<< Bikie Gangs -- Injunctions Down Under | Main | Why You Get Stupid at Law School >>

News Scan

| 1 Comment
Death Row Inmate Gets Parole Hearing by Mistake: Brett Barrouquere of the Associated Press reports a death row inmate was allowed to argue his release from prison by mistake. The Kentucky Department of Corrections said the Parole Board erred when it allowed a parole hearing for John Mills. Initially the Knox County Circuit Court threw out the death sentence but Mills was still under a death sentence when the hearing took place because his appeal was pending before the Kentucky Supreme Court. The board voted 2-0 to defer action on Mills for five years. That decision has since been voided and Mills record has been corrected, but had they voted in Mills favor he could have been released. The Department of Corrections spokesman Todd Henson said they are looking into the mistake and it is being addressed. Mills was sentenced to death after the murder of 79 year old of Arthur Phipps.  .

Dying Man's Blinks Key Testimony: Tina Susman of the Los Angeles Times reports an Ohio jury will get to see testimony from a dying man's blinks. Ricardo Woods shot David Chandler in the head and neck last year but Chandler stayed alive long enough for investigators to interview him. Chandler was unable to speak or move but was able to communicate with investigators by blinking his eyes. When shown a picture of Woods, Chandler blinked three times to identify the shooter. Chandler was shot on October 28, 2010 and died two weeks later from his injuries. Ohio Judge Beth Myers watched the video and ruled in September that it could be shown to jurors. Myers stated she found it reliable and and said that it wasn't made by routine involuntary eye blinking, but by pronounced, exaggerated eye movements.

Men Sentenced in Execution-Like Slayings: David Hanners of Pioneers Press reports two men convicted in June of executing three people were sentenced today to three consecutive life sentences by a federal judge in Minneapolis. When arguing for the sentence the prosecuting attorney stated, "The defendants slaughtered three different human beings. Each victim deserves to have the defendant be punished for the crime committed against him or her." The issue before the federal judge was whether to have the sentences run concurrently or consecutively. The judge said, "Each victim deserved a distinct sentence for the crimes and that making them concurrent would amount to cutting the defendants a bargain they didn't deserve."

1 Comment

I don't know why they still allow someone to get a parole when they know that this man already committed a criminal act. It may be good for him, but how bout for the victim's family?

Eula from scanner diapositives

Leave a comment

Monthly Archives