<< News Scan | Main | Alien Release Notice, Access, and Byrne Grants >>


News Scan

October 29, 2019 1:05 PM | Posted by CJLF Staff | 4 Comments
Jury Gives Death Penalty to Hollywood Ripper:  An article in Courthouse News Service reports that multiple murderer, Michael Garguilo, known as the Hollywood Ripper, has received the death penalty from a unanimous jury.  Under California law the sentencing jury reaches a verdict, rather than making a recommendation, regarding whether a capital murderer should receive a death sentence or life without the possibility of parole.  Technically, the judge announces the sentence after the jury reaches its verdict, but it is extremely rare for a judge to reject the jury's decision.  Garguilo, was convicted for the brutal stabbing murders of Ashley Ellerin, 22, Maria Bruno, 32, and the attempted murder of Michelle Murphy, between 2001 and 2008.  The victims were killed by a distinct pattern of stab wounds, and substantial evidence including a DNA match, tied Garguilo to the crimes.  DNA evidence also tied him to the 1993 stabbing murder of an 18-year-old woman in Illinois who lived in his neighborhood.  This case was widely publicized because Ashton Kutcher was called to testify about his connection to one of the victims.  While Garguilo's attorneys claimed that his alleged mental illness diminished his responsibility of the killings, the jury did not accept this defense. 

4 Comments

Adamakis | October 31, 2019 6:36 AM | Reply

“Garguilo's attorneys claimed that his alleged mental illness
diminished his responsibility of the killings”

How many separate murders, seen through to the end, can one commit
before a ‘diminished mental capacity’ becomes ludicrous and logically untenable?

I’m just a simple man, but would we not make progress if this
would be taken as seriously as the Twinkie defense, or the PMS defense?

Adamakis | October 31, 2019 6:50 AM | Reply

Here’s a case of a FULLY FUNCTIONING member of society whose death penalty
was pathetically overturned for his low IQ.

“Twenty years after Joseph Miller was charged with murdering 3 women
in Dauphin County -- he later confessed to a 4th murder -- he has been
charged with yet another [5th] killing."

Two other women survived attacks by Miller before he was arrested:
a Harrisburg woman survived after she was raped, forced to perform
oral sex, stabbed in the head 25 times with a screwdriver, and left for
dead in a wooded area in Perry County.

Another survivor said Miller raped her, bound her in duct tape, beat
her on the head with beer bottles and told her no one would be able
to identify her body when he was done with her.
-----------------
Miller was convicted of the kidnapping, beating and rape of Selina Franklin, 18, and Stephanie McDuffey, 23 [Franklin was 18 years old and looking for a ride
when she was raped and murdered by Miller. McDuffey was 8-months-
pregnant when she was killed..
..confessed to killing another woman, Jeanette Thomas…
Miller also killed Kathi Novena Shenck in 1990 by running over her after she
fled his car, i.e. “run over by a car several times.”
-----------------
DA Ed Marsico [noted] Miller had a low IQ but he functioned in society as a
husband, father and as an employee.

Miller planned the murders with 'rape kits' and more, and successfully
targeted minority women, which showed premeditation, Marsico said.

After Franklin’s murder, Miller was questioned but says he dropped her off, and though Franklin’s necklace was found in his car, he had his wife claims it as hers.
After another attack, Miller is photographed withdrawing money from an ATM
with the victim in his car.
When Miller ditched his car after an attack in 1992, he knowingly climbed a
roof and threatened suicide.
-----------------
10/25/02: Judge Jeannine Turgeon ruled that Miller was mentally
handicapped and the state could not execute him because it
would be "cruel and unusual punishment."

~https://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/04/the_grisly_history_of_joseph_m.html

Kent Scheidegger replied to comment from Adamakis | October 31, 2019 9:11 AM | Reply

In my opinion, the bright-line rule of Atkins v. Virginia should have been limited to those diagnosable as "moderately retarded" or below under the DSM-IV. The rule of Penry v. Lynaugh should have been retained as to the "mildly retarded."

Adamakis replied to comment from Kent Scheidegger | November 1, 2019 7:41 AM | Reply

Perhaps someone can help me with the highlighted section of this {below}.

• Assuming that the author’s assessment of Justice Stevens’s argument
is correct, I cannot understand how his notions have any relevance to
the sentencing phase of a criminal trial!

• Am I wrong in simply concluding that the “risk of wrongful conviction”
has nothing to do with the sentence allowed? Isn’t it extremely
injudicious and indiscreet to outlaw a punishment because of
concern for a “special risk” during the guilt phase?
-----------
Justice John Paul Stevens struck an important blow against the modern death penalty 17 years ago in a Supreme Court decision barring capital punishment
for intellectually disabled people.
In his majority opinion in Atkins v. Virginia, Justice Stevens said the “cognitive and behavioral impairments” of the intellectually disabled made them “less morally culpable” and put them at “special risk of wrongful conviction.”

Those defendants, he warned, would be more prone to give false confessions
and less capable of helping their lawyers mount a strong defense.
It was a step toward greater humanity in the law…

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/17/
opinion/stevens-supreme-court.html

Leave a comment

Search

Subscribe to feed Subscribe to this blog's feed

Subscribe to FULL feed Subscribe to FULL feed

Recent Entries

Monthly Archives