Results matching “first”

Jennifer Sullivan has this story in the Seattle Times.

"It's been so long that we have had to deal with all of this; now that it's over, I don't have to think about him anymore," a tearful Becky Washa, Holly's sister, told reporters during a news conference after the execution.

The story is mostly about the debut of Washington's one-drug protocol.

After making a nearly three-minute statement from the prison's death chamber, Brown was administered five grams of sodium thiopental intravenously while strapped to a gurney. His chest heaved three times and his lips shuddered, then there was no movement.

Witnesses said Brown died about a minute and a half after the drug was administered. He was pronounced dead by prison officials at 12:56 a.m. Brown was the first person executed in Washington since August 2001.

The anti-DP lawyer says exactly what you would expect. "However, killing a human being is never humane when we could instead lock him up forever."  Of course, we have seen in the case of the juvenile murderers that the instant the death penalty is off the table they start claiming that locking them up forever is inhumane and referring to LWOP as a sentence to "die in prison."  That is, death is suddenly no longer different.

He also predicts the other states will switch. On that point, I agree, although it may be a slow process. It will be slower than it needs to be because the anti-DP crowd and courts sympathetic to them have imposed unnecessary obstacles to the procedure for changing protocols in many states.

Pretrial Hearings Continue in Case Against Suspected Embassy Bomber:  A hearing will be held today in the case against Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, who is suspected of plotting the 1998 bombings of the U.S. Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya.  Last month, presiding U.S. District Court Judge Lewis A. Kaplan determined that the testimony of one of the government's proferred key witnesses was inadmissible because the witness was identified through the CIA's use of "extremely harsh interrogation methods" against Ghailani.  Today, the government will make another attempt for the testimony's admissibility, arguing that it is "sufficiently attenuated" from the alleged illegality.  Ghailani has already tried - unsuccessfully - to dismiss his case based on a violation of his right to a speedy trial.  (Read CJLF's brief here.)  Jury selection is set to begin next week, making Ghailani the first Gitmo detainee to be tried in civilian court.  The New York Law Journal has this story.

Nationwide Murder Suspect Appears in Court:  The Napa Valley Register (CA) reports on the court appearance of Roy Allen Melanson, who is suspected of stabbing to death Anita Andrews at a California bar 36 years ago.  Melanson arrived at the Napa Superior Court from his current residence - the Colorado Department of Corrections - where he is serving a life sentence for killing backpacker Michele Wallace.  Melanson was linked to Andrews's death after he was matched to a crime scene sample through a federal DNA database.  He has also been charged with the 1988 murder of Charlotte Lily Sauerwin in Louisiana and remains a suspect in an unsolved Texas murder case.

Husband/Father Takes Stand in Horrific Home Invasion Trial:  Connecticut doctor William Petit took the stand today in the case against Steven Hayes who is charged, along with co-defendant Joshua Komisarjevsky, with torturing, sexually assaulting, and murdering Petit's wife and two daughters in 2007.  Petit testified that after a pleasant Sunday with his family, he awoke at 3 a.m. on the couch with blood running down his face and two armed men standing in front of him.  After the men bound his wrists and ankles to the couch, he heard them upstairs with his wife and daughter.  Though he lost nearly seven pints of blood, Petit was able to free himself and crawl to a neighbor's house, but it was too late.  Hayes and Komisarjevsky offered to plead guilty for life sentences, but prosecutors commendably pushed for trials and a chance at death sentences for the men.  Read ABC New's story here.      

Mexico's Largest Prison Break in History:  CNN reporter Gustavo Valdes reports on a massive manhunt last Friday after 85 inmates escaped from a Mexico prison on Mexico-Texas border.  The prisoners used a ladder to escape and quickly dispersed through the streets of Mexico.  66 of the fugitives were serving time on federal charges, and the rest for less serious violations.  Two prison guards remain missing and 44 have been detained under suspicion for corruption.   

"Speed Freak Killer" Set to be Released:  One of two convicted in a methamphetamine-fueled murder spree lasting 15 years in San Joaquin County, California, is set to be released from prison in the coming days, reports the San Francisco Chronicle.  Wesley Shermantine and Loren Herzog were each initially convicted of several first-degree murder charges, but in 2004, the California Court of Appeals tossed out Herzog's convictions and sentence after finding his confession to be coerced.  Without his videotaped confession, prosecutors had no choice but to enter a plea deal with Herzog.  Now, though Shermantine fortunately remains on death row, Herzon will walk free after serving 14 years of a 78-year sentence. Residents of San Joaquin County fear Herzog's release even though he will be released hundreds of miles away.  Herzog and Shermantine are also implicated in several unsolved murders.

Impeachment Trial Begins Against Federal Judge:  In its first impeachment trial since 1999 against former President Clinton, the Senate today began impeachment hearings in the case against U.S. District Judge G. Thomas Porteous of Louisiana.  Porteous, who was appointed by Clinton in 1994, is charged with accepting money gifts from several attorneys, including an all-expense paid trip to Vegas complete with expensive meals and a trip to the strip club.  Porteous's conduct was discovered during the FBI investigation "Operation Wrinkled Robe."  Though he was never charged with a crime, the Judicial Conference of the U.S. recommended that Congress consider impeachment.  If convicted by the Senate, Porteous will be the eighth judge to be removed by impeachment.  Read the AP's story here.

Homeland Security to Test Iris Scanners:   USA Today reports on DHS's plan to test iris scan technology on illegal immigrants in a Texas Border Patrol station.  Able to scan and take pictures from three to four feet away, iris scanners pose a faster method of identification than fingerprinting.  The military has used the procedure since 2007 to track suspected Iraqi militants.  The ACLU has expressed ... wait for it ... objections to such an efficient means of tracking persons. 

When one person hires another to murder a third, who is more culpable?

In the Getsy case in Ohio, the mastermind was tried separately on different evidence (not including Getsy's confession) and found guilty of a noncapital crime. As a result, triggerman Getsy was sentenced to death but the man who hired him was not.  A three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit found it so outrageous that the obviously more culpable boss received the lesser penalty that it declared Getsy's sentence unconstitutional. Fortunately, the Sixth corrected this error en banc.  CJLF's brief is here.

Now there is much wailing and gnashing of teeth that Virginia is going to execute the boss but not the triggerman in a murder for hire scheme.  The anti-DP PR machine is claiming she wasn't really the "mastermind," but that claim has been examined and rejected by both state and federal courts. John Grisham has a piece in the WaPo, dated tomorrow, titled "Teresa Lewis didn't pull the trigger. Why is she on death row?" The Fourth Circuit's answer follows the jump.

Federal Appeals Court Upholds Death Sentence for Rapist in 1979 Murder:  Bob Egelko of the San Francisco Chronicle reports on a Ninth Circuit decision affirming the death sentence of Harvey Heishman, who was convicted of murdering an Oakland woman in 1979.  Heishman fatally shot 28-year-old Nancy Lugassy in her front yard after she told police that Heishman raped her.  In appealing his death sentence, Heishman's attorneys claimed his trial lawyers failed to adequately investigate his background, including physical and sexual abuse he experienced as a child.  The Ninth Circuit concluded that while trial counsel's performance may have been deficient in some respects, any error would not have affected the verdict - especially in light of the heinousness of the crime and Heishman's eight previous sexual assaults.  Heishman may still seek reconsideration by the Ninth Circuit or appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Crackdown on Cell Phones in Prison:  The AP has this story about Mississippi's latest efforts to crack down on cell phone possession by the state's prison population.  The state's department of corrections has signed on with private companies to immobilize the cell phones by sending radio waves to intercept the unauthorized calls.  Emergency and official calls will still go through, but inmates attempting to make a call will hear a recorded message informing them that "the cellular device you are using ... has been identified as contraband ... the device will no longer function."  While illegal possession of cell phones by inmates is widespread, Mississippi is the first to use such a system.  The state reports it has confiscated over 5,000 cell phones in the past two years. 

Proposed ICE Policy Could Let Illegals Go Free:  Jana Winter of FoxNews.com reports on a proposed ICE policy that would prevent immigration officers from detaining illegal immigrants discovered during traffic stops.  The proposal includes several exceptions, allowing detainment of illegals with prior convictions or previous deportations, or where the traffic stop involves alcohol or drugs, but those not fitting within these categories would be let go.  ICE has defended against criticism of the proposal, with one official claiming it is simply a way to "solicit public input on how to best set priorities for the use of our limited detention resources to protect public safety.     

Cal Coburn Brown was executed by the state of Washington last night.  The story is here.  Brown raped, tortured and murdered a young woman, Holly Washa, in 1991. Here are links to the prior posts of Sept. 7, 2010, March 9, 2009, and June 4, 2007.

 Mr. Brown was not particularly repentant.  The story notes that:

Brown protested sentencing disparities, saying that criminals who had killed many more people, such as Green River killer Gary Ridgway, were serving life sentences while he received a death sentence.

"I only killed one victim," he said. "I cannot really see that there is true justice. Hopefully, sometime in the future that gets straightened out."

Brown did not apologize to the family of the victim, but said he understood their emnity for him. He said he forgave that hatred, held no emnity toward them...

Well that's cool.  The rapist and killer "forgives" the family of the victim for thinking poorly of him.  You can't make this stuff up.  No wonder abolitionists refuse to talk about specifics.

Congratulations to the Kings County District Attorney's Office for its sustained, outstanding work in this case, which is the first execution in Washington since 2001. 

 

UPDATE:  An astute reader points out that Brown's last words, though odious, were cogent.  This puts the lie to his lawyer's argument, made only shortly before, that he was mentally incompetent.  The reader asks why sanctions should not be imposed for an argument that the lawyer almost surely knew was false.  My own experience from the US Attorney's Office is that it's next to impossible to get sanctions imposed on a criminal defense attorney; unfortunately, courts seem to have come to accept false (and even preposterous) filings as part of the game.

[Update 2: The Supreme Court's order denying a stay is here. No dissent noted. -- KS]

There are news reports that Rev. Terry Jones has called off his constitutionally protected and utterly perverse plan to burn the Koran, in exchange for Imam Rauf's agreement to move the Gound Zero Mosque.  Some later reports cast doubt on this, so at this stage, it cannot be said with assurance whether the Koran burning will go forward.

Lost in these developments is another, quite troubling story.  This is the first line in an AP report filed six hours ago:

GAINESVILLE, Fla. -- FBI agents visited Thursday with a minister of a small Florida church that plans to burn the Quran on Sept. 11, as public safety became a paramount concern and President Barack Obama added his voice to the chorus of opposition.

The wording of this report suggests that the FBI is there to protect public safety.  Having been an attorney with the Justice Department for many years, I do not see how that can be the case.  There may well be public safety concerns (which I guess is a euphemism for the threat of violent retaliation against the Koran burning), but that is the concern of state and local police, not the FBI.  There is no visible nexus whatever for FBI involvement.  So what gives?

Two days ago I observed here:

It's true that Holder is not threatening to punish Jones. But in the First Amendment context, creating a chill is the next "best" thing to an overt threat of punishment. I have not objected to any other officer of the government calling Jones an idiot, including Gen. Patraeus and Sec. Clinton. But they can't send in the FBI...Holder can.

It may be pure coincidence that Jones called this thing off very shortly after the FBI came calling.  For the sake of the Republic, I sure hope it is.

There are many good reasons to oppose the proposed burning of the Koran:  It lumps Islamic jihadists together with the huge majority of Muslims who want to live in peace; it disrespects an entire religion; and it will be offensive and hurtful to individual Muslims.  It is ungenerous and, if I may, unAmerican (I know the Left has forbidden use of the word "unAmerican," but I might get a pass this time, since I'm using it to agree with them).

Some would also say it's unChristian, but I'm not going there.

There is, however, one lousy reason to oppose the planned Koran burning, and that's the threat that, if it goes forward, there could be violent retaliation.

If Rev. Terry Jones persists in this perverse, blockheaded and insulting exercise of his First Amendment rights, he should be able to do it without physical retaliation directed at him, much less directed at others.  I would take that to be elementary among those dedicated to free speech.  But I'm not hearing it much.  Indeed, what I'm hearing is that Jones should stand down because, among other things, there could be a violent response.

Am I the only one who thinks that's thuggishness?  And that instead of mumbling to ourselves that, yes, we need to worry about violence, we should be saying that violence won't be tolerated no matter how offensive this Jones stunt turns out to be?  If an atheist group proposed to burn the Bible to protest "In God We Trust" on our national currency, and some crazy sect then snarled that the burning could provoke violence, should our leaders  --  or any respectable person  --  take the position that the sect's threat was a reason the atheists should stand down?  Or should they say that, in this country, the peaceable tolerance of free speech, no matter how offensive, is built into the price we pay for our liberty?

You can't get maturity, respect or tolerance  --  from Rev. Jones or anyone else  --  at the point of a gun.  And those employing gunpoint-like threats in the present controversy, or urging the rest of us to bow to them, have some answering to do themselves. 

As noted here, California has completed the drawn-out process of establishing its protocol through the Administrative Procedure Act process. A date of Sept. 29 was set for the long-overdue execution of Albert Brown, as noted in this story by Richard De Atley in the Riverside Press-Enterprise.

The Superior Court judge in Marin County said that her stay is still in effect, and the California Attorney General went to the Court of Appeal with a writ petition. That case is California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al. v. The Superior Court of Marin County, A129450.  The petition was filed September 1. The next day, the court issued an order on three points. First was a deficiency in service of process, which was quickly corrected. Second, the court set fast-track briefing: opposition by Sept. 8 (today) and reply by Sept. 13. Most importantly,

We advise the parties that this court might proceed by issuing a peremptory writ in the first instance. (See Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 171, 177-180.) Generally the court will employ "the accelerated Palma procedure ... only when petitioner's entitlement to relief is so obvious that no purpose could reasonably be served by plenary consideration of the issue ... or where there is an unusual urgency requiring acceleration of the normal process." (Ng v. Superior Court (1992) 4 Cal.4th 29, 35.)

Sounds like they are serious.

BTW, I was at the annual conference of the Association of Government Attorneys in Capital Litigation last week. (It's good once a year to get together with the fighters for justice in person, rather than the email and telephone interaction we normally do.) Anyway, the fellow from Texas advised against scheduling more than two executions in a given week. The folks from California didn't think that would be an issue.

Remember a few days ago, when, in response to the controversy about the Ground Zero Mosque, liberals were reminding us of the First Amendment and  -- at an even higher decibel level  -- the value of tolerance, even for religious expression some might find hurtful and offensive?

Remember that?

Now there's a new controversy involving a minister for a small congregation in Florida.  The minister is planning to burn copies of the Koran to protest Islam (or something  --  I confess I don't understand precisely what he has in mind).

Are the liberals reminding us of all that tolerance stuff that was so important last week?

Not exactly.  Here's what a leading liberal, who also happens to be our chief prosecutor (and thus in a uniquely menacing position to chill speech) has to say.  Fox News reports:

WASHINGTON -  Attorney General Eric Holder is calling the planned burning of the Quran at a Florida church idiotic and dangerous.

That's the word from religious leaders who met with Holder for nearly an hour Tuesday to discuss recent attacks on Muslims and mosques around the United States.

The meeting was closed to reporters, but a Justice Department official who was present confirmed that Holder said that the plan by the Rev. Terry Jones to burn copies of the Quran at his church in Gainesville, Fla., Saturday was idiotic.

 'Lan sakes alive!  Not a word about tolerance, pluralism, the First Amendment or any of that.

For the record, Mr. Holder is correct on the merits.  Burning the Koran is idiotic and dangerous (as General Patraeus has noted).  To treat all Muslims as terrorists, and the Koran as a terror manual, is, for starters, factually wildly incorrect, not to mention disgraceful.  But the point to remember is that our Attorney General appears to be quite selective in his appreciation of free speech rights.  Some conservative extremists might worry about this.

A study by Seena Fazel and colleagues in the September issue of the Archives of General Psychiatry is generating a bit of a buzz among mental health professionals - and it provides a good lesson on how the results of a good study can be viewed depending on the interpretative lens one wants to look through. 

The study examined arrests for violence among people with bipolar disorder in Sweden.  The study is notable because Sweden maintains a national mandatory health registrar which makes large epidemiological population studies possible.  This is in contrast to the approach taken in most other studies which rely on sampling which is prone to sampling bias and other errors. 

And what did Fazel and colleagues discover?

For people with bipolar disorder alone, the risk of violence was comparable to the general population.  But for those with bipolar disorder and substance abuse, the link was strong: the adjusted odds ratio was 6.4%.  That's a substantial increase in the risk of violence compared to the general population.  So, what's the take home message?

One might conclude that the association between bipolar disorder and violence is negligible and this study helps prove that fact.  But with the prevalence of substance abuse among those with bipolar disorder around 50% such conclusions seem overly simplistic.  Indeed as the authors themselves conclude: "Available data suggest a common familial etiology for bipolar disorder, violent criminality, and substance abuse."  Untangling that etiology has proven difficult but claims that "people with a severe mental illness are no more likely to be violent than anyone else - unless they abuse drugs or alcohol, a study has suggested" seems to understate matters a bit.

 

The LA Times has this unsurprising editorial about the California Assembly's recent defeat of SB399, or in their words, the Assembly's refusal "to lead California out of the Dark Ages by banning sentences of life without the possibility of parole for juveniles."  (Read Kent's previous posts about the bill here, here, and here.)  Characterizing the bill as "extremely modest," the article implores Senator Yee to push again for such a law in the future in the hopes that "[a]t some point, the Assembly with find the courage to do the just thing."  The article implies that LWOP for juveniles serves neither of the two functions of incarceration - punishment and protection of the public - based on general studies of juvenile delinquency patterns.  Notably, the article omits the fact, noted in Sacramento District Attorney Jan Scully's press release, that LWOP is only available to juvenile offenders ages 16 to 18, convicted of first degree murder with special circumstances - not, as the article seems to suggest, to "children ... capable of reform" who find themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time. 

Executions to Resume in California?:  According to California prison officials, new lethal injection procedures went into effect on Sunday for executions in the state.  After scheduling of executions in California was put on hold in 2006, the state was required to undergo a time consuming regulatory adopting process - which it completed on Sunday.  A superior court judge, however, ordered an indefinite ban on executions "unless and until" she says otherwise.  Prison officials claim they plan on going forward with any planned executions - the first of which has been scheduled for September 29th - but will honor the judge's order if it remains in effect at that time.  Read the AP's story here.

Solidarity on Ohio's Death Row:  One Ohio death row inmate is seeking to keep a fellow death row inmate alive long enough to testify on his behalf, reports the AP.  Inmate #1, Danny Lee Hill, was sentenced to death for raping and killing a 12-year-old boy in 1985.  He has argued - unsuccessfully - for years that he is mentally disabled and thus cannot be constitutionally executed.  He is now asking a federal judge to delay the execution of inmate #2, Kevin Keith, who is scheduled for execution on September 15th for killing three people, including a 4-year-old girl, in 1994.  (Read CJLF's previous post about Keith here.)  Hill claims that as his fellow inmate, Keith can attest to Hill's mental disability by providing information about Hill's infrequent bathing and cell-cleaning habits.

"Victims Visitors' Day":  The Daily Citizen (GA) has this story about Georgia's countywide "Victims Visitors' Days," at which crime victims and their relatives have the opportunity to speak one-on-one with members of the state parole board.  Victims can receive information about the offender's current status, "have input" into the parole process, and meet with victim service providers.  One former member of the state's pardons and parole board said that the events often provide some relief to victims and help them on their paths to recovery.  Since 2006, 13 Victims Visitors' Days have been held in Georgia.

21 Life Terms... Plus 433 Years:  After being convicted earlier this month of 22 felony counts, a Los Angeles man was sentenced yesterday to 21 life terms (10 of which were stayed) and a base term of 433 years, reports the AP.  In 2008, Charles Juan Proctor's use of a razor blade during his attacks of six women in the Long Beach area gave him the nickname "box cutter."  One victim testified that Proctor dug a blade into her neck and cheek and twisted it to make the wound deeper.  During sentencing, presiding Judge Gary Ferrari referred to the Proctor's crime spree as "unconscionable" and told him "I can say absolutely ... you deserve each of these 433 years."

Federal Judge Holds Hearing in MA Death Penalty Case:  A federal judge yesterday held a hearing in the case of Gary Lee Sampson, the first person to be scheduled for execution in Massachusetts since 1947.  After Sampson pleaded guilty to the stabbing deaths of two men in 2001, a federal jury recommended a sentence of death - rejecting his proferred defense of mental disease or brain damage.  After imposing the sentence, presiding U.S. District Court Judge Mark Wolf angered some family members of the victims by stating that he believed Sampson was indeed mentally ill.  Judge Wolf is now also the presiding judge over Sampson's federal habeas proceeding, and family members are concerned that he will get a second chance to avoid imposing a death sentence for Sampson.  Read the Boston Globe's story here.

James Taranto at the WSJ has found a word for an attitude that often comes up in debates on crime, especially capital punishment, although the focus of Taranto's column is the Ground Zero mosque dispute. The word is "oikophobia."  It is the opposite of xenophobia.  It is contempt and loathing of the familiar.  The source is this essay at Civitas in England by Roger Scruton: "the disposition, in any conflict, to side with 'them' against 'us', and the felt need to denigrate the customs, culture and institutions that are identifiably 'ours.' "  Taranto explains the American variant of this attitude:

Yet the oiks' vision of themselves as an intellectual aristocracy violates the first American principle ever articulated: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal . . ."

This cannot be reconciled with the elitist notion that most men are economically insecure bitter clinging intolerant bigots who need to be governed by an educated elite. Marxism Lite is not only false; it is, according to the American creed, self-evidently false. That is why the liberal elite finds Americans revolting.

Tim Redmond at the San Francisco Bay Guardian is very upset with California Assemblywoman Fiona Ma for voting against the bill to effectively abolish life without parole for the very worst 17-year-old murderers.  We have a different take, of course.  We will put aside our disagreements with Ms. Ma on other issues and give her a Profile in Courage award on this one.  The pressure from the soft-on-crime crowd was intense, and the major newspapers had lined up, repeating Senator Yee's vignettes without verification.  Here is the statement from Ms. Ma's office, as quoted in the SFBG story:

I did not come to my decision on SB 399 easily - it's legislation that I have carefully reviewed and considered for months. While I acknowledge that some juveniles in the correctional system may have the capacity to be rehabilitated after decades of being incarcerated, I feel that we cannot reset a defendant's clock 25 years later expecting a victim's family will reset their hearts.

Blago Holdout Juror Talks:  Juror JoAnn Chiakulas - the holdout juror in former Governor Rob Blagojevich's trial - recently told the Chicago Tribune that she stands by her decisions.  This AP story reports that Chiakulas found Blago's recorded statements about allegedly selling President Obama's former Senate seat too disorganized to constitute a criminal conspiracy.  Chiakulas also expressed concerns about the credibility of some of the government's key witnesses, who had cut deals with prosecutors before the trial.  A judge announced yesterday that Blago's retrial will begin the week of January 4th.  

Escaped NC Convict Charged with Murder in CA:   The San Diego Union Tribune reports prosecutors yesterday charged Michael Eugene Richardson with two counts of special-circumstance murder for the deaths of his wife and mother-in-law, who were found in a wrecked car in what appears to be a staged auto accident.  Before her death, Richardson's wife reported to authorities her discovery that Richardson had been maintaining a sexual relationship with his 17-year-old niece.  Richardson's run-ins with the law date back to the '80s and reach coast-to-coast - in 1982, he escaped from a North Carolina prison after serving only a few years of a 30-year sentence for armed robbery.  He was captured in 2000, but was paroled back to California after serving only a few years.  

AZ Governor Files Brief in Appeal:   Lawyers for Arizona Governor Jan Brewer yesterday filed their first brief in the appeal of last month's ruling putting the state's controversial immigration law on hold, reports the AP.  The state is appealing to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that the district judge improperly relied on speculation that the law would place an unconstitutional burden on legal immigrants in the U.S.

Trial for USS Cole Bomber Delayed:   Approaching the 10th anniversary of the terrorist attack of the USS Cole, during which 17 sailors were killed and dozens more injured, the DOJ this week indicated that there "are not charges either pending or contemplated" for Adb al-Rahim al-Nashiri, the suspected bomber.  The Department of Defense claims, however, that prosecutors in the Office of Military Commissions are actively investigating a case and developing charges against him.  In any event, friends and families of those killed aboard the Cole remain frustrated with the government's delay in seeking justice.  Read the Washington Post's article here.   

Felony Stupid:  The AP has this story about a Washington state man who appeared in court to face a methamphetamine charge... with a bag of meth in his pocket.  He now faces an additional felony possession charge after a guard discovered the drugs during a pat down.     

I go past the California State Capitol twice a day, so I see a lot of silly demonstrations and displays.  This one goes in the Hall of Infame.

The banner says "1920 -- Votes for Women; 2010 -- Vote for Women's Values."

So let me get this straight. Barbara Boxer and Ann Coulter are both women. So in terms of values, they have more in common with each other than Boxer does with Barack Obama or Coulter does with Glenn Beck, right?

It seems like the message here is similar to the one directed at black conservatives such as Clarence Thomas and Thomas Sowell.  Don't think for yourself.  Don't stray from the script.  If you do, you are not "authentic." 

This kind of stereotyping is a betrayal of the drive for equal rights, not a celebration of it.

So what are "women's values" on issues of crime and punishment? I haven't seen any strong correlation between sex and positions on this issue.

Update: It's worse than I thought. The rally was staged by the California Nurses Association for the purpose of taking cheap shots at the person who is at least even money to be the first woman governor of California. Jack Chang has this story in the SacBee.

CNA Executive Director Rose DeMoro said, "We're basically here to call attention to the hypocrisy of her running and to say just because you're female, that doesn't make you a woman."

Yep. That's pretty much the same as the "not authentic" comments noted above.

Q:  What country is the new Workers Paradise of the Western Hemisphere, embodying compassionate socialist values?

A:  Venezuela, courtesy of Hugo Chavez.

Q:  What country was proudly the first to abolish the death penalty?

A:  Venezuela (1863, in its Constitution).

Q:  What country has the highest murder rate for any large nation in the world?

A:  You got it  --  Venezuela.

I'm no fan of these international "studies" relentlessly tossed out to show that the United States has a murder rate higher than countries (mostly in Western Europe) without capital punishment.  But since they're all the rage with the DPIC and similar outfits, I thought I would join the fun by noting this story from the New York Times:  "Venezuela, More Deadly Than Iraq, Wonders Why."

Yes, why indeed.  You will not be surprised to hear that, among the numerous reasons the Times suggests, the absence of capital punishment nowhere appears.  Indeed the story omits this fact altogether.

This gem, however does appear, concerning the efforts of the National Police to "respect human rights."  The Times quotes a high police official remarking, "I'm not saying we'll be weak...but the idea is to use dialogue and dissuasion as methods of verbal control when approaching problems."  Gads, this guy must get his stuff from Amnesty International press releases.  I haven't heard as much mush since Eric Holder's last speech.

The whole thing, here  http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/23/world/americas/23venez.html, is an eye-opener.  Bear it in mind the next time an abolitionist starts in on you with "the murder rate in the United States....." 

                                                                                                                             

 

Persuasive Appellant Now Triple-Homicide Suspect:  The Seattle Times has this story about John Allen Booth Jr., currently on the loose and wanted for three murders committed last weekend in Washington state.  Booth's life of crime began at age 13, and his record ranges from thefts and trespassing to witness intimidation and serious assault charges.  The article details Booth's successful journeys through the criminal appeals process, which almost always ended in an early release and an additional crime.  After his last stint in prison for two counts of first-degree assault for bludgeoning a man in the head with a crowbar, Booth was again released early and is now wanted for three point-blank gun murders.

Feds Dismissing Deportation Cases:  The Houston Chronicle reports that the Department of Homeland Security has begun reviewing thousands of pending deportation cases and moving to dismiss those against illegal immigrants with no serious criminal record.  A memo from an ICE official explains that the agency has the capacity to remove about 4% of the illegal immigrant population in the country annually, and the deportation of those with serious criminal records is the top priority.  Still, critics claim that dismissal of these other cases amounts to backdoor "amnesty" by the Obama administration and will leave local agencies with no choice but to pick up the slack.  

Federal Murder Convict Spared the Death Penalty:   A federal jury was unable to reach a unanimous decision on the death penalty for Timothy O'Reilly reports the AP. See prior post on this case here. Both the story and the defense lawyer quoted in the story erroneously say the jury decided against the death penalty.  No, they did not.  The jury could not decide, and the badly written federal death penalty law requires a life sentence as the result of nondecision.  In 2001, while robbing a federal credit union, O'Reilly murdered 30-year-old guard Norman Stephens.   

We hear more and more that brutally tight state budgets require cutbacks in imprisonment.  Sentences for the much-heralded and apparently ubiquitous "low-level, first-time" offender should not include a jail term, and some  --  or many  --  of those already in prison should be released early.  The money just isn't there.

Those of us not born yesterday recognize this argument as a make-weight for the pre-existing position that sentences have been too harsh for years (roughly the years coinciding with a dramatic drop in the crime rate, although that last part is kept quiet).  The frugality argument is simply one that opponents of serious sentencing figure can gain some traction where their other arguments have deservedly failed. 

But as ever, the first thing you need to do with the argument is check its factual premises.  It sounds plausible because the economy in fact remains weak, as everyone but the President seems to know.  The problem is that not every plausible proposition is a true proposition.

Hence I want to call to your attention this news clip from California, one of the states where the release-early-to-save-money pitch is at its peak.  The story concerns the recent opening of a taxpayer funded half-billion dollar high school.

That's not a misprint.  It's half a BILLION.   Actually, several million more than that.  For a high school.

This high school doesn't sound a bit like the one I went to.  It does, however, sound a lot like the Acapulco Four Seasons. 

Moral of story:  It's not about money.  It's about getting serious.

9th Circuit Reversal #1:  The 9th Circuit last week reversed the death sentence of David Scott Detrich.  In 1989, Detrich sexually assaulted and stabbed to death Elizabeth Souter and dumped her body in the desert near Tucson.  He was convicted of first-degree murder, kidnapping and sexual assault and sentenced to death.  The 9th Circuit reversed, finding that Detrich's attorney provided ineffective assistance during the penalty phase of trial.

9th Circuit Reversal #2:  The AP reports that the 9th Circuit today reversed the convictions of Kurt Williams Havelock, who mailed to various media outlets letters containing violent threats and describing his planned massacre at the 2008 Super Bowl.  Havelock also drove to the stadium on the day of the Super Bowl armed with an assault rifle, but turned himself in before firing any shots.  He was convicted in federal court of six counts of mailing threatening communications, but the 9th Circuit reversed because the letters were addressed (i.e., on the envelope) to corporations - not natural persons as required for a conviction under the statute.

CA Teen Sentenced to 159 Years for Crime Spree:  A Sacramento judge on Friday sentenced Sammie Lee Nichols to a term of 159 years to life for 18 felonies Nichols committed during his teen years, reports the AP.  At age 17, Nichols went on a year-long home invasion crime spree, entering female victims' homes and ordering them at gun point to withdraw money from an ATM.  He also raped two of his victims.  Post-Graham v. Florida, Nichols is not eligible for LWOP. 

"A Conservative is a Liberal Who Got Mugged the Night Before"?:   The Miami Herald (FL) reports Marleine Bastien was robbed at gunpoint while waiting in a church parking lot for a campaign event.  Bastien is a Democratic candidate currently campaigning for a seat in the House.

Eric Felten has this article in the WSJ.

Beloit College in Wisconsin put out its annual "Mindset List" this week, a collection of pop-cultural tidbits meant to give professors a quick peek into their new students' knowledge base. It's a sort of academic parallel to the Steely Dan song "Hey, Nineteen," a lament that the young don't get the cultural references of even a decade past. Come to think of it, the class of 2014 probably has no idea who Steely Dan is.

Shouldn't that be "who Steely Dan are"?  Anyhow, Felten's main point is in the subheading: "Jokes aside, Beloit's arbiters may be the out-of-it ones."  One paragraph refers to a CJLF case:

Or maybe the widely cited list is just intellectually sloppy. Consider item 22, which asserts that, for those who have just turned 18, "Cross-burning has always been deemed protected speech." Actually, the Supreme Court ruled in 2003, in Virginia v. Black et al., that laws criminalizing the Ku-Kluxers' pernicious pyrotechnics can be perfectly constitutional. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote in the court's majority opinion that states can "outlaw cross burnings done with the intent to intimidate."

The "et al." matters here. There were actually two cases.  Barry Black, the Klansman, burned a cross at a rally.  He was expressing his ideology in general terms, not directed to anyone in particular.  Despicable as it is, that was protected speech.  The other case involved a couple of punks named Elliott and O'Mara who burned a cross on a neighbor's lawn to intimidate him and his family. That is not protected speech, and their convictions were reinstated.  CJLF's brief, which addresses primarily the latter case, is here.

There really hasn't been any huge change in this area.  Black and R.A.V. v. St. Paul are reasonably consistent with prior First Amendment law.  They are clarifications rather than quantum leaps.  The free speech rights of hate-spewing bigots had been protected for a long time.  See, e.g., National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43 (1977). So this is not a good example of a big shift in life experience between generations.

Heated Debate in Blagojevich Jury Room:  Sarah Ostman and Rummana Hussain of the Chicago Sun-Times have this story about tensions in the jury room during former Governor Rod Blagojevich's trial.  The jury foreman stated that deliberations were contentious from the get-go.  Another juror explained that many of them were overwhelmed by the amount of evidence presented and frustrated by the government's seemingly-illogical presentation of the case.  The jurors focused their deliberations on the most serious charges - those related to the former governor's alleged attempt to sell Barack Obama's Senate seat - but ended deadlocked due to one holdout juror.  If the feds decide to retry the case, the jury foreman recommends that they focus more on these charges and simplify the rest.

Parole Board Denies Clemency for Ohio Death Row Inmate:  The Dayton Daily News (OH) reports that the state's parole board this morning unanimously rejected a clemency plea from Kevin Keith, who is scheduled for execution next month.  In 1994, Keith shot to death 24-year-old Marichell Chatman, her 4-year-old daughter, and her 39-year-old aunt.  Two other children were also wounded during the attack.  Chatman's brother was an undercover police informant, who had assisted police weeks earlier in a drug raid leading to Keith's arrest.  In his appeal for clemency, Keith, with support from several innocence projects, argued another suspect was the killer and that Keith had a strong alibi.  The board was not persuaded, claiming no evidence was presented to it that would alter the outcome of the trial.  Now, Keith's fate rests in the hands of Ohio Governor Ted Strickland, who has the final word on Keith's scheduled execution. 

Reversed Murder Convictions Coast-to-Coast:  A California appeals court yesterday reduced the second degree murder conviction of Seth Cravens to manslaughter, reports the San Diego Union Tribune.  In May 2007, Cravens and several other men dubbed the "Bird Rock Bandits" were involved in an altercation with victim Emery Kauanui Jr.  Cravens punched Kauanui once in the head, causing him fall on the pavement and suffer a fatal skull fracture.  The court reduced the conviction, finding the evidence did not support a finding of the requisite mental state for murder.  In Massachusetts, the state's high court ordered a new trial today for Eric Durand, convicted of first-degree murder in 2006, reports by the Boston Globe.  In 2003, Durand beat to death his girlfriend's 4-year-old son, throwing a toy shark at him as punishment and eventually delivering a fatal blow to the boy's stomach.  At trial, the medical examiner testifying as to the boy's autopsy report was not the medical examiner who had prepared it.  The court found this to be a violation of Durand's right to confrontation and reversed.

Leniency for Juvenile Offenders in Proposed CA Bill:  The San Fransisco Chronicle has this story about SB399, a bill that would allow some juvenile offenders serving life sentences to petition a court for review of their case after ten years - and possibly receive a significant sentence reduction.  Supporters claim the bill is needed to account for the differences between juvenile and adult offenders.  Opponents argue the bill is unnecessary, as only the "worst of the worst" juvenile offenders are up for LWOP, especially in light of the recent SCOTUS decision Graham v. Florida.  SB399 has already been approved by the state Senate and is set to be taken up by the Assembly as early as this week.

Early Released Rapist Arrested for Murder:  The Journal Gazette (IN) reports on Tuesday's arrest of Edward Kinslow for the murder and rape of 46-year-old Darlene Day, who was found dead in her home in May from blunt force trauma.  In 2003, Kinslow was convicted in Indiana of rape and sentenced to 12 years.  He was released after serving slightly more than half his term, however, because Indiana prisoners receive one day of credit for each day served with good behavior.

Oklahoma City Bomber's Whole Grain-Deficient Diet:  The AP reports a judge dismissed a federal civil rights lawsuit filed by Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Terry Nichols, who claimed his prison diet constituted cruel and unusual punishment because it was insufficient in whole grains, fiber, and raw fruits.  Nichols also alleged that by keeping him from his preferred diet, prison officials violated his First Amendment right to freedom of religion.  U.S. District Judge Christine Arguello disagreed and tossed out the suit.

We often hear that legalization of marijuana is not a first step toward legalizing everything, and that claims to the contrary are just so much fear mongering by Puritanical types who relish putting otherwise law abiding citizens in prison.  The truth, so we are told, is that marijuana legalizers understand that the harder drugs, such as heroin and cocaine, should remain prohibited.

Yes, well, as Emily Litella said on Saturday Night Live, "Never mind."

The London Telegraph has this story.

Tonight, Texas is scheduled to finally carry out justice in the case of the ringleader of one of the state's most notorious crimes. In 1993, two teenage girls, Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Pena, took a shortcut home and ran in to a violent street gang led by Peter Cantu. The facts are described in CJLF's brief in the first Medellin case in the Supreme Court here.  The victims' memorial web page is here.  CJLF filed two more briefs in Medellin's case: this one in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and this one in the U.S. Supreme Court in its second review of the case. In the last brief, we were pleased to represent Randy and Sandra Ertman as well.

Michael Graczyk of AP has this story on the case and Mr. Ertman.  He has previously attended the executions of Medellin and Derrick O'Brien, and he will be there tonight for Cantu's. Two other perpetrators escaped execution because they were 17 at the time of the crime. Some of Cantu's supporters claim it is unfair that he is executed while they were spared due to a small difference in age. That is an argument that Roper v. Simmons was wrongly decided and that it was unfair to let the others off from the punishment they so richly deserved; it is not a good argument we should let Cantu off as well. In any event, Cantu is distinguished by his leadership role in the crime as well as his age.

Update: Mission accomplished.

The U.S. Supreme Court issued this orders list yesterday. Nothing of substantive interest. This order in Michigan v. Bryant, No. 09-150, a confrontation case, has some mild interest for Court-watchers:

The motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument is granted. The motion of Richard D. Friedman for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument is denied. Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of these motions.

I believe that is the first time the words "Justice Kagan" have appeared in a Supreme Court order. The recusal is no surprise. The US amicus brief was filed May 6, while Ms. Kagan was still SG. So the Bryant case will be decided by an 8-Justice court. A 4-4 division would mean that the Michigan Supreme Court decision in favor of the defendant is affirmed, but no Supreme Court precedent is set.

Why is it a bad idea to tell criminals that they're mere vessels of adverse social forces and thus, in all fairness, entitled to understanding rather than punishment?

First, because it's false.  Second, because it retards the development of a sense of guilt, an important ingredient in changing behavior.  Below are the first three paragraphs of a piece in today's Wall Street Journal that makes the point:

 

Authorities in China recently made a surprising announcement: They want to see an end to public shaming of miscreants by the police.

It's a step in the right direction that shame is falling out of favor as an official punishment in China. Thankfully, here, too, it remains the exception rather than the rule. Most of us have little appetite for bringing back the town stocks, and "perp walks" can end up parading an innocent suspect. The ugliness of shame makes us want to avert our eyes wherever we find it.

Yet in rejecting the cruelty of public humiliation, it's important that we not make the mistake of tossing aside guilt as well. Despite the bad reputation it has acquired since perhaps Freud, few emotions are more socially productive or personally beneficial. Let's not hold it against guilt that many people can't distinguish it from its evil twin, shame.

Blagojevich Jury Deadlocked:  The Chicago Tribune reports that the jury in the case of former Governor Rod Blagojevich has reached a verdict for two counts but is deadlocked on the rest.  Blagojevich is on trial in federal court for 24 counts, ranging from rackteering to wire fraud.  The jury, today on their 12th day of deliberations, also told the judge they have not yet voted on the 11 wire fraud counts.  U.S. District Court Judge James Zagel instructed the jury to continue deliberations.

CA Death Row Inmate Dies of Natural Causes:  Robert Rubane Diaz, a former nurse sentenced to death in 1981 for killing 12 patients, died yesterday of natural causes reports the AP.  Diaz had been on California's death row since 1984.  51 California death row inmates have died from natural causes since the state reinstated capital punishment in 1978.  13 have been executed.

Arizona Supreme Court Overturns Death Sentence:  The Arizona Republic reports that the state's high court this week overturned the death sentence of Gary Snelling, who strangled 66-year-old Adele Curtis with a lamp cord in 1996.  Snelling was convicted of first-degree murder and in 2008, a jury decided on a sentence of death after finding that the murder was especially cruel.  The Arizona Supreme Court disagreed, concluding that it was unlikely Curtis suffered mental anguish or physical pain because Snelling strangled her quickly and by surprise.

Federal Death Penalty Sought in Ohio Fire:  Federal prosecutors are seeking the death penalty in their case against Antun Lewis, who is charged with setting a Cleveland house on fire resulting in the deaths of eight children and three adults, reports the AP.  Federal prosecutors argue that, because the damaged home was rented with the help of a federal Section 8 rent subsidy, the house was a part of interstate commerce.  The feds therefore have jurisdiction to seek the death penalty because the fatalities were caused by the alleged arson of government property.  Since the 1960s, only three federal defendants have been executed.