Kudos to Dave Maass for exposing Andy Kahan of Crime-Victim Services of Houston’s Mayor Office [“Is no MySpace sacred?” November 22-28]. Mr. Kahan has always tried to harass the anti-death penalty activists through his dishonest conducts and always in the name of victims. In response, the anti-death-penalty activists need to organize even more than before and reach to the victim family members through groups such as Murder Victim Families for Reconciliation (mvfr.org) while helping the family members of death-row inmates. The Texas death-penalty system is broken and we cannot achieve a moratorium on executions as long as we are not able to address the false arguments of Mr. Kahan and his peers.
Hooman Hedayati,
President, Texas Students Against the Death Penalty
Austin
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Is no MySpace sacred?
Monday, November 27, 2006
Atwood: We are all guilty of homicide
Monday, November 27, 2006
Texas has carried out 24 executions this year. It would have been 25, but Charles Nealy narrowly missed the executioner's needle on Nov. 16. No other state in the Union had more than five executions; 46 states had one or none.
Texas continues to carry out executions with a vengeance, and that is what it is, institutionalized vengeance. Texas does not have to do this.
The death penalty is not needed to protect society. Such protection can be achieved through long-term incarceration. And we now have life without parole as an optional punishment for capital murder. Furthermore, the death penalty does not deter violent crime by others. This was shown once again in a 1999 study by a number of Texas professors.
My heart goes out to the victims of crime and their families, but an execution is not the answer to their pain. The healing they seek can be realized only through a loving God, a caring community and time.
We are, sadly, all complicit when it comes to the death penalty in Texas. Politicians who support this punishment are particularly complicit because they use it as a means to promote their political careers. If they really wanted to be "tough on crime," they would strengthen programs that effectively prevent crime such as child protective services, mental health services and drug rehabilitation programs.
The criminal justice system is complicit because it is biased in favor of executions. This begins with a system that excludes many people from serving on juries because they don't believe in the death penalty. It continues with incompetent and/or underfunded defense attorneys, judges who often allow grievous errors to go uncorrected, an appeals process that closes the door on legitimate claims, and a clemency process that fails to deliver either mercy or justice.
Texas has sent a number of innocent people to death row and has executed several with strong claims of innocence including Ruben Cantu, Cameron Willingham and Carlos Deluna.
People who carry out the executions are also complicit. Throughout history, people have committed atrocities and justified doing so by saying they were just carrying out orders. That is not a valid excuse if we believe in personal responsibility.
Christians who support the death penalty are complicit. Apparently they have forgotten Jesus' teachings about mercy and forgiveness.
And the citizens of the state are complicit by continuing to elect politicians who support the death penalty, and by not protesting when executions are carried out in their names.
Much of the world considers the United States to be a huge violator of human rights. Texas, with nearly 380 executions since 1982, is considered the worst offender. We may say that we don't care what others think, but I wonder how God will judge us. We are all guilty of homicide. We are all complicit.
Atwood, a member of Texas Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, is on the Texas Murder Victims for Reconciliation advisory board.
Sunday, November 26, 2006
Social Science and Law - Jury Selection
Watch the video in QuickTime or in RealVideo.Mary Rose is assistant professor in the Department of Sociology at the University of Texas in Austin and the School of Law. Her research concerns lay people’s understanding of law/legal practices, justice perceptions, jury behavior and emotions and law.
She has written on a variety of topics including the effects of jury selection practices on jury representativeness, citizen reactions to jury selection questioning, jury damage awards, and public views of fairness in sentencing.
Professor Rose is also an investigator on the landmark study of decision making among 50 deliberating juries from Pima County, Ariz. She serves on the editorial boards of Law & Social Inquiry, Law & Society Review and is a trustee of the Law & Society Association.
In 2005, her research on the peremptory challenge was cited in the U.S. Supreme Court decision Miller-el v. Dretke (Breyer, J., concurring).
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
Woman's family sues CNN, Nancy Grace
Melinda Duckett shot herself to death on Sept. 8, one day after taping a segment on Grace's CNN Headline News show in which Grace interrogated Duckett about her whereabouts on the August day that 2-year-old Trenton Duckett was reported missing. The network aired the segment after Melinda Duckett's death.
Investigators have since named Melinda Duckett as the prime suspect in his disappearance.
Jay Paul Deratany, the attorney for Duckett's estate, said that Grace encouraged Duckett to appear on her show by saying the goal was to draw public attention to help find the boy.
"It's not just about the questioning. It's about the misrepresentation with the knowledge that she was emotionally distraught," Deratany said. The attorney said Grace improperly took on the role of a law enforcement officer.
The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages.
CNN Headline News said in a statement: "We stand by Nancy Grace and fully support her, as we have from the beginning of this matter."
Monday, November 20, 2006
Texas appeals court does not ensure justice
Justice is not always easy to come by in Texas, particularly for death-row inmates who have to depend on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals for a review of their cases.
This state's highest appeals court for criminal cases consistently ignores justice, even when the evidence of injustice is clear. True to its recent history, the court last week rejected two appeals from condemned inmates whose trials were travesties of justice.
The most ardent death penalty advocate understands that a capital murder proceeding must guarantee a fair trial. One of the strongest arguments against capital punishment in Texas is that the judicial system is so broken that innocent defendants can be condemned and executed.
Last week's rulings by the Court of Criminal Appeals provided more evidence for those who hold that view. In separate rulings, the court upheld the convictions of Jose Ernesto Medellin and Daniel Acker, 2 convicted murderers who had clearly inadequate defense attorneys at their trials.
Neither Acker nor Medellin is a model citizen, and the crimes they were convicted of are horrible. Acker was found guilty of killing his girlfriend in Hopkins County, and Medellin was convicted and condemned for the rape and murder of two teenage girls in Houston.
Nevertheless, even the most despicable defendant should be afforded competent counsel at trial. In fact, the more heinous the crime, the more the state should ensure the defendant has a good lawyer and a fair trial. That was not the case for Acker and Medellin.
Last month, American-Statesman reporter Chuck Lindell detailed the horrendous appeal filed by Acker's court-appointed attorney, Greenville lawyer Toby Wilkinson. The appeal was largely taken from a ranting letter Acker had written. Also, Wilkinson's writ was filled with errors.
That didn't matter to the appeals court judges, who rejected the appeal without mention of the awful condition of Wilkinson's writ.
Medellin's case went all the way to the International Court of Justice in the Hague and provoked a memorandum from President Bush. News reports focused on the Texas appeals court's admonishing the president for overstepping his authority under the Constitution's separation of powers doctrine, but the heart of the issue is still ineffective counsel.
Medellin is a Mexican national, one of 51 Mexicans on death row in the United States that the international court said deserved reconsideration and review because they had not contacted their consuls. Bush last year directed state courts to abide by the ruling of the United Nations' court.
The Texas judges didn't like that, and in denying Medellin's appeal, wrote that the president had overstepped his authority. Perhaps, but that ignores the fact that Medellin's 1994 trial was flawed. His court-appointed defense attorney was suspended from practicing law during the trial for ethical violations, and he failed to call any witnesses during the punishment phase.
International treaties should ensure fairness for everyone. Americans arrested abroad most certainly want to be able to contact their government officials and be assured a fair trial. Their rights can only be secured as long as foreign nationals arrested and tried in this country are afforded those same considerations.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals continues to ignore justice and common sense, and it has been admonished for its untenable rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, which is where these 2 cases are inevitably headed.
Support for capital punishment in Texas wanes a little each year, in no small part because cases like Acker's and Medellin's raise so much doubt in the public mind about the system's fairness. It is essential that anyone on trial for his life have competent counsel and a fair trial. But that isn't happening in Texas because the Court of Criminal Appeals neglects its duty.
Source: Editorial, Austin American-Statesman
Thursday, November 16, 2006
News Alerts
Here are some of the recent news alerts:
Russia may extend death penalty moratorium
JURIST - USA
[JURIST] Russia [JURIST news archive] may effectively extend a death penalty moratorium [Pravda report] for three years if the State Duma [official website, in ...
Supreme court retains death penalty
AND - Johannesburg,Gauteng,South Africa
By KELVIN CHONGO. THE Supreme Court in Zambia has rejected a petition to abolish the death penalty because it had no constitutional powers to do so. ...
Death penalty defended
Stanly News & Press - Albemarle,NC,USA
Sunday, November 12, 2006 — Death is warranted as punishment for Guy Tobias LeGrande, who is scheduled to receive the death penalty Dec. ...
Exonerated death row inmate to speak on death penalty
Examiner.com - USA
... death row by DNA evidence hopes Democratic Gov.-elect Martin O'Malley will be more open to considering whether to abolish or suspend the death penalty than his ...
Susan Hagstrom: Death penalty would present brutality over wisdom
The Capital Times - Madison,WI,USA
Dear Editor: Channel 3 had a story saying a majority of Wisconsin residents favored a death penalty. Are they aware of the details behind the issue? ...
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
State Vs Rodney Reed documentary - Full Version 59 min
| State vs. Reed" is a 60 minute documentary that explores an explosive capital murder trial in Texas that has resulted in a questionable death penalty conviction of Bastrop, Texas' Rodney Reed. Reed, a then-28 year-old black male with a minor criminal record, was convicted in 1998 of the murder of Stacey Stites, a 19 year-old finacee' of a local police officer named Jimmy Fennell. Though Fennell was the primary suspect for over a year who failed two polygraph examinations, Reed was eventually arrested after DNA found on the victim was connected to him. Reed claims that he and the victim, who was Caucasian, shared a consensual sexual affair for over 6 months and that an encounter the night before would account for the finding of his DNA as well as a possible motive for the real killer. "State vs. Reed" dives into this complex and potentially benchmark case that still rattles the citizens of this small Central Texas town. By talking to those who knew best -- friends of the victim and family of the defendent, investigators, lawyers, journalists and Reed himself, on Texas' notorious Death Row -- the award winning documentary reveals a case fraught with open questions and unusual coincidences. Ultimately, the documentary reveals the mistake-prone system that sentences men and woman to death in the state of Texas at a rate incomparable around the world. Filmmakers Bustoz and Polomski are first-time feature filmmakers, though have worked in the medium in central Texas for years. Previously, they have worked on the internationally screened short documentary, "Hecho a Mano: Tres Historias de Guatemala". "State vs. Reed" premiered at the 2006 South By Southwest Film Festival where it won the Lone Star States Audience Award. It has since been screened multiple times in the central Texas area, including PBS. | |
Sunday, November 12, 2006
TSADP essay contest
Awards: 12th Grade winner $200
12th grade runner-up $50
11th grade winner $200
11th grade runner-up $50
Deadline for entries is Feb 1st, 2006
Visit our website for complete rules and instructions.
Friday, November 10, 2006
Thursday, November 09, 2006
Venting -- 24 Hours of Hell
grubac(at)prodigy.net
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Texas Inmates Protest Conditions With Hunger Strikes
The Texas Department of Criminal Justice said that the first inmates began refusing food Oct. 8 and that two were still on hunger strikes in the Polunsky prison unit in Livingston, about 45 miles east of the execution unit in Huntsville. The Polunsky Unit houses death-row inmates until their executions. As of Tuesday, one inmate had missed 35 consecutive meals and one 17 meals, but no one has yet been force-fed, said a department spokeswoman, Michelle Lyons.
"Either conditions will improve, or we will starve to death,” vowed one of the first hunger strikers, Steven Woods, in an Internet posting put up by groups opposed to the death penalty. Since death row was moved from an older and more open facility in 2000, he said, “We lost all our group recreation, art programs, and supplies” in addition to “work programs, televisions and religious services.
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Midnight results
| Name (Party) | Votes | Pct. | |
| Rick Perry (R) | 1,432,912 | 39% | |
| Chris Bell (D) | 1,067,713 | 29% | |
| Carole Keeton Strayhorn (I) | 656,847 | 18% | |
| Kinky Friedman (I) | 447,185 | 12% | |
| James Werner (L) | 21,848 | 0% | |
| James 'Patriot' Dillon (WI) | 706 | 0% |
| Name (Party) | Votes | Pct. | |
| Greg Abbott (R) | 2,130,379 | 60% | |
| David Van Os (D) | 1,300,612 | 36% | |
| Jon Roland (L) | 113,214 | 3% |
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS-PRESIDING JUDGE
| Name (Party) | Votes | Pct. | |
| Sharon Keller (R) | 1,958,168 | 57% | |
| J.R. Molina (D) | 1,459,021 | 42% |
| Name (Party) | Votes | Pct. | |
| Barbara Parker Hervey (R) | 2,127,024 | 76% | |
| Quanah Parker (L) | 668,207 | 23% |
| Name (Party) | Votes | Pct. | |
| Charles Holcomb (R) | 2,123,557 | 76% | |
| Dave Howard (L) | 655,553 | 23% |
Wisconsin Death Penalty Enact death penalty for first-degree homicide convictions supported by DNA? 2345 of 3597 Precincts Reporting | |||
| NAME | VOTES | Pct. | |
| Yes | 794,760 | 55% | |
| No | 652,790 | 45% | |
11 pm returns
Precincts Reporting: 5878 Of 8510 69%
| Winner | Candidate | Incumbent | Votes | Vote % |
| X | Rick Perry (R) | X | 1,334,672 | 39% |
| Chris Bell (D) | 1,015,268 | 30% | ||
| Carole Strayhorn (I) | 611,801 | 18% | ||
| Kinky Friedman (I) | 413,972 | 12% | ||
| James Werner (L) | 20,204 | 1% |
Precincts Reporting: 4827 Of 8510 56%
| Winner | Candidate | Incumbent | Votes | Vote % |
| X | Sharon Keller (R) | X | 1,581,318 | 57% |
| J. Molina (D) | 1,172,686 | 43% |
Wisconsin:
| |||||||||||||||||||
10 PM results
| Winner | Candidate | Incumbent | Votes | Vote % |
| X | Rick Perry (R) | X | 979,301 | 39% |
| Chris Bell (D) | 724,699 | 30% | ||
| Carole Strayhorn (I) | 445,701 | 18% | ||
| Kinky Friedman (I) | 284,650 | 12% | ||
| James Werner (L) | 13,892 | 1% |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Precincts Reporting: 1693 Of 8510 19%
| Winner | Candidate | Incumbent | Votes | Vote % |
| Sharon Keller (R) | X | 1,008,132 | 59% | |
| J. Molina (D) | 691,393 | 41% |
Sunday, November 05, 2006
State vs. Reed
If you haven't yet gotten a chance to watch the award-winning
documentary "State vs. Reed," then you're in luck. KLRU (Austin's PBS
affiliate) has just recently begun a new series that will feature
several of the best films from the 2006 SXSW Film Festival. "State
vs. Reed" will be aired this Tuesday evening (11/7) at 7pm on KLRU as
part of this series. Click here for the schedule:
http://www.klru.org/Schedule/ViewProgram.asp?VSNID=151725.
This is great news! "State vs. Reed" is an excellent presentation of
all the issues surrounding Rodney Reed's case. Rodney Reed was
convicted in 1998 for the murder of Stacey Stites. However, as the
film rightly shows, the case for Rodney Reed's innocene is
overwhelming. You can watch the trailer at Youtube.
Please plan to watch the film Tuesday evening. And tell everyone you
know to tune in as well. The more people who know about Rodney's
case, the better. Rodney and the Reed family need everyone's help in
getting him off of Death Row.
One way to help, is to come to our regular weekly meetings. This
week, we'll be meeting in our usual spot in CMA 3.130 on Monday
(11/6). The meeting begins at 7pm.
Students protest death penalty at Capitol
Source: Badger Herald
Saddam Hussein sentenced to death
- BBC News
Saturday, November 04, 2006
Editorial: Austin American Statesman
Legislature should starve appeals court
The criminal appeals court should be put out of business because the court has failed in its obligations.
Saturday, November 04, 2006At some point, the Texas Legislature must weigh whether it should continue directing tens of millions of public dollars to a court that is failing in its most important duty. Lawmakers budgeted nearly $28 million for the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals for the current two-year cycle.
Legislators should put the criminal appeals court out of business because the court has failed in its obligation to ensure that the condemned received competent legal help.
Texas is operating under an antiquated system that establishes two courts to handle appeals. The State Supreme Court deals with civil matters and the Court of Criminal Appeals handles criminal appeals. It would take a state constitutional amendment to replace the two courts with one supreme court for civil and criminal appeals. The Legislature, however, does have the power to yank the criminal court's budget. It should use that authority to force the court to do its job or put it out of business.
Generally, the all-Republican Texas Supreme Court is widely respected. But the Court of Criminal Appeals — also composed of nine elected GOP judges — has embarrassed the state with a series of bad rulings, many of them regarding the death penalty. Recently, the conservative leaning U.S. Supreme Court signaled its frustration with Texas' criminal appeals court when it agreed to hear three Texas death penalty cases in its next term.
By now, many Texans know about some of the rulings that made national news, including the infamous sleeping lawyer case. In that case, the criminal appeals court judges saw nothing wrong with a defense lawyer who slept through key portions of his client's capital murder trial.
The same court said OK to prosecutors who hid evidence from defense lawyers in several capital murder cases involving indigent defendants.
And it gave thumbs up to racial gerrymandering of a jury by Dallas prosecutors years ago in another capital murder case.
This week, we learned about more disturbing practices that probably are costing people their lives. For years, the court has permitted lawyers to submit sloppy, erroneous and inferior work in death penalty appeals. In a system in which almost anything passes as a writ of habeas corpus to appeal a death sentence, it is very possible that innocent people have been — and will be — put to death.
American-Statesman staff writer Chuck Lindell reported on a broken system that permits lawyers appointed to handle appeals for inmates on death row to submit shoddy, erroneous and incomplete work. That is outrageous in cases involving the ultimate and irreversible punishment: death.
In some cases, Lindell identified lawyers who submitted writs that fell far short of professional standards,
collecting thousands of dollars from taxpayers:
•In a 2003 appeal, Greenville lawyer Toby Wilkinson filed a nearly incoherent collection of statements lifted almost verbatim from his death row client's letters. His client, Daniel Acker, was sentenced to death for the 2000 killing of his girlfriend.
•Dick Wheelan of Houston has submitted a number of habeas writs copied largely verbatim from a death row inmate's direct appeal, even though such claims cannot be considered in a habeas writ.
The State Bar of Texas bears much of the blame for permitting those attorneys to continue practicing in the complex area of habeas death penalty appeals. The bar has been slow to curb incompetent lawyers cashing in on indigent clients.
But the state Court of Criminal Appeals is the ultimate authority in death penalty appeals cases. It regulates the list of lawyers who are deemed competent to represent poor defendants. Also, why are the judges accepting lawyers' shoddy, inferior work in cases involving life and death?
A high school teacher would fail students who plagiarized their work.
Continuing to invest in a court that is indifferent to justice is a waste of taxpayers' money. Get rid of it.
Friday, November 03, 2006
STOP PRISON TORTURE
END ISOLATION ON DEATH ROW !
DEMONSTRATE
SATURDAY, NOV. 4, 2006
- Regular housing, not segregation and isolation
- Unlimited visitation on days preceding an execution date
- Group recreation
- An end to gassing, beatings, racist degradation
- Access to television
- Religious services
- Cells with bars, not solid steel doors
- A work program
- Arts and crafts / piddling privileges
- Decent and prompt medical care
- Nutritious food in adequate proportions

