Early Dallas Exoneree Randall Dale Adams died in Ohio Last Year

Randall Dale Adams in 2001 Calling for a Moratorium on
Executions in Texas.

Early Dallas exoneree Randall Dale Adams died in Ohio last year. Jenna, an intern with the Texas Witness to Innocence was working with me on the case of  Randall Dale Adams last month and noticed that tributes.com has listed him as passed away in Ohio. This was very surprising to me, because I had talked with his wife a month before his death inviting him to to participate in our 2010 fall gathering in Chicago. I sent out an email to several journalist who have interviewed him previously and also several individuals in the anti-death penalty movement who had worked with him previously. Scott Cobb of Texas Moratorium Network contacted Pamela Colloff of Texas Monthly, because she written a story on him recently. She was not aware of his death other than a twitter post the night before by Errol Morris, director of the documentary "Thin Blue Line."

Finally Dallas Morning News, almost a year after his death and thanks to our intern's discovery confirmed that he passed away last year in Ohio because of a brain tumor. Associated Press also has published a short article on his death. In 2001 he testified to a committee in the Texas Legislature for a moratorium bill, helping to convince the committee to vote in favor of stopping executions and studying the system.  

New York Times published a long and well deserved obituary about Randall in last week's Sunday paper. Condolences, memories and tributes can be left here.

Day 4: Can't We All Just Get Along?

First posted by Dallas Morning News



This blog post is written by Pamela Skjolsvik, a blogger and author currently finishing her first book, Death Becomes Us. A resident of Bedford, she earned a master's degree in 2010 from Goucher College in Maryland. Her writing has been included in Creative Nonfiction, the Durango Herald, and in the upcoming Ten Spurs literary journal from the University of North Texas.


After the Day of Innocence march and rally at the Capitol, day four of the Alternative Spring Break was low key. Along with the four exonerees who were brought to Austin by www.witnesstoinnocence.org to speak about their lives, we attended a showing of "Incendiary" a new documentary about Todd Cameron Willingham's case. This powerful film by Austin filmmakers Steve Mims and Joe Bailey is playing at SXSW and will be showing again tomorrow. In the film there is commentary from both sides, including Willingham's defense attorney who was and is still convinced that his client was guilty of murder.

There is also footage in the film of Barry Sheck, a New York attorney who started the Innocence Project (www.innocenceproject.org), speaking to the newly appointed forensics commission. I'd heard of Sheck. In fact I recently saw Peter Gallagher portray Sheck in a Hollywood film called "Conviction" with Hillary Swank. So I was like, wow, there he is and Peter Gallagher looks nothing like him.

Anyway, Albert Burrell, one of the exonorees was seated next to me in the theater. During Sheck's impassioned speech in the film, Mr. Burrell tapped me on the arm and said, "That was my lawyer." He said this like a kid pointing out his really cool older brother. I don't know if Sheck really was his attorney, but it got me thinking. Nobody believed in this man. He was locked away, forgotten and headed for an execution. How would I feel if I were treated that way?

I don't know a lot of statistics or studies, but I do know that the death penalty tends to polarize people. Either you are for it or you against it. The middle ground seems to be missing. I would imagine that the reason many haven't given much thought about the death penalty is because they feel it doesn't concern them. If you're a human being, it does.

If I've learned anything from attending this Alternative Spring Break, it is this -- if you believe in a cause, you have to act. And don't be discouraged because your views don't necessarily jibe with popular opinion. Take a look at our history books. Again and again there are incidences of people opposing popular opinion and changing the world for the better. Call me kooky, but I don't think that it's right for our government to kill people for killing people to show that killing people is wrong.

Peace out.

Day 3: Lobbying, and rallying and marching -- Oh My!

First posted by Dallas Morning News. This blog post is written by Pamela Skjolsvik, a blogger and author currently finishing her first book, Death Becomes Us. A resident of Bedford, she earned a master's degree in 2010 from Goucher College in Maryland. Her writing has been included in Creative Nonfiction, the Durango Herald, and in the upcoming Ten Spurs literary journal from the University of North Texas. 


Yesterday was the Day of Innocence lobby day and rally to stop executions in Texas. After a meet and greet with the death row exonerees--Clarence Brandley, Shujaa Graham, Ron Keine and Albert Burrell--I followed the Kids Against the Death Penalty group to the House gallery.

First of all, I am ashamed to admit that I know very little about how our government actually works. (Sorry Mr. Riggle) Call me naïve, or simply optimistic, but I fully expected decorum, but speakers at the podium had to compete with the din of loud voices, casual conversations and a sort of bored indifference to the proceedings. I felt ashamed that no one was paying attention and that less than half of our elected representatives were in attendance. As people scurried around the room pressing buttons at empty desks, Teri Been, whose brother, Jeff Woods, is on death row due to the Law of Parties, had to explain the practice of ghost voting to me.

I was shocked.

As Representative Harold Dutton approached the podium, a voice of reason rang out into the room. Representative Jim Keffer asked that people be respectful and take their conversations outside. I would have loved to quote his actual words, but I could barely hear him. The room hushed as Representative Dutton honored the exonerees who were in attendance with a resolution. In regards to these men's incarceration on death row for crimes they didn't commit he said, "You have gone through hell while living here on earth."
Amen.

After that, I followed the KADP members to several Representatives offices around the Capitol. The kids were concentrating their efforts on the HB 855 and HB 2511, which concern the Law of Parties. The kids spoke mainly with aides, but they were able to speak one on one with Representative Cindy Burkett. Representative Burkett listened attentively to Teri Been's story of her brother's life on death row. As Ms. Been relayed the events of her brother's execution date (he received a stay hours before his execution) she broke down. Representative Burkett hugged Teri and said, "I'm a hugger." And I'm glad she was.


Although the members of KADP are focusing their attention on a very serious issue, they are just teens. As all seven of them entered and left each office, they were sure to take a piece of candy from the various bowls placed by each sign in book. Hey, I did too. In Representative Pete Gallego's office, the kids giddily ventured out onto the balcony to take in the scenery.

As the day wore on, I asked Nick who is fourteen about his work with KADP.

In a very serious manner he told me about their meetings and the protests they've organized. I thought back to my concerns when I was fourteen. If memory serves, the only thing I was passionate about was finding the perfect hair styling product. If only I'd paid more attention in Mr. Riggle's American Government class, I too could have addressed the World Congress in Geneva, like three of the members of KADP did.

"We're like really famous in Switzerland," Nick informs me.

Yeah, I bet they are.

If you'd like to read more about their efforts, go here.

Dallas Morning News Editorial to Anti-Death Penalty Alternative Spring Breakers: "never give up in this monumental quest"

Former Bexar County DA Sam Millsap speaking to participants
at the 2011 Anti-Death Penalty Alternative Spring Break

Our 2011 Anti-Death Penalty Alternative Spring Break is mentioned in an editorial today in the Dallas Morning News:

Editorial: Spring-breakers join an anti-death-penalty crusade

It never would have happened without the curiosity of students.

Last week, Illinois became the 15th state to abolish the death penalty, and it’s worth remembering that the momentum for this policy shift started with investigative journalism students at Northwestern University in 1999. That was the year professor David Protess launched the Medill Innocence Project and his students started systematically building the case for institutional reasonable doubt.

Their work is the foundation for this statement by Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn last week: “Since our experience has shown that there is no way to design a perfect death penalty system, free from the numerous flaws that can lead to wrongful convictions or discriminatory treatment, I have concluded that the proper course of action is to abolish it.”

The Medill work has grown into the Innocence Network, which includes more than 50 schools nationwide, and their researchers have found plenty of shaky cases worth investigating in Texas. For example, Northwestern students were involved in the recent Supreme Court victory for Hank Skinner’s legal team, which is fighting for DNA testing of evidence in his murder case.

This week in Austin, about 30 students from across the country have gathered to learn how they can build upon recent successes during the Anti-Death Penalty Alternative Spring Break. Begun in 2005, this annual event brings students together for a crash course in lobbying and other useful information. This year, they will hear from six men who spent a combined 50 years on death row before having their flawed convictions thrown out.

The students also will attend a special screening of Incendiary, a new documentary about allegations of junk science in the case of Cameron Todd Willingham.

Coincidentally, spring break beach-goers may well have packed John Grisham’s entertaining best-sellerThe Confession, which centers on a seemingly absurd case in which the appeals court closes early instead of considering a life-or-death filing and ignores the fact that the prosecutor was sleeping with the judge. They probably will credit the author’s imagination for the accounts of a forced false confession, absurd jailhouse snitch testimony and botched forensic science.

But all of those examples — all of them — were pulled from real-life cases, and it was often young adults who helped uncover the sordid facts. In the past few years, students from Arlington, Houston and Austin have taken a keener interest in discovering the truth than many jurists elected to the state’s highest appeals court.

We urge those students who are skipping the beaches in order to gather in Austin this week to find ways to work together, learn from one another and never give up in this monumental quest.

Day 2: Don't judge a book by its cover

This blog post is written by Pamela Skjolsvik, a blogger and author currently finishing her first book, Death Becomes Us. A resident of Bedford, she earned a master's degree in 2010 from Goucher College in Maryland. Her writing has been included in Creative Nonfiction, the Durango Herald, and in the upcoming Ten Spurs literary journal from the University of North Texas.

What I personally learned from Day Two's training is that it's one thing to have an opinion about a social injustice, it is quite another to actually do something about it in an effective way. After lectures on media relations, lobbying and grassroots organizing, the alternative spring breakers and I were ready to test our newfound skills in the real world.

We divided into small groups, armed with clipboards and a sense of purpose. We fanned out into the streets of Austin to gather signatures for a moratorium on executions. I spent my time shadowing two students, Chelsea Leggett from UT Arlington and Michael Luke from Texas A&M. While Chelsea is a veteran alternative spring breaker, having attended last year's event, Michael is a newbie who wanted to learn more about the death penalty in Texas. He's originally from New York where the death penalty has been abolished.
When we parked the car, two alternative looking men with tattoos were smoking outside their apartment. I thought for sure they'd agree with us, sign their names and off we'd go. I was wrong. And it kind of stung.
The next young man we approached wouldn't even look at the three of us as he said no. Geez, this was going to be a lot more difficult than I imagined.

But then, as luck would have it, three was our lucky number. We came upon a man seated on a stoop wearing a Texas Longhorn T-Shirt with a matching lunchbox at his side. He was more than happy to sign our petition. "I was in for 15 years. I've been out for four and it's good to be out and earn a paycheck."
Darn tootin'!!!

On our way towards 6th and Congress, we stopped at Wooldridge Square and encountered a large group of, for lack of a better description, bohemian vagrants. Some of them were for the death penalty and some were against.

One young man commented that execution is "kind of what makes Texas, Texas." (And here I was thinking that it was football and barbecue.) Another man, who was missing both of his arms wanted to sign our petition and he did so with his feet. Ironically, he had the best penmanship of all the people who signed our petition.
With a little practice, we eventually hit the jackpot with all of the SXSW attendees. At stop lights and in front of bars, we engaged people in conversations, we made human connections, and we invited those that were interested to stop by tomorrow's rally at the Capitol.
It's at 5:30 on the South Steps of the Texas Capitol.

Day 1: These young voices will soon be heard

From Dallas Morning News:

This blog post is written by Pamela Skjolsvik, a blogger and author currently finishing her first book, Death Becomes Us. A resident of Bedford, she earned a master's degree in 2010 from Goucher College in Maryland. Her writing has been included in Creative Nonfiction, the Durango Herald, and in the upcoming Ten Spurs literary journal from the University of North Texas. 

As the clock ticks towards the initial kick-off of the Alternative Spring Break, Scott Cobb of the Texas Moratorium Network and Hooman Hedayati of Witness to Innocence affix posters and banners to the walls of the generic classroom at UT to liven things up and relay the message of the week--No More Executions.
A sprinkling of solo "breakers" and a small group of college gals from USC enter the room and take their seats near the front. They are followed by a boisterous group of teenagers who stake their claim on the cool kid seats in the back row. I overhear one of the teens say, "Do we get to pick and choose what we do, cuz I wannna have a spring break."

This should be interesting.

Before my cynicism gets the best of me, we introduce ourselves to the group. Several people are repeat attendees, including some of the teens. Most are in school. The oldest members of our group are three women from Houston, one of which is "eighty-five years young." The majority of us are from Texas, which we find out from Danielle Dirks, a PhD candidate who teaches "Capital Punishment in America" at UT, is the state that leads the nation in executions.
The stand out fact that I learn during Ms. Dirks' talk is that "In Texas, a death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years." (Dallas Morning News, March 8, 1992)

My immediate reaction upon learning this fact is--wouldn't this money be better spent on say, I don't know, education or after school programs? Let's put the moral argument against the death penalty aside for just a moment--don't you think that Texas is being fiscally irresponsible by seeking the death penalty? It's not like sentencing a person to life without the possibility of parole is being soft on crime. Prison is not exactly summer camp.
Later in the evening, we receive a phone call from Stanley Howard, a man in prison in Illinois who was wrongfully sentenced to death for murder. Afterwards, Sam Millsap, a former County District Attorney from San Antonio and Judge Charlie Baird from Travis County spoke about their thoughts on the death penalty. This was the most surprising event of the evening and if I took anything away from their talk, it was this--mistakes are made, especially in regards to eyewitness testimony, which is a powerful prosecutorial tool in the court.
I suggest checking out the book, "The Seven Sins of Memory: How the Mind Forgets and Remembers" by Daniel L. Schacter
Day one was a great introduction to the anti-death penalty movement. I'm excited about tomorrow and I look forward to chatting with the other members of our group, especially the teens. As witnessed by their questions throughout the evening, they knew more about this issue than me. (But that isn't saying much.) These young men and women are all members of a group called KADP or Kids Against the Death Penalty.
Their opinions and voices may not be heard in the election process, but they soon will be, and that makes me feel pretty hopeful about our future.

Dallas Morning News Editorial Board Names a Moratorium on Executions a Top Priority in 2011

The Dallas Morning News Editorial Board has named a moratorium on executions and a study commission one of their major goals of 2011.

Texas legislators gather in Austin in nine days. If ever there were a year for progress on some of this newspaper's goals for our city, region and state, this is it. We warned last year that the price continues to grow for the state and city as our leaders keep kicking major problems down the road. Texas and Dallas have a chance to find solutions this year. In fact, 2011 is the year for our leaders (and wannabes) to stand and deliver. You may recall the 1980s movie by that title, the one about crusading school principal Jaime Escalante. We see no reason the same couldn't be said for our legislators, council members and school trustees – and their constituents. Enough kicking the can. Stand and deliver.

Get it right on criminal justice

The goals

• Revamp rules for eyewitness evidence.

• Require digital recording of interrogations.

• Examine the appeals and pardons procedures.

• Create a reliable forensic science commission.

• Halt executions and appoint a panel to recommend changes to Texas' use of the death penalty.

The plan

Some of the sensible reforms that could have kept innocent people out of prison failed in the 2009 session to procedural motions. But after a year in which human error was exposed in the high-profile Anthony Graves case – on top of a foundation of doubt from years of DNA exonerations – the need for justice reform is too big to ignore.

That's why we will call on legislators to revamp and make uniform rules for dealing with eyewitness evidence. This most unreliable form of evidence cannot be left to the shaky methods of untrained investigators. We also will keep pushing the Legislature to mandate digital recording and archiving of interrogations. Likewise, legislators need to require that even confessions are verified by other evidence.

As they pursue those goals, lawmakers must examine the appeals and pardons process so the truth has a chance of coming to light. Texas' appeals process is myopically focused on legal maneuvers, leaving little room for claims of actual innocence.

Austin also needs to create a post-conviction forensic science commission with a sense of public purpose, unlike the current one, which is prone to political hijacking.

Finally, we will press legislators to halt executions in Texas and create a blue-ribbon panel of experts to make recommendations about the future of the nation's busiest death chamber.

Where other states have acted boldly, Texas has averted its eyes. That should change in 2011.

DMN: Debate over capital punishment

"Debate over capital punishment" is the title of Dallas Morning News' recent editorial on the death penalty.

Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens and author David Garland have both dived into the national discussion over the death penalty this fall, with the bigger waves being kicked up by the recently retired jurist.

Writing in the New York Times Review of Books, Stevens convincingly challenges the underpinnings of capital punishment in a probing critique of Garland's new book, Peculiar Institution: American's Death Penalty in the Age of Abolition. Doing so, Stevens sheds light on why he began his career as a supporter of capital punishment, under the right conditions, and ended his career an opponent.

Stevens' metamorphosis tracks the conversion of many others – including this newspaper – as they analyze how and why some people are selected for the ultimate punishment.
Quoting his own opinion in a 1977 death penalty case out of Florida, Stevens summed up his previous views: "It is of vital importance ... that any decision to impose the death sentence be, and appear to be, based on reason rather than caprice and emotion."

At the time, states were pushing back against a court decision that essentially imposed a moratorium on executions. What followed was a movement toward narrowly crafted laws intended to root out emotion, build in safeguards and apply capital punishment fairly.
Stevens now writes candidly about a more recent and "regrettable judicial activism" that has loosened restrictions on capital punishment and opened the door once again to abrogation of justice. Prosecutors have a clarified freedom, for example, to root out potential jurors who have qualms about the death penalty and to seek it for non-triggermen. 

Stevens now believes the death penalty represents "the pointless and needless extinction of life with only marginal contribution to any discernible social or public purposes."
Stevens and Garland point out one benefit that is glaringly evident in Texas: support for the death penalty "wins votes," the justice says. An NYU law and sociology professor, Garland wrote recently in the Houston Chronicle that "politicians give voters what they want by enacting capital punishment statues even when they will never be enforced."

A deterrent to crime is one supposed benefit for the death penalty, but its imposition is not associated with lower murder rates in the 35 states that allow it. Further, consider this from Garland: Out of 14,000 homicides in the U.S. last year, juries imposed death sentences in only 106 cases. Death is far from a sure punishment for taking a life, nor is it swift. Some death row inmates have been there for decades.

Just in Texas, the sentence is far from evenly imposed. Of the 316 people on Texas' death row, more than a third are from Harris County.

In what should be particularly disturbing in Texas – for obvious reasons – Stevens mentions the "execution of innocents" as if a given. Perhaps that, more than anything, has caused prominent Texans, from a former governor to former prosecutors, to adjust their thinking, as has Stevens, and advocate a saner justice system that guards against a flawed but irrevocable sentence.  

Disgraced Sharon Keller to Run for Re-election; Gloats that She "Won" Despite Fact That Case Thrown Out on Technicality

Sharon Keller says she plans to run for re-election in 2012.

From the Dallas Morning News Editorial Board:  "the technical victory doesn't erase the commission's written conclusion that Keller had cast "public discredit on the judiciary."

From Texas Lawyer:

Breaking her silence after three years, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Presiding Judge Sharon Keller says she feels "vindicated" by a special court of review's decision to vacate the State Commission on Judicial Conduct's public warning and charges against her.

Although some reporters have written that the three-justice court of review's Oct. 11 decision in In Re: Honorable Sharon Keller was only a technical victory for Keller, she doesn't see it that way.

"I won," Keller says. "People can call it what they want."

Keller, a member of the CCA since 1995 and its presiding judge since 2000, also says she will seek re-election in 2012. "I have always planned on doing that," she says.

Her judicial conduct case played out against the backdrop of debate over the death penalty. Dubbed "Sharon Killer" by some anti-death penalty activists, Keller has experienced not only the commission's investigation and prosecution of its charges against her but also critical media coverage and protests at her home.

"It's been a three-year-long ordeal," Keller says.

Keith Hampton Endorsed by Dallas Morning News Editorial Board

The Dallas Morning News has endorsed Keith Hampton in his campaign to become a judge on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. The CCA's presiding judge is Sharon Keller, who has been issued a "Public Warning" for judicial misconduct. Visit Hampton's website at: http://www.hamptonforjudge.com.

From the DMN:

Three seats on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals are up for election this year. The Court of Criminal Appeals is the highest criminal court in the state, hearing criminal appeals – including death penalty appeals. Judges serve six-year terms. We are recommending in the only race being contested by both major parties.

Elections 2010

Early voting: Oct. 18-29

Election Day: Nov. 2

DMN Voter Guide: Hear from the candidates in their own words

For more information: Call the Dallas County elections office at 214-637-7937; visit dalcoelections.org; call the Texas secretary of state's office at 1-800-252-8683; or visitsos.state.tx.us/elections.

What's The Big Story? Find out atdallasnews.com/opinion

Blog: Opinion

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has developed a reputation as a court that turns its back on verdicts that need a second or third look.

It's easy to see why. Seven of the nine judges have backgrounds as prosecutors, and the presiding judge once campaigned as "pro-prosecutor." Court-watchers recite a list of marquee cases of failed justice. The court's tilt is a concern, considering that Texas leads the nation in executions and has far more DNA-proven miscarriages of justice than any other state.

The Nov. 2 election for Place 6 on the court is an opportunity for a rebalancing. Austin defense attorney Keith Hampton, running against veteran Judge Michael Keasler, has the legal credentials and a perspective now missing on the court: If elected, he would be the only member to have involvement in a capital murder case from indictment all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Hampton, 49, a Democrat, has pushed for important legal reforms in Austin as legislative director for the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association. One effort led to a law giving juries the option of life without parole for murderers. An unsuccessful effort last year would have improved police photo lineups – an overdue reform in light of widespread cases of documented witness misidentification.

If elected, Hampton says, the robe goes on, the "advocacy stops" and the job becomes restrained application of legal precedent.

Likewise, Keasler says judges are bound to precedent, even when they don't like the result. Keasler says he prosecuted 432 jury trials for the Dallas County District Attorney's office before he was elected to a local judgeship in 1980. And he describes himself as on the conservative end of the appeals court.

Keasler concedes that the court has a poor reputation, but he says the quality of its work has improved drastically in recent years, bringing it into "the mainstream" nationally.

Still, in some death penalty cases, the court has appeared more concerned with procedure than the possibility of new information that could affect the outcome. A high-profile example involved murder accomplice Kenneth Foster, who raised claims of new information in 2007 that the court refused to address. (Gov. Rick Perry commuted the death sentence to life based on concerns that Foster was tried jointly with the triggerman).

Keasler has written and taught extensively and has been active in judicial organizations nationwide. He should be respected for his contributions, but this court would benefit now with Hampton sitting in his seat.

Frisco attorney Robert Ravee Virasin, 38, a Libertarian, also is on the ballot.

Retrial Ends in Life for Former Death Row Inmate; Co-Defendant Greg Wright Executed in 2008 Saying "Before you is an innocent man"

According to the Dallas Morning News, a retrial has resulted in life in prison for John Adams, a person formerly on Texas death row. The co-defendant in the case, Gregory Wright, was executed in 2008. Wright professed his innocence until his death, he said in his last words that it was John Adams who actually killed the victim. Now, Adams has been removed from death row and given life. But did Texas execute someone who did not kill anyone, namely Greg Wright? You can read more about the case at www.freegregwright.com.

Here are Greg Wright's last words:

Yes I do. There has been a lot of confusion on who done this. I know you all want closure. Donna had her Christianity in tact when she died. She never went to a drug house. John Adams lied. He went to the police and told them a story. He made deals and sold stuff to keep from going to prison. I left the house, and I left him there. My only act or involvement was not telling on him. John Adams is the one that killed Donna Vick. I took a polygraph and passed. John Adams never volunteered to take one. I have done everything in my power. Donna Vick helped me; she took me off the street. I was a truck driver; my CDL was still active. Donna gave me everything I could ask for. I helped her around the yard. I helped her around the house. She asked if there were anyone else to help. I am a Christian myself, so I told her about John Adam. We picked him up at a dope house. I did not know he was a career criminal. When we got to the house he was jonesin for drugs. He has to go to Dallas. I was in the bathroom when he attacked. I am deaf in one ear and I thought the T.V. was up too loud. I ran in to the bedroom. By the time I came in, when I tried to help her, with first aid, it was too late. The veins were cut on her throat. He stabbed her in her heart, and that's what killed her. I told John Adams, "turn yourself in or hit the high road." I owed him a favor because he pulled someone off my back. I was in a fight downtown. Two or three days later he turned on me. I have done everything to prove my innocence. Before you is an innocent man. I love my famly. I'll be waiting on ya'll. I'm finished talking.

From the DMN:

The state of Texas will not execute John Wade Adams for the 1997 murder of Donna Vick. He will serve a life sentence instead.

In a rare Sunday court session, District Judge Gracie Lewis discharged the jury that had been deliberating Adams' penalty. She ruled that the Dallas County jury was not able to make the life-or-death decision after 27 hours of deliberation over three days.

"Our prayers were answered," said Bobbie Adams Satterlee, one of a dozen family and friends who came from Louisiana and Alabama for the retrial of the penalty phase.

Adams' guilt was not at issue. He had been tried for stabbing Vick to death and found guilty of capital murder 12 years ago. The only question was whether his death penalty should stand or be reduced to life in prison.

Defense attorneys argued his punishment should be life in prison because the original trial jury did not hear evidence about Adams' abusive childhood, evidence that family members presented in a retrial that spanned the last two weeks.

Gregory Wright was also convicted of the Vick murder and was executed in 2008.

To watch Greg Wright's wife Connie speaking at the 10th Annual March to Abolish the Death Penalty in 2009 click here. She starts speaking around the 2 minute 30 second mark.

Dallas Morning News Editorial says Forensic Panels Should Meet in Public

The Dallas Morning News had an editorial last week saying that the Texas Forensic Science Commission should hold public meetings of all of its committees, including the committee dealing with the Todd Willingham investigation.

We agree and after last Friday's meeting, Texas Moratorium Network started an online petition to allow the public to contact FSC Chair John Bradley and other members of the Commission to urge them to hold public meetings.

Click here to sign the petition, which sends an email to the Commission every time someone signs.





Today's DMN Editorial:

The Texas Forensic Science Commission has taken a step forward and then tap-danced behind a cloud of secrecy under the leadership of new Chairman John Bradley.

Disturbing philosophy

"I don't think that is in the best interest of trying to move forward on this, because the ability to discuss and resolve these issues requires us to have those discussions in private. ... All of our issues will be released publicly during full commission meetings."

–John Bradley, chairman of the Texas Commission on Forensic Science, when asked about keeping committee meetings open

What's The Big Story? Find out atdallasnews.com/opinion

Blog: Opinion

Blog: Texas Death Penalty

Meeting Friday for just the second time since Bradley was named in September, the commission resumed work on the four-year-old complaint filed in the Cameron Todd Willingham execution case.

That made good Bradley's promise to state lawmakers to advance the matter. He also should get credit for asking those commissioners who have been working two-plus years on the case to fully air their opinions.

None disagreed that much more information is needed beyond the searing critique from eminent arson scientist Craig Beyler.

Just how – and how much – information should be gathered is a matter of keen public interest, but Bradley wants the initial course to be charted in private.

That's an awful approach.

Everyone knows the Beyler report is a potential political grenade. In a report to the commission last summer, Beyler said state and local investigators ignored sound scientific techniques in concluding that arson caused the 1991 fire that killed Willingham's three daughters in their Corsicana home. Convicted of murder, Willingham was executed in 2004 – Rick Perry, governor.

Commissioners say they need to study a range of documents, including the full transcript of the trial, in which state and local arson investigators testified. Commissioners said they have questions for Beyler and probably for other experts.

Nearly all of the nine commissioners are scientists, and they should pursue the evidence they need. Their job is not to reconsider the verdict against Willingham, but to determine whether junk science was part of his trial.

The matter is now before a four-person committee that Bradley formed to guide the Willingham case. Bradely, the district attorney of Williamson County, named one defense attorney to the committee, which achieves balance. But limiting membership to four means the committee isn't a commission quorum and, therefore, doesn't trigger an open-meetings requirement.

Secret meetings run contrary to a basic principle of public service. State law and the Texas Constitution give some investigatory bodies authority to conduct business confidentially. The State Commission on Judicial Conduct is one. The forensics commission, however, is not.

Nowhere did lawmakers give the commission that latitude when they created it in 2005. Procedures the commission adopted in January are silent on the matter. Some commissioners said after Friday's meeting that they were surprised that committee sessions would be done in secret.

When Perry installed Bradley and three other new members last fall, critics hatched the theory that the governor wanted the Willingham matter frozen until after the 2010 election. Bradley has said he didn't accept Perry's appointment to be somebody's puppet, and we'll accept that at face value. At the same time, though, he must see that public confidence is at stake. The way to preserve that is to conduct state business where the state can see it.

"I don't think that is in the best interest of trying to move forward on this, because the ability to discuss and resolve these issues requires us to have those discussions in private. ... All of our issues will be released publicly during full commission meetings."

–John Bradley, chairman of the Texas Commission on Forensic Science, when asked about keeping committee meetings open

Write Forensic Science Commission to Demand All Subcommittee Meetings are Public and Not Held in Secret Behind Closed Doors

If you believe that all subcommittee meetings of the Texas Forensic Science Commission should be public and not private, secret closed door meetings, then please join us in writing commission Chair John Bradley (photo left) and other members urging them to make the meetings public and to post notices on their website of when and where the subcommittee meetings will take place.
The address is:

Texas Forensic Science Commission
Sam Houston State University
College of Criminal Justice
Box 2296
816 17th Street
Huntsville, Texas 77341-2296

Fax: 1-888-305-2432
E-mail: info@fsc.state.tx.us

Report of today's meeting from the Dallas Morning News:

Bradley meets the press. Asked about the pace of the Willingham case ahead, he says it will proceed as appropriate. Asked if he would set a timetable, he says no. He says that would be arbitrary.

Asked about the newly configured, four-person Willingham committee, he says it will meet in private. Why not public? "I don't think it's in the best interest of how we choose to do things." Asked who decided the Willingham committees will meet privately, he says the committee did. (I should point out that the assistant AG attending today's session advised the commission that the committee were only made official today and that they couldn't have made official decisions at their organizing meetings last week.)

Bradley cuts off questions before I could ask him particulars of what the committee will tackle at its next meeting.

Talking with Commissioner Evans, the Fort Worth defense attorney, who says it was news to him that the committee will be meeting in private. Should it be? Evans says he would have no objection to public meetings, though he appreciates that there is a level of frankness that can help get things done behind closed doors. Overall, he says he's willing to listen to pros and cons.

Evans says he figures that committee members will be in contact to decide what materials to review and people to talk to for their next session -- whenever that is.

On his way out, Adams says it was news to him that committees will conduct business in private. He presumed they would be public. But don't worry, he says, other members of the commission will make sure business is above-board.

From last week's Grits for Breakfast, "Forensic commission's Willingham committee meeting in secret":

Committee meetings of the Forensic Science Commission are being held in secret, including a committee evaluating the Todd Willingham arson investigation which met yesterday. Death penalty activist Scott Cobb emailed FSC coordinator Leigh Tomlin to ask:

I heard your voice mail that the Complaint Screening Committee and the Investigative Committee on the Willingham/Willis Case held meetings yesterday in Dallas. When and where were they held? I didn't see any meeting notice posted on the website. I only knew about it because I had read in the Houston Chronicle that it was going to be held next Thursday. Did the Commission provide a public notice before the meetings were held? How can the public be aware of when these meetings are going to be held in the future? Are there minutes available of the meetings yesterday?

Tomlin replied with a single sentence: "The meetings were not public meetings."

They could be public, of course, at the discretion of the commission and the chair. But the new rules Chairman John Bradley rammed throughat the commission's last meeting allow him to opt to have closed sessions.

Having watched that meeting online, I seriously doubt the majority of commissioners understood that this would be the result or intended to close their deliberations. This is simply the chairman exercising his discretion in the convenient absence of any rule to the contrary. This is what happens when rules aren't publicly posted or even shared with commissioners before the day they're required to vote on them. One hopes the commission majority will override their chairman to revisit and amend those rules, making committee hearings public and publishing their agendas just like regular commission meetings.

The Forensic Science Commission never conducted its business in secret before. What do they have to hide?

Dallas Morning News Editorial: Hold up Hank Skinner Execution for DNA Tests

Please call Gov Rick Perry at (512) 463-2000 and urge him to stop the execution of Hank Skinner on March 24, 2010 by granting a 30-day stay of execution so that DNA evidence can be tested. Call anytime day or night and leave message on voice mail.

Dallas Morning News Editorial Board:

The state's determination to execute Hank Skinner tomorrow should make even death-penalty supporters go pale.

The Skinner case

The crime: Twila Busby, 40, was beaten to death in 1993, and her grown sons Elwin Caler and Randy Busby were stabbed to death, in her Pampa home.

Incrimination: Her boyfriend, Hank Skinner, 31, a petty criminal, had blood on his shirt the next morning and was charged with capital murder.

Defense: His attorneys said he had consumed too much alcohol and drugs to do the killings, and they pointed to another possible suspect.

Untested evidence: Appellate attorneys seek DNA tests on two knives found at the scene, a bloody dishtowel, hairs in Ms. Busby's hands, her fingernail clippings, a vaginal swab and a windbreaker jacket.

What's The Big Story? Find out atdallasnews.com/opinion

Blog: Opinion

Blog: Texas Death Penalty

Key evidence in the 1993 murder case has never undergone DNA analysis. Skinner may be guilty of a bloody triple slaying in Pampa, but every sliver of doubt must be eliminated before the state exercises its life-or-death authority.

We trust that Gov. Rick Perry agrees with that, and we urge him to use the power of his office to postpone tomorrow's planned execution as insurance against miscarriage of justice. The TexasBoard of Pardons and Paroles decided against Skinner on Monday, which means a temporary reprieve by the governor may be the last chance to buy time to carry out critical forensic tests. State courts and the prosecution have thwarted proper DNA analysis, but Perry ought to send the message that Texas settles for nothing less than absolute certainty.

If Perry is concerned about appearing soft on crime during his re-election campaign, he could cite the example of his immediate predecessor.

It was June 2000, and Gov. George W. Bush was running for president. The national media and legal community were watching intently how he handled the case of death-row inmate Ricky McGinn, facing execution in the rape and murder of his stepdaughter in Brown County. McGinn, too, sought forensic tests on evidence in the case, and Bush granted a last-hour reprieve to allow for DNA analysis that was unavailable at the time of trial.

Bush said about his decision: "Any time DNA evidence can be used in its context and be relevant as to the guilt or innocence of a person on death row, we need to use it."

As it turned out, test results backed up prosecutors in the McGinn case. Less than four months later, McGinn went to the death chamber with no questions of innocence hovering.

The Skinner appeal is more complicated; it involves credible charges of falsified trial testimony as well as post-trial evidence that allegedly points to a different suspect, a relative of the victim with a history of violence.

What's more, there was no DNA testing of a long list of physical evidence, including hair found in the one of the victim's hands and fingernail clippings, which could point to the identity of the killer.

Any responsible person asked to pass judgment on Skinner's role in the slayings would want to see the results of tests on these items. Justice for the victims demands it as well.

The governor stands with the majority of Texans in support of the death penalty, a position this newspaper does not share. We think a fallible justice system should not be in the business of extinguishing life.

Despite that difference in philosophy, there must be common ground in one regard: The finality of Texas justice should be airtight.

Alternative Spring Break: Lessons in activism

This is the second in a series of blog post by James Tate, a student at the University of Texas at Dallas, for the Dallas Morning News. After finishing his undergraduate degree, he plans to attend law school and pursue a career in international humanitarian law. He also volunteers for the Innocence Project. His e-mail address is waylontate@gmail.com.

Yesterday was the second day of the Anti-Death Penalty Alternative Spring Break, and it was just as loaded as the first. As in most situations were there are large groups, students found their niche and relationships began to foster. Spring breakers were less nervous to ask questions and were much more eager to be a part of the process. It was interesting to take a step back and absorb fractions of conversations around the room. Some were amazed by the details of executions and the process, while others were outraged by the lack of determination and know-how by public defenders on these cases. However varied the opinions and ideals were in the room, it was evident that the light bulb had turned on. I suspect that it the real reason that we are here.

The day started off with a discussion on the religious views of the death penalty. Steven Crimaldi, National Director of Dead Man Walking Theater Project, captivated the room with a showing of the last ten minutes of the movie from which the play derived. A tearful Susan Sarandon walked behind a condemned to death inmate, played by Sean Penn. "I want the last face you see in this world to be one of love," she whispered. Mr. Crimaldi, who in his work is very close with the real-life Sister Helen Prejean, said it was essential to director Tim Robbins that the audience be aware that this criminal did indeed commit the crimes to which he was found guilty. Flashbacks to the violent rape and murders are intertwined with the execution itself, and the girl sitting next to me turned her head away more than once. This scene validated a poignant argument for those opposed to the death penalty. Even though this man participated in barbaric acts, a stranger had found compassion and love in his goodness. It was a story of humanity - of redemption and salvation. And the State chose to kill him anyways. It was certainly a way to wake up the audience.

We were introduced to Mary K. Poirier, a mitigation specialist from the McCallister Law Firm. Her job is to create a life story of the defendant to be used by the defense. It is her responsibility to paint a picture of the defendant and his or her upbringing, social and economic environment, and other factors that might have played a role in the crimes that their clients have committed. Her findings, unfortunately, are only utilized after a guilty decision has been entered and is used in the trial deciding whether the defendant will get a life sentence or the death penalty. I had a moment to speak with her after her presentation and her work has a striking similarity to that of Erin Brockovich. She is not an attorney, and she owns that, but her efforts take her in the face of danger at times and she gets closer than most to the clients. She has a background in clinical social work and finds herself on a slippery slope of befriending the defendants and their close relationships to compose her stories. The room, and myself included, were quite inspired by her character and the work with which she is involved.

The finale to our day was certainly the most eye opening thus far. We were charged with the task of collecting signatures for a moratorium on the death penalty. Myself and my two partners were hopeful. We had naively concluded that parallel to our conference was the worldwide know SXSW Festival and we were sure to capture a collection of young, liberal artists and musicians. Our mission was to collect 50 signatures on our petition and we had two hours to complete our task. So we set out to an energetic 6th Street, where smiles were abundant and laughter floated throughout the air. Our strategy was to approach our enthusiastic passer-bys with a quick "how about saving a life" tag line. Our first encounter was a young man at a bus stop whose only reply was that were were basically wasting our time and, "we can't do anything." He wasn't speaking to myself and my partners, rather he was speaking of citizens as a whole. We were little disappointed admittedly, but we pressed further. We engaged with people from all corners of the earth and our momentum picked up. We received everything from "Sure" to "I'd be happy to" to one "I love death". Ultimately our efforts paid off and we achieved our goal of 50 signatures. Unfortunately when we returned back to campus, we were told that we had only received 35 valid signatures as some had left out their address or additional contact information. We weren't disappointed however. We felt accomplished that we had broken the ice and had approached strangers with a purpose that is growing more and more personal to us. The climate is changing and I am sure that this experience will leave us forever changed.

Alternative Spring Break: The issue becomes personal

This blog post is written by James Tate, a student at the University of Texas at Dallas, for the Dallas Morning News. After finishing his undergraduate degree, he plans to attend law school and pursue a career in international humanitarian law. He also volunteers for the Innocence Project. His e-mail address is waylontate@gmail.com.


I am a student at the University of Texas at Dallas, and upon receiving an email from a professor, I elected to spend my spring break at the University of Texas learning about the death penalty and its violations against human rights. The Anti-Death Penalty Alternative Spring Break is in its 5th year, and the momentum continues to build. The activities from this conference, that includes students from all over the country, has resulted in bringing awareness to the death penalty, sending a message of its injustice, and in some ways affected Texas legislation.

Last night was the first time that all of the participants gathered. Guided to a small room in the Communications Building on the UT campus, the walls were decorated with signs reading "Stop the Death Penalty" and "30 Years of Blood on Our Hands". The diversity of the attendees surprised me. Every race and ethnicity, age, gender, and funny enough political affiliation was in attendance and it likened us to an ad for United Colors of Benetton. The emotions were varied. Students were quiet at first, nervously flipping through materials given to us as we entered the room. A large screen in the front of the room played a video of a mother at a rally whose son had been executed only days earlier. The silence gave way as we were each asked to give an "ice breaker" and tell where we were from and our reasoning for coming. A young student had flown in from upstate New York. She had previously worked for Amnesty International and would rather spend her spring break "making a difference." Another was a Chicago native who is studying piano performance at the University of Houston. She is eager to help in any avenue of justice and plans to attend law school after completing her Bachelors.

I assume I was naive to the complexity of this conference. I had originally thought my days would be filled with information sessions loaded with details and statistics pertaining to the death penalty. I figured there would be guest speakers and workshops of how to handle the question of whether it is the right of the State to execute, but I hadn't given much thought to the human side of the situation. After a brief introduction to the agenda for the next four days, the temperature was immediately turned up. We received a call from Stanley Howard, a 47 year-old black man who has been incarcerated for more than half of his life. Stanley shared his story and what it is truly like to be on death row. He belongs to a group of men that were forced into confessions through torture by Chicago's Area 2 detectives known as the "Death Row 10". We were introduced to five exonerees who had all been on death row awaiting the inevitable. Each story uniquely compelling, gave insight to how the justice system had not only failed them, but had nearly killed them.

I was expecting to hear an array of stories claiming innocence and injustice. Such existed, but by no means was this the focus. The exonerees were more interested in conveying to us what their lives on death row had done to their families. Being on death row "killed both of my parents," said Derrick Jamison, a man who served on death row for 17 years to be exonerated only hours before his scheduled execution.

A day that started with nervous anticipation and eagerness to learn ended with a human approach to the question at hand. I have, for as long as I can remember, been opposed to the death penalty. I have never, however, been privy to have a conversation with someone living on death row. Debating the issue of the death penalty is only half of the issue. When given the opportunity to make the situation personal and make a human connection to someone who has to live this reality, the sentiment felt changes profoundly. I know now that I made the right decision in attending this conference. I look forward to what follows.