Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 88

Thread: Linda Anita Carty - Texas Death Row

  1. #21
    Passed away.
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    The Phog
    Posts
    651
    TONS of great information and a link to ALL of the appeals here.

    http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/o..._us_court.html

    I had found this site in the summer of 2010 when Carty was schelduled the first time. I am glad that I found it again.

  2. #22
    Administrator Heidi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    33,217
    Great find tpg..thanks for sharing!

  3. #23
    Administrator Heidi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    33,217



    Op-Ed: The British woman on Death Row

    Last night, Channel 4 screened a documentary about convicted murderess Linda Carty; with major contributions from Clive Stafford Smith, it could only have been an exercise in special pleading.

    For those who can receive it, The British Woman on Death Row can currently be found here.

    This is a documentary about Clive Stafford Smith - patron saint of lost causes - as much as about convicted murderess Linda Carty. It is introduced as the extraordinary story of the British woman on death row. The reality is that while Linda Carty was indeed convicted of an extraordinary murder, her claim to British citizenship is as tenuous as Stafford Smith's grip on reality. The entertainer Cliff Richard was born in India; does anyone claim Cliff Richard is Indian?

    A much younger Clive Stafford Smith appears in this video, dating from the time he shot to fame as the gullible limey lawyer who advocated for Edward Johnson, who was executed for murder in 1987. We are told here that Johnson was executed in spite of many of the guards on death row believing him to be innocent, though we are not told how many of those guards sat on the jury that convicted him and sentenced him to death.

    That claim of innocence is echoed by Mr Stafford Smith who writes on the Reprieve website:

    “One of the executions I witnessed was one of an innocent man: Edward Earl Johnson, who was executed in a Mississipi gas chamber in 1987”. (His spelling of Mississippi).

    Got that, Ed Johnson was innocent. Right?

    Although this documentary is about Linda Carty, it is worthwhile making an excursion to the Johnson case here to demonstrate just how objective and honest is our crusading lawyer.

    Let us see what the United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit said on May 19, 1987.

    In Johnson's brief, to which Stafford Smith contributed, it is argued:

    (A) His trial counsel were ineffective. - That old useless lawyer gambit again; it is truly amazing how many bad lawyers there are in the good ol' US of A, and somehow they all seem to get lumbered with innocent clients on capital charges.

    (B) His prior habeas corpus counsel were ineffective. - Obviously, if his lawyers were so bad.

    (C) An instruction of the trial court created a mandatory presumption that improperly shifted the burden of proof to him. - Hmm, like explaining how he came to be in possession of the murder weapon?

    (D) The prosecution concealed the fact that a biased juror failed to disclose her bias. - Apparently, the juror had a relative in the county, a stepson, who was in no way connected with these proceedings. That one is weak indeed.

    (E) A statement taken from Johnson violated his right to counsel under the sixth and fourteenth amendments. - These appear to relate to the right to a speedy trial and perhaps something to do with (playing the) race (card), a well worn tactic for black defendants who are as guilty as sin.

    (F) It would violate the eighth amendment to execute Johnson because he was only 18 years old at the time of the crime. - The crime he did not commit?

    (G) The Mississippi capital statute under which Johnson was tried is unconstitutional on its face because it limits the mitigating circumstances he could develop for the jury.

    Whatever that means. Does the reader notice a curious desideratum? Not one of these grounds of appeal claims Johnson is not guilty/innocent and has been wrongly convicted. That is hardly surprising because in the judgment we are told:

    “Johnson asserts that at a time when he was the only suspect, when he was in custody, and after his family had told law enforcement agents that they wished to get Johnson an attorney, a statement was taken from him by officers. In this statement, Johnson implicated himself and gave officers sufficient information to enable them to recover Marshal Trest's gun that Johnson had used to murder the officer.”

    Oops. What was that about “One of the executions I witnessed was one of an innocent man: Edward Earl Johnson, who was executed in a Mississipi gas chamber in 1987”, Clive?

    Then there is this classic: “Johnson's new counsel contend that the admission of this statement was obviously prejudicial.”

    Well, yes, if you tell the police where you hid the murder weapon, that might just be prejudicial to a verdict of not guilty.

    Now that we have established the veracity of Clive Stafford Smith - not for the first time on this site - let us return to Carty. The documentary maker Steve Humphries has dug up or been given access to a lot of footage, including crime scene photographs of Joana Rodriguez, the woman Carty smothered with a plastic bag in the trunk of her car. The fact that Houston Police gave him free access to so much material speaks volumes for their belief in Carty's guilt. They are saying in effect, this is an open and shut case; we have nothing to hide.

    Amusingly, Clive Stafford Smith likens the death penalty applied to convicted murderers to the same applied to those convicted of witchcraft in a bygone age. What he seems to forget is that murderers are real; witches are not.

    For those who are not au fait with this case or who want a recap, check out this article and this one, and most important, the findings of fact by the appellate courts. They refute all the nonsense and special pleading in this documentary which Steve Humphries has overlooked or glossed over, for whatever reason, like the oft' repeated claim that Carty's original lawyer is to blame for not informing the British consulate, the embassy or the Queen herself that one of her loyal subjects had been arrested on a murder charge and was in desperate need of a get out of jail free card. Carty lied to Jerry Guerinot, telling him she was an American citizen.

    There is also a lot of guff about Carty entering into a number of abusive relationships, including with a drug dealer, and how she risked life and limb working undercover for the DEA. All lies.

    Humphries concludes that her trial was a fiasco and that this poor woman deserves our sympathy. He does make one good point, that is that if Carty is guilty - if? - then what she did is crazy, or words to that effect, and by implication she should not have been tried.

    This claim has some merit, unfortunately though, Carty did not elect to run an insanity defence, so it is too late to go back for a second bite of the cherry.

    Will she be executed, and does she deserve it?

    Certainly there are far worse people in line for lethal injection in Texas, but if ever a woman deserved to die for one murder, then that woman is Linda Anita Carty. Don't shed any tears for her; there are many, far more tragic cases on death row all over America, and unlike Carty, a few of them might just be innocent.

    http://www.digitaljournal.com/articl...#ixzz1fr1u0eMC

  4. #24
    Administrator Heidi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    33,217
    Op-Ed: Linda Carty's other lawyer sets the record straight

    Two years ago, Clive Stafford Smith's Reprieve organisation launched a campaign on behalf of Linda Carty, who was and remains on death row in Texas.

    That campaign has been more enthusiastic than truthful.

    Anyone convicted of any crime, great or small, has the right to protest his or her innocence, even in the face of absolutely overwhelming evidence of guilt.

    There are though different rules for lawyers, not least for lawyers who solicit money from both the general public and from corporations in order to fund research, campaigning and advocacy.

    A lawyer may be an advocate but he is also an officer of the court, and as such he has an overriding duty to justice.

    Sometimes it can be tricky to both advocate for a client and serve justice; and sometimes, a lawyer will cross the line.

    While Linda Carty has the absolute right not only to protest her innocence but to make any wild claim she pleases, a lawyer who represents her or professes to represent her does not, especially when such advocacy includes defaming other members of his profession, and endorsing clearly proven lies.

    Some background to the case of Linda Carty can be found here and here; a critical review of the recent documentary about her can be found here, and a lengthy legal document including findings of facts by the appellate courts can be found here. [LEFT][COLOR=#000000]

    Briefly though, two years ago, the London office of the Reprieve organisation - a registered charity - launched a high profile campaign on Carty's behalf. The thrust of that campaign is not simply that Carty should be spared execution, but that she is innocent of the terrible crime of which she was convicted, and that she is on death row for two reasons entirely not of her making: that she was framed by wicked drug dealers, and that she was represented by the worst lawyer in Texas if not in America or even the entire world.

    A number of allegations have been made against Jerry Guerinot including that he spent only fifteen minutes with his client prior to trial, that he failed to advise her of her right to consular assistance - as a British citizen - and that he failed to locate crucial witnesses.

    It has also been claimed that he has more clients or former clients on death row than any other attorney in America.

    On the face of it, these are serious allegations, but do they stand up to scrutiny?

    One person who thinks not is Windi Akins Pastorini, the former Windi Akins and Jerry Guerinot's co-counsel. Although she doesn't look old enough, she has been a lawyer for 25 years, and now has her own practice in Houston. Her credentials are impressive.

    Being both unaware of the campaign being waged by Reprieve on behalf of her former client, and being also understandably suspicious of a contact by an unknown quantity out of the blue, she was initially somewhat reserved, but agreed to set the record straight subject to legal protocol.

    It is no exaggeration to she was shocked at some of the allegations that have been thrown around like confetti for the past two years and more; as the lady herself said: “Has anyone even bothered to read the transcript of the trial?”

    Sadly, the people who are currently lobbying for Carty on Facebook - principally daffy young women - seem to take pride in not reading anything about this case and in parroting uncritically the guff spewed out by Carty herself and regurgigated by a smiling Clive Stafford Smith.

    AB: Thank you for taking the time to answer some questions; it is much appreciated. I see you are still handling capital cases. Can I ask how many clients you have on death row?

    WA: I have only one other person on death row. All my other clients where convicted have received life.

    AB: I sent you some links, would you care to comment?

    WA: The article you sent me is full of misrepresentations about the representation Jerry rendered. What exactly are you looking for? I wouldn't want to speak for Jerry because I don't know his perspective.

    AB: Linda Carty's daughter Jovelle doesn't think much of you, see at 1.40 seconds here.

    WA: Linda Carty's daughter didn't want to testify for her mother, even knowing it was in an effort to save her life, so I had her subpoenaed and physically brought her to court. She wasn't happy with me, but we were trying to save Linda's life, she didn't want to get involved.

    AB: How did you become involved with this case?

    WA: Judge Davies and Jerry Guerinot asked me to take the case and assist him at trial.

    AB: Did you or did Linda Carty consider an insanity plea?

    WA: We had Carty examined by a psychiatrist twice; once before trial and once during trial. She, unfortunately, is not crazy nor was she incompetent to stand trial.

    AB: What do you say to the claim that Jerry Guerinot is the worst lawyer in America because he has or had so many clients on death row?

    WA: Jerry Guerinot is a very good lawyer. He has so many people on death row because judges in Harris County would appoint him to the baddest of the bad.

    If this sounds a bit lame, the reader should consider the following. First, Texas executes far more convicted murderers than any other state. Check out this table.

    Whether or not Clive Stafford Smith, Windi Akins or anyone else agrees with this policy, it is a fact.

    Second, Jerry Guerinot was at that time a public defender specialising in capital cases. By the same token, the late Judge Sabo, who presided over the trial of Mumia Abu-Jamal, specialised in death penalty cases. (Apologists for Mumia have often claimed Sabo “sentenced to death” more people than any other judge in America).

    Third, if the police and the District Attorney do their jobs properly, one would hope that the only people indicted for murder would be those who are almost certainly guilty, if not of murder then of some extremely serious crime. Therefore it could be argued that a high percentage of convictions for capital murder implies that the system is working. Conversely, if 95% of Jerry Guerinot's clients had been acquitted of capital murder, one might have inferred either that he was the second coming of Perry Mason or perhaps bribing judges.

    In short, this is yet another case of lies, damned lies and statistics.

    This article from the Observer of December 2, 2007 while overtly hostile to Guerinot as well as crassly sympathetic to Carty, sheds some light on the difficulties he faced as a defense attorney in capital cases. It reveals also that he has prosecuted successfully in six capital cases (though not for the defendants!) Back to the interview.

    AB: Do you believe Linda Carty is guilty?

    WA: There is no question in my mind that the last thing the new mother, of her 4 day old baby who was taken from her saw, was the face of Linda Carty carrying her son away, as she lay hog-tied in the trunk of the car Linda Carty had rented. She died a terrible death.

    AB: What about her co-conspirators, the men she claims were responsible?

    WA: Those “drug dealers” that she recruited are about as small time as drug dealers can get, and there was absolutely nothing in it for them, except for all the money Linda promised there would be in the apartment where the parents of the new baby lived...which was a major lie.

    AB: Did Linda Carty testify in her own defense?

    WA: No, Linda did not take the stand. She solidly refused to tell us what was her defense. She was always talking about one attorney or the other going to take over the case, and she would tell them about her “defense”.

    AB: And Carty's claim that her lawyer spent only fifteen minutes with her prior to trial?

    WA: Jerry spoke to Linda many times, even before I was asked to help; and not for “just 15 minutes before trial”. He had a licensed investigator already appointed, John Castillo, who not only did the investigation in the case, and provided us with written reports, he took us to all the places where events allegedly occurred and then several times he took us to the jail for the 3 of us to be able to visit with Linda personally…and that was only during the time I was on the case. Jerry provided me with notes from many interviews with Linda, and shared with me the frustration for a client who refused our help. His hope was that I would be able to get her cooperation and help in her defense, which she refused to do.

    AB: Windi Akins Pastorini, thank you very much.

    WA: Thank you for your interest in telling the whole truth.

    Now the reader must make up his or more likely her, own mind. The choice is to believe Linda Carty and her amen corner, or to believe the former Windi Akins who was there and did her best for her client against the odds, and has been rewarded for it by slander and vilification. Bear in mind that not only was Carty's other lawyer there, but the official record confirms everything she has said, and that official record is but a mouse click away.

    The simple fact is that rather than being framed by wicked drug dealers, Carty is the author of her own misfortune, and rather than having the worst lawyer in the world, her attorney, Jerry Guerinot, had arguably the worst client in the world. A client who was both uncooperative to the point of vexatiousness, and guilty as sin.

    http://www.digitaljournal.com/articl...#ixzz1fr7EOnRd

  5. #25
    Senior Member Frequent Poster PATRICK5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    329
    She's definitely not crazy and what she did is not crazy - it's criminal. She's a cold blooded criminal. She was not obsessed with not being able to have a child. The issue of pregnancy only arose when her boyfriend tried to leave her. She wanted to keep him - not have a baby. When he finally did dump her, she kidnapped and murdered Joana Rodriguez. I would hate to think what would have happened to the baby if she hadn't been arrested and Corona didn't fall for her scheme of trying to pass it off as his son. I have no doubt that she would have murdered the baby, too.

  6. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Great Britain
    Posts
    119
    PATRICK5, I strongly believe Linda Carty is innocent, and just so you know, the prosecutors said Linda masterminded the kidnapping but they did not say she did the actual kidnapping and murder. My opinion is that Linda Carty had nothing to do with it and largely the only reasons she was convicted in the first place were down to her terrible counsel, Jerry Guerinot, and prosecutors who often fix trials in their favour, at least somewhat! Save Linda Carty from execution, people of the UK!

  7. #27
    Senior Member Frequent Poster PATRICK5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    329
    I'm interested in facts and evidence - not your personal opinions. The evidence at trial was that Carty both kidnapped the mother and baby and smothered the mother. She was convicted because she is guilty.

    Save American babies! Don't let murderers like Carty get away with it!

  8. #28
    Candy
    Guest
    Linda masterminded the kidnap so therefore played the major role in the kidnapping. Brit or no Brit, she deserves the death penalty. She's evil!

  9. #29
    Administrator Michael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,515
    Every visitor of another country has to accept the local laws (or cancel the visit). If he commits a crime based on these laws he should get the same sentence as a local (and no special support from politicans and "stars" from his/her country). A criminal is a criminal, even if he commit the crime in another country.
    No murder can be so cruel that there are not still useful imbeciles who do gloss over the murderer and apologize.

  10. #30
    SoupDragon
    Guest
    I agree Michael. I remember the execution of Akmal Shaikh (EU National), for drug smuggling in China. Britain was up in arms over it. I had ZERO sympathy, ditto Carty.

Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •