The StandDown Texas Project

In Pennsylvania

The Sunday Philadelphia Inquirer reported, "A new, unusual twist in death-penalty fight," by Joseph A. Slobodzian.  Here's the beginning of this report on a complicated case:

When condemned fugitive Joseph Kindler was returned to Philadelphia in 1991 after two escapes, three years on the lam in Canada and four fighting extradition, the news was grim.

Prosecutors argued - and Pennsylvania judges agreed - that by fleeing, Kindler had forfeited his rights to appeal his death sentence for the 1982 beating and drowning of a witness against him in a burglary case.

Kindler's lawyers fought that issue to the U.S. Supreme Court and back until 2011, when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ordered that Kindler get a new death-penalty hearing or be sentenced to life in prison.

Now 54, Kindler is again before a Philadelphia judge, fighting for his life on an unusual legal theory: He cannot fairly be executed because in the 32 years since the slaying of 18-year-old David Bernstein, witnesses and mitigating evidence that might persuade a jury to spare his life have died or been destroyed.

Earlier coverage from Pennsylvania begins at the link.  I am also in the process of adding state postal codes in the category index.  The PA category index will take you to earlier posts involving Pennsylvania.

Controversial Missouri Execution Date Looms

"Lawyers, judges seek stay for Missouri inmate Christeson," is by Bob Priddy for MissouriNet.  There is audio at the link.

A national group that says it tries to reach consensus on difficult constitutional issues, and a number of former state and appellate judges warn that the execution of Mark Christeson tomorrow night would “cast a pall” over the judicial process. They claim Christeson has been denied his legal rights.

Mark Christeson was 18 when he and a 17-year-old cousin murdered a woman and her two children and threw their bodies into a pond near Vichy in 1998.   He is the only condemned Missouri prisoner whose case has not been reviewed at the federal level.

The judges and the Constitution Project are asking the Eighth District federal appeals court to stay the execution and to throw Christeson’s attorneys off the case.

Constitution Project counsel Sarah Turberville says Christeson’s lawyers missed the deadline by 117 days for filing a federal appeal and that’s why they should no longer represent him. She says it’s a conflict of interest for his attorneys to represent him because they have “blown any attempt he would have at federal review.”

"Former judges raise concerns about Missouri execution scheduled for this week," is by Jim Salter of AP, via the Republic.

Attorneys for a condemned Missouri man and several former judges on Monday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to halt his upcoming execution, saying a mistake by his former attorneys cost him the chance to appeal his case through the federal courts.

Mark Christeson is scheduled to die at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday for the killing a southern Missouri woman and her two children in 1998. He would be the ninth person put to death in Missouri this year.

Christeson's attorneys and 15 former judges filed a brief Friday with the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals claiming Christeson was denied federal court review because the court-appointed attorneys who took over his case after the trial missed the deadline to file a federal appeals petition by four months.

The 8th Circuit refused the request, prompting the appeal to the Supreme Court.

AP also posts, "Religious leaders seek clemency for Missouri man set for execution Wednesday," via the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Several religious leaders from across Missouri are asking Gov. Jay Nixon to grant clemency for a man scheduled to be put to death this week.

And:

A clemency letter signed by leaders of several denominations raises concerns about actions of prosecutors in the case and says Christeson's trial attorney was inadequate. The letter also raises concerns about Christeson's mental capacity and questions why his case has not received review in federal court.

The Constitution Project has issued a news release, "TCP: Judges' Brief Warns Allowing Christeson Execution to Proceed Without Court Review Would 'cast a pall' over the Judicial Process."  Here's the beginning:

Last month, the Supreme Court of Missouri set an Oct. 29th execution date for Missouri death row inmate Mark Christeson. Today, a group of former state appellate and federal district and circuit court judges - from across the political spectrum and the nation, including the state of Missouri - filed an amicus brief, organized by The Constitution Project, and drafted with the pro bono assistance of Goldstein & Russell P.C., in support of Christeson's request for a stay of execution with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Asserting their strong interest in maintaining the fairness and public legitimacy of the judicial system, the judges acknowledge that they have a "heavy responsibility to ensure that the process is beyond reproach," particularly in capital cases.  The judges take no position on the merits of Christeson's claims, but they are united in their view that a court must thoroughly examine allegations that attorneys appointed to represent Christeson abandoned him and then worsened their malfeasance by misleading Christeson about their errors.  Their abandonment has left Christeson as the only man on Missouri's death row to have been deprived of any federal review of his death sentence.  "To permit an execution without further review," the brief warns, "would cast a pall over the process."

Earlier coverage begins at the link.

New Sentencing Ordered in Pennsylvania Death Case

he Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling in Commmonweath v. Tharp is available in Adobe .pdf format, as are three concurring opinions and one concurring and dissenting opinion.

"New sentencing ordered for Pennsylvania woman on death row," is the AP report, via the Harrisburg Patriot-News.

The state Supreme Court has ordered a new sentencing hearing for a western Pennsylvania woman on death row in the starvation death of her 7-year-old daughter.

And:

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ordered a new penalty hearing Wednesday on the grounds that her attorney failed to present evidence that may have persuaded a jury to spare her life, such as a history of mental illness, abuse throughout her childhood and borderline intellectual function.

The Observer-Reporter posts, "Supreme Court orders mother to be resentenced for child’s starvation death," by Barbara Mille.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered that Michelle Tharp be resentenced for the starvation death of her daughter because her public defender did not at trial present evidence of her mental state that might have resulted in a different verdict than the death penalty.

“We conclude that there is a reasonable probability that at least one juror at (Tharp’s) trial may have struck a different balance had such mental health . . . evidence been presented,” wrote Justice Max Baer.

The court upheld Tharp’s first-degree murder conviction stemming from the starvation death of her daughter, Tausha Lee Lanham.

"Washington County woman who starved daughter gets new hearing," is by Paula Reed Ward of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

During the penalty phase, the jury found one aggravating factor — that the victim was younger than 12 years old — and two mitigating factors — that Tharp had no criminal record and an­other catch-all provision concerning the defendant’s character.

Still, the panel determined that the aggravating factor outweighed the mitigating ones.

During the Post Conviction Relief Act hearing, however, Tharp presented extensive evidence, including a history of mental illness, previous abuse throughout her childhood and adult life, as well as a borderline range for intellectual function.

Earlier coverage from Pennsylvania begins at the link.  Related posts are in the female and ineffective assistance of counsel category indexes.

California Death Sentence Vacated

"Sacramento judge takes murderer off of death row," is by Denny Walsh in the Modesto Bee.

A federal judge on Tuesday threw out the death penalty of a transient who fatally stabbed a man 33 years ago on a bank of the American River in Sacramento, then fled in the victim’s car.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence K. Karlton adopted the recommendation of a magistrate judge that a lesser sentence be imposed on Larry Junior Webster, unless the Sacramento County District Attorney’s Office initiates a retrial of the penalty phase within 90 days.

“We’re glad the guilt phase was not overturned,” Chief Deputy District Attorney Steve Grippi said. “We will take a hard look at the penalty phase and decide whether we want to retry it.”

U.S. Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd had found that Webster, the recipient of a Bronze Star for combat bravery in the Vietnam War, was denied a fair trial in the penalty phase because his counsel was ineffective. Karlton agreed with Drozd that Webster was deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to “effective assistance of counsel” due to his lawyer’s “failure to investigate and present a mitigation case ... to the jury.”

Related posts are in the ineffective assistance of counsel category index.  Earlier coverage from California begins at the link.

e here: http://www.modbee.com/2014/08/26/3505596_sacramento-judge-takes-murderer.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

Post-Conviction Case Roundup

There are news reports today of cases in Florida, Texas, and Virginia.

Florida's Lakeland Ledger reports, "Defense Attorneys Seek to Halt Execution of Lakeland Man Convicted of Murder," by Suzie Schottelkotte.

Lawyers for condemned murderer Eddie Wayne Davis are seeking to halt his July 10 execution, arguing that his longtime alcoholism and sexual abuse as a youth stunted his brain development.

And:

Davis' court-appointed lawyers are asking Circuit Judge Donald Jacobsen for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether Davis should be granted relief.

Prosecutors will file their response today, and Jacobsen has scheduled a preliminary hearing Friday.

In Texas, "Lawyers for convicted killer Thuesen push to get death penalty off the table," is the Bryan-College Station report by Maggie Kiely.

Attorneys for Brazos County death row inmate John Thuesen continued presenting evidence Tuesday in an attempt to prove he had ineffective representation during his 2010 trial.

At the conclusion of the more than two-week trial, the 30-year-old was sentenced to death by a jury that convicted him of shooting and killing his ex-girlfriend and her brother, Rachel and Travis Joiner, on March 6, 2009 inside the home of the Aggie siblings.

And:

In a 235-page application for writ of habeas corpus, Thuesen's attorneys assert Carter and Esparza failed to adequately develop the main defense theory -- that Thuesen, a Marine, had returned from Iraq in 2004 with post-traumatic stress disorder, a mental illness that contributed to the double-murder.

"John Thuesen's PTSD was the factor that best could have explained to the jury both the crime and Thuesen's reduced moral culpability for the events that occurred," the writ application states.

"Death-row inmate pursues intellectual disability claim," is the Virginia news report in the Richmond Times-Dispatch.  It's by Frank Green.

Lawyers for a Virginia death-row inmate who contends he is intellectually disabled will argue their case in federal court today, hoping to take advantage of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down the strict use of IQ test score cutoffs.

A hearing on a motion to dismiss the appeal and other issues is set before U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson for Alfredo R. Prieto, 48, who was convicted of a 1988 rape and double murder in Fairfax County.

Related posts are in the post-conviction review category index.

Supreme Court Grants Cert in Texas Case

SCOTUSblog posts, "Breaking News."

The Court has granted one new case: Jennings v. Stephens, in which it will consider when a habeas petitioner must seek a certificate of appealability to defend a district court’s judgment in his favor.

Issue: Whether the Fifth Circuit erred in holding that a federal habeas petitioner who prevailed in the district court on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim must file a separate notice of appeal and motion for a certificate of appealability to raise an allegation of deficient performance that the district court rejected even though the Fifth Circuit acquired jurisdiction over the entire claim as a result of the respondent’s appeal.

This is a Texas death penalty case.  It will be argued at the Court during the next term, which will begin in October 2014.

Related posts are in the Supreme Court category index.

Stop the Execution Train

That's the title of an editorial in today's edition of the Tennessean.

If the state of Tennessee has its way, it will put 10 people to death in a period of 18 months between April 22, 2014, and Nov. 17, 2015.

The federal public defender’s office in Nashville has doubts that any of the 10 are solid cases for the death penalty — if there is such a thing as a solid case for institutionalized cruelty.

And:

It took unlawful actions by the Correction Department, flouting federal statutes over drug imports, and then changing Tennessee’s own open-records law to keep a shroud of secrecy over new sources of lethal drugs, to bring us to the point where Tennessee feels it is ready to execute so many people so quickly.

Other states are putting executions on hold because lethal injections are proving to be tantamount to torture. Not Tennessee; its correctional system, with the help of state Supreme Court justices who suddenly appear to be worried about job security, can’t wait to start the intravenous drip.

Earlier coverage from Tennessee begins at the link.

Wyoming Roundup

Today's Casper Star-Tribune reports, "Batch of death penalty cases drains Wyoming Public Defender's Office budget," by Joan Barron.  For those following indigent criminal justice issues, it's filled with details.

A rash of actual and potential death penalty cases left the Wyoming Public Defender's Office pinched for money last year, the agency's director said Wednesday.

The office spent $665,000 on seven potential cases between July 1, 2012 and Oct. 31, 2013 compared to only one capital case in the past two budget cycles, Diane Lozano said during a budget hearing before the Legislature's Joint Appropriations Committee.

The agency handled homicide and potential death penalty cases in Park County (three), Fremont County (two), Platte County (one) and Laramie County (one).

All but one of the homicide cases were resolved by the defendants pleading guilty and receiving sentences of life in prison.

And:

The ACLU has sued Montana and a couple of other states for not providing enough money for adequate representation for indigent criminal defendants.

Also from Wyoming, there is additional news of legislation to authorize firing squads as a form of execution.  "Burns: Firing squad as an alternative form of execution practical," is by Hannah Wiest in the Sheridan Press.

Sen. Bruce Burns, R-Sheridan, has filed a bill for consideration by the 2014 Wyoming Legislature regarding the death penalty that has turned more than a few heads across the nation.

The bill would amend state statute to make death by firing squad Wyoming’s alternative form of execution rather than gas chamber. The primary form of execution in Wyoming — along with 35 other states, the U.S. military and the U.S. government — is lethal injection.

Burns said he was surprised by the overall negative reaction to his bill.

“Wyoming’s more the rule than the exception when it comes to the death penalty,” Burns said. “I brought the bill for practical purposes. Having the gas chamber as a back-up option in Wyoming is equivalent to stating that the back-up is being dropped from great height from a Zeppelin.”

Wyoming doesn’t have a gas chamber to use for executions, and Burns felt it would be economically impractical to pursue building one since it would likely be used very little — if ever. Burns also said he felt gas chambers are cruel and unusual punishment.

“In my opinion, it’s a very gruesome form of execution, the idea that you’re basically being suffocated to death,” Burns said. “For me personally I’d rather have a firing squad. I’d take a firing squad even over the needle.”

And:

Wyoming currently has one inmate on death row. Dale Wayne Eaton was convicted in 2004 of the rape and killing of 18-year-old Lisa Marie Kimmell, who was from Billings, Mont.

Earlier coverage from Wyoming begins at the link.

Considering the Toll of War in a Death Penalty Debate

That's the title of Brandi Grissom's report at the Texas Tribune and the New York Times Texas edition of December 27.  Here's the beginning:

The car would not stop. Flares did not stop it. Shots fired into the engine didn't stop it. Exaggerated hand gestures and hollering surely didn't. As far as the four Marines stationed at a roadside checkpoint in Iraq knew, the sedan hurtling toward them was a bomb on wheels.

Tim Rojas flashed a thumbs-up at his fellow lance corporal, John Thuesen, 21, the quiet Texan manning the machine gun on the Humvee’s turret. Bullets ripped through the car. The driver slumped over the steering wheel as the sedan crawled to a stop.

There was no explosion. The Marines were alive, and in that moment, Rojas recalled, the four men felt like heroes.

Then, the car’s rear door opened, and a boy, covered in his family’s blood, terror all over his face, ran screaming toward them.

“It was a terrible feeling,” Rojas said, his eyes glassy with tears, recalling the day that he said forever changed their lives.

That was nearly a decade ago. Now, Rojas is again standing with his buddy.

Thuesen, 30, is on death row for shooting his girlfriend and her brother in their College Station home in 2009. Thuesen and his lawyers have filed an appeal, arguing that the jury would have imposed a life sentence had it been fully informed about the damage that post-traumatic stress disorder can cause. Rojas is now talking about their ordeal, hoping it will help with his friend’s appeal and bring more awareness about post-traumatic stress disorder from the battlefield.

Grissom also posted, "Year in Review: Criminal Justice," at the Texas Tribune.

Fallout from the high-profile Michael Morton exoneration along with more prison closures and growing concerns about the mentally ill in Texas prisons dominated criminal justice headlines in 2013.

Morton was released from prison in 2011 after DNA tests revealed that he did not murder his wife in 1986, a crime for which he was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. After spending nearly 25 years in prison for a crime he did not commit, Morton lobbied the Legislature this year to pass laws that would prevent others from experiencing the same tragedy. And both the prosecutor who oversaw Morton’s conviction and the man whose DNA was connected to Morton’s wife’s murder wound up behind bars.

As the prison population and the number of juveniles in youth lockups continued to fall in the wake of criminal justice reforms in recent years, lawmakers decided to shutter more facilities. Legislators approved the closure of two privately operated state jails and one juvenile detention center. While some cheered the move, others in the communities where the facilities are located worried the closures would devastate the local economies.

Earlier coverage of Michael Morton's life after exoneration begins at the link.

Supreme Court Rules in Kansas v. Cheever

The Supreme Court ruling in Kansas v. Cheever is available in Adobe .pdf format.

"Court: Kan. death sentence shouldn't be thrown out," is the initial AP report.

The Supreme Court says a lower court should not have overturned the conviction and death sentence of a man who admitted killing a Kansas sheriff.

The high court Wednesday unanimously overturned the Kansas Supreme Court's decision to throw out Scott Cheever's death sentence for the 2005 fatal shooting of Greenwood County Sheriff Matt Samuels.

The Kansas court said Cheever's rights against self-incrimination were violated by prosecutors who used a court-ordered mental evaluation from a different trial against him.

Cheever's own expert argued that methamphetamine use had damaged his brain. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said that because Cheever's side raised the brain damage issue, prosecutors were entitled to use testimony from the mental health expert from the other trial. That expert said Cheever killed because of an anti-social personality, not because of brain damage.

Earlier coverage of the Kansas case begins at the link.

Andrew Cohen on the Buck Ruling & Dissent

"In Texas, Prosecutors Add Twitter Insult to Capital Punishment," is Andrew Cohen's follow-up on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals opinions in Duane Buck's case.  Here's the beginning of another Cohen must-read:

Twice, as we’ve recounted here at The Atlantic, Texas has deprived convicted murderer Duane Buck of his constitutional right to equal protection. The first time came in 1997 when a now-notorious expert unlawfully told jurors under prosecution questioning that Buck would be more dangerous in the future because he was black. "Future danger" was an "aggravating" factor Buck's jury had to consider in imposing the death penalty on him, which those jurors quickly did after that explosive testimony.

And:

There has indeed been a great deal of unprofessional conduct in the Duane Buck case. It started with that now-disgraced expert and, as the dissent says, terrible defense work at trial and on the initial appeal of Buck's conviction. It continued years later with a broken promise by Texas officials to Buck that, like the others similarly situated, he would get a new sentencing hearing void of unlawful racial undertones. And it continues to this day in the effort by state attorneys, and these six judges, to diminish the import of what happened to Buck by precluding even a review of his case on its merits.

This man—this indigent black man in Texas with a low IQ who received inadequate assistance of counsel and whose trial was rocked by racial prejudice— deserves a new sentencing hearing. If Texas had given him one in 2000, this case would be long over (the five other men tainted by that "expert" were re-sentenced to death).  It's not only unprofessional, it's unjust that Texas is fighting so hard to prevent that new sentencing trial from taking place. And I'd be willing to bet that at least a few justices in Washington agree.

Earlier coverage of Duane Buck's case begins at the link.

The NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund has more information on Duane Buck's case.

More 50,000 people from Texas and around the country have signed a Change.org petition calling on Texas officials to grant Mr. Buck a new sentencing hearing.

Related posts are in the race category index.

Los Angeles Times Commentary on Alabama's Judicial Override

The Los Angeles Times Opinion L.A. blog posts, "Alabama killer case: When a jury says 'life' and a judge says 'death'," by Michael McGough.  He's a member of the paper's editorial board.

And if the fact that judges are elected calls into question a decision to impose the death penalty, why doesn’t it also discredit their other sentences? Voters who like judges who sentence murderers to death also like judges who throw the book at rapists, bank robbers and drug dealers.

Sotomayor made another point: that allowing judges to decide on death sentences might contradict a series of recent decisions in which the court has said that any fact that can lead to an increased sentence must be proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. She noted that the case in which the court announced this rule, Apprendi vs. New Jersey, was handed down in 2000, five years after the court upheld Alabama’s practice of allowing judges to override juries and impose the death penalty.

But the Apprendi decision and subsequent rulings expanding on it involved the finding of facts — such as whether a defendant had a racial motive, or killed his victim in an especially cruel way, or possessed a certain quantity of illegal drugs. In deciding whether to impose the death penalty, the judge or jury must balance aggravating factors against mitigating factors, a much more subjective process akin to the one judges engage in on a daily basis.

Earlier coverage of Justice Sotomayor's dissent in the Alabama case begins at the link.

Justice Sotomayor's dissent in Woodward v. Alabama is available in Adobe .pdf format.

In 2011, Alabama's Equal Justice Initiative issued the report , The Death Penalty in Alabama: Judge Override.

News Coverage of the Duane Buck Ruling & Dissent

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruling in Ex Parte Buck is at the link.  Judge Alcala's Dissent was joined by Judges Price and Johnson.

The Austin American-Statesman report is, "Appeal dismissed in death row case with racial backdrop," by Chuck Lindell.

The state’s highest criminal court Wednesday dismissed an appeal by death row inmate Duane Buck, who claims his sentence is improper because it was based, in part, on a psychologist’s finding that he presents a greater danger to society because he is black.

In a 6-3 ruling, the Court of Criminal Appeals said that Buck had already filed his one guaranteed appeal, known as a petition for writ of habeas corpus, in 1999 and wasn’t legally entitled to another.

But the court’s newest member, Judge Elsa Alcala, submitted a blistering dissent that said Buck had been ill-served by previous lawyers and the court system.

“The record in this case reveals a chronicle of inadequate representation at every stage of the proceedings, the integrity of which is further called into question by the admission of racist and inflammatory testimony from an expert witness,” Alcala wrote in a dissenting statement joined by Judges Tom Price and Cheryl Johnson.

The upshot, Alcala said, is that no state or federal court has examined, let alone ruled on, Buck’s claim that his constitutional rights had been violated by the inclusion of inappropriate racial testimony and by the incompetence of previous lawyers.

“This cannot be what the Legislature intended when it (voted in 1995 to provide) capital habeas litigants ‘one full and fair opportunity to present all claims in a single, comprehensive post-conviction writ of habeas corpus,’” Alcala wrote.

"CCA Dismisses Buck Appeal," by Jordan Smith for the Austin Chronicle.

A divided Court of Criminal Appeals this morning declined an appeal from condemned inmate Duane Buck, who has asked to have a sentencing hearing free from racially biased testimony.

The majority of the state's highest criminal court, six judges, issued an unsigned opinion, dismissing the appeal outright without any elucidation beyond stating that it failed to meet the criteria set out in statute for the consideration of a subsequent writ.

Nonetheless, two judges – Tom Price and Cheryl Johnson – joined a dissent filed by Judge Elsa Alcala, who argues at length that the record in Buck's case "reveals a chronicle of inadequate representation [by counsel] at every stage of the proceedings, the integrity of which is further called into question by the admission of racist and inflammatory testimony from an expert witness at the punishment phase," she wrote. Buck's initial habeas attorney was "so incompetent," she continued, that he did not assert any cognizable claim for the court to review. As a result, "no Court has ever considered the merits" of Buck's appeals for post-conviction relief – including that racially-biased testimony tainted his jury. "This cannot be what the Legislature intended" to happen under the state's habeas laws, she wrote.

"Appeals court denies hearing in death penalty case where race testimony questioned," by Mike Tolson in the Houston Chronicle.

Buck, 50, was one of six condemned killers whose trials in the 1990s were marked by the testimony of Walter Quijano, a psychologist who often referred to statistics on race when assessing the extent of potential future dangerousness, one of the questions asked of juries in capital cases. Unlike the others' cases however, Quijano appeared on Buck's behalf and testified that his personality and the nature of the crime, committed in rage, made him less likely to repeat his violence.

During cross-examination, a prosecutor asked him about racial statistics and violent crime, then asked whether those statistics indicated blacks would be more likely to be a danger in the future. Quijano answered affirmatively. Prosecutors referred to the testimony during closing arguments.

"Texas Court Rejects Condemned Inmate's Appeal," is the updated AP report by Michael Graczyk.  It's via ABC News.

Buck was within a six-hour period set for his execution on Sept. 15, 2011, when the Supreme Court gave him a reprieve. The high court decided months later not to review his case and lifted its reprieve.

He does not currently have an execution date.

AFP posts, "Texas rejects death penalty appeal that argued racial bias."

Neither Buck's attorneys nor prosecutors dispute his conviction for the double-murder, but they have argued that racial considerations factored into the sentencing phase of his trial.

During the 1997 hearing, psychologist Walter Quijano testified that blacks pose a greater risk of "future dangerousness" than whites. The prosecutor cited this testimony in asking for the death penalty.

The Supreme Court intervened just hours before Buck's execution on September 15, 2011, with justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan arguing that the case needed to be reviewed because "our criminal justice system should not tolerate (a death sentence) marred by racial overtones."

But despite an outcry from some politicians, religious leaders, and judges calling for a new hearing, the nine justice-panel at Texas' highest criminal court rejected Buck's appeal.

"We are gravely disappointed," Buck's lawyers, Kate Black and Christina Swarns, said in a statement.

They said they will bring the case to the Supreme Court "and we are hopeful that the Supreme Court will intervene to right this unequivocal wrong."

Additional coverage includes:

"Texas court denies appeal to death sentence determined by race," by Natasha Lennard at Salon.

"Texas Court Rejects Appeal Of Death Row Inmate After Testimony That Blacks Are More Dangerous," by Nicole Flatow for Think Progress.

"Texas Man Denied New Trial Despite Evidence Of Racial Bias," by D.L. Chandler at News One.

"Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Denies Duane Buck a New Sentencing Hearing," by Dianna Wray in the Houston Press.

"Divided Court Denies Case Where Race Impacted Death Sentence," at the Orlando Advocate.

Earlier coverage of Duane Buck's case begins with initial news of the CCA ruling.

The NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund has more information on Duane Buck's case.

More 50,000 people from Texas and around the country have signed a Change.org petition calling on Texas officials to grant Mr. Buck a new sentencing hearing.

Related posts are in the race category index.

Split Texas CCA Denies Relief to Duane Buck in Racially Tinged Sentencing

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruling in Ex Parte Buck is at the link.  Judge Alcala's Dissent was joined by Judges Price and Johnson.

"Split Texas court rejects condemned man's appeal," is Michael Graczyk's AP report, via KDFW-TV.

A divided Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has rejected an appeal from a convicted killer in a Houston case where supporters contend his death sentence unfairly was based on race.

The state's highest criminal court Wednesday refused an appeal from 50-year-old condemned inmate Duane Buck. Buck was convicted of the slaying of his ex-girlfriend and a man at her Houston apartment in July 1995.

During the punishment phase of his 1997 trial, a psychologist testifying for the defense said black people were more likely to commit violence. Advocates for Buck, who is black, say that unfairly influenced the jury, is grounds for a new sentencing hearing and should have been pursued vigorously by lawyers early in the appeals process.

Three of the nine appeals court judges joined in a dissent.

Duane Buck's attorneys have issued the following statement:

“We are gravely disappointed that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has dismissed Duane Buck’s appeal and failed to recognize that his death sentence is the unconstitutional product of racial discrimination. As noted by three members of the Court, ‘[t]he record in this case reveals a chronicle of inadequate representation at every stage of the proceedings, the integrity of which is further called into question by the admission of racist and inflammatory testimony from an expert witness at the punishment stage.’  These judges recognized that this outcome ‘jeopardizes both the integrity of the underlying conviction and of this Court’s judicial processes’ and deprives Mr. Buck of ‘one full and fair opportunity to present his claims.’

“With today’s decision, Texas has once again reneged on its promise to ensure that Mr. Buck would not be executed pursuant to a death sentence that was the unfair product of a prosecutorial appeal to racial bias and stereotype. ,For this reason, more than one hundred civil rights leaders, clergy of various faiths, former judges, former prosecutors, and thousands of individuals in Texas and across the world, have joined our call for a new, fair, and colorblind sentencing for Duane Buck. We now urge the Harris County District Attorney’s Office to respect these calls and refrain from seeking an execution date for Mr. Buck. We will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the important due process and equal protection issues at stake in Mr. Buck’s case, and we are hopeful that the Supreme Court will intervene to right this unequivocal wrong.”

-- Attorneys Kate Black, Christina Swarns (Director of the Criminal Justice Practice at NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund), and Kathryn Kase (Executive Director of Texas Defender Service)

Earlier coverage of Duane Buck's case begins at the link.

The NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund has more information on Duane Buck's case.

More 50,000 people from Texas and around the country have signed a Change.org petition calling on Texas officials to grant Mr. Buck a new sentencing hearing.

Related posts are in the race category index.

Oklahoma Roundup

The Tulsa World reports, "Man twice given death penalty in Tulsa clerk's 1994 killing due third sentencing trial," by Bill Braun.

A Tulsa federal judge has ruled that a convicted Tulsa County murderer who has received a death sentence twice is entitled to another new sentencing trial because he received ineffective legal assistance at his previous resentencing.

Because defense counsel for James J. Fitzgerald, 54, decided not to present expert testimony as mitigation for the defense, the jury was "left to conclude that the petitioner (Fitzgerald) was simply a calculating, violent man,'' according to a 101-page order filed recently by Chief U.S. District Judge Gregory Frizzell.

As U.S. Magistrate Lane Wilson observed in a report, the resentencing jury in 2000 had no understanding of the interplay of Fitzgerald's diabetes diagnosis, his lack of family support from a young age, damage to the frontal lobe of his brain, and the impact his intoxication had on his brain function, according to Frizzell's filing.

The state Attorney General's Office has filed notice of an intent to appeal the resentencing ruling to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Attorneys from the Oklahoma Indigent Defense System represented Fitzgerald at his 2000 resentencing trial.

"Oklahoma lawmaker wants death row organ donations," is the AP report, via the San Francisco Chronicle.

A state lawmaker says he wants to give Oklahoma's death row inmates a chance at redemption by donating their organs before their execution.

Democratic state Rep. Joe Dorman of Rush Springs said Wednesday that he's developing legislation that would give a person who's been convicted of taking a life an opportunity to give someone else a chance to live a longer life.

Dorman says the program would be voluntary and no inmate would be forced to give up an organ. But Ryan Holmes, assistant director of health care ethics at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University in California, says the idea raises ethical concerns and would be "very problematic" for surgeons.

Earlier coverage from Oklahoma begins at the link.

Florida Capital Sentencing Juries

"'Death is different,' and so is jury selection for Dontae Morris," is by Peter Jamison for the Tampa Bay Times.

Starting today, Dontae Morris will experience one of the American justice system's strangest and most consequential rituals: choosing a group of strangers who could decide whether he lives or dies.

Jury selection begins this morning in Orlando for Morris, accused of murdering five men in the summer of 2010. The trial now getting under way involves the most heavily publicized of his alleged crimes, the killing of two Tampa police officers.

After a jury of Orange County residents is picked — Hillsborough Circuit Judge William Fuente is seeking people who have not been exposed to media coverage of the case — arguments and testimony will take place in Tampa.

And:

The goal is 12 ordinary people who can exercise the virtues expected of jurors in any trial — impartiality, thoughtfulness, close attention to factual and legal details — with something like perfection. The standard is not always met.

Herman Lindsey, a 40-year-old South Florida man who was exonerated and freed in 2009 after spending two years on death row for a murder conviction, said watching the jury deliberate over the value of his life at his trial was dispiriting.

"The people who are going to decide your fate — you got to understand, they don't know nothing about the law. A lot of them don't want to be there. A lot of them are inattentive," Lindsey said.

The state Supreme Court eventually reversed both his death sentence and conviction, ruling the jury's decisions were based on insufficient evidence.

The importance of seating a capable jury is clear in Florida, which has demonstrably failed in its administration of capital punishment more than any other state. Florida has seen 24 of its death row inmates exonerated in the past four decades, the highest number in the country.

Related posts are in the jury category index.

News Coverage of Kansas v. Cheever Oral Arguments

The oral arguments transcript in Kansas v. Cheever is available in Adobe .pdf format.

Amy Howe posts, "Argument analysis: Defendant meets skepticism on question presented in Fifth Amendment privilege case," at SCOTUSblog.

On Tuesday, Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked a lawyer for the auto giant Daimler AG whether he “cared how you win.”  Today, Sotomayor pressed former Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal to tell the Court “which way would you rather lose?”  Katyal was appearing on behalf of Scott Cheever, who was convicted of capital murder for the death of a sheriff, only to have his conviction overturned by the Kansas Supreme Court.   By the time the oral argument was over, it appeared that the lower court’s ruling throwing out Cheever’s conviction is in real jeopardy, though Cheever could be well positioned to ultimately win his case back in the Kansas courts, which may have been his lawyers’ strategy all along. 

The issue in Kansas v. Cheever was whether Cheever waived his privilege against self-incrimination when he introduced expert testimony to support his contention that he could not have intended to kill the sheriff because he was in a state of “voluntary intoxication.”  If so, he arguably opened the door to the state countering with its own expert, who had conducted a court-ordered psychiatric examination of Cheever.  Arguing on behalf of the state, Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt fielded several questions from Justices Scalia and Kennedy about whether his proposed rule would apply more broadly.  If, Justice Scalia asked, once Cheever decided to make his mental state an issue, he could no longer rely on his Fifth Amendment privilege, wouldn’t the same be true even if Cheever didn’t call an expert, but instead testified himself?  Would the state still be allowed to call an expert?  Schmidt responded that the state was just seeking a “rule of parity,” so that the Court in this case did not need to decide whether to draw the line.

"Death penalty in Kansas cop killing case gets aired before Supreme Court," is by Michael Doyle of the McClatchy Washington Bureau.

Supreme Court justices sounded deeply skeptical Wednesday about the constitutional claims made by a meth-addled cop killer from Kansas.

The killer, Scott D. Cheever, admits shooting Greenwood County Sheriff Matt Samuels in January 2005 but says methamphetamine use rendered him incapable of premeditation. He also says prosecutors should not have been able to counter a defense psychiatrist with a government psychiatrist who had examined Cheever under court order.

During an hour-long oral argument Wednesday morning, conservative and liberal justices alike effectively dismantled Cheever’s case.

“Assuming the incredulity of my colleagues continues with your argument,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor instructed Cheever’s attorney at one point, “which way would you rather lose?”

A broad court ruling could open the door for many more waivers of the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. More likely, a narrow ruling would return Cheever’s case to the Kansas Supreme Court for a determination of what limits should be placed on the testimony of the government psychiatrist.

Either type of decision would represent a victory for Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt, who was presenting his first oral argument before the high court.

The SCOTUSblog case file for Kansas v. Cheever contains all briefing.

Earlier coverage of the Kansas case begins at the link.

Kansas Death Case at Supreme Court, Wednesday

"U.S. Supreme Court to decide on retrial of Kansas death penalty case," is the Wichita Eagle report by Hurst Laviana.

When the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments Wednesday, it will be considering a Kansas death penalty case that has moved from the Greenwood County Courthouse in Eureka, to the federal courthouse in Wichita, back through Eureka, and then through the Kansas Supreme Court in Topeka.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling, which is expected next spring, likely will determine whether Scott Cheever will be retried for the January 2005 shooting of Greenwood County Sheriff Matt Samuels.

The Kansas Supreme Court ruled in August 2012 that prosecutors violated Cheever’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination when they allowed an expert witness to discuss the results of a mental exam that Cheever was required by a federal judge to take.

Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt appealed that state court decision and is scheduled to argue his case before the U.S. Supreme Court. Georgetown University law professor Neal Katyal, a former acting Solicitor General, is representing Cheever in the case at no charge. The court has set aside an hour for arguments.

And:

The ultimate question now before the U.S. Supreme Court deals with whether a criminal defendant waives his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination by asserting a defense that requires a court-ordered mental exam.

The SCOTUSblog case file for Kansas v. Cheever contains all briefing in the case.

"Death penalty case goes to U.S. Supreme Court this week," is AP coverage via the Topeka Capital-Journal.

Scott Cheever has admitted killing Greenwood County Sheriff Matt Samuels in January 2005, but the 32-year-old says heavy meth use made him unable to understand what he was doing.

At Cheever’s trial in 2007, the state called a witness who had given Cheever a mental exam and determined he knew what he was doing when he shot Samuels.

That testimony prompted the state Supreme Court last year to overturn the verdict.

Earlier coverage of Scott Cheever's case begins at the link; also available, more recent capital news from Kansas.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/10/13/3056519/us-supreme-court-to-decide-on.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/10/13/3056519/us-supreme-court-to-decide-on.html#storylink=cpy

Washington Supreme Court Allows Death Penalty Prosecution

The Washington Supreme Court ruling in Washington v. McEnroe (& Washington v. Anderson) is available in Adobe .pdf format.

"Justices OK pursuit of death penalty in Carnation case," is the AP report, via the Everett Daily Herald.

The state Supreme Court says prosecutors can seek the death penalty against two people accused of killing a family of six in Carnation on Christmas Eve 2007.

In a unanimous decision Thursday, the justices said King County Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Ramsdell was wrong to bar Prosecutor Dan Satterberg from pursuing capital punishment for Michele Anderson and her former boyfriend, Joseph McEnroe.

The two are charged with aggravated first-degree murder in the slaughter of Anderson's family -- her parents, brother, sister-in-law, and her young niece and nephew.

Their lawyers argued that in deciding whether to seek death, Satterberg improperly considered the strength of his case -- rather than only whether there was mitigating evidence that should warrant leniency. The lower court judge agreed.

But the justices said that argument made little sense. The court ruled that prosecutors may consider how strong their case is, as long as they also consider any mitigating factors."Prosecutors, in exercising their executive functions, better serve the public by holistically considering all facts and circumstances related to the crime, which, realistically, include the strength of evidence," Justice Charles Wiggins wrote for the court. "Given the time and expense it takes to prepare and try a capital case, it makes good sense for a prosecutor to seek the death penalty only when the prosecutor believes there is a good chance of obtaining a conviction."

The Seattle Times posts, "Decision to seek death penalty upheld in case of accused Carnation killers," by Jennifer Sullivan.

The state Supreme Court has ruled that King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg did not err when he decided to seek the death penalty against a former couple in connection with the Christmas Eve 2007 slayings of six people in Carnation.

Justices, in their ruling, ordered the trials of Michele Anderson and Joseph McEnroe to proceed. If convicted in King County Superior Court, the two could be sentenced to death.

“The King County prosecuting attorney followed the statutory requirements when he considered whether mitigating circumstances merited leniency and when he determined that they did not,” according to the unanimous ruling authored by Justice Charles Wiggins. “… we reverse the trial court and remand this matter with instructions to reinstate the notices of special sentencing proceeding so that the capital prosecutions against McEnroe and Anderson may finally proceed to trial.”

In January, King County Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Ramsdell ruled that prosecutors could not seek the death penalty in the slayings of six members of Anderson’s family: her parents, brother, sister-in-law and the younger couple’s two preschool-aged children. Ramsdell found that Satterberg erroneously considered the strength of the state’s evidence against McEnroe and Anderson in deciding whether to seek the death penalty.

Ramsdell said that prosecutors should only have weighed whether mitigating circumstances existed in the decision to seek the death penalty.

Satterberg’s office then asked the Supreme Court to reverse Ramsdell’s decision, reinstate the death-penalty notice and remand the case to Superior Court for trial.

Earlier coverage of the Washington case begins at the link.

9th Circuit Vacates Arizona Death Sentence

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit opinion in Murdaugh v. Ryan is available in Adobe .pdf format.

Courthouse News Service posts, "Death Penalty Vacated for Horrific AZ Murder," by Tim Hull.  Michael Murdaugh is the inmate.

A Phoenix judge sentenced Murdaugh to death in 2001, and the Arizona Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and sentence on appeal. In a subsequent habeas petition, Murdaugh claimed, among other things, that the U.S. Supreme Court's 2002 ruling in Ring v. Arizona gave him the right to have a jury decide "the presence or absence of the aggravating factors required by Arizona law for imposition of the death penalty."

A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit agreed on Friday, vacating Murdaugh's death sentence and remanding the case for a new sentencing hearing.

"We conclude that the absence of a jury at the sentencing stage had a 'substantial and injurious effect or influence' on Murdaugh's sentence of death," Judge Dorothy Nelson wrote for the San Francisco-based appeals court.

"The expert reports, though not drafted for the purpose of mitigation, provided some details about Murdaugh's chronic drug use, which a jury might have found established drug impairment," Nelson added. "Because a jury could have found that a preponderance of the evidence supported the (G)(1) mitigating factor, and voted for leniency on that basis, the Ring error was prejudicial. We must grant the habeas petition."

More on Ring v. Arizona, via Oyez.

Ohio Governor Denies Clemency for Billy Slagle

That's the title of the news release issued by Governor John Kasich.  Here's the full text:

Gov. John R. Kasich has denied a request for executive clemency from Billy Slagle, who in 1988 was convicted of aggravated murder with death penalty specifications, aggravated burglary and aggravated robbery of Mari Anne Pope in Cuyahoga County.

Slagle is scheduled to be executed on August 7 at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility in Lucasville. On July 16, 2013, the Ohio Parole Board recommended against clemency for Slagle by a vote of 6-4.

"Ohio Gov.: No Clemency Despite DA's Plea," is Andrew Welsh-Huggins' AP coverage, via ABC News.

The governor rejected clemency Wednesday for a condemned Cleveland killer who stabbed his victim 17 times, overruling a rare plea for mercy from the prosecutor overseeing his case and support from nearly half of a parole board that previously voted unanimously against the inmate.

Gov. John Kasich's decision left death row prisoner Billy Slagle with few options before his Aug. 7 execution date for killing neighbor Mari Anne Pope in a 1987 burglary while two children she was watching were home.

Kasich followed the recommendation of the Ohio Parole Board, which voted 6-4 last week to turn down Slagle's request for clemency. As is his custom, Kasich didn't explain his decision in his statement.

The entire board ruled against mercy two years ago for Slagle, but that was before the election of new Cuyahoga County prosecutor Tim McGinty and a change in his office's approach to capital punishment.

McGinty, who is applying new criteria to both old and new death penalty cases, has said he doesn't believe his office could obtain a death sentence for Slagle today. McGinty pushed for life without parole, arguing that without that option in 1987, jurors trying to ensure that Slagle would never go free chose the only option before them: a death sentence.

And:

Attorneys for Slagle, 44, long argued his sentence should be commuted to life without parole, citing his age — at 18, he was the minimum age for execution in Ohio when the crime happened — and a long history of drug and alcohol abuse.

"Billy was exposed to alcohol from the womb to the crime," Joe Wilhelm, a federal public defender, said at a July 8 hearing.

Earlier coverage of Billy Slagle's case begins at the link; also available, unrelated Ohio news coverage.  Related posts are in the clemency index.

Washington Supreme Court Hears Arguments Over Barred Death Penalty

"High court reviews exclusion of death penalty in 2007 Carnation killings," is by Sara Jean Green for the Seattle Times.

A King County judge overstepped his bounds when he ruled that prosecutors can’t seek the death penalty against the two people accused of killing a family of six on Christmas Eve 2007 in Carnation, the state Supreme Court was told Thursday.

King County Senior Deputy Prosecutor James Whisman argued that under the state’s death-penalty statute, “discretion is placed with the prosecutor” to decide whether to seek capital punishment.

But in ruling out the death penalty, Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Ramsdell wasn’t privy to all of the information King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg considered in deciding to seek the death penalty, Whisman said.

“The court ruled the prosecutor can’t consider the strength of the evidence ... but he wasn’t clear on what he meant by ‘strength of the evidence,’ ” Whisman told the nine-member panel. Ramsdell did not have access to mitigation information on both defendants that was submitted by their defense attorneys, and the judge had previously denied a defense motion to compel Satterberg to spell out “which factors in the mitigation package he found persuasive and which ones” he didn’t, Whisman said.

But defense attorney Kathryn Ross, who represented defendants Michele Anderson and her former boyfriend, Joseph McEnroe, before the Supreme Court, said Satterberg’s decision to seek the death penalty was based only on the evidence and not on the mitigation evidence submitted by the defense. Ross argued that the state’s death-penalty statute is unique in that prosecutors are directed to impose it only if there isn’t sufficient evidence of mitigating factors to merit leniency.

“I guess that’s why we’re here — to decide how to read that statute. Is mitigation the only thing they consider” in deciding to seek the death penalty, said Chief Justice Barbara Madsen.

And:

Ramsdell ruled that while Satterberg properly considered the “facts and circumstances” of the crimes, the prosecutor erroneously considered the strength of the state’s evidence against Anderson and McEnroe in deciding whether to seek the death penalty.

He said the prosecutor should only have weighed whether there were sufficient mitigating circumstances to warrant leniency if convicted — which in the case of aggravated first-degree murder means life in prison without the possibility of release, instead of death.

Under state law, mitigating factors in potential death-penalty cases can include evidence of an extreme mental disturbance or impairment. Leniency also can be merited if a suspect acted under duress or domination of another person.

Arizona Clemency Hearing Canceled Following 9th Circuit Order

The

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit's order in Schad v. Ryan is available in Adobe .pdf format.

The Arizona Republic reports, "Ariona death-row inmate's clemency hearing canceled."  It's by Michael Kiefer.

Edward Schad, scheduled to be executed a week from today for the 1978 murder of a Bisbee man, was to appear today before the Arizona Board of Executive Clemency at the state prison in Florence to ask that his life be spared.

But the hearing was canceled late Tuesday because of a ruling in the U.S Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The appellate judges did not issue a stay of execution, but ordered that the U.S. District Court in Arizona reconsider Schad’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel at his trial.

And:

[A]t Schad’s trial, his defense attorney failed to bring up Schad’s mental illness, which might have persuaded a judge to impose a sentence of life in prison instead of death.

Earlier appeals based on that information were denied in the courts. But a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision redefined when allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel can be raised in federal court. Normally such issues must first be raised in state court before they can be considered in federal court.

Tuesday’s Ninth Circuit order asked the lower court to reevaluate Schad’s argument in light of the U.S. Supreme Court decision.

The Supreme Court case referenced is Martinez v. Ryan; more via Oyez.

Lincoln Caplan Looks at Kentucky

Lincoln Caplan posts, "‘Clear Errors’ About the Death Penalty," at the New York Times Taking Note blog.

When the United States Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976, it said that the penalty could never be mandatory. Even if a jury finds a defendant guilty of a brutal murder, it still must weigh evidence about how to sentence him. Aggravating evidence concerns why a jury should impose a death sentence. Mitigating, or moderating, evidence concerns why it should not. That is the law of the land.

But it is not the law of the Kentucky Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court decided this week not to review a ruling by that state court which upheld the 1986 death sentence of Benny Lee Hodge. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that because “this is a capital case, and clear errors of law such as those here should be redressed,” she dissented from her court’s decision and laid out the Kentucky court’s errors.

And:

In this case, Justice Sotomayor made clear, extensive, uncontested mitigating evidence was not allowed to mitigate. And the “brutal nature” of the murder and the attempted murder made the death penalty all but mandatory. Both errors are fundamental under U.S. Supreme Court rulings. They make the Kentucky Supreme Court approach to the death penalty unconstitutional in the case.

The seriousness of these errors is all too familiar in Kentucky. Death sentences there have been overturned in two out of every three cases since 1976. A year ago, the American Bar Association published a 521-page report about the enormous problems of the state’s capital punishment system. The errors in the Hodge case add to the far-reaching basis for a unanimous recommendation of the Kentucky Human Rights Commission this year: it is time for the state to abolish the death penalty.

Justice Sotomayor's dissent is available in Adobe .pdf format.

Earlier coverage from Kentucky begins at the link.

Georgia Supreme Court Overturns Death Sentence

The Georgia Supreme Court ruling in Ellington v. Georgia is available in Adobe .pdf format

"Death sentences overturned for man who killed family," is Bill Rankin's post at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

The Georgia Supreme Court on Monday threw out death sentences imposed by a DeKalb County jury against a man who killed his wife and their 2-year-old twin sons.

The court, in a unanimous opinion, upheld the murder convictions against Clayton Jerrod Ellington and sent the case back for a new sentencing trial. When Ellington’s death sentence was handed down in 2008, it was the first capital sentence imposed by a DeKalb jury in almost two decades.

In reversing the death sentences, Justice David Nahmias wrote that the trial judge incorrectly prohibited Ellington’s lawyers from asking prospective jurors during jury selection if they would only consider a death sentence — and not life in prison — for the murder of two young children.

The jury selection process is needed to find a jury that will be fair and impartial, Nahmias wrote.

"Death Penalty Tossed Out in DeKalb Triple Murder Case," is the AP report, via WMAZ-TV.

The Georgia Supreme Court has unanimously tossed out the death sentence of a man who was convicted of killing his wife and twin 2-year-old sons in Lithonia in 2006.

The court on Monday upheld Clayton Jerrod Ellington's murder conviction, and a jury will once again have the option to sentence him to death.

Ellington's attorneys had argued the trial court unfairly prohibited them from asking prospective jurors whether they would consider a life sentence rather than the death penalty.

 

GRACE Law Marks 10th Anniversary with Events

You can find out about all the activities at the Gulf Region Advocacy Center - GRACE Law - website.  They include:

Fantasy Memorabilia Auction.
October 15th through November 12th

Online Silent Auction
November 12th through 17th

Intimate Luncheon with Sister Helen Prejean. 
November 15th 11:30 am – 1:30pm

Telling the Narrative: Life is a Story.
November 15th at 6:00 p.m.

Film Screening Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory
November 16th at 6:30 p.m.

Culminating in the big event:

10th Anniversary Awards Dinner Gala & Silent Auction - November 17th at 6:30 p.m.
Hosted by Jason Baldwin, keynote speaker Mike Farrell, live performance by Steve Earle. Special guests include Shelley Fabares, Anthony Graves, Rais Bhuiyan and others.

Last year, Jeffrey Toobin's profiled the work of GRACE and its founder Danalynn Recer in his New Yorker article, "The Mitigator: A new way of looking at the death penalty."  It's noted at the link.

Terry Williams' Case Coverage

Today's New York Times reports, "Pennsylvania Justices Block an Execution," by Jon Hurdle.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Wednesday halted the execution of Terrance Williams, a convicted murderer who had been scheduled to die by lethal injection only a few hours later.

The ruling upheld a stay of execution granted last week by Judge M. Teresa Sarmina of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas on the ground that prosecutors had withheld evidence at Mr. Williams’s 1986 trial that could have led to a lesser penalty.

In a brief statement, the state’s highest court denied an emergency application by the Philadelphia district attorney, R. Seth Williams, to overturn Judge Sarmina’s ruling, which also granted a new sentencing hearing. The defendant remains under sentence of death unless or until the State Supreme Court upholds the ruling for resentencing and a new jury commutes the sentence to life without parole.

The court gave no reason for its decision, which followed defense arguments that the murder victim had sexually abused Mr. Williams for most of his adolescence and that prosecutors had withheld that evidence from the jury.

Mr. Williams had been scheduled to be put to death at 7 p.m. Wednesday. The execution would have been the first in Pennsylvania in 13 years, and the first in the state since 1962 for an inmate who did not choose to die because he had lost all appeals.

"Terrance Williams misses his date with executioner," by Joseph A. Slobodzian in the Philadelphia Inquirer.

In an unsigned one-sentence order, the state's high court decided to take more time - possibly months - to review Friday's ruling by Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina. Sarmina ruled that the integrity of Williams' 1986 death sentence had been undermined by new evidence that the trial prosecutor withheld information that Williams was sexually molested by his victim.

Williams attorney Shawn Nolan thanked more than 380,000 people who signed an Internet clemency petition.

"The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has wisely decided to consider all of the evidence before making a final decision, and we look forward to presenting our case in the coming months," Nolan said.

Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams said in a statement that he continues to believe that Terrance Williams is one of the few who deserves the death penalty and that "his new claims are not true."

"The case will now proceed as a normal appeal to the Supreme Court," Williams said. "This is not the first time the prosecution has appealed a capital case, and it probably won't be the last."

The AP filing is, "Pa. court spares inmate from execution," by Maryclaire Dale, via the Allentown Morning Call.

Terrance "Terry" Williams spent a day on death row waiting for a call that never came.

Williams feared he'd be shipped across the state to be executed on Wednesday, the first person sent to the death chamber in Pennsylvania since 1999. But the call never came. Instead, his defense lawyers phoned him that afternoon to say the state Supreme Court had in effect halted the execution.

A state judge last week granted a stay of execution, and the court said it wouldn't overturn her decision before Williams' death warrant expired at midnight. The court plans to review Williams' case over time.

Additional coverage includes:

"Terrance 'Terry' Williams will not be executed today," by Donald Gilliland for the Harrisburg Patriot-News.

"Pennsylvania high court upholds stay of execution for Terrance Williams," by David Ariosto at CNN.

"Pennsylvania Supreme Court stays Terrance Williams' execution," by Karen Langley in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

"Williams spared from execution," by Mary Wilson at WHYY-FM NewsWorks.

"Pa. Supreme Court Spares Man From Execution," by Jim Malewitz at Stateline - the Pew Center on the States.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.

Statement From Terry Williams' Attorneys

Shawn Nolan has released a "Statement from Attorneys for Terry Williams Re: Stay of Execution."  Here's the statement in full:

“On behalf of Terry Williams we are extremely pleased that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has affirmed Judge Sarmina’s grant of a stay of execution and want to thank everyone supporting the effort to stop this execution. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has wisely decided to consider all of the evidence before making a final decision and we look forward to presenting our case in the coming months.
 
After hearing multiple days of testimony and careful consideration of all the records, Judge Sarmina granted a stay of execution and found that the prosecution withheld critical evidence from the jury. As the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has now confirmed, Judge Sarmina’s grant of a stay was factually and legally sound.
 
The Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office should stop its pursuit to execute Terry Williams. The time has now come for them to heed the call from the victim’s widow, jurors, child advocates, victim’s rights advocates, and over 380,000 people who do not want Terry executed.”

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins with the preceding post.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Refuses to Lift Stay

"Not tonight. Condemned killer spared execution," is the Philadelphia Inquirer breaking news post by Joseph A. Slobodzian.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has refused a prosecution plea to reinstate today's execution of condemned Philadelphia killer Terrance Williams.

At about 3:45 p.m., the court in a one-sentence order denied the District Attorney's emergency motion and ordered court personnel to draft a schedule for filing legal briefs and, perhaps, an oral argument.

The state's high court decision let stand last Friday's ruling by Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina that the 1986 trial prosecutor made Williams' death sentence more likely by withholding informtion that Williams was sexually molested by his victim.

"Condemned Killer's Life Spared in Last Hours," is the AP filing, via WCAU-TV.

Pennsylvania's top court has denied prosecutors' emergency petition in a death penalty appeal, meaning Terrance Williams will not be executed tonight.

The 46-year-old Williams has a stay of his scheduled execution, which is the first in Pennsylvania in more than a decade. A state judge has vacated his death sentence and ordered a new sentencing hearing after finding last week that prosecutors hid evidence at his 1986 trial.

Judge M. Teresa Sarmina said prosecutors suppressed evidence that Williams' victim was an alleged pedophile who abused boys, including Williams, so jurors were not aware of those allegations when they voted to impose the death penalty.
 
But Philadelphia prosecutors appealed to the state's high court to overturn that ruling and reinstate the death penalty in time to execute Williams on Wednesday. The court rejected the appeal.

CounterPunch posts, "Prosecutorial Misconduct and the Death Penalty," by Linn Washington, Jr.

The recent outrage in Pennsylvania over the scheduled October 3 execution of a man who killed two men who had sexually abused him during his childhood has tarnished the reformer image of Philadelphia DA Seth Williams, exposing him as just another prosecutor willing to trample justice to preserve a death penalty.

When Seth Williams successfully campaigned to become Philadelphia’s top prosecutor a few years ago he used a catchy phrase: “A New Day/A New DA.”

But based on Williams’ recent posturing and positions taken by him, evidence indicates this new DA continues operating in the same old way as his predecessors.

Instead of running his office in accordance with that ‘New Day’ many expected, DA Williams is defending death penalty cases that are stained by prosecutorial misconduct and is pursuing factually bogus charges against victims of police brutality, including one involving a blind man charged with attacking the police who beat him.

The most pronounced example of Williams’ old wine/new bottle stance is his vigorous –and intellectually dishonest — public relations campaign backing the execution of child-sex abuse victim-turned-murderer Terrance Williams.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.

A Flagrant Conflict of Interest

That's the title of Lincoln Caplan's New York Times Taking Note blog post.

Last Friday, a state trial judge stayed Pennsylvania’s execution of Terrance Williams—scheduled for this Wednesday—and ordered a new sentencing hearing. In response to a motion from Philadelphia’s district attorney, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court could overturn the stay and order, putting the execution back on schedule. Yet the court’s chief justice has no business judging this case.

Chief Justice Ronald Castille has a classic and flagrant conflict of interest: he is passing judgment on a prosecution that he approved and oversaw, and on a trial judge’s ruling that strongly censured that prosecution. He was the Philadelphia district attorney in 1986 and accountable for the serious misconduct that led to Mr. Williams’ death sentence.

The current Williams defense team filed motions on Monday for the chief justice to either recuse himself, or refer the matter to his fellow justices, so he was not deciding his own case. But, within hours, Mr. Castille turned down both motions.

And:

When Mr. Castille was elected chief justice in 1993 on a law-and-order platform, his campaign boasted that he had put 45 criminals on death row, including Mr. Williams. He has called previous requests that he recuse himself “ethical lapses”—of the lawyers making the requests. And he has otherwise displayed untenable judicial ethics, as The Philadelphia Inquirer reported, receiving many gifts of dinners, event tickets, golf outings and plane rides, some from people with cases decided by his court.

With the decision not to recuse himself in this case, Mr. Castille has underscored his obtuseness about what basic fairness requires. He has diminished his position, the court he sits on and the rule of law in Pennsylvania. Even if the court upholds the trial court’s stay and order, as the merits dictate, its ruling will be badly tainted. And if it does not, the ruling will simply not be trustworthy.

"Philly DA wants to file new brief in death appeal," is an updated AP article, via the Erie Times-News.

For now, Williams has a stay of his scheduled execution. A state judge vacated his death sentence Friday and ordered a new sentencing hearing after finding that prosecutors hid evidence at his 1986 trial.

But Philadelphia prosecutors appealed to the state's high court to overturn that ruling and reinstate the death penalty in time to execute Williams today. Williams' death warrant expires at midnight, and prosecutors asked on Tuesday to respond to the objection filed by his lawyers.

The state Supreme Court could grant District Attorney Seth Williams' appeal, reject it or allow him to file another legal brief. Seth Williams is no relation to Terry Williams.

A second AP report examines Pennsylvania's execution protocol, "Condemned Killer Could Still Be Executed Wednesday."  It's via WCAU-TV.

If Terrance Williams is executed, it will be an event strictly supervised by the state.

For now, the 46-year-old Williams has a stay of his scheduled execution, which would be the first in Pennsylvania in more than a decade. A state judge has vacated his death sentence and ordered a new sentencing hearing after finding last week that prosecutors hid evidence at his 1986 trial.
 
But Philadelphia prosecutors have appealed to the state's high court to overturn that ruling and reinstate the death penalty in time to execute Williams on Wednesday. His death warrant expires at midnight.
 
If he is executed, his death would be carried out according to a bureaucratic script under the steely supervision of the state government.

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reports, "Execution’s stay won’t open ‘floodgates’ in Pennsylvania," by Adam Brandolph.

A Philadelphia judge’s decision last week that brought the state back from the brink of its first execution in more than a decade likely won’t have much of an impact on the remaining 199 inmates sitting on death row, legal observers say.

“Every one of these decisions is unique and idiosyncratic. Every one has his or her own circumstances, different backgrounds, different crimes,” said University of Pittsburgh law professor John Burkoff. “This won’t be precedential, and I don’t think the floodgates will open.”

Judge M. Teresa Sarmina on Friday stayed the execution of Terrance Williams, 46, who was scheduled to be put to death on Wednesday for the death of Amos Norwood, 56, a chemist and church volunteer.

Sarmina said prosecutors suppressed evidence that Norwood had sexually abused Williams as a teenager, a mitigating circumstance never heard by the jury that sentenced Williams to death in 1987.

“This case is a perfect storm of what can go wrong with the death penalty,” said Marc Bookman, executive director of the Atlantic Center for Capital Representation, a Philadelphia-based nonprofit that helps lawyers whose clients face the death penalty. “It’s really a learning moment for Pennsylvania.”

Bookman said Williams’ case may deter juries from imposing the death penalty.

“It’s inconceivable to me that this debacle would encourage our community to seek more executions. I think a lot of people learned from this all the mistakes that can happen, and it shows how frail and full of errors the death penalty can be.”

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.

Judge's Stay Should End Williams' Death Sentence

That's the title of an editorial published in today's Philadelphia Inquirer.

The historic ruling Friday by a Philadelphia judge to stay the execution of condemned killer Terrance Williams has given Pennsylvania yet another compelling reason to vacate Williams' death sentence once and for all.

With the clock still ticking, the courts and Gov. Corbett have an opportunity to correct a horrific wrong by sparing Williams' life and commuting his punishment to life in prison, a more appropriate sentence.

Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina made the right ruling in staying the execution scheduled for Wednesday. At the same time, she upheld the guilty verdict for the murder.

Sarmina found that prosecutors withheld crucial evidence that might have convinced a jury in Williams' 1986 trial to sentence him to life for the killing of a city man, Amos Norwood.

Her findings are stunning in a case that could be a textbook example of the flaws in a capital punishment system already proven to be fallible, a system that puts minority and poor defendants at a greater risk of the death penalty.

And:

The governor should leave Williams to spend the rest of his life in prison without a chance of parole. And Pennsylvania should scrap the death penalty entirely.

"Castille refuses to recuse self in Williams decision," is the Inquirer news report written by Joseph A. Slobodzian.

Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Monday rejected a defense motion to disqualify himself from the case of Terrance Williams because he had been the city district attorney when Williams was condemned to death.

Trying to preserve a stay that will keep Williams, 46, out of the execution chamber Wednesday, Williams' lawyers contended that Castille's participation created the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Castille, however, denied the motion in a one-sentence order late Monday. Castille rejected as well a companion bid to leave the decision up to his five fellow justices.

Castille was Philadelphia district attorney in 1986 when Williams was sentenced to death for the 1984 murder of Amos Norwood.

As the city's top prosecutor, Castille approved the decision to seek the death penalty and to defend the sentence on appeal.

Now, as chief justice of the state's high court considering whether to reinstate Williams' execution Wednesday, Castille's history seems a conflict of interest, the defense argues.

In 18 years on the court, Castille has rebuffed recusal motions based on his tenure as district attorney from 1986 to 1991.

And:

The death warrant for Williams expires at midnight Wednesday. If the stay is later reversed, Gov. Corbett would have to sign a new death warrant.

"Pennsylvania has a log-jam of death penalty cases nearing the ends of their appeal processes," by Charles Thompson of the Harrisburg Patriot-News looks at and beyond the Terry Williams' case.

While Williams’ fate has yet to be determined, legal experts suggest that the state will likely soon be dealing with the death penalty for the first time in more than a decade.
    
It appears that in Pennsylvania, the death penalty could soon mean death again.
    
There is a logjam of decades-old death penalty cases that are nearing the end of the appeals marathon. And for some of them, there may be no more valid reasons to apply the brakes that haven’t already been fully litigated.
    
The next test case may be that of Hubert Lester Michael Jr.
    
A former Lemoyne resident, Michael is currently facing a Nov. 8 execution for the 1993 abduction and killing of 16-year-old Trista Eng near Dillsburg.
    
Michael has no more appeals remaining, so he will be forced to seek some sort of emergency stay to avoid execution. His attorney, Ronald Travis of Williamsport, did not respond to requests for an interview for this story.
    
Of the 200 inmates currently on Pennsylvania’s death row, 85 were sentenced to the death penalty before Michael. Thirty-nine of them have been on death row since the 1980s. Three inmates on death row are women.

“I don’t know whether it’s this year or next year... but for Pennsylvania to have three, four executions a year I don’t think would be surprising,” said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center.
    
“There’s just too many cases clicking along in that long, slow system.”

"Disrespecting victims of abuse," is by Sue Osthoff in the Inquirer.  She's the director of the National Clearinghouse for the Defense of Battered Women, based in Philadelphia.

Many advocates for victims of sexual assault, victims of violent crime, children's rights advocates, and others are closely following the case because of the horrific physical and sexual abuse that Terry Williams suffered from age 6 until he killed two of his abusers at ages 17 and 18.

With Pennsylvania's recent history of child sexual-abuse cases, it is unacceptable for the district attorney to write about allegations of sexual abuse with such disdain: "There was a neighbor boy, allegedly, and a friend, and a teacher, and his cellmates at the youth detention center, all of whom supposedly took advantage of him." Whether Seth Williams believes these charges or not, the rape of a child is not "taking advantage of him."

The district attorney's language fails to reflect the gravity of the experience of child sexual abuse and rape, and most importantly, disrespects all victims of childhood sexual abuse.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.

Related posts are in the prosecutorial misconduct category index.  The responsibility of the state to provide exculpatory evidence to the defense was articulated in the 1963 Supreme Court ruling in Brady v. Maryland; more via Oyez.

More From Philadelphia

Andrew Cohen posts, "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Execution," at the Atlantic.

Twenty-six years after the fact, too late but just in time, a measure of justice finally found Terry Williams on Friday when a Pennsylvania judge, a former prosecutor, stayed his October 3 execution and vacated a death sentence that had been unfairly imposed upon him in 1986. No reasonable review of Williams' case -- no evaluation of the evidence, no respect for his trial jurors or the victim's widow, no fealty to the Sixth Amendment's fair trial guarantees -- can sustain, in law or fact, the imposition of capital punishment here.

And yet today, seeking to defend an indefensible verdict, unapologetic about the misconduct of his predecessor, impervious to the dynamics of child sex abuse cases, tone-deaf to local politics and morality in the Age of Sandusky, unrepentant about misstatements to the state's parole board, Williams' prosecutor pushes on. I have been covering capital cases like this for 15 years and I can rarely remember an instance where a district attorney fought so willfully for so long for the right to do an injustice. It's a risible offense.

And:

Instead of accepting Judge Sarmina's reasoned judgment, instead of acknowledging that defendants like Williams are entitled to a meaningful remedy when the state cheats at trial, instead of preparing for a new sentencing hearing which would include all the relevant evidence, Williams' current prosecutor doubled down.

Late Friday, Seth Williams (obviously no relation) issued a statement that beggars belief. In Seth Williams' world, the prosecutor who cheated in 1986 in a capital case has been "unfairly victimized." In this world, he is obliged to "preserve the integrity of the jury's verdict and sentence" even though nearly half of that jury has walked away from its work. What "integrity" is left to protect about an inaccurate sentence? Seth Williams didn't say. But he was sure to tell the world that he doesn't want to make a villain out of the victim, Amos Norwood, the child sex predator.

None of this excuses what Terry Williams did. But it sure explains it, doesn't it? And isn't that the essence of what the sentencing phase of a capital trial should be about? Terry Williams is not getting away with anything, he's not cheating anyone, and that's never been the point of this round of appeals. If he is not executed, he will spend the rest of his life in prison, which is the sentence he almost certainly would have gotten in 1986 had prosecutors played by the rules, had jurors been given all the relevant evidence, and had a capital defendant been given adequate counsel.

But even this is not good enough for prosecutor Williams. He immediately appealed Judge Sarmina's ruling. Want to know why more and more Americans are skeptical of the death penalty, why the constitutional guarantees of due process and fair trials so often go unmet? It's because of cases like this one, where prosecutors cheat at trial and where their successors, decades later, cannot then admit, to themselves or the world, that such behavior undercuts confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the criminal justice system.

"Lawyers ask state's chief justice to step down from death row case," is the AP filing, via WITF-FM.

Lawyers for a death-row inmate facing a possible execution Wednesday want Pennsylvania's chief justice to step down from the case.

Lawyers for Terrance "Terry" Williams argue that Chief Justice Ronald Castille should recuse himself because Castille supervised Williams' death-penalty case when he was Philadelphia's district attorney.

WHYY-FM posts, "Terrance Williams safe for now, but D.A. falls short of 'zealous, ethical and effective' standards," by Aja Beech, a board member of Pennsylvanians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty.

Williams is one of over 200 people on Pennsylvania's death row and almost half of those people have come from Philadelphia. Of the 95 people on death row that have come from Philadelphia courts, approximately 18 of those cases were tried and sentenced to death in a period from 1983 until 1987, according to an execution list maintained by the state. (See document below.) This four-year period has come under great scrutiny because of issues such as the McMahon tapes, an instructional video made in 1986 by senior prosecutor at the time in the Philadelphia district attorney's office Jack McMahon on excluding "young blacks" from juries.

The verdict in the Williams hearing confirmed that the original prosecutor willfully withheld and suppressed important information relevant to the initial Williams case in the late 1980s, continuing the tragic saga of justice deferred in Philadelphia.

And:

Something is wrong with the capital punishment system in Pennsylvania, and our state is finally starting to see this. There are some in state government working to fix this problem, such as Senators Daylin Leach and Stewart Greenleaf, who on behalf of the bipartisan task force and advisory committee studying the death penalty in Pennsylvania, released a letter requesting "no execution be carried out in the Commonwealth" until the study is completed in December 2013. That we may be sure we are doing the right thing by proceeding with state executions; can we not wait a year until we are sure it is within the law and ethics of our state to do so?

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.

Update From Philadelphia

Judge Sarmina's order staying Terry Williams' execution and vacating the death sentence is available in Adobe .pdf format.

Philadelphia Daily News columnist Stu Bykofsky writes,"State has dirty hands in Terrance Williams case," for today's paper.

Judge Sarmina, a former city prosecutor who is no dewy-eyed sap, believes that's what happened.

I am for the death penalty, but only when we are certain the accused committed coldblooded murder. Another stipulation is that the prosecution must play by the rules. The D.A.'s role is to secure justice, not just convictions.

There is, at least, strong suspicion that the D.A.'s office broke the rules. If so, sadly, that wouldn't be a first. It happens more often than we would like.

If you believe in justice, you can't allow prosecutors to put their thumbs on the scales. Some of you are thinking the defense does that all the time, and you are right. But the defense represents an individual; the D.A. represents the state - you and me.

The Philadelphia Inquirer posts, "What next?" by Joseph Slobodzian.

Monday and Tuesday could see a burst of last-minute legal activity as Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court decides whether to affirm or reverse Friday’s ruling staying Wednesday’s scheduled execution of condemned Philadelphia killer Terrance Williams.

Legally, as of now Williams’ death sentence for the 1984 murder of Amos Norwood, 56, is on hold. But that could change in an instant if the state’s high court reverses the stay by Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina.

The Philadelphia District Attorney’s office filed the emergency motion with the Supreme Court hours after Sarmina’s ruling but since then, according to the court’s website, nothing: no orders for the filing of legal briefs, scheduling of a hearing, response of any kind.

That may not be unusual and District Attorney Seth Williams said Friday that he does not believe it likely that the court will act on his emergency motion before Terry Williams’ death warrant expires at midnight Wednesday.

According to Janet Kelley, a spokeswoman for Gov. Corbett, if the warrant expires the governor is required to sign a new warrant within 30 days from when Sarmina’s stay is lifted. A new execution date would then have to be set within 60 days of the signing of the new warrant, Kelley said.

Any action by the state Supreme Court before Wednesday will trigger appeals by one side or the other to the federal court system or even to the U.S. Supreme Court.

"Judge in Terrance Williams case a "terrier" for the truth," is by Donald Gilliland for the Harrisburg Patriot-News.

When attorneys speak Judge Teresa Sarmina's name, they tend to do so in the respectful tone of the previously wounded.

The diminutive but ferociously intelligent Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge has a courtroom demeanor reminiscent of Martin Shaw's Judge John Deed on the BBC, alternately humorous and severe, prone to sparring with attorneys over the nuance of case law and - with a keen ear for the unsaid - taking over the examination of witnesses herself.

Sarmina is known as a terrier: once she gets her teeth into something, she doesn't let it go.

What she usually shakes out is the truth - or something closer to it than would have been presented to her otherwise.

But the habit exasperates attorneys on both sides of the bench. 

This week Sarmina granted a stay of execution for Williams after a last-minute appeal that stretched into three days. Her ruling - which excoriated the prosecution in the case as both unconstitutional and unethical - dropped like a boulder into the pond of current and former state prosecutors, prompting the likes of Ed Rendell to spring to the former prosecutor's defense.

Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams accused Sarmina - without speaking her name - of unfairly victimizing former prosecutor Andrea Foulkes and "offering brutal murderers what they don't deserve."

The circling wagons of political reputation aside, the evidence was clear - and much of it had been unearthed and entered into evidence by Sarmina herself.

And:

In the end it was clear that multiple witness interviews had been "sanitized" of references to Norwood's predilection for boys before being handed over to the defense. Critical information - including full details of the prosecution's plea bargain deal with their main witness - had been withheld.

And most importantly, it was clear that Foulkes presented a skewed and misleading portrait of the victim to the jury when they sat down to consider the death sentence.

"Evidence has plainly been suppressed," said Sarmina, who  noted that Foulkes' tendency of "playing fast and loose" inclined her "toward a finding that the suppression was closer to willful" rather than inadvertent.

Sarmina said Foulkes engaged in "gamesmanship" and "had no problem disregarding her ethical obligations" in an attempt to win.

"Judge calls off execution of death-row inmate," by Mensah M. Dean in the Philadelphia Daily News.

CITING GROSS prosecutorial misconduct and evidence suppression, a Philadelphia judge on Friday vacated the Oct. 3 execution sentence of Terrance Williams and ordered that he be granted a new penalty hearing.

The ruling by Common Pleas Judge M. Teresa Sarmina indefinitely halted an execution decades in the making.

Williams' first-degree-murder conviction is unchanged by the ruling, meaning that the jury at his new penalty hearing will determine if he should be sentenced to death or spend the rest of his life in prison without parole.

And:

The defense argued that former Assistant District Attorney Andrea Foulkes, who prosecuted Williams in 1986, kept that evidence from the trial defense attorney and jury and instead presented Norwood as a kindly, sympathetic figure who merely had offered Williams a ride home.

Sarmina agreed with the defense, noting the two boxes of evidence turned over just this week from homicide detectives that, she said, corroborated the defense claims against Norwood and Herbert Hamilton, 50. Williams, at 17, had a sex-for-money, abusive relationship with Hamilton and murdered him five months before killing Norwood.

Additional coverage includes:

"Execution Halted for Killer Claiming Abuse by Victim," by Jon Hurdle in the New York Times.

The updated AP report is, "Judge Halts Execution of Terrance Williams," by Maryclaire Dale, via WCAU-TV.

"Terry Williams, Facing Death for Killing Alleged Abuser, Granted Stay of Execution," by John Rudolf at Huffington Post.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.

Related posts are in the prosecutorial misconduct category index.  The responsibility of the state to provide exculpatory evidence to the defense was articulated in the 1963 Supreme Court ruling in Brady v. Maryland; more via Oyez.

Statement From Terry Williams' Attorneys

Shawn Nolan has issued a, "Statement from Attorneys for Terry Williams in Response to the Stay of Execution and Vacation of Death Sentence."  Here's the full text:

“On behalf of Terry Williams, we are extremely pleased that Judge Sarmina, after carefully considering all of the evidence in this case, has vacated the death sentence based on misconduct by the prosecution.  Her decision was right and well-reasoned.  As prosecutor for more than 10 years and a judge who likely presided over more than a hundred homicide trials, Judge Sarmina certainly understands how the prosecution misled the jury in this case. The Philadelphia District Attorney should stop their appeals and stop fighting to have Terry executed.

The District Attorney’s very own files were replete with evidence from as early as 1984 of predatory, exploitive and abusive acts by Herbert Hamilton and Amos Norwood against Terry Williams and other teenage boys.  It is legally and ethically unconscionable that Seth Williams and his Assistants have been advocating for the execution of Terry Williams after hiding critical evidence from jurors and continuing to hide it for 28 years.

Judge Sarmina found that the trial prosecutor engaged in misconduct. She found that the prosecutor 'played games and took unfair measures to win.' She also noted that the prosecutor violated her ethical duty for failing to turn over evidence in the files in the possession of the Commonwealth.

If the DA appeals, we are confident that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will not overturn Judge Sarmina’s well-reasoned decision, and do not believe that the Court will tolerate the prosecutor’s actions in this case, especially when life or death are at issue.

We are also hopeful that Governor Tom Corbett and the Pennsylvania Board of Pardons will now grant clemency in light of Judge Sarmina’s decision and the significance of the evidence that prosecutors kept from the Board during their life or death deliberations.  A majority of the Board, including Attorney General Linda Kelly, previously voted in favor of clemency.  Surely, after considering the new evidence, they will not allow this execution to go forward.”

The Philadelphia Inquirer's updated coverage is, "DA vows to appeal execution stay," by Joseph A. Slobodzian.

Criticizing the prosecutor for "gamesmanship" and withholding evidence that would have likely convinced the jury not to impose a death sentence, Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina today stayed Wednesday's execution of condemned killer Terrance Williams.

District Attorney Seth Williams vowed an appeal to the state Supreme Court.

Sarmina, in a 45-minute oral opinion delivered to a courtroom packed beyond its 71-person capacity, said evidence that was withheld about the sexual proclivities of Williams' victim Amos Norwood, and the extent of the prosecution's deal with admitted accomplice Marc Draper had undermined confidence in the fairness of Williams' 1986 death sentence.

Sarmina, however, affirmed the guilty verdict against Williams in Norwood's murder. She said the District Attorney's office had the option of conducting a new penalty phase for Williams if it still wished to seek the death penalty.

Terrance Williams' attorney Shawn Nolan praised Sarmina's ruling and said it is "time for the District Attorney's office to end the appeals."

The prosecutors could file an emergency challenge to Sarmina's ruling with the state Supreme Court and the state's high court could reinstate Williams' Oct. 3 execution date.

Andrea Foulkes, the assistant district attorney who prosecuted Williams in two murder trial in 1985 and 1986, could not be reached for comment.

The Harrisburg Patriot-News also updates coverage with, "Philadelphia D.A. to appeal ruling that halted inmate's execution," by Donald Gilliland.

Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams criticized the ruling today that stayed Terrance Williams' execution and will appeal the decision.

Terrance Williams had been scheduled to die by lethal injection Wednesday for killing two men. His lawyers are not challenging his guilt, but asking that he remain in prison on a life sentence. They contend that Williams had been sexually abused from the time he was a child, including by the victims.

Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina ruled that the prosecution in Williams' 1986 murder trial withheld evidence and sanitized witness statements to police before handing them over to the defense.

Seth Williams said that her ruling is unjust and has instructed his staff to file an immediate appeal.

"Evidence has plainly been suppressed," said Sarmina, who was especially tough on prosecutor Andrea Foulkes, who is now a U.S. Attorney. Sarmina said Foulkes "had no problem disregarding her ethical obligations" in an attempt to win.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.

Pardons Board to Meet; Newspapers Sue for Execution Access

"Pa. pardons board to reconsider Williams clemency plea," is Joseph A. Slobodzian's Philadelphia Inquirer report.

For the second time, lawyers for condemned Philadelphia killer Terrance "Terry" Williams go before Pennsylvania's Board of Pardons Thursday to urge the board to recommend that Gov. Corbett commute Williams' death sentence to life in prison without parole.

With less than a week to go before Williams, 46, is to be executed by lethal injection on Oct. 3, Williams' lawyers are moving on at least two fronts to keep him alive.

In Philadelphia, Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina will decide Friday whether to grant Williams' plea for a stay of execution.

And:

Williams' lawyers first sought clemency from the state pardons board on Sept. 17, armed with support by more than 300,000 signed supporters including an affidavit from Mamie Norwood, the victim's 75-year-old widow.

Though the board voted 3 to 2 for clemency for Williams, 46, a unanimous vote was needed for the nonbinding recommendation to Gov. Corbett.

In a letter to the board on Sept. 18, Williams' lawyers asked for reconsideration because of how Assistant District Attorney Thomas Dolgenos answered a question from pardons board member Harris Gubernick.

"Pa. pardons board to hear condemned killer's clemency request a 2nd time," is the AP filing, via the Republic.

The state Pardons Board will consider a condemned Philadelphia man's clemency request for a second time less than a week before he's scheduled to be put to death.

The pardons board will meet Thursday morning to consider the request from 46-year-old Terrance "Terry" Williams, who was convicted in 1986 of fatally beating a man he now claims had been sexually abusing him.

"Inquirer, Harrisburg paper seek viewing of executions," is by Amy Worden of the Inquirer's Harrisburg Bureau.

The Inquirer and the Harrisburg Patriot-News asked a federal court Wednesday to literally pull back the curtain on the state's execution chamber and allow witnesses to see the whole procedure.

The suit says the state Department of Corrections is violating the state constitution by a policy preventing witnesses to the commonwealth's first execution in 13 years from observing the entire process.

The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District one week before convicted murdered Terrance Williams is scheduled to be executed at Rockview state prison in Centre County for the 1984 bludgeoning death of Amos Norwood in Philadelphia.

And:

The state's execution protocol gives witnesses, who include reporters, only a brief glimpse of the process during which the lethal injection is administered.

"The execution protocols deprive the public of the information necessary to engage in an informed debate about the most severe penalty the government can impose on its citizens," the suit says.

If Williams is put to death, witnesses, including the victim's family and citizens, will not see the demeanor of the prisoner or anyone else in the room, including the execution team. Nor does the protocol allow them to see if force is used when the prisoner is strapped down in the gurney or if the prisoner displays any signs of pain throughout, the suit says.

Nor does the protocol provide the condemned the opportunity to make a final statement while visible to the witnesses, the suit says.

Under Pennsylvania procedures, the prisoner, if he chooses, either writes or dictates a statement beforehand, and it is provided to reporters afterward, said Susan McNaughton, a spokeswoman for the Department of Corrections.

McNaughton said the department does not comment on litigation.

The Harrisburg Patriot-News reports, "Newspapers file suit to determine if execution is humane," by Charles Thompson.

The Patriot-News and The Philadelphia Inquirer filed a federal suit Wednesday seeking greater access for reporters who are witnesses to the scheduled Oct. 3 execution of convicted murderer Terrance Williams.

The newspapers are battling state Department of Corrections rules that, as written, only permit reporters and other public witnesses to see the administration of the lethal injection firsthand, but none of the steps leading to or following that.

The suit contends those rules, established in 2010, interfere with the press’ opportunity to gauge whether Pennsylvania’s death penalty can be administered humanely.

It seeks an order allowing all witnesses to “view and hear the entirety of the execution from the moment the condemned enters the execution chamber through ... the time the condemned is declared dead.”

Public radio station WITF-FM posts, "What happens next in the execution process for Terrance Williams," by Mary Wilson.

Planning is underway for the first state execution in Pennsylvania since 1999.

Terrance “Terry” Williams is scheduled to be put to death by lethal injection on October 3, at 7 p.m. at a state prison in Centre County. Williams received the death penalty for murdering a Philadelphia man in 1984 as an 18-year-old.

In early August, Gov. Corbett signed a death warrant for the 46-year-old man setting the wheels in motion for the lethal injection to be carried out. The warrant was signed because Williams had exhausted the appeals process.

But there have been some developments since then – two recent appeals, on parallel tracks, could derail the execution before next Wednesday.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins with the preceding post.

Time to Call Off Terrance Williams' Execution

That's the title of today's Philadelphia Inquirer editorial, and it begins today's coverage of the Terry Williams case.  Here's an extended excerpt:

The case for sparing the life of condemned killer Terrance Williams has never been more compelling than now, just days away from his scheduled appointment with Pennsylvania's executioner.

Working along two tracks, Gov. Corbett and the courts still have a chance to head off an irreversible injustice - and what would be the state's first execution in a half-century of someone who had not given up on appealing his death sentence.

The first opportunity comes Thursday, when the state Board of Probation and Parole is set to review its rejection of Williams' clemency bid. New evidence that weighs heavily in Williams' favor should be more than enough to convince two board holdouts to recommend commutation by Corbett to a life sentence.

Those revelations, coming in the last week during hearings before Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina, establish that prosecutors should have given Williams' defense information that might have mitigated his sentence for killing a city man, Amos Norwood.

The disclosures support Williams' claim that he murdered Norwood after years of sexual abuse by the victim. Along with testimony from Williams' accomplice and chief accuser that he was pressured into portraying the killing solely as a robbery, some jurors in the 1986 trial have said they didn't know they could have sentenced Williams to life without parole as an alternative.

Whatever the pardons board decides, Sarmina has a clear duty when she convenes her court on Friday to enter what will be a historic ruling that would halt the Oct. 3 execution.

Presiding with methodical determination, the judge is herself a witness to how Williams, 46, was shortchanged by the state's flawed system of capital punishment. It's a system long prone to error, and known to put poor and minority defendants at greater risk of the death penalty.

Indeed, the legal twists and turns in this case - not to mention the endless appeals and court costs - make it a prime example of why the state should scrap the death penalty.

The Harrisburg Patriot-News publishes the OpEd, "Pennsylvania's big question: To kill or not to kill Terrance Williams," by Jeremy Ritch.

There is no doubt he killed his neighbor and had committed other criminal acts as a youth, including the death of a man that was ruled self-defense. To many, he is simply a hardened criminal and should pay for his crime. However, others feel because of the abuse that was inflicted there should be mercy by the court.

The other issue is that because he was convicted of second-degree murder, it seems somewhat extreme that capital punishment was even an option. As a Christian, I am opposed to the death penalty, but I do understand it is the law of the land in the state I reside in. That being said, I also believe that this particular case is a good reason to grant Williams his life and commute his sentence.

Our state was just shocked by the allegations of sexual abuse by former Penn State coach Jerry Sandusky and his ultimate conviction. We know all too well the damage this kind of crime does to children. For years, we have heard of victims of abuse within the Catholic Church coming forward and finally getting justice for their pain.

At the National Constitution Center's blog, Abigail Perkiss posts, "The purpose of clemency: The case of Terrance Williams."  Perkiss is an assistant professor of history at Kean University.

If Williams’ sentence is carried out on October 3, he will be the first non-voluntary execution in the state in 50 years.

But while some anti-death penalty advocates have painted Williams as a new figurehead for the abolition movement, at its heart this case is about the function of clemency in the American prison system.

As legal scholar Daniel T. Kobil argues, “clemency can be used to achieve justice, by individualizing sentencing and remitting undeserved punishment… Clemency, exercised in this way, can properly be said to be a fundamental part of any system of justice.”

The debate over clemency has a long history in the United States.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.  In the next post, I'll have today's news coverage of the latest developments.

Advocates for Terry Williams have posted an online petition calling for clemency.

Williams' Commentary

"Williams v. Williams," is Lincoln Kaplan's post at the New York Times Taking Note blog.

Pennsylvania is scheduled to execute Terrance Williams next Wednesday, Oct. 3, the first time in 50 years that it will put someone to death who is still fighting his sentence.

Philadelphia’s District Attorney, Seth Williams, could ask for a stay and a fuller review of evidence. Instead, he’s crusading in favor of the death penalty, even writing an op-ed for The Philadelphia Inquirer called “Making the case for Williams’ execution.”

Terrance Williams’ life is on the line, and so is Seth Williams’ reputation.

"Death penalty morally wrong," is the Philadelphia Inquirer OpEd by Jonathan Zimmerman.  He teaches history at New York University.  Here's the beginning of this must-read:

Terrance Williams was sexually abused by the two men he killed, according to his lawyers. He was poorly represented at his trial, where jurors never heard about these circumstances. And the widow of one of his victims wants Williams' death sentence commuted.

But those aren't the strongest arguments for sparing the life of Terrance Williams, who is scheduled to be executed on Oct. 3. The best reason is the simplest: Capital punishment is inherently wrong, no matter the circumstances. And Philadelphians should understand that better than anybody else.

That's because the movement to abolish the death penalty in America began right here, in the City of Brotherly Love. On March 9, 1787 - just a few months before the drafting of the Constitution - Philadelphia physician and patriot Benjamin Rush delivered a stinging rebuke to capital punishment at a lecture in the home of another famous local patriot, Benjamin Franklin.

Part of Rush's argument would be familiar to us today: The death penalty won't deter the most vicious criminals. But his real concern - repeated until his own death in 1813 - was the effect of capital punishment on the rest of us.

At its root, Rush wrote, the death penalty "lessens the horror of taking away human life." Conducted in public, executions often devolved into drunken revelries of mirth and revenge.

Worst of all, the death penalty allowed human beings to determine life and death. Rush wasn't worried about whether capital cases were correctly decided, which is the issue that dominates our debate today. Instead, he insisted, the decision wasn't ours to make.

"'Vengeance is mine,' said the Lord," Rush declared, quoting Scripture. "A religion which commands us to forgive, and even to do good to, our enemies, can never authorize the punishment of murder by death."

Spearheaded by Rush, the movement against capital punishment scored some impressive early victories. In 1786, the year before his lecture at Franklin's home, Pennsylvania became the first state to abolish the death penalty for robbery, burglary, and sodomy - all capital crimes at the time.

"Public support for the death penalty 'is not what it used to be,' expert says," is Robert J. Vickers' Harrisburg Patriot-News column.

Though most Americans still favor the death penalty, public support for executions has dropped in the past few years.
    
Recent disclosures indicating death row convictions were made erroneously have caused many citizens to be more reticent about putting a convicted killer to death.
    
“The death penalty is not what it used to be in terms of public opinion,” said Frank Baumgartner, an expert on capital punishment at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the former head of political science at Penn State.
    
“People are not as certain about all these cases,” he said. “A majority of Americans still are happy to see an execution go forward, it’s not as many as a while ago because of the problems of innocence.”
    
A Gallup poll in 2011 shows 61 percent of Americans surveyed favor the death penalty, a solid majority to be sure. But that figure represented a 39-year low.
    
In Pennsylvania, the issue is murkier.
    
Only three convicts have been put to death since the punishment was reinstated in 1976.
    
Terrance Williams could become the first person executed in Pennsylvania in 13 years. Williams faces the death penalty for killing a Philadelphia man in 1984. His attorneys argue that Williams should be spared because the victim sexually abused him for years.
    
“Pennsylvania has not been an execution state traditionally,” said Robb Austin, a former Democratic state legislator now working as a Republican media consultant. “It has not been an issue in the public domain. I don’t think it would rise to the level of a campaign issue.”

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins with the preceding post.

Williams' Hearing Expected to Conclude Today

Today's Philadelphia Inquirer reports, "Judge in Williams bid for execution stay orders sides to make their cases."  It's by Joseph A. Slobodzian.

The Philadelphia judge who is hearing condemned killer Terrance Williams' bid to stay his Oct. 3 execution has ordered lawyers to argue their positions Tuesday.

The decision by Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina followed four hours of testimony Monday by Marc Draper, Williams' admitted accomplice in the 1984 murder of Amos Norwood.

Draper, who is serving a life term after pleading guilty to second-degree murder and testifying against Williams at trial in 1986, told Sarmina that police pressured him to say Norwood's killing happened during a robbery and not because Williams' rage at Norwood for sexual abuse since he was 13.

In another development Monday, the state Board of Pardons announced it would vote Thursday on whether to reconsider Williams' plea to commute his death sentence to life without parole.

The five-person board, chaired by Lt. Gov. Jim Cawley, is scheduled to meet at 9 a.m. in Harrisburg. If a majority votes yes, the board will hear the case at 2:30 p.m.

On Sept. 17, the board voted, 3-2, for clemency. A unanimous vote is needed for the nonbinding recommendation to go to Gov. Corbett.

Monday's testimony by Draper, 46, was key to Williams' effort to persuade Sarmina to stay what would be the state's first execution since 1999.

"Truth becomes elusive in appeal of execution," by Mensah M. Dean for the Philadelphia Daily News.

A CONFESSED murderer whose hours of testimony on Monday were intended to help sway a judge to stop the execution of Terrance Williams had to explain why he lied on the stand decades ago and why he has appeared to utter several new lies.

The shaky performance by Marc Draper, 46, set the stage for closing arguments Tuesday morning in the evidentiary hearing before Common Pleas Judge M. Teresa Sarmina.

Draper, incarcerated for 28 years of a life sentence after pleading guilty to his role in the 1984 murder of Amos Norwood, 56, stuck to the story he testified to when the hearing began last week: that Williams initiated the killing out of rage at having been in a five-year sexual relationship with Norwood.

"Judge calls for more evidence in hearing to stay execution of Terrance "Terry" Williams," is by Donald Gilliland for the Harrisburg Patriot-News.

Monday morning two boxes of 28-year-old police investigation records were wheeled into a Philadelphia courtroom, and instantly the plot thickened.

The second day of an emergency stay hearing in the execution of Terrance “Terry” Williams extended to three.

Williams was convicted of the 1984 bludgeoning death of Amos Norwood, a 56-year-old man who was likely having sex with him. Williams is slated to be executed on Oct. 3.

The primary witness in the case recently changed his story, claiming he told police and prosecutors that “the homosexual relationship” was the motive of the killing, but that they told him if he wanted leniency, he had best say the killing was motivated by robbery, which he did.

The prosecutor at the time, current U.S. Attorney Andrea Foulkes, says he’s lying.

The witness, Marc Draper, currently serving life in prison for his role in the murder, says Foulkes is lying.

Who to believe?

Astonishingly, documentary evidence surfaced last week that lends some credence to the convict’s story - enough evidence that Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina ordered the police investigation records to be hauled out of storage for inspection.

"Pardons board may take second vote in death penalty case," by Karen Langley in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

The Pennsylvania Board of Pardons plans to meet Thursday to decide whether it will reconsider its recommendation against clemency for Terrance Williams ahead of his Oct. 3 execution.

After hearing arguments that Williams deserves clemency because he had been sexually abused by the man he murdered in 1984, as well as by other men, three of the five members of the board voted earlier this month to recommend that Gov. Tom Corbett grant clemency. Attorneys for Williams had urged that his death sentence be commuted to life in prison. But such a decision requires a unanimous vote by the board, so the 3-2 vote does not allow Mr. Corbett to act.

After a request by the federal defenders representing Williams, the board today agreed to meet at 9 a.m. Thursday in Harrisburg to decide whether it will hold a second hearing. If a majority approves, the board will hear the case again that afternoon.

The York Daily Record posts the AP filing, "Death row inmate Terrance Williams' stay of execution hearing to continue."

A Philadelphia judge will hear summary arguments Tuesday on whether to halt the scheduled execution of a man who killed two people in his teens.

The arguments follow testimony Monday from an accomplice who says he lied at Terrance Williams' 1984 trial about the motive for the second killing.

"Testimony wraps up in stay of execution hearing for convicted killer," at CNN.

Attorneys for a convicted killer will focus on a former prosecutor's notes when they argue Tuesday their client should not die by lethal injection in nine days.

No one disputes that Terrance Williams beat Amos Norwood to death with a tire iron in 1984 or that he should be in prison.

But the defense team says information that Norwood had allegedly sexually abused Williams was withheld from the trial, and his life should be spent in a cell.

"One of the strongest pieces of our case it that, as we heard in court on Thursday for the first time ever, that in the prosecutor's own file, in her own handwriting, there was evidence that Mr. Norwood had been previously accused of touching boys," attorney Shawn Nolan told CNN. "The prosecutors have known about that evidence throughout the whole history of this litigation."

The judge overseeing the stay of execution hearing, M. Teresa Sarmina, referred last week to the notes of Andrea Foulkes, who was the prosecutor in Williams' 1986 trial, which showed Foulkes had heard about possible incidents of Norwood abusing boys. The notes also referred to Norwood as a "john" for Williams.

Williams' accomplice, Marc Draper, continued his testimony Monday and prosecutors tried to portray Williams as male prostitute rather than a victim of sexual abuse.

"Williams appeal continues into second day," by Emma Jacobs for WHYY-FM NewsWorks.

Asked by the judge why he stood by statements for 26 years that he now says are false, Draper said: "Looking back now it's almost laughable. Going through the interrogation room, I was a sheep for whatever they wanted me to do. I regret that. I'm almost ashamed to say that right now, because I was so gullible."

Williams's lawyers won't speak to the press during the ongoing hearing. Mark Bookman, Executive Director of the Atlantic Center for Capital Representation says Williams does not deserve to die for the crime he committed as a teen.

"You've got an 18 year, 3-month-old who was by virtually all accounts at this point, sexually abused almost his entire life. To think that he's the worst of the worst is absurd."

Testifying last week, the prosecutor in the original case said she had no proof of a sexual relationship between Williams and the murder victim.

"I never told him [Draper] to lie about anything. I never told any witness to lie about anything."

Pages of her case notes produced last week show she heard reports that the older man had sexually abused other boys.

Democracy Now posts, "New Evidence Emerges in Pennsylvania Death Row Case," earlier this morning.  There is video at the link.

In a new evidentiary hearing, Andrea Foulkes, the prosecutor who oversaw the case against Williams three decades ago, was confronted with her own notes showing the mother of another of Norwood’s abuse victims had told her that Norwood molested her son. For years, Foulkes has rejected the argument that Williams had a motive of seeking revenge against Norwood for sexual abuse.

"Terry Williams Death Penalty Case Rocked By New Evidence Days Before Planned Execution," is John Rudolf's Huffington Post report.

The prosecutor sat in the witness box, as the judge told her to review a document from a murder case decided nearly 30 years ago.

"It looks like notes about an interview," said Andrea Foulkes, a former Philadelphia assistant district attorney and now a federal prosecutor. "That is my handwriting."

The interview, in late 1984, was with a mother whose 16-year-old son belonged to a church youth group led by Amos Norwood, a 56-year-old chemist recently found stabbed and beaten to death in a cemetery.

"Touched on privates," Foulkes said, reading from her notes. "Brought boy home and told him not to say anything. Heard from others about possible incidents."

Foulkes' notes, introduced as evidence for the first time in Pennsylvania state court on Friday, represent an explosive new twist in the case of Terry Williams, sentenced to death in 1984 for killing Norwood in what the jury believed was merely a robbery gone wrong.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link; commentary on the case, in the next post.

Advocates for Terry Williams have posted an online petition calling for clemency.

Terry Williams' Hearing Resumes

"The clock is ticking," is Joseph Solbodzian's post at the Philadelphia Inquirer.

Ten days -- that’s how much time Terrance “Terry” Williams has left before his Oct. 3 execution by lethal injection and Monday may be the most important of those days.

Monday will be the final day of testimony on a motion for an emergency stay of execution before Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina. And Williams’ fate arguably rests in the ability of his admitted accomplice in the June, 11, 1984 murder of Amos Norwood to convince Sarmina that Williams killed in a rage over sexual abuse by Norwood and not in the robbery that convinced a jury to sentence him to death.

Williams’ team of lawyers have argued that Williams’ immaturity at the time of the Norwood killing – just three months past 18, the minimum age for execution in the United States – and the alleged suppression of a history of sexual abuse by Norwood and others -- would have convinced the jury to sentence him to life in prison instead of death.

Williams’ admitted accomplice, Marc Draper, like Williams an 18-year-old Cheyney University freshman at the time of the Norwood murder, testified for about an hour on Thursday afternoon. Draper, serving life in prison after pleading guilty to second-degree murder in Norwood’s killing, told Sarmina his rebirth as a Christian had led him to recant his 26-year-old trial testimony against Williams.

“All I want to do is tell the truth,” Draper, 46, told the judge.

"Complexity of Terrance Williams case has been revealed as lawyers try to prevent his execution," is by Donald Gilliland for the Harrisburg Patriot-News.

Williams had just turned 18 when he killed Norwood. Draper, the son of a Philadelphia city cop, entered a plea deal to testify against Williams, who was convicted of both murders.

Williams was sentenced to death in the Norwood killing.

The ravening beast had been removed from among us.

Justice, it seemed, had been done.

But the case wasn’t nearly so simple.

Terry Williams wasn't the only one with a hidden animal nature.

The complexities of the case have emerged in vivid detail as Williams’ lawyers try to prevent his execution.

Williams is scheduled to be put to death on Oct. 3.

Arguing that Williams was sexually abused and exploited for years, the defense attorneys contend that he should spend the rest of his life in prison, but he doesn’t deserve lethal injection.

A hearing that could spare his life continues in Philadelphia Monday.

Salon posts, "Terry Williams: A victim might be executed," by Rania Khalek.

As Williams’ Oct. 3 execution nears, his attorneys are scrambling to save his life. On Monday, the Pennsylvania Board of Pardons rejected a clemency petition. Though the five-member board voted 3-to-2 in favor of clemency, unanimous approval is required for the governor to consider halting the execution. Williams’s lawyers have since asked the Board of Pardons to reconsider, citing an allegedly inaccurate statement made by assistant district attorney Thomas Dolgenos, though it’s unclear whether board rules allow for reconsideration.

Williams’ life currently rests in the hands of Philadelphia Common Pleas Court judge M. Teresa Sarmina, who has the power to grant an emergency stay of execution. Victor Abreu, one of Williams’ attorneys, tells Salon, “The state knew the real motive for the killing and yet presented evidence that was false.” Sarmina is currently reviewing whether this is indeed the case.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins with the preceding post.

Pennsylvania Editorials, Columns Call for Relief in Terry Williams' Case

"Abused to death? A killer who was molested should not be executed," is the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette editorial.

If the death penalty is going to survive in an era when public attitudes on capital punishment have become less supportive, its proponents must choose their cases carefully. Terrance Williams will never be the poster child for state-run execution.

On Monday, the state Board of Pardons rejected a bid for clemency -- and a sentence of life in prison without parole -- for the convicted murderer. On Oct. 3, unless a court intervenes or Gov. Tom Corbett relents, he will become the first Pennsylvania inmate to be executed since 1999. Indeed, the state hasn't executed an inmate who has contested his sentence since 1962.

Williams was convicted of first-degree murder, robbery and conspiracy in the death of Amos Norwood in Philadelphia in 1986. Now 46, he is said to be remorseful for his crimes, but that alone wouldn't argue against his date with the executioner. Something else dreadful complicates his case.

He claims that he was raped as a youth by several men, including the man he was charged with killing and another man he killed earlier. He also was beaten by his mother and stepfather. Prosecutors take the position that he did not mention this at the time and he has every incentive to make it up. But a clinical psychologist testified that piecemeal revelations of past sex abuse are typical.

"Fatal flaw: Pardons board needs to make change on death penalty cases," is the Harrisburg Patriot-News editorial.

Whatever one thinks about the death penalty, the case of Terrance Williams illustrates a critical flaw in the justice system.

It involves the Pennsylvania Board of Pardons. The majority of the pardons board agreed that Williams shouldn’t be executed. But Williams might be put to death anyway.

Williams might become the first person to be put to death in Pennsylvania in 13 years. He is slated to be executed on Oct. 3.

He’s out of appeals, but a Philadelphia judge is holding an emergency hearing to consider facts in the case. The hearing continues Monday.

And:

Right now four of five pardons board members could agree that a defendant’s life should be spared, but under the current system, the death sentence would go forward.

The Legislature should change the law to require the entire board to agree on execution.

At the least, if the majority opposes death, the board should be able to recommend that to the governor, who would make the final call.

Such a change wouldn’t signal a weaker approach to crime. It would simply ensure that someone doesn’t stay on death row if most of the pardons board thinks a defendant’s life should be spared.

Philadelphia Inquirer columnist Karen Heller writes, "Brutal crimes, but the right sentence is life."

As a child, Terrance Williams endured constant physical abuse and was sexually assaulted by both his victims, his defense argues, important evidence that was never presented at trial more than a quarter century ago. His legal representation was so shoddy and inept that he received the death penalty though he was barely an adult when he committed the crime.

Clemency is now supported by five former jurors, more than 360,000 petitioners, Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput, and the widow of one of the victims.

And:

Marc Bookman of the Atlantic Center for Capital Representation says: "The death penalty is a failed government program. We're spending very little in the beginning but a lot during the appeals process at the end, when the truth is it should be reversed."

True enough. On Thursday, I sat in Judge M. Teresa Sarmina's courtroom, which was packed with top attorneys for both sides, an Olympics of death-row hearings. The original prosecutor was grilled for seven hours about whether evidence that Williams had been raped by victim Otis Norwood was withheld in the original 1986 trial.

Without the death penalty, only life in prison without parole, no one would be there debating an ancient murder case. Instead, the hearing continues Monday with Williams' codefendant.

If Sarmina is unconvinced the evidence merits an emergency stay, defense lawyers will surely appeal.

Meanwhile, Williams remains scheduled to be executed in 10 days.

"Why must we go through this again? The death penalty deters no one, is morally dubious and costs a bundle," is the title of Sally Kalson's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette column.

Here we go again, arguing over a death penalty case when life without parole would punish the offender just as surely and afford society just as much protection.

Equally important, it would eliminate the time and expense of a death row appeal, not to mention the moral quagmire of executing someone whose childhood was shaped by beatings and sexual abuse.

The subject this time is Terrance Williams, 46, of Philadelphia. In 1984, at age 18, he beat 54-year-old Amos Norwood to death. The jury convicted him of first-degree murder and sentenced him to death.

The jurors were never told that Williams had been sexually abused for years by the victim, and by a teacher, as well as by an older boy who first raped him when he was 6.

Five of the jurors later signed statements that they would have voted for life in prison without parole if they had known all the facts.

And:

All the evidence shows that the death penalty is more trouble than it's worth, and that includes the impending lethal injection of Terrance Williams. It's past time for the law to catch up to reality.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.  In the next post, I'll have news coverage previewing today's hearing.

Williams' Philadelphia Court Hearing to Resume Monday

"Pa. death-row inmate’s hearing to continue Monday," is the AP report, via the West Chester Daily News.

A hearing for a death-row inmate who could become the first person in Pennsylvania executed since 1999 has been continued until Monday after nine hours of testimony in Philadelphia.

Forty-six-year-old Terrance "Terry" Williams now claims he was sexually abused for years by the middle-aged man he admits beating to death in 1984 at the age of 18. He's asked a Philadelphia judge to halt the scheduled Oct. 3 lethal injection based on new evidence about the victim and the key accuser.

One of the issues at Thursday's hearing was whether prosecutors and homicide detectives withheld from Williams' lawyers a statement that the killing was motivated by rage over sexual abuse. The jury was told it was over a robbery.

"Hearing continued on Terrance 'Terry" Williams case, man set to be executed Oct. 3," is the Harrisburg Patriot-News report by Donald Gilliland.

A last-ditch hearing to stay the execution of Terrance "Terry" Williams was continued late Thursday afternoon after nearly nine hours of testimony. The judge will reconvene in Philadelphia on Monday morning.

And:

The hearing Thursday was to determine if a stay should be granted, given allegedly new evidence from the primary prosecution witness, who helped Williams kill Norwood and who now -- after 28 years -- is saying he told police and a prosecutor that sex was at the heart of the killings, but that they weren't interested and told him to stick with a robbery scenario.

Williams has exhausted nearly all avenues of appeal -- both state and federal -- to stop the execution. A push in recent months to highlight his history of sexual abuse has garnered support from a wide variety of judges, former prosecutors, child victim advocates and Norwood's widow.

An appeal to the governor for clemency -- the first of its kind in 50 years -- failed last week, with a 3-2 vote from the board that considers whether such appeals should go to the governor. Three on the panel -- including Attorney General Linda Kelley -- voted that Williams should not be executed, but rather serve life without parole, but the vote must be unanimous.

Williams' defense team has asked for a reconsideration of that decision.

"Phila. prosecutor calls death-penalty plea by Terrance Williams bogus," is Joseph A. Slobodzian's Philadelphia Inquirer report.

The prosecutor who put Terrance Williams on death row denounced Williams' admitted accomplice Thursday, rejecting as a lie the contention that Williams killed Amos Norwood in a sexual rage and that authorities ignored evidence of his motive.

"It's a complete lie," Andrea Foulkes said when asked about new statements by Marc Draper. Draper now says Foulkes and detectives ignored his information about a sexual motive behind the 1984 killing of Norwood, 56, in West Oak Lane.

Draper's account of Williams' alleged abuse by Norwood is the evidence being used by Williams' lawyers to try to block his scheduled Oct. 3 execution.

"Accomplice reverses his 1986 testimony to save Terrance Williams' life," by Mensah M. Dean in the Philadelphia Daily News.

MARC DRAPER, who has spent that past 28 years in prison for helping to beat a man to death, told a Philadelphia judge Thursday that he lied under duress from authorities when he testified against his accomplice and is now ready to tell the truth to save his friend's life.

"Being a man of faith, a man of God, I wouldn't want to see anybody die in that manner," a weeping Draper said of his childhood friend, Terrance Williams, 46, who is to be executed Oct. 3 for the 1984 murder of Amos Norwood, 56.

Draper, 46, the son of a retired city cop, is serving a life without parole sentence for his role in the murder. He was one of two witnesses to testify during the stay-of-execution hearing in Common Pleas Court. Andrea Foulkes, who prosecuted Williams, also testified.

And:

Foulkes, now a federal prosecutor, vehemently denied having told Draper to lie. She also disputed his claim that he had been promised a shortened prison sentence in exchange for his testimony.

Additional coverage includes:

"Pardons board could be last hope for Terrance Williams, as his Oct. 3 execution date nears," by Charles Thompson for the Patriot-News.

"Prosecutor takes stand in Williams' final death penalty appeal," by Emma Jacobs for WHYY-FM NewsWorks.

"Governor Corbett Ready To Proceed With Convicted Killer’s Execution," by Larry Kane of KYW-TV.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.

Philadelphia Court Hearing Today for Terry Williams

KYW-AM/FM/TV posts, "Death Row Inmate’s Last Chance," by Cherri Gregg.

A Philadelphia judge is expected to hear new evidence today in a hearing that could mean a stay of execution for convicted killer Terry Williams.

Earlier this week, a clemency board in Harrisburg refused to grant clemency to Williams. If Williams is unsuccessful today, he will be executed on October 3rd.

And:

Federal defender Shawn Nolan says they will present new evidence about what prosecutors knew at trial.

“The jurors have now come forward and said if they had known that evidence, they wouldn’t have voted for death. And we are arguing that that should have been disclosed to the defense, it should have been disclosed to the jury.”

Nolan says co-defendant Marc Draper will take the stand. He came forward in January saying he told the police and DA about the abuse. Andrea Folkles, the DA who prosecuted the case, will also testify.

"Attorneys to ask Pennsylvania judge to call off killer's execution, citing sex abuse," by Dominique Debucquoy-Dodley at CNN.

Attorneys are set to ask a Pennsylvania judge Thursday to call off the execution of a death row inmate, arguing prosecutors withheld evidence that he was sexually abused by the man he later beat to death with a tire iron.

Terrance Williams, 46, is scheduled to be executed on October 3 for the 1984 slaying of Amos Norwood.

Defense attorneys argue that the jurors who convicted Williams more than 25 years ago were told that it was a robbery-homicide case and never learned of the alleged sexual abuse.

A sworn statement from the case's primary witness -- who is serving a life sentence for his involvement in the murder -- supports that allegation.

Marc Draper has said the prosecution at the time pushed him not to disclose that Williams was routinely sexually abused by Norwood, and that the abuse was Williams' primary motive to kill Norwood. He is expected to testify Thursday.

The sexual abuse allegedly began when Williams was 6 years old, according to his attorneys.

"Several jurors now say they would have voted for life in prison without the possibility of parole instead of death if they had known this important information," Williams' attorneys said in a statement last month after his execution date was set.

And:

Since the execution date was set, there have been a number of high-profile supporters calling for clemency in the case, including Pennsylvania Attorney General Linda Kelly. More than 360,000 people have signed an online petition asking authorities to spare Williams' life. Norwood's widow has also asked for the execution to be called off.

But Norwood's daughter wants the execution to go forward, the Philadelphia district attorney's office said Monday.

The state's Board of Pardons on Monday failed to reach the unanimous agreement required to recommend clemency. Three members of the five-person panel voted in favor of asking Corbett to consider granting clemency. But two other board members voted against the petition.

Andrew Cohen posts, "In Pennsylvania, a Clemency Catch-22," at the Atlantic.

In the Alice-in-Wonderland world that is the Pennsylvania justice system, a man who won his clemency hearing Monday is scheduled to be executed anyway in two weeks. Terrance Williams -- a man raped throughout his childhood until he finally murdered his adult rapists; a man whose life before prison and redemptive life in custody caused even his victim's wife to lobby on his behalf; a man whose jurors tried 25 years after his trial to rescue him -- received three of five clemency votes Monday following a 90-minute hearing before the state Pardons Board. He won the day, 3-2, and yet he's still scheduled for lethal injection on October 3.

This is so because Pennsylvania law requires a unanimous clemency vote in capital cases, even where, as here, the condemned prisoner seeks no release from custody but rather life in prison without parole. It's been this way since 1997. The two dissenting votes -- two more death sentences for a man whose 1986 trial was incomplete and inaccurate -- came from the state's lieutenant governor, Jim Cawley, and Harris Gubernick, a longtime prison official. Voting in favor of clemency were state Attorney General Linda Kelly, "victim representative" Louise B. Williams, and Dr. Russell A. Walsh, a psychologist.

There was no written ruling that accompanied the vote. There was no official explanation or justification from the state Pardons Board to help us understand how dooming Williams serves the interests of justice. There was no press conference or email blast. But, really, what could the dissenters have said? That they blew off the wishes of Mamie Norwood, the victim's wife, who says today that Williams is "worthy of forgiveness" after all these years? It was her husband, Amos Norwood, who reportedly preyed on Williams, savagely raping him over and over again until Williams brutally murdered him in 1984.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.  Andrew Cohen's earlier column on the case is also available.

Advocates for Terry Williams have posted an online petition calling for clemency.

Terry Williams' Case Coverage

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette publishes an OpEd, "The weight of child abuse: Should a killer's horrific childhood matter in deciding his fate?"  It's by Frank P. Cervone, director of the Philadelphia-based Support Center for Child Advocates.  Here's beginning of  this must-read:

Throughout his childhood, Terry Williams, now 46, suffered unspeakable physical and sexual abuse. In 1984, soon after turning 18, Williams killed Amos Norwood, a 56-year-old Philadelphia man who had been sexually abusing him for five years and had raped him the night before the murder.

Following Williams' conviction, as it considered his sentence, the jury heard of another murder Williams had committed. The jury sentenced him to death. Yet neither the lawyers who represented Williams nor the jury knew that both men whom Williams killed had been abusing him. Terry Williams had not said a word. Now he faces execution in Pennsylvania on Oct. 3 and all of that history is being revisited.

The state Board of Pardons voted 3-2 in favor of clemency on Monday but a unanimous vote is needed to send a clemency recommendation to the governor. That likely leaves Williams' fate in the hands of Gov. Tom Corbett, although a Common Pleas judge has agreed to hear testimony Thursday about the claims of sexual abuse.

Victims of child sexual abuse face a monumental crossroad in the decision to disclose their abuse. Some get help, heal their emotional wounds and get on with their lives. Others don't tell their story, sometimes for months, years or ever. Later, they might hurt themselves or others. When we come upon them, we are left with questions: Why didn't they tell? Should we believe them? Should they get a "pass" or "discount" for the harm done to them and subsequent dysfunctions and behaviors? How should they be held accountable?

Trauma experts are now demonstrating convincingly that exposure to violence in childhood can create lasting psychological damage and even physiological changes to the brain as it develops. Subsequent experiences of depression, inability to trust, health problems and even acts of aggression and violence can all find root in early childhood experiences. Notions of personal responsibility and accountability get turned around. The trauma-focused question shifts from "what did you do?" to "what happened to you?"

"Latest clemency appeal cites prosecutor's inaccurate information," is Joseph A. Slobodzian's continuing coverage in today's Philadelphia Inquirer.

Lawyers for condemned Philadelphia killer Terrance Williams have asked the state Board of Pardons to reconsider Williams' petition for clemency, citing purportedly inaccurate information a prosecutor gave the board Monday at the hearing.

Though the board voted, 3-2, for clemency for Williams, 46, who is scheduled for execution Oct. 3, a unanimous vote was needed for the nonbinding recommendation to be sent to Gov. Corbett.

In a letter to the board Tuesday, Williams' lawyers asked for reconsideration because of how Assistant District Attorney Thomas Dolgenos answered a question from board member Harris Gubernick.

Gubernick asked about the validity of Williams' claim that the prosecutor in Williams' 1986 trial had promised to help his admitted accomplice, Marc Draper, get parole if he testified against Williams.

Dolgenos "stated that the federal courts had heard and rejected that allegation," wrote defense attorney Shawn Nolan. "That is simply false."

Gubernick and Lt. Gov. Jim Cawley voted against clemency. But because no board member stated a reason for his vote, there was no way of knowing whether Dolgenos' answer had an impact.

And:

The prosecutor's alleged promise to Draper and Draper's new statement on the 1984 killing are to be the subjects of a hearing Thursday on a motion to stay execution before Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina.

Public Radio WITF-FM posts, "Task force to review PA's death penalty law," by Tim Lambert and Radio Pennsylvania.

As Pennsylvania moves closer to its first execution since 1999, a state Senate task force is studying the death penalty law.

The panel is conducting a comprehensive review of capital punishment in Pennsylvania -- mere weeks before the scheduled October third execution of convicted murderer Terrance Williams.

Democratic Senator Daylin Leach of Montgomery County serves on the bipartisan task force. He says it's asking Governor Corbett for a temporary moratorium on executions until the report is complete.

"We feel that if we're going to be carrying out such an expensive and irrevocable government program as this, then we need to make sure that, A, we're doing it right, B, we're doing it fairly and C, the taxpayers are getting their money's worth for what they spend," he says.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.  Advocates for Terry Williams have posted an online petition calling for clemency.

Additional Coverage of Clemency Rejection for Terry Williams

The updated AP filing is, "Clemency bid rejected for condemned Pa. killer," by Peter Jackson.  It's via the York Daily Record.

A death-row killer who could become the first person since 1999 to be executed in Pennsylvania lost a bid for clemency Monday before Pennsylvania's Pardons Board.

Terrance "Terry" Williams now says he was sexually abused for years by the middle-aged man he beat to death in 1984 at 18 years old.

A unanimous vote was needed to recommend that Gov. Tom Corbett commute Williams' sentence to life imprisonment, but two of the five board members voted no.

None of the board members, who include state Attorney General Linda Kelly and Lt. Gov. Jim Cawley, commented following the vote. Kelly favored clemency and Cawley opposed it.

During two hours of often-emotional arguments and testimony in the state Supreme Court chamber at the Capitol, witnesses drew comparisons to Jerry Sandusky's victims in the Penn State child sex scandal to explain Williams' reluctance to publicly disclose the abuse.

And:

Although Williams has exhausted his appeals, he could win a reprieve if his lawyers can prove that prosecutors at his 1986 trial withheld evidence or interfered with his defense. A Philadelphia judge has scheduled a Thursday hearing to hear testimony from Draper and the prosecutor at Williams' trial.

The Philadelphia Inquirer updates its report for today's paper, "Killer loses bid for clemency."  It's by Joseph A. Slobodzian.

Condemned Philadelphia killer Terrance Williams lost his bid for clemency Monday when a divided state Board of Pardons failed to unanimously recommend his case for consideration by Gov. Corbett.

Nevertheless, advocates for Williams - scheduled for execution on Oct. 3 for the 1984 murder of Mount Airy churchman Amos Norwood - cited the fact that three of the five-member board voted to spare Williams' life and some suggested Corbett might still not be barred from commuting his sentence to life in prison without parole.

Monday's session was the first clemency hearing in a death penalty case in 50 years. Pennsylvania voters in 1997 amended the state constitution to require the board's vote for clemency be unanimous instead of a majority. But advocates suggested after the hearing that because the 1997 amendment was spurred by the commutation of a life sentence, the change might not apply to a death-penalty case.

The board granted the Williams case three times its usual 30 minutes to enable defense attorneys and two lawyers for the Philadelphia District Attorney's office to argue their positions.

The board then deliberated in private for about 35 minutes before returning to the ornate state Supreme Court chamber in the Capitol to vote.

Voting for clemency were state Attorney General Linda L. Kelly; Louise B. Williams, the board's victim representative; and board psychologist Russell A. Walsh.

Voting against clemency was Lt. Gov. Jim Cawley, who chairs the board, and Harris Gubernick, the board's corrections expert.

None of the five members discussed the reasons for their vote.

"Pardons board rejects clemency for Terrance Williams," by Mensah M. Dean for the Philadelphia Daily News.

TERRANCE WILLIAMS on Monday moved another step closer to becoming the first person executed by Pennsylvania in 13 years.

The state Board of Pardons rejected his petition for clemency, removing one of Williams' last opportunities to be spared the death penalty. The panel voted 3-2 in favor of recommending that Gov. Corbett commute Williams' sentence to life in prison without parole, but a unanimous vote was needed to move the petition forward.

"Death row inmate loses bid for clemency," by Karen Langley of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Harrisburg Bureau.

WHYY-FM NewsWorks posts, "Condemned to die Oct. 3, Terrance Williams is denied clemency," by Mary Wilson.

"Penn. board rejects clemency in murder case, execution still planned," by Vignesh Ramachandran for NBC News.

"Pa. Board Denies Clemency For Death Row Inmate Allegedly Abused by Victim," by Jim Malewitz for Stateline - Pew Center on the States.

"Clemency Denied For Pennsylvania Inmate Who Killed His Alleged Sexual Abuser," by Ashley Portero for International Business Times.

The Financial Channel posts, "US death row inmate loses appeal for clemency."

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins with a statement from his attorney, Shawn Nolan.

Advocates for Terry Williams have posted an online petition calling for clemency.

Related posts are in the clemency and victims' issues index

Statement From Terry Williams' Attorney

Shawn Nolan, Terry Williams' attorney has issued a statement, "Re: Board of Pardons Split Decision."

"On behalf of Terry Williams, we are deeply disappointed that the Board of Pardons has denied Terry’s request for clemency. This is particularly disheartening after a majority of the Board, including the Attorney General of Pennsylvania, by a 3-2 vote, recommended to spare Terry’s life. Pennsylvania requires a unanimous recommendation in favor of clemency in order for clemency to be considered by the Governor.

Notably the majority vote for clemency for Terry Williams came from the three members of the Board who have the most experience with victims of child sex abuse and victims generally, including Attorney General Linda Kelly (who prosecuted the Sandusky scandal), the Victim Representative and a mental health expert.

In light of the fact that the Commonwealth’s top prosecutor has voted for clemency, we are deeply troubled that District Attorney Seth Williams continues to push for Terry’s execution.  Seth Williams, who considers himself an advocate and defender of victims of abuse, has allowed prosecutors to argue that evidence that Terry was abused by the man he killed since the age of 13 should not matter in deciding whether he lives or dies. 

>We look forward to presenting new evidence on Thursday in the Court of Common Pleas that prosecutors at the time of trial hid the true motive for the killing of Amos Norwood from jurors.  The motive was not robbery, as alleged at trial, but Mr. Williams' reaction to the years of abuse by Mr. Norwood.  Mr. Williams' co-defendant was aware of the true motive but testified that it was robbery in exchange for an undisclosed deal with the prosecutor to help him get early parole.

Evidence of the actual motive for the killing would have made a difference at Terry’s trial and jurors have submitted sworn affidavits declaring that, now that they know all the facts, they support life in prison without parole over the death sentence for Terry Williams. The victim's widow has also stated that she supports life without the possibility of parole.

We are confident that a thorough review of the facts will make it clear that the jurors in this case did not have accurate and complete information about the crime or Terry Williams.”

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.

Advocates for Terry Williams have posted an online petition calling for clemency.  You can find out more about the case and read the entire clemency petition filed with Pennsylvania Board of Pardons.

Related posts are in the clemency and victims' issues index

Split Vote by Pennsylvania Board of Pardons

"PA pardons board rejects clemency for Williams," is the breaking news report filed by Joseph A. Slobodzian at the Philadelphia Inquirer.

A divided Pennsylvania Board of Pardons voted against clemency for convicted Philadelphia killer Terrance "Terry" Williams in the 1984 killing of Mount Airy churchman Amos Norwood.

In order for the clemency recommendation to proceed the board would have needed to vote unanimously in the decision.

The 3-2 vote in favor of clemency by the five-member board came after a 90-minute hearing and 35 minutes of private deliberations over whether it should make a nonbinding recommendation to Gov. Corbett to commute Williams' Oct. 3 execution by lethal injection to life in prison without chance of parole.

In seeking clemency, Williams' lawyers cited his youth at Norwood's murder - three months over 18, the minimum age for execution - and that Williams was sexually abused by Norwood and several other men.

With Williams' state and federal appeals exhausted all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, the 46-year-old former Germantown High School quarterback's last hope of escaping becoming the first person executed in Pennsylvania in 13 years lies in a hearing Thursday before Philadelphia Common Pleas M. Teresa Sarmina.

Since Sept. 7, when they filed the motion for clemency before the Pardons Board, Williams' lawyers have been involved in a legal and public campaign to show that he should not be executed because the Philadelphia jury that condemned him did not know of years of sexual abuse at the hands of his victim and other men.

Williams' lawyers have obtained the support of Norwood's 75-year-old widow, Mamie Norwood, in pleading for his life. And they have obtained three sworn statements this year from his admitted accomplice in the Norwood killing.

And:

Williams' scheduled Oct. 3 execution comes as a bipartisan legislative task force is studying the death penalty's efficacy and is to issue a report in December 2013.

Last week, the task force's legislative leaders - state Sen. Daylin Leach, a Montgomery County Democrat, and state Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, a Montgomery County Republican and all 12 members of its advisory committee asked Corbett to halt executions until the task force files its report.

Corbett issued a statement saying that capital punishment was one of the governor's sworn duties under the state Constitution and that he would exercise it when warranted.

"Clemency bid rejected for condemned PA killer," is the initial AP filing, via WITF-FM.

Pennsylvania's Pardons Board is denying a request for clemency from a condemned killer who could become the first person since 1999 to be executed in the state.

The request from Terrance "Terry" Williams was denied Monday after a hearing in Harrisburg. The defense had said Williams was sexually abused for years by the middle-aged man he beat to death in 1984 at the age of 18.

Witnesses drew comparisons to Jerry Sandusky's victims in the Penn State child sex scandal and said Williams deserved to have his sentence commuted to life imprisonment.

Earlier coverage of Terry William's case begins at the link.  A Philadelphia judge has scheduled a hearing for this Thursday in William's case.

Pennsylvania Clemency Board Meets Today

"A Push for Clemency as an Execution Nears," is the New York Times report by Jon Hurdle.  Here's the beginning of this excellent recap:

The scheduled execution of a convicted murderer has prompted pleas for clemency from thousands of people who argue that he should be spared because he had been sexually abused by his victim.

The inmate, Terrance Williams, 46, is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection on Oct. 3 for killing a man after what his supporters say was years of being abused by the victim, as well as by a teacher and an older boy who first raped him when he was 6.

Mr. Williams was 18 in June 1984 when he beat to death Amos Norwood, 56.

Mr. Williams was also found guilty in a separate trial of third-degree murder, which does not carry the death penalty, for the killing in January 1984 of Herbert Hamilton, 50, who had made sexual advances toward him, according to court testimony. Mr. Hamilton was stabbed and beaten to death.

If the execution is carried out, Mr. Williams would be the first convict put to death involuntarily in Pennsylvania since 1962. Since reinstating capital punishment in 1978, Pennsylvania has executed only three people, all of whom asked for death after having exhausted their appeals.

A petition urging Gov. Tom Corbett and the state’s Board of Pardons to commute Mr. Williams’s sentence to life without parole has been signed, his lawyers said, by about 286,000 supporters, including former judges, religious leaders, mental health professionals and 35 advocates for children, who say his crimes resulted from a long history of abuse.

“Terry’s acts of violence have, alas, an explanation of the worst sort,” the advocates for children said in a joint letter in support of clemency. “Terry lashed out and killed two of the men who sexually abused him and caused him so much pain.”

The scheduled execution is opposed by the Roman Catholic archbishop of Philadelphia, Charles J. Chaput, whose 1.5-million-member archdiocese has been shaken in recent years by evidence that some of its priests abused children.

The archbishop wrote in a weekly column on the archdiocese Web site that Mr. Williams deserved punishment but did not deserve to die because a judicial execution would perpetuate the “wrongheaded lesson of violence ‘fixing’ the violent among us.”

Mr. Norwood’s widow, Mamie, has also asked for clemency for Mr. Williams. Ms. Norwood, 75, wrote that she had been “angry and resentful” toward Mr. Williams for many years but later concluded that the only way to have a “peaceful and happy” life was to forgive him.

“I do not wish to see Terry Williams executed,” Ms. Norwood said in a signed declaration filed with the court, the prosecutor’s office and the Board of Pardons. “His execution would go against my Christian faith and my belief system.”

Pressure on Governor Corbett, a Republican, has also come from the Pennsylvania Task Force and Advisory Committee on Capital Punishment, a bipartisan group that includes state lawmakers. On Thursday, the panel asked the governor to postpone planned executions until it completes a study of the death penalty and announces its findings in December 2013.

The case continues a recent focus on the sexual abuse of children in Pennsylvania after Jerry Sandusky, a former Pennsylvania State University football coach, was convicted of abusing young boys, and Msgr. William J. Lynn, a former senior official in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, was convicted of child endangerment for failing to stop abuse by priests under his supervision.

"Clemency hearing in Harrisburg set for condemned Pa. killer," is the AP filing, via the Harrisburg Patriot-News.

A condemned killer who claims he was sexually abused by the man he beat to death is set for a clemency hearing today before Pennsylvania’s Board of Pardons in Harrisburg.

Terrance “Terry” Williams is scheduled to be executed next month for killing a Philadelphia man in 1984. He says he fatally beat Amos Norwood with a tire iron following years of sexual abuse.

Today's hearing isn’t the only legal avenue Williams is pursuing to avoid execution. A judge has granted a new evidence hearing after an accomplice claimed he knew Williams was abused but authorities with whom he had a plea agreement told him to focus on a robbery motive instead. 

WHYY-FM NewsWorks posts, "Board of Pardons to hear case of Philly prisoner sentenced to die Oct. 3," by Emma Jacobs.

A commission on the death penalty convened by the Pennsylvania Legislature wants Gov. Tom Corbett to delay an execution scheduled for next month.

The request comes as the state Board of Pardons holds a hearing on whether to let Terry Williams of Philadelphia be executed Oct. 3.

State Sen. Daylin Leach, who represents Montgomery and Delaware counties, co-led the caucus that sent a letter to the governor asking for a stay of execution pending its December report.

"We feel waiting a few more months to make sure that we're doing it right, that we're doing it fairly, that it is worth doing, all of those things is a reasonable approach to take," said Leach, a Democrat. "And that's what we've asked the governor to do."

The Harrisburg Patriot-News publishes an OpEd, "Justice? Pennsylvania is set to execute its first prisoner since 1999," by William DiMascio.  He's executive director of the Pennsylvania Prison Society.

On Oct. 3, Pennsylvania is slated to perform its first execution in more than a decade. As the date rapidly approaches, Pennsylvania finds itself astride another great moral controversy: Should the state carry out the lethal injection of a man convicted at 18 of murdering a predator who might have repeatedly and violently sexually assaulted him?

In a state weary of accounts of traumatic abuse in churches and athletic facilities, Terrance Williams sits on death row awaiting the end of a tragic life that spanned the assaults of predatory men since he was 6 years old. It’s easy to decide cases where good versus evil but much more difficult to mete out justice when victims oppose victims.

Mamie Norwood, widow of the man Williams and an accomplice killed in 1984, favors sparing Williams from execution. Her preference would be a commutation of Williams’ sentence to life without parole. The state Board of Pardons will hear an appeal for clemency for Williams on Monday.

"What Would Be Gained by the Execution of Terry Williams?" is David A. Love's post at Huffington Post.  He's the executive director of Witness to Innocence.

There's an execution planned in Pennsylvania, the first one in thirteen years. Gov. Tom Corbett signed a death warrant for Terrance "Terry" Williams. Barring intervention from the Governor, the Pennsylvania Board of Pardons, or the Philadelphia District Attorney, Williams will be executed on October 3.

But the execution should not go forward.

Two things stand out about the case of Terry Williams: First, he allegedly suffered a traumatic childhood of sexual and physical abuse, and ultimately killed two of his alleged abusers. Second, a broad coalition of organizations, religious leaders, advocates and others -- including the widow of one of his victims and several of the jurors who convicted him -- are calling for clemency for Terry.

Love also writes, "Push to shut down Pennsylvania’s death row focuses on man who killed his sexual abuser," for the Grio.

Unless the state’s Board of Pardons prevents it, Pennsylvania is about to execute Terrance “Terry” Williams, 46, who was sent to death row for the 1984 murder of Amos Norwood, a man who had sexually abused him as a child.  Months earlier, Williams had killed another man who had raped him. Gov. Tom Corbett set an execution date of October 3, which would make Williams the first person put to death in Pennsylvania in 13 years.

Prosecutors characterized Williams as a serial killer, but the jurors never heard evidence of the years of horrific abuse he suffered from older men. Now, judges, prosecutors, child advocates, the jurors who found him guilty, and the widow of his victim all say his life should be spared. Moreover, over 345,000 people have signed a petition on Change.org calling for clemency for Williams. Such a viral show of support for a death row inmate has not been seen since Troy Davis a year ago this week.

Terry Williams’ case has exposed the inherent flaws in the administration of the death penalty, and has acted as a catalyst in the push for a death penalty moratorium in the Keystone state.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.

Advocates for Terry Williams have posted an online petition calling for clemency.  You can find out more about the case and read the entire clemency petition filed with Pennsylvania Board of Pardons.

Related posts are in the clemency and victims' issues index.

Andrew Cohen on the Williams Case

"A Plea for Mercy for a Murderer in Pennsylvania," is Andrew Cohen's post this morning at the Atlantic.  Here's the beginning:

On Monday afternoon, before the Pennsylvania Board of Pardons in Harrisburg, lawyers for a man named Terrance Williams will attempt to convince state officials that his life should be spared-- that instead of being executed by lethal injection on October 3rd Williams (shown at left) should instead be permitted to spend the rest of his life in prison without the possibility of parole. Despite the deadly violence of Williams' crime, despite no questions about his guilt, it's an unusually compelling clemency request-- and because of its timing, in the midst of two local sex abuse scandals, a vivid test of the nature of Pennsylvania's clemency process itself.

Williams' lawyers will make their case to five officials who will then make a recommendation to Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett, a Republican, who signed Williams' death warrant on August 8th. The vote of the Board of Pardons must be unanimous in Williams' favor and, even then, under state law, Gov. Corbett is free to disregard it and push on with the execution. It would be the first contested execution in the state in nearly half a century (three executions between now and then occurred when the defendants in the cases all agreed to waive their appeals). And it's clear that the governor will be a tough sell.

This is so despite the fact that the widow of Williams' victim now believes that his sentence should be commuted to life. It is so despite the fact that eight former judges -- federal and state -- now believe his trial was unjust. It is so despite the pleas of 28 former prosecutors -- federal, state and local -- who have gone on the record saying that justice would be served by clemency. It is so despite the fact that five of Williams' trial jurors have come forward and declared, under oath, that they never would have recommended a death sentence for him had they known of material facts his defense attorneys did not introduce at trial.

At its core, clemency is an act of mercy, an official acknowledgment that justice will be best served in a particular instance by the granting of relief to someone who is not, technically speaking, entitled to it. There are many legitimate legal reasons why Williams ought to be given a new trial-- just yesterday a state judge agreed to hear more about the new evidence in the case-- but clemency is not about law. It's about equity. It's about the power of the state to put to right an unjust result. Below are some of the facts that were not introduced at Williams' long-ago murder trial. Judge for yourself whether he deserves to die at the hands of the state.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins with the preceding post.

Judge Orders Thursday Hearing in Terry Williams' Case

"Convicted killer will get a new hearing in effort to avoid execution," is the title of Joseph A. Slobodzian's report in today's Philadelphia Inquirer/

Terrance "Terry" Williams' execution is still set for Oct. 3, but a Philadelphia judge on Friday agreed to hear testimony on his lawyers' claim that the prosecutor at his 1986 trial withheld from the jury evidence of Williams' history of sexual abuse by his victim.

Although Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina questioned whether Williams' lawyers had met the legal standard for an emergency hearing, she added that "The fact is, death is different. . . . The penalty is serious enough, and it cannot be reversed."

Sarmina said the hearing Thursday would involve two witnesses: Andrea Foulkes, the city prosecutor in Williams' trial in the 1984 murder of Amos Norwood; and Marc Draper, Williams' admitted accomplice, who in new sworn statements says detectives and Foulkes ordered him to testify that Williams killed Norwood in a robbery - not in a rage over years of sexual abuse by Norwood.

In seeking clemency, Williams' attorneys have cited his youth when Norwood was killed - three months over 18, the minimum age for execution - and his sexual abuse by Norwood.

Foulkes, now a federal prosecutor in Philadelphia, has said it is inappropriate for her to comment while Williams' case is being litigated.

Draper, now 46, is serving a life sentence after pleading guilty to second-degree murder and testifying against Williams for the prosecution.

Sarmina conducted a two-hour hearing Monday on Williams' lawyers emergency motion to stay execution. She said she was skeptical but gave them until Friday to supplement their claim.

Unlike Monday, Williams, 46, was not present for Sarmina's decision, but his lawyers were pleased. If Sarmina had not stayed the execution, the hearing is the necessary prelude to block Pennsylvania's first execution in 13 years.

"Philly judge grants condemned killer new hearing," is the AP filing by Maryclaire Dale, via the Trentonian.

A Philadelphia judge has granted a new evidence hearing for a killer set to be executed next month, saying she wants to hear from his co-defendant and the trial prosecutor.

Terrance “Terry” Williams admits he killed Amos Norwood with a tire iron at age 18, months after killing another man. Williams now says the 56-year-old Norwood had been sexually abusing him since he was 13.

In a new affidavit, co-defendant Marc Draper says he told detectives and a prosecutor that Williams “snapped” over his relationship with Norwood. The defense believes that corroborates Williams’ claims of abuse — which the jury did not hear.

Common Pleas Judge R. Teresa Sarmina on Friday ordered Draper and the trial prosecutor, Andrea Foulkes, to testify at a hearing Thursday.

Draper said Foulkes and city detectives told him not to mention the relationship when he testified against Williams, but to instead focus on the alleged robbery motive. The pair stole cash and credit cards from Norwood during the 1984 slaying at a cemetery, then went gambling in Atlantic City, N.J.

“Neither Ms. Foulkes nor the police wanted to hear anything about the case having to do with Norwood having sex with Terry,” Draper, who is serving a life sentence for his role in the slaying, wrote in an affidavit signed Tuesday. “They did not want me to say the case involved a relationship. They wanted me to say it was only a robbery. Ms. Foulkes made it clear to me that I had to stick to the story.”

Foulkes, now a federal prosecutor in Philadelphia, said she cannot comment on the pending litigation.

The Philadelphia Daily News posts, "New evidence hearing scheduled for death row inmate," by Mensah M. Dean.

DEFENSE ATTORNEYS for the Philadelphia man scheduled to be executed on Oct. 3 persuaded a judge Friday to schedule a hearing to hear testimony from witnesses whom the attorneys allege covered up evidence during the condemned man's 1986 trial.

The ruling, made over the objections of city prosecutors, was a ray of sunlight for Terrence Williams, 46, who is on deck to become the first person executed in Pennsylvania in 13 years.

And:

Common Pleas Judge M. Teresa Sarmina scheduled the hearing for Thursday to hear from Foulkes, who is now a federal prosecutor, and Draper, 46, who is serving life in prison for his part in Norwood's murder.

Before that hearing, Williams will be in Harrisburg on Monday for a clemency hearing before the state Board of Pardons, from which he is seeking to have his death sentenced commuted to life in prison without the chance for parole.

"Terry Williams Execution: Man Who Killed Alleged Sexual Abuser Scheduled To Die Next Month," by John Rudolf at Huffington Post.

A Philadelphia judge on Friday granted a condemned man a rare hearing to weigh whether prosecutors failed to disclose key evidence indicating the true motive behind a grisly killing nearly 30 years ago.

The ruling is a major break for Terry Williams, 46, slated to be the first prisoner in more than 50 years to be executed in Pennsylvania while still appealing his sentence. Attorneys for Williams say his life should be spared due to his traumatic and violent childhood, and the fact that he was sentenced to die for killing a man who sexually abused him and other teenage boys.

Judge Teresa Sarmina, of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, did not stay Williams' execution, which is scheduled for Oct. 3, but allowed a hearing next Thursday that opens the door to that possibility. His attorneys want Williams' sentence reduced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Democracy Now posts, "In Controversial Death Row Case, Pennsylvania Prepares to Execute Man Who Killed His Sexual Abusers.  There is video at the link; a rush transcript is also available.

Advocates for child victims of sexual abuse are calling on Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett to grant clemency to Terrance "Terry" Williams, who is scheduled to be executed on October 3. In 1986, Williams was convicted of killing Amos Norwood. What the jury in that case did not know is that Norwood had sexually abused Williams and had allegedly violently raped him the night before. Furthermore, Williams had suffered years of physical and sexual abuse by older males.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' case begins at the link.

Advocates for Terry Williams have posted an online petition calling for clemency.  You can find out more about the case and read the entire clemency petition filed with Pennsylvania Board of Pardons.

Related posts are in the clemency and victims' issues index.

Continued Support for Clemency for Terry Williams in Pennsylvania

 

Today's New York Times publishes the editorial, "Pennsylvania’s Broken Machinery of Death."

Pennsylvania is scheduled to execute Terrance Williams on Oct. 3. The state has sentenced more than 400 people to death since the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976 and has executed three who gave up on their appeals. But he would be the first person in 50 years to be put to death there while still fighting his sentence.

That should not happen. On Friday in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Mr. Williams’s lawyers are scheduled to explain why a state trial judge should stay his execution and why the Philadelphia district attorney should agree that his sentence be commuted to life without parole. There is compelling evidence for both.

And:

The case is a shocking illustration of how Pennsylvania’s machinery of death is irreparably broken. A state commission is studying capital punishment and whether its high cost and manifest unfairness make it time for the state to abolish the penalty. The answer is yes.

"A victim's plea for mercy," is Vicki Schieber's OpEd in the Philadelphia Inquirer.  She's a crime victims' advocate and a member of the Pennsylvania Advisory Committee on Capital Punishment.

Many have come forward with concerns about the execution of Terrance Williams, which is to take place Oct. 3 unless his sentence is commuted. One objection in particular should be given great weight: that of Mamie Norwood, the widow of the man Williams killed in 1984.

I know what it means to lose someone you love to violence. In 1998, my beautiful daughter, Shannon, was murdered in Philadelphia. Shannon was a brilliant young woman and a student at the Wharton School. Every year that passes is full of reminders of what she might have become if not for an act of brutal, senseless violence.

Losing a loved one to murder is a tragedy of unimaginable proportions. At first, my husband and I didn't know how we could go on with our lives. In the years since, working as an advocate for others affected by violent crime, I have learned that this is not unusual among victims' families. Many experience a similar cycle of emotions, from confusion and despair to anger and, for the lucky ones, some kind of peace, acceptance, and ability to continue living productive lives.

And:

Our justice system exists to ensure the safety of citizens and to provide some measure of fairness for those affected by crime. Terrance Williams is not a threat to the public if he serves a life sentence without the possibility of parole.

After public safety concerns, Mamie Norwood's well-being should be the next priority. The governor and others must respect her wishes for the man who killed her husband and allow her to retain the peace she has found.

Today's Inquirer also reports, "Pa. legislative panel asks for moratorium on executions."  It's  by Joseph A. Slobodzian.

With three weeks left before Pennsylvania's first execution in 13 years, a bipartisan legislative task force studying the death penalty's efficacy asked Gov. Corbett on Thursday to halt executions until the panel files its report in December 2013.

Calling the delay "particularly prudent," the task force, in a letter to Corbett, noted that Pennsylvania has not executed anyone in 50 years.

The letter on state Senate stationery was signed by the task force's two ranking members - State Sen. Daylin Leach, a Montgomery County Democrat, and State Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, a Montgomery County Republican - and all 12 members of its advisory committee.

Corbett spokeswoman Janet Kelley said Corbett had not seen the letter and had no immediate comment.

The moratorium request came amid efforts by death-penalty opponents to stop the Oct. 3 execution of Terrance "Terry" Williams, 46, for the 1984 murder of Amos Norwood, 56, in the city's West Oak Lane section.

Williams was privately interviewed Thursday by the state Pardons Board on his request for a recommendation of clemency asking the governor to commute his sentence to life in prison without parole.

The board will hold a public hearing Monday in Harrisburg. The five-member board must unanimously vote for clemency in order for Corbett to consider the nonbinding recommendation.

"Co-defendant joins opposition to Philly man's Oct. 3 execution; condemned man claims abuse," is the AP report filed by Maryclaire Dale.

A judge may rule Friday on a motion to stay the scheduled Oct. 3 execution of a Philadelphia man who now claims his victims had sexually abused him.

Terrance Williams is on death row for killing Amos Norwood at age 18, months after killing another man.

Co-defendant Marc Draper says they told him not to mention it at trial, but to only discuss the robbery motive.

Draper is serving life for his role in the slaying.

The Financial Channel posts, "EU calls for halting Pennsylvania man's execution."

The European Union made an appeal Thursday to stay the execution of a Pennsylvania man subjected to childhood abuse who is due to be put to death next month for killing two of his abusers. 

Through its delegation in the United States, the EU launched an "urgent humanitarian appeal" on behalf of Terry Williams, who has been on death row for 24 years.

The consequences of the trauma Williams endured during his childhood "have arguably had a significant and destructive effect on his life," the EU delegation said in a letter to Pennsylvania Governor Thomas Corbett.

The EU, which is opposed to capital punishment in all circumstances and is seeking a global moratorium against the death penalty, said executing Williams as scheduled on October 3 would break a "de facto moratorium" in the northeastern state, which last executed a convict on July 6, 1999.

Earlier coverage of Terry Williams' clemency request begins at the link.

Advocates for Terry Williams have posted an online petition calling for clemency.  You can find out more about the case and read the entire clemency petition filed with Pennsylvania Board of Pardons.

Related posts are in the clemency and victims' issues index.