’ pretexts to suppress society through executions. It is essential to oppose the death penalty as an inhumane practice and to eliminate the conditions that foster crime, which are often created by the regime itself.”

Campaign members expressed gratitude for public support and announced their backing for a general strike in Kurdistan against executions on Wednesday. They called on everyone to join this strike and encouraged all prisoners in various facilities to unite with the “No to Executions Tuesdays” campaign to collectively defend the right to life for those on death row.

On Tuesday, January 21, 2025, during its 52nd week, the “No to Executions Tuesdays” campaign saw hunger strikes across 34 prisons, including Evin Prison (Women’s Ward, Wards 4 and 8), Ghezel Hesar Prison (Units 3 and 4), Karaj Central Prison, Greater Tehran Prison, Khorin Varamin Prison, Arak Prison, Khorramabad Prison, Isfahan Asadabad Prison, Isfahan Dastgerd Prison, Ahvaz Sheiban Prison, Shiraz Nezam Prison, Adelabad Prison in Shiraz (Women’s and Men’s Wards), Borazjan Prison, Bam Prison, Kahnouj Prison, Tabas Prison, Joveyn Prison, Mashhad Prison, Qaemshahr Prison, Lakan Prison of Rasht (Women’s and men’s Wards), Roudsar Prison, Haviq Talesh Prison, Ardabil Prison, Tabriz Prison, Urmia Prison, Salmas Prison, Khoy Prison, Naqadeh Prison, Saqqez Prison, Baneh Prison, Marivan Prison, and Kamyaran Prison.

(source: wncri.org)

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

“No to Executions Tuesdays” Campaign Marks Its 1st Anniversary On Tuesday, January 21, the “No to Executions Tuesdays” campaign reached its 1st anniversary. This heroic initiative, now in its 52nd week, has expanded to 34 prisons across Iran. Just last week, the women’s ward of Adelabad Prison in Shiraz joined the campaign. Launched on January 29, 2024, by prisoners in Ghezel Hesar Prison, the “No to Executions Tuesdays” campaign emerged as a response to the Iranian regime’s excessive use of the death penalty. Over the past year, the movement has garnered widespread support. In addition to spreading to prisons nationwide, more than 3,000 leaders, public figures, and global representatives have voiced their solidarity. Teacher unions in various provinces, despite facing intense security pressures, have courageously endorsed the campaign, chanting “No to Executions” during their weekly gatherings. Kurdish clerics in cities across Kurdistan have also publicly condemned executions. In a statement marking the campaign’s 52nd week, organizers reiterated their core message: “The campaign condemns all death sentences, regardless of the charges or beliefs of the prisoners, and once again asserts that the death penalty is inhumane and must be abolished. The despotic Iranian regime uses its self-serving ‘religious and legal’ pretexts to suppress society through executions. It is essential to oppose the death penalty as an inhumane practice and to eliminate the conditions that foster crime, which are often created by the regime itself.” Campaign members expressed gratitude for public support and announced their backing for a general strike in Kurdistan against executions on Wednesday. They called on everyone to join this strike and encouraged all prisoners in various facilities to unite with the “No to Executions Tuesdays” campaign to collectively defend the right to life for those on death row. On Tuesday, January 21, 2025, during its 52nd week, the “No to Executions Tuesdays” campaign saw hunger strikes across 34 prisons, including Evin Prison (Women’s Ward, Wards 4 and 8), Ghezel Hesar Prison (Units 3 and 4), Karaj Central Prison, Greater Tehran Prison, Khorin Varamin Prison, Arak Prison, Khorramabad Prison, Isfahan Asadabad Prison, Isfahan Dastgerd Prison, Ahvaz Sheiban Prison, Shiraz Nezam Prison, Adelabad Prison in Shiraz (Women’s and Men’s Wards), Borazjan Prison, Bam Prison, Kahnouj Prison, Tabas Prison, Joveyn Prison, Mashhad Prison, Qaemshahr Prison, Lakan Prison of Rasht (Women’s and men’s Wards), Roudsar Prison, Haviq Talesh Prison, Ardabil Prison, Tabriz Prison, Urmia Prison, Salmas Prison, Khoy Prison, Naqadeh Prison, Saqqez Prison, Baneh Prison, Marivan Prison, and Kamyaran Prison. (source: wncri.org) ********

Kurdish cities in Iran strike over death sentences for 2 Kurdish women

Businesses in several Kurdish cities in Iran went on strike Wednesday after Kurdish groups called for a protest against the death sentences of 2female political prisoners.

Social media images showed closed shops in cities such as Sanandaj, Saqqez, Divandarreh, and Marivan in Kurdistan province, as well as Mahabad, Bukan in West Azarbaijan province, and Kermanshah.

Earlier this week, 6 Kurdish groups released a joint statement urging people to stage a strike on Wednesday to prevent the executions of Pakhshan Azizi and Varishe Moradi by shutting down marketplaces, workplaces, and schools.

Moradi was sentenced to death in November by Tehran's Revolutionary Court on charges of "armed rebellion." Azizi received the same sentence in July.

Both sentences have sparked outrage locally and internationally. Shirin Ebadi, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, also joined the protest calls, writing on Instagram, “I urge all political, social, cultural, civil, and professional organizations to join this strike.”

Among the parties supporting the strike were the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan, also known as the Kurdish Democratic Party of Iran (KDPI), the Kurdistan Free Life Party (PJAK), the Kurdistan Freedom Party (PAK), the Komala Party of Iranian Kurdistan, the Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran, and the Kurdistan Organization of the Communist Party of Iran.

Azizi was sentence to death in July 2024 for “armed rebellion against the state” and imposed an additional 4-year prison sentence for alleged membership in the PJAK, accusations her lawyers have denied. PJAK has been designated as a terrorist organization by Iran, Turkey, and the US.

In addition to these groups, students and a coalition of Kurdish women issued separate statements condemning the death sentences. They also expressed support for the strike, denouncing the treatment of Azizi and Moradi, who are detained in Tehran’s Evin Prison, notorious for its harsh conditions and political detentions.

Earlier this month, Amnesty International has condemned Iran’s Supreme Court for upholding Azizi’s death sentence, calling her trial deeply flawed and her punishment unjust. Amnesty said, “Iran’s authorities must halt any plans to carry out her execution and release her immediately,” adding that her conviction appears to be tied to her peaceful humanitarian and human rights work.

In a letter from prison, Azizi has described instances of torture and harassment, including mock executions. Her case has become a focal point for human rights organizations, with many viewing her sentencing as part of a broader pattern of state repression against political dissidents.

According to the US-based rights group HRANA, at least 54 political prisoners, including Azizi, are currently facing execution across various prisons in Iran. Iran has faced increasing international criticism for its widespread use of the death penalty, especially against political prisoners and activists.

The United Nations human rights office reported in January that Iran in 2024 executed 901 people, including 31 women, marking a sharp rise in capital punishment cases.

(source: iranintl.com)

JANUARY 22, 2025:

TEXAS:

Fewer Texans sentenced to death, executed amid “evolving standards of decency”----Texas continues to lead other states on capital punishment. But the decline in new death sentences and executions reached a record low.

In 1982, Texas was the 1st in the world to execute an inmate by lethal injection, its 1st execution since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976. Quickly, the state became the United States’ top executioner and is among the top 3 in imposing death sentences.

At the turn of the century in 2000, the population on Texas’ death row reached a record high of 459 inmates and officials carried out 40 executions, the most in a single year. Decades later, the state’s interest in capital punishment appears to have cooled, according to available data, influenced by cultural shifts, legal updates and what some experts have called “evolving standards of decency.”

In 2022, the death row population dropped to under 200 inmates for the 1st time in almost 3 decades, and by the start of 2025, there were 174 people on Texas’ death row. Still, Texas has executed more people than the next 4 states combined since 1982, a trend largely upheld by a few urban counties — the top 3 of which are responsible for more than 40% of the state’s executions.

“The death penalty is no longer an American story, it's really a local story,” said Robin Maher, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center. “It's about which local jurisdictions are using it, and those decisions that are being made by their local elected officials.”

5 men were executed by Texas in 2024, the 6th year in a row in which there were less than 10 executions. A little more than 1/2 of those sentenced to death in Texas — almost 600 of more than 1,100 inmates — have been executed since 1977. Since 2020, almost as many people on death row in the state have had their sentences reduced or convictions overturned as those executed, with 24 executions and 22 sentence reductions, most due to intellectual disability. 9 men also have died on death row before their execution date since 2020.

The slowdown in death sentences isn’t something that can be attributed to one thing but rather a buildup of legal and social factors, said Kristin Houlé Cuellar, executive director of the Texas Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, a grassroots advocacy group whose focus is on death penalty education and abolition.

One of the most significant reasons for the decline was the state adopted life sentences without parole as an option to capital punishment in 2005. Texas was the last state with the death penalty to do so, according to the coalition’s 2024 report.

“That has given prosecutors and juries more discretion in terms of how they handle capital cases,” Houlé Cuellar said. “So what we've seen is that in the vast majority — and by vast majority, I would say 99-point-something-percent of capital cases — prosecutors in Texas are not pursuing the death penalty as a sentencing option.”

The financial costs of a death sentence to counties is also a factor prosecutors, specifically in rural counties, must consider when seeking the death penalty.

After the capital murder trials of 3 men who dragged James Byrd Jr., a Black man, for 3 miles and left his body outside an African American church in 1998, Jasper County was forced to raise its property taxes by more than 8% because of the cost to the county — $1.1 million of its $10 million budget. 2 of the 3 men, who were self-admitted white supremacists, were executed, one in 2011 and the other in 2019, and the case led to new state and federal hate crime laws. The 3rd man is serving a life sentence.

The moment a district attorney chooses to seek the death penalty on a capital murder charge, the cost increases as those trials often require a more expensive jury selection process, expert witnesses from out of state and a separate trial to determine if execution is warranted. Those costs are incurred by the counties, but long periods of incarceration on death row and yearslong appeals processes are costs the state pays.

“All of this adds up to a very expensive system, and that meter starts running the minute the district attorney decides that [they’re] going to seek the death penalty,” Houlé Cuellar said.

Other significant developments adding to the decline of death penalty convictions occurred in 2017 and 2019 when U.S. Supreme Court rulings originating from Harris County mandated that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals update its standards on disqualifying death sentences based on intellectual disability. Executions of those with intellectual disabilities are considered cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and 18 people have been removed from death row since 2017 based on evidence of intellectual disability.

Despite the decades-long decrease, 2024 had the highest number of new sentences in 5 years, with 6 people receiving the death penalty, three alone out of Tarrant County — its 1st since 2019. Houlé Cuellar said all 3 trials falling in 2024 is somewhat unintentional because the charges were brought across a 3-year period, but the fact the death penalty was pursued at all speaks to a mindset some prosecutors have.

“I think the fact that all 3 trials happen this year is somewhat random, but the decision to seek the death penalty was very deliberate and reflects a very … aggressive use of the death penalty out of a county that really seems to be going in the opposite direction from the rest of the state,” Houlé Cuellar said.

Tarrant County District Attorney Phil Sorrells said in a statement to the Texas Tribune that choosing to levy the death penalty against anyone is “never an easy decision,” but clarified the juries in all 3 cases in 2024 agreed with the sentencing.

“We don’t often ask for the death penalty,” Sorrells said in the statement. “But in 2024, we asked juries 3 times to convict capital murderers and give them the death penalty. 3 times they agreed.”

Dallas and Harris counties lead in the number of death sentences handed down, but Tarrant County’s three cases in 2024 placed it ahead of Bexar County for third highest in the state. The 4 counties together represent more than 1/2 of all executions in the state, as Harris remained the top county in the U.S. for executions with 135 since 1977, 2 of which were in 2024.

Public opinion on the death penalty has also split between older and younger Americans. National support for the sentence has dwindled to its lowest since 1972, having dropped more than 10% since 2000, according to an October Gallup poll. And while 53% of U.S. adults overall were in favor of the death penalty in 2024, less than half of Gen Z and Millennial adults supported the sentence.

“As the death penalty has been used less in terms of new death sentences and executions have become fewer, the death penalty is really fading from the minds of many voters to the point that some may conclude it’s simply not necessary,” Maher said.

10 executions are currently scheduled nationally for 2025, 4 of which are in Texas. Those four scheduled do not include Robert Roberson, whose execution has not yet been rescheduled after it was temporarily blocked by the Texas Supreme Court in October. Roberson’s case has received national attention because of the contention around his innocence and a bipartisan effort within a Texas House of Representatives committee to halt his execution.

Steven Lawayne Nelson, who was convicted of suffocating a pastor with a plastic bag and assaulting a woman during a church robbery in Arlington, is scheduled to be Texas’ 1st execution in 2025 on Feb. 5.

(source: texastribune.org)

ALABAMA----impending execution

Alabama inmate set for February execution imprisoned in wrong state, lawsuit claims

Lawyers for an Alabama death row inmate set to be killed in the state's 1st execution of 2025 are arguing that he actually belongs in the custody of another state.

Earlier this month, Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey authorized the nitrogen hypoxia execution of Demetrius Frazier, 52, who is set to die between the hours of 12 a.m. on Thursday, Feb. 6 and 6 a.m. on Friday, Feb. 7, by way of nitrogen hypoxia.

Alabama was the 1st in the nation to utilize the controversial execution method, described as a "human experiment" by some detractors, having done so a total of three times since January of 2024.

Who is Demetrius Frazier? Behind Alabama's 1st inmate set to be executed in 2025

Attorneys for Frazier previously sued to block the state from carrying out his execution unless the state makes changes to the protocol. His lawyers argued the nitrogen gas causes “conscious suffocation” and that earlier nitrogen executions did not result in swift unconsciousness and death.

While that federal lawsuit is still ongoing, Frazier's legal team now has a new angle in their attempt to save his life: He doesn't belong in Alabama at all.

In early 1992, a then 19-year-old Frazier was arrested in Detroit, Michigan, where he was ultimately convicted of murder, first-degree criminal sexual conduct and armed robbery. Each charge came with a life sentence, according to court documents.

While in custody, he made statements referring to his role in the death of an Alabama woman and eventually confessed to the murder of Pauline Brown in Birmingham months prior.

Frazier was indicted by a Jefferson County grand jury for Brown's murder in November of 1993. Roughly 2 years later, Alabama was granted temporary custody of Frazier by the Michigan Department of Corrections so he could stand trial.

On June 5, 1996, Frazier was convicted of 1 count of Capital murder and one count of murder. 2 days later, the jury recommended the death sentence by a vote of 10-2.

Frazier was soon returned to Michigan where he spent the next 15 years, but an executive agreement signed by then-governors Robert Bentley of Alabama and Rick Snyder of Michigan in 2011 would see him taken back to Alabama.

In a new lawsuit filed last week, Frazier's attorneys argue that Bentley and Snyder's agreement caused him to be "held unlawfully in the physical custody of the wrong sovereign" and is "void, entered without lawful authority, and violates the IAD and the Due Process Clause."

According to the state's constitution, the governor of Michigan's ability to enter into agreements with other governments is limited and subject to "provisions of general law" unless "otherwise provided in this constitution.

As Michigan declared the death penalty unconstitutional in 1963, specifically declaring that "no law shall be enacted providing for the penalty of death, Frazier's attorneys claim that Gov. Snyder acted without lawful authority when signing him over to Alabama.

The lawsuit further argues that Frazier is still technically in legal custody of MDOC as state law requires him to serve out his sentences in-state.

Frazier's attorneys reached out to current Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer last November, imploring her to have him extradited back to the state, claiming that Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey would have "no choice" but to turn him over as compliance with the U.S. constitution's extradition clause is not discretionary.

According to the suit, a staff member for Governor Whitmer notified Mr. Frazier's counsel that she would not act on his request at that time.

An Alabama Department of Corrections Inmate Summary lists Frazier as "borrowed" from MDOC; MDOC's website still has him listed as a current prisoner.

(source: WVTM news)

OKLAHOMA:

Oklahoma's only woman on death row says prosecutors sex shamed her; US Supreme Court orders review

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled in favor of convicted murderer Brenda Andrew, the only woman on Oklahoma's death row, ordering a lower court to review whether she got a fair trial for murdering her husband after prosecutors used salacious details of her sexual history to convict her.

In an unsigned opinion, a majority of justices ordered the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider her well-publicized claim that her 2004 murder trial was unfair because prosecutors sex shamed her.

The majority threw out the decision upholding her conviction by Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

"The State spent significant time at trial introducing evidence about Andrew’s sex life and about her failings as a mother and wife, much of which it later conceded was irrelevant," the majority wrote.

"Among other things, the prosecution elicited testimony about Andrew’s sexual partners reaching back 2 decades; about the outfits she wore to dinner or during grocery runs; about the underwear she packed for vacation; and about how often she had sex in her car," they wrote.

"In its closing statement, the prosecution again invoked these themes, including by displaying Andrew’s 'thong underwear' to the jury, by reminding the jury of Andrew’s alleged affairs during college, and by emphasizing that Andrew 'had sex on [her husband] over and over and over' while 'keeping a boyfriend on the side.'"

Andrew, 61, always had maintained her innocence.

Her attorney, Jessica Sutton, said Tuesday they were hopeful the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals now "will stop this injustice."

"Wielding these gendered tropes to justify a conviction and punishment of death is intolerable and poses a threat to everyone who does not follow rigid gender norms," she said.

Another attorney, Sandra Babcock, a Cornell law school professor, called the decision a "historic victory for gender justice."

It is the 2nd time in a year justices have given another chance to a high-profile Oklahoma death row inmate with an innocence claim. Justices last January agreed to consider Richard Glossip's latest complaints about his murder-for-hire case.

In a concurring opinion Tuesday, Justice Samuel Alito wrote "our case law establishes that a defendant’s due-process rights can be violated when the properly admitted evidence at trial is overwhelmed by a flood of irrelevant and highly prejudicial evidence that renders the trial fundamentally unfair."

"I express no view on whether that very high standard is met here," Alito added.

Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Neil Gorsuch dissented. Thomas complained the majority opinion "inaccurately portrays the State’s evidence, the prosecution’s closing arguments, and the reasoning of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals."

Andrew was convicted in the fatal shooting of her estranged husband at their Oklahoma City home in 2001. Her lover, James Pavatt, now 71, was convicted at a separate murder trial in 2003 and is awaiting execution.

"Pavatt confessed to committing the shooting with a friend," the majority opinion Tuesday noted. "Pavatt denied that Andrew had been involved."

Andrew's attorneys told the Supreme Court that prosecutors "fixated on obtaining a conviction and death sentence by denigrating her character as a woman."

"In order to do so, the State relied on sex-based stereotypes to dehumanize and portray Ms. Andrew as immoral, remorseless, deviant, dangerous, and thus more likely to have committed the crime and more deserving of the ultimate punishment," they argued.

As an example, they told justices a prosecutor had called her a "slut puppy" in closing arguments.

Her supporters include women advocacy groups and LGBTQ+ advocacy groups that told the Supreme Court her case "represents the most severe consequence of the gender prejudice and bias that ... continues to permeate the criminal justice system."

Attorney General Gentner Drummond had argued Andrew was giving the impression that she was convicted and sentenced to death only because prosecutors "convinced the jury she is a bad person."

"Nothing could be further from the truth," he told justices.

After the ruling Tuesday, the attorney general's press secretary, Leslie Berger, said, "We are disappointed but respect the court's decision."

Pavatt, an insurance salesman, and Brenda Andrew became lovers after meeting at church, according to testimony at the trials. They even taught a Sunday school class together.

Pavatt had been friends with her husband, Rob Andrew. He assisted Rob Andrew in setting up a life insurance policy worth $800,000.

The Andrews' 17-year marriage fell apart in 2001, with her filing for divorce and him moving out.

How was Rob Andrew killed?

On Nov. 20, 2001, Rob Andrew came to the family home to pick up his son and daughter for Thanksgiving. He went into the garage after Brenda Andrew told him the pilot light on the furnace was out.

There, he was shot twice, first by Pavatt and then by Brenda Andrew, with his own 16-gauge shotgun, prosecutors alleged. Pavatt also shot Brenda Andrew in the arm with a .22-caliber pistol to make it look like she was a victim, too, prosecutors alleged.

Brenda Andrew told police 2 armed, masked men had attacked her husband. Police later found evidence that Pavatt hid afterward in the attic of the home of the Andrews' next-door neighbors, who were away.

As police suspicions about her story grew, Pavatt and Brenda Andrew fled to Mexico with her children. After running out of money, the couple re-entered the United States in February 2002. They were arrested at the border.

The lower courts that considered her claims also had issues with the sexual nature of the testimony at Brenda Andrew's trial.

The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver upheld her conviction and punishment in a 2-1 decision in 2023. The majority there acknowledged they had concerns "about some of the 'sexual and sexualizing' evidence admitted at trial, and the use to which it was put by the government."

In a dissent, Judge Robert Bacharach wrote prosecutors focused from start to finish on her sex life.

"This focus portrayed Ms. Andrew as a scarlet woman, a modern Jezebel, sparking distrust based on her loose morals," he wrote. "The drumbeat on Ms. Andrew’s sex life continued in closing argument, plucking away any realistic chance that the jury would seriously consider her version of events."

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals also was divided in its decision upholding her conviction in 2007. The judges in the majority acknowledged they were "struggling" to find any relevance to some of the sexual evidence They, however, found its introduction at trial "was harmless due to the overwhelming evidence in this case."

In a dissent, Judge Arlene Johnson wrote a resentencing was warranted because prosecutors put on evidence "that has no purpose other than to hammer home that Brenda Andrew is a bad wife, a bad mother, and a bad woman."

"I find it impossible to say with confidence that the death penalty here was not imposed as a consequence of improper evidence and argument," she also wrote.

How many women have been executed in Oklahoma?

Oklahoma has executed only 3 women since statehood, according to historical records. All 3 were put to death by lethal injection in 2001 for murder.

(source: The Oklahoman)

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

Supreme Court rules for female Oklahoma death row inmate over sex-shaming claim----The Supreme Court is allowing a death row inmate convicted of murdering her husband to pursue a claim that prosecutors inappropriately focused on her sex life at trial.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued a rare ruling in favor of a death row inmate, finding that an Oklahoma woman convicted of murdering her estranged husband can pursue a claim that prosecutors inappropriately focused on her sex life at trial.

Divided 7-2, the court opened the door to Brenda Andrew challenging her conviction and death sentence. She is the only woman on death row in Oklahoma.

The court ruled an appeals court was wrong to conclude that Andrew's claim that her due process rights were violated by the focus on her personal life, including treatment of her children, could not move forward.

The right to due process under the Constitution's 14th Amendment "forbids the introduction of evidence so unduly prejudicial as to render a criminal trial fundamentally unfair," the Supreme Court said in an unsigned opinion.

The case will now return to lower federal courts for further litigation on Andrew's habeas corpus claim.

Andrew was convicted in state court of the 2001 murder of husband Rob, who was shot twice with a shotgun in the garage of their former family home in Oklahoma City when he came to pick up their 2 children.

Her alleged accomplice, boyfriend James Pavatt, was also prosecuted and is currently on death row. Andrew, now 61, was herself shot in the arm during the incident.

Andrew's conviction was upheld in state court, prompting her to file a habeas corpus claim in federal court, which was also rejected.

Andrew’s lawyers say prosecutors focused on her personal life because they lacked concrete evidence connecting her to the crime

Among the issues raised at trial were that Andrew previously had affairs with other men, that she dressed provocatively, and that she had made sexual advances towards two young men working in her yard.

Toward the end of the trial, a prosecutor held up thong underwear owned by Andrew and asked the jury if a "grieving widow" would wear such an item of clothing. The prosecutor also used the term "slut puppy" to refer to Andrew, her lawyers said, although the state says the comment was not a direct reference to her.

The prosecutors' case "fixated on obtaining a conviction and death sentence by denigrating her character as a woman," her lawyers said in court papers.

2 conservative justices, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, disagreed with Tuesday's ruling.

Thomas wrote in a dissenting opinion that the court had not followed its own rules in determining whether a habeas corpus claim arising from a prosecution in state courts can move forward.

Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond said in court papers that there was "overwhelming evidence that Andrew and Pavatt plotted the murder" in order to access a life insurance payout.

Andrew, he added, had a "visceral hatred" of her husband, and evidence of her "ability to get men ... to do her bidding" was relevant to the case.

(source: Yahoo News)

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

Supreme Court revives case of death row inmate who says she was ‘sex-shamed’ at trial

The Supreme Court on Tuesday revived a challenge by a death row inmate in Oklahoma who claims prosecutors “sex-shamed” her during her trial, referring to her as a “slut puppy” and holding up her thong for the jury.

Brenda Andrew, the only woman on death row in Oklahoma, is facing execution for the 2001 shooting death of her estranged husband. In her appeal to the high court, Andrew said the prosecution’s use of “plainly irrelevant sexual history” violated her due process rights and should invalidate her 2004 murder conviction.

In an unsigned opinion Tuesday, the Supreme Court sent Andrew’s case back to an appeals court to revisit whether the evidence against her was too prejudicial to be used against her.

At the time of her conviction, the Supreme Court “clearly established law provided that the Due Process Clause forbids the introduction of evidence so unduly prejudicial as to render a criminal trial fundamentally unfair.”

Conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissented.

“The state invited the jury to convict and condemn Ms. Andrew to die because she was a ‘hoochie,’ was a bad mother and wife, did not cry publicly, and otherwise failed to adhere to feminine stereotypes,” Andrew’s lawyers said.

Her supporters said the state weaponized sex stereotypes at trial, which they say is all too common in the criminal justice system.

The Supreme Court in 2017 ruled for a Black death row inmate who was sentenced after an expert witness testified he was statistically more likely to act violently in the future because of his race. Andrew’s attorneys said a similar tainting took place during their client’s trial, only it was her gender that was targeted, rather than her race.

Oklahoma officials say prosecutors used the evidence to establish motive and to counter Andrew’s defense that she was “was a good mother, who would never go to such lengths as killing the father of her children.” Prosecutors say Andrew and her boyfriend lured her estranged husband, Robert Andrew, into a garage and killed him with two shotgun blasts and then, days later, fled to Mexico.

Brenda Andrew was arrested when she returned to the United States. The thong, prosecutors say, was recovered from her luggage.

Andrew’s co-defendant, James Pavatt, confessed to Robert Andrew’s murder. He is also on death row. But despite the confession, police suspected Andrew helped arrange the shooting and she was charged – and then convicted – with murder and conspiracy to commit murder.

The sex-based evidence that Andrew contests in her Supreme Court appeal, the state said, is “but a drop in the ocean of the state’s evidence” against her.

Andrew also said police whisked her from a hospital bed after the shooting and questioned her without reading her a Miranda warning.

A divided 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the state.

(source: CNN)

IDAHO:

Legislator introduces bill to make firing squad main way of carrying out death penalty in Idaho----There are 9 individuals on death row in Idaho, according to Idaho Department of Correction

A Nampa legislator wants to make death by firing squad the primary way of administering the death penalty in Idaho.

Rep. Bruce Skaug, R-Nampa, introduced the legislation to the Idaho House Judiciary, Rules and Administration Committee on Tuesday. The committee voted to introduce the legislation, clearing the way for a public hearing before the committee at a later date.

Lethal injection is the primary way of administering the death penalty in Idaho. Death by firing squad became legal in Idaho in 2022, when Skaug successfully sponsored House Bill 186 and Gov. Brad Little signed it into law, citing challenges in obtaining lethal injection drugs.

During the 2022 legislative session, the Idaho Legislature passed House Bill 658, which gives the suppliers and manufacturers of lethal injection chemicals confidentiality. That law, which Little signed in March 2022, also prevents that confidential information from being disclosed in court filings, the Sun previously reported.

Skaug said his new bill would not take effect until July 2026 to give the Idaho Department of Correction time to refurbish a facility for firing squad purposes. It would have no fiscal impact to the state’s budget, Skaug said, because the 2022 legislation already appropriated $750,000 to the Department of Correction to refurbish the facility.

“This bill is not about whether the death penalty is good or bad …” Skaug told the committee. “Our job is to make sure to carry out the most efficient manner under the bounds of the Constitution.”

There are 9 people on death row in Idaho, according to the Idaho Department of Correction’s website.

(source: idahocapitalsun.com)

NEVADA:

Jury hears closing arguments in brutal Las Vegas death penalty murder case

Prosecutors Tuesday urged a Clark County jury to find a man guilty of a revenge killing for murdering and cutting up and setting on fire the remains of the person they say slept with his and impregnated his wife, then forcing her to have an abortion.

In closing arguments of a death penalty murder trial, prosecutors said Anthony Newton robbed, kidnapped and murdered Cesar Molina on Christmas 2016 in East Las Vegas. Newton is charged with 6 felonies, including open murder, kidnapping and robbery – all with a deadly weapon.

If convicted of 1st-degree murder, Clark County District Court Judge Jacqueline Bluth will preside over a separate, additional phase of the trial to determine Newton’s sentence. The jury would, in that case, have the authority to send Newton to death row.

“Your job is quite straightforward,” William Flinn, a chief deputy district attorney, in his closing argument to the jury said. “Take the overwhelming evidence, apply the law and return a conclusion. And that conclusion should be to hold Anthony Newton accountable and find him guilty.”

Newton’s attorney, on the other hand, argued that the state did not meet its burden of proof that Newton is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. He said inconsistent witness testimony and contradictory forensic evidence should tilt the verdict in Newton’s favor.

“There is not evidence that my client committed this crime,” Josh Tomsheck, a highly-regarded defense attorney said. “He wasn’t there.”

One item of evidence, Tomsheck points to in that theory of the case is that a homeowner in Henderson found what police ultimately identified as Molina’s hand in 2018, some two years after the murder while Newton was in Clark County Detention Center awaiting trial.

Tomsheck argued, and prosecutors could not refute that Newton could not have placed Molina’s severed, decaying hand into that mailbox.

Wife’s affair, abortion offers motive for brutal Las Vegas murder, prosecutors say

Newton went on trial late in 2024 for the same charges, but Bluth declared a mistrial because that jury heard testimony about Newton’s prison time, which Newton’s attorneys argued would make it impossible for a jury to render a fair verdict.

That witness, Kelsea Glass, is expected to plead guilty for her role in luring Molina to the apartment where prosecutors say he was killed, public records show. Another witness, George Malaperdas, is also expected to plead guilty in February for helping remove Molina’s body parts after his death.

(source: KLAS news)

USA:

'Ghoulish': Trump Expands Federal Death Penalty----The Republican president "articulated his plan to drastically increase executions, and we all know this is one promise he can't wait to keep," said one death penalty abolitionist.

Delivering on a promise to "vigorously pursue the death penalty," U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday night signed an executive order that reverses his predecessor's moratorium on federal capital punishment and calls for expanding it.

The widely expected order—one of several issued on Inauguration Day—was swiftly criticized on factual and moral grounds.

Attorney and death penalty expert Robert Dunham pointed out that the order "starts with a demonstrable falsehood ('Capital punishment is an essential tool for deterring and punishing those who would commit the most heinous crimes'), signaling that the administration intends not to allow the facts to affect its policy decisions."

"In fact, the death penalty does not contribute anything to public safety," said Dunham, citing a study by the Death Penalty Policy Project, which he directs. "As for 'deterring the most heinous crimes,' see my analysis of the worst of the worst mass shootings in the United States."

"It is essential, with the importance and deadly consequences of this policy, that media coverage report the truth and not just the rhetoric," he stressed. "The executive order is grounded in a false, dark fantasy about deterrence and has nothing to do with making the public safer."

Declaring that "the death penalty is unjust and cruel," the ACLU warned that Trump's order not only directs an expansion of its use at the federal level but also encourages states to do the same.

Specifically, the order says that "in addition to pursuing the death penalty where possible," the attorney general shall seek it "regardless of other factors" for federal cases involving the murder of a law enforcement officer or a capital crime committed by an undocumented immigrant—and shall "encourage state attorneys general and district attorneys to bring state capital charges for all capital crimes with special attention to" those circumstances, "regardless of whether the federal trial results in a capital sentence."

The order further directs the head of the U.S. Department of Justice to "seek the overruling of Supreme Court precedents that limit the authority of state and federal governments to impose" the death penalty and "ensure that each state that allows capital punishment has a sufficient supply of drugs needed to carry out lethal injection."

Last week, outgoing U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland "withdrew the Justice Department's protocol for federal executions that allowed for single-drug lethal injections with pentobarbital, after a government review raised concerns about the potential for 'unnecessary pain and suffering,'" The Associated Pressreported. "The protocol could be imposed by Trump's new acting Attorney General James McHenry III, or his pick to lead the Justice Department, Pam Bondi, once she's confirmed by the Senate."

Though Trump's order doesn't name Garland, it explicitly takes aim at former President Joe Biden for his moratorium as well as his attempt to prevent another GOP killing spree like the one that occurred at the end of the Republican's 1st term, accusing the Democrat of commuting the sentences of "37 of the 40 most vile and sadistic rapists, child molesters, and murderers on federal death row: remorseless criminals who brutalized young children, strangled and drowned their victims, and hunted strangers for sport."

Biden said last month that "in good conscience, I cannot stand back and let a new administration resume executions that I halted." He left Charleston church gunman Dylann Roof, Pittsburgh synagogue shooter Robert Bowers, and Boston bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on death row. The others now face life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Trump cannot reverse Biden's commutations, but he directed the attorney general to "evaluate the places of imprisonment and conditions of confinement for each" of those 37 men and "take all lawful and appropriate action to ensure that these offenders are imprisoned in conditions consistent with the monstrosity of their crimes and the threats they pose."

The president also said that the attorney general "shall further evaluate whether these offenders can be charged with state capital crimes and shall recommend appropriate action to state and local authorities."

Death Penalty Action executive director Abraham Bonowitz said in a Monday statement:

President Trump's executive order demanding capital charges for the murder of law enforcement officers or capital crimes by illegal aliens is unnecessary bluster, because the death penalty already exists for such crimes. But Trump can't help himself. Donald Trump's Agenda2025 articulated his plan to drastically increase executions, and we all know this is one promise he can't wait to keep.

We are also dismayed at President Biden's cynical compromise that commuted 37 federal death sentences while leaving 7 prisoners on federal and military death rows. While expressing both his personal opposition to the death penalty and his desire to maintain the moratorium on executions he imposed in 2021, Biden has nevertheless primed the pump for Donald Trump to resume his execution spree.

Social media users also slammed Trump's order, with one saying that "this is extremely disturbing" and another calling it "one of the most ghoulish things I've ever fucking read." Many critics highlighted that the president issued the measure while pardoning over 1,500 insurrectionists who stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, which led to the deaths of multiple police officers.

James Goodwin, policy director at the Center for Progressive Reform, noted that it "is straight out of Project 2025," the sweeping Heritage Foundation-led playbook from which Trump unsuccessfully tried to distance himself during the campaign.

Trump has a long history of supporting capital punishment. As journalist Prem Thakker put it, "On Martin Luther King Jr. Day, the man who bought [a] full-page [newspaper] ad calling for the execution of the Central Park Five—5 Black and Latino teens wrongfully convicted of rape—makes one of his first acts as president to restore and prioritize the death penalty."

(source: commondreams.org)

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

Among Flurry of 1st-Day Executive Orders, President Trump Issues Order on the Death Penalty

On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump signed more than 2 dozen Executive Orders, includ­ing a call to "restore” the fed­er­al death penal­ty. The Order, while lack­ing many impor­tant details, instructs the Department of Justice’s Attorney General to ?“pur­sue the death penal­ty for all crimes of a sever­i­ty demand­ing its use,” includ­ing the killing of a law enforce­ment offi­cer or ?“a cap­i­tal crime com­mit­ted by an ille­gal alien present in this coun­try” and to encour­age state attor­neys gen­er­al to bring state-cap­i­tal charges for these crimes. President Trump also calls on the Attorney General to ?“take all nec­es­sary and law­ful action” to ensure that states with cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment have suf­fi­cient access to the drugs need­ed for lethal injec­tion exe­cu­tions. The Order also directs the Attorney General to seek to over­rule any estab­lished Supreme Court prece­dent that ?“lim­it the author­i­ty of state and fed­er­al gov­ern­ments to impose capital punishment.”

Many of the state­ments in the exec­u­tive order sim­ply echo pre­vi­ous cam­paign rhetoric with­out pro­vid­ing impor­tant specifics or address­ing the fact that well-set­tled legal prece­dent or laws would need to be changed by the United States Supreme Court or Congress to make the pro­pos­als a reality.

With respect to the recent com­mu­ta­tions of fed­er­al death sen­tenced pris­on­ers, the Executive Order calls on the Attorney General to eval­u­ate the place­ment of each of the 37 men whose fed­er­al death sen­tences were com­mut­ed by for­mer President Joe Biden in December 2024. The Attorney General should take law­ful action to ensure that each of these indi­vid­u­als "are impris­oned in con­di­tions con­sis­tent with the mon­stros­i­ty of their crimes and the threats they pose.” The Attorney General, per the Order, should also eval­u­ate whether these indi­vid­u­als can be charged with state-lev­el cap­i­tal crimes and ?“shall rec­om­mend appro­pri­ate action to state and local author­i­ties.” Local elect­ed pros­e­cu­tors have the ulti­mate dis­cre­tion in charg­ing a cap­i­tal case at the state lev­el and may or may not seek the death penal­ty for a vari­ety of rea­sons, includ­ing vot­er pref­er­ence, case fac­tors, and bud­get. Given these fac­tors, it’s unlike­ly state pros­e­cu­tors would choose to pros­e­cute crimes that occurred 20 or t30 years ago, espe­cial­ly when the defen­dants have already been con­vict­ed and sen­tenced to life with­out parole in federal prison.

The Executive Order can be seen, inter alia, as a rebuke by the incom­ing admin­is­tra­tion to President Biden’s December 2024 deci­sion to com­mute 37 of the 40 pris­on­ers on death row, as well as in reac­tion to for­merAttorney General Merrick Garland’s July 2021 mem­o­ran­dum plac­ing a mora­to­ri­um on fed­er­al exe­cu­tions and call­ing for a review of fed­er­al exe­cu­tion poli­cies and pro­to­cols. That review result­ed in a deci­sion by AG Garland last week to rescind the fed­er­al government’s sin­gle-drug pen­to­bar­bi­tal lethal injec­tion pro­to­col. At the same time, the out­go­ing Attorney General also direct­ed the Bureau of Prisons ?“to con­duct eval­u­a­tions of any oth­er man­ner of exe­cu­tion,” that might be intro­duced going for­ward, and includ­ed in that eval­u­a­tion ?“state or local facil­i­ties and per­son­nel involved in any such exe­cu­tion[.]” This direc­tive is bol­stered by the detailed Department of Justice analy­sis of pen­to­bar­bi­tal use, and while not bind­ing on the incom­ing admin­is­tra­tion, should be seri­ous­ly con­sid­ered by DOJ offi­cials before any sub­sti­tute for pen­to­bar­bi­tal is selected.

President Trump’s direc­tive that the Attorney General "take all nec­es­sary and law­ful action” to ensure that states with cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment have suf­fi­cient access to the drugs need­ed for lethal injec­tion exe­cu­tions” appears direct­ed at the fact that most drug com­pa­nies now refuse to sup­ply drugs used in exe­cu­tions to pris­ons. Laws passed in recent years bar the pub­lic from learn­ing the sources of lethal drugs being used, mak­ing it increas­ing­ly dif­fi­cult to judge the reli­a­bil­i­ty of man­u­fac­tur­ers or the effi­ca­cy of the drugs, and increas­ing the chances of ?“botched” exe­cu­tions. Some states have explored alter­na­tives to lethal injec­tion, includ­ing the use of nitro­gen hypox­ia, or gas, which results in death by suf­fo­ca­tion as an indi­vid­ual is forced to breathe pure nitro­gen, depriv­ing the brain and body of oxygen.

In Trump’s 1t term, his admin­is­tra­tion car­ried out 13 fed­er­al exe­cu­tions in his last 6 months in office under the now-with­drawn pen­to­bar­bi­tal exe­cu­tion pro­to­col. Just three men remain on fed­er­al death row, none of whom have exhaust­ed their appeals.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

TAIWAN:

Death penalty in double murder commuted to life sentence

The Taichung branch of the High Court today overturned Yang Hung-ju’s death penalty and sentenced him to life in prison for double homicide.

Yang was found guilty of murdering two friends and stuffing their bodies into iron drums before disposing of them in Hualien County, stemming from his jealousy over his friend’s girlfriend and suspected gambling debts.

In the 1st and 2nd trials, the Taichung District Court and the Taichung branch of the High Court found that Yang was unremorseful and not likely to be rehabilitated, and sentenced him to the death penalty.

Yang appealed the case to the Supreme Court, which in September 2023 found that the 1st trial’s investigation was incomplete and ordered a new trial at the Taichung branch of the High Court.

Given the 8 years between the trials, the court invoked Article 7 of the Criminal Speedy Trial Act to reduce his sentence to life imprisonment.

The retrial also found that given Yang’s advanced age, he is unlikely to reoffend, even if he is one day released from prison.

Yang can still appeal the verdict, which in addition to life imprisonment, also deprives him of his civil rights for life.

In the 1st case, Yang murdered a friend, surnamed Chen, after deciding to pursue Chen’s girlfriend due to her wealth, the courts found.

Yang lured Chen to Nantou County on June 27, 2015, under false pretenses before drugging and sedating him, then stuffing him in a barrel and abandoning it in a valley along a highway in Hualien, they said.

A gambling dispute with another friend, surnamed Lai, who threatened to report him to police, led to Yang commit a similar murder, judges said.

He drugged Lai in a car on the way to Taitung County on July 12, 2015, and stuffed his body into a barrel, which he also abandoned near his 1st victim, they said.

Both men died from suffocating inside the barrels.

In September last year, the Constitutional Court ruled that the death penalty should only be applied in the “most serious” of cases.

On Thursday last week, a death row inmate was executed for the 1st time since the decision.

The Ministry of Justice said it was in line with the Constitutional Court’s ruling.

(source: taipeitimes.com)

SAUDI ARABIA----execution

Saudi executes man convicted of terrorism

The Saudi Ministry of Interior announced in a statement on Saturday that a citizen had been executed following his conviction on terrorism charges.

The man, whose identity was not disclosed, was executed under a discretionary punishment ruling.

The man had joined a terrorist organisation and travelled abroad to attend a training camp where he learned how to manufacture explosives and shells, the ministry said. He then returned to Saudi Arabia.

The ministry added that his crimes included attempting to produce explosives for use in attacks targeting security personnel, possessing firearms and financing terrorism to carry out criminal acts.

The statement emphasised Saudi Arabia’s commitment to maintaining national security, stability and justice by enforcing Islamic law against those who threaten the safety of its citizens and violate their rights to life and security. It also warned others against engaging in similar actions, noting that they would face legal consequences.

(source: mioddleasetmonitior.com)

IRAN:

Iran Protests: “No to Executions Tuesdays” Marks 52nd Week with Support from 34 Prisons

The “No to Executions Tuesdays” campaign, now in its 52nd week, continues to expand across Iran, with the men’s ward of Adelabad Prison in Shiraz joining the movement. This follows recent support from the prison’s women’s ward. Amid reports of over 110 executions in January and 950 since early 2024, the campaign now spans 34 prisons nationwide.

Supported by teachers’ unions and Kurdish religious leaders, the initiative condemns the regime’s use of executions as a tool of repression. Hunger strikes and public solidarity demand the abolition of capital punishment and justice for Iran’s oppressed citizens.

The full statement of the “No to Executions Tuesdays” Campaign follows:

On the Verge of the Campaign’s Anniversary, the Men’s Ward of Adelabad Prison in Shiraz Joins the 52nd Week of the “No to Executions Tuesdays” Campaign

As part of the ongoing systematic executions and daily oppression of Iranian citizens, the tyrannical rulers executed over 110 prisoners in January alone. Since the beginning of 2024, 950 imprisoned citizens have been hanged. These statistics indicate an unprecedented rise in the use of executions as a tool to suppress society.

The 52nd Week of the “No to Executions Tuesdays” Campaign

In the latest updates, a political prisoner named Malek Davarshenas (Mousavi), 26 years old and a resident of Kharkeh, has been sentenced to death on charges of baghi (armed rebellion). Arrested in 2021, he was subjected to physical and psychological torture to force a confession and now faces the imminent risk of execution.

In response to such inhumane rulings, society and prisoners have resisted the regime’s violence. The “No to Executions Tuesdays” campaign has now spread to 34 prisons and continues to garner widespread support both domestically and internationally.

Among the supporters are 11 teachers’ unions in various provinces, which have courageously backed the campaign despite security pressures. These unions have repeatedly chanted anti-execution slogans during their weekly gatherings. Kurdish religious leaders (mamoustas) in various cities in Kurdistan have also condemned executions.

Additionally, on January 18, two infamous judges, Mohammad Moghiseh and Ali Razini, who have a history of four decades of human rights violations and issuing thousands of execution sentences for both political and non-political prisoners, were confronted by an enraged citizen for their crimes. This act of justice brought joy and applause from society, especially among the families of thousands of victims of political executions. It reflects the Iranian people’s deep-rooted disgust for executions and demonstrates that the “No to Executions Tuesdays” campaign and other forms of action against executions represent the majority’s voice and their demand to abolish this medieval punishment.

Men’s Ward of Adelabad Prison Joins the Campaign

According to the latest reports, the men’s ward of Adelabad Prison in Shiraz has now joined the “No to Executions Tuesdays” campaign. Last week, the women’s ward of the same prison also declared its support for the campaign.

The campaign firmly condemns all execution sentences, regardless of the charges or beliefs of the prisoners, and reiterates that the death penalty is inhumane and must be abolished entirely. The oppressive Iranian government has exploited its self-created “legal and religious” pretexts to use executions as a means of suppressing society. It is essential for everyone to oppose the death penalty as an inherently inhumane punishment to remove the conditions that perpetuate crime and violence. It is, after all, the regime itself that lays the groundwork for much of the crime in society.

As campaign members, we appreciate the public’s support and express solidarity with the general strike against executions in Kurdistan on Wednesday, urging all people to join them in their stand. Once again, we call on all prisoners in various prisons to join the “No to Executions Tuesdays” campaign, uniting their voices to defend the right to life for those sentenced to execution.

Participating Prisons in the 52nd Week of the Campaign – Tuesday, January 21, 2025

The following 34 prisons will participate in hunger strikes:

Evin Prison (Women’s Ward, Wards 4 and 8)

Ghezel Hesar Prison (Units 3 and 4)

Karaj Central Prison

Greater Tehran Penitentiary

Khorin Prison in Varamin

Arak Prison

Khorramabad Prison

Isfahan Central Prison

Dastgerd Prison in Isfahan

Sheiban Prison in Ahvaz

Shiraz Military Prison

Adelabad Prison in Shiraz (Men’s and Women’s Wards)

Borazjan Prison

Bam Prison

Kahnooj Prison

Tabas Prison

Joveyn Prison

Mashhad Prison

Qaemshahr Prison

Rasht Prison (Men’s and Women’s Wards)

Rudsar Prison

Haviq Prison in Talesh

Ardabil Prison

Tabriz Prison

Urmia Prison

Salmas Prison

Khoy Prison

Naqadeh Prison

Saqqez Prison

Baneh Prison

Marivan Prison

Kamiyaran Prison

This week marks the 52nd week of the campaign, and its momentum continues to grow as a voice for justice and humanity in the face of systemic oppression.

(source: ncr-iran.org)

JANUARY 21, 2025:

FLORIDA----impending execution

Here’s the latest on capital punishment in Florida. Thanks for reading.

WARRANT: Ford files postconviction motion ahead of scheduled execution

James Ford's execution is scheduled for February 13. 1`Yesterday, Ford filed a successive motion for postconviction relief in the circuit court. The State filed its response today.

James Ford’s execution is scheduled for 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, February 13, 2025—the 1st for the State in 2025. Over the weekend, he filed a successive motion for postconviction relief.

Ford’s Motion

Consistent with the circuit court’s scheduling order, on Sunday, Ford filed a successive motion for postconviction relief in the circuit court.

In the Motion, Ford raises 2 claims.

First, Ford argues that his death sentence is unconstitutional under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments pursuant to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Roper v. Simmons because Ford’s mental and developmental age was below 18 at the time of the crimes underlying his sentence of death. Ford argues that even now, “at the age of 65, Ford’s impairments in mental functioning persist, and an evidentiary hearing is needed to put forth expert testimony concerning Ford’s current mental impairments.”

Second, Ford argues that his sentence of death because of the jury’s nonunanimous recommendation for death. This argument addresses the fact that Ford missed the deadline for Hurst relief by less than 30 days—as I previously mentioned. A full copy of the Motion can be downloaded here, at: https://www.docdroid.com/fqyakA9/james-ford-filed-rule-3851-motion-pdf

State’s Response

On Monday, the State filed its response to Ford’s Motion. In its Response, the State argues that Ford’s claims are untimely and should be summarily denied. In addition, the State argues that Ford’s arguments have no merit. First, on Ford’s Roper claim, the State argues that it is based on testing that was conducted in 1999 and should have at least been raised within 1 year of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in Roper. Further, the State argues that the claim is without merit because he was in his 30s when he committed the murders in this case and, therefore, Roper does not apply. On the Atkins-related part of Ford’s claim, the State argues that Ford asks the Court to improperly expand the protections of the Eighth Amendment.

Second, on Ford’s claim regarding the jury’s nonunanimous recommendation for death, the State argues that “[t]his is Ford’s third attempt to challenge his sentences” on this basis. Even if Erlinger constituted a new rule, the State argues, it is inapplicable here and “did not address capital sentencing at all.” Further, the State argues that this claim fails under binding precedent.

A full copy of the State’s Response can be downloaded here, at: https://www.docdroid.com/bzUD3Ef/states-response-ford-pdf

Per the circuit court’s scheduling order, the Court will determine tomorrow whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary on Ford’s claims. The Court will rule on Ford’s Motion on January 24.

(source: fladeathpenalty@substack.com)

OHIO:

My father was murdered. Years of appeal, headlines hurt families like mine.

My father was murdered. My family's suffering must stop.

Mark Weaver’s opinion editorial Jan. 2 misses the point on the death penalty: the problem isn’t just how the system is or isn’t working for victims’ families — it’s the death penalty itself.

This policy has consistently failed victims’ families, and that’s never going to change because like it or not, death is different.

The truth is many victims’ families oppose the death penalty for a variety of reasons. And whether they do or don’t, no one can argue that it’s healthy to remain tied to the killer through decades of appeals and headlines.

Since 1976, just 2% of counties have been responsible for the majority of cases leading to executions. This punishment reflects the decisions of a few, not the will of most.

My father was murdered, and I wish the man who took his life wasn’t on death row. My family has suffered enough. The endless delays and public attention only prolong our pain.

It’s time to drop the empty rhetoric.

If you really want to help families like mine, focus on providing access to the services we need in the wake of our loss — not on a punishment that only deepens our suffering.

Jonathan Mann, Columbus

(source: Letter to the Editor, Columbus Dispatch)

ARIZONA:

Prosecutors seek death penalty for man charged with killing ex-wife, another man----Phoenix Police said the suspect had been in a prior relationship with the woman, and evidence showed he had been stalking her for months before the murder.

Maricopa County prosecutors are now seeking the death penalty for a double murder suspect.

This case from January 2024 flew under the radar until now. We now know who the victims are and what happened.

This case appears to be an obsession with an ex-wife that started out as stalking but ended with her and another man’s death.

Anna Marie Chavez, 44, and Anthony Tate, 49, were found shot to death on Jan. 5, 2024, near Encanto Boulevard and 39th Avenue.

Phoenix Police said they learned the suspect, Paul Jon Thomas, had been in a prior relationship with Chavez, and evidence showed he had been stalking her for months before the murder.

A family member told Arizona’s Family that Thomas and Chavez had been married for a long time.

Documents show Thomas was charged with stalking in both August and September of 2023. In September, that charge noted a reasonable fear of death, which likely contributed to the apparent premeditation in this double murder.

The day after the killings, Thomas was found in Atlanta and extradited back to Arizona to face 1st-degree murder charges.

According to the City of Mesa, Chavez worked at the Mesa municipal court for 7 years. Her daughter said her mom would have wanted her story told in hopes of helping other domestic violence victims.

As far as Tate’s life before his death, an online obituary from his family shows he worked as a cardiovascular technician in the Valley and was a devoted father.

We’ve now learned the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office filed a notice of intent to seek the death penalty on Christmas Eve.

The documents call Chavez’s murder especially heinous and cruel, stating she suffered mental, emotional or physical suffering at the hands of Thomas before her death.

While he’s facing 1st-degree murder for both Chavez and Tate, court records reveal the County plans to call the medical examiner to testify in the penalty phase, specifically to show additional autopsy and crime scene photos of Chavez’s murder.

Arizona’s Family has reached out to family members of both victims, hoping to learn more about them and their lives, but has not heard back from most of them.

As of now, Thomas’ murder trial is slated for this July.

(source: azfamily.com)

USA:

Trump signs death penalty order directing attorney general to help states get lethal injection drugs

President Donald Trump signed a sweeping execution order Monday on the death penalty that directs the attorney general to “take all necessary and lawful action” to ensure that states have enough lethal injection drugs to carry out executions.

Trump’s order, coming just hours after he returned to the White House, compels the Justice Department to not only seek the death penalty in appropriate federal cases but also to help preserve capital punishment in states that have struggled to maintain adequate supplies of lethal injection drugs.

Trump had been expected to restart federal executions, which have been on hold since a moratorium was imposed by former Attorney General Merrick Garland in 2021. Only three defendants remain on federal death row after Democratic President Joe Biden recently converted 37 of their sentences to life in prison.

Trump directed the attorney general to pursue federal jurisdiction and seek the death penalty “regardless of other factors” when the case involves the killing of a law enforcement officer or capital crimes “committed by an alien illegally present in this country.” He’s also instructing the attorney general to seek to overrule Supreme Court precedents that “limit the authority of limit the authority of State and Federal governments to impose capital punishment.”

“The Government’s most solemn responsibility is to protect its citizens from abhorrent acts, and my Administration will not tolerate efforts to stymie and eviscerate the laws that authorize capital punishment against those who commit horrible acts of violence against American citizens,” Trump’s order said.

Trump’s administration carried out 13 federal executions during his 1st term, more than under any president in modern history, and the president has spoken frequently of expanding executions. In a speech announcing his 2024 campaign, Trump called for those “caught selling drugs to receive the death penalty for their heinous acts.” He later promised to execute drug and human smugglers and even praised China’s harsher treatment of drug peddlers.

Trump’s order comes days after Garland withdrew the Justice Department’s protocol for federal executions that allowed for single-drug lethal injections with pentobarbital, after a government review raised concerns about the potential for “unnecessary pain and suffering.” The protocol could be imposed by Trump’s new acting Attorney General James McHenry III, or his his pick to lead the Justice Department, Pam Bondi, once she’s confirmed by the Senate.

The pentobarbital protocol was adopted by Bill Barr, attorney general during Trump’s 1st term, to replace a three-drug mix used in the 2000s, the last time federal executions were carried out before Trump was in office.

Biden’s decision last month left just three inmates on federal death row. They are Dylann Roof, who carried out the 2015 racist slayings of 9 Black members of Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina; 2013 Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev; and Robert Bowers, who fatally shot 11 congregants at Pittsburgh’s Tree of Life synagogue in 2018, the deadliest antisemitic attack in U.S history.

(source: Associated Press)

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

President Trump’s America First Priorities

January 20, 2025

MAKE AMERICA SAFE AGAIN

President Trump will take bold action to secure our border and protect American communities.

This includes ending Biden’s catch-and-release policies, reinstating Remain in Mexico, building the wall, ending asylum for illegal border crossers, cracking down on criminal sanctuaries, and enhancing vetting and screening of aliens.

President Trump’s deportation operation will address the record border crossings of criminal aliens under the prior administration.

The President is suspending refugee resettlement, after communities were forced to house large and unsustainable populations of migrants, straining community safety and resources.

The Armed Forces, including the National Guard, will engage in border security, which is national security, and will be deployed to the border to assist existing law enforcement personnel.

President Trump will begin the process of designating cartels, including the dangerous Tren de Aragua, as foreign terrorist organizations and use the Alien Enemies Act to remove them.

The Department of Justice will seek the death penalty as the appropriate punishment for heinous crimes against humanity, including those who kill law enforcement officers and illegal migrants who maim and murder Americans.

MAKE AMERICA AFFORDABLE AND ENERGY DOMINANT AGAIN

The President will unleash American energy by ending Biden’s policies of climate extremism, streamlining permitting, and reviewing for rescission all regulations that impose undue burdens on energy production and use, including mining and processing of non-fuel minerals.

President Trump’s energy actions empower consumer choice in vehicles, showerheads, toilets, washing machines, lightbulbs and dishwashers.

President Trump will declare an energy emergency and use all necessary resources to build critical infrastructure.

President Trump’s energy policies will end leasing to massive wind farms that degrade our natural landscapes and fail to serve American energy consumers.

President Trump will withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord.

All agencies will take emergency measures to reduce the cost of living.

President Trump will announce the America First Trade Policy.

America will no longer be beholden to foreign organizations for our national tax policy, which punishes American businesses.

DRAIN THE SWAMP

The President will usher a Golden Age for America by reforming and improving the government bureaucracy to work for the American people. He will freeze bureaucrat hiring except in essential areas to end the onslaught of useless and overpaid DEI activists buried into the federal workforce. He will pause burdensome and radical regulations not yet in effect that Biden announced.

President Trump is announcing an unprecedented slate of executive orders for rescission.

President Trump is planning for improved accountability of government bureaucrats. The American people deserve the highest-quality service from people who love our country. The President will also return federal workers to work, as only 6% of employees currently work in person.

President Trump is taking swift action to end the weaponization of government against political rivals and ordering all document retention as required by law. President Trump is also ending the unconstitutional censorship by the federal government. No longer will government employees pick and require the erasure of entirely true speech.

On the President’s direction, the State Department will have an America-First foreign policy.

BRING BACK AMERICAN VALUES

The President will establish male and female as biological reality and protect women from radical gender ideology.

American landmarks will be named to appropriately honor our Nation’s history.

(source: whitehouse.gov)

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

Statement of Death Penalty Action Executive Director Abraham Bonowitz responding to President Trump's Executive Order Expanding Capital Punishment

"President Trump's executive order demanding capital charges for the murder of law enforcement officers or capital crimes by illegal aliens is unnecessary bluster, because the death penalty already exists for such crimes. But Trump can't help himself. Donald Trump's Agenda2025 articulated his plan to drastically increase executions, and we all know this is one promise he can't wait to keep.

"We are also dismayed at President Biden's cynical compromise that commuted 37 federal death sentences while leaving seven prisoners on federal and military death rows. While expressing both his personal opposition to the death penalty and his desire to maintain the moratorium on executions he imposed in 2021, Biden has nevertheless primed the pump for Donald Trump to resume his execution spree."

(source: Death Penalty Action)

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

Trump signs executive order on death penalty: What will change

President of the United States of America Donald Trump has signed an executive order on the death penalty. The Attorney General has been instructed to assist states in obtaining lethal injection drugs, the Associated Press reports.

As noted by AP, the order was issued only a few hours after Trump returned to the White House. The move obliges the Department of Justice not only to seek the death penalty in appropriate federal cases but also to promote its preservation in states that have difficulty maintaining sufficient stocks of lethal injectable drugs.

Among other things, Trump has instructed the Attorney General to seek the death penalty in the following cases:

the murder of a law enforcement officer;

capital crimes committed by an alien who is unlawfully present in this country.

The AP adds that the Trump administration has carried out 13 federal executions during its first term, more than any other president. In his speech, the Republican also called for the death penalty for those caught selling drugs and later promised to execute drug smugglers.

Death penalty by injection

The death penalty by injection is a method of executing a death sentence that involves injecting a convicted person with a special drug or combination of drugs that causes loss of consciousness, muscle paralysis, and cardiac arrest. This method was first used in the United States in 1982 and has since become the main method in most states where the death penalty is authorized.

At the end of December, Trump promised to seek the death penalty for those who have committed violent crimes.

(source: Associated Press)

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

During the Jubilee Year, it's time to abolish the death penalty in the US< P>

On Dec. 26, as part of the Jubilee Year, Pope Francis opened a new Holy Door in a peculiar place: Rome's Rebibbia prison.

It's far from the first time the pope has brought attention to the incarcerated. Notably, he often chooses to wash the feet of prison inmates during Holy Thursday liturgies. And even before the Jubilee Year officially began, he once again called for the worldwide abolition of the death penalty. As an American Catholic, I believe there is neither a better time nor occasion than the Jubilee Year to abolish the death penalty in our country.

The opening of Holy Doors is a pivotal part of inaugurating a Jubilee Year in the Catholic Church, which we will celebrate this year. The foundation of these special celebrations can be found in Isaiah 61: "The Lord has anointed me; he has sent me to bring good news to the afflicted, to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, release to the prisoners, to announce a year of favor from the Lord."

Interestingly enough, one of the groups explicitly mentioned here is the incarcerated. And although the Jubilee Year has just begun, Pope Francis is already making good on incorporating that community into the Jubilee's celebrations.

In 2018, the pope approved edits to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which would classify the death penalty as "inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person" (2267). But things get hairier once we try to put this into practice, especially here in the United States, where the death penalty is still on the books in 27 states, as well as on the federal level and for the military.

In likely one of the final acts of his presidency, President Joe Biden, himself a devout Catholic, chose to commute the sentences of 37 of the 40 men on federal death row to life without parole. This is in stark contrast to his predecessor, who signed off on 13 federal executions during his tenure as president.

That very same predecessor mentioned the men who had their death sentences commuted in a Christmas message on Truth Social, saying about them, "I refuse to wish a Merry Christmas to those lucky ‘souls' but, instead, will say, GO TO HELL!"

Unfortunately, the former president's comments might not seem out of place for a country that still practices the death penalty but they are nevertheless incompatible with church teaching. And there's no denying that many of the people on death row in this country have committed heinous crimes. But in reckoning with the reality of those crimes and their victims, we must also reckon with our belief in the sanctity of life.

Lethal injection — the most commonly used method of execution in the United States — is far from the "peaceful" death it appears to be. In the state of Ohio, executions have been suspended since 2019, when Gov. Mike DeWine (himself Catholic) stopped the practice after a federal court found some of the drugs used in the lethal injection process would feel like "a sense of drowning" akin to waterboarding and "as though fire was being poured" into the inmate's veins.

Finding the above to amount to "cruel and unusual punishment," DeWine said "As long as the sta­tus quo remains, where we don't have a pro­to­col that has been found to be OK, we cer­tain­ly can­not have any exe­cu­tions in Ohio."

It might be a good start for DeWine. But, according to his and our faith, there is no protocol that is OK to execute someone because of our belief in the sanctity of life.

It might surprise readers to know that Texas — a state almost synonymous with frequent executions — is overseen by a Catholic governor, Greg Abbott. Since January 2019, 32 people have been executed in Texas. In addition, 174 men and women are on death row, and four of them are scheduled to be executed in the coming months. This is definitely unfortunate, as the sanctity of life is a concept Gov. Abbott does seem to at least in part understand, as Texas has some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country.

There are 4 other states that both have Catholic governors and death penalty laws on the books: Florida, Indiana, Missouri and Nebraska. While none of them are as frequent offenders as Texas, the death penalty remains an unfortunate reality in all of them. For example, Florida has 227 death row inmates and has executed nine people over the past five years. Missouri has 10 death row inmates and has executed 13 people in the same span of time.

Indiana and Nebraska are a bit different — but by no means are they on the Catholic path. Indiana executed its first death row inmate since 2009 only last month, as the state couldn't acquire the required lethal injection drugs. This same issue has halted executions in Nebraska since 2018, but rather than taking the hint and abolishing the practice, Nebraska state Sen. Loren Lippincott proposed asphyxiating death row inmates with nitrogen instead.

Thankfully, Lippincott's proposal was indefinitely postponed in Nebraska. But in Alabama, it was put into practice on two death row inmates last year. Those who observed the execution of Kenneth Smith said it appeared painful and inhumane. Meanwhile, Alan Miller was supposed to be executed by lethal injection in 2022, but prison officials were unable to connect the IV line that would dispense the lethal drugs. CBS News also reported it was "unknown" if those being executed by nitrogen gas would be able to indicate if they were in pain during the process.

This begs the question: instead of brainstorming new, different and terrible ways to execute people, what if we just … didn't?

Is it time to name and shame? Name, perhaps, but not shame. Pray for these governors by name. Pray for Greg Abbott, Ron DeSantis, Mike Braun, Mike Kehoe and Jim Pillen to have mercy on the condemned in their states, and to remember that before they were associated with the various crimes committed, they were first children of God.

Jesus says to his disciples in the Gospel of Matthew that "whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me." As such, each time we execute someone in this country — innocent or otherwise — we crucify Christ anew. And a year when we are called to proclaim liberty to captives and release prisoners is as good a time as any to stop.

(source: Opinion, Rose Brennan----National Catholic Reporter)

INDIA----female receives death sentence

At 24, Greeshma is the youngest to be sentenced to death in Kerala----Rafeeqa Beevi, convicted in the Mulloor Santhakumari murder case last year, is the other woman awaiting capital punishment.

Convicted for the murder of Sharon Raj, S S Greeshma on Monday became the youngest person in the state to receive the death sentence.

The 24-year-old is the 3rd woman to be awarded the death penalty and the 2nd woman on death row in the state. Rafeeqa Beevi, convicted in the Mulloor Santhakumari murder case last year, is the other woman awaiting capital punishment.

With the announcement of the quantum of sentence in the Sharon murder case, there are now 35 people on death row in the state. Judge A M Basheer, who also delivered the verdict in the Santhakumari case, sentenced Greeshma to death, citing the brutal nature of her crime.

In 2006, after being found guilty of murdering her husband Vidhukumaran Thampi, Binitha became the 1st woman to be awarded the death penalty in the state. However, her sentence was commuted to life imprisonment by the High Court.

Rafeeqa was sentenced to death last May for murdering, Santhakumari, an elderly woman, with the intention of stealing her jewellery. Rafeeqa’s accomplices, including her son Shefeek and friend Al Ameen, also received death sentences, making it the only case in the state where all the accused were awarded capital punishment.

Rafeeqa and Greeshma are both lodged in Thiruvananthapuram women’s prison. Of the other 33 inmates awaiting capital punishment in the state, 23 are housed in Poojappura central prison, with four each in Viyyur and Kannur central prisons. There are 2 death row convicts in Viyyur high-security prison.

(source: thenewindianexpress.com)

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

"Not Our Job To Protect Criminals": Bengal Seeks Death Penalty For RG Kar ConvictSanjay Roy, a former civic volunteer, was found guilty and sentenced to life term yesterday in the RG Kar rape and murder case.

The Mamata Banerjee government has challenged the trial court's life imprisonment order against the RG Kar rape-murder case convict in the Calcutta High Court, demanding that he be given the death penalty.

Sanjay Roy, a former civic volunteer who worked for the city police, was found guilty and sentenced to life term yesterday by a Sessions Court, with the judge noting the case was not in the "rarest of rare" category for a death penalty.

Advocate General Kishore Dutta moved the high court's division bench headed by Justice Debangshu Basak today seeking the death penalty for Roy. The high court has allowed the matter to be filed.

Ms Banerjee - whose government had come under fire for allegedly mishandling the case - expressed disappointment with the lower court's order today, saying it is not the state's job to protect criminals.

"When someone is a demon, can the society be human? Sometimes they get out after a few years. If someone commits a crime, should we forgive them? How does the judgment say it is not the 'rarest of rare' (case)? I say it is rare, sensitive, and heinous. If someone commits a crime and gets away, he will do it again. Our job is not to protect them," said Ms Banerjee

She also said that the Bengal assembly had passed the Aparajita Bill "to protect the dignity of mothers and daughters", but it is still lying with the Centre.

The RG Kar case sparked massive outrage last year after an on-duty trainee doctor was found dead on August 9. The case, initially probed by Kolkata Police, was transferred to the CBI after allegations of mishandling by the protesting doctors.

Roy was found guilty on Saturday under sections of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita relating to rape and murder. On Monday, the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment.

During the final arguments, the convict pleaded he was framed, to which the court said the charges against him were proven.

In his 172-page judgment, Judge Anirban Das noted the crime was "particularly heinous", but "arguments for ultimate punishment" must balance against the "principles of reformative justice and the sanctity of human life".

Stating that the judiciary must ensure justice based on evidence and not public sentiment, he said the court must resist the temptation to bow to public pressure and emotional appeals.

"In the realm of modern justice, we must rise above the primitive instinct of 'an eye for an eye' or 'a tooth for a tooth' or 'nail for a nail' or 'a life for a life'. Our duty is not to match brutality with brutality, but to elevate humanity through wisdom, compassion, and a deeper understanding of justice," said Judge Das.

The judge also ordered financial assistance of Rs 17 lakh to be paid to the victim's parents. But the grieving couple refused and said they want only justice.

Ms Banerjee had said the city cops would have ensured the death penalty in the case, but it was taken away from them.

"We ensured death penalty in 3 cases within 60 days. If the case stayed with us, we would have ensured death penalty long back. I am not satisfied. Had it been the death penalty, at least my heart would have been somewhat at peace," Ms Banerjee said.

Later in the evening, she said in an online post that the case fell in the "rarest of rare" category that warrants the death penalty and asserted her government would plead in the high court.

(source: ndtv.com)

CHINA----execution

Chinese man executed for knife attack leading to 8 deaths, 17 injuries at vocational school in E.China

Xu Jiajin, the perpetrator of a knife attack that resulted in 8 deaths and 17 injuries at a vocational school in Yixing, East China’s Jiangsu Province, was executed on Monday in accordance with the law, Xinhua News Agency reported on Monday.

Wuxi Intermediate People’s Court in Jiangsu province carried out the death penalty against Xu after receiving the criminal ruling and execution order from the Supreme People’s Court. Wuxi People’s Procuratorate dispatched officers to supervise the process per legal requirements. Before the execution, Xu was allowed to meet with his close relatives, according to Xinhua.

On December 17, 2024, Wuxi Intermediate People’s Court sentenced Xu to death for intentional homicide and permanently revoked his political rights. Xu accepted the sentence, which was subsequently reviewed by the Jiangsu High People’s Court and submitted to the Supreme People’s Court for final approval.

The Supreme People’s Court, upon review, found that Xu deliberately and unlawfully took the lives of others, with particularly egregious criminal circumstances and extremely serious consequences. His crimes are extremely severe and warranted the harshest punishment under the law. As a result, the court approved the death penalty for Xu, according to Xinhua.

The attack took place on November 16, 2024 at the Wuxi Vocational Institute of Arts and Technology. The 21-year-old suspect Xu, was caught at the scene and he confessed to his crime, according to a statement released by the public security bureau of Yixing.

According to the police, Xu, a graduate of the school in 2024, returned to the school to vent his anger for not receiving his graduation certificate due to failing exams and for dissatisfaction with his internship pay.

(source: globaltimes.cn)

ISRAEL:

Israeli blood Is not a bargaining chip: A call for the death penalty for terrorists - opinion----"Instead of freeing murderers, we must send a different message: Israeli blood is not expendable."

This past weekend, I awoke to an unbearable reality. The Hamas terrorist who brutally murdered my father is being released as part of a hostage exchange deal. This is not justice. It is a capitulation that exposes our helplessness in the face of terror.

9 years ago, my father, Richard Lakin z”l, was brutally murdered by a Hamas terrorist on his way home aboard bus 78 in Jerusalem. Gunshots and stab wounds ended his life and traumatized our family. But my personal grief is just one thread in the national fabric of anguish.

As an Israeli, I believe in the sanctity of life. If releasing the terrorist who murdered my father could save even one hostage from the horrors of Gaza’s dungeons, I would support it. I am confident my father would feel the same. Yet the price is far too high. This price is too high for any nation to bear. History is our witness: Released terrorists return to kill.

Over the years, Israel has released thousands of terrorists in various deals. The statistics are clear: More than half of them return to terrorism, and many are responsible for the murder of thousands of additional Israelis. Among those previously released are the masterminds behind the horrific massacre of October 7.

Ending the cycle

Hamas terrorists do not limit their atrocities to Jews. They target anyone who stands in their way – Jews, Arabs, and international civilians alike. Many of the terrorists being freed will likely rejoin the ranks of terror and claim more Israeli lives. Hundreds, possibly thousands, of Israelis could be murdered by those being released today. How many more lives must we sacrifice before we send a clear message to our enemies?

It is time to put an end to this cycle. We cannot continue a policy of capitulation. Instead of freeing murderers, we must send a different message: Israeli blood is not expendable. I call on the government and the Knesset to immediately pass legislation for the death penalty for terrorists.

This law must be unequivocal and binding – with no alternatives or discretionary options – for any terrorist convicted of murdering an Israeli in civilian or military courts. Once the appeal process is completed, the sentence must be carried out. Only in this way can we ensure justice, deterrence, and a clear message to our enemies: Israeli blood is not cheap, and murderers will pay the ultimate moral price.

The moral imperative is clear: those who take the lives of others in cold blood forfeit their own right to live. As the Torah commands: “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed” (Genesis 9:6), and “You shall purge the evil from your midst” (Deuteronomy 17:7).

The State of Israel, founded on the values of justice and the sanctity of life, cannot tolerate a reality where convicted murderers enjoy comfortable prison conditions and, in some cases, early release. This injustice defies the very values our nation was built on.

Beyond the moral argument, there is also an economic responsibility. Over the years, Israel has spent hundreds of millions of shekels housing terrorists in its prisons. These funds, drawn from taxpayers, should be redirected to supporting victims of terror and building a brighter future for all Israelis – not to financing cushy prison conditions for murderers.

As the son of Richard Lakin z”l, I speak to you from personal pain and a deep concern for Israel’s future. Still, this is not just my struggle; it is ours. Israeli blood is not a bargaining chip. The lives of our citizens are not commodities to be negotiated.

It is time for us to stand up for our dignity and our future. Israeli blood is not expendable, and murderers must pay the ultimate moral price. Together, we must demand that Israel confront terror with strength, enforce justice with resolve, and uphold the honor of every life taken.

(source: Opinion; Micah Avni is an Israeli businessman, thought leader, activist, and host of a Hebrew podcast, The Leadership of Tomorrow----The Jerusalem Post)

IRAN:

Iran court sentences singer to death for blasphemy

Tehran’s First Criminal Court has sentenced the popular singer Amir Hossein Maghsoudloo, known as Tataloo, to death on appeal after he was convicted of blasphemy for “insulting Prophet Muhammad”, according to Iran International. The case was reopened after the prosecutor rejected the original verdict to sentence Tataloo to 5 years of imprisonment.

Tataloo, the 37-year-old musician is famous, particularly among young audiences for openly expressing his political statements in his music. Tataloo’s supporters argue that the government’s attempts to suppress his influence with several lawsuits stem from his outspoken criticism of Iran’s conservative regime.

According to local media, he was once favored by conservative politicians to appeal to younger audiences when his song, released in 2015, supporting Iran’s nuclear program resonated with the government’s stance. However, when his lyrics and lifestyle continue to go against Iran’s conservative values, his artistic expression was allegedly restricted. According to Iran News Update’s report, the Ministry of Guidance has tightened control over artistic expression to suppress creative freedoms, with artists frequently facing imprisonment, censorship, or exile.

Tataloo had been living in Istanbul, Turkey since 2018 until Turkish police extradited him to Iran in December 2023. Since then he has been in detention with 10-year sentences for several charges including disseminating “propaganda” against the Islamic Republic, promoting prostitution and publishing “obscene content”. According to Amnesty International, Iran’s courts are controlled by the country’s security and intelligence bodies and lack independence.

The UN Human Rights experts, in 2022, highlighted the need “to take meaningful steps to ensure the right to freedom of religion or belief and freedom of opinion and expression without discrimination.” Despite the UN’s calls to decriminalize blasphemy due to claims it is used as a form of “systematic persecution” of religious minorities, Yousef Mehrdad and Sadrollah Fazeli Zare were reportedly executed in 2023 for crimes including blasphemy for “insulting Islamic sanctities” under Article 513 of the Islamic Penal Code (IPC) and “insulting the Prophet” under Article 262 IPC.

According to the UN, Iran executioned, at least 853 people in 2023 and 901 people in 2024.

Diana Eltahawy, Deputy Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International claims, that “the authorities have weaponized the death penalty in an orchestrated bid to sow fear among the public and suppress dissent.”

(source: Sandar Linn | Newcastle Law School, GB, jurist.org)

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

3,400 Activists Condemn Death Sentence of Pakhshan Azizi

A group of 3,400 artists, writers, poets, journalists, civil, political, religious, and student activists, lawyers, and citizens has condemned the death sentence of activist Pakhshan Azizi.

In a statement, they said, "In the path of justice, there is no place for the word execution."

The statement added, "Pakhshan Azizi is one of us, a person from among our people, sharing our pains, aspirations, and hopes. Her execution would leave a wound on our conscience that will never heal."

"No society becomes more just by shedding human blood. In the path of justice, there is no place for the word execution."

The group said, "This time, we speak not as artists, civil activists, or in any other capacity, but as anguished people, as citizens of this country, and as Iranian families who feel a duty to oppose any form of oppression. We strongly object to the death sentence for Pakhshan Azizi."

Azizi, a resident of Mahabad, was arrested by security forces in Tehran on August 4, 2023, and subsequently transferred to Ward 209 of Evin Prison.

She had previously been detained by security forces on November 16, 2009, and was released on bail after 4 months.

Despite significant procedural concerns raised by her legal team, Iran’s Supreme Court upheld her death sentence.

Branch 39 of the Supreme Court confirmed the verdict, which includes an additional 4-year prison term, without addressing what her lawyer described as numerous procedural flaws in the case.

The original sentence was issued by Tehran’s Revolutionary Court on charges of “armed rebellion through membership in opposition groups.”

(source: iranwire.com)

JANUARY 20, 2025:

FLORIDA:

Long-awaited DNA analysis proves Zeigler innocent in 1975 murders, lawyers say----After nearly 50 years on death row, the results of Zeigler’s successful battle for DNA testing could mark a breakthrough.

A trail of blood, rug fibers and cat fur show it is impossible for Florida death row inmate Tommy Zeigler to have killed his wife and in-laws on Christmas Eve 1975, his lawyers assert in a new court filing.

Fresh DNA analysis of dozens of pieces of evidence instead supports Zeigler’s story of walking in on a burglary at his family’s furniture store in Winter Garden, his lawyers say, and provides enough reasonable doubt to overturn his convictions.

The results upend what Orange County prosecutors told Zeigler’s 1976 jury: that Zeigler, who is white, shot and killed his wife, mother-in-law and father-in-law, then lured 3 Black men to the store to blame them for the murders, killing 1. The tests also point to another man as the killer.

Zeigler, who will be 80 in July, has lived on death row for 48 years — the longest among Florida inmates and quite possibly the nation.

He tried for decades to get the evidence in his case analyzed for DNA. Prosecutors and judges refused 6 times to allow the tests, even at his lawyers’ expense.

Then in 2021, Monique Worrell became the Ninth Judicial Circuit Court state attorney serving Osceola and Orange counties. She had previously reviewed Zeigler’s case as founder of the office’s conviction integrity unit and said the state had a moral obligation to be certain it had convicted the right person.

Florida’s attorney general opposed the evidence release, but the Florida Supreme Court refused to stop it.

“There is reasonable doubt in spades in this case,” said one of Zeigler’s attorneys, David Michaeli, “and we don’t convict people, let alone execute them, when we’re not absolutely sure they’re guilty.”

In a recent interview at a conference room on death row, Zeigler said he hopes his experience showcases the police and prosecutorial misconduct embedded in Florida’s death penalty.

In his case, police or prosecutors coached witnesses, failed to get any of the blood subtyped and lost or destroyed key evidence, including a loose tooth seen in crime scene photos that did not belong to a victim, the new filing says.

Officers or prosecutors withheld the existence of multiple witnesses and police reports, including one of an attempted armed robbery at a gas station across the street from the furniture store within hours of the murders. The original judge also behaved inappropriately, the lawyers say, getting a doctor to prescribe Valium to a holdout juror, who only then voted to convict.

If he were declared innocent, Zeigler would join 30 other wrongfully convicted men released from Florida’s death row — the most of any state.

His appeals lawyers have been with him since 1987 and paid for the DNA analysis. During the last 2 years, they have sent him glimpses into the exhaustive testing by Forensic Analytical Crime Lab of Hayward, Calif. They’ve offered reassurances, and for the first time in many years, hope.

• • •

That chilly Christmas Eve in 1975, Zeigler, then 30, and his handyman, Edward Williams, 58, pulled up to the back of the W.T. Zeigler Furniture store, about 10 miles north of the Magic Kingdom. They planned to deliver several large Christmas gifts, including a LazyBoy for Zeigler’s father-in-law. Eunice, Zeigler’s 32-year-old wife, and her parents had driven ahead of Zeigler to pick out the recliner.

As Zeigler walked into the dark showroom, someone hit him over the head, knocking off his glasses, he later told police and a jury. 2 blurry figures, one much larger, threw him up against a wall and into a hallway.

Zeigler hustled to a desk, where he kept a revolver for protection. He remembers hitting someone with it and pulling the trigger, then he got knocked down and lost the gun. As he was getting up, he said, he felt the burn as a bullet entered his abdomen.

Before he fell unconscious, he heard a voice: “Mays has been hit, kill him.”

Zeigler told the first officer to arrive that he had been shot by Charlie Mays, a 35-year-old orange crew chief and father of 4 who owed the furniture store money.

When the lights came back on, police found Zeigler’s wife and in-laws in different parts of the store. Virginia Edwards, 54, was slumped on her side behind a floral couch in the front showroom, shot in her waist and the side of the head. Zeigler’s wife of eight years, Eunice, lay on her back in the store’s tiny kitchen, her hand in the pocket of her herringbone jacket and a bullet wound on the right side of her head.

Zeigler’s father-in-law, Perry Edwards, was found in the back of the store, about 15 feet from Mays. Both men had been shot multiple times and struck repeatedly in the head with a steel crank used to turn linoleum rolls. Seven guns lay scattered around the bodies.

Zeigler was still in the hospital, recovering from an operation to his stomach, when a deputy sheriff arrived at his bedside and charged him with all 4 murders. The apparent motive: a pair of insurance policies worth a combined $500,000 purchased by Zeigler months before on his wife.

The most damning testimony against Zeigler came from Williams, a Bahamian carpenter who had performed odd jobs for the Zeigler family for almost 2 decades.

Williams said when he entered the back of the store, he came face to face with Zeigler, who was pointing a .38 Special at him. Zeigler pulled the trigger 3 times, Williams told police, but the gun failed to fire. Williams said he noticed specks of blood on Zeigler’s face. He said he pocketed the gun, jumped over a fence and got a ride to a nearby town. Hours later, he returned to the Winter Garden Police Department and handed over the gun. It turned out to be one of the weapons used to shoot Zeigler’s in-laws.

Willams, who is deceased, appeared to have never been treated as a suspect. Zeigler’s lawyers sent Williams’ pants out for analysis only to learn after the trial that Williams had likely changed his clothes since the pocket where he’d stuck the murder weapon contained no gunshot residue.

Orange County Sheriff’s Office Detective Donald Frye had graduated the previous summer from a week-long school with a now-discredited blood spatter analyst. Frye noticed that Mays’ blood had dried in spots atop 72-year-old Perry Edwards’ blood on the terrazzo floor.

Frye decided Edwards’ blood had dried at least 30 minutes before Mays’ had flowed, suggesting that Zeigler killed his family. Frye, who died in 2017, theorized that Zeigler then lured Williams, Mays and another man to the store to kill them and blame them for the killings.

Zeigler, who had no criminal record, had shot himself with a .357 revolver, Frye suggested, to cover up his involvement.

In front of a jury 6 months later, that’s the story State Attorney Robert Eagan told. The prosecutor, who died in September, pointed to blood stains along the underarm of Zeigler’s shirt. He said they came from Zeigler holding his father-in-law in a chokehold while he hit the older man in the head with the linoleum crank.

If the Orange County Sheriff’s Office had ordered blood subtyping — available in the 1970s but only if performed within two weeks — they would have learned that the blood on Zeigler’s shirt belonged to Mays — not Perry Edwards.

• • •

48 years later on a muggy, rainy day last June, New York lawyers Michaeli and Dennis Tracey flew to Jacksonville and drove through pine forests and cow fields to Union Correctional Institution in northwest Florida to deliver the latest DNA results to Zeigler.

It was distressing to see the 6-foot Zeigler in a wheelchair with an oxygen cannula stuck into his nose, Michaeli said in a phone interview.

Zeigler had fought pneumonia and been diagnosed with COPD. His weight had dropped to 105. The staff had raced him to the prison hospital so many times that now they kept him there. A doctor had prescribed him a 3,000-calorie-a-day diet that included Ensure Plus, so he was gaining weight.

Michaeli said he handed Zeigler a stack of DNA reports, and they went through them one-by-one.

Lab analysts had tested Zeigler’s corduroy shirt in 18 spots, including the cuffs, the collar, the front and back, and turned up no blood from his murdered relatives. His glasses and his orange, navy and tan plaid pants also were clean.

But Mays, who had been shot twice and beaten in the head with a linoleum crank, had evidence all over his body indicating culpability, according to the lawyers. In addition to what appeared to be the store’s cash receipts in his pockets, blood from Zeigler’s father-in-law soaked Mays' Converse sneakers and the lower thigh and upper calf of Mays’ trousers, according to the results.

The bottoms of Mays’ shoes also suggested he’d moved around the store closer to Perry Edwards’ death. They bore Persian cat fur matted with blood and brown rug fibers from the front of Zeigler’s store, where evidence showed Edwards had been first shot in the ear and shoulder, and near where Virginia Edwards died. Zeigler and his wife kept 5 Persian show cats that they took to competitions around Florida, but the cats had never come to the store.

There was more. Eunice Zeigler, repositioned after her death, also was splattered with her father’s blood. It was found inside her lapel, on the back of her pant leg, on a sock inside her shoe and on the shoe. Someone with hands covered in Perry Edwards’ blood had rearranged her clothes after her death, the lawyers told Zeigler, replacing her shoe on her foot and buttoning up her jacket.

The absence of any of Perry Edwards’ blood on Zeigler’s clothes meant he couldn’t have been there when Eunice, Perry and Virginia Edwards were killed, the lawyers told Zeigler. The victims had each been shot in the head with large-caliber bullets and there were no exit wounds, which meant the killer would have been splattered with their blood.

Adding to the defense theory that Mays was a perpetrator — and not a victim — his blood and touch DNA were found in minute amounts on the cuffs of Eunice’s herringbone jacket and at the opening of one pocket. This suggested Mays had moved her and buttoned up her coat.

Zeigler allowed himself to feel satisfaction. He knew this was going to be the outcome. At the same time, he couldn’t force himself to get excited. He’d been disappointed too many times before, he said.

He had initially sought early DNA testing in 1994 after he heard about a prosecutor in Orange County being the first to use it to convict a rapist. A judge finally granted the analysis in 2001 after Florida passed a DNA testing law. Forensic tests on four tiny squares of Zeigler’s clothes failed to detect his family members’ blood.

But his appeals of innocence went nowhere, even after two expert witnesses testified that based on the limited tests, Zeigler could not have killed his family.

Florida prosecutors and judges all the way to the state Supreme Court denied further requests, saying that the information gleaned from the analysis would not automatically acquit Zeigler, as Florida’s DNA testing law required.

Michaeli and Tracey told Zeigler they thought they now had enough.

But one mystery remains unsolved for now. Spots of blood on Mays’ shirt do not match anyone who was in the store that night, and a search of the national criminal database of DNA yielded no results.

• • •

Zeigler’s future seems intertwined with that of State Attorney Worrell. The progressive prosecutor approved Zeigler’s testing only to be removed from office by Gov. Ron DeSantis in August 2023 for what he said was a failure to fully prosecute drug trafficking and gun crimes.

Worrell won back her job last November, and on Jan. 8, she was sworn back in as the next state attorney without any interference from DeSantis.

As long as she retains the job, she must decide whether to support Zeigler’s request. As she headed back into her office after her swearing-in Jan. 8, she said she hoped to review the results of Zeigler’s DNA tests soon.

Zeigler was the subject of a 2018 Tampa Bay Times series and podcast, Blood and Truth. The Times found him to be among more than 30 men sent to death row in the 1970s and 1980s who were denied DNA testing, despite the law passed in 2001. Courts rejected their appeals for DNA tests a combined 70 times, or almost 3 out of every 4 requests, according to a review of more than 500 death row cases. 8 were executed without ever obtaining DNA tests.

Lynn-Marie Carty, Zeigler’s private investigator of 14 years, said Florida should have been reviewing cases from the 1970s and 1980s once DNA testing became available, especially given its abysmal record on exonerations.

“It doesn’t really seem like that’s a priority one way or the other with the powers that be,” Carty said. “But I don’t think that you can ignore dramatic DNA results.”

But Mays’ two remaining sons, who still live in the Winter Garden area, said the DNA results do not sway them.

Mays’ eldest son, Pierre Mays, 61, was 12 when his Dad died. Initially, he said the DNA results gave him doubts about Zeigler’s guilt. But minutes later, he changed his mind. “In my mind, I think he did it,” he said of Zeigler. “I might be wrong… but my Daddy was a good father, and I don’t believe he would do no one like that. And how could he kill these three people and he was the last one that got killed? How could that be? It’s like a puzzle to me.”

Down the street in a small duplex, his brother, Napoleon, 59, was equally adamant after hearing about the DNA tests. “My mamma always said if my Daddy killed all these people, why didn’t he kill Zeigler?” he said.

Zeigler said his last goal in life is to clear his name. He wonders how the DNA results will be received by those with the power to set him free.

”We just have to wait and see if a judge will stand up after 48 years,” he said, “and say, ‘we screwed up.’”

(source: Tampa Bay Times)

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

Veterans on Florida's Death Row, Part III----This is Part III of the latest series from Tracking Florida’s Death Penalty: Veterans on Florida’s Death Row, exploring information about veterans who are or have been on Florida's death row.

Florida has the highest number of death row exonerations in the nation, with 30 death-row exonerations since 1973. 2 of Florida’s 30 death row exonerees are veterans.

Robert Cox was a Lieutenant in the Army. He was convicted of 1st-degree murder in Orange County, Florida, and sentenced to death despite “adamantly and continuously proclaim[ing] his innocence.”

Cox spent 1.5 years on Florida’s death row before becoming Florida’s 12th death row exoneree following the Florida Supreme Court’s ruling on direct appeal reversing his 1988 conviction for first-degree murder and vacating his sentence of death.

Upon his release from death row, Cox “was turned over to prison authorities from California, where he [was required to] finish serving time on a previous kidnapping charge.”

Ron Wright was an Air Force Sergeant and Orange County Deputy Sheriff before being sentenced to death following a jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of 7-5. On direct appeal in May 2017, the Florida Supreme Court held that “the evidence [was] insufficient to sustain Wright's convictions.” Wright was Florida’s 27th death row exoneree.

Currently on Death Row

Several prisoners currently on Florida’s death row are U.S. military veterans. The list is in alphabetical order by last name and will be split into parts, as it is too long to be included in just one post. This post covers A-J. The entire list of Florida’s death row prisoners can be found on the Department of Corrections website here.

Raymond Bright (Duval County)

Raymond Bright was sentenced to 2 sentences of death for crimes that occurred in 2008 following the jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of 8-4.2 At trial, there was testimony about Bright’s military service:

Attorney and former marine James Hernandez testified that Bright served 9-plus years in the United States Marine Corps (USMC), during which he served as a fighter jet mechanic. Hernandez described Bright's multiple promotions during his service in the USMC. Hernandez testified that Bright received 2 separate awards for good conduct, a prerequisite of which is three continuous years of honorable service in the USMC. Hernandez also explained that Bright received a Meritorious Mast Award for noticing a problem on a jet upon take-off which required it to land, thereby preventing a “tragic mishap.” Bright received two separate honorable discharges from the USMC, and one general discharge under honorable conditions. The reason for the general discharge was listed as “Alcohol Abuse Rehabilitation Failure.”3

At sentencing, the trial court considered Bright’s military service as follows and assigned the noted weight:

10 years of service in the USMC with two honorable discharges and a third discharge under honorable circumstances (considerable weight);

Bright has skills as a mechanic and served as an aviation mechanic in the USMC (some weight); and

Bright's actions as a USMC aviation mechanic likely saved lives (some weight)4

Bright is 70 years old.

Daniel Conahan, Jr. (Charlotte County)

Daniel Conahan was sentenced to death in 1999 for crimes that occurred in 1996 following a jury’s unanimous recommendation for death.5 There’s some indication in the record that Conahan served in the Navy. Other sources provide that Conahan joined the Navy in 1977 and was stationed at the Naval Base in Great Lakes, Illinois, but was soon discharged for inappropriate behavior.

Conahan is 69 years old.

James Dailey (Pinellas County)

James Dailey was sentenced to death for crimes that occurred in 1985 following a jury’s unanimous recommendation for death.6 On direct appeal in 1991, the Florida Supreme Court struck 2 aggravating factors, reversed the sentence of death, and remanded for resentencing before the trial judge.

On remand, Dailey was again sentenced to death. In 1995, on direct appeal from resentencing, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed Dailey’s sentence of death.7

There has been extensive litigation related to Dailey’s sentence of death, including Dailey’s claims of innocence. In 2018, the Florida Supreme Court denied Dailey’s request for Hurst relief because his sentence became final before 2002.8 In 2019, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court’s denial of Dailey’s 2nd successive motion for postconviction relief.9 In 2020, Dailey was under an active death warrant.

While his military service is generally not discussed in the various decisions about his case, news reports (linked below) state that Dailey is a Vietnam veteran.

Dailey is 78 years old.

Floyd Damren (Clay County)

Floyd Damren was sentenced to death for crimes that occurred in 1994. Damren served in Vietnam. In 2022, Damren filed a motion for postconviction relief in part based on “newly discovered evidence of his post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) at the time of the offenses” that he argued “renders his death sentence unreliable.”10 The claim was denied.

Damren is 73 years old.

Leon Davis, Jr. (Polk County)

Davis was sentenced to more than 1 sentence of death in 2 separate cases. The record indicates that “Davis . . . joined the military and while enlisted, he attempted suicide by hitting a concrete pole while driving at a high rate of speed. Thereafter, he was discharged from the military.”11 At sentencing in one case, the trial court considered Davis’s service in the Marine Corps as mitigation and gave it little weight.12

Davis is 47 years old.

Gary Hilton (Leon County)

Gary Hilton was sentenced to death in 2011 for crimes that occurred in 2007 following a jury’s unanimous recommendation for death.13 At sentencing, the trial court considered Hilton’s service in the U.S. military as mitigation and assigned it “very little weight.”14

Hilton is 78 years old.

George Hodges (Hillsborough County)

George Hodges was sentenced to death for crimes that occurred in 1987. On direct appeal, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed Hodges’ conviction and sentence. However, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and vacated the Court’s decision for further consideration. On remand, the Florida Supreme Court reaffirmed its prior decision.

In postconviction, Hodges argued that his trial counsel failed to adequately research his school, military, and medical records for presenting mitigation at trial. The Florida Supreme Court denied this claim in 2004. However, Chief Justice Pariente dissented, writing that Hodges’ case is “particularly troubling” based on counsel’s “failure to investigate and present mitigation, in conjunction with defense counsel's failure to object to a patently improper penalty-phase closing argument.”15 According to the dissent, “the military records [in the postconviction record] indicate that Hodges was discharged after only 55 days by ‘reason of unsuitability’/’defective attitude.’ Internal military documents describe Hodges as ‘unable to adjust to a disciplined environment.’”16

Hodges is 67 years old.

Jeffrey Hutchinson (Okaloosa County)

Jeffrey Hutchinson was sentenced to death for killing his girlfriend and her 3 children in 1998.17 He waived a penalty-phase jury and was given 3 sentences of death—1 for each child.18 In sentencing Hutchinson to death, the trial court considered that he was “a decorated military veteran of the Gulf War” as mitigation and assigned it “significant weight.”19 The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and sentences on direct appeal, and his sentences of death became final in 2004.

Bryan Jennings (Brevard County)

After two trials, Bryan Jennings was sentenced to death for crimes that occurred in 1979 following the jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of 9-3. At sentencing, the trial court did not find any mitigation. On direct appeal, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed Jennings’ convictions and sentence. This decision addressed Jennings’ military service.

However, on certiorari, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated and remanded for further consideration. On remand, the Florida Supreme Court vacated Jennings’ case for a new trial.

At the third trial, Jennings was again sentenced to death. On direct appeal, in 1987, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed Jennings’ convictions and sentence.

Jennings is 66 years old.

Tyrone Johnson (Hillsborough County)

Tyrone Johnson was sentenced to death for crimes that occurred in 2018. In July 2024, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and sentence of death on direct appeal.

The Court’s opinion indicates that Johnson served in the military and had no prior criminal history. He had also been diagnosed with Depressive Disorder and Anxiety Disorder by the Veteran’s Administration.

Johnson is 48 years old.

Ray Johnston (Hillsborough County)

Ray Johnston was sentenced to death for crimes that occurred in August 1997 following a jury’s unanimous recommendation for death.20 At sentencing the trial court considered Johnston’s service in the U.S. Air Force and honorable discharge as mitigation and assigned it “slight weight.”21

Johnston is 70 years old.

Randall Jones (Putnam County)

Randall Jones was sentenced to death for crimes that occurred in 1987 following a jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of 11-1.22 The record reflects that Jones served in the Army.23

Jones is 56 years old.

1----Due to the age of some records and the unavailability of some information, it is possible that the lists in this series are incomplete. If you know of a veteran who is not included on the lists in this series, please let me know. Also, for purposes of thoroughness, this series includes those who were discharged from the military. Thank you to the Death Penalty Information Center for their assistance with research.

2----Bright v. State, 90 So 3d 249, 255 (Fla. 2012).

3----Id.

4----Id. at 257.

5----Conahan v. State, 118 So. 3d 718, 725 (Fla. 2013).

6----Dailey v. State, 594 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 1991).

7----Dailey v. State, 659 So. 2d 246 (Fla. 1995).

8----Dailey v. State, 247 So. 3d 390 (Fla. 2018). For a full explanation of Hurst, see the five-part TFDP series available here. Even if his sentence was eligible for retroactive application of Hurst, he likely would not have been eligible for relief based on the jury’s unanimous recommendation for death.

9----Dailey v. State, 279 So. 3d 1208 (Fla. 2019).

10----Damren v. State, 2023 WL 5968167, at *1 (Fla. Sept. 14, 2023).

11----Davis v. State, 207 So. 3d 177, 187 (Fla. 2016).

12----Id. at 188.

13----Hilton v. State, 117 So. 3d 742, 749 (Fla. 2013).

14----Id.

15----Hodges v. State, 885 So. 2d 338, 363 (Fla. 2004) (Pariente, C.J., dissenting).

16----Id.

17----Hutchinson v. State, 343 So. 3d 50, 52 (Fla. 2022).

18----Id.

19----Hutchinson v. State, 882 So. 2d 943, 959 (Fla. 2004).

20----Johnston was also sentenced to death for crimes that occurred in February 1997 following a jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of 11-1. Johnston v. State, 863 So. 2d 271, 277 (Fla. 2003). However, that sentence was later reduced to life.

21----Johnston v. State, 841 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 2002).

22----This was the jury’s recommendation in Jones’ 2nd trial. On direct appeal after his 1st trial, Jones was granted a new trial.

23----Id. at n.27.

(source: fladeathpenalty.substack.com)

ARIZONA:

Secret jars in a prison fridge hold Az’s lethal injection drugs, and they may be expired----Retired judge looking into executions is skeptical about prison officials’ claims that pentobarbital stockpile won’t ever expire

One pharmaceutical company that used to make pentobarbital sodium salt says on its product page that the drug has a shelf life of three years.hitthatswitch/FlickrOne pharmaceutical company that used to make pentobarbital sodium salt says on its product page that the drug has a shelf life of 3 years.

In a locked and alarm-equipped refrigerator at an Arizona Department of Corrections Rehabilitation & Reentry facility in Florence are 8 unmarked glass containers that resemble Mason jars. Inside the jars is a white substance that the agency claims is pentobarbital salt, the active pharmacological ingredient in the drug used to execute Arizona death row prisoners.

It’s enough poison to kill every Death Row prisoner in the United States and then some, according to a legal declaration obtained by a federal public defender who interviewed the manufacturer.

And how long it’s sat in that refrigerator is a question that ADCCR staff won’t answer, because state law forbids divulging details about execution sources and executioners themselves. It’s also unclear if the drug has an expiration date.

The current Arizona Corrections administration did not procure the drug. Instead, it was purchased by the administration of former Gov. Doug Ducey. The invoice from the manufacturer is dated October 2020, and the drug was used in 3 executions in 2022.

Now it sits, unmarked in a refrigerator, ostensibly waiting for the next execution, which is being discussed in the Arizona Supreme Court. Aaron Gunches, who killed a man in 2002, has asked to be put to death, and Gov. Katie Hobbs is trying to accommodate him.

But there are questions.

“I’m flabbergasted that a medical doctor would draw anything from an unmarked container and put it into people,” said David Duncan, the retired federal magistrate judge who Hobbs hired in 2023 to investigate the state’s lethal injection protocols. Duncan was unceremoniously fired late last year by Hobbs, who he has never met, before he could finish a report that promised to be scathing.

“…While certainly possible in theory, lethal injection is not a viable method of execution in actual practice,” he wrote in a summary before he was canned.

Duncan was told by ADCRR personnel that the pentobarbital salt can last forever. But Kelley Henry, a federal defender in Tennessee, claims she was told by the drug manufacturer, Absolute Standards, that the salt is unstable, needs to be refrigerated and has a shelf life of 2 1/2 years.

So, whether it was delivered to Arizona at the end of 2020, as suggested by the purchase invoice, or sometime in 2021 before the executions, it may well be at its limit.

Duncan is not the only one raising concerns.

On Jan. 15, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland withdrew the federal execution protocol using pentobarbital because of the likelihood that the drug, once thought to be the most humane form of execution, in fact causes a painful death by pulmonary edema that has been likened to drowning or waterboarding torture. Earlier this month, a Virginia law professor tried to file a “friend of the court” brief in the Arizona Supreme Court in the Gunches case on the exact same grounds.

So, can Arizona go forward with any executions using the pentobarbital in those unmarked jars in Florence?

Snuffing out an independent investigation Duncan, who sat on the federal bench in Phoenix for 17 years, was appointed by Hobbs in early 2023 to study the state’s execution protocol and suggest ways to move forward with executions. There had been a long history of problems, some associated with the drugs used. In 2010, for example, the corrections department side-stepped federal laws and FDA and DEA regulations to import a drug from the United Kingdom, and later, in 2015, tried to import it from India.

Then, in 2014, Arizona used a questionable cocktail that took 15 injections and nearly 2 hours to kill the prisoner as he panted and gasped on the execution gurney.

And there were repeated problems getting doctors and other medical staff competent enough to set the catheter lines in the condemned mens’ arms and legs. Consequently, there were no executions between the 2014 botch and 2022, when then-Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich filed death warrants for three death row prisoners. All three were executed and the problems setting lines persisted.

Brnovich also obtained a death warrant for Gunches, but not in time to carry out the execution before his term ended. Hobbs and the newly elected Arizona attorney general, Kris Mayes, decided not to, and instead appointed Duncan to do an independent review of the process.

Duncan pored over thousands of documents, conducted numerous interviews and uncovered some unsettling facts, including how prison staff had to consult Wikipedia at the last minute before one of the executions to estimate a fatal dose of pentobarbital. He also was concerned that the drugs were delivered by the manufacturer in unmarked containers to a private residence.

“Until the very end, I thought they were open to every question I had,” he said. He was supposed to make recommendations of best practices, after all.

“At the end, it completely shifted.”

Duncan wanted to watch a rehearsal of the process, and the department refused on grounds of confidentiality. The medical staff did not want to be seen, for fear that, if outed, they would lose their respective medical licenses.

“They said it’s against the law to reveal their identities,” Duncan recalled.

He was incensed at the insinuation.

“To sit across from a federal judge and suggest that the retired federal judge is going to violate the law is a ridiculous notion. And I said, I can’t accept that. Then they said I could not watch a dry run for the same reason — that I would create a risk.”

Duncan took issue with the things that they were rehearsing: parking, crowd control, where to seat journalists, how to walk the prisoner from his cell to the death chamber. While the pomp and circumstance were rehearsed, the actual execution — how to set the lines and administer the drugs — wasn’t, even though the current medical team has never participated in a lethal injection.

His contact at ADCRR “volunteered to me that there was no expiration date on pentobarbital, the base chemical. And I said, ‘How do you know that?’ And she said, ‘Because I checked with the manufacturer.’”

In the course of his research, Duncan didn’t recall seeing any documentation of a phone call with the manufacturer saying there was no expiration date. His source said those records had been thrown away.

“I found it hard to believe that the documents showing provenance and vitality and potency of the medication, that you would just throw them away. That was a step away from transparency,” he said.

One pharmaceutical company that used to make pentobarbital sodium salt says on its product page that the drug has a shelf life of 3 years.

Duncan concluded that lethal injection was too prone to error and suggested the state should consider firing squad, which, though shocking to witnesses, had a lesser chance of being botched.

Then politics raised its ugly head. The Arizona Attorney General’s Office was in a pitched battle with Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell over who had legal authority to request death warrants for execution. And Donald Trump, who is a booster of capital punishment was reelected, and Republicans won up and down the November 2024 ballot.

It was not a good time for a Democratic governor hoping to boost her reelection chances in a state that just shifted to the right to issue a scathing review of execution practices. The mood changed.

Hobbs fired Duncan and turned to an in-house review of execution protocol by the Corrections Department, which concluded that all problems were resolved and executions were ready to resume.

Sourcing execution drugs

In April 2022, Henry, an assistant federal public defender from Tennessee, and an investigator in her office showed up at the Connecticut offices of the only domestic supplier of pentobarbital salt, Absolute Standards, to ask questions.

Because of a 2015 U.S Supreme Court decision, defendants about to be executed were required to find the drugs to do so if they didn’t like the executing state’s decision. Pentobarbital was thought at the time to be the most humane alternative.

AMA Text Hope

Although the drug is used in clinical settings under its trade name, Nembutal, its European manufacturer refused to allow its use in executions, forcing state corrections departments to buy the raw materials and then find a compounding pharmacy to turn it into something that could be injected into the condemned prisoner.

Absolute Standards saw a hole in the market and filled it. Furthermore, the company owner assured Henry that his company was the only domestic source of the drug’s raw material, known in technical parlance as the active pharmaceutical ingredient. He told her his company had supplied the drug to the federal government and to Arizona and other states. (The company said in 2024 that it stopped producing the drug for executions at the end of 2020. It did not respond to a request for comment from the Arizona Mirror.)

Henry and the investigator were told that the price was $1.5 million — the same price that Arizona paid in 2020 — and that it would take a year to produce. The reason for the time and the high price was that, in order to be of adequate quality and stability, it had to be made in batches of at least 1 kilogram, and the process was time-consuming.

“They very specifically said it has a shelf life,” Henry told Arizona Mirror, raising questions as to whether the Arizona supply is still viable.

And now the feds have renounced the use of pentobarbital altogether in federal executions.

“Having assessed the risk of pain and suffering associated with the use of pentobarbital, the review concluded that there is significant uncertainty about whether the use of pentobarbital as a single-drug lethal injection for execution treats individuals humanely and avoids unnecessary pain and suffering,” Garland wrote in his order ending the use of the drug by the U.S. Department of Justice.

“Because it cannot be said with reasonable confidence that the current execution protocol ‘not only afford[s] the rights guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of the United States’ but ‘also treat[s] individuals [being executed] fairly and humanely,’ … that protocol should be rescinded, and not reinstated unless and until that uncertainty is resolved. In the face of such uncertainty, the Department should err on the side of treating individuals humanely and avoiding unnecessary pain and suffering.”

What the incoming presidential administration decides remains to be seen.

And so does the decision of the current Arizona administration; the Governor’s Office, the Attorney General’s Office and the Department of Corrections have not responded to inquiries.

(source: tucsonsentinel.com)

CALIFORNIA:

Santa Clara County DA Commutes Death Sentences – Other DAs Won’t Go There

Those convicted of murder and sentenced to death in Santa Clara County over the past 50 years do not inspire sympathy, as seen through the examples of Richard Farley and Mark Crew, wrote the Sacramento Bee last week.

The Bee added Santa Clara County has lost millions of dollars in fighting appeals against death sentences that convicted murderers are entitled to under the law, noting there have been no executions in California since 2006.

Santa Clara District Attorney Jeff Rosen, as stated in the Bee, doubted “the morality of sentencing people to death in a system” that penalizes them harsher depending on the race of the victim and perpetrator, and in which 4 % of convictions are said to be flawed.”

But, Rosen is pretty much alone among DAs willing to commute sentences, the Bee wrote.

Rosen’s doubts about the system is the reason why he will ask for Farley’s sentence to be commuted to life in prison without the possibility of parole in March, which is the latest in more than a dozen such cases that he has successfully fought.

Rosen, quoted by the Sacramento Bee, said, “I’m trying to end, for my county, the resources that we’re spending every day, every week on litigation in these cases, and then being able to have those resources spent investigating and prosecuting rapes, murders, burglaries and holding those offenders accountable.”

According to the Sacramento Bee, this change is unlikely to happen in Sacramento, since District Attorney Thien Ho stated he would consider commuting sentences for inmates believed to be innocent, but he continues to seek capital punishment in some cases.

Meanwhile, in Yolo County, the Sacramento Bee states that District Attorney Jeff Reisig “said he would never undertake a move like Rosen’s.”

The Sacramento Bee introduces Austin Sarat, a political scientist who opposes the death penalty and has studied the issue at Amherst College in Massachusetts. According to Sarat, these three approaches by different prosecutors illustrate the political climate that surrounds the death penalty in California and elsewhere.

In Sarat’s view, as noted in the Sacramento Bee, all three prosecutors are acting at a time when public opinion surrounding the death penalty, and appropriate sentences for other crimes, is changing. Sarat claims that as a society, many disagree about whether or not the death penalty should be used, and how and when to impose it.

The Bee quoted Sarat: “We are in a period of national reconsideration of capital punishment…a variation in the way in which people, prosecutors, governors, legislators, respond to the situation of the death penalty in the United States.”

The Sacramento Bee asks if Gov. Gavin Newsom could follow in Biden’s footsteps, when Biden commuted the sentences of all but 3 federal death row inmates last month. Newsom said he was considering a similar move for California’s inmates but did not indicate that such an action would happen soon. Newsom imposed a moratorium in 2019.

Sarat claims in the Bee that U.S. juries sentenced as many as 300 people to death per year in the late 1990s. This number dropped to around 25 last year. Drawing from state data, the Sacramento Bee stated that only three people were sentenced to death in 2023, down from the 41 people sentenced in 1996.

Again drawing from state data, the Sacramento Bee emphasizes how 2 dozen men are under death sentences sought by Sacramento County prosecutors, with another two tried in Yolo County. The oldest such case is from 1981 when Joe Edward Johnson, now 74, was sentenced to death by a Sacramento jury.

The Sacramento Bee refers to a statement from the office of District Attorney Ho, in which he indicated his unlikeliness to deviate from the existing process of considering and imposing the death penalty, citing checks and balances in the judicial system.

According to the Sacramento Bee, Ho is currently seeking capital punishment for Adel Ramos, who pled guilty to the shootout that took the life of 26-year-old Sacramento police rookie Tara O’Sullivan.

The statement from Ho’s office is quoted in the Sacramento Bee noting, “The decision to seek a death sentence is never taken lightly,” and “once imposed, death sentences are then automatically appealed. Any decision to alter from this path would require compelling circumstances.”

In the case there was credible evidence indicating an inmate’s innocence, Ho told the Sacramento Bee that “we would not hesitate to revisit the issue.”

The Sacramento Bee describes District Attorney Reisig from Yolo County as one of the first prosecutors in the state who moved to reduce terms for people serving time for offenses that would not be treated as harshly today. However, according to the Bee, Reisig said commuting death penalties was “going too far” and he “would never consider doing that.”

Reisig said to the Bee, “California voters have rejected ballot initiatives that would have eliminated the death penalty twice, and thus it is an acceptable manner of punishment for the worst crimes. The voters have been pretty unequivocal in California on the issue…that is the root of my view on why I would never consider it.”

According to the Sacramento Bee, none of the three district attorneys mentioned had calculated the cost of pursuing the death penalty and handling appeals at the county level.

However, Rosen is said to have cited studies that claimed each such case cost at least $1 million, and according to an analysis by the Sacramento Bee, the legal costs for death penalty cases in California was around $72 million per year.

The Sacramento Bee also emphasizes how only 36 lawyers in the state were qualified to handle certain state-level appeals, which meant that inmates often had to wait 30 or more years simply to obtain legal counsel—more than 360 inmates do not have an attorney to handle these habeas corpus appeals, and around 125 of them have been waiting for over 20 years.

(source: davisvanguard.org)

US MILITARY:

Accused 9/11 Mastermind Agrees to Use of Disputed Confession for Life Sentence

The man accused of being the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, has agreed to let government prosecutors use portions of a 2007 confession that he says were obtained through his torture at any future sentencing trial if his case is settled with a life sentence.

Defense lawyers have been trying for years to have those confessions excluded from the death-penalty trial against Mr. Mohammed and 3 other men accused of plotting the Sept. 11, 2001. The lawyers had argued that he was conditioned to answer his captors’ questions in a secret C.I.A. prison network where he was waterboarded, beaten and subjected to rectal abuse.

But an excerpt from his plea deal that was released by a federal court over the weekend shows that Mr. Mohammed agreed that prosecutors can use certain portions of his disputed confessions against him at a sentencing trial — if he is allowed to plead guilty.

That deal is in the midst of a heated political and legal controversy that is spilling over into the Trump administration.

On July 31, after more than a decade of litigation, a senior Pentagon appointee signed separate agreements with Mr. Mohammed, Walid bin Attash and Mustafa al-Hawsawi to settle their capital case in exchange for their giving up the right to appeal their convictions and challenge certain evidence. Those deals were submitted to a military judge, under seal.

The crime. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the accused mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, and four other defendants are facing charges in a U.S. military tribunal at Guantánamo Bay of aiding the hijackings that killed nearly 3,000 people. The charges carry the death penalty.

The trial. The defendants were arraigned in 2012, but the case has been mired in pretrial proceedings, much of them focused on the C.I.A.’s torture of the defendants. Learn more about why the trial hasn’t started.

The role of torture. In 2021, a military judge in Guantánamo's other capital case threw out key evidence because that prisoner was tortured. Defense lawyers in the Sept. 11 case are challenging the same type of evidence, and seeking to have either the case or possibility of a death penalty dismissed because of torture.

The plea deal. Susan Escallier, a retired general and former Army lawyer, authorized a plea agreement in July meant to resolve the case with life sentences for Mohammed and 2 other defendants. But Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin abruptly canceled the deal, reviving the possibility that they could someday face a death penalty trial.

The power to approve plea deals. After defense lawyers challenged Austin’s cancellation, a different judge, Col. Matthew McCall, ruled that the original deal could go forward. At the end of November, Austin stripped Escallier of her authority to reach settlements in any cases at Guantánamo Bay, giving himself the sole power to approve plea deals in terrorism cases there in the final months of the Biden administration.

The defendants in the plea deal. Along with Mohammed, Walid bin Attash is accused of training 2 of the hijackers, researching flights and timetables and testing the ability of a passenger to hide a razor knife on flights. Mustafa al-Hawsawi is accused of helping some of the hijackers with finances and travel arrangements.

The other defendants. Ammar al-Baluchi is accused of transferring money from the United Arab Emirates to some of the hijackers in the United States. He chose not to join the plea agreement and could face trial alone. Ramzi bin al-Shibh was accused of helping to organize a cell of hijackers in Germany. In 2023, he was found medically incompetent to stand trial and removed from the case. He could someday face trial if his mental health is restored.

Then, 2 days later, Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III moved to withdraw from the deals. He retroactively stripped his appointee, Susan K. Escallier, a retired Army lawyer, of the authority to reach the deal and said he wanted the men to face trial.

Now a federal court has halted their entry of pleas while it decides whether Mr. Austin had the authority to breach the contract and whether to return the case to a full trial.

The court’s release of a few of the excerpts from the plea agreement comes at a pivotal time.

Hearings are still underway at Guantánamo Bay in the case of Ammar al-Baluchi, the 4th defendant in the case. The military judge, Col. Matthew N. McCall, is set to decide whether to exclude Mr. Baluchi’s confessions from his death-penalty trial, as they were obtained through torture.

Mr. Baluchi’s case has proceeded without the participation of legal teams for the three men who have sought to plead guilty to avert eventual death-penalty trials.

There is a precedent for a military commission suppressing the confessions. In August 2023, an Army judge threw out the same type of evidence in Guantánamo’s other capital case, against a prisoner who is accused plotting the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in 2000. Prosecutors are appealing to get his 2007 interrogations by the F.B.I. reinstated.

In Washington, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has scheduled arguments for Jan. 28 on whether the other three defendants’ plea deals can go forward. The case was brought on Mr. Austin’s behalf by Biden administration appointees at the Justice Department who will leave the job on Monday.

Career Justice Department lawyers have now taken over the case and submitted the excerpts, by agreement with the military commissions defense lawyers of Mr. Mohammed, Mr. bin Attash and Mr. Hawsawi. The court filing also revealed that Mr. Bin Attash and Mr. Hawsawi have likewise agreed to have portions of their 2007 confessions used against them at their sentencing trial, if the pleas go forward.

But the Trump administration has not signaled how it will deal with the plea agreements. Colonel McCall, the judge, has said that if the circuit court resolves the case in favor of the pleas, he could hold proceedings in February. If the deal falls apart, the defense lawyers would go back to trying to keep the confessions out of the trial.

Like his co-defendants, Mr. Baluchi spent more than 3 years in C.I.A. custody after his capture in Pakistan in 2003 and was moved to Guantánamo Bay in September 2006. Within months of his transfer there, F.B.I. agents were brought in to interrogate the men for evidence to be used at their trial.

His lawyers have argued that in those early months, he had no reason to believe he could provide his interrogators with answers other than those he gave to the C.I.A. for years.

Lawyers for all 4 men also have also asked the judge to discard transcripts of their appearances in early 2007 before a panel of military officers called combatant status review tribunals. They argue that those, too, are tainted by torture.

At Mr. Mohammed’s March 10, 2007, tribunal, an unidentified U.S. military officer read aloud a statement he said was submitted by Mr. Mohammed: “I was responsible for the 9/11 operation, from A to Z.”

Excerpts from the plea agreement show that Mr. Mohammed also agreed to have portions of that transcript used against him at his sentencing trial.

Clayton G. Trivett Jr., the lead prosecutor who negotiated the plea deal, has described plans for a sentencing trial that he said would start late this year and most likely extend into 2026.

The sentencing would include a monthslong presentation to the panel and the public “to establish a historical record of the accuseds’ involvement in what happened on Sept. 11,” he said, as well as potentially hundreds of victim impact statements from survivors or relatives of those killed.

(source: New York Times)

JAPAN:

Capital Punishment: Japan’s Pause in Executions Extends for More than 2 Years----Japan has not carried out an execution since July 2022. The September 2024 acquittal of Hakamata Iwao, who spent decades on death row, has sparked fresh debate about capital punishment.

2 1/2 years have passed since Japan last carried out the death penalty. The most recent case was the execution of Kato Tomohiro on July 26, 2022, for a 2008 stabbing spree that left 7 people dead and 10 injured in Tokyo’s Akihabara district. There have been previous pauses on executions, such as the year of the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011 and the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, but this is the first time this century for 2 calendar years to go by without a prisoner being put to death.

Number of Annual Executions in Japan since 2000

Japan’s Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates that the death penalty should be implemented within six months of the issuing of the sentence, but in fact this is almost never the case. From the beginning of 2000 to July 26, 2022, 98 death sentences were carried out. The shortest time span from sentencing to execution was 1 year, while the longest was 19 years and 5 months. The Ministry of Justice does not clarify any of the criteria on which the decision to execute a prisoner is based. In fact, in the past it was policy to not even publicly announce that an execution had been carried out. Disclosure of information on executions and the number of those executed only began in October 1998, under the direction of Minister of Justice Nakamura Shozaburo. In September 2007, the justice minister of the time, Hatoyama Kunio, instructed the ministry to also release the name of each executed convict and the place of execution.

Decisions about executions seem to reflect the thoughts and feelings of the minister of justice of the time. Sugiura Seiken, upon being appointed to that post in October 2005, for instance, openly declared that he would not issue an execution order on religious and philosophical grounds. Although he soon retracted the statement, amid criticism questioning his right as justice minister to refuse to carry out a duty stipulated by law, he did not end up signing an execution order during his tenure of roughly 11 months. Contrasting with Sugiura’s attitude were the cases of those ministers who signed execution orders at the rapid pace of one every few months.

Only 9 people were executed from September 2009 to December 2012 under the administrations of the Democratic Party of Japan, whose justice ministers showed reluctance to carry out the penalty. Chiba Keiko, the DPJ’s first justice minister, was originally opposed to the death penalty and had been one of a group of Diet members who called for its abolition. In July 2010, however, she signed the order to execute two death-row prisoners. Chiba witnessed the executions—a first for a Japanese justice minister—and expressed her desire that they should serve as an opportunity for a national debate over the death penalty. Toward that end, she set up a study group within the ministry to consider whether it should continue. In August of the same year, Chiba opened the Tokyo Detention House’s execution chamber to the media for the first time, as well as the room it provides for prisoners to meet with religious representatives.

Eda Satsuki, who was appointed justice minister in January 2011 under the DPJ government of Prime Minister Kan Naoto, stated at a press conference soon afterward that “capital punishment is a flawed penalty”—although he later retracted the statement. In July of that year, Eda expressed his intention to not sign any execution orders for the time being since the study group on the issue established by Chiba was still meeting. That year no executions were carried out. The study group continued to meet under the next justice minister as well, but it convened for the last time in March 2012 without reaching any final conclusion, merely registering the various opinions expressed on both sides of the issue.

When Japan introduced trial by jury in 2009, members of the public became involved in capital punishment decisions. In 2017, there was a string of executions of prisoners who were petitioning for retrial. Criticism was also raised inside and outside Japan in 2018 over the execution of 13 prisoners connected to the Aum Shinrikyo cult in the space of a few weeks.

A recent high-profile case concerns Hakamata Iwao, who was sentenced to death in 1980 for the killing of four people in 1966. He maintained his innocence from prison and in 2014, Shizuoka District Court released him and granted him a retrial. The retrial began in 2023 and concluded in September 2024, with the court acquitting Hakamata after finding that investigators had fabricated evidence. The ruling came 58 years after his original arrest and 44 years after he was sentenced to death. Having been incarcerated for so many years with the death penalty hanging over him, Hakamata, even a decade after his release, has difficulty communicating with others.

This story has put the spotlight on capital punishment, sparking calls for reform. A panel including lawmakers, a former prosecutor general, and a former commissioner general of the National Police Agency released a statement on November 13 calling for a halt on executions until authorities rethink the government’s approach to capital punishment and institute fundamental changes to the system.

As of the end of 2024, there were 106 death row prisoners in Japan.

(source: nippon.com)

CHINA----executions China executes 2 men for committing deadly ‘revenge on society crimes’----Fan Weiqu had rammed his car into a crowd, killing 35 people, while 21-year-old Xu Jiajin killed eight people and injured 17 in a stabbing attack.

China has executed2 men who committed deadly attacks that killed dozens in November, raising concerns about a surge in what are called “revenge on society crimes”, state media reported.

Fan Weiqu, 62, who rammed his car into a crowd outside a sports stadium in the southern city of Zhuhai, killing at least 35 people, was executed on Monday.

The attack was the country’s deadliest in more than a decade, according to authorities. Police said Fan was upset over his divorce settlement.

Also in November, 21-year-old Xu Jiajin killed 8 people and injured 17 in a stabbing attack at his vocational school in the eastern city of Wuxi.

Police said Wu had failed his examinations and could not graduate, and was dissatisfied about his pay at an internship. He was also executed on Monday, according to state broadcaster CCTV.

Chinese President Xi Jinping urged local governments to take measures to prevent such attacks, known as “revenge on society crimes”.

The 2 men’s death sentences were issued by the intermediate people’s courts in the cities of Zhuhai and Wuxi, respectively, in December, and approved by the Supreme People’s Court, according to state media.

Violent crimes are rarer in China than in many Western countries, but the country has seen a rise in recent years. Stabbings and car attacks have challenged the governing Communist Party’s reputation for strict public security and crime prevention.

They also carried a shock factor that led some to question perceived social ills such as frustration with a slowing economy, high unemployment and diminishing social mobility.

China classifies death penalty statistics as a state secret, but some rights groups believe the country executes thousands every year. Executions are traditionally carried out by gunshot, though lethal injections have also been introduced in recent years.

(source: aljazeera.com)

SINGAPORE:

Singapore’s Shanmugan defends death penalty stance against Biden’s pardons in US----Law Minister K Shanmugam’s Facebook post was a response to a Wall Street Journal article about US President Joe Biden commuting the death sentences of 37 inmates

Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam said on Sunday that personal feelings are “set aside” to protect the majority of people in Singapore when it comes to the death penalty.

Shanmugam was responding to a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) article in December last year about US President Joe Biden commuting the death sentences of 37 inmates before stepping down from his role on January 20.

The US newspaper’s commentary, Biden’s Prisoners of (His) Conscience, highlighted some of the convicts whom Biden has pardoned, such as Jorge Avila-Torrez, who sexually assaulted and murdered women, and Anthony Battle, who killed his wife and a prison officer.

“President Biden referred to his personal conscience, for doing this,” Shanmugam said in a Facebook post.

He added that the Wall Street Journal had also pointed out that in contrast, there were others whose death sentences Biden had not commuted.

This included the gunman who murdered Jewish congregants at a synagogue in Pittsburgh, and the person who shot and killed African-American worshippers at a church in Charleston. “WSJ made the point about Biden’s personal conscience overriding the law: The prisoners who were pardoned by him had gone through trials, appeals, and were found guilty – beyond reasonable doubt”, Shanmugam said.

“And at the same time, the inconsistency in President Biden’s actions in allowing the death sentences to stand for some other cases: The killers in the synagogue and the church were not pardoned. Why was it OK to pardon some cold-blooded killers, while no pardon was given to other cold-blooded killers?”

“I am often asked about my position on the death penalty. For me, the public interest of Singapore is the primary consideration: What is in the best interests of Singaporeans as a whole?” Shanmugam said.

“One’s personal beliefs can and will inform one’s views on policy, but in the end, you have to do what is right by society, for the benefit of the community as a whole, regardless of your personal beliefs; to do otherwise would be wrong.”

While removing the death penalty will save the drug traffickers’ lives, Shanmugam said it will “encourage more people” to traffic drugs into Singapore and the drug supply will “undoubtedly rise”.

“And there will be consequences: More serious crime, violence, drug-related deaths. Many more innocent people will die in Singapore, including more innocent young children.”

Shanmugam gave the example of the European Union, where he said “1/2 of all homicides and more than a quarter of illegal firearms seizures were linked to drug trafficking”.

“In the US, every 14 months, more Americans die from abusing fentanyl than from all of America’s wars combined since the Second World War, from Korea to Afghanistan,” he added.

In Singapore, the Central Narcotics Bureau now arrests about 3,000 drug abusers per year, far less than the 6,000 per year in the 1990s, Shanmugam noted.

“All things being equal, this number should have gone up in the last 30 years: The supply of drugs in the region has exploded, our purchasing power has increased significantly, and the international environment is increasingly drug-tolerant. But instead, the number has halved,” he said.

Should the government remove the death penalty, when we completely believe that doing so would certainly lead to many more people dying? K Shanmugam, Singapore’s Law Minister

Singapore’s tough approach “has saved thousands of lives: Many potential abusers, victims of crimes that come with drug abuse, and their families”, he added.

“Should the government remove the death penalty, when we completely believe that doing so would certainly lead to many more people dying – and thousands more lives [including children] harmed in some way, from drugs?,” Shanmugam said.

“As policymakers, we set aside our personal feelings, and do what is necessary to protect the majority of people.

“And we cannot be at peace with ourselves, if we take a step which leads to many more innocent people dying in Singapore.”

(source: scmp.com)

INDIA:

Beant Singh killing: Supreme Court asks Centre to decide on Balwant Singh Rajoana's mercy plea by March 18

(see: https://www.deccanherald.com/india/beant-singh-killing-supreme-court-asks-centre-to-decide-on-balwant-singh-rajoanas-mercy-plea-by-march-18-3363505)

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

Sharon Raj murder case: ‘Crime can’t be ignored,’ Kerala court gives death penalty to accused girlfriend Greeshma----In a chilling verdict, the Neyyattinkara Additional Sessions Court sentenced Greeshma to death for the murder of her boyfriend, Sharon Raj. The court highlighted the premeditated nature of the crime and Greeshma's emotional manipulation, raising questions about trust and betrayal in relationships.

Greeshma, the accused in the high-profile Sharon Raj murder case, was sentenced to death by the Neyyattinkara Additional Sessions Court on Monday. Greeshma had poisoned her 23-year-old boyfriend, Sharon Raj, with pesticide-laced ayurvedic decoction, as reported by ANI.

The court also sentenced the third accused, Greeshma's uncle Nirmalakumaran Nair, to three years of rigorous imprisonment.

While pronouncing the quantum of punishment, the court observed, “The act of inviting Sharon over under the pretext of sexual intimacy and subsequently committing the crime cannot be ignored. It is the State's responsibility to ensure punishment for criminal acts. Evidence such as Sharon recording a video of the suspicious juice, despite Greeshma asking him not to record, indicates that he suspected something was wrong. Sharon fought for his life for 11 days without even consuming a drop of water.”

ANI reported that the court further observed that Greeshma betrayed the trust of her boyfriend Sharon, manipulating him emotionally. She has no evidence to support claims of mental pressure from Sharon, the court said, adding, “Greeshma's defence that Sharon had physically abused her also lacks any proof. On the contrary, Sharon had never blamed her in any messages or communications. While Sharon remained committed to the accused, she was simultaneously in contact with her fiance.”

“It is evident that the crime was premeditated and carried out without provocation. Greeshma's cunning attempts to cover up her crime were unsuccessful. Her argument of youthful age cannot be considered in light of the severity of the crime. The evidence suggests that Sharon was unaware of Greeshma's plan to murder him,” the court observed.

Accused Greeshma, who faced multiple charges under the Indian Penal Code, including murder, abduction, administering poison, and obstruction of justice, was sentenced to death by the Neyyattinkara Additional Sessions Court.

The court found her guilty on January 17 for poisoning her 23-year-old boyfriend, Sharon Raj, with pesticide-laced ayurvedic decoction. Greeshma's mother, Sindhu, was acquitted of all charges. The court heard final arguments on the quantum of punishment on Saturday.

Why did Greeshma kill Sharon?

Greeshma, convicted for poisoning her boyfriend Sharon Raj, has been sentenced to death by the Neyyattinkara Additional Sessions Court. The case dates back to October 14, 2022, when Greeshma allegedly mixed poison in herbal medicine at her residence to end her relationship with Sharon, who refused to break up.

Sharon fell seriously ill and died 11 days later while being treated in the ICU. His dying declaration, in which he revealed he consumed the herbal medicine given by Greeshma, was a key piece of evidence in the case, along with forensic findings.

Greeshma’s uncle, Nirmalakumaran Nair, was sentenced to three years of imprisonment for obstructing justice.

The police filed the charge sheet on January 25, 2023, following a meticulous investigation led by a special team under then-Superintendent of Police Shilpa. The trial, which began on October 15 last year, concluded on January 3 this year. Over 95 witnesses were examined in the case, ANI reported.

(source: livemint.com)

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

Greeshma remains impassive as death sentence pronounced in Sharon Raj murder case----Greeshma is the youngest convict in the state to receive the death penalty and the 2nd woman in the state currently awaiting execution.

Greeshma, the primary accused in the Sharon murder case, remained impassive as the Neyyattinkara Additional Sessions Court sentenced her to death on Monday.

With her head bowed, Greeshma stood motionless as the judge delivered the verdict and observations. The third accused, Nirmalakumaran Nair, sentenced to 3 years in prison, also had no reaction.

Before the verdict, Sharon’s parents were called to the front by the court. As the judgment was announced, they broke down, clasping their hands in relief. Sharon’s mother, seated with a rosary in prayer, later said, “My son has received justice.” Sharon’s brother expressed gratitude to the judiciary and police. On the other hand, Greeshma’s family burst into tears upon hearing the death sentence.

Greeshma is the youngest convict in the state to receive the death penalty and the 2nd woman in the state currently awaiting execution. The other, Rafeeqa Beevi, was sentenced in the Mullur Shanthakumari murder case. Both verdicts were delivered by the Neyyattinkara court. With Greeshma, the number of convicts sentenced to death in the state’s history has reached 40.

The court dismissed pleas for leniency, stating that the murder was premeditated and unprovoked. It emphasised that Sharon’s death was caused by severe organ damage due to poisoning, a result of a meticulously planned crime. Greeshma’s suicide attempt was deemed an effort to mislead the investigation. The argument that Greeshma lacked a criminal background was also rejected, with the court asserting that her actions warranted the death penalty.

(source: newindianexpress.com)

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

Life in Prison for Hospital Rape and Murder That Shocked India----The police had sought the death penalty in a horrific but familiar crime. Its handling by the local authorities had outraged the nation.

An Indian court on Monday sentenced to life in prison the man convicted of raping and murdering a trainee doctor in Kolkata, sparing him the death penalty in a case that was a chilling example of how the country remains unsafe for women.

The killing in August led to months of protests and political turmoil in the state of West Bengal, of which Kolkata, formerly Calcutta, is the capital.

India’s Central Bureau of Investigation, its equivalent of the F.B.I., had asked the court to hand down a death penalty for Sanjay Roy, the perpetrator. So had the victim’s family, and the powerful chief minister of the state, Mamata Banerjee.

But the court ruled that Mr. Roy’s crimes did not meet the “rarest of the rare” standard used to justify executing those convicted of capital offenses.

Rekha Sharma, a former chief of the National Commission for Women and a member of Parliament, told an Indian news agency that “the victim’s family and all of us are really sad” that Mr. Roy avoided the death penalty. A member of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s party, she blamed the sentence on shortcomings of the Kolkata Police, who answer to Ms. Banerjee.

Before the sentencing, Mr. Roy, who had served as a volunteer with the Kolkata Police, said he was not guilty. “I haven’t done this. I have been framed,” he told the court on Monday. Months ago, he had said that the written confessions he gave to police were obtained by force.

Details about the crime were murky for several days after the body of the 31-year-old victim was found in a seminar hall at a university hospital in Kolkata. They were also horrific, in a way that recalled a notorious case of rape and murder in New Delhi in December 2012 that also led to mass protests and, eventually, to four hangings.

In the Kolkata case, the junior doctor had gone to sleep on a mattress she had placed on the floor in the early hours of Aug. 9, after a grueling hospital shift. After her body was discovered, the authorities said she had been raped and strangled. Police arrested Mr. Roy after he was identified in CCTV footage entering the building before the attack and wearing headphones that were found at the crime scene.

The public reaction was extraordinary, and escalated over the next few months. Thousands of doctors across the city went on strike to demand safer working conditions. They were joined by many thousands of Indians, incensed at what they regarded as callous treatment of the victim’s family and efforts at a cover-up.

“People are convinced that this was connected with wholesale corruption in the medical college,” said Jawhar Sircar, a former civil servant who joined Ms. Banerjee’s political party but resigned in September over what he said was graft under her rule, and the role that it seemed to play in the Kolkata hospital rape and murder case.

A spokesperson for Ms. Banerjee, one of Mr. Modi’s most vocal rivals, greeted the sentencing by posting on social media that the politician and the Kolkata police had been vindicated by the verdict. But many protesters, Mr. Sircar added, had taken to the streets to rally against what they perceived as corruption under her long stint as chief minister of West Bengal.

And now, after the sentencing, the widespread feeling, Mr. Sircar said, was that “by selecting this guy, and punishing him, only partial justice has been done.”

(source: New York Times)

PAKISTAN:

Mentally Ill Man on Death Row for Blasphemy for 23 Years----Anwar Kenneth wrote in 2001 letters that clearly included the ramblings of a psychiatric patient. Nonetheless, he was sentenced to death in 2002 and kept in jail.

Human rights organizations in Pakistan and abroad are campaigning for the liberation of Anwar Kenneth. He is a mentally ill man who has been sentenced to death for blasphemy in 2002 and has spent more than 23 years on death row.

Campaigners want him liberated and placed under the care of a psychiatric institution, noting that he has remained in jail for years in confinement and with his legs shackled, rather than receiving proper psychiatric care.

The case of Anwar Kenneth tests the undefined borders between the ramblings of a psychiatric patient and blasphemy in Pakistan. At the beginning of our century, the man sent letters to religious scholars, ambassadors, and heads of state. Some of his comments were constructed as blasphemous towards Islam, but it is clear they represented the delusions of a mentally ill man.

Nonetheless, a FIR (First Information Report) was filed at Gawalmandi Police Station, Lahore, in 2001, leading to his arrest and trial under Pakistan laws against blasphemy. In 2002, he was sentenced to death. Pending appeal, he was later imprisoned. In 2014, a 2-member bench of the Lahore High Court upheld the trial court’s verdict.

Throughout the legal proceedings, Anwar Kenneth consistently declined legal assistance, further manifesting his mental problems and stating that “God was his counsel.” Despite several efforts to assign state lawyers, five different legal counsels withdrew from representing him.

On 24th January 2023, the Supreme Court directed the Pakistan Bar Council to provide legal representation for Anwar Kenneth. In March 2024, after legal representation was finally arranged, the court sought opinions from religious institutions on the case. In December 2024, Anwar Kenneth was moved from Faisalabad Central Jail to Lahore Central Jail for a psychiatric evaluation at the Punjab Institute of Mental Health. A medical board diagnosed him with bipolar affective disorder, currently hypomanic, and recommended treatment at a psychiatric hospital.

It is now urgent that charges against Anwar Kenneth be dropped so that he may receive proper medical attention rather than continuing with the anguish of the death row, which has certainly made his condition worse.

(source: bitterwinter.org)

SYRIA:

He oversaw the public execution of two women. Now he’s Syria’s new justice minister.----The new regime should think about replacing Shadi al-Waisi “as soon as possible,” a member of Syria’s Orthodox Christian community told NBC News.

In a shaky video filmed in 2015, a woman cloaked in black and kneeling on a public street begs to see her children for the last time. Instead, a man identified as Shadi al-Waisi, Syria’s new justice minister, motions to a gunman, who shoots her in the back of the head.

A 2nd video shows al-Waisi reading out a death sentence for another woman, who, like the first, was convicted of corruption and prostitution. She is shot and drops to the ground.

The videos were filmed a decade ago, when al-Waisi was a judge for Jabhat al-Nusra, an Al Qaeda affiliate in Syria’s northern Idlib province. But they have re-emerged and are spreading widely on social media after he was appointed to his high-profile role in Syria’s new government, raising difficult questions about the country’s new leaders as they try to distance themselves from their extremist roots.

The videos were widely circulated at the time, but it wasn’t until earlier this month that Verify Sy, a respected Syrian news outlet, confirmed that al-Waisi was the man dispensing the sentences. Using specialized technical tools, Verify Sy said it matched al-Waisi’s features and voice to that of the man in the video.

It also interviewed a number of people who witnessed the executions and an official of the current government who confirmed that the man in the video was al-Waisi, but who went on to say that the executions were carried out during a stage that Syria had now moved beyond.

NBC News has reached out to al-Waisi’s office for comment about the videos, which contrast sharply with the moderate image espoused by Ahmad al-Sharaa, who appointed al-Waisi as justice minister. Sharaa became Syria’s de facto leader after spearheading the rebel advance that toppled President Bashar al-Assad’s brutal regime last month.

Sharaa, who was formerly known by his nom de guerre Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, was a top general for Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), Syria’s most powerful rebel army, which grew out of Jabhat al-Nusra and is still considered a terror group by the United States 13 years after it was first designated as one.

As Sharaa transitions into the role of statesman, he is calling on the U.S. and other countries to drop sanctions imposed against Syria during the deposed Assad regime, and has vowed to usher in an inclusive government that represents the country’s many religious and ethnic groups, a task that requires convincing many inside and outside of Syria that HTS’s early links to ISIS and Al Qaeda are not indicative of how his government will rule.

It’s a task complicated by the resurfacing of its leaders’ past actions, like al-Waisi’s execution videos, which have prompted alarm and outrage among some including Hind Kabawat, a member of Syria’s large Orthodox Christian community. In an interview with NBC News last week, she said it was “wrong” to put al-Waisi into such a high-level position and the new regime should “think about replacing him as soon as possible.”

Kabawat, a professor of conflict resolution at Virginia’s George Mason University who travels regularly to Syria, said there were “many qualified judges” in Syria, and at a time when the country “could not afford any mistakes,” and there should be “zero tolerance against corruption and zero tolerance against violence of any kind.”

Sandy Aly, a 27-year-old server in Damascus, also said “somebody else” should be installed into the role. “I am of the opinion that if someone has a way of behaving, they are not going to change it. Even after 100 years, he will be the same,” Aly said.

Her colleague Fatima Omar, 24, echoed that opinion. “We don’t support that they put him there,” she said.

But others like Mustafa Obaid, 43, a high school teacher from Aleppo, defended al-Waisi. He said that as a judge, al-Waisi was upholding the law in Idlib, which was based at the time on a strict interpretation of Islamic law, or Sharia.

Mohammed Mardoud, 41, also pointed to the fact that Jabhat al-Nusra “was just a small Islamic group controlling Idlib province.” The construction worker from the city of al-Rastan in Syria’s central Homs province said that in “the absence of a functioning state and laws, people turned to Islamic Sharia to settle their issues.”

Now that they had taken power over the whole of Syria, he said, Sharaa, al-Waisi and their fellow government ministers “need to rethink their approach” because “Syria is home to many religions and a rich cultural diversity.”

Zubair Abbasi, a British academic and the associate editor of the “Yearbook of Middle Eastern and Islamic Law,” cautioned against framing Sharia as a state-enforced legal code, describing it instead as a “moral and ethical framework.”

“While rulers or their officials may justify their political actions by invoking Sharia, such claims do not bestow divine sanctity upon their decisions or policies,” he said, adding that while some Muslim jurists have discussed death as a punishment for adultery, they have also “placed significant emphasis on mercy, repentance and divine forgiveness, prioritizing these values over the strict enforcement of the death penalty.”

When HTS was founded in 2017, it strictly interpreted Sharia teaching, in line with Al Qaeda and ISIS, but since then it has “decidedly changed,” according to Paul Salem, the vice president for international engagement at the Washington-based Middle East Institute think tank.

The group has since become more of a nationalist movement, he said.

But as the videos show, its hard-line past remains a concern — including for the U.S. and other Western governments that are weighing whether to lift sanctions imposed during the Assad regime, a move that would be critical in reviving Syria’s struggling economy and for the overall success of the new government.

Outside Syria, it remains “unclear what the U.S. stand on all this is going to be,” according to Joshua Landis, the director of the Center of Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma. Sharaa would have to balance the internal politics of HTS with the wider goals for Syria.

“He’s got a terrible job ahead of him,” Landis said. “Politics has been so destroyed in Syria for so long that Syrians don’t really know each other, they don’t know how to speak to each other.”

However, he added that Sharaa was “keeping hope alive for every sector of Syrian society and he seems to be very good at speaking in all directions.”

Inside Syria, Obaid, the teacher, was prepared to back Sharaa and his choice of al-Waisi for justice minister, despite the videos.

“I think he is a respectable person and deserves his position,” Obaid said. “Don’t forget that this is a transitional government and won’t last long.”

(source: NBC News)

IRAN:

Kurdish groups in Iran call for general strike against looming executions

Iranian Kurdish opposition groups called for a general strike in the western Kurdish areas (Rojhelat) on Wednesday to condemn the Islamic republic's death sentences for political prisoners Pakhshan Azizi and Varisheh Moradi.

“Due to the risk of execution of Pakhshan Azizi and Varisheh Moradi, urgent and immediate steps must be taken to save them from the gallows. One of these steps is to carry out a general strike in Kurdistan,” a rare joint statement from the groups said.

The groups include the Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran (KDPI), Komala, the Free Life Party of Kurdistan (PJAK), and the Kurdistan Freedom Party (PAK).

Azizi is awaiting imminent execution for allegedly being a member of Iranian Kurdish groups considered “terrorists” by Tehran such as KDPI and PJAK. She was sentenced to death in June 2024 on charges of “armed rebellion.”

Moradi was handed a death sentence by a Tehran court in November of last year on charges of “armed insurrection” for allegedly being a member of PJAK. She is a member of the East Kurdistan Free Women Society (KJAR).

The statement called on “all the struggling masses of Kurdistan to participate in a general strike … against the death sentences of our children, and we also call for all workplaces, markets, and educational centers to be closed.”

The Kurdish parties also called for the strike to be conducted in a “civil and peaceful manner,” reiterating their joint statement during the September 2022 nationwide protests after the death of Kurdish woman Zhina (Mahsa) Amini at the hands of Iran’s so-called morality police.

On Tuesday, the US called on Iran to overturn the death sentence of Azizi and to stop targeting Kurds.

Tasnim news agency, affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), further accused Azizi of joining university protests in Iran after being trained by the Kurdish groups to spread social unrest.

Azizi was also active as an aid worker in refugee camps in northeast Syria (Rojava) and Shingal (Sinjar) where she was helping those affected by Islamic State (ISIS) attacks, according to her lawyer.

(source: rudaw.net)

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

Death Penalty Given To Pop Singer Amir Tataloo By Iranian Court For Blasphemy----Amir Tataloo, Iranian pop singer, sentenced to death for blasphemy in a controversial court ruling.

Amir Tataloo, a well-known Iranian pop singer, has been sentenced to death by an Iranian court after being convicted of blasphemy. The ruling has sparked outrage both inside Iran and internationally, with human rights groups calling for the immediate reversal of the verdict.

Tataloo, who has gained a large following in Iran and across the Middle East for his music, was charged with spreading content deemed offensive to Islam, a highly sensitive issue in the Islamic Republic. The court’s decision comes amid increasing crackdowns on artists and celebrities who are perceived to be challenging the strict cultural norms imposed by the Iranian government.

The controversial singer has faced previous legal troubles related to his outspoken views and his criticism of the regime, including a period of imprisonment. Tataloo’s music often pushes boundaries, and his style has made him both a celebrated and polarizing figure. However, this most recent conviction is by far the most severe, as it brings the death penalty into play.

Iran has a long history of imposing harsh penalties for actions it deems blasphemous or against Islamic values, and Tataloo’s case is no exception. The decision has attracted criticism from international human rights organizations, who argue that it highlights the oppressive nature of the regime in dealing with free expression and dissent.

While many in Iran have rallied behind Tataloo, calling for his release and a fair trial, others remain deeply concerned about the consequences of challenging the country’s religious laws. The singer’s supporters fear that the sentence could be carried out swiftly, while the broader global community has urged the Iranian government to reconsider the penalty.

This case reflects the broader tensions in Iran, where citizens, especially artists and musicians, have faced increasing repression as they attempt to push back against government restrictions on freedom of expression and creativity. With Tataloo’s case, the world watches closely, hoping for an outcome that ensures justice and freedom for the artist and his supporters.

(source: newsx.com)

***************** Iranian court sentences pop star Tataloo to death for blasphemy----Amir Hossein Maghsoudloo’s 5-year jail term increased after prosecutor’s objection, according to reports An Iranian court has sentenced the popular singer Amir Hossein Maghsoudloo, known as Tataloo, to death on appeal after he was convicted of blasphemy, according to local media reports. “The supreme court accepted the prosecutor’s objection” to a previous 5-year jail term on offences including blasphemy, the reformist newspaper Etemad reported on Sunday. It said “the case was reopened, and this time the defendant was sentenced to death for insulting the prophet”, referring to Islam’s prophet Muhammad. The report added that the verdict was not final and could still be appealed against. The 37-year-old underground musician had been living in Istanbul since 2018 before Turkish police handed him over to Iran in December 2023. He has been in detention in Iran since then. Tataloo had also been sentenced to 10 years for promoting “prostitution” and in other cases was charged with disseminating “propaganda” against the Islamic Republic and publishing “obscene content”. The heavily tattooed singer, known for combining rap, pop and R&B, was previously courted by conservative politicians as a way of reaching out to young, liberal-minded Iranians. Tataloo even held an awkward televised meeting in 2017 with the ultra-conservative Iranian president Ebrahim Raisi, who later died in a helicopter crash. In 2015, Tataloo published a song in support of Iran’s nuclear programme. (source: The Guardian)

JANUARY 19, 2025:

TENNESSEE:

Tennessee will still use execution drug abandoned by DOJ over ‘unnecessary suffering’ concerns

Despite the Department of Justice announcing it will no longer use the single lethal injection drug, pentobarbital in executions after a review raised questions about whether it causes “unnecessary pain and suffering,” the Tennessee Department of Correction (TDOC) still plans to use the drug, which was included in its new execution protocol completed last month.

On Wednesday, the U.S. Attorney General told the director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons in a memo to stop using pentobarbital in executions because it’s unclear whether it causes unnecessary pain and suffering.

TDOC completes review of lethal injection protocol after 2022 pause

“Because it cannot be said with reasonable confidence that the current execution protocol ‘not only afford[s] the rights guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of the United States’ but ‘also treat[s] individuals [being executed] fairly and humanely,’ that protocol should be rescinded, and not reinstated unless and until that uncertainty is resolved,” the memo read.

Pentobarbital, a drug commonly used to euthanize pets, has been reported to cause flash pulmonary edema in humans when used for executions, which can feel similar to being waterboarded or drowning, according to some medical experts.

However, a TDOC spokesperson told News 2 the department still plans to use pentobarbital as part of its new execution protocol, which the state announced in Dec. 2024.

Gov. Bill Lee paused all executions in the state in April 2022 after a report and lawsuits revealed Tennessee wasn’t following its own rules when putting people to death, including failing to test the drugs used in executions. Lee ordered TDOC to create a new protocol.

“I’ve told the department take all the time you need to develop this thing exactly as it should be because it matters very much to Tennesseans,” Gov. Lee told reporters in Jan. 2024.

TDOC took more than 2 years to finalize its new protocol.

Stacy Rector, the executive director of Tennesseans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty told News 2 the state has a history of transparency issues surrounding executions, first by not following its own protocol, then refusing to release the new protocol before later releasing a redacted version, which Rector said “is even more secretive and less transparent than where we were before.”

“I think all citizens, regardless of your opinion on the death penalty, should have deep concern about government shielding itself from accountability this way,” Rector said. “I’m grateful that the DOJ, after their thorough review of this, came to that conclusion, because it’s the conclusion that many people who have been looking at this for a long, long time have come to.”

Rector argues the lack of transparency and the DOJ’s concerns over pentobarbital not only create issues for those being executed but also for those carrying them out.

“When these sorts of things are going on with the drugs, with lack of transparency with the protocols, what that does is put these individuals in a situation where they may have to deal with some horrific realities in that execution chamber that we should not be asking state employees to have to deal with,” Rector said.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 20 of the 27 states that allow the death penalty have statutes permitting single-drug lethal injections, including most recently Tennessee.

(source: WKRN news)

USA:

Biden Commuted Their Death Sentences. Now What?----As 3 men challenge their commutations, others brace for imminent prison transfers and the finality of a life sentence with no chance of release.

In the days after President Joe Biden commuted his death sentence, 40-year-old Rejon Taylor felt like he’d been reborn. After facing execution for virtually his entire adult life for a crime he committed at 18, he was fueled by a new sense of purpose. He was “a man on a mission,” he told me in an email on Christmas Day. “I will not squander this opportunity of mercy, of life.”

Taylor saw new signs of life all around him. Biden had granted clemency to 37 of the 40 men on federal death row, an unprecedented move that none of them expected. One of his neighbors, a man who long ago seemed to have “fallen into an abyss in his fractured mind, never to return again,” suddenly appeared lucid, talking to Taylor instead of the voices in his head. “He even cleaned up his cell today, something he NEVER does. … He now has hope, despite a life sentence! I’m amazed!”

The sense of renewal was shared by men like Charles Hall, whose years on death row had been especially punishing. In a six-page letter to Biden, he vowed that the decision to grant clemency “will not be wasted on me.” Hall had earned a paralegal certificate while on death row and he planned to continue his education, he wrote, adding that change and positivity are possible “even behind razor wire, fences, walls, and bars.”

The outpourings of gratitude came amid a flurry of activity inside the Special Confinement Unit at the U.S. Penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana. Men sorted their belongings and packed their things. They had been told that the unit would likely be shut down and its residents transferred to other prisons. No one knew precisely when this would happen — or where they might end up — but it was best to be prepared. Prison transfers are notoriously disruptive, taking place with no advance notice, and sometimes lasting months.

Yet not everyone was eager for a new beginning. Within days of the announcement, two men had sent handwritten emergency petitions to a federal court in Indiana seeking to block the commutation of their death sentences. Neither of them had applied for clemency and both were adamant that they did not want it, arguing that it threatened to derail their efforts to prove their innocence in court. One of them decried Biden’s commutations as a “publicity stunt.” This week a third man, Iouri Mikhel, similarly objected to Biden’s reprieve.

While people on death row are automatically entitled to legal representation, those serving life without parole are not.

The challenges are a long shot to say the least. “The Court harbors serious doubt that it has any power to block a commutation,” a federal judge wrote in response to the first two filings. But the lawsuits also lay bare a sobering reality for most people who go from facing a death sentence to a life sentence with no chance of release. While people on death row are automatically entitled to legal representation, those serving life without parole are not. And for those who harbor even the faintest hope of overturning their convictions, a commutation can foreclose on legal avenues that once made it possible. This is true even for those who do not claim to be innocent but have challenged their convictions on other grounds, from ineffective advocacy by trial lawyers to racial bias to official misconduct.

With Taylor and his neighbors facing a lifetime behind bars — and with more questions than answers about what will happen next — the mood in Terre Haute has shifted. The initial wave of celebration has given way to anxiety over the future. Rumors have run rampant about the upcoming prison transfers; some days the men hear they will happen imminently, only to be told that it could be a while. Many are nervous about living in general population after years or even decades in solitary confinement.

In the thick of such uncertainty, the man whose mental illness seemed to recede after the commutations has gone back to his previous behaviors, sometimes yelling from behind his steel cell door, Taylor told me recently. “He’s falling back under the weight of his stress again.”

Significant Uncertainty

After an unprecedented 13 executions during Trump’s final six months in office, there was no question that his reelection spelled doom for the men in Terre Haute. Although Biden fell short of abolishing the federal death penalty as he vowed to do during his 2020 campaign, his mass clemency robbed Trump of a chance to carry out another execution spree. “In good conscience, I cannot stand back and let a new administration resume executions that I halted,” Biden said upon announcing the commutations.

Biden’s moratorium had been imposed in January 2021 by Attorney General Merrick Garland, who also announced a review of the federal protocol used to carry out Trump’s executions. After four years, the results were finally released this week. In a 25-page report, the Department of Justice addressed long-standing concerns over the method of lethal injection used to carry out Trump’s execution spree. Autopsy reports have long revealed that executions carried out by a single dose of pentobarbital (as well as other drug combinations) have led to pulmonary edema, the filling of fluid in the lungs.

Citing “significant uncertainty” about whether the pentobarbital executions inflicted “unnecessary pain and suffering,” Garland rescinded the government’s lethal injection protocol, calling on the Justice Department to “halt the use of pentobarbital unless and until that uncertainty is resolved.”

“The DOJ’s review has confirmed what medical experts have said for many years: pentobarbital causes excruciating pain when used to carry out executions,” death penalty lawyer Shawn Nolan said in a statement. While Garland’s actions could certainly complicate plans to restart federal executions, the truth is that Trump would have been unlikely to be able to carry out new executions soon after returning to office anyway. The three remaining men on death row — Dylann Roof, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and Robert Bowers — are a long ways off from exhausting their appeals.

Trump could theoretically restart executions sooner if the men fighting their commutations somehow prevail. Winning their lawsuits might allow their post-conviction appeals to continue in the short term — but if their challenges eventually fail, it would set them up for execution.

Shannon Agofsky, who filed his challenge late last year, says that’s a risk he is willing to take. “The fact that I do not want commutation may lead you to believe that I am mentally disturbed, suicidal, or somehow wishful of death,” he wrote in an email sent via his wife, Laura Agofsky, in late December. “That is not the case. I am in full possession of my faculties, and am not eager to die at all; in fact, I have much to live for.”

Agofsky found out about the commutations the same way as his neighbors: through media reports shortly after 5 a.m. on December 23. He immediately called Laura, who lives in Germany and was shopping for Christmas. She cried when she heard the news. “I sort of had a mental breakdown in the grocery store,” she told me in a phone call. Both of them assumed that he would lose his lawyers and that his legal challenges were now null and void. (His lawyers have since reassured him that they will continue to represent him.)

Agofsky was sent to death row after killing a man at USP Beaumont, a maximum security penitentiary known as one of the bloodiest prisons in the federal system. He swore it was an act of self-defense — and a key eyewitness later gave a sworn declaration saying he was coerced into pinning the blame on Agofsky. Nonetheless, in 2004, a federal jury found Agofsky guilty and sentenced him to death based on the fact that he had previously been convicted of a different murder.

But Agofsky is adamant that he is innocent of the first crime. He had been sent to Beaumont after being convicted and sentenced to life alongside his brother for a 1989 bank robbery and killing. The case against him turned almost entirely on fingerprints matched to Agofsky — a type of forensic evidence that, while ubiquitous, has since been revealed to be often unreliable, especially given the analytical techniques used at the time.

It was not until Agofsky was sentenced to die that he was able to secure lawyers who investigated both his cases and found evidence questioning his original conviction. Though records in his case remain under seal, he argues that they expose his wrongful conviction — and that Biden’s commutation order came just as he was “on the cusp” of proving his innocence.

Agofsky wrote in an email that he would do “whatever it takes, go to any lengths, to prove that my brother and I did not rob a bank, or kill a banker.” At their 1992 sentencing, his brother Joseph accused the government of manufacturing evidence, telling the court “our innocence will be proven eventually.” Joseph Agofsky died in prison in 2013.

In his legal filing, Agofsky invoked the “heightened scrutiny” courts are supposed to give death penalty cases. “To commute his sentence now, while the defendant has active litigation in court, is to strip him of the protection of heightened scrutiny,” he wrote.

Len Davis, the second man who challenged his commutation in December, for his part argued that he “has always maintained that having a death sentence would draw attention to overwhelming misconduct” in his case.

Davis, a former New Orleans police officer, was convicted and sentenced to death for ordering the murder of a woman who had allegedly filed a complaint against him. Unlike Agofsky, he has no pending appeals remaining. But Davis told me that he is not afraid that his lawsuit would leave him vulnerable to execution. “First, I’m a Born-Again believer in Jesus The Christ,” he wrote in an email. “I can’t be scared with a trip to heaven.” What’s more, he argued, “Trump should be able to empathize with me about D.O.J Misconduct.” He hopes that by rejecting a commutation, he will draw more attention to his innocence claim — and possibly receive a pardon.

On January 14, federal prosecutors filed responses to the emergency petitions, calling the judge’s doubts about his power to block a commutation order “well-founded.” Under existing case law, “a prisoner’s consent is not necessary when the President unconditionally commutes a federal death sentence to a life sentence,” they wrote. Two days later, a lawyer appointed to represent Agofsky and Davis summarized their arguments in response, but ultimately agreed with the government that the court “does not have the power to block” the commutations.

By the 2nd week of January, rumors swirled among the men in Terre Haute that the transfers would happen far sooner than expected. There were whispers that most, if not all, of them might be headed, at least temporarily, to ADX Florence in Colorado, the highest security penitentiary in the federal system. For Taylor, who craves community and human connection, such an environment would be hard to take. In contrast to the Special Confinement Unit, where residents have access to phone calls and emails, ADX is notorious for its isolation.

Taylor found himself unprepared. He had previously heard that the Bureau of Prisons was willing to at least consider housing preferences from the men whose sentences had been commuted. He hoped to get into a residential program that was available right there in Terre Haute. The program, called Life Connections, is “designed for inmates who are sincerely interested in seeking their faith, or improving their social responsibility,” according to the Bureau of Prisons. Participation is up to the chaplain — and Taylor, who is known for his empathy and desire to make a positive impact inside and outside prison walls, could be an ideal candidate.

In an email responding to questions from The Intercept, Bureau of Prisons spokesperson Scott Taylor wrote that the men whose death sentences were commuted “will be transferred to an institution commensurate with their respective safety, security, health, and programming needs.” He did not provide a timeline, but the rumored imminent transfers have not come to pass.

With Trump’s inauguration just a few days away, Taylor and his neighbors remain in limbo. For now, his cell is packed. His beloved art supplies and family pictures are in boxes, which he will send to loved ones for safekeeping. His walls are mostly bare, save for a calendar featuring cityscapes and a photo of one of his paralegals with her French bulldog. Rather than distract himself with TV, he’s trying to prepare himself mentally, he said, the same way he did before the commutations were announced: by envisioning the worst-case scenario while hoping for the best. “If you sit with anxiety, it helps you prepare for the future.”

(source: theintercept.com)

JAPAN:

Family of ex-death row inmate seeks answers after Japan gov't blacks out execution docs

The family of a death row inmate who was executed while he was preparing to request a retrial has filed a civil lawsuit demanding full disclosure of documents relating to the execution, large portions of which the Japanese government blacked out.

The man, Michitoshi Kuma, was convicted of killing 2 elementary school students in the Fukuoka Prefecture city of Iizuka in 1992, in what came to be known as the Iizuka incident. His death sentence was finalized in 2006 and he was executed 2 years later at the age of 70. Kuma had protested his innocence and his family is now fighting the government seeking information on his execution, which they say was carried out too soon.

In September 2008 around two years after the death sentence was finalized, lawyers Tsutomu Iwata and Yasuyuki Tokuda met Kuma in a meeting room at Fukuoka Detention House. "If you don't request a retrial soon, the death sentence could be carried out," they warned him. Kuma showed them a list of death row inmates, including himself, with the dates their sentences had been finalized. Names of those already executed were crossed out. "I'm still about in the middle, so it's OK. There's still time so please proceed with the retrial request," Kuma said before leaving the meeting room.

However, only about a month later, on Oct. 28, 2008, he was executed.

The Code of Criminal Procedures stipulates that executions must be carried out within 6 months after the death penalty is finalized. But according to the Ministry of Justice and other sources, over the period from 2014 to 2023, the average time from the finalization of the sentence to execution was around 9 years. Among the currently incarcerated inmates there is a case when the execution has been stayed for over 50 years.

The execution of Kuma, in comparison, was quick, being carried out after roughly 2 years and 1 month. Lawyer Iwata recalls, "At the time, the government was avoiding executing inmates when they were seeking retrials. Detention facility workers were present at the meeting, so the Ministry of Justice must have been aware of the details. Why, then, was the execution carried out so quickly?"

In January 2022, Kuma's bereaved family requested the disclosure of documents relating to the execution process. About 2 months later, the government released some documents, including a "Death penalty execution petition" addressed from the superintending prosecutor of the Fukuoka High Public Prosecutors Office to the minister of justice, an internal Ministry of Justice decision document titled "Regarding execution of the death penalty" and a "Death penalty execution report."

The documents show that the superintending prosecutor filed a petition for Kuma's execution to the justice minister on Feb. 7, 2007, about 4 months after his sentence was confirmed. On Oct. 24, 2008, the Ministry of Justice's Criminal Affairs Bureau drafted the execution, which was approved by 13 ministry officials. The minister of justice at the time then ordered the superintending prosecutor to carry out the execution, with the directive "Carry it out as per the court's ruling."

However, other parts of the documents were mostly blacked out. The document titled "Regarding execution of the death penalty" is said to have contained concrete deliberations on the appropriateness of the death penalty, but about nine relevant pages were totally blacked out.

The "Death penalty execution report," meanwhile, is believed to contain a chronological record of the procedures on the day of the execution and the condition of the former death row inmate, but that part too, was blacked out. The reason for this was said to be that those parts constituted "information where it is possible to identify a specific individual" and "information likely to cause impediments to the execution of punishment," which are subject to nondisclosure under Japan's information disclosure law.

Among the many inmates on death row, why was Kuma, who was preparing to request a retrial, chosen at that particular time, and how did he spend his final days? Dissatisfied with the documents full of redactions, Kuma's kin filed a lawsuit in the Fukuoka District Court in October 2023 requesting annulment of the nondisclosure decision. In the lawsuit, the family argues, "Despite being willing to waive our own privacy rights, the information was unilaterally withheld." The family further states the government's act unacceptably went as far as to conceal information that could help restore Kuma's honor, and that the nondisclosure was illegal.

The government, on the other hand, argued that if the process by which officials consider implementation of the death penalty becomes known, then other inmates might imagine that they are next and try to escape or kill themselves. It said all of the blacked-out parts constitute information subject to nondisclosure and is calling for the court to dismiss the family's suit.

Iwata, however, stated, "When the documents are blacked out, there is no way to verify whether execution of the sentence was appropriate. The information should be fully disclosed, not hidden."

Shinichi Ishizuka, a professor emeritus of criminal law at Ryukoku University, who is knowledgeable about Japan's death penalty system, stated, "Shedding light on the execution process is the starting point for discussing the existence of the death penalty system. Withholding information takes away the opportunity for debate, which is unacceptable. In the lawsuit, the question of whether disclosing the information could harm the public interest and the appropriateness of nondisclosure on the grounds of protecting the privacy of the former death row inmate, even when requested by the bereaved family, are likely to emerge as points."

The Iizuka incident

In February 1992, 2 first-year elementary school girls went missing in Iizuka, Fukuoka Prefecture. They were later found dead in the mountains of the prefectural city of Amagi (present-day Asakura). In September 1994, police arrested Michitoshi Kuma, who lived within the school zone. He consistently maintained his innocence, but he was convicted of murder and sentenced to death. His death sentence was finalized in 2006 and he was executed in 2008. According to the confirmed ruling, Kuma was convicted of abducting the 2 girls between about 8:30 and 8:50 a.m. Feb. 20, 1992 near a 3-way intersection in Iizuka, strangling them by around 9 a.m., and disposing of their bodies in the mountains of Amagi around 11 a.m.

(source: mainichi.jp)

INDIA:

Life or death for RG Kar rape and murder convict Sanjoy Roy? All eyes on Sealdah court

The Sealdah court will on Monday sentence the civic volunteer convicted in the RG Kar rape and murder case, which shook the country.

After Sealdah Additional Sessions Judge Anirban Das on Saturday found Kolkata Police civic volunteer Sanjoy Roy guilty of the rape and murder of a 31-year-old doctor of RG Kar Medical College and Hospital, all are eagerly waiting for the quantum of punishment to be announced on Monday.

The maximum punishment for the crimes committed is the death penalty, while the minimum sentence is life imprisonment. The judge, in an open court, informed Sanjoy Roy that the death penalty was an option for offences proved under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita sections 64, 66 and 103(1). “It may be a life term or even death, given the way you throttled and killed the victim,” the judge said.

But, till the very end, Roy insisted he was innocent and had been falsely implicated in the case.

Billwadal Bhattacharya, a senior counsel at the Calcutta High Court, told The Indian Express that a lot of questions regarding the August 9 incident still remained unanswered given that “there is no further investigation and this person has been made the sole convict”.

“The death penalty is given in the rarest of rare cases. There cannot be any second thoughts on the fact that this was one of the most heinous forms of crime against a woman. It was done in a beastly manner. The way the young doctor was murdered, and the torture that was inflicted on her, definitely fits the rarest of rare cases, which very well warrants the death penalty,” he said.

Bhattacharya also raised questions about the investigation. “Initially, there were allegations that the police were trying to botch up the investigation. There were a lot of loopholes, which is why the matter got transferred to the CBI by the Calcutta High Court. But the question is, was it done only by this particular person who has been convicted? Now, a lot of questions will remain unanswered.”

He added, “In our country, the legal system grants an opportunity to appeal against the order of conviction given by the lower court. This will take time…”

Another senior counsel at the high court, Jayanta Narayan Chatterjee, said that Roy has been declared guilty on the basis of documents collected as circumstantial evidence or statements of eyewitnesses.

“In this case, he has been declared guilty on the basis of circumstantial evidence. I do not know what is the weight and value of the circumstantial evidence, but at the same time, it has to be appreciated that the immense pressure of the public has played a vital role in this case,” he told The Indian Express.

Reflecting on the Kamduni case of 2013, he said, “Due to the pressure of society, 7 persons were given the death penalty; one person died during trial, and 6 persons faced the trial. They appealed in the high court, and we saw that 4 people came out and 2 people got life terms. Not a single one got the death penalty, because the witnesses and evidence were weak.”

Chatterjee said the death penalty was the only option. “But I feel there are some doubts in the trial. In the lower court, a death sentence will be given, but when the case goes to the high court or the Supreme Court, I do not know what the fate of this case will be.”

Advocate Kaustav Bagchi, another counsel at the Calcutta High Court, noted that the trial was in-camera and said the question of the death penalty would definitely arise. “But what we are all more concerned with is that apart from Sanjoy, there are more perpetrators of the crime and they need to be booked. We hope and believe that this trial has not been a shabby or a shoddy trial. We hope that the sentence given to Sanjoy will not be overturned by a higher court,” he told The Indian Express.

The verdict was delivered 162 days after the on-duty postgraduate trainee doctor was raped and murdered on the premises of the hospital in Kolkata. The CBI counsel has termed the crime as the rarest of rare during the trial.

(source: indianexpress.com)

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

Daughter testifies against father, an Army jawan who killed his wife, son; court hands death sentence: Report

(see: https://www.deccanherald.com/india/uttar-pradesh/daughter-testifies-against-father-an-army-jawan-who-killed-his-wife-son-court-hands-death-sentence-report-3362731)

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

Extreme, grotesque: Court in death sentence to Haryana man who stabbed disabled brother

(see: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/extreme-grotesque-court-in-death-sentence-to-haryana-man-who-stabbed-disabled-brother-28-times-for-property/articleshow/117357466.cms)

PAKISTAN:

Death penalty of 2 brothers suspended over mother’s compromise

District & Sessions Judge, Shahpur Mian Shahid Javed on Saturday while hearing murder case has suspended the death punishment of 2 brothers, who had killed their sister on honour issues on the behalf of written compromise of their mother in the court. According to prosecution, Sarfraz (44) and Umar Draz R/O Shahpur city had killed their sister Nighat Yasmeen on the doubt of her ill character.

The court released the murderers on the behalf of written compromise of their real mother.

(source: nation.com.pk)

KUWAIT:

6 Kuwaitis among 8, including a woman, set for execution----Executions, approved after final rulings by criminal, appeals and cassation courts

8 individuals convicted of murder are scheduled to be executed on Sunday at Kuwait's Central Prison, following the completion of all legal procedures, a security source confirmed.

? The convicts include 6 Kuwaiti nationals — 5 men and 1 woman —alongside an Egyptian national and a Bidoon (individual who has no documents), the source said.

The executions, approved after final rulings by the criminal, appeals and cassation courts, were ratified in accordance with Kuwaiti law.

The Ministry of Interior, in collaboration with the Departments of Correctional Institutions, Criminal Evidence, the Criminal Execution Prosecution and judicial authorities, has finalised all preparations for the executions. Specialised doctors from the Ministry of Health will be present to ensure protocols are properly followed.

This marks Kuwait’s 1st executions of 2025. The Central Prison last carried out executions on September 5, 2024, when 6 murder convicts were executed, and in November 2022, when seven individuals faced capital punishment.

(source: gulfnews.com)

IRAN----executions

The Elimination of Iranian Judges Behind Mass Executions

According to official reports, 2 senior judges, Ali Razini and Mohammad Moghiseh, both responsible for mass executions, were eliminated in their offices in Tehran. The attack occurred in the early hours of Saturday morning when an infiltrator within the judiciary reportedly used a handgun to fatally shoot the 2officials. The assailant then took his own life as security forces approached.

Both judges were infamous figures in Iran’s judiciary, with long records of human rights abuses and repression that have drawn widespread international condemnation. Their deaths have reignited discussion about their role in decades of systemic oppression, including the massacre of over 30000 political prisoners in the 1988 massacre.

Ali Razini: Enforcer of the 1988 Massacre

Ali Razini, head of Branch 41 of the Supreme Court, was among the architects of the Iranian regime’s campaign of repression. His most infamous role was in the 1988 massacre, during which over 30,000 political prisoners were summarily executed.

Razini was a member of the “Death Committees” that sentenced prisoners to execution based solely on their political affiliations. Survivors and human rights organizations have accused him of fabricating charges to justify these killings.

In a 2016 interview, Razini defended his actions, boasting about personally interrogating hundreds of prisoners and ensuring they were either executed or given extended prison sentences.

Razini once sentenced dozens of university students to death in Bojnourd after accusing them of ties to opposition groups. He later claimed this instilled fear in their families and crushed dissent in the region.

Mohammad Moghiseh (Naserian): The Executioner Judge

Mohammad Moghiseh, also known by his alias “Naserian,” was a central figure in Iran’s judiciary, notorious for presiding over politically motivated trials, issuing death sentences, and overseeing torture.

1988 Massacre and Beyond:

As part of the Death Committee in Gohardasht Prison, Moghiseh ordered the executions of countless political prisoners. Survivors recount how he expedited hangings, even personally assisting in carrying disabled prisoners to the gallows.

In 2019, he sentenced Abdullah Ghasempour to death and imprisoned 3of his relatives on charges of supporting the PMOI/MEK.

In 2016, he issued death sentences for seven Sunni prisoners based on confessions extracted under torture, many of whom were executed in subsequent years.

Survivors describe Moghiseh executing paralyzed prisoners, including Mohsen Mohammad Bagher, and taunting inmates about their impending deaths.

International human rights organizations have long called for accountability for the atrocities committed by these judges. Both men were sanctioned by the European Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States for their roles in human rights abuses, including their involvement in the 1988 massacre.

(source: ncr-iran.org)

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

Taliban ask Iran to share list of Afghan prisoners, seek leniency for those on death row

A Taliban judicial delegation led by Abdul Malik Haqqani, the deputy chief justice of the Taliban’s Supreme Court, has requested that Iran share a list of Afghan prisoners, particularly those sentenced to death.

The request was made during a meeting with Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s deputy judiciary chief, during Haqqani’s visit to Tehran, according to a statement issued by the Taliban’s Supreme Court on Sunday.

Haqqani called for leniency toward Afghan prisoners facing execution, citing Islamic principles. “Execution is a discretionary punishment, and Islam provides prosecutors with the authority to exercise discretion in such cases. We request Iranian authorities, in the spirit of Islamic brotherhood, to replace execution with alternative measures,” he said.

The Taliban also urged Iranian officials to ensure that Afghan migrants in Iran are granted the right to work and education “in accordance with Sharia.”

The meeting reportedly focused on strengthening judicial cooperation between the two countries. Discussions included potential alternatives to execution for Afghan prisoners and improving the rights of Afghan migrants living in Iran.

According to the Taliban’s statement, Gharibabadi assured the delegation that 1,500 Afghan prisoners would soon be transferred back to Afghanistan. He also emphasized that efforts would be made to treat Afghan citizens with dignity.

Iranian officials have not publicly commented on the meeting.

The request comes amid a noticeable increase in the execution of Afghan citizens in Iran in recent months. The rise in executions has heightened tensions, particularly as migration from Afghanistan to Iran has surged following the Taliban’s return to power in August 2021.

At the same time, the number of Afghan migrants leaving Iran has also increased, reflecting growing economic and social challenges faced by refugees in the country.

(source: amu.trv)

JANUARY 18, 2025:

TEXAS----impending execution

Texas Gives Steven Nelson Execution Date of February 5, 2025

Steven Nelson is scheduled to be executed at 6 pm local time on Wednesday, February 5, 2025, inside the Walls Unit execution chamber at the Huntsville State Penitentiary in Huntsville, Texas. 37-year-old Steven is convicted of 28-year-old Clinton Dobson on March 3, 2011, in Arlington, Texas. Steven has spent the last 12 years on death row in Texas.

Steven was born in Oklahoma. His father was rarely around and was abusive when he was. Steven dropped out of school after the 11th grade. Throughout his childhood, Steven had numerous encounters with law enforcement and spent time at a high-risk juvenile detention center. As an adult, he also had numerous encounters with law enforcement, including spending some time in prison for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. Before his arrest, he worked as a laborer.

Clinton Dobson, pastor of NorthPointe Baptist Church had agreed to meet church member Dale Harwell for lunch on March 3, 2011. When Clinton did not arrive, Dale unsuccessfully attempted to contact him. Debra Jenkins went to the church and saw 2 cars in the parking lot, that of Clinton and Judy Elliot. When Debra was unable to enter the church or have anyone answer at the church office, she left. She returned about 15 minutes later and noted that Judy’s car was no longer in the parking lot. Another church member arrived for a meeting with Clinton but left after being unable to reach him.

Clinton’s wife, Laura, was concerned when she could not reach her husband and asked the part-time music minister to go to the church. He agreed, along with Judy’s husband. Upon arriving, they were able to enter the church using a passcode. They noticed that the church office was in disarray and a woman was lying on the ground severely beaten. She was not immediately recognized as Judy. They also saw Clinton lying on the floor and called the police.

When police arrived, they discovered that both victims were lying on their backs, with their hands bound behind them. Clinton had a plastic bag over his head, sucked into his mouth. Clinton was soon pronounced dead. Judy suffered long-lasting and permanent injuries from the attack but survived.

It was discovered that Steven Nelson stole Judy’s car after the altercation in teh church office. He also stole several items and Judy’s credit cards. Nelson sold some of the items and used Judy’s credit cards to purchase numerous items including shoes, jewelry, clothes, alcohol, and gas.

Nelson was arrested on March 5, 2011. He was arrested wearing many of the items he purchased with the stolen credit card. A search of the apartment where he was arrested identified more items purchased with the stolen credit card. DNA evidence would also link Nelson to the crime scene.

On March 19, 2012, while in jail awaiting trial, Nelson allegedly killed Jonathon Holden, a mentally challenged inmate. Nelson convicted Holden of faking a suicide attempt by hanging. Holden approached Nelson’s cell bars and allowed Nelson to place a noose around his neck. Nelson then tightened the noose and held it, resulting in Holden’s death. Nelson was seen celebrating after Holden’s death. He was never tried for Holden’s death.

During his trial, Nelson claimed that 2 others committed the murder and robbery and that he only served as a lookout. Nelson also confessed to stealing some items from the office and to using the stolen credit card.

Pray for the family of Clinton Dobson. Pray for healing for Judy Elliot and her family. Please pray for strength for the family of Steven Nelson. Pray that if Steven is innocent, lacks the competency to be executed, or should not be executed for any other reason, that evidence will be proved before his execution. Pray that Steven comes to find peace through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

(source: theforgivenessfoundation.org)

PENNSYLVANIA:

Bill could abolish the death penalty in Pennsylvania, ‘Sanctity of life'

A lawmaker in the House of Representatives announced plans to introduce legislation that would abolish the death penalty in the Commonwealth.>

The bill, authored by Rep. Russ Diamond (R-Lebanon County), would abolish the death penalty, which aligns with “pro-life” values. Diamond argued that states should not take life as punishment, even in response to the gravest of crimes. The role of the government “should not be to decide” who lives and who dies, the legislation reads.

Diamond added in his legislation that the death penalty is “inconsistent with the sanctity of life” and fails to meet the “practical and moral standards” of justice and equality. The bill outlined 5 specific points where it is believed the death penalty fails to meet said standards.

Risk of Wrongful Execution - “The irreversible nature of the death penalty magnifies its tragic consequences,” Diamond wrote. Over 190 individuals nationwide have been exonerated from death row since 1973, with some coming within days of execution. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 13 individuals who had been sentenced to death in Pennsylvania were later exonerated, including 1 in 2024, the legislation reads.

Perpetuation of Violence – Capital punishment “perpetuates a cycle of violence” that devalues human life and “undermines our efforts to build a culture of life and hope.”

Bias and Inequities Persist – The application of the death penalty disproportionately affects people of color, those with limited financial resources, individuals with mental illness and those with intellectual disabilities, according to the bill.

Deterrence is a Myth – “Decades of research show no evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than life imprisonment without parole,” Dimond wrote.

Economic and Ethical Costs – The death penalty “burdens taxpayers with excessive costs, diverting resources away from victim support and crime prevention offices.”

According to the legislation, a recent student found that since Pennsylvania enacted the death penalty in 1978, it has cost the state about $816 million dollars more than the cost of life without parole. Diamond argued that the money would be better spent on initiatives that uplift life and community well-being.

There are currently 95 people on death row in Pennsylvania, according to the Department of Corrections. Since 1978, only 3 people have been executed in Pa., with the last one being carried out in 1999.

Diamond ended his legislation by highlighting how 23 states and Washington, D.C. have already abolished the death penalty, saying that Pennsylvania “can and should” prioritize a consistent ethic of life in our justice system.

(source: WTAJ news)

SOUTH CAROLINA----impending execution South Carolina Gives Marion Bowman Execution Date of January 31, 2025

The South Carolina Supreme Court has refused to halt the upcoming execution of Marion Bowman. Bowman has claimed he is innocent and had beneficial evidence withheld from his team during his original trial. He can seek clemency from the Supreme Court of the United States and from South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster.

Marion Bowman is scheduled to be executed at 6 pm local time, on Friday, January 31, 2025, inside the execution chamber of the Broad River Capital Punishment Facility at the Broad River Correctional Institute in Columbia, South Carolina. 44-year-old Marion is convicted of murdering 21-year-old Kandee Louise Martin on February 16, 2001, in Branchville, South Carolina. For the last 22 years, Marion has been on death row in South Carolina.

Marion began drinking at a young age and he had a history of heavy alcohol use on his mother’s side. By the age of 14, Marion was selling drugs and drinking every weekend. He soon began drinking every day.

On February 16, 2002, Marion Bowman retrieved a gun from a friend’s home, where it was being stored. Later that day, he was in a car with two other women, when he instructed them to stop so he could speak to a person he saw: Kandee Martin. Kandee asked him to wait until she was done speaking with someone else. This infuriated Bowman who stated, “I’m about to kill this [expletive].” He also said, “[She] will be dead by dark.” Bowman also informed the two women in the car that Kandee owed him money.

Later that evening, Bowman and Kandee were in a car together, when Bowman spotted Tywan Gadson and stopped to pick him up. Tywan had been drinking all afternoon and evening Eventually, Bowman stopped the car and he and Tywan got out. They walked away from the car where Bowman told Tywan that he was going to kill Kandee because she was wearing a wire.

Kandee approached Bowman stating she was scared. All 3 were startled by a passing car and walked into the woods. Kandee then began walking back to the car. Bowman then shot his gun 3 times behind her. Kandee ran towards Tywan before stopping and facing Bowman, asking him to stop because she had a child to care for. Bowman then shot her twice more. Kandee fell to the ground and Bowman dragged her body into the woods. Tywan and Bowman returned to the car and left.

Bowman dropped off Tywan and then attempted to sell Kandee’s car but was unsuccessful. However, he later picked up another friend telling him he needed help. Together, they took Kandee’s car, retrieved her body from the woods, and placed it in the trunk. While moving the body, Bowman confessed to killing her. A nearby resident heard noises, discovered the fire, and called the police. An investigation led to Bowman’s arrest the following day. Police also eventually found the gun and connected it to the murder.

Bowman was tried, convicted, and sentenced to death by a jury for the murder of Kandee.

Pray for the family of Kandee Martin. Pray for strength for the family of Marion Bowman. Please pray that if Marion is innocent, lacks the competency to be executed, or should not be executed for any other reason, that evidence will be provided before his execution. Pray that Marion may find peace through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

(source: theforgivenessfoundation.org)

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

South Carolina inmate chooses lethal injection over electric chair or firing squad----Marion Bowman Jr., 44, is the 3rd inmate set to die since the state was able to restart executions after a 13-year pause last year.

A South Carolina inmate who has spent more than 1/2 his life on death row has chosen to die by lethal injection instead of by electric chair or firing squad later this month.

Marion Bowman Jr., 44, is the 3rd inmate set to die since the state was able to restart executions after a 13-year pause last year. All 3 have chosen lethal injection over the electric chair or a firing squad, which was created when the state feared it might never be able to obtain drugs for lethal injections again.

3 more inmates have also had all of their regular appeals rejected by the courts. The state Supreme Court is allowing executions to take place every 5 weeks.

Bowman is scheduled to die at 6 p.m. on Jan. 31 at the Broad River Correctional Institution in Columbia.

“Marion has spent decades fighting to prove his innocence in this capital case in a state that has disproportionally applied the death penalty to young men of color. We will continue to support him and hope that South Carolina does not execute another innocent man," Bowman's attorney, Lindsey Vann, said in a statement.

A law allowing secrecy for executions has permitted the state to buy the pentobarbital it uses for lethal injections without revealing the drug's supplier.

On Thursday, the federal government announced it was rescinding its protocol for executions with pentobarbital after a government review raised concerns about the potential for “unnecessary pain and suffering.”

State prison officials, who have said South Carolina's procedures for lethal injection are similar to the federal government, did not comment on the decision, which could be changed again next week when Donald Trump is sworn in as president.

Bowman's lawyers are asking a federal judge to require prison officials to give them more information about the lethal injection drug. They said the state told the doctor performing an autopsy of Richard Moore that he was given pentobarbital through an IV twice — once as the execution started and again 11 minutes later when he was killed on Nov. 1.

The initial dose of pentobarbital, if administered correctly, was such an extremely high dose that his breathing should have stopped in a minute without a need for a 2nd dose, Dr. David B. Waisel, an anesthesiologist at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, wrote in court papers for the defense.

Fluid was also found in Moore's lungs, and Waisel wrote, “It appears likely that during Mr. Moore’s execution, he consciously experienced feelings of drowning and suffocation during the 23 minutes that it took to bring about his death.”

Wasiel also said he fears South Carolina's protocols don't consider Bowman's weight, which is listed as 389 pounds (176 kilograms) in prison records. It can be difficult to properly get an IV into a blood vessel and determine the dose of the drugs needed in people with obesity.

Bowman was convicted of murder in the shooting of a friend whose burned body was found in the trunk of her burned-out car in Dorchester County in 2001. Much of the evidence against Bowman at his trial came from friends and family members who testified against him as part of plea deals.

Bowman has insisted he did not kill 21-year-old Kandee Martin. He did not testify at his trial but released a statement last month through his lawyer with his story about what happened around the time Martin was killed.

When Bowman was arrested, he had Martin's watch but said she gave it to him as collateral when she didn't have the money to buy crack cocaine.

Bowman said his lawyers did a poor job representing him at trial, failing to show jurors a video from a nearby store around the time Martin was shot, which captured another man buying a container of gasoline and voices on the tape talking about killing a woman.

The prosecutor offered a plea deal for a life sentence, but Bowman said he refused to take it because he didn't kill anyone. One of his lawyers encouraged him to take it, too, saying a jury might hold his race against him.

The attorney “came to the jail and said, ‘son, you need to plead guilty. You are charged with killing a white girl and you and your family are Black,’” Bowman wrote.

On Thursday, the South Carolina Supreme Court rejected a request from Bowman's current lawyers to postpone his execution so new evidence could be reviewed over what they said was the poor performance of Bowman's trial lawyers and one of them sympathizing more with the victim because she was white.

The justices called the arguments “meritless” and said they were based on comments taken out of context.

Bowman's last chance to spare his life may lie with asking Gov. Henry McMaster to reduce his sentence to life without parole.

Bowman's attorneys said he has been a model prisoner during his more than two decades on death row. They have sworn statements from several former nurses and other death row workers who say Bowman is a gentle giant who has a knack for helping inmates with mental problems cooperate with psychologists and take their medication. He also acted for years as the official intermediary between death row inmates and prison officials.

South Carolina has executed 45 inmates since the death penalty was reinstated about 50 years ago. No governor has ever offered clemency, including McMaster, for the 2 inmates executed in 2024. McMaster will announce his decision minutes before Bowman's execution is scheduled to start at 6 p.m. on Jan. 31.

Bowman said he regrets selling his friend drugs that led to her addiction.

“I have done some things in life I regret. I regret the role I had in dealing to Kandee and know that her addiction probably led to her death. But I did not do this,” Bowman wrote. “I am so sorry for Kandee and her family, but I did not do it.”

(source: WLTX news)

UTAH:

Deseret News archives: Gary Gilmore firing squad death in 1977 was 1st U.S. execution in 4 decades----On Jan. 17, 1977, nation watched capital punishment drama as Gilmore, convicted for pair of homicides, was put to death

On Jan. 17, 1977, convicted murderer Gary Gilmore, 36, was killed by a firing squad at Utah State Prison in the 1st U.S. execution in a decade.

A last-minute court decision cleared the way for the man’s execution. His last words: “Let’s do it.”

Per the Deseret News that day, “Gilmore, who killed 2 young men in 2 robberies in Utah County in July 1976, became the 1st man to suffer the death penalty in the United States in nearly 10 years. His execution was fought literally down to the last minute by opponents of capital punishment. Gilmore’s victims were Max Jensen, Orem, a 24-year-old law student, and Bennie J. Bushnell, 26, a Provo motel manager.

“Gilmore was in the news often for the year and a half he spent in Utah’s prison. His love affair with Nicole Barrett and their feeble attempts at double suicide, his love poems and his defiant challenge to state authorities to get his execution over with almost overshadowed the depth of his crimes. His government-sanctioned death triggered a spate of executions across the country.”

Since then, 1,607 people have been executed in the U.S., including eight in Utah. Taberon Honie’s execution came late last year. Utah changed its laws in 2004 to eliminate the firing squad option. The majority of those executed in recent years is by lethal injection, according to the Death Penalty Execution Center. In 2005, Utah modified the law so that the firing squad could be an option if the drugs needed for a lethal injection aren’t available.

Norman Mailer’s book “The Executioner’s Song” (1979) won the Pulitzer Prize for fiction. It became a made-for-television biographical crime drama film, which was shot in Utah.

(source: deseret.com)

ARIZONA:

Why Arizona death row inmates are not executed in order

Just because someone new arrives on Arizona's death row doesn't mean they are last in line for execution. Here's why.

Alex Madrid has a new mugshot as the newest member of Arizona’s death row.

He was sentenced to death yesterday for killing his ex-girlfriend’s teen daughter back in 2013.

Alex Madrid is now one of the more than 100 inmates on Arizona’s death row, but just because he’s the latest does not mean he’s last in line for execution.

Attorneys will file many motions for many years to appeal a death sentence and go back through a trial and scrutinize every little thing that was said to make sure nothing was wrongly prejudicial or damaging.

But sometimes, an inmate wants to die. So, do they get their way?

The answer is - maybe.

There are currently 112 people on Arizona’s death row: 109 men and 3 women. So, a decades-long appeal process for Alex Madrid will likely begin soon, like most inmates on death row.

Former capital case prosecutor Susie Charbel, who began on Madrid’s case before leaving the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, said the average inmate will live on death row here for 20 years - and often longer.

She said if an inmate wants to die and waives their appeals process, that could get them 5 or 6 years ahead of others and closer to death.

Not only do defense attorneys reinvestigate a case all over again in appeal, which can vary in length for every convict and case, but she said something else a little more offbeat comes into play, too: Is the inmate healthy enough to die?

“If that person has special needs, there are a lot of mental health issues a lot of times. It’s also physical issues. A person, believe or it not, has to be healthy mentally, physically, and emotionally in order to be put to death,” Charbel said.

Former media representative for the Department of Corrections Barrett Marson also said even if an inmate wants to die, that doesn’t mean attorneys stop fighting for them to live.

“There are attorneys who represent death row inmates who believe firmly the death penalty is unconscionable and they understand the process and how to throw up road blocks and how to put off that ultimate sentence,” said Marson.

Charbel also said it doesn’t matter if somebody killed 1 victim or 4, that won’t speed up or slow down an appeals process either; it simply is about if everything was done correctly in trial.

Charbel also said sometimes an inmate will die on death row before ever making it to the execution chamber.

For some time, Arizona had the oldest death row inmate in the nation - a man who died at 94 years old from natural causes back in 2010.

(ource: azfamily.com)

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

Firing squads will never be a more 'humane' way to die in Arizona | Opinion----A Republican lawmaker says strapping a convict to a chair and riddling him with bullets is 'always humane.' And he thinks Arizona voters will agree.

The journalists charged with covering the machinations of lawmakers at the Arizona Capitol would be hard pressed each week to select the most bizarre statement made by a member of the Legislature.

There are simply too many.

This week, however, I believe the clear winner would be the grotesquely oxymoronic declaration by Republican Rep. Alexander Kolodin.

Speaking about an alternative to Arizona’s lethal injection death penalty, he said, “We actually know what’s always humane and always seems to work properly, which is the firing squad.”

Always humane?

Will voters allow execution by firing squad?

A prisoner is bound to a chair that’s surrounded by sandbags (to catch bullets and blood) while a doctor pins a piece of white cloth over his heart. 5 shooters armed with rifles (1 loaded with blanks) aim and fire.

If successful, the condemned inmate loses consciousness quickly. If not …

Humane?

Good people have their reasons for supporting the death penalty. But I’d guess that every person who believes it serves justice, or believes it honors victims, or believes it is a deterrent (if only inside prison), understands that killing another human being is not humane.

In its own way, execution is the most premeditated of all killings. Arizona has a history of botching them.

Kolodin wants to put using a firing squad on the 2026 ballot so voters can decide.

“I don’t know what it is,” he said. “But lethal injection just seems to be incredibly complicated, where it always leads to these delays and these hiccups and whatever.”

The death penalty costs more than life in prison

Actually, delays are built into death penalty cases.

It’s well known that it costs taxpayers WAY more to put a killer on death row than to sentence him to life without the possibility of parole.

The longer trials, the appeals, the costs of the lawyers and experts in the cases ... it goes on and on. The inmate often dies naturally in prison.

We also know that wealthy defendants do better than poor ones in death penalty cases, meaning justice is rarely equal.

And we know as well that a number of condemned inmates have been exonerated of all charges after being sent to death row. The number is now at 200 since 1973.

Maybe you still want to kill the bad guys who are already locked up. Fine.

Just don’t call it humane.

Arizona once thought hanging was humane

It’s no more humane than the guillotine, banned in the ‘70s by France after it abolished the death penalty.

It’s no more humane than the sword, still used in Saudi Arabia to behead the condemned.

Killing is killing. If we are going to do it, we should own it.

In some countries it is still acceptable to stone to death a condemned person.

Up until the 1930s, Arizona’s method of capital punishment was hanging.

That ended following the execution of Eva Dugan, convicted of murdering of a wealthy Tucson chicken rancher named A.J. Mathis.

When Dugan dropped from the gallows and the noose tightened, she was decapitated.

News reports said her head rolled close to some of the spectators who had gathered for the event, causing 3 men and 2 women to faint.

Up until then, I’d guess there were many people in Arizona who thought hangings were humane.

(source: Opiinion, EJ Montini----Arizona Republic)

NEVADA----death row inmate dies

Nevada death row inmate who killed 2 people dies

A death row inmate who killed 2 employees at a restaurant where he was laid off nearly 30 years ago has died, the 8 News Now Investigators have learned.

Marlo Thomas, 52, was pronounced dead at Centennial Hospital in Las Vegas on Thursday, according to the Nevada Department of Corrections.

The 8 News Now Investigators reached out to the coroner’s office for the cause and manner of death.

Thomas entered the Lone Star Steakhouse, where he had worked as a dishwasher until he was laid off, to get his job back on April 14, 1996, according to court records. Thomas then robbed the manager and stabbed two employees to death, documents stated.

Thomas received 2 death sentences and was convicted of 2 counts of 1st-degree murder, conspiracy to commit murder, battery causing substantial bodily harm, robbery, burglary, kidnapping and 3 deadly weapon enhancements. He most recently served time at High Desert State Prison near Indian Springs and began serving prison time on July 16, 1996, according to the department.

An autopsy has been requested and next-of-kin has been notified, the department stated.

The state of Nevada’s last execution of a death row inmate was in 2006.

(source: KLAS news)

USA:

Garland’s Cynical Rescission of the Death Penalty Protocol----The outgoing Biden-Harris administration and its AG continue to play a political game with capital punishment.

Merrick Garland continues his bid to outrank Eric Holder as the most partisan attorney general in American history. On Wednesday, he rescinded the federal death penalty protocol — essentially, just as President-elect Donald Trump is about to take office, and 4 years after Garland could have taken this cynical action if he truly believed it was warranted.

Garland issued a memorandum to the Bureau of Prisons in which he reported that the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy determined that the administration of phenobarbital is . . . problematic. The federal government’s execution protocol, which has not been invoked since President Biden took office in 2021, when Garland imposed a death penalty moratorium, calls for the lethal injection of phenobarbital sodium. Garland claims that such injections could lead to a degree of pain and suffering that might violate what he takes to be the government’s “responsibility to treat individuals humanely and avoid unnecessary pain and suffering.”

The attorney general must couch his 11th-hour conversion in these vagaries because he knows that, in its 2020 Barr v. Lee decision, the Supreme Court rejected the contention that executions should be halted because some medical experts opine that phenobarbital might cause painful pulmonary edema. Garland is thus reduced to rationalizing that, even though the federal execution method does not violate the Eighth Amendment or meet the Court’s standard for judicial intervention, the Justice Department is still obliged “to raise important questions.”

Pretty compelling, no?

I have observed a number of times that the Biden-Harris administration and its attorney general play a political game with capital punishment. They know that it is endorsed by the broad public but anathema to the progressives who call the tune in the Democratic Party. So, on the one hand, they tell the public they are responsible custodians of death row who defend capital punishment in worthy cases (as the DOJ successfully did in the Supreme Court when a federal appeals court reversed the jury’s death penalty verdict in Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s case); on the other hand, they wink at their progressive political base, assuring that there’s no need to worry because no one is actually going to be executed.

This of course is why Biden waited until after the 2024 election to grant clemency to 37 death row inmates — undermining Congress’s laws, eviscerating the work of juries and judges who lawfully adjudicated those cases, and scoffing at the suffering of families whose loved ones were brutally killed. (See our editorial urging Biden not to do what he did.) This corrupt use of the pardon power for the benefit of heinous murderers — this foisting of the Left’s policy preference on an unwilling public — would have cost Democrats dearly at the ballot box if they’d been transparent about it during the campaign.

And it gets worse. Less than a month ago, after national outrage was provoked by the cold-blooded killing of Brian Thompson, a health insurance executive shot from behind on a Manhattan street, Garland’s Justice Department quickly filed capital murder charges against Luigi Mangione. Even as the charges were announced in the DOJ’s chest-beating press release, Garland knew that there could be no death penalty under his moratorium, and he had to know both that the administration was about to pardon a slew of death row inmates and that he would soon endeavor to make executions illegal by eradicating the protocol.

Remember, moreover, that in pardoning 37 death row inmates, Biden preserved the death sentences of three defendants (including Tsarnaev) whose capital cases were brought or defended by Biden’s 2 administrations (his own and President Obama’s, in which Biden served as vice president). Biden and Garland struggled to come up with some coherent rationale for why their three death penalty cases were righteous while all the others “raised important questions” about the humaneness of capital punishment. But the only rational explanation is political: Basically, we only did our death cases because the voters would have hammered us if we didn’t, but since our hearts are pure, how could we cop to being inhumane?

And now, as they saunter out the door with no further concerns about political accountability, Garland and Biden tell us it was all inhumane after all . . . except they can’t say it is unconstitutional or flouts American tradition (which for centuries abided less humane methods of capital punishment).

The driver of all this legerdemain is partisan politics: Garland is trying to make it difficult for the incoming Trump administration to prosecute death penalty cases — and even to execute the three inmates who Biden told us, just a few days ago, deserved capital punishment.

As Garland well knows, in future cases — including that of Mangione, in which he approved capital charges — defense lawyers and progressive judges will use his invalidation of the execution protocol as a basis to claim that the death penalty is sadistic, illegal, and potentially unconstitutional. And mind you, in this exercise of slavish adherence to Soros-approved progressive nonenforcement pieties, the beneficiaries will as always be hardened criminals.

To be sure, federal capital sentences are rare — under current jurisprudence, the death penalty is only imposed for murder, and the vast majority of murder prosecutions are done in the state court systems. 13 federal offenders were executed in Trump’s 1st term (hence the Supreme Court’s afore-described Lee case, involving murderers of children); prior to that, there had been no executions in 17 years — not since the first Bush 43 term, after which Obama’s AG, like Biden’s, imposed a moratorium rationalized by baseless concerns about constitutionality (while nevertheless charging Tsarnaev with capital murder).

So why expend all these resources on internal DOJ and academic studies, litigation, and debate? At stake, after all, is only a minuscule fraction of the approximately 20,000 murders annually committed in the United States. Why not just content ourselves with sentences of life imprisonment without parole for the worst offenders, chalk up the steep expense of incarcerating murderers for decades as a cost of doing humaneness, and end the waste of time and effort?

Because if you don’t have a death penalty, you won’t have sentences of life imprisonment without parole.

Understand, progressives are nearly as offended by imprisonment — at least lengthy incarceration — as they are by death sentences. If the death penalty were ever repealed, progressives would immediately mount a campaign against sentences of life imprisonment, arguing that these, too, are inhumane. Gradually, congressional Democrats would push to reduce the maximum federal sentence to some term of years — say, 25 or 30 for starters, to be whittled down from there. Or, à la Europe, the federal system would maintain a nominal “life imprisonment” sentence, but defendants would become eligible for parole after a dozen or so years.

For now, progressive Democrats support sentences of life imprisonment without parole only because it is a cosmetically reasonable position to take in opposing capital punishment. Once their monstrous portrayal of grisly federal death chambers has accomplished its objective of repealing the ultimate penalty, they’d simply step up their demagoguing of our supposedly barbaric “carceral state.”

That’s at least 4 years away. In the meantime, strap in for the Trump years, in which the DOJ will likely undertake to execute the few murderers who Biden and Garland said deserve to die, while Biden, Garland, and other Democrats counter that executing them would transgress “our values” — by which they mean their values: solicitude for the predators, not the victims.

(source: Andrew C. McCarthy is a senior fellow at National Review Institute)

JAMAICA:

Senator doubles down on death penality for child killers----LONGMORE... if somebody murders a child, especially in the premeditated way, they should not even be considering that they have the chance of seeing sunlight again

Government Senator and consultant psychiatrist Dr Saphire Longmore on Friday doubled down on her call for Jamaica to enforce its death penalty law, particularly for child killers, irrespective of age or gender, arguing that even if individuals are not executed, a message will still be sent.

Longmore had faced some criticism for making that pitch in early December ahead of the sentencing of dental assistant Kayodi Satchell who, in June 2023, snatched eight-year-old Danielle Rowe from her Braeton Primary and Infant School in Portmore, St Catherine, before taking her to a location in St Andrew where she slashed the child’s throat.

On Friday, in making her contribution to the State of the Nation Debate at Gordon House in downtown Kingston, Longmore, stating that she wanted to explain further, said, “I needed to clarify that my position is not because of my ignorance of capital versus non-capital murder or of death penalty not being gender-specific. In my mind, if you kill a child [whether you are] man or woman, you should get the death penalty, even if we are not enforcing it.”

Under Jamaica’s Offences Against the Person Act, the punishment for capital murder is the death penalty. There is, however, one exception as the Act specifically exempts from execution women who are convicted of offences punishable with death, but who are found by a jury to be pregnant.

In that circumstance, the sentence passed on her is set as life imprisonment with or without hard labour.

The last person to be executed in Jamaica was Nathan Foster, who was convicted of murder and hanged in 1988.

Last year the Crown, in prosecuting Satchell, did not seek the death penalty. Jamaica is more or less hamstrung by the precedent set by the ruling of the United Kingdom Privy Council in the case of Trimmingham v The Queen (2009), where it was held that the death penalty should be imposed only in cases which, on the facts of the offence, are “the most extreme and exceptional”, “the worst of the worst”, or “the rarest of the rare”.

“It’s hard for me to speak about Danielle Rowe, it really is, and my position is not based on the fact that I am not cognisant of the norms of our island,” Longmore said on Friday.

“My position is based on the fact that I want meted out to child murderers, the most severe punishment we have on our books. Mi nuh know what needs to happen, but if somebody murders a child, especially in the premeditated way, they should not even be considering that they have the chance of seeing sunlight again,” Longmore argued.

“We don’t enforce the death penalty, I know, but it is still on our books, so mek wi use it to get the message across: ‘Leave our children alone.’ Allow them the chance to become the Jamaican citizen that is capable of changing the world. We have had so many examples of this,” she declared.

Longmore, who said the trauma from these killings spread far and wide, emphasised that another painful aspect is that “the system is structured in such a way that the murderer is more guaranteed care” than those who are directly affected by the situation — parents, siblings, classmates, ordinary citizens.

“When you have a lot of trauma like, for example, a trauma that happens at school, 1/3 of the persons will immediately react and show a response; 1/3, in about 6 months it will come; and then another third will probably not be affected at all. Out of every 10, one person will probably grow from that trauma,” she said.

“And so, I encourage us in our dispensation of health care to seek post-traumatic growth as an objective and resiliency factor, especially amongst our children,” Longmore added.

Satchell, who had confessed to killing Danielle, was in late December sentenced to life in prison for the murder of the 8-year-old and will be eligible for parole after serving 27 years and four months.

(source: jamaicaobserver.com)

NIGERIA:

Housewife, sister sentenced to death by hanging for killing co-wife

A High Court sitting in Minna, the Niger State capital, has sentenced one Amina Aliyu, a housewife, and her sister, Aishat Mohammed to death by hanging for the brutal killing of her co-wife, Hafsat Fatima Aliyu.

The youngest sister of the accused person, Zainab, who was alleged to have participated in the murder also received life imprisonment due to her age at the time the crime was committed.

The accused persons had conspired and killed the deceased in March 2021, at the family residence in Barkin Saleh, a suburb of Minna, the state capital.

The 2 accused persons – Amina and Aishat – were convicted for murdering Hafsat, after hitting her with a pestle from behind in the kitchen on the fateful day.

According to the prosecutor, the accused persons later set the lifeless body on fire to make it look as if she died of fire incident in the kitchen.

During the proceedings, which spanned 3 years, 4 witnesses testified, including Sani Aliyu, the husband of the deceased, who recounted how Amina and her sisters conspired and killed Hafsat.

Justice Balkisu Gambo Yusuf of Minna High Court 7, while sentencing the accused persons said that the prosecutor had proven his case beyond doubt, adding that: “The punishment for culpable homicide under Section 221 of the Penal Code is death.”

However Peter Omale, the defence counsel, urged leniency for Zainab, highlighting her status as a minor at the time of the crime.

Justice Yusuf concurred, admitting that, “As of 2021, when the offence was committed, the ACJA excluded anyone below 18 from facing the death penalty.”

(source: thesun.ng)

TAIWAN:

EU, Australia, and Canada urge Taiwan to end executions----Representative offices protest after Taiwan carries out 1st execution in 5 years

The EU, Australia, and Canada joined human rights groups to call for the abolition of the death penalty after Taiwan carried out its 1st execution in almost 5 years on Thursday.

Huang Lin-kai was executed by firing squad in Taipei yesterday for a double murder and sexual assault he committed in 2013. He was sentenced to death in 2017 and an appeal against the decision was dismissed by the Supreme Court in the same year.

A spokesperson for the EU’s Diplomatic Service issued a statement on Thursday condemning the crimes and expressing sympathy to the family of the victims. “At the same time, the EU recalls its opposition to capital punishment in all cases and all circumstances.”

The spokesperson said the death penalty is an “inhumane and degrading punishment” and noted that it does little to deter crime. The EU calls on Taiwan to place a moratorium on the use of the death penalty and work towards abolition, the spokesperson said.

A post on the EU representative office’s Facebook page carrying the statement received numerous replies supporting the execution. Many also suggested the EU should not comment on Taiwan’s internal affairs.

Canada’s representative office in Taiwan also posted a statement expressing sympathy for the victims’ family and condemning the use of the death penalty. “Canada's policy is to oppose the death penalty in all circumstances and to advocate for its global abolition,” the post read.

The post added there is a growing international consensus against the use of the death penalty and also called on Taiwan to instate a moratorium on it. “It has also been shown to have no deterrent effect and may lead to irreparable misjudgments,” the post read.

The Australian Office in Taipei issued a similar statement. “We call on Taiwan to cease all executions and take steps towards complete abolition of the death penalty,” the office wrote in a Facebook post.

A joint statement issued by the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty and other human rights groups called the execution unlawful and “bloodthirsty.” The statement asked the justice minister to cease all executions until the chief prosecutor has had adequate time to review all death row inmates' appeals against the sentence.

A Facebook post containing the joint statement also received many comments supporting the death penalty.

(source: taiwannews.com.tw)

PHILIPPINES:

38 Filipinos face death penalty abroad

The number of Filipinos on death row abroad has decreased to 38, according to Department of Migrant Workers (DMW) Secretary Hans Cacdac, who shared the update during the Kapihan held at the Manila Hotel on Friday.

Cacdac reported that the number of Filipinos on death row had previously reached as high as 72. By November 2023, during Senate budget deliberations, the figure had already dropped to 44. He attributed the decline to the enactment of Malaysia’s Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act of 2023, which took effect in July of the same year.

This new law allows Malaysian judges to impose imprisonment instead of the death penalty for serious crimes such as murder, treason, kidnapping, terrorist attacks, and drug trafficking.

The majority of Filipinos currently on death row are in Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries, with many convicted of murder and drug-related offenses. Cacdac said these Filipinos have been provided assistance through the DMW’s legal assistance program.

(source: tribune.net.ph/)

PAKISTAN:

Death penalty of 2 brothers suspended over mother’s compromise

Additional District & Session Judge,Shah purr Mian Shahid Javed on Saturday while hearing murder case has suspended the death punishment of 2 brothers who had killed their sister on honor issues on the behalf of written compromise of their mother in the court.

According to procesicution,Sarfraz (44) and Umar Draz r/o Shah purr city had killed their sister Nighat yasmeen on the doubt of her ill character.

The court released the murderers on the behalf of written compromise of their real mother.

(source: app.com.pk)

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

On death row

THE judiciary in Pakistan does not have established sentencing guidelines for the application of the death penalty. Unfortunately, Pakistan has one of the world’s highest numbers of prisoners sentenced to death. By the end of 2024, the total number on death row reached 6,161 — a significant increase from 2022, when death row prisoners numbered 3,226, according to a 2024 report by Justice Project Pakistan.

This suggests heightened sentencing activity by judges at the trial court level. Even though, Pakistan amended the Control of Narcotics Substances Act in 2023 and the Sabotage of the Railways (Amendment) Act in 2022, to reduce the provision for capital punishment to a life sentence, the judicial view of the application of capital punishment has not changed. In 2024, some courts continued to impose death sentences for narcotics-related offences.

This underscores the need for continuing judicial training and awareness programmes so that legislative changes are properly implemented. Currently, 31 offences in Pakistan can lead to the death penalty. These include, among others, murder, perjury and kidnapping for ransom. This is not in line with Article 6(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that the death penalty can only be imposed for the most serious crimes.

The outcome is irreversible injustice.

The test applicable in criminal trials, including in cases involving the death penalty, is ‘proof beyond reasonable doubt’. However, trial courts continue to apply the death penalty even where this test is not met; the outcome is irreversible injustice.

Pakistan was ranked 129th out of 142 countries on the application of the rule of law and 98th on the effectiveness of its criminal justice system by the World Justice Project in 2024. This highlights a crisis within Pakistan’s criminal justice system, marked by police reliance on torture to extract confessions, the fabrication of evidence, and inadequate legal aid services. The gap in Pakistan’s justice system underscores the prevalence of both wrongful convictions and wrongful prosecutions across the country.

The legal process for death row prisoners in Pakistan starts with sentencing in the trial courts and may advance through the high courts and the Supreme Court. At the final stage, submitting mercy petitions to the president of Pakistan serves as the last option for prisoners after their appeals are denied by the Supreme Court.

The president has the authority to pardon death row prisoners under Article 45 of the Constitution. However, there is neither an established procedure nor a mechanism in place for submitting and resolving mercy petitions, leading to prolonged delays that often span years before a decision is made.

In 2018, the Supreme Court upheld the death penalty in only three per cent of the reported capital cases, overturning the sentence or ordering a review. Generally, an accused spends an average of 10 years under the death sentence before his or her case is heard by the apex court. In 65pc of the acquittals, the Supreme Court had serious doubts about the reliability of police investigation. The most common issues with such investigations were evidence that appeared to be planted, manipulated, or doubtful, according to a report by Reprieve.

There have been no executions in Pakistan since December 2019 as per the report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review in March 2023. However, the courts continue to apply the penalty. Once sentenced by the trial court, individuals are confined to death row, where they endure deplorable conditio­­ns while awaiting an execution that may never occur.

Recently, in the case of Ghulam Shabbir, the Supreme Court described the living conditions in death cells as “miserable”. It highlighted that the “space of a cell provided for each condemned prisoner is about 9 x 12 feet, with a single toilet to be used jointly by all the prisoners… . The death row prisoner is not permitted to participate in any extracurricular activities… . The convict is forced to live in such an inhuman condition. The date and time of execution of his sentence is uncertain, which in the given circumstance results in horrible feelings and creates anxiety. It is not just the prisoner who suffers, it’s the family too… .”

Now imagine that the Supreme Court only upheld the death penalty in 3pc of its reported capital cases, but by the time the case had been decided, a prisoner had spent years inside the death cell of the prison, resulting in irreversible injustice.

The Supreme Court must adopt sentencing guidelines in capital cases along with stipulating the mitigating factors that can result in a reduction in the quantum of sentences in cases involving capital punishment.

(source: Rita Tahir; The writer is a barrister of Lincoln’s Inn and an advocate of the high courts of Pakistan----dawn.com)

INDIA:

In India, a police volunteer is convicted of rape and murder of a trainee doctor

An Indian court on Saturday found a police volunteer guilty for the rape and murder of a trainee doctor, a crime that sparked countrywide protests and hospital strikes last year amid renewed concerns over lack of safety for women.

The killing of the 31-year-old physician while she was on duty at a hospital in the eastern city of Kolkata in August highlighted once again the chronic issue of violence against women in the country. The trial in the case was fast-tracked through India's notoriously sluggish legal system and arguments began in November.

Judge Anirban Das said the sentence for 33-year-old Sanjay Roy will be announced on Monday and could range from life imprisonment to the death penalty.

Police discovered the bloodied body of the woman at the city's R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital's seminar hall on Aug. 9. An autopsy later found the victim had been strangled and confirmed sexual assault.

Roy was arrested a day after the crime. He has since consistently maintained his innocence and told the court that he was not guilty.

The case was initially being investigated by the Kolkata police but later the court handed over the probe to federal investigators after state government officers were accused of mishandling the investigation.

After the incident, doctors and medical students across India held protests and rallies demanding justice and better security for them. Thousands of women across the country also protested on the streets, demanding justice for the victim as they participated in "Reclaim The Night" marches. Some protesters called for the perpetrator of the crime to be given the death penalty.

Asia

Anger from the rape and murder of a female doctor in India is now political

The incident highlighted rising sexual violence against women in India and prompted India's Supreme Court to set up a national task force that suggested ways to enhance safety measures in government hospitals.

Many cases of crimes against women go unreported in India due to the stigma surrounding sexual violence, as well as a lack of faith in the police. Women's rights activists say the problem is particularly acute in rural areas, where the community sometimes shames victims of sexual assault and families worry about their social standing.

Still, the number of recorded rape cases in the country has increased. In 2022, police recorded 31,516 reports of rape — a 20% jump from 2021, according to the National Crime Records Bureau.

In 2012, the gang rape and killing of a 23-year-old student on a New Delhi bus galvanized massive protests across India. It inspired lawmakers to order harsher penalties for such crimes, as well as the creation of fast-track courts dedicated to rape cases. The government also introduced the death penalty for repeat offenders.

The rape law amended in 2013 also criminalized stalking and voyeurism and lowered the age at which a person can be tried as an adult from 18 to 16.

(source: npr.org)

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

UP: Couple gets death penalty for killing 6 members of family, including parents, in 2020----Ajay Singh and wife Rupa Singh along with their minor son murdered 6 members of their family in 2020.

A Lucknow court on Friday sentenced a married couple to death for murdering 6 members of their family including parents in 2020.

The additional district judge sentenced Ajay Singh and his wife Rupa Singh for killing 6 members of their family, including brother Arun Singh, his wife, 2 children, and parents.

According to a Live Hindustan report, the couple was convicted on December 16 last year.

What was the incident?

According to the report, Ajay Singh's sister Durgawati alias Guddi Singh had complained to Banthra Police Station in May 2020.

She alleged that her brother Ajay Singh, his wife Rupa Singh and their juvenile son had conspired and murdered their father Amar Singh, mother Ram Dulari, brother Arun Singh, sister-in-law Ram Sakhi, nephew Saurabh and niece Sarika using a chopper and also shot them.

(source: hindustantimes.com)

**********

Death sentence to 45-year-old man within 54 days of rape, murder of minor girl----The verdict came a day before the Sealdah court was scheduled to announce its judgment on the rape and the murder of a junior doctor at R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9

A court in Hooghly district on Friday awarded the death penalty to a 45-year-old man for raping and murdering a minor girl in November last year.

Chandraprova Chakraborty, the additional district and session judge of the Pocso court at Chinsurah, pronounced the sentence within 54 days of the crime. Ashok Singh had raped and murdered the 5-year-old after luring her with a packet of potato chips on November 24.

The verdict came a day before the Sealdah court was scheduled to announce its judgment on the rape and the murder of a junior doctor at R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9.

Chief minister Mamata Banerjee and her nephew Abhishek hailed Hooghly rural district police and its chief Kamanasish Sen for the speedy investigation and for ensuring the capital punishment for the accused within a very short time.

"I thank Hooghly Rural District Police for their swift action and thorough probe that ensured speedy trial and conviction in 54 days. My heart goes to the family, and I share their pain and longing," Mamata wrote on her X handle on Friday evening.

"A rapist has no place in our world. All of us together will make it a safer place for our children through stringent law, social reforms, effective and unforgiving administration. No such crime will go unpunished," she added.

The Hooghly verdict is being billed as the fastest conviction of a rapist as the police ensured the completion of the investigation within 13 days and the capital punishment of the accused within 54 days by producing the necessary evidence in the court.

Earlier, in the case of the rape and murder of a Class IV student at Kultali of South 24-Parganas, a court at Baruipur had awarded the death penalty to the accused within 62 days of the crime.

Abhishek Banerjee, the national general secretary of the Trinamool Congres, hailed Bengal's "zero-tolerance approach to crimes against women".

"This serves as a powerful reminder that while others may offer mere lip service to NARI SURAKSHA, Bengal stands firm with a ZERO TOLERANCE APPROACH to crimes against women," the Diamond Harbour MP wrote on X on Friday.

The leader of the Opposition, Suvendu Adhikari, welcomed the judgment but said the capital punishment awarded by lower courts was commuted by higher courts because of the apathy of public prosecutors. He gave the example of how those accused in the Kamduni rape and murder incident were relieved of the gallows because of the alleged state's failure.

"Madam CM, why are you so eager to promote the Death Sentence so early. Let's wait for at least 10 years to see if the convict is actually hanged or acquitted just like the convicts of Kamduni Case," Adhikari wrote on his X handle.

A senior police officer said the punishment was ensured within a very short period as the Hooghly rural police had not delayed the investigation and had taken all possible steps to file the chargesheet as soon as possible.

"Good teamwork brought great relief to us. We ensured capital punishment for the rape and murder accused in a very short period.... I thank both the judiciary and our public prosecutors who helped us deliver justice for the parents of the minor girl," said Hooghly rural police SP Kamansish Sen, who personally monitored the case from Day One.

The mother of the girl said she was happy with the judgment that came on the birthday of her 5-year-old daughter.

"We kept our faith in the police who finally ensured punishment for the culprit who brutalised my daughter. My daughter loved to have cake that I could not offer her this year," said the mother.

(source: telegraphindia.com)

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

A look at death penalty in India as RG Kar victim’s parents seek capital punishment----The parents of the victim of the RG Kar Medical College and Hospital rape and murder case seek nothing less than a death sentence as the Sealdah court in Kolkata is expected to pronounce the verdict today.

The parents have demanded capital punishment for prime accused Sanjoy Roy, according to a News18 report.

The body of a 31-year-old female trainee doctor was recovered from the seminar hall of the government-run RG Kar Medical College and Hospital in Kolkata in August 2024, which led to widespread protests across the country.

The chargesheet in the case was filed on October 7 before the Additional District and Sessions Court, Sealdah.

“5 months or 5 years later, it does not matter. We are living for justice. We have nothing left in our lives now. We hope Roy will get capital punishment. There was biological evidence that Roy was present at the spot, but we don’t believe that he was the only one,” the parents told News18 ahead of the verdict.

The death penalty is the highest degree of punishment in India. It is executed by hanging the convict by the neck. It is given to the person who has committed heinous crimes like terrorism or murder.

In India, the death penalty can also be awarded under various Sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which came into force on July 1, 2024.

Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (Section 302 of IPC) states that whoever commits murder shall be punished with the death penalty or life imprisonment.

The death penalty can also be given under Section 71 of BNS (Section 376E of IPC), which deals with the punishment for repeat offenders of sexual crimes like rape, who have been convicted earlier for similar offences.

The death penalty is also awarded under Section 147 of BNS (Section 121) if a person is found guilty of waging war against the Government of India.

Also called capital punishment, the death penalty has always been a subject of contention, with strong opinions from both abolitionists and supporters.

Convicts on death row in India

According to a report, ‘Death Penalty in India: Annual Statistics Report,’ by Project 39A of the National Law University, Delhi, 120 death sentences were awarded by trial courts in 2023 across the country, while 561 inmates remained on execution row by the end of the year.

This number marks the highest number of convicts on death row in nearly 2 decades.

“Only one death sentence was confirmed in 2023, making it the year with the lowest rate of death sentence confirmations by the appellate courts since 2000,” the report added.

The year also saw an increase of 45.71% in the death row population since 2015.

The research also added that trial courts in the country imposed 120 death sentences in 2023, with the highest number of verdicts from Uttar Pradesh at 33, followed by 12 in Jharkhand; 11 each in Gujarat, Haryana and Madhya Pradesh; and 10 in West Bengal.

Uttar Pradesh has the highest number of convicts on death row at 119.

In 2023, the most death penalties by trial courts were handed out in murder cases involving sexual offences (64 of a total of 120 verdicts).

The report added that 541 and 490 inmates were on death row at the end of the years of 2022 and 2021. As many as 167 death sentences were awarded in 2022 and 146 in 2021.

The report also stated that in March 2023, the President of India rejected one mercy appeal in a case involving kidnapping, rape and murder of a minor in 2008.

It also added that as many as 488 death row prisoners were awaiting judgment from the High Courts.

(source: cnbctv18.com)

KUWAIT:

Kuwait Court Upholds Death Sentence for Bedoun in Patricide Case

(see: https://www.arabtimesonline.com/news/kuwait-court-upholds-death-sentence-for-bedoun-in-patricide-case/)

IRAN----executions

Saman Davoudian and Rashid Zeynabi Executed in Khorramabad

The execution of 2 prisoners, Saman Davoudian and Rashid Zeynabi, who had been sentenced to death (qisas) for "premeditated murder," was carried out at Khorramabad Central Prison (Parsilon).

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO), the death sentences of 2 men were carried out at Khorramabad Central Prison on the morning of Thursday, January 16. The two prisoners have been identified as Saman Davoudian, 31, and Rashid Zeynabi, 36, both sentenced to qisas for "premeditated murder."

A knowledgeable source told Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO), “Saman Davoudian was from Aligudarz and belonged to the Hassanvand tribe of Lorestan. He was arrested 6 years ago on murder charges and sentenced to death. Rashid Zeynabi was from Borujerd, arrested 4 years ago on murder charges, and sentenced to qisas. He was the father of 1 child.”

The execution of these 2 prisoners has not been reported by Iranian domestic media or official sources at the time of writing this report.

The lack of classification for murder charges in Iran means that all murder cases, regardless of the circumstances, severity, or motive, can result in a death sentence.

**********

Mohammad Amiri Executed in Khorramabad; Number of Executions in Khorramabad Rises to 4

Earlier, the execution of 2 other prisoners on the same day had been reported.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO), the death sentence of Mohammad Amiri-Bahravand, a 32-year-old man, was carried out at Khorramabad Central Prison on Thursday, January 16. He had been sentenced to qisas for "premeditated murder."

A knowledgeable source told Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO), “Mohammad Amiri-Bahravand was from Lorestan and had been arrested 4 years ago on charges of murdering a relative. He was sentenced to qisas.”

With the execution of Mohammad Amiri-Bahravand, the total number of executions on Thursday at Khorramabad Central Prison has risen to 3.

The execution of this prisoner has not been announced by Iranian domestic media or official sources at the time of writing this report.

The lack of classification for murder charges in Iran means that all murder cases, regardless of circumstances, severity, or motive, can result in a death sentence.

(source for all: iranhr.net)

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

Iranian-Kurdish rapper once on death row arrives in Germany

A Kurdish rapper in Iran who was handed a death sentence for supporting nationwide protests in 2022 has arrived in Germany after being freed from jail, a non-governmental organization announced on Friday.

Saman Yasin is a Kurdish rapper from Iran’s western Kermanshah province who recorded songs protesting Iran’s socioeconomic conditions. He was arrested in October 2022 and transferred to Tehran’s notorious Evin prison during the Jin Jiyan Azadi (Women Life Freedom) protests.

He was convicted on charges of moharebeh, or enmity against God, which carries the death penalty in Iran, as well as “assembly and collusion with the intention of acting against the security of the country.”

His death sentence was overturned in October 2023.

Duzen Tekkal, a German-Yazidi journalist and founder of Hawar Help NGO, said on X that Yasin had managed to leave Iran and make his way to Germany.

“While in captivity, Saman was subjected to torture and even mock executions by prison guards… During at least one previous hospital stay, he was injected with an unknown liquid that caused him to lose consciousness for 24 hours,” Tekkal said.

Yasin was admitted to a psychiatric clinic at least twice while in captivity, according to Tekkal.

Amnesty International says that Iran has used the death penalty disproportionately to suppress minority groups like Kurds and Baluchis who were active in the 2022 protests that erupted after the death of young Kurdish woman Zhina (Mahsa) Amini while in the custody of Iran’s morality police for wearing a lax hijab.

(source: rudaw.net)

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

Prisoner executed for murder-related charges in Sanandaj Central Prison

Seyvan Yaghoubi, a prisoner sentenced to death on charges of “premeditated murder”, was executed in Sanandaj Central Prison on 16 January.

Yaghoubi, a 36-year-old man from the village of Bisaran in Sarvabad, Kurdistan Province, was sentenced to death about 3 years ago.

The Kurdistan Human Rights Network (KHRN) has learned that the prisoner was transferred to solitary confinement on 15 January in preparation for the execution, and was executed at dawn the following day.

(source: kurdistanhumanrightsnetwork.org)

JANUARY 17, 2025:

TEXAS----impending execution

Christians argue death penalty in controversial North Texas murder case----Steven Nelson is on death row for murdering a pastor, but Christians are split on who gets the final say—God or the court?

Back in 2011, Steven Lawayne Nelson was charged with smothering 38-year-old Rev. Clint Dobson to death and beating 64-year-old church administrator Judy Elliott during a botched robbery at NorthPointe Baptist Church in Arlington.

The following year, Nelson, then 25, was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death. After denials on appeals, a Fort Worth-area judge last summer signed a warrant that detailed how Nelson would be put to death by lethal injection Feb. 2, 2025, at Texas State Penitentiary in Huntsville.

Christians in Texas and across the country have since appeared divided on whether the religion supports executions. Some believers say the Bible instructs them to spare Nelson's life, citing the phrase "turning the other cheek" from Jesus' Sermon on the Mount in the gospel of Matthew. Others argue they can find biblical passages supporting the punishment and the killing of Nelson, who is now 37 and identifies as Christian.

Jeff Hood, a priest in the Old Catholic Church in Little Rock, Arkansas, is Nelson's spiritual adviser. He's joined anti-death penalty activists nationwide to plead for mercy from the state of Texas, per reporting by Texas Monthly. Hood has asked Northpointe Baptist's parent church, First Baptist Church in Arlington, to help him in his quest to get Nelson off death row.

Hood, who belongs to the Old Catholic Church that broke from Roman Catholicism, delivered an impassioned pitch during a November press conference outside of First Baptist. "You can't love your neighbor as yourself and kill them at the same time," Hood asserted. Nelson's then-fiancee, Noa Dubois, also appeared at the event to ask state courts to stop the execution. Nelson wasn't a "monster," she added, but a victim of childhood abuse. Dubois married Nelson on Dec. 4, 2024.

However, Texas Monthly reported that First Baptist leaders aren't showing any interest in hearing Hood out; they haven't responded to his phone calls or emails and refuse to answer the door when he comes around.

When the court sentenced Nelson to death 13 years ago, First Baptist pastor Dennis Wiles issued a statement backing the decision: "We have asked God for the truth to be known and for justice to be served," the statement read. "As the Bible teaches us, God has placed the civil authority in our midst so that innocent people can live in freedom without fear and so that guilty offenders can be appropriately punished. . . . We now can confidently say that justice has been served and we will support the decision of this court."

Prosecutors have argued that Nelson committed the crimes alone. Nelson and his lawyers maintain that he was the lookout during a robbery at Northpointe Baptist while two other men went inside the church, stole Elliot's keys and killed Dobson. (The two other men have alibis.) Associates testified that Nelson laughed at news reports of the crimes, used stolen credit cards to buy clothes, and sold Dobson's laptop.

Dobson reportedly belonged to the Arlington Clergy and Police Partnership, a group of clergy serving in chaplain roles for the Arlington Police Department. After his death, the partnership established the Clint Dobson Memorial Award. Elliot, who suffered physical and mental harm in the beating, died in 2024.

The split among Christians in this case mirrors protests to either support or object to the execution of Robert Roberson, an autistic Texas man convicted of killing his 2-year-old daughter in 2002. Roberson's execution was scheduled for Oct. 17, 2024, one of the first executions in a case that included evidence of shaken baby syndrome. Christian Democrats and Republicans, along with clergy from various denominations, then protested the execution which was delayed after a temporary restraining order was issued. The Texas Supreme Court ruled that a new execution date could be set within 90 days of the original date.

(source: chron.com) ***************

Austin man faces death penalty in Saline County murder case

A suspect who is accused of fatally stabbing an East End couple in May 2024 is now facing the death penalty.

Brittany and David Taylor were found discovered in their home on Jolie Place on May 4, following a 911 call from the couple’s child. By the next morning, Bryan Reed, 37, had been named as a person of interest and arrested on charges of 1st degree murder, 1st degree battery and endangering the welfare of a minor.

Reed’s charges have now been upgraded: two counts of capital murder, for which Arkansas is now seeking the death penalty; aggravated residential burglary; and aggravated assault on a family or household member.

“Nothing is unique from any other case where capital murder is alleged and the state is seeking the death penalty. Lots of court dates and lots of hearings,” said Reed’s attorney, Lee Deken Short. “There is a lot of work being done on both sides. That’s one of the things as a defense attorney in a possible death penalty case you have to do, is learn about their history. It takes quite a bit of time. That’s where we’re at right now.”

Prosecuting attorney Chris Walton was unable to provide details about the case, but he did say that the prosecution is going through a similar process as the defense.

“At this time, both sides are going through the discovery,” he said.

Short said that so far, Reed has cooperated with the defense team.

“I think like anyone he would like the process to be quicker, but unfortunately that’s just not the system. He seems committed to providing us all the information that we need and his family seems committed to assisting us as well,” Short said.

Reed’s review date, during which both sides will be assessed on progress to see if they are ready to proceed to the next step, is on Feb. 3 at the Saline County Courthouse.

(source: bentoncourier.com)

FLORIDA:

Florida Supreme Court affirms denial of Wayne Doty's request for postconviction relief----In today’s regular release of opinions, the Florida Supreme Court issued a per curiam decision in Doty v. State, affirming the circuit court's denial of Doty's motion for postconviction relief.

Wayne Doty was sentenced to death for crimes that occurred in 2011. The original jury recommended death by a vote of 10-2. At a second penalty phase in 2018, the jury unanimously recommended death. Doty’s sentence became final in November 2021.

In this case, Doty appealed (1) the circuit court’s summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief, (2) the postconviction court’s denial of his request for a PET scan and MRI, and (3) the postconviction court’s order denying his request to interview a venire member. In his motion for postconviction relief, Doty raised 8 claims.

3 claims related to relative culpability, including one alleging that violations of Brady and Giglio involving the testimony of Senior Inspector Kevin Snow and Dr. Hamilton during the second penalty phase “changed the facts of the case to such a degree that the most culpable defendant was improperly changed” from Wells to Doty. Two claims related to Doty’s assertion that under Indiana v. Edwards, 554 U.S. 164 (2008), he should not have been allowed to represent himself. Another claim alleged that the judge from the second penalty phase impermissibly questioned potential jurors outside Doty’s presence. Doty also raised a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel—both “initial trial counsel” back in 2011, as well as standby counsel during the second penalty phase. Finally, Doty alleged cumulative error.

The Court unanimously affirmed the postconviction court’s ruling, denying relief on all claims. Justice Labarga concurred in result to reiterate his disagreement with the Court’s abandoning its precedent on relative culpability.

The full decision can be accessed on the Court’s website here, at: https://supremecourt.flcourts.gov/content/download/2445993/opinion/Opinion_SC2023-1123.pdf

(source: fladeathpenalty@substack.com)

ALABAMA----impending execution

Alabama death row inmate set for execution is in wrong state, lawsuit argues

An Alabama death row inmate, who is set to die next month by nitrogen gas, is arguing that he shouldn’t be in Alabama’s custody at all.

Demetrius Terrence Frazier, 52, is set to die sometime within a 30-hour-period starting at midnight on Thursday, Feb. 6 and ending at 6 a.m. on Feb. 7. Frazier is set to die by inhaling pure nitrogen gas.

But on Thursday afternoon, Frazier’s attorneys with the Federal Public Defenders filed a lawsuit saying Frazier—who admitted to the slaying of Pauline Brown in Jefferson County over 30 years ago—shouldn’t be in the state’s prison system.

Frazier was arrested in Michigan in 1992, when he was 19 years old. Shortly after his arrest, he admitted to killing Brown in 1991.

Frazier was convicted in Michigan for a string of crimes. In 1995, Michigan authorities brought Frazier to Alabama, where he was tried, found guilty and sentenced to death. The Michigan authorities then brought him back north.

Frazier remained locked up in Michigan’s penal system, serving 3 life sentences for 1993 convictions of murder, criminal sexual conduct, and robbery in the state. But in 2011, then-Govs. Robert Bentley of Alabama and Rick Snyder of Michigan created an executive agreement to transfer Frazier to Alabama, according to documents signed by the governors and attached to the new lawsuit.

No explanation was provided in the documents as to why the transfer was initiated.

Michigan does not have the death penalty, and its state constitution banned it in 1963.

Now Frazier’s attorneys are arguing that executive agreement was unlawful and void, and asking the inmate to be sent back to Michigan.

One of Frazier’s lawyers, Spencer Hahn, wrote in November to the current Michigan governor, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, arguing that Frazier is in the legal custody of the Michigan Department of Corrections and being executed by Alabama would violate the northern state’s constitution. Hahn asked the governor to do “everything in (her) power to ensure he is returned to the physical custody of MDOC.”

“You have a legal duty to preserve, protect, and defend the Michigan Constitution and Mr. Frazier requests you do so,” Hahn wrote.

Whitmer’s office had not responded to a request for comment from AL.com prior to publication of this story.

Whitmer, according to the lawsuit, responded to Hahn and said “she would not act on his request at that time.”

In the Thursday lawsuit, Frazier’s lawyers argued his “Michigan life sentences have not been commuted and he has not been pardoned.” And the northern state’s law says, according to Frazier’s lawyers, that an inmate like Frazier “shall not be eligible for custodial incarceration outside a state correctional facility or a county jail.”

The Michigan Department of Corrections lists Frazier as a prisoner on their online database, with his current status listed as prisoner and his location listed as Alabama.

Alabama’s anti-DEI law violates Constitution, UA professors and UAB students claim in lawsuitJan. 14, 2025, 12:57 p.m.

According to an inmate classification summary from the Alabama Department of Corrections, Frazier is an inmate “borrowed from Michigan.”

Frazier also has a separate federal lawsuit being waged in the Middle District of Alabama over the Alabama’s nitrogen execution protocol. A judge has set a hearing for that case for Jan. 28.

(source: al.com)

MISSISSIPPI:

AG asks state Supreme Court to set Crawford execution date again

Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch has renewed her efforts to have the state’s highest court to set an execution date for death row inmate Charles Ray Crawford.

In court documents filed earlier this month, Fitch’s office argued Crawford’s latest petition for post-conviction relief is “meritless” and that the appeal of a separate rape case should not stop the Mississippi Supreme Court from setting an execution date. In their reply, Crawford’s defense team argued the PCR petition is valid because it brings up a new argument. The defense also wrote that if the rape case is reversed, it could affect the constitutionality of his death sentence.

Crawford, who will turn 59 next month, admitted he kidnapped, raped and killed Northeast Mississippi Community College coed Kristy Ray, 20, more than 30 years ago. A jury found him guilty of capital murder and sentenced him to death in April 1994, but legal wrangling over the years has kept him out of the death chamber at the Mississippi State Penitentiary at Parchman.

He ran out of appeals on the capital murder conviction in 2014, so Crawford appealed a separate rape conviction, which the state used in arguing for the death penalty. The federal appeal was initially denied in U.S. District Court but the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to hear the case. The New Orleans-based court heard oral arguments in October 2023. The 15 judges deliberated more than 13 months before issuing an 11-4 ruling denying the appeal.

The same day the appeal was denied, Nov. 22, 2024, Fitch filed a motion asking the Mississippi Supreme Court to set an execution date. About three weeks later, the defense filed the PCR motion, arguing that the defense team in the original capital murder trial erred when they admitted Crawford’s guilt to support an insanity plea, a strategy Crawford had opposed.

Defense attorneys with the Mississippi Office of Capital Post-Conviction Counsel disagree, arguing that “Crawford’s attorneys admitted his guilt and pursued an unwanted insanity defense over Crawford’s repeated objections before and during” the capital murder trial. They say disregarding the PCR claim would create a federal due process issue.

The state holds the position that the latest PCR is “barred and meritless” and “can be viewed as merely a delay tactic.”

“His 3rd PCR motion filed 30 years (after the 1994 conviction and death sentence) is clearly outside the time allowed by law,” and should not be considered, the attorney general argues.

The 2nd issue is whether the state should wait for all appeals of the rape case to be exhausted before setting an execution date. In arguing for the death penalty 3 decades ago, the state used the rape as a prior violent felony aggravator. The defense argues if the rape conviction is overturned, the death penalty should be due overturned as well.

The state says Crawford’s death sentence has been final for a decade when the U.S. Supreme Court reused to hear it in 2014.

“Even if Crawford has not yet exhausted all his federal remedies in the rape case,” the Attorney General’s Office argues in the new documents, “that does not mean that he has any available remedy for further challenging his judgement of death.”

The state further argues that since separate aggravated assault conviction was also used to argue for death, even if the rape is reversed, the death penalty would still be valid.

“The state is wrong on both counts,” the defense writes.

When the attorney general’s office first asked for an execution date in 2014, the Mississippi Supreme Court denied the motion because the appeal of the rape conviction was still pending. The defense notes the appeal is still pending, waiting to see if the U.S. Supreme Court will hear it.

The defense also cites a Supreme Court ruling where the reversal of any one of the aggravators requires a re-examination of the death sentence.

(source: djournal.com)

LOUISIANA:

Grand jury to hear ‘Mr. Prada’ murder case----Thomas is charged with 1st-degree murder in the brutal killing of Baton Rouge therapist Dr. Nick Abraham.

The murder case against Terryon Thomas, known on social media as “Mr. Prada,” will go before a grand jury in East Baton Rouge Parish Thursday, January 16.

Thomas is charged with 1st-degree murder in the brutal killing of Baton Rouge therapist Dr. Nick Abraham.

The grand jury will be presented details about the case to determine if there is enough evidence to hand down an indictment.

An indictment would clear the way for the case to proceed to trial and determine his guilt or innocence. If ultimately found guilty of 1st-degree murder, Thomas could face the death penalty.

Investigators allege the September 2024 murder happened at an apartment complex off Essen Lane in Baton Rouge.

The East Baton Rouge Sheriff’s Department says Dr. Abraham, age 69, was last seen alive entering Thomas’ apartment.

Abraham’s body was later found in Tangipahoa Parish wrapped in a tarp and left alongside a highway.

A search of Thomas’s apartment turned up several sharp objects, weapons and large amounts of the doctor’s blood, investigators said.Thomas, who fled Baton Rouge after nearly being captured by police, was later apprehended in Dallas, Texas.

(source: WAFB news)

KENTUCKY:

Death penalty still on the table for man accused of killing Ky. deputy

A judge denied a motion to remove the death penalty as an option against Steven Sheangshang.

He’s charged in the shooting death of Scott County deputy Caleb Conley.

In December, the judge heard a motion the death penalty should be taken off the table if Sheangshang is convicted due to mental illness.

According to court records, the judge ruled the defense failed to show a documented history of a serious mental illness.

Sheangshang was recently moved to the Fayette County Detention Center due to security concerns.

Court records show he has a status hearing scheduled for Friday morning.

(source: WKYT news)

MISSOURI:

Rich Hill man could face death penalty after drug deal turned homicide

A Rich Hill man has been charged with murder and could face the death penalty after he shot a man he attempted to buy drugs from in his own home.

Bates County, Missouri, Circuit Court records filed on Thursday, Jan. 16, have revealed that David A. Stewart, 40, of Rich Hill, has been charged with murder in connection to a November shooting.

A probable cause statement filed by the Bates County Sheriff’s Office indicated that on Nov. 14, emergency crews were called to a Rich Hill home with reports of a death. When they arrived, they found a man with an apparent gunshot wound to his head. The death appeared to be a suicide but was classified as suspicious.

The victim was later identified as Jerry McLay, 48, of Rich Hill.

A security camera upstairs showed that just before 12:25 p.m. on Nov. 13, McLay returned to his home in his truck with a gold SUV known to belong to Stewart following him. About 5 minutes later, Stewart’s vehicle left eastward and then returned approximately 20 minutes later.

Less than 5 minutes after Stewart returned, investigators said the security camera recorded the sound of a gunshot 2 minutes before the SUV left for the final time. There was no other traffic recorded on the camera until around 9:20 a.m. on Nov. 14 when the mail carrier arrived. The package delivered was still there when deputies arrived.

Over the last 2 months, the Sheriff’s Office said around 10 search warrants were executed in connection to the case. Investigators noted that a search of McLay’s phone revealed messages with Stewart on the day of the murder.

A search warrant was executed at Stewart’s home on Jan. 13, in connection to firearms stolen and pawned in Nevada. After his arrest, he was interviewed on Wednesday, Jan. 15, during which he admitted he had been at McLay’s house on the day of the shooting for a drug deal.

“This is the reason why we investigate all deaths like they are homicides until we can prove different. This case has been very labor-intensive over the last 2 months. I am proud of the determination and dedication of all my staff and all those agencies who worked on this case as a team,” Sheriff Chad Anderson said. “Our sympathy goes out to the family of Jerry McLay. We are far from Justice being served until this case is adjudicated through the court system. We are still following up on leads and ask that if you have any information regarding this homicide please reach out and contact a Detective at 660-679-3232"

As a result, Stewart was taken into custody and charged with murder in the 2st degree and armed criminal action. If convicted he could face either the death penalty or life in prison.

As of Thursday, Stewart remains behind bars in the Vernon County Jail on a $1 million bond. A hearing has not yet been scheduled in this case.

(source: KCTV news)

NEBRASKA:

Ending death penalty, rule changes among legislative proposals

Proposals ranging from abolishing the death penalty to changing legislative rules were among ideas under discussion by state lawmakers Thursday.

Among the measures that have been introduced in this legislative session is a proposal by Sen. Terrell McKinney to abolish the death penalty. The abolition would take the form of a state constitutional amendment. That means, unlike a law, it could not be changed by the Legislature.

But it also means that it would have to be approved by voters. In 2016, after the Legislature voted to repeal the death penalty, Nebraskans voted 61% to 39% to reinstate it. McKinney was asked what’s changed.

“Society has changed. We went through a pandemic," he said. "I think, why not try it to see what could happen? The conversation around a lot of things has changed and I think we should try to at least see what the voters think."

The proposal would need support from 30 senators in the 49-member Legislature to be placed on next year’s ballot.

(source: nebraskapublicmedia.org)

ARIZONA:

Death Sentence for Rapist and Murderer of 14-Year-Old Girl----Decade-long case ends with ultimate punishment.

Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell has announced that Alex Anthony Madrid (DOB: 02/1982) has received the death penalty for the murder of 14-year-old Claudia Lucero, a freshman at Westwood High School. Today’s death sentence is in addition to the 91 years he already received for kidnapping and other non-capital charges related to the same assault.

On December 5, 2013, Claudia Lucero’s family filed a missing person report with the Mesa Police Department after Claudia didn’t come home from school. The following day, her body was found in a dumpster two miles from her Mesa home. According to the medical examiner’s report, Claudia died of strangulation, and her body showed signs of sexual assault. Semen collected from the victim’s body matched Alex Madrid’s DNA profile. Madrid was subsequently arrested.

In October, a jury found Madrid guilty of the following:

One count of First-Degree Murder, a Class One Felony

One count of Kidnapping, a Class Two Felony

One count of Sexual Conduct with a Minor, a Class Two Felony and Dangerous Crime Against Children

One count of Burglary in the Second Degree, a Class Three Felony

One count of Abandonment or Concealment of a Dead Body, a Class Five Felony

One count of Unlawful Flight from Law Enforcement, a Class Six Felony.

“After waiting 11 painful years to see Claudia’s murderer be held accountable, the day has finally arrived for Claudia’s mother and the Lucero family. I have had the privilege of being with them and saw firsthand the pain they’ve been through,” said County Attorney Rachel Mitchell. “I commend our prosecutors Christopher Sammons and Jennifer Carper, and the Mesa Police Department for their unwavering dedication for more than a decade to getting justice for Claudia and her family.”

(source: maricopacountyattorney.org)

***********

Lawmaker: Ask Arizona voters to OK firing squads for executions

Calling the current system inhumane, a state lawmaker wants to give voters the chance to replace the lethal injection method of executing condemned inmates with a firing squad.

The proposal by Rep. Alexander Kolodin follows a preliminary report last year by a special “death penalty commissioner’’ hired by Gov. Katie Hobbs to look into how the state executes criminals by lethal injection. Retired federal magistrate David Duncan reported there is “no humane way’’ to kill someone using that method.

Duncan said if the state is to continue with executions, the most humane method is the firing squad.

So now Kolodin, a Scottsdale Republican, wants to put a measure on the 2026 ballot asking voters to approve the change.

Kolodin said he believes in the death penalty, but that the record shows the current method — approved by voters in 1992 — is filled with problems.

“I don’t know what it is. But lethal injection just seems to be incredibly complicated where it always leads to these delays and these hiccups and whatever,” he said.

Kolodin said just preparing for an execution itself creates issues.

The state has had trouble in prior years even obtaining the lethal chemicals.

In 2015, for example, Arizona ordered 1,000 vials of sodium thiopental, a muscle relaxant used in the process, from a supplier in India, after a domestic manufacturer refused to sell it for executions.

That came despite warning from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that such importation would be illegal. It ended up with Customs and Border Protection seizing the drugs at Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix.

The state now uses a different drug, but it also presents issues: It not only has to be compounded but has a limited shelf life.

Then there’s the process itself.

Hobbs appointed Duncan after what she said was a series of “botched’’ executions, including reports by witnesses of pain and bleeding as state employees had trouble inserting the necessary intravenous line.

In the interim, Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes said she would not seek any warrants of execution until the report was done.

Duncan, in his preliminary report, said the state should consider using a firing squad because it results in near-instantaneous death. He said it “does overcome the impediments to lethal injection from unavailability of material and skilled personnel."

The Democratic governor subsequently fired Duncan, saying that suggestion was beyond the purview of what he was supposed to study. But Kolodin said it’s time to take the report seriously.

“We actually know what’s always humane and always seems to work properly, which is the firing squad,’’ he said. “And this has actually been known for a long time. I’m surprised that Hobbs fired the guy for saying so because people who have at least a reasonable amount of exposure to criminal law already know this."

He said using that method could end some of the litigation about the method of execution that can result in death penalty cases dragging out for years, if not decades.

“We would not have all of these freakin’ legal hang-ups in terms of delivering capital punishment," Kololdin said.

“And it would be far more humane,’’ he continued. “So why don’t we just do it that way?"

Hobbs has not discussed her personal feelings about the death penalty and the method it is administered in Arizona. And in fact, what she thinks is legally irrelevant.

First, the method of execution is spelled out in the Arizona Constitution. It can be changed only with voter approval, a process that bypasses the governor.

Second, the governor plays no role in the process. Instead, that rests with the attorney general, who has to be the one to ask the Arizona Supreme Court for a warrant to execute someone.

A spokesman for Mayes said she opposes what Kolodin is proposing.

“The attorney general supports the current protocol,’’ said her press aid Richie Taylor of the use of lethal injection.

He also said Mayes has reviewed a report by Ryan Thornell, director of the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Release. He said he has reviewed and revamped the execution process.

Based on that, Richie said, Mayes is convinced that the agency, going forward, can use lethal injection in a humane fashion to execute inmates.

That 1st execution could occur on March 18 if the Supreme Court grants Mayes’ request to execute Aaron Gunches. He has been on death row since pleading guilty to the 2022 murder and kidnapping of Ted Price, his girlfriend’s ex-husband.

Arizona initially executed inmates by hanging. That was changed to the use of lethal gas in 1934.

The last person put to death that way was in 1992. Donald Eugene Hardin took more than 10 minutes to die after cyanide pellets were dropped into sulfuric acid in a bowl beneath his chair. Witnesses said Harding gasped, shuddering and tried to make obscene gestures with both of his hands strapped down.

That led to the voter-approved constitutional amendment later that year, replacing it with lethal injection. Kolodin proposes further amending that provision to make firing squad the only legal method.

Several states authorize firing squads, including Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah. Idaho became the latest state added to the list in 2023, though its law says that is authorized only if the state cannot obtain the drugs needed for lethal injection.

Kolodin’s proposal, based on his assessment of what is humane, contains no such condition.

(source: tucson.com)

USA:

Drug used in federal executions under Trump may cause ‘unnecessary pain and suffering,’ Garland says

The Justice Department is rescinding its protocol for federal executions that allowed for single-drug lethal injections with pentobarbital, after a government review raised concerns about the potential for “unnecessary pain and suffering.”

Attorney General Merrick Garland’s order to withdraw the lethal injection policy comes days before President-elect Donald Trump, who is expected to restart federal executions, is set to return to the White House. Trump’s Justice Department could reinstate the protocol to use pentobarbital as a single drug to carry out executions.

Indiana resumed executions last month following a 15-year pause after then-governor Eric Holcomb announced in June that the state had acquired pentobarbital.

Once the death penalty resumed, 49-year-old Joseph Corcoran of Fort Wayne was the 1st inmate on death row to be executed by a lethal dose of the drug on Dec. 18.

A moratorium on federal executions has been in place since 2021, and only 3 defendants remain on federal death row after Democratic President Joe Biden converted 37 of their sentences to life in prison.

The governments’ findings about the potential risks of unnecessary pain could have broader implications. Legal challenges have been brought in several states where pentobarbital is the primary method of execution, potentially leading to reviews of execution protocols nationwide.

The department’s review of scientific and medical research found there remains “significant uncertainty about whether the use of pentobarbital as a single drug lethal injection causes unnecessary pain and suffering,” according to a report published Wednesday.

“In the face of such uncertainty, the Department should err on the side of treating individuals humanely and avoiding unnecessary pain and suffering,” Garland wrote in his memo ordering the director of the Bureau of Prisons to rescind the protocol. Garland said it should not be reinstated ”unless and until that uncertainty is resolved."

The report from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy noted that the Food and Drug Administration “has not reviewed or approved of the use of pentobarbital in high doses or for the purpose of causing death.”

The pentobarbital protocol was adopted by Bill Barr, attorney general during Trump’s 1st term, to replace a 3-drug mix used in the 2000s, the last time federal executions were carried out before Trump was in office. The Trump administration carried out 13 federal executions, more than under any president in modern history.

Under Trump, the Justice Department also sanitized the accounts of the executions carried out in 2020 and 2021. Government lawyers said the process of dying by lethal injection was like falling asleep and they called gurneys “beds” and final breaths “snores.” But accounts by reporters from The Associated Press and other media witnesses described how prisoners’ stomachs rolled, shook and shuddered as the pentobarbital took effect during executions at the U.S. penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana. The AP witnessed every federal execution.

Questions about whether inmates’ midsections trembled, as media witnesses reported, were a focus of litigation throughout the series of executions. Inmates’ lawyers argued it proved pentobarbital caused flash pulmonary edema, in which fluid rushes through quickly disintegrating membranes into lungs and airways, causing pain akin to being suffocated or drowned. The Constitution prohibits execution methods that are “cruel and unusual.”

Several states also have policies allowing single-drug executions with pentobarbital. Tennessee announced last month that it would use the single drug to carry out executions that have been halted since 2022. The state’s previous protocol called for three different drugs to be used in a series.

Shawn Nolan, a lawyer who has represented federal death row inmates, said in a statement that the report makes clear that “no jurisdiction, federal or state, should continue using this cruel, unconstitutional execution method.”

The chief of the federal public defender’s habeas unit in Nashville, Tennessee, Kelley Henry, said the review was “a damning condemnation of the use of pentobarbital to poison prisoners to death” and that Tennessee “should rescind its execution protocol immediately.”

Biden’s decision commute the sentences of most death row inmates spared the lives of people convicted in killings, including those of police and military officers, people on federal land and those involved in deadly bank robberies or drug deals, as well as the killings of guards or prisoners in federal facilities.

The decision leaves three federal inmates to face execution. They are Dylann Roof, who carried out the 2015 racist slayings of 9 Black members of Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina; 2013 Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev; and Robert Bowers, who fatally shot 11 congregants at Pittsburgh’s Tree of life Synagogue in 2018, the deadliest antisemitic attack in U.S history.

(sources: Associated Press & WPTA news)

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

Department of Justice Withdraws Federal Execution Protocol and Keeps Moratorium on Executions in Place

Methods of Execution Lethal Injection Federal Death Penalty US Federal Government

3 1/2 years after announc­ing its inves­ti­ga­tion into the fed­er­al death penal­ty pro­to­col, Attorney General Merrick Garland announced on January 15, 2025 that the Department of Justice (DOJ) is rescind­ing the fed­er­al government’s sin­gle-drug pen­to­bar­bi­tal lethal injec­tion pro­to­col. The DOJ’s deci­sion was based on what AG Garland called ?“sig­nif­i­cant uncer­tain­ty” about whether exe­cu­tions by pen­to­bar­bi­tal caused unnec­es­sary pain and suf­fer­ing. The DOJ’s state­ment expressed a desire to "err on the side of treat­ing indi­vid­u­als humane­ly.” It fol­lowed an exten­sive set of con­sul­ta­tions with fed­er­al and state author­i­ties, med­ical experts, expe­ri­enced cap­i­tal coun­sel, and oth­er stake­hold­ers. Federal Execution reg­u­la­tions were not changed. Single-drug lethal injec­tion is autho­rized by statute in 20 of the 27 states where the death penal­ty is legal.

“Because it can­not be said with rea­son­able con­fi­dence that the cur­rent exe­cu­tion pro­to­col 'not only afford[s] the rights guar­an­teed by the Constitution and laws of the United States’ but 'also treat[s] indi­vid­u­als [being exe­cut­ed] fair­ly and humanely,’…that pro­to­col should be rescind­ed, and not rein­stat­ed unless and until that uncer­tain­ty is resolved.”

Attorney General Merrick Garland in a let­ter to the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons

On July 1, 2021, Attorney General Merrick Garland ordered the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy to coor­di­nate a review of the fed­er­al exe­cu­tion pro­to­col adden­dum and the Department’s reg­u­la­tions regard­ing fed­er­al exe­cu­tions. The review includ­ed an exam­i­na­tion of autop­sies of exe­cut­ed indi­vid­u­als, reports of med­ical experts, and accounts of exe­cu­tion wit­ness­es. The review con­clud­ed that there is "sig­nif­i­cant uncer­tain­ty about whether pen­to­bar­bi­tal can be used in a sin­gle-drug exe­cu­tion pro­to­col with­out caus­ing unnec­es­sary pain and suf­fer­ing.” Specifically, the DOJ not­ed: (1) there is a risk that indi­vid­u­als who are exe­cut­ed with pen­to­bar­bi­tal will expe­ri­ence flash (acute) pul­monary ede­ma; (2) pen­to­bar­bi­tal may not ade­quate­ly anes­thetize the indi­vid­ual before they expe­ri­ence pul­monary ede­ma; and that (3) flash pul­monary ede­ma cre­ates a sen­sa­tion experts liken to being water­board­ed. The first Trump Administration used this pro­to­col to exe­cute 13 peo­ple in 2020 and 2021.

A review of state statutes by DPI indi­cates that 20 of the 27 states that still allow the death penal­ty have statutes that allow sin­gle-drug lethal injec­tion (Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, and most recent­ly, Tennessee). The remain­ing s7 death-penal­ty states specif­i­cal­ly autho­rize 3-drug pro­to­cols (Alabama, Mississippi, Montana, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Utah, and Wyoming). Autopsies con­duct­ed on dozens of indi­vid­u­als exe­cut­ed by fed­er­al and state gov­ern­ments in recent years using 1-drug pen­to­bar­bi­tal have revealed evi­dence of flash pul­monary ede­ma.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

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

Bloodbath?----Federal Death Row Abolishes Lethal Injection. What Does It Mean for Trump’s Killing Spree?; During the last years of the last Trump presidency, 13 people were executed using such a method

Just days before President-elect Donald Trump is set to take office, the Department of Justice has announced its decision to withdraw the federal government’s lethal injection protocol on the grounds that it causes unconstitutional suffering.

“Because it cannot be said with reasonable confidence that the current execution protocol ‘not only afford[s] the rights guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of the United States’ but ‘also treat[s] individuals [being executed] fairly and humanely,’ … that protocol should be rescinded, and not reinstated unless and until that uncertainty is resolved,” Attorney General Merrick Garland wrote in a Jan. 15 letter to the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

Garland initially began a review — which was completed this month — of the process in July 2021. That review took into account autopsies of inmates executed via 1-drug pentobarbital execution protocols and found that those people experienced flash pulmonary edema, which feels akin to being waterboarded. It also found that the drug failed to properly anesthetize the executed person, so that they felt intense pain upon dying. During the last years of the last Trump presidency, 13 people were executed using such a method — what criminal justice reformers and defense attorneys that many of them still refer to as a historic “bloodbath.”

“The DOJ’s review has confirmed what medical experts have said for many years: pentobarbital causes excruciating pain when used to carry out executions,” says defense lawyer Shawn Nolan; 11 states currently use this method. “No jurisdiction, federal or state, should continue using this cruel, unconstitutional execution method. We also hope the federal government, as well as state authorities, take into the traumatic impact executions have on correctional staff.”

Currently, federal death row only houses 3 people — Robert Bowers, Dylann Roof, and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev — after President Biden commuted the sentences of 37 inmates right before Christmas. But the question becomes: what methods will the next Trump administration adopt going forward? In recent years, sources close to the next president say he’s considering bringing back the firing squad, hangings, and, potentially, group executions — despite public opinion of the death penalty being at an all-time nadir.

“The ‘killing spree,’ as you call it, is returning,” a Trump adviser tells Rolling Stone. “There’s a new sheriff in town, and he doesn’t think murderers and rapists should get off easy.”

(source: rollingstone.com)

GLOBAL:

Monitoring conditions of detention of prisoners sentenced to death: a new practical guide for NHRIs and NPMs

ECPM has released a new practical guide for National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) and National Preventive Mechanisms (NPMs) on ‘Monitoring the conditions of detention of prisoners sentenced to death’. Available in French and English, its digital publication is accompanied by an online presentation organised on Tuesday 28 January 2025 by Julia Bourbon-Fernandez, Head of ECPM's MENA desk, alongside Carole Berrih and Vicki Prais, co-authors of the guide.

Registration page to attend the online presentation of the guide | Tuesday 28 January 2025, 11:00 AM (zoom)----see: https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/TqC5Z9hdRP2lw4UO5Hn7lA#/registration

Prisoners sentenced to death are likely to be among the most marginalised groups in prisons worldwide. They are often forgotten, neglected and ignored by prison authorities, and may be held in unfavourable and inhumane conditions that fail to comply with international human rights standards. They find themselves in a specific situation, often characterised by a high level of psychological uncertainty about their future. Prisoners sentenced to death face deprivation and hardship in their daily lives in prison, which has an impact on their physical and mental well-being.

Monitoring bodies (at national, regional and international level) play a central role in ensuring that persons deprived of their liberty are held in an environment that respects their dignity and other human rights. These bodies can also play an important role in driving change in policies and practices.

In light of these specific challenges, ECPM has developed this guide to assist NPMs and NHRIs in their work to assess detention conditions of prisoners sentenced to death. This practical guide supports and complements ECPM’s work on the detention conditions of individuals sentenced to death and its wider advocacy and awareness-raising activities.

This guide was developed in collaboration with Morocco’s National Human Rights Council (Conseil national des droits de l’Homme – CNDH).

Who can use this guide ?

This guide is primarily aimed at NPMs and NHRIs. It provides tools, practical guidance and advice for assessing the specific conditions of prisoners sentenced to death, in accordance with international and regional standards. It aims to facilitate the monitoring process and to ensure that the rights of prisoners sentenced to death are at the centre of the efforts of detention monitoring bodies. Beyond NHRIs and NPMs, other actors may be interested in this guide, including academics, international organisations, civil society actors and donors.

Although closely linked to the work of detention monitoring, this guide does not address issues related to the monitoring of conditions of deprivation of liberty in immigration centres or police custody facilities.

How to use this guide ?

Designed as a practical handbook for detention monitoring bodies, this guide should be considered a “living instrument”. Through general information, checklists, questions, innovative practices and advice from practitioners, this guide sets out the various stages involved in analysing the conditions of detention of women and men sentenced to death and helps to identify the systemic risk factors affecting this group. It can be used as a tool in various contexts, but its application and implementation will depend on each situation.

Ideally, this guide should not be read in isolation or as a “standalone” document, but as a complement to and in coordination with other general guides for assessing detention conditions

How was this guide developed ?

This guide is based on a literature review of existing resources on prisoners sentenced to death, including international and regional resources from intergovernmental organisations, NGOs working to combat the death penalty, press articles and other open sources.

The information contained in this guide, such as monitoring techniques, practical procedures and guiding principles of monitoring bodies, is internationally recognised and implemented by many monitoring bodies. This guide has been inspired by other practical guides, particularly those dealing more broadly with the monitoring of places of deprivation of liberty, such as those developed by the Association for the prevention of torture (APT) and by The Advocates for Human Rights. The information presented here has been adapted to the needs of prisoners sentenced to death.

(source: ecpm.org)

GAMBIA:

Man, sentenced to Death Sentence

Justice Ebrima Jaiteh of Banjul High Court on Monday sentenced one Famara Kanteh to death for killing one Omar Ceesay alia ”Bahoreh” on January 9, 2020, at Manjai Kunda in the Kanifing Municipality, The Gambia.

According to the court record the convict, Famara Kanteh pleaded not guilty to a single count of murder contrary to section 187 of the Criminal Code, Cap 10:01, Volume 3, Laws of The Gambia.

Justice Jaiteh, however, in the verdict recalled that the convict, Famara, a cocoanut seller, was a neighbour of the deceased, Omar Ceesay, who requested a green teapot locally known as ‘attaya pot’ to brew his tea. He added that the deceased at the time refused to give it to him with an excuse that Famara should wait until he was done.

He further stated that after taking the ”attaya pot” from the deceased, Famara (convict) failed to return it on time, adding that such aroused a bitter argument between Famara and Omar which made the convict angry, and started insulting the deceased’s mother and threatened to kill him.

According to the prosecution witnesses, on the following day after a heated argument between Famara and the deceased (Omar), they were separated, stating that Famara claimed to have sustained an injury which made him seek medical treatment thereafter.

”On the following day, the accused again approached the deceased and started insulting him. He attacked him and stabbed him on his right leg, he fell down and subsequently died as a result of profuse bleeding,” state witnesses affirmed in court.

Justice Jaiteh in passing a sentence against Famara said that the law on murder, contrary to section 187 of the Criminal Code, under which Famara Kanteh stands accused stated that: ”any person who of malice aforethought causes the death of another person by unlawful act or omission is guilty of murder”.

He stressed that the offence of murder is one of the heinous and abominable crimes of the land, adding that when committed, the culprit is charged, tried, and found guilty upon all the available evidence presented before the court including his/her defence thereto attracts death sentence against the accused.

Justice Jaiteh at that juncture stated that before passing sentence, he found it expedient to state that section 18 (2) of the 1997 Constitution of The Gambia permits the imposition and execution of the death penalty, however, he stated that upon assumption of office President Adama Barrow in 2018 placed a moratorium on the death penalty in honour of The Gambia’s commitments under the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR.

Justice Jaiteh cited that section 18 (3) of the Constitution (supra) provides that the National Assembly shall within ten (10) years from the date of coming into force of the 1997 Constitution review the desirability or otherwise of the total abolition of the death penalty in The Gambia.

”Time has elapsed but the said provision has not been reviewed by the National Assembly and as such this Court’s hands are tied. Therefore, having found the convict Famara Kanteh guilty of the murder of Omar Ceesay brutally, cowardly and considering that this court does not have any discretion under section 188 of the Criminal Code, Cap 10:01, Volume 3, Laws of The Gambia, the convict Famara Kanteh is hereby sentenced to death under section 250 of the Criminal Procedure Code, Cap 11:01, Volume 3, Laws of The Gambia,” Justice Jaiteh ruled.

(source: voicegambia.com)

DR CONGO:

DR Congo's death penalty plan for gang youth sparks division----In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, authorities have opted to implement the death penalty as a response to the surge in urban banditry by young gangs. While most religious leaders and human rights defenders contest this measure, others support it.

Should the Congolese justice system execute the death sentences pronounced against hundreds of young delinquents locally referred to as “Kuluna”? The question has caused a rift, even among the country’s religious leaders – though the vast majority firmly say “no.”

After numerous police crackdowns that led to the arrests of hundreds of alleged offenders, “more than 300 Kuluna have been convicted, including 127 sentenced to death,” explained Democratic Republic of the Congo’s Justice Minister Constant Mutamba during a press briefing January 6. These death sentences come after the Congolese government lifted a moratorium on executions in March last year, a ban that had been in place since 2003. The government justified its decision by citing a security crisis characterized by frequent knife attacks and foreign troop incursions, which authorities claim are sometimes aided by Congolese collaborators.

'A step backward in defending life'

Public opinion in Congolese society remains divided over these death sentences. The National Episcopal Conference of Congo (CENCO), which has consistently opposed the death penalty, maintains its stance. Speaking to La Croix International, Monsignor Donatien Nshole, CENCO’s secretary general, reiterated the church’s dismay, noting that after 20 years of suspension, there had been hope for outright abolition of capital punishment.

Further reading: End the death penalty: choose life

“With the lifting of the moratorium on the death penalty, our country is taking a step backward in defending life,” insisted Monsignor Nshole, citing CENCO’s message, “Thou shall not kill.” He emphasized, “Driven by the conviction that all life is sacred and human dignity must be protected, we categorically reject the use of the death penalty.” For the DRC’s episcopate, the purpose of punishing crime must include the offender’s rehabilitation.

The same position is echoed by the Church of Christ in Congo (ECC), a Protestant denomination. “Every person has the right to life,” stated Pastor Eric Senga, ECC’s spokesperson and secretary general. “Article 16 of the constitution upholds the sanctity of human life and obliges the state to respect and protect it,” he said. Instead of “taking shortcuts and deliberately violating the constitution,” the pastor urged Congolese authorities to explore alternative ways of managing the Kuluna. The president of the Islamic community in Congo, Sheikh Abdallah Mangala, is aligned with this view.

'Fruitless debate'

Conversely, revivalist churches—Pentecostal-inspired Christian denominations prominent in the DRC—seem more inclined to support the death penalty’s implementation. “The damage caused by the Kuluna is immense, and they seem to believe they are above the law,” said Ejiba Yamapia, the legal representative of these churches. “Eliminating traitors within the army and curbing terrorism and urban banditry is critical for our nation. If the judiciary deems this penalty appropriate, who am I to oppose it?”

Further reading: Pope Francis: Death penalty is contrary to the Gospel

Justice Minister Constant Mutamba, for his part, dismissed the controversy as a “fruitless debate.” “We are a nation under attack, a country at war. Some of our compatriots, including those in high-ranking positions, have betrayed the nation. In this context, the priority is not pleasing human rights NGOs but addressing national security imperatives,” he told the press.

Although the death row inmates have been transferred from Kinshasa to the high-security Angenga prison in the northwest, no executions have been carried out to date. However, responding to reports that more than 170 people under sentence of death were transferred to Angenga prison, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director for East and Southern Africa, Sarah Jackson, said: “The announcement of these prison transfers is absolutely appalling. We fear imminent mass executions by the authorities amid a lack of reliable information about the status of people sentenced to death.”

(source: international.la-croix.com)

MALAWI:

Malawi Reaffirms Commitment to Abolish Death Penalty, Says Justice Minister

(see: https://www.nyasatimes.com/malawi-reaffirms-commitment-to-abolish-death-penalty-says-justice-minister/)

ZIMBABWE:

Zimbabwe abolishes death penalty: A life-line for 62 people on death row

The President of Zimbabwe, Emmerson Mnangagwa, signed into law the Death Penalty Abolition Act (2024) effectively removing the death penalty sentence in the penal code. Although the Southern Africa country has not carried out death sentences for nearly 2 decades, 62 people who had been sentenced to death will be resentenced or have their death sentences commuted.

Zimbabwe’s cabinet approved the Death Penalty Abolition bill in February 2024 following the approval of the bill by the National Assembly and the Senate. The private member’s bill had been introduced by opposition member of parliament, Edwin Mushoriwa, in 2023. It received backing from both sides of the political divide and was also a result of a “sustained collaboration between government and civil society for almost a decade,” noted The Death Penalty Project, a legal-action charitable trust.

“I am delighted that the Death Penalty Abolition Act has become law. Removing the death penalty sends a message to all that our nation should respect and uphold the value of human dignity. This achievement is a move in the right direction,” said Hon. Mushoriwa.

The Executive Director of Amnesty International Zimbabwe chapter, Lucia Masuka, applauded the country’s decision to abolish the death penalty for all crimes, but regretted the possibility of its reinstatement during a state of emergency under the Defence Act.

“This is not just great progress for Zimbabwe, it is also a beacon of hope for the abolitionist movement in the region, and a major milestone in the global collective pursuit for an end to this ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment,” said Masuka.

Zimbabwe has become the 27th country in Africa to scrap the death penalty for all crimes. Other countries that fully abolished the death penalty include the Central African Republic, Chad, Zambia, Sierra Leone, Rwanda, South Africa and Ivory Coast. 18 African countries such as Malawi, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania still retain the death penalty in their penal code but have not executed people in over 2 decades.

The European Union, while applauding the abolition of the death penalty, also urged Zimbabwe to remove the provision for the temporary reintroduction of the death penalty during a state of public emergency.

More than 100 prisoners executed in the Democratic Republic of Congo

Barely a week after Zimbabwe enacted the Death Abolition Act, the Democratic Republic of Congo announced that it had executed 102 inmates in December 2024 with another 70 more set to be executed later. Some of the death row inmates, aged between 18 and 35 years, had been convicted for being part of the “urban bandits” locally known as Kulunas that the government had said were terrorizing residents.

It is suspected that about 40 of the executed prisoners had been arrested and sentenced for organizing and participating in a failed coup in DRC in May 2024 while another 13 Congolese soldiers had been found guilty of desertion.

Congo had abolished the death sentence in 1981, but it reinstated it in 2006 under the Military Penal Code. Most of the executed prisoners were tried in military court. Congo has been under pressure to act against urban crime but human rights defenders, including Amnesty International Deputy Regional Director for East and Southern Africa, Sarah Jackson, have questioned the imminent mass executions “amid a lack of reliable information about the status of people sentenced to death.”

“President Felix Tshidekedi must immediately, publicly and unambiguously halt any plans to execute people in Angenga prison or elsewhere. Parliament should adopt a moratorium on executions, pending full abolition of the death penalty,” added Jackson.

Similarly, Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture in DRC (ACAT-DRC) has been lobbying and pushing back against what they describe as a cruel, inhuman and degrading sentence. The association has also been fighting against abusive pre-trial detention by distributing food and medicine to prisoners who are held in overcrowded and unhygienic facilities.

In an interview with Prison Insider, ACAT-DRC’s Michel Kalemba said incarceration often leads to abandonment by families. “Prisoners sentenced to death, even more so than other prisoners, are often incarcerated in isolated prisons because those are the ones with advanced security systems,” said Kalemba.

Advocates of the abolition of the death penalty have argued that execution is an extreme punishment especially in Africa where convicts are kept in dehumanising conditions while waiting to be executed which is a “type of torture.”

Kalemba said that a number of senior government officers in the current DRC regime were once convicted by the Kinshasa military court for participating in the insurrectionary movement. They were saved by a moratorium that had set aside the death penalty but have now lifted the moratorium.

“If they do not take advantage of being in power to abolish the death penalty, the day may come when - as it did in 2003 - the moratorium is lifted and people will be executed. As direct abolition seems unlikely at this time, an interim solution would be to establish a de jure moratorium, which would be more secure. This would save people from getting up every morning and thinking, 'The executions will start up again today',” said Kalemba.

(source: Christian Daily International)

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

Prisons Close Hanging Gallows, Turn Them To Museum

The Zimbabwe Prisons and Correctional Service (ZPCS) has repurposed the infamous hanging gallows at Chikurubi Maximum Security Prison into a museum and radio broadcasting studios. This transformation marks a significant step following Zimbabwe’s recent abolition of the death penalty.

The gallows at Chikurubi were originally used in the 1970s to execute offenders.

The last execution at the facility took place in 1979 before the execution chamber was relocated to Harare Central Prison, where the death penalty was last carried out in 2005.

Since then, Zimbabwe had maintained an unofficial moratorium on executions, culminating in the formal abolition of capital punishment under President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s administration.

Brian Moyo, Director of Corporate Chaplaincy Services for Bridging the Gap Foundation, hailed the initiative, saying, “This transformation signifies a genuine commitment to respecting United Nations human rights practices. We applaud the government and ZPCS for leading this reform, and we thank President Mnangagwa for championing the abolition of the death penalty.”

The project has drawn technical support from the Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe (BAZ).

Matthias Chakanyuka, BAZ’s technical director, noted the site’s suitability for broadcasting purposes: “After our assessment, we determined that this place is ideal for a radio station, with all necessary facilities in place.”

Chikurubi’s Officer in Charge, Chief Superintendent Alfred Machingauta, described the psychological toll of the death penalty, saying, “I have interacted with individuals who were on death row, and their experiences were profoundly traumatic. Transforming these facilities gives new meaning to a place once associated with despair.”

ZPCS Commissioner General Moses Chihobvu highlighted the practical benefits of the conversion: “This initiative allows us to generate revenue through museum visits while also symbolizing our alignment with modern penal reforms and the abolition of the death penalty.”

Zimbabwe’s death penalty history is intertwined with its colonial and post-independence legal systems.

Executions were a common feature during the 1970s and early 1980s, primarily targeting political dissidents and convicted criminals.

However, no executions have been carried out since 2005, owing to growing advocacy against the practice and a lack of a hangman willing to perform the grim task.

The abolition of the death penalty is a milestone in Zimbabwe’s justice system.

President Mnangagwa, himself a former death row inmate during the liberation struggle, has been a vocal advocate against capital punishment.

His government’s approval of the bill to abolish the death penalty demonstrates Zimbabwe’s commitment to aligning with global human rights standards.

Located on the outskirts of Harare, Chikurubi Maximum Security Prison houses over 2,000 inmates, with the majority serving long sentences.

Known for its harsh conditions, the prison has been at the center of various reform initiatives aimed at improving the rehabilitation of inmates.

The conversion of the gallows into a museum and radio studios is expected to contribute to educational and awareness efforts while generating revenue for the ZPCS.

It also provides an opportunity for the public to engage with the history of Zimbabwe’s justice system, learn about the abolition of the death penalty, and explore avenues for promoting restorative justice.

This transformation represents a symbolic closure of a dark chapter in Zimbabwe’s penal history, paving the way for a new era centered on rehabilitation and human rights.

(source: zimeye.net)

NIGER:

2 Sisters Sentenced To Death For Killing, Burning Woman's Body In Niger State

2 siblings, Amina Aliyu and Aishat Mohammed Aliyu, have been sentenced to death in Niger State for the brutal killing of Hafsat Aliyu, a married woman.

Zainab, the youngest sibling, received life imprisonment due to her age at the time of the crime.

The incident occurred in March 2021 at the family residence in Barkin Saleh, Minna.

Amina and Aishat were convicted of murdering Hafsat, who was both Amina's co-wife and the wife of Alhaji Muhammad Sani.

According to the prosecution, Aishat attacked Hafsat with a pestle before setting her body on fire in the kitchen.

The trial began at Minna Chief Magistrate Court Number One before being transferred to the High Court.

During the proceedings, which spanned 3 years, 4 witnesses testified, including Sani, who recounted how Amina killed Hafsat.

Justice Balkisu Gambo Yusuf of Minna High Court 7 confirmed the prosecution had proven its case beyond doubt, stating, “The punishment for culpable homicide under Section 221 of the Penal Code is death.”

Peter Omale, the defence counsel, urged leniency for Zainab, highlighting her status as a minor at the time of the crime.

Justice Yusuf concurred, ruling, “As of 2021, when the offence was committed, the ACJA excluded anyone below 18 from facing the death penalty.”

(source: saharareporters.com)

INDIA:

Haryana Man Who Carried Disabled Brother's Severed Head In A Bag Sentenced To Death----According to the deceased's sister, the younger brother's torso was found in a pool of blood on the house's verandah, with his neck slashed by a sharp weapon. His head was missing, and the CCTV DVR was also gone

The court of District and Sessions Judge Deepak Agarwal has sentenced the man guilty of brutally slitting the throat of his disabled brother to death in Tohana in Haryana’s Fatehabad district. The court deemed this case the rarest of rare cases and imposed the death penalty.

On June 18, 2020, the accused allegedly murdered his brother following a property dispute. The accused is reported to have slit his brother’s throat and subsequently fled the scene with the victim’s head concealed in a bag. Law enforcement officials later apprehended the accused and recovered the severed head.

The police registered a case against the accused under Sections 457, 506, 302, and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court sentenced him to death and imposed a fine of Rs 20,000 under Section 302. Additionally, the court sentenced him to 5 years’ imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5,000 for each of the offences under Sections 457, 506, and 201.

District Deputy Public Prosecutor Arun Kumar represented the prosecution in this case. District Public Prosecutor Devendra Mittal stated that Sushma Devi, the deceased’s sister and wife of Manjit Singh, a resident of Sangrur, Punjab, filed the case.

Sushma stated that her brother Ashok had killed his younger brother Deepak by cutting his neck with a sharp weapon due to enmity. In her police complaint, Sushma said she has six siblings, of whom two brothers have died.

Her younger brother, 40-year-old Deepak, had been disabled for 3 to 4 years and was divorced. He lived with his mother near Guga Medi in Tohana. His mother registered her house in Deepak’s name 10 years ago. Sushma stated that Deepak’s brother, Ashok, held a grudge against him for this and had spoken about killing him several times.

According to the complainant, Surjeet, of village Dangra, was her brother Deepak’s brother-in-law. On June 18 2020, Surjeet called Deepak and told him that on June 17, while he (Surjeet) was at Deepak’s house, Ashok came and sat in front of him and drank alcohol. Afterwards, Surjeet returned to his village.

(source: news18.com)

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

Man given death penalty for killing disabled younger brother

“Ashok Kumar was disgruntled after my mother had transferred the plot to Deepak. My elder brother Ashok decapitated Deepak and roamed with the latter’s severed head for one day and later threw it in a canal.”

A local court in Haryana’s Fatehabad on Thursday sentenced a man to death for brutally killing his brother with disability over property dispute in 2020. District and sessions judge Deepak Aggarwal convicted Ashok Kumar under sections 302 (murder), 457, 506 (criminal intimidation) and 201 of the Indian penal code. He awarded death penalty to the accused besides imposing a fine of ?35,000 on him.

Aggarwal termed this incident as ‘rare of the rarest’. According to police, the case dates back to June 18, 2020 when the victim’s sister Sushma had lodged a police complaint against her elder brother Ashok Kumar for allegedly killing their younger brother Deepak, who was disabled. She told the police that Deepak was living with their mother in Fatehabad’s Tohana.

“Ashok Kumar was disgruntled after my mother had transferred the plot to Deepak. My elder brother Ashok decapitated Deepak and roamed with the latter’s severed head for one day and later threw it in a canal. We got information from Deepak’s friend that Ashok had killed him. We spotted Deepak’s body in a pool of blood and informed the police,” she added.

According to police, the accused Ashok Kumar had fled with ?60,000 in cash, two mobile phones and a gold bracelet of Deepak. Later, he informed all the relatives that he had killed his brother, and he had even recorded the audio calls.

(source: hindustantimes.com)

SINGAPORE:

End harassment and intimidation of Transformative Justice Collective----Statement By the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty

We, the undersigned 11 organizations, condemn in the strongest terms the latest restrictions imposed by the Singapore government on activists from the Transformative Justice Collective (TJC), a civil society group actively opposing the death penalty and advocating for human rights in the country.

These orders are an undue restriction on the right to freedom of expression, create a climate of fear and have the effect of stifling debates on the human rights concerns surrounding the use of the death penalty in Singapore. The Government must immediately bring an end to the reprehensible campaign of harassment and intimidation against the human rights defenders from TJC, withdraw the direction orders and ensure the protection of the right to freedom of expression for all.

The Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) orders

On 20 December 2024, the Ministry of Digital Development and Information of Singapore issued an order declaring TJC’s website and social media accounts as “Declared Online Locations” (DOL(s)) under Section 32 of the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act 2019 (POFMA). The order requires TJC to carry a notice on all their online platforms alerting viewers that the platform “had communicated multiple falsehoods, and that viewers should exercise caution when accessing it for information”. It further directs that TJC not be allowed to receive any financial or other material benefit from operating the online platforms; and that individuals and companies must not provide financial support to TJC’s online platforms “if they know or have reasons to believe that by doing so, they will promote the communication of falsehoods in Singapore on these platforms.”1 These restrictions are to be in place until 20 December 2026.

The 20 December order is the latest in a series of orders issued under the POFMA against TJC in recent weeks. Out of the 27 orders that the Singapore Ministry of Home Affairs issued under the POFMA since 1 July 2024, seven have directly targeted activists from TJC or TJC itself, all relating to posts against the death penalty. An additional order issued on 9 October targeted the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network, a regional civil society network of which TJC is a member. A further order was issued against the online publication The Online Citizen on 16 December, in relation to statements the media outlet had made critical of POFMA orders against the TJC. Additionally, the authorities issued seven Targeted Correction Directions against social media companies, including LinkedIn, META, Tik Tok and X, to request them to issue correcting posts in relation to statements made on the use of the death penalty in Singapore.

Continued intimidation and climate of fear targeting death penalty and other criticism We are gravely concerned at the continued intimidation and climate of fear that the Singapore authorities have created around anti-death penalty activism and other human rights concerns through POFMA orders. Issued by the Minister for Home Affairs, the Minister for Digital Development and Information and the POFMA Office, the POFMA orders targeting those who criticize the handling of death penalty cases in Singapore have the broader effect of curtailing the right to freedom of expression and human rights activism in the country and of preventing fully informed debates on the ongoing use of the death penalty and other matters of public policy.

The latest order, in particular, will have a significant impact on the operations of TJC as it threatens the organization’s ability to operate freely and carry out their human rights work safely within the country. The order on 20 December designating TJC’s website and social media accounts as “Declared Online Locations” has a 2-year operational period and the effect of further limiting scrutiny on the practice of the death penalty and human rights concerns in Singapore.

Scrutiny of the use of the death penalty in Singapore is already restricted due to the limited transparency that surrounds it; and other restrictions on the dissemination of information and public gatherings in Singapore. Human rights defenders should be free to discuss and advocate new human rights ideas and principles without fear of reprisals. We demand that the harassment of activists ceases at once.

Disproportionate restrictions to the right to freedom of expression

The authorities must act in accordance with international human rights law and standards including by upholding the right to freedom of expression for those who are critical of government policies. Restrictions to the right to freedom of expression must be clearly and narrowly defined in law and conform to the strict tests of necessity and proportionality to a legitimate aim2. POFMA orders are disproportionate to any possible perceived threat and provide the government unfettered powers to stifle criticism, in violation of the right to freedom of expression. Such orders have targeted human rights activists and other critics of the government, including members of TJC. The orders have created a widespread climate of fear around any attempt to debate or criticize any aspect of Singapore’s use of the death penalty or other areas of government policy.

We call on the government of Singapore to cease the use of POFMA orders to stifle criticism of the authorities; to revoke the orders already issued against human rights defenders, civil society organizations and online platforms; and to take the necessary steps to abolish POFMA and other laws that unduly restrict the right to freedom of expression.

This statement is co-signed by:

Amnesty International

Australians Against Capital Punishment

Capital Punishment Justice Project

CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation

ECPM – Together Against the Death Penalty

Harm Reduction International

Human Rights Watch

International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders

Julian Wagner Memorial Fund

World Coalition Against the Death Penalty

World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders

--Ministry of Digital Development and Information of Singapore, Operators of Transformative Justice Collective’s online platforms prohibited from receiving financial benefit due to history of communicating multiple falsehoods, 20 December 2024

--UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), General Comment No. 34, 12 September 2011, UN Doc. CCPR/C/GC/34, para 22

(source: worldcoalition.org)

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

New Leader Retains Cruel Death Penalty Policy----Crackdown on Government Critics, Peaceful Protesters

Singapore Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, who took office in May 2024, has maintained the city-state’s harsh death penalty policies and used repressive laws to crack down on government critics and peaceful protesters, Human Rights Watch said today in its World Report 2025. The authorities have harassed and prosecuted anti-death penalty activists, sought new laws to limit appeals of death sentences, and imposed executions for drug-related offenses in violation of international law.

For the 546-page world report, in its 35th edition, Human Rights Watch reviewed human rights practices in more than 100 countries. In much of the world, Executive Director Tirana Hassan writes in her introductory essay, governments cracked down and wrongfully arrested and imprisoned political opponents, activists, and journalists. Armed groups and government forces unlawfully killed civilians, drove many from their homes, and blocked access to humanitarian aid. In many of the more than 70 national elections in 2024, authoritarian leaders gained ground with their discriminatory rhetoric and policies.

“Singapore Prime Minister Lawrence Wong’s government has given no sign that it will change its policy on executions, bucking the global trend to abolish capital punishment,” said Bryony Lau, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Singapore’s business and trade partners should publicly and privately raise concerns about the city-state’s continued use of the death penalty, and urge the government to urgently impose a moratorium on the inherently cruel practice.”

On June 27 the authorities investigated, then later charged, three activists under the Public Order Act for organizing a public demonstration on February 2, in which supporters of Palestine delivered letters to the then-prime minister urging him to cut ties with Israel.

On October 4, the authorities executed Mohamed Azwan bin Bohari for drug trafficking, despite his pending appeal, along with 30 other prisoners, and ignoring a call from the United Nations Human Rights Office to halt the execution. The Central Narcotics Bureau of Singapore stated that 4 people, including Azwan, were executed for drug-related offenses in 2024. On February 28, the authorities also executed Ahmed Salim, 35, a Bangladeshi national, for murder.

The government invoked the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act against anti-death penalty activists, including Transformative Justice Collective and Kokila Annamalai, for their reporting on Azwan’s execution, requiring them to post government-determined “corrections” notices. Both had long been targets of government harassment and intimidation.

The Singaporean government should halt the executions of the country’s death-row prisoners and impose a moratorium on the use of the death penalty for drug-related crimes and other offenses, as a critical step toward abolition, Human Rights Watch said. The authorities should also stop using the country’s repressive legislation to infringe upon people’s basic rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly.

(source: Human Rights Watch)

TAIWAN:

1st execution since 2020 a shameful setback

Responding to the 1st execution carried out by the Taiwanese authorities since April 2020, E-Ling Chiu, the Director of Amnesty International Taiwan, said:

“This execution is a shocking and cruel development. Taiwan’s Minister of Justice, with a strike of his pen, has undone several years of hard-fought progress towards the abolition of the death penalty. This is a huge setback for human rights in Taiwan.

“The execution of Huang Linkai was carried out in violation of constitutional and international safeguards on the use of the death penalty, and while an appeal filed by his lawyer to stop the execution was still pending before the courts. This renders his execution unlawful and arbitrary, in violation of the right to life.

“It is horrifying that the execution was carried out at a few hours’ notice, without the possibility of any last family visits. The death penalty is a cruel and irreversible punishment and the Taiwanese authorities have implemented it in a way that shows an utter disregard for the rights of those affected.

“We urge Taiwan’s government to immediately halt any plans to carry out further executions. Instead, the authorities must immediately change course and establish an official moratorium on executions as the first critical step towards abolition of the death penalty”.

Background

On 16 January, Cheng Ming-chien, Taiwan’s Minister of Justice, announced that he had authorized the execution of Huang Linkai, who was convicted of rape and two murders in 2017.

On 20 September 2024, the Constitutional Court of Taiwan issued its decision on a challenge on the constitutionality of the death penalty, recognizing the fundamental flaws that have characterized its use. The Court strengthened human rights protections while finding the death penalty constitutional for serious offences such as murder. It gave the authorities two years to amend the law in order to comply with the judgment.

As part of its decision, the Court ruled that the death penalty be imposed only following unanimous judgments and for such information to be disclosed by the prosecution. At the time that the execution of Huang Linkai was scheduled, his lawyer had not received information confirming that the decision in his case had been unanimous. Additionally, a pre-sentencing social investigation had not been conducted in his case, raising questions on whether the standard set by the Constitutional Court that cases have to be examined through the most stringent process was followed.

Huang Linkai’s lawyer filed an appeal on the evening of 16 January asking for these concerns to be reviewed, but the authorities proceeded with the execution.

Safeguard No.8 of the UN Safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, adopted by two UN bodies in 1984 without a vote, states that “[c]apital punishment shall not be carried out pending any appeal or other recourse procedure or other proceeding relating to pardon or commutation of the sentence”.

The last execution in Taiwan was carried out on 1 April 2020. As of 31 December 2023, 37 out of the 45 people held on death row had their death sentences finalized and were at risk of execution. As of today, 113 countries have abolished the death penalty for all crimes and 144 are abolitionist in law or practice.

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception regardless of the nature or circumstances of the crime; guilt, innocence or other characteristics of the individual; or the method used by the state to carry out the execution.

(source: Amnesty International)

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

Taiwan executes death row inmate convicted in 2013 murders

Taiwan on Thursday executed a death row inmate convicted in a 2013 double murder, marking the country's 1st execution since President Lai Ching-te took office last year.

Minister of Justice Cheng Ming-chien signed the order, and the death sentence was carried out by shooting Thursday night at the Taipei Detention Center, the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) said.

The 32-year-old inmate Huang Lin-kai was sentenced to death in 2017 for the October 1, 2013 rape and murder of his ex-girlfriend and murder of her mother in New Taipei's Sanchong District.

Huang, an active duty soldier at the time, said during his trial that he had strangled his victims to death due to dissatisfaction that arose after his ex-girlfriend pressed him to return money he owed her.

Currently, there are 36 inmates on death row in Taiwan, and the last execution before Huang's was on April 1, 2020.

It was Taiwan's 1st execution of a prisoner since President Lai Ching-te of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) took office in May of last year.

Prior to that, 2 death row inmates were executed during the 2 terms (2016-2024) of then President Tsai Ing-wen of the DPP.

During the 2008-2016 administration of President Ma Ying-jeou of the Kuomintang, 33 inmates were executed.

Last year, Taiwan's Constitutional Court issued a ruling finding the death penalty constitutional only for "the most serious" premeditated murders and crimes leading to death, severely limiting its use in the future.

The National Human Rights Commission, which calls for the abolition of the death penalty, on Thursday night expressed deep regret over the MOJ's decision to carry out the execution.

Meanwhile, the opposition Kuomintang (KMT), voiced support for capital punishment, saying that carrying out the death penalty in accordance with the law is the unshirkable responsibility of the government.

It upholds judicial fairness and provides justice to the victims and their families, the KMT said.

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

DPP government condemned for executing death row inmate

Human rights groups have condemned the execution of a death row prisoner in Taiwan, calling it an attempt by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government to reverse political headwinds.

"We strongly condemn the attempt of the Lai Ching-te government to use the implementation of the death penalty to divert attention from his current political predicament," the groups said in a joint statement issued hours after Huang Lin-kai was executed Thursday night at the Taipei Detention Center.

They were likely referring to the lack of a breakthrough by the Lai administration to end the legislative impasse over several bills and the central government's budget plans for 2025.

Speaking to reporters at an event in Taichung on Friday, Lai said the death penalty was constitutional, and he expressed hope for public support for the government's action in accordance with the law.

He did not respond, however, to a question about whether the execution was carried out to boost his government's approval rating, given the public's consistent backing of the death penalty.

A survey released by the Taiwanese Public Opinion Foundation in December found that Lai's approval rating actually increased by 8.5 percentage points from a month earlier to 51.3 percent, despite a majority of respondents supporting several opposition-endorsed bills.

In the statement, the groups said the execution, signed off on by Justice Minister Cheng Ming-chien, violated procedural justice and the Constitutional Court's ruling on the death penalty last year.

Carrying out the death sentence will not bring about a safer society or improve public trust in the government. Instead, the groups said, it will "render a more bloodthirsty society and deepen public resentment against the government."

In September 2024, the Constitutional Court ruled the death penalty to be constitutional only for "the most serious" premeditated murders and crimes leading to death, further limiting its use in the future.

The ruling also said the 37 death row convicts who had brought their cases to the court after exhausting appeal measures, including Huang, might petition the head prosecutor of the Supreme Prosecutors Office to file extraordinary appeals for them.

The groups called for giving the remaining 36 death row inmates sufficient time to petition the Supreme Prosecutors Office and for a moratorium on their executions until Prosecutor-General Hsing Tai-chao (???) has reviewed their petitions.

The statement was issued by the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty, the Judicial Reform Foundation, the Taiwan Association for Human Rights, and the Covenants Watch.

Meanwhile, in a statement issued on Thursday (Brussels time), the European Union said it "recalls its opposition to the capital punishment in all cases and all circumstances" while expressing its "sincere sympathy to the family of the victims" in Huang's case.

It urged Taiwan to "apply and maintain a de facto moratorium, and to pursue a consistent policy towards the full abolition of the death penalty."

In a statement Thursday night confirming the death of the 32-year-old Huang, the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) said the death penalty by shooting was carried out according to the law to "ensure social justice" while taking into account human rights protections.

It was Taiwan's 1st execution since Lai took office on May 20, 2024.

The MOJ said Huang, who was sentenced to death in 2017 for the rape and murder of his ex-girlfriend and the murder of her mother in New Taipei's Sanchong District on Oct. 1, 2013, had committed the most serious crime.

The Supreme Prosecutors Office reviewed Huang's case and determined that there were no grounds for filing an extraordinary appeal, the ministry added, contending that the execution was in compliance with the Constitutional Court ruling.

(source for both: focustaiwan.tw)

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

Statement by the Spokesperson on the recent execution

On 16 January, Huang Lin-kai was executed in Taipei. He was convicted of murdering 2 people. The European Union condemns this crime in the strongest terms and expresses its sincere sympathy to the family of the victims. At the same time, the EU recalls its opposition to the capital punishment in all cases and all circumstances.

The EU believes that the death penalty is an inhumane and degrading punishment, which represents the ultimate denial of human dignity. Evidence shows clearly that the death penalty has little or no effect in deterring or reducing crime.

The EU therefore calls on Taiwan to apply and maintain a de facto moratorium, and to pursue a consistent policy towards the full abolition of the death penalty in Taiwan.

(source: eeas.europa.eu)

IRAN----executions

3 Prisoners Executed in Adelabad Prison, Shiraz

At dawn yesterday, January 15, 2025, the death sentences of 3 prisoners convicted of murder were carried out in Adelabad Prison, Shiraz, according to the Iran Human Rights Organization.

The identities of the executed prisoners have been reported as follows:

Farrokh Nasiri, approximately 40 years old

Payam Cheraghi, 36 years old, both residents of Najafabad, Isfahan

Mansour Gholizadeh, 29 years old, a resident of Rafsanjan

According to the report, Mr. Nasiri and Mr. Cheraghi were arrested 4 years ago in a joint case on charges of murder and were subsequently sentenced to death by a judicial authority. Mr. Gholizadeh was arrested 3 years ago for murder during a dispute with motives linked to family honor and was also sentenced to death.

As of the time of this report, the executions have not been officially announced by prison officials or relevant authorities.

(source: en-hrana.org)

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

Amnesty International Urges Halt to Imminent Executions of Two Iranian Political Prisoners

Amnesty International is urgently calling on Iranian authorities to halt the execution of Behrouz Ehsani, 69, and Mehdi Hassani, 48, 2 political prisoners sentenced to death on charges of alleged membership in the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK).

Ehsani and Hassani were convicted in September 2024 by Branch 26 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court under charges including “enmity against God” (moharebeh), “corruption on earth” (efsad-e fel-arz), and collusion against national security. Their sentences were upheld by the Iranian regime’s Supreme Court last week, sparking international outrage.

Amnesty International Secretary General Agnes Callamard posted on X: “We at @Amnesty are calling on Iranian authorities to immediately halt the executions of Behrouz Ehsani, 69, and Mehdi Hassani, 48.” The organization also highlighted the use of torture during their detention, prolonged solitary confinement, and a grossly unfair trial.

Ehsani, a political prisoner since the 1980s, and Hassani were arrested in late 2022 and transferred to Evin Prison’s notorious Ward 209, where they endured severe physical and psychological abuse. Both were vocal members of the “No to Execution Tuesdays” campaign, advocating against Iran’s rising execution rates.

In letters written before their sentencing, the men called for international support. Behrouz Ehsani stated, “This execution-driven regime can do nothing else. I will not bargain over my life… I am ready to sacrifice my insignificant life for the liberation of the Iranian people.”

The Iranian Resistance has also called on the United Nations, the European Union, and international human rights bodies to intervene immediately. “The regime’s judiciary is using these executions to suppress dissent and intimidate the population amid growing unrest,” said the Secretariat of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI).

In 2024, Iran’s regime executed at least 1,000 people—the highest number in 3 decades—with 47% of these killings occurring in the year’s final quarter as the regime faced mounting crises. Under Masoud Pezeshkian’s presidency, who openly mocked human rights concerns, the judiciary targeted marginalized groups, including 119 Baluch citizens, 34 women, and 7 juveniles. These executions, coupled with brutal punishments such as amputations and eye-gouging, reflect the regime’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s desperate attempt to suppress dissent and delay the regime’s inevitable collapse, as noted by NCRI President-elect Maryam Rajavi.

The international community now faces mounting pressure to respond decisively to prevent the loss of 2 more lives in Iran’s crackdown on political dissent.

(source: ncr-iran.org)

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

A Person with Disabilities Executed in Gachsaran

In October of last year, the execution of a prisoner with disabilities named Ebrahim Shooli, who had been sentenced to death on drug-related charges, was carried out secretly and without public notice in Gachsaran Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO), the death sentence of a man was carried out at Gachsaran Prison on the morning of Sunday, October 27. The identity of the prisoner, sentenced to death on drug-related charges, has been confirmed as Ebrahim Shooli.

A knowledgeable source told Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO), “Ebrahim Shooli had a disability and had lost one of his legs. He was arrested four years ago on drug-related charges and sentenced to death.”

? The source added, “Ebrahim Shooli’s execution was carried out without allowing a final meeting or farewell with his family.”

The execution of this prisoner has not been announced by Iranian domestic media or official sources at the time of writing this report.

The number of prisoners executed on drug-related charges has risen sharply and consistently over the past 4 years. In 2023, there was an 84% increase compared to 2022, when 256 people were executed for drug-related offenses. In 2023, this number reached 471.

(source: iranhr.net)

JANUARY 16, 2025:

TEXAS----impending execution

He’s on Death Row for Killing a Pastor. Christians Are Divided Over Whether He Should Die.----On February 5, the 37-year-old newlywed will be put to death for the gruesome murder of an Arlington pastor. His spiritual adviser is urging forgiveness.

The sun was so bright on November 15 that the priest had to squint to read his prepared remarks. A cassock peeked from beneath his tan trench coat, and the gentle breeze called attention to his red, sternum-length beard. He spoke to a small gaggle of journalists gathered in the driveway of an Arlington church and hurtled accusations of “spiritual malpractice, theological atrocity, and a failure to love.”

“There was a demand for Steven Nelson’s head on a platter,” Jeff Hood said, casting church leaders in the role of Herodias, the adulterous princess of the Christian gospels who demanded, and was granted, John the Baptist’s death. “That ain’t got nothin’ to do with Jesus.” About a half dozen supporters stood behind the priest holding a banner and wearing T-shirts that bore a more reserved appeal: “Hope for Steven Nelson.”

Nelson, 37, is set to be executed on February 5 for his participation in the 2011 murder of pastor Clint Dobson and brutal beating of 64-year-old church administrator Judy Elliott. While Nelson’s lawyers race to make their case for retrial, Hood is calling for Christians to be messengers of a divine love that transcends guilt or innocence. He’d like that message to come from one church, specifically: First Baptist Church Arlington, the church that sent Dobson to pastor its daughter congregation, NorthPointe Baptist church, where he was killed. When Nelson was sentenced, in 2012, church leadership released a statement saying that justice had been served. Hood sees things very differently.

Hood subscribes to a somewhat radical “turn the other cheek” philosophy, one in which even the worst offenders are offered grace and forgiveness. A priest in the Old Catholic Church, a collective term used to describe certain groups that broke from Roman Catholicism, Hood is married with five children and teaches Sunday school in a United Methodist Church in Little Rock. Hood knows how to use scripture to provoke, like when he said, at the November press conference, “You can’t love your neighbor as yourself and kill them at the same time.”

But Hood’s version of Christian hope for offenders is not the only one. Other Christians can point to the same Bible to support a very different response to violent crime: state-sanctioned punishment, even death. In that version, a perpetrator’s hope lies in a personal profession of Christian faith and eternal life in heaven. Both of those things can happen—Nelson identifies as Christian—with the death penalty firmly in place on earth. On a Zoom call convened by Hood last month, the spiritual leader addressed the disconnect. “I’m angry because here are people who are proclaiming a faith that I share and not just not living up to it, but . . . using it to kill people.”

Hood is calling on First Baptist Arlington to join his cause, to offer forgiveness or some kind of reconciliation, because he wants Nelson, and whoever else might be listening, to hear the message that God does not deem anyone beyond hope. His strident methods—which included posting flyers all over the First Baptist property on the morning of the press conference—aren’t getting him very far. The leaders at First Baptist, who didn’t respond to requests for interviews, won’t take Hood’s calls, answer his emails, or open the door when he stands outside knocking.

Nelson’s lawyers are disputing the details of the case, which are harrowing. Nelson claims that he was the lookout during a robbery while two accomplices went into NorthPointe and, in the process of stealing Elliott’s car keys, beat and suffocated Dobson with a plastic bag. Elliott was beaten to the point that her own husband did not recognize her when he came to the church to check on her. It was only when he saw her clothes that he realized the body on the floor was his wife. Elliott still suffered from physical and mental impairments at the time of the trial. She died in 2024.

Prosecutors argued that Nelson acted alone. Acquaintances testified that Nelson acted cavalier later, laughing at news reports. He used stolen credit cards to buy shoes and a shirt at a nearby mall and sold Dobson’s laptop for cash. Most damning for Nelson: The two men he claims committed the crimes have alibis.

The jury convicted Nelson, finding him guilty of capital murder.

Whether Nelson held the plastic bag or whether he was the lookout, the Tarrant County district attorney had the grounds he needed to pursue the death penalty, and pressure to do so was high. Dobson was a young husband and a well-loved member of the community. In addition to being the pastor chosen to lead First Baptist’s fledgling church plant—a vote of high confidence in evangelical church circles—Dobson was a member of the Arlington Clergy and Police Partnership, a coalition of clergy members serving in chaplain-type roles for the Arlington Police Department. After his death, the partnership established the Clint Dobson Memorial Award.

When the court handed down the death penalty sentence in 2012, Dennis Wiles, the pastor of First Baptist, issued a statement that read as a resounding affirmation of the decision: “We have asked God for the truth to be known and for justice to be served. As the Bible teaches us, God has placed the civil authority in our midst so that innocent people can live in freedom without fear and so that guilty offenders can be appropriately punished. . . . We now can confidently say that justice has been served and we will support the decision of this court.”

Like an overwhelming number of others on death row, Nelson was abused as a child. He remembers watching Family Matters and wondering why his house couldn’t feel as safe and friendly as the Winslow home. Sometimes, he told me, he’d get himself sent to juvenile detention on purpose just to get away from home for a while. He remembers being twelve years old in a youth rehabilitation center, staring all day at a blank white wall as punishment for some infraction. He spent enough days like this, he said, that something snapped, and he simply stopped caring about other people. He didn’t want to connect with anyone.

Along the way, he was offered rehabilitation programs—paths back into society. If he was good enough, the programs promised, he could be redeemed. But he came to see society’s offers of hope as carrots, he said, eternally dangling before him, never landing on his plate.

While Nelson was on death row, other inmates urged him to join the prison’s Faith-Based Program, an evangelical-leaning spiritual-development initiative inside the prison. Joining would make him more sympathetic in the eyes of the courts, they said, and would show that he’d changed since his early days in jail—days marked by angry, violent outbursts. He would be a good candidate, they said, as someone who has a personal faith. His prayers are marked by the repetitive invocation “Father God,” common in evangelical churches. But when I asked him why he didn’t join the Faith-Based Program and its separate unit, with more privileges, he made a hand gesture, from behind the glass in the visitation room, as if he was dangling a carrot in front of my face. He saw the Faith-Based Program as one more carrot, one more promise that society would see him as something other than a monster. It wouldn’t work. “Besides,” he said, “I don’t have to have a group of people to express my spirituality. I’m not changing myself for people. I’m changing myself for me.”

Well, he admitted, for himself and for Noa.

In 2020, Noa Dubois, a French immigrant with large brown eyes and a contagious laugh, was working as a video game producer in Los Angeles, where most of her friendships were surface-level, she told me. “I had like a thousand questions and no one to really ask them to.” That was when she found Nelson on a matching site for prison pen pals. Their letters quickly ventured into deep and sensitive territory: culture, race, trauma. The structured, limited nature of their communication forced them to get good at it, she said.

As the connection between the two deepened, Dubois began asking Nelson to be more “vulnerable.” She asked him, instead of channeling his pain into anger and violence, to name the hurt: The sting of family members saying they will visit and then never showing. The frustration of the court system denying his appeals. The hopelessness of being told that society would be better off with him dead.

In July, when the state announced the date for Nelson’s execution, Dubois made two decisions: She would try to save the life of the man she had come to love, and she would become Nelson’s wife. Getting Nelson off death row, if possible at all, would be a long, slow, complicated path that would have to begin with a stay of execution. Nelson’s lawyers were working on various appeals, but courts had already rejected their strongest arguments. Nelson did not have the kind of record or public image that made him an easy figure to rally around. If the couple’s hope rested in being happy together outside prison walls, it was far-fetched, and Dubois knew this. “We’re not fully delusional, thinking he’s coming home tomorrow.” But making her second decision, that of marriage, was simpler. In fact, Hood, who has become like family, encouraged it. “I don’t usually play Cupid,” he said, but he felt it would give both Dubois and Nelson a sense of peace.

The wedding, held on December 4, was an administrative procedure. The only difference between that visit and others was the dress Dubois had chosen—one that was shorter than the prison typically allows, but for the special occasion, she said, the guards let her get away with it—and the fact that instead of the couple’s usual chat, Dubois and Nelson exchanged vows. It was all over in less than an hour.

Dubois was standing next to Hood on November 15 at the press conference at First Baptist Arlington. Poised and grave in a chic blazer worn over her “Hope for Steven Nelson” T-shirt, she made her own plea for mercy, with Hood’s supportive arm around her. As they spoke, Hood’s eyes continued to drift to one of the only people standing around who was not an obvious member of the press. A young, slight man with shoulder-length brown hair and a Sherpa-lined trucker jacket appeared to scowl at Hood from the scant shade of an ornamental tree along the sidewalk.

Alex Tablizo, a twenty-year-old member of First Baptist and student at the University of Texas at Arlington, was indeed scowling. “He demonized us,” Tablizo said, referring to Hood’s speech and making it clear he did not speak on behalf of the church. He said this was the first he was hearing of Nelson’s case and its connection to his church. Hood’s comments were ignorant and hypocritical, he said, full of the same kind of vitriol the priest was denouncing. He resented Hood’s characterization of the entire church. “Most of the members of First Baptist Arlington don’t know anything about this.”

While Tablizo said it did seem that spending 12-plus years on death row was inhumane—a “failure of the legal system”—he said that the death penalty itself has the potential to put one’s focus on the destiny of all living things. Theologians call this memento mori, living with the awareness that life is finite. If a looming execution brought Nelson to know Christ, then, in Tablizo’s opinion, February 5 will be his entry into heaven, his liberation day.

Nelson doesn’t see it that way. But he’s also not afraid to die. He’s made a certain kind of peace with the life that brought him here, and with what it means to have hope in his final days. He doesn’t see hope the way Tablizo sees it—as anchored solely in some kind of eternal life. He doesn’t see hope the way Hood sees it—in the embrace of a more just society. For Steven Nelson, hope lies in a reason to get up every day, and for the 21 days he has left, his reason is simple: It’s Noa.

(source: texasmonthly.com)

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

‘I Am Ready, Warden’ follows a man facing execution and 2 sons who lost their fathers----John Henry Ramirez took the life of Pablo Castro. A new documentary tells the story of how his victim’s son, and his own, tried to find peace.

A still from "I Am Ready, Warden."

In 2004, Pablo Castro was killed during a robbery at a convenience store in Corpus Christi where he worked. John Henry Ramirez, a former Marine, was convicted of the crime, and sentenced to death.

Ramirez was executed by Texas in 2022. He had fled to Mexico after the crime, but ultimately was returned to Texas and acknowledged his guilt. He became a devout Christian during his time in prison.

A new film, “I Am Ready, Warden,” follows Ramirez during the last weeks of his life.

The film is also the story of 2 sons – Aaron, whose father died violently at Ramirez’ hands, and Izzy, whose father had spent most of his son’s life on death row.

The film was directed by Smriti Mundhra, and produced by Los Angeles Times investigative reporter Keri Blakinger, who says Ramirez sought her out near the time of his death. Listen to the interview above or read the transcript below.

This transcript has been edited lightly for clarity:

Texas Standard: I understand you’ve been affected by these wildfires in Los Angeles, but fortunately, your house is intact. Where are you now? Are you back in Texas?

Kari Blakinger: No, I am in L.A. It’s been a chaotic week and there are red flag warnings. So I think we’re in for a potentially chaotic next week, as well.

Well, I’m glad to hear that, so far, things are all right for you. But I know so many people have been affected and I wish you continued success in trying to deal with this situation.

Congratulations on the film. It’s very powerful. Can you talk about how you became involved in this project?

So this was a kind of unusual situation. The way that I first became aware of this case was when John Ramirez asked if I could be the reporter who would witness his execution.

I’ve witnessed executions before as a reporter, but I never had somebody request it like that. And given how Texas prison system rules work out, that didn’t end up being possible because I wasn’t local to the crime.

But I was so intrigued by that unusual request that I immediately put in a request to interview him and just sort of talk to him and see what stories were there. And then the stories that came out of that interested me.

What made this story an interesting and important one to tell? I mean, this is not the story of a person who might be innocent of a crime, which is sort of a classic narrative arc in a death penalty story – or you have a mishandling of a trial or something like that. John Henry Ramirez committed the murder he was accused of.

I think that’s actually what made it so interesting and so powerful as a film, because there’s a lot of stories in reporting that explore narratives of people who are innocent and wrongfully convicted. And it’s easier to get sympathy for them and get readers and viewers to care.

But I think this gave us a chance to explore ideas of redemption that you can’t explore the same way with someone who’s not admitting guilt.

I mentioned Aaron Castro, Pablo’s son, who we meet in the film. Where is he when it comes to John Henry Ramirez, his father’s killer?

I think he’s a very empathetic guy. And I think you can see in the film that he sort of has his emotions right under the surface and seems to want to forgive him and tends towards forgiveness, but also has the sort of deep hurt and this sense that there should be some justice.

So I think he’s kind of conflicted. But you see him work through it in the film, and I don’t want to sort of ruin too much, but I think watching him work through it is really what ended up making the film.

What about Izzy, Ramirez’ son? What did you learn about him and what was his relationship with his father?

That was a really heartbreaking connection to make – to be talking to his son in the days leading up to, and on the day of, the execution.

One of the things that John told us several times was that he was so grateful that his son didn’t turn out anything like him. And he described him as a square. And there’s one point at which he said that he was glad, in some ways, that he hadn’t been able to be around to influence him negatively at all.

But yeah, I mean, I think the story of 2 sons ended up being particularly heartbreaking.

What you’re just talking about speaks to Ramirez’s own… What would you say? “Transformation” while on death row?

Yeah, I think so. I think some of the transformation may have already begun to occur between the time of the crime and the sentencing. Over the years that he’d been on the row, he’d become particularly devout. He had always been religious. And I think he dove into religion a lot more.

And one of the things that really struck me about him and his case was a little bit of audio that I’d heard early on when he had given some of the other men on the row a little speech before he had an execution date that got called off. And it gave me this really rare opportunity to hear how a death row prisoner will speak to other people when there’s not a reporter in the room.

Because normally I don’t get to hear all the men speak amongst themselves and hearing the sincerity and the remorse in what he was saying when there was no one from the outside listening was, I think to me, really moving, because that’s not a window I get to see very often.

People may remember Ramirez’s name because this case got a lot of attention for a couple of reasons. One of them was I recall he had asked his pastor to lay hands on him at the time of his execution. Could you tell us about what happened there?

Yeah, I think that was the the main thing that had this case in the spotlight in recent years, because, again, like I said, he had become very devout and religious. And he wanted to be able to have his pastor lay hands on him as he was dying.

The Texas prison system said that that wasn’t possible. So Ramirez started litigating that ended up going up to the Supreme Court. And eventually the Supreme Court’s decision ended up meaning that the pastor could lay hands on him, which meant that he won that. But because that had been resolved, it opened up the door to setting another execution date.

The other thing, of course, that ended up, I think, putting this case on some people’s radar was that the district attorney at the time had wanted to recall the execution date because he decided he no longer believed in the death penalty. And so he tried to have the date called off – to the Corpus Christi D.A., which was then Mark Gonzales – and was not successful in that legal battle, also got a decent amount of press.

Ultimately, as you followed all of these players in this tragedy, do you feel like this affected you in any way? I mean, was there something that you took away from this experience?

I feel like almost every person we followed in this had absolutely heartbreaking stories and moments. I mean, it was difficult following Izzy and it was difficult following some of the other people that supported John that we didn’t even end up putting in the film. And then I think obviously the moments that we captured on camera with Aaron [Castro] were all pretty heartbreaking as well.

I think, for me, watching John Ramirez lose hope… And it seems in some ways like I was watching him possibly lose faith in the final months. And that was particularly heartbreaking to me.

I’m not a religious person, but watching him go from someone who had this very elaborate view of the afterlife to someone who eventually just became sort of so worn out with the years of solitary and the years of litigation that he said he hoped for nothingness after his death… That, to me, seemed like a really heartbreaking and dark transition to witness.

(source: Shelly Brisbin, texasstandard.org)

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

Judge accused of bias removed from case of death row inmate who killed ex-wife's family in Spring

A judge has granted the state's motion to recuse District Court Judge Natalia Cornelio from a high-profile death row appeal after she was accused of bias.

Wednesday's ruling comes after the Harris County District Attorney's Office wanted Cornelio to be removed from Ronald Lee Haskell's case after she ordered him back to Harris County under unusual circumstances last summer.

The initial motion for her recusal was filed Oct. 7, 2024, "based on conduct indicating that she has cast aside her role as a neutral, detached decision maker to become an advocate for death row inmate Ronald Lee Haskell," it reads.

Haskell was given the death penalty in 2019. He was charged with 6 counts of capital murder for the shooting deaths of 6 of his family members at their Spring home in 2014.

The crime was described as a "massacre" and the victims included 6 children, ages 6 to 13, and their parents, Katie and Stephen Stay. Katie was the sister of Haskell's ex-wife, whom he stalked, authorities said. Cassidy Stay, just 15 years old at the time, was the only survivor.

Court records show that on June 27, Cornelio issued a bench warrant for Haskell to appear in her courtroom a month later at midnight.

The DA's office said that never happened, and they had no idea Haskell had been moved from TDCJ custody.

Instead, during Haskell's nearly 3-week stay at the Harris County Jail, he called his mother, acknowledging the secretive nature of his presence, calling it "cloak and dagger," according to a jail call transcript.

He was also taken to a private imaging clinic near the Texas Medical Center for a scan as seen in still images from body camera video that were filed with the court.

Drue Lyon is Katie Stay's brother.

"The inmate was feet -- 3or 4 feet -- away from some random guy sitting at the doctor's office, waiting for his name to be called. Did that guy know he was feet away from a mass murderer?" Lyon asked. "Who on Earth has that much power and authority? Who authorized that?"

The defense argued the state didn't have enough evidence to firmly prove Cornelio was incapable of impartiality, but on Wednesday, Judge Susan Brown ruled otherwise.

ABC13 spoke to Joshua Reiss with the Harris County District Attorney's Office following her ruling in their favor.

"What was very clear is that the victims of Ron Haskell were never going to have a fair shot," Reiss said.

Reiss named all Haskell's victims in his closing arguments.

(source: ABC News)

ALABAMA----impending execution Alabama inmate asks court to block nitrogen gas execution----Attorneys for an Alabama inmate facing execution by nitrogen gas are asking a federal judge to block the upcoming execution Attorneys for an Alabama inmate scheduled to be the 4th person put to death with nitrogen gas on Wednesday asked a federal judge to block the execution, arguing that the first three inmates showed signs of suffering from suffocation as the gas flowed. Demetrius Terrence Frazier, 52, is scheduled to be executed Feb. 6 for the 1991 murder and rape of Pauline Brown. His attorneys in a Wednesday court filing asked a judge to block the execution unless the state makes changes to the protocol, such as giving him a sedative before the gas begins flowing. The court filing cited witness descriptions of the state’s first three executions with nitrogen gas. “The data set for nitrogen hypoxia executions is small —t3 — but provides clear results: Alabama’s method does not work the way defendants claim and necessarily causes conscious suffocation, in violation of the Eighth Amendment,” lawyers for Frazier wrote in the court filing. Alabama last year became the first state to carry out an execution with nitrogen gas. Three inmates were put to death using the new method last year. The method involves placing a respirator gas mask over the person’s face to replace breathable air with pure nitrogen gas, causing death by lack of oxygen. Media witnesses, including The Associated Press, described how the men shook on the gurney for the first minutes of their execution, followed by what appeared to be several minutes of periodic labored breaths with long pauses in between. The Alabama attorney general’s office has not yet filed a response to the request to block the execution. The state previously asked a federal judge to dismiss Frazier’s lawsuit over the execution method, arguing the movements exhibited by the inmates were not a sign of suffering. “He never confronts more likely causes of movement, including voluntary resistance or involuntary movements associated with dying, which can be misperceived as signs of consciousness or distress,” lawyers for the state wrote in a Christmas Eve court filing. Lethal injection remains Alabama’s primary execution method. Alabama in 2018 became the 3rd state to authorize the use of nitrogen gas to execute prisoners. Alabama gave inmates a brief window to select their preferred execution method. Frazier was among inmates who selected nitrogen gas as their preferred execution method, but at the time the state had not developed procedures for using the gas to carry out an execution. Frazier was convicted of killing Brown in her Birmingham apartment. Prosecutors said Frazier, while in police custody in Detroit on an unrelated charge, confessed to raping and shooting Brown after stealing about $80 from her purse. A jury voted 10-2 that he receive a death sentence. A judge sentenced him to death. (source: Associated Press)

INDIANA:

Legislation abolishing death penalty among ICC’s priorities at Statehouse

At the start of a new legislative session, the Indiana Catholic Conference (ICC) is already out front on numerous issues, including the state’s recently reignited debate over the death penalty.

The 124th Indiana General Assembly opened Jan. 8, less than a month after the state carried out its first execution in 15 years. Lawmakers are now considering — and the ICC is strongly supporting — House Bill 1030, which would eradicate the death penalty in Indiana. Its author, Rep. Bob Morris (R-Fort Wayne), is a Catholic who has spoken widely about his change of heart concerning capital punishment, which he favored until recently.

The ICC’s support for this measure comes as additional Catholic lawmakers lead the charge on other key legislation, including bolstering parents’ authority over their children’s use of social media and offering a fresh start to residents who have an eviction on their record.

Underscoring these issues is the Catholic Church’s unwavering commitment to upholding the sanctity of human life and protecting the vulnerable, according to Alexander Mingus, executive director of the ICC, the public policy voice of the Catholic Church in Indiana.

“As we discern our priorities for any given legislative session, we always try to stay attentive to the moral areas the Church cares about — in particular, matters concerning the dignity of the human person,” Mingus said. “But we also look at what is on the minds of legislators and how we can advance the Church’s long and rich tradition of social teaching when it comes to the issues of the day.”

The ICC has taken that approach since its inception nearly 60 years ago. Now, Mingus is its new leader following the retirement of his predecessor, Angela Espada, over the summer. And there is a new voice at the ICC — that of Roarke LaCoursiere, its new associate director.

With her background in law and her deep formation in Catholic tradition, LaCoursiere has immersed herself in the death penalty debate that has been making headlines since then-Gov. Eric Holcomb announced in June that Indiana would resume executions in Indiana state prisons. Despite opposition from the 5 Catholic bishops in the state, the ICC and other pro-life advocates, 49-year-old Joseph Corcoran was executed on Dec. 18 for the murders of 4 people in 1997.

In their recent ICC podcast, LaCoursiere and Mingus discussed the legislation that Rep. Morris introduced 2 weeks before the execution. House Bill 1030 has undergone its first reading and awaits further action in the Committee on Courts and Criminal Code.

“I’m so inspired by Rep. Bob Morris and the efforts that he has taken to spread the word about how abolition of the death penalty is in line with the pro-life agenda, and all the efforts he’s made to talk to his co-legislators about this issue,” LaCoursiere said.

Mingus helped institute the weekly ICC podcast, ICAN (Indiana Catholic Action Network), 4 years ago.

“If you haven’t thought much about the death penalty or the Church’s teaching on it, take some time to read about it and to pray about it, just as we have,” Mingus said.

The ICC testified on day one of the legislative session in support of another measure — Senate Bill 11, which would require social media companies to verify parental permission for users under age 16. Its author, Sen. Mike Bohacek (R-Michiana Shores), introduced legislation last year aimed at restricting minors from accessing online pornography — a measure that was ultimately signed into law.

“The Catholic Bishops of Indiana, as pastors, are aware of the potential harms of social media and the emerging body of evidence that links mental health issues with social media usage,” Mingus said during a Jan. 8 hearing on the bill in the Senate judiciary committee. “Youth are particularly vulnerable to harm and exploitation online, and we believe this bill makes an important step toward their greater protection.”

Another Catholic lawmaker, Sen. Liz Brown (R-Fort Wayne), is Bohacek’s co-sponsor on Senate Bill 11 — as well as the primary author of another measure that has the support of the ICC. Senate Bill 142 would automatically expunge, or permanently erase, an eviction from a person’s record after seven years. Under current law, an individual has to proactively apply for an eviction to be expunged — and only after 10 years.

The ICC and other advocates say passage of this bill would open doors for people who face serious challenges in attaining a stable housing situation. A past eviction creates what many call a “Scarlet E,” haunting a tenant for years.

“This would be a preferential option for people who have been struggling with housing,” LaCoursiere said. “Taking an eviction off their record could help them find another rental unit much more easily, or to even open up the possibility for them to one day be homeowners.”

In this long session of the General Assembly, held every 2 years and culminating in passage of the state’s biennial budget, fiscal matters will be at the forefront. Attaining universal school choice will again be a high priority for the ICC and advocates including the Indiana Non-Public Education Association (INPEA).

2 years ago, the state legislature expanded school choice eligibility to 97 percent of Indiana families. This year, advocates want to see that reach 100 percent, ensuring that any Indiana family can receive a voucher for their child to attend a school of their choice.

LaCoursiere and Mingus encourage the Catholic faithful to stay up to date on the issues and legislation before the General Assembly by joining the Indiana Catholic Action Network (ICAN). Details can be found on the ICC website.

“To amplify the voice of the Church, we need the engagement of all Catholics in our state,” Mingus said. “We thank everyone who has been active with our ICAN network in the past, and we hope to expand our reach as we work to bring the timeless teachings of the Catholic Church to the public arena.”

For more information, visit www.indianacc.org.

(source: evdiomessage.org)

NEBRASKA:

109th Unicam update: Day 6 filings include bills on urban housing, police reform, death penalty, vaping, license plates, Article V----A summary of Nebraska state senators’ activity on Wednesday, Jan. 15

Nebraska state senators — and mulitple committees — filed dozens of bills on Wednesday, their s6th day in session.

Lawmakers filed 57 pieces of legislation Tuesday, including 2 amendment proposals.

Here’s a quick look at which senators have submitted bills on Day 6:

Below is a look at a few bills that caught our attention on Wednesday:

State Sen. Victor Rountree of Bellevue submitted LB267, which would allow landlords to evict tenants who have committed domestic violence.

State Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha filed LB273, which would not allow a medical power of attorney to make decisions regarding a pregnancy unless the person’s life is at risk.

State Sen. Terrell McKinney of Omaha introduced LB276, a police reform bill that would ban no-knock warrants, and create a citizen police oversight board; and LB277, which would require a special prosecutor be appointed to investigate in-custody deaths and require law enforcement involved in such incident not return to duty until the grand jury proceedings have been completed; and LB290, which would prohibit downtown businesses from receiving recovery grant funds. He also filed LR15CA, an amendment proposal to eliminate the death penalty in Nebraska.

(source: WOWT news)

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

‘No merit’: Judge strikes down Jason Jones’ renewed motion to quash death penalty

A 2nd attempt by Jason Jones, who was found guilty of murdering 4 people in Laurel, to have Nebraska’s death penalty statutes ruled unconstitutional was again unsuccessful, keeping execution a possibility for Jones.

A district judge ruled Wednesday that Jones’ arguments against the death penalty’s constitutionality were all “without merit” and have been previously addressed by the Nebraska Supreme Court. As a result, Jones’ renewed motion was denied.

Jones originally filed a motion to quash in Jan. 2023 after being accused of killing Gene, Janet, and Dana Twiford, along with Michele Ebeling, back on Aug. 4, 2022. That motion was denied and dismissed in March 2023.

A jury would later find Jones guilty of 10 counts on Sept. 26, 2024, including 4 counts of 1st-degree murder, 4 counts of use of a firearm to commit a felony, and 2 counts of 2nd-degree arson. A 3-person panel was appointed soon after to determine whether or not he should be given the death penalty. Jones then renewed his motion to quash on Dec. 3, 2024.

Jones utilized the same arguments across both motions, and the court came to the same conclusion in both instances.

Jones’ wife, Carrie Jones, is also charged in connection with the case. She is accused of 1 count of 1st-degree murder, tampering with evidence and accessory to a felony. Carrie Jones pleaded not guilty to her charges in May 2023. A pretrial conference is scheduled for March 24, 2025.

(source: KCAU news)

COLORADO:

A tattoo, the N-word, a different crime: Colorado justices hear appeal of former death row inmate----Robert Ray was one of the last prisoners on Colorado's death row when lawmakers abolished capital punishment

Almost 20 years after the murders of a young couple in Aurora, the Colorado Supreme Court heard the appeal of the man convicted of orchestrating the killings and who now alleges numerous errors pervaded his trial.

Arapahoe County jurors convicted Robert Keith Ray for the 2005 slayings of Javad Marshall-Fields and Vivian Wolfe. He received a death sentence and remained on death row until 2020, when the legislature abolished capital punishment and Gov. Jared Polis commuted his sentence to life imprisonment.

Although another man, Sir Mario Owens, was convicted for being the gunman, prosecutors asserted Ray arranged for the murders in order to prevent Marshall-Fields from testifying about a related shooting the summer prior in Lowry Park.

Lengthy postconviction proceedings meant the Supreme Court had its 1st opportunity on Wednesday to hear Ray's claims about his 2009 trial. In an unusual two-hour oral argument, the justices hinted that several aspects of Ray's prosecution, taken together, might have been problematic enough to warrant a new trial.

Among their concerns were the prosecution's repeated use of the N-word in court while quoting Ray; its emphasis on Ray's tattoo of a rap lyric, "Crime Payz in 999 Wayz"; extensive testimony about the victims; and roughly one-third of the trial being dedicated to the already adjudicated Lowry Park shooting.

"This is concerning," said Justice Richard L. Gabriel. "It may well be you can say there’s overwhelming evidence that Mr. Ray coordinated these murders. That may be. But there was a lot of evidence that came in that I’m mystified."

In the defense's telling, the proof of Ray's involvement in the murders was circumstantial and depended largely on witnesses who received tangible benefits in their own criminal cases by cooperating with law enforcement and painting Ray as the killer.

The government countered that jurors had a right to believe those witnesses, and that Ray had a motive to get rid of a witness to the Lowry Park shooting to avoid conviction and continue his lucrative drug business.

Last year, the Supreme Court decided Owens' appeal and upheld his convictions for killing Wolfe and Marshall-Fields, who was the son of Arapahoe County commissioner and former state legislator Rhonda Fields. Considering Ray's appeal, however, several of the justices seemed alarmed by decisions the prosecutors and trial judge made that were unique to his prosecution.

The defense argued the district attorney's office tried to paint Ray as a "young, Black, drug-dealing thug," noting the White prosecutors had said the N-word 24 times during trial while quoting Ray, who is Black.

"Why was that necessary?" Chief Justice Monica M. Márquez asked the government. "The repeated use of those words and those kinds of phrases .... it does seem to play into that picture, does it not?"

"This is an awful word. It should never be used. But it came out of defendant’s mouth," responded Senior Assistant Attorney General Carmen Moraleda.

"I think it’s more subtle. ... There is a picture that's getting drawn here," interjected Gabriel. "It does paint a picture of, this is a drug-dealing, low-life thug against the clean-cut, college-educated victims. That makes the N-word problematic."

Justice William W. Hood III added that other evidence tended to feed into the jury's perception of Ray as a bad person.

"Maybe the word 'thug' wasn't used, but when you have the tattoo evidence coupled with some other things, you know, you might as well take out a billboard that says 'thug,' right?" he said. "Why did they put on the tattoo evidence?"

"Because it was probative, your honor," said Moraleda.

"Was it?" pressed Hood.

He also was curious about the amount of evidence jurors heard before deciding Ray's guilt that portrayed the victims' lives as being "rich and abundant with promise."

"The prosecution's typically given a chance to humanize the victims to some extent," said Hood, a former trial judge and prosecutor. "This seems to go well beyond that."

Members of the court questioned the defense about how the trial judge evaluated evidence, whether Ray's attorneys had objected at the time and whether some of the allegedly improper evidence was relevant after all. Some justices seemed inclined to think that the cumulative effect of Ray's alleged errors, rather than any single instance, could determine whether he receives a new trial.

To that end, Justice Melissa Hart expressed curiosity about the logistics of a redo.

"As a practical matter," she said, "what does a new trial look like 20 years on?"

"The issue before the court is whether Mr. Ray’s constitutional rights were violated," responded his attorney, Gail K. Johnson. "There’s certainly no evidence before the court that a retrial would be impractical."

Justice Carlos A. Samour Jr. is not participating in the appeal. As a former Arapahoe County trial judge, he briefly handled Ray's case following the convictions.

The case is People v. Ray.

(source: coloradopolitics.com)

IDAHO:

Idaho Reckons with High Costs of the Death Penalty

Costs Representation Idaho

A recent op-ed in the Idaho Statesman high­lights a num­ber of dif­fi­cul­ties that are a result of his­toric under­spend­ing on cap­i­tal defense as the state pre­pares for its first exe­cu­tion since 2012. Idaho’s pub­lic defense sys­tem is tran­si­tion­ing to statewide over­sight as part of an effort to address long­stand­ing inequities in coun­ty-fund­ed legal rep­re­sen­ta­tion. With the con­sol­i­da­tion of the pub­lic defend­er sys­tem came pay increas­es for most of Idaho’s pub­lic defend­ers, but many of the high­est-paid attor­neys took cuts. The American Civil Liberties Union of Idaho said that with these cuts came ?“mass res­ig­na­tions” of attor­neys and sup­port staff, leav­ing many defen­dants with­out access to ade­quate legal rep­re­sen­ta­tion. In response to this cri­sis, Governor Brad Little request­ed a bud­get increase of 70%, from just over $50 mil­lion to $89 mil­lion for the state pub­lic defense sys­tem for fis­cal years 2025 and 2026.

The bud­get increas­es to sup­port the pub­lic defend­er sys­tem are just one of many fac­tors dri­ving up the cost of pur­su­ing the death penal­ty in Idaho. The state’s deci­sion to amend its lethal injec­tion pro­to­col and pro­ceed with exe­cu­tions, as well as the cre­ation of a new fir­ing squad cham­ber in response to recent leg­is­la­tion have also increased death-penal­ty-relat­ed expen­di­tures. Public records reveal that the state spent $150,000 on lethal injec­tion drugs in its efforts to exe­cute Thomas Creech—$50,000 in October 2023 and $100,000 in June 2024. Recent ren­o­va­tions to the F Block unit at the Idaho Maximum Security Institution to cre­ate an exe­cu­tion prepa­ra­tion room cost an esti­mat­ed $313,915, accord­ing to IDOC pub­lic infor­ma­tion offi­cer Sanda Kuzeta-Cerimagic. The ren­o­va­tions to the exe­cu­tion room includ­ed imag­ing, design, and engi­neer­ing, and are just the 1st phase of a 2-stage ren­o­va­tion. The 2nd stage includes the cre­ation of a secured facil­i­ty for exe­cu­tions via fir­ing squad, which was adopt­ed as an alter­na­tive exe­cu­tion method in 2023. Phase two con­struc­tion costs are esti­mat­ed at $952,589, as report­ed by the Idaho Capital Sun.

All of this under­scores the finan­cial strain cre­at­ed by the deci­sions to seek death sen­tences and car­ry out exe­cu­tions in Idaho. Lori Daybell’s tri­al, which did not ulti­mate­ly result in a death sen­tence, cost Fremont and Madison Counties about $2 mil­lion. The Idaho Statesman op-ed not­ed that had Daybell’s case been held in neigh­bor­ing Clark County, the amount of mon­ey would have required near­ly a quar­ter of the county’s total operating budget.

Cost stud­ies from mul­ti­ple states con­sis­tent­ly show that cap­i­tal cas­es cost sig­nif­i­cant­ly more than non-cap­i­tal cas­es, for rea­sons includ­ing longer tri­als, increased secu­ri­ty, and appeals. A 2017 inde­pen­dent study in Oklahoma esti­mat­ed that cap­i­tal cas­es in the state cost 3.2 times more than non-cap­i­tal cas­es on aver­age. In their review of 15 dif­fer­ent state stud­ies from across the coun­try, the Oklahoma Death Penalty Review Commission found that nation­al­ly, seek­ing the death penal­ty impos­es an aver­age of approx­i­mate­ly $700,000 more in costs than not seeking death.

The finan­cial strain on Idaho’s pub­lic defense sys­tem high­lights a crit­i­cal dis­con­nect between the state’s pri­or­i­ties and resources. While the statewide pub­lic defend­er sys­tem strug­gles to meet the con­sti­tu­tion­al rights of indi­gent defen­dants, mil­lions are spent on cap­i­tal cas­es and the death penal­ty in a state that has not car­ried out an exe­cu­tion since 2012.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

USA:

A.G. Garland withdraws federal execution drug protocol following review----"[T]here is significant uncertainty about whether the use of pentobarbital as a single-drug lethal injection for execution treats individuals humanely," Garland wrote.

Attorney General Merrick Garland ordered the head Bureau of Prisons to withdraw the federal government’s current execution drug protocol, leaving the federal government with no drug protocol in place to carry out executions.

The current drug protocol, the use of pentobarbital in a single-drug lethal injection, was last used to carry out executions in the first Trump administration.

After a multi-year review ordered in 2021, the Department’s Office of Legal Policy concluded — and Garland echoed — that there is “significant uncertainty” surrounding the use of pentobarbital that justifies withdrawing the protocol authorizing it.

“[T]he review concluded that there is significant uncertainty about whether the use of pentobarbital as a single-drug lethal injection for execution treats individuals humanely and avoids unnecessary pain and suffering,” Garland wrote Wednesday in a letter to the director of the Bureau of Prisons. Writing that “it cannot be said with reasonable confidence” that the pentobarbital protocol protects “the rights guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of the United States" and ensures that those facing execution are treated “fairly and humanely,” the attorney general concluded “that protocol should be rescinded, and not reinstated unless and until that uncertainty is resolved.“

Although the underlying statutes authorizing executions, as well as the federal rules regarding the manner of execution remain in place, Garland’s action would force additional steps on the incoming Trump administration before it could carry out any executions.

The move to rescind the execution drug protocol comes a few weeks after President Joe Biden commuted the death sentences of all but three men on the federal death row to life in prison without the possibility of parole in the days before Christmas.

The earlier years of the administration presented a more mixed record from the Justice Department, with Garland authorizing continued and new capital prosecutions.

In all, though, it is a striking record of opposing capital punishment and doing significant work to end the federal death penalty, as I called for here in recent months — and as candidate Biden pledged to do when running for office in 2020.

Back in July 2021, Garland issued an execution moratorium following the 13-person execution spree carried out in the closing year of the 1st Trump administration. At that time, he also ordered a review of the federal government’s execution protocol and procedures — something previously undertaken in the Obama administration with no resolution.

This time, however, the review was concluded — on Wednesday, according to Garland’s letter and a a report provided to Law Dork via Chris McDaniel, who received it on Wednesday night from the Justice Department. My former colleague from BuzzFeed News, McDaniel now works at Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, where he conducted an investigation that led to the show’s incredible report on where the Trump administration obtained its execution drugs.

After detailing the first Trump administration’s authorization of the use of pentobarbital in a “federal execution protocol addendum,” Garland noted, “The then-Attorney General ordered the Bureau of Prisons to adopt the addendum on July 24, 2019. Following the adoption of the addendum, 13 federal executions took place between July 2020 and January 2021.”

Biden then took office, Garland ordered the review, and the Office of Legal Policy provided its report this month.

Regarding the use of pentobarbital in a single-drug lethal injection, the report addressed four areas of concern, first asserting that “there is a risk of flash (acute) pulmonary edema with the use of pentobarbital in executions.” Specifically, it added, “Two autopsies were conducted after recent federal executions with pentobarbital, and both showed signs of pulmonary edema.”

Second, it noted that “experts have warned that the use of high amounts of pentobarbital in a single-drug execution protocol could cause extreme pain upon the initial injection.”

Third, the report highlighted the “greater significance” of eyewitness accounts in this area:

In light of the limited research and unanswered questions about the risks of pulmonary edema and pain associated with lethal injection by pentobarbital, witness accounts take on greater significance and provide important anecdotal evidence. Witness accounts from the 13 federal executions using pentobarbital are particularly relevant.105 In February 2021, AP News reported that “executioners who put [those] 13 inmates to death in the last months of the Trump administration likened the process of dying by lethal injection to falling asleep…but those tranquil accounts are at odds with reports by The Associated Press and other media witnesses of how prisoners’ stomachs rolled, shook and shuddered as the pentobarbital took effect inside the U.S. penitentiary death chamber in Terre Haute, Indiana.” 106 During the execution of Alfred Bourgeois in 2020, witnesses reported that he “grimaced and furrowed his eyebrows. He began to exhale rhythmically, and his stomach started to quiver uncontrollably.”107 It was observed during Lezmond Hall’s execution in 2020 that his “chest heaved” and his “stomach area began to throb.”108 Similarly, in 2020, witnesses reported that William LeCroy’s “midsection quickly began to heave uncontrollably” after the pentobarbital was administered.109 In addition, in 2020, eyewitnesses observed that as the drug was administered to Orlando Hall, he “appeared to wince briefly and twitched his feet...open[ing] his mouth wide, as if he was yawning…[e]ach time that was followed by short, seemingly labored breaths.”110

Finally, the report highlighted the distinction between “consciousness” and “responsiveness.” Disturbingly, but in fitting with many of the questions raised by those witness reports, the report stated, “It is not clear whether a person who receives 5 grams of pentobarbital can feel and experience the impact the drug has on the body.” It is possible, it noted, that “the drug leaves a person in a state of connected consciousness, in which they may or may not be physically responsive to pain of pulmonary edema but are experiencing that pain.”

In addition to rescinding the current protocol, Garland put in place — for now, at least — a process for considering any other protocol.

“I further direct the Director [of the Bureau of Prisons] to assist the Office of Legal Policy, under the supervision of the Deputy Attorney General, to conduct evaluations of any other manner of execution, and of the State or local facilities and personnel involved in any such execution, before such other manner may be implemented,” he wrote. As such, Garland ended his memorandum by noting that “the moratorium on federal executions announced on July 1, 2021, remains in effect.”

For now, then, federal executions remain on hold.

Donald Trump takes office in 4 days.

(source: lawdork.com)

INDIA:

Fatehabad Court Sends Man To The Gallows For Decapitating Differently-Abled Brother----The fraternal enmity broke out in 2020 after their mother transferred the house ownership to the victim. A Rs 35,000 fine has also been slapped.

The district court in Fatehabad has awarded a death sentence along with a Rs 35,000 fine to a person guilty of killing his differently-abled brother.

On June 18, 2020, the accused, Ashok, had decapitated his brother, Deepak, and roamed with the severed head for about one-and-a-half-hour before disposing it into a canal. Considering the case a rarest of rare crimes, Judge Deepak Aagarwal awarded the capital punishment.

During the investigation, the police recovered the head and other items a case was registered against the accused under sections 457, 506, 302 and 201 of the IPC, as the incident happened before July 1, 2024, when the three new criminal laws came into effect.

Public Prosecutor Arun Kumar said Sushma Devi, wife of Manjit Singh, of Sangrur, Punjab, had recorded a statement that her brother Ashok had killed her younger brother, Deepak (40), by severing his head from the torso. In her complaint to the police, Sushma said she had five siblings of whom two brothers died. Deepak, a divorcee and differently-abled, lived with his mother near Gogamedi in Tohana. Their mother got the house registered in Deepak's name a decade ago. Ashok was upset with this and had threatened to kill Deepak several times.

"Surjeet of Dangra village was the brother-in-law of Deepak. On June 18, 2020, Surjeet called Sushma and told her that on June 17, Ashok went to Deepak's house. Both drank liquor and were chatting. Meanwhile, Surjeet left both of them and went to his house. In the morning, when Surjeet came to meet Deepak, he found the door closed and got no response from inside. Sushma reached the spot with her husband and informed the police. When the door was broken, they found Deepak's decapitated body in the verandah," the complaint said.

(source: etvbharat.com)

PAKISTAN:

At least 68 Pakistanis are on death row in 10 countries----Nearly 1/2 of Pakistanis imprisoned abroad are detained in Saudi Arabia

The National Assembly of Pakistan was informed that nearly 10,300 of the 20,000 Pakistani nationals currently incarcerated overseas are being held in Saudi Arabia.

The revelation came during a session led by Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, who also serves as Deputy Prime Minister.

According to data from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, a total of 10,279 Pakistanis are detained in Saudi prisons, making the kingdom home to roughly 1/2 of the 19,997 Pakistanis imprisoned abroad. The number of detainees in foreign jails highlights the significant issue of Pakistani nationals facing serious charges in countries around the world.

The figures provided also revealed that 68 Pakistanis are currently on death row across 10 countries, facing charges ranging from terrorism to drug trafficking and murder.

The primary offenses for which Pakistanis are detained abroad include illegal immigration, drug possession, human trafficking, assault, and fraud.

Significant numbers

Aside from Saudi Arabia, other countries with significant numbers of detained Pakistanis include the UAE (5,292), Greece (598), and Oman (578). Other countries, including Malaysia, Turkey, and the UK, also have notable figures, with many facing serious charges such as money laundering.

Repatriation efforts

In his statement, Dar assured the public that the government is actively working to facilitate the repatriation of prisoners. He explained that emergency travel documents are issued to those whose passports have expired after they complete their sentences, and that the Pakistani community often helps pay fines for released prisoners.

“There is no obstacle in the repatriation of prisoners to Pakistan,” Dar said, adding that Saudi Arabia has agreed to repatriate 570 prisoners under a bilateral agreement. He emphasised the ongoing efforts to return detainees to their home country.

The report underscores the widespread challenge faced by Pakistani nationals abroad, with the government working to manage diplomatic ties and ensure the safe return of prisoners wherever possible.

(source: gulfnews.com)

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