Page 16 of 33 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 328

Thread: Texas Capital Punishment News

  1. #151
    Administrator Helen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    20,875
    Propro you are so off the mark on this one. Murder of cops was up 51% in 2015 and went up over 60% in 2016. Some of those officers were targeted specifically because they were police officers.

    Hatred of law enforcement is at an all time high and was fueled by the white house and Obama, Eric Holder and that douche bag race baiter Al Sharpton.

    I would go one step further and say that if a first responder is targeted for his uniform it should be a federal crime with the death penalty. That way officers murdered in non DP states could have justice.

    What is the difference if someone is killed because of their skin colour, sexual orientation or murdered for being in a uniform?
    "I realize this may sound harsh, but as a father and former lawman, I really don't care if it's by lethal injection, by the electric chair, firing squad, hanging, the guillotine or being fed to the lions."
    - Oklahoma Rep. Mike Christian

    "There are some people who just do not deserve to live,"
    - Rev. Richard Hawke

    “There are lots of extremely smug and self-satisfied people in what would be deemed lower down in society, who also deserve to be pulled up. In a proper free society, you should be allowed to make jokes about absolutely anything.”
    - Rowan Atkinson

  2. #152
    Administrator Helen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    20,875
    'Lauren's Law' bill filed to change capital murder

    By Patrick Johnson
    Times Record News

    A person could soon be facing the death penalty or life in prison without parole if they kill someone under the age of 15, if a bill introduced into the Texas Legislature passes.

    The victim's age under which first-degree murder could be enhanced to capital murder was raised from six to 10 in 2011. If passed, a bill filed on Friday by Wichita Falls Rep. James Frank would raise that age to 15.

    “Everybody’s child feels like their child no matter how old they are," Frank said. "This senseless and tragic loss of life is always a bad thing, and I felt like there shouldn’t be a difference in the penalty for murdering a 9-year-old than murdering a 12-year-old.”

    According to H.B. 3894, the act will be known as "Lauren's Law" in memory of Lauren Landavazo, the 13-year-old who was killed in Wichita Falls. It would take effect on Sept. 1, 2017 – a day before the one-year anniversary of the shooting.

    “I think it’s an amazing thing to help future families," said Bianka Landavazo, Lauren's mother. "There will be more in the future, kids are being murdered unfortunately. They’ll have the tools on the table though that we don’t have to make sure these perpetrators don’t go back on the street again.”

    On Sept. 2, 2016, Lauren was shot multiple times and was dead at the scene in the 5100 block of Kingston Drive. A friend she was walking with, Makayla Smith, also 13, was wounded but survived.

    According to the affidavit, Makayla was able to talk to police at the emergency room and told them she and Lauren were walking home from McNiel Middle School after class. The scene of the shooting is only a short distance away from the school.

    Makayla said when the two reached Trinidad Drive, a vehicle stopped ahead of them and she saw a young male with shaggy brown hair driving. She said she didn’t know the driver, but made eye contact with him and he reached into the passenger area and produced a rifle.

    Makayla said he shot her and she ran. She said she looked back and saw Lauren on the ground.

    The man was later identified as Kody Austin Lott, 21. Lott was arrested on Sept. 4 and remains in Wichita County Jail in lieu of a total bail of just over $1 million on charges of aggravated assault, first-degree murder and possession of prohibited weapons.

    His next court appearance is scheduled for April 7.

    At the time, the Wichita Falls Police Department said officers have heard some confusion about why police didn’t charge him with capital murder in Lauren’s death.

    According to the Texas Penal Code as it currently stands, capital murder, in this case, would only apply if she had been younger than 10 years old or if both girls had died. "Lauren's Law" seeks to change that for future offenses.

    Murder is a first-degree felony in Texas with a punishment range of life in prison, or between five and 99 years. Capital murder allows the state to seek the death penalty.

    In capital felony cases, a sentence of life without parole is mandatory if a person over the age of 18 is convicted and the state does not seek the death penalty. If a person under the age of 18 is convicted, they are given life in prison but are eligible for parole.

    Bianka and Vern Landavazo, Lauren's parents, were confused when they learned of the age limitations on capital murder in Texas and began to research what they could do to get the law changed.

    “They brought it to us and explained the situation," Frank said. "We went through the background to research what we could do.”

    After looking at the topic and discussing a range of ideas, Frank said they determined raising the age from 10 to 15 years old would be in the best interest of children across the state.

    http://www.timesrecordnews.com/story...rder/99052484/
    "I realize this may sound harsh, but as a father and former lawman, I really don't care if it's by lethal injection, by the electric chair, firing squad, hanging, the guillotine or being fed to the lions."
    - Oklahoma Rep. Mike Christian

    "There are some people who just do not deserve to live,"
    - Rev. Richard Hawke

    “There are lots of extremely smug and self-satisfied people in what would be deemed lower down in society, who also deserve to be pulled up. In a proper free society, you should be allowed to make jokes about absolutely anything.”
    - Rowan Atkinson

  3. #153
    Senior Member CnCP Legend Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    4,795
    U.S. Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Texas Death Row Inmate

    The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Texas death row inmate Tuesday, sending his case back to the appeals court and invalidating the state's current method of determining if a death-sentenced inmate is intellectually disabled and therefore ineligible for execution. Texas' method relies on decades-old medical standards and a controversial set of factors.

    The high court's 5-3 ruling in the case of Bobby Moore, a 57-year-old man who has lived on death row for more than 36 years, said Texas’ refusal to use current medical standards and its reliance on nonclinical factors violates the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the opinion, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissenting.

    As the court has previously instructed, "adjudications of intellectual disability should be ‘informed by the views of medical experts.’ That instruction cannot sensibly be read to give courts leave to diminish the force of the medical community’s consensus," Ginsburg wrote.

    Moore was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death in July 1980, three months after he walked into a Houston supermarket with two other men and fatally shot James McCarble, the 73-year-old clerk behind the counter, according to Texas' brief to the high court.

    In 2014, a Texas state court used current medical standards to determine Moore was intellectually disabled and could not be executed. But the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overruled the decision, claiming the lower court erred by using those standards instead of the state’s test.

    The test, commonly known as the Briseno standard, was established by the Court of Criminal Appeals in 2004, two years after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that executing the intellectually disabled was unconstitutional. The court defined the test using a medical definition from 1992 as well as several other factors to help courts determine adaptive functioning. The Court of Criminal Appeals claimed, based on those factors, that Moore doesn’t have the disability.

    Included in those factors is a controversial reference to Lennie, a character from John Steinbeck’s novel “Of Mice and Men.” The Briseno opinion written by the Court of Criminal Appeals said most citizens might agree a person like Lennie should be exempt from execution. The state has argued the reference was an “aside;” critics say it exemplifies the arbitrariness of defining intellectual disability in Texas.

    Moore’s case was the third since 2002 that the high court considered the death penalty and the intellectually disabled. That year, justices ruled that executing people with intellectual disabilities is unconstitutional, but it left it up to the states to legally determine the condition. In 2014, the court weighed in on borderline cases, ruling that states can’t use an IQ below 70 as the sole way to define the disability.

    http://kut.org/post/us-supreme-court...h-row-inmate-0
    "There is a point in the history of a society when it becomes so pathologically soft and tender that among other things it sides even with those who harm it, criminals, and does this quite seriously and honestly. Punishing somehow seems unfair to it, and it is certain that imagining ‘punishment’ and ‘being supposed to punish’ hurts it, arouses fear in it." Friedrich Nietzsche

  4. #154
    Administrator Helen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    20,875
    Five death penalty reform bills heard in Texas House committee

    Five death penalty bills were heard in a seven-hour-long meeting at the Capitol Monday night

    By Jolie McCullough
    The Texas Tribune

    The death penalty was a hot topic at the Texas Capitol Monday night.

    Testimony on five capital punishment bills was heard by the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee in a seven-hour-long meeting that lasted until close to midnight. The bills included two that would stop the practice of sentencing accomplices to death in certain cases and two which would abolish the death penalty altogether.

    House Bills 147 and 316, by Democrats Harold Dutton and Terry Canales, respectively, would change how a person could be sentenced to death under Texas’ “law of parties,” which holds that those involved in a crime resulting in death are equally responsible even if they weren't the actual killer.

    “At the end of the day, the logic should be, 'Did you intend to participate in that murder? Were you a part of it?'” Canales exclaimed while laying out his bill near the end of the long meeting. “Let’s cut the nonsense out.”

    The most prominent case of a current Texas death row inmate sentenced under the law of parties is Jeff Wood. Wood was convicted in the 1996 murder of Kriss Keeran, who was fatally shot by Wood's friend in a Kerrville convenience store while he sat outside in a truck. Last year, Wood’s case garnered national attention as his execution neared. Texas lawmakers from both parties spoke out against the execution, which was halted days before the scheduled date.

    Republican Rep. Jeff Leach has been one of the most adamant supporters of reforming the law of parties. He has taken an interest in Wood’s case, going so far as to visiting him on death row in February.

    “I promised Jeff that I and Chairman Dutton and Rep. Canales would do everything that we can this session to ensure that another case like Jeff Wood’s case would never happen again in the state of Texas,” Leach said at a news conference earlier Monday on the bills.

    There are two ways to find someone guilty under Texas’ law of parties. The first puts responsibility on those who help commit or solicit a crime, even if they weren’t directly involved. The second states that all parties are responsible for one felony that stems from another if the second “should have been anticipated.” For Wood, the state argued he was willfully participating in a robbery and knew his accomplice would resort to killing if Keeran did not comply, so Wood should have anticipated the robbery would lead to a murder. Wood has maintained he didnt know his friend had a gun on him.

    The reform bills focus mainly on the “anticipation” clause, removing the possibility of a death sentence if someone is found guilty under the second part of the law of parties and automatically granting them a sentence of life without parole. Currently, after being convicted, a jury still must agree the convict intended to kill or anticipated death to issue a death sentence.

    Travis County Assistant District Attorney Justin Wood was the lone testifier against the bills, with eight others testifying in support of the bills that were laid out close to 11 p.m. He said the law of parties has been a “useful tool” for prosecutors, adding that “there are a lot of monsters who never get their hands dirty.”

    But Dutton argued that those people would still be punished, just not to death.

    Chairman Joe Moody, D-El Paso, said Wood’s testimony resonated with him as he has long struggled to “strike a balance” with the law of parties and the death penalty. In 2009, a similar bill filed in the House made it to the Senate, but died there. Terri Been, Jeff Wood’s sister, said she has been lobbying against the law of parties for 20 years and pleaded through tears for the Legislature to move it forward this year.

    “My cries have fallen on mostly deaf ears. I’m begging you to be leaders and to lead your constituents in the right direction,” she said before wiping her eyes.

    It is not common for a jury to sentence someone to death under the law of parties, but it happens. In 2007, prison inmates Jerry Martin and John Ray Falk, Jr., attempted escape. In the escape, Martin hit and killed prison guard Susan Canfield with a van.

    This March, Falk was sentenced to death as a party to the murder.

    And Texas has executed at least five people under the statute, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. Only five other states have executed anyone under similar laws.

    Aside from the law of parties, two identical bills to get rid of the death penalty in Texas completely were also heard Monday evening. Dutton and Rep. Jessica Farrar filed House Bills 64 and 1537.

    Both lawmakers have repeatedly filed abolition bills in past legislative sessions, and they acknowledged their main goal was to keep up a discussion on the death penalty. In a Republican-led legislature, it is almost certain that the bills will not pass.

    Dutton clarified to committee members he was asking for them not to vote against the death penalty but “to vote to let the House have a debate on this.”

    “This bill might not pass this time, but if it doesn’t pass this time, we’ll be right back here next time, fighting the same fight,” Dutton said earlier Monday at a press conference on his two death penalty bills.

    Fourteen people testified in support of abolishing the death penalty for reasons ranging from arbitrary sentencing to the cost of appeals. One woman tearfully spoke of her death-sentenced husband. No one spoke out against the bill.

    The remaining bill focused on the death penalty was one by Rep. Barbara Gervin-Hawkins, a democrat from San Antonio. House Bill 3411 aims to lessen requirements to become the lead defense attorney in capital murder cases to allow for more lawyers to handle the backlog of death penalty cases.

    Texas Defender Services Executive Director Amanda Marzullo argued against the lesser requirements, saying she believed it would cause more trouble in the appeals process and that there were other ways to ease the backlog such as creating a public defender office.

    “We’ve got to build the bench, and we’ve got to move these cases,” Gervin-Hawkins responded. “These people need their day in court.”

    All of the bills were left pending before the committee.

    https://www.texastribune.org/2017/04...s-legislature/
    "I realize this may sound harsh, but as a father and former lawman, I really don't care if it's by lethal injection, by the electric chair, firing squad, hanging, the guillotine or being fed to the lions."
    - Oklahoma Rep. Mike Christian

    "There are some people who just do not deserve to live,"
    - Rev. Richard Hawke

    “There are lots of extremely smug and self-satisfied people in what would be deemed lower down in society, who also deserve to be pulled up. In a proper free society, you should be allowed to make jokes about absolutely anything.”
    - Rowan Atkinson

  5. #155
    Moderator Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Newport, United Kingdom
    Posts
    2,454
    How many doses of lethal injection drugs does Texas have?

    With execution drugs in short supply across the nation and increasing secrecy about the companies that provide them, The Texas Tribune is keeping track of movement in the state’s supply.

    08 DOSES EXPIRE JULY 20, 2017
    10 DOSES EXPIRE JAN. 22, 2018

    SCHEDULED EXECUTIONS

    MAY 16
    Tilon Carter

    MAY 24
    Juan Castillo

    JUN 28
    Steven Long

    JUL 19
    Kosoul Chanthakoummane

    JUL 27
    Taichin Preyor

    RECENT INVENTORY CHANGES

    -8 doses MARCH 31, 2017 Drugs expired

    -1 dose MARCH 14, 2017 Execution of James Bigby

    -1 dose MARCH 7, 2017 Execution of Rolando Ruiz

    -1 dose FEBRUARY 7, 2017 Drugs removed from stock

    +11 doses FEBRUARY 2, 2017 Drugs added to inventory

    -1 dose JANUARY 26, 2017 Execution of Terry Edwards

    -1 dose JANUARY 11, 2017 Execution of Christopher Wilkins

    -2 doses OCTOBER 31, 2016 Drugs removed from stock

    -1 dose OCTOBER 5, 2016 Execution of Barney Fuller

    -1 dose AUGUST 3, 2016 Drugs returned to supplier

    +12 doses AUGUST 1, 2016 Drugs added to inventory

    -10 doses JULY 11, 2016 Drugs returned to supplier

    WHY THIS MATTERS

    Since 1977, lethal injection has been the method for executing Texas criminals sentenced to death. But the drugs used in executions have changed over the years, as the state has struggled to get a hold of enough life-ending doses.

    Texas, along with other states that hold executions, has been engaged in a battle for years to keep an adequate inventory of execution drugs. Currently, the state uses only pentobarbital, a sedative it has purchased from compounding pharmacies kept secret from the public.

    To promote transparency, The Texas Tribune has obtained the inventory history and current supply of execution drugs held by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The information, collected through continuous open records requests, will be updated regularly with the available doses and recent changes to the state’s inventory.

    In 2011, drug manufacturers began blocking their products from being used in lethal injections. As Texas struggled to perform executions, it turned to compounding pharmacies, state-regulated agencies that mix their own drugs without federal regulation.

    When one pharmacy’s name became public, the owner said he received threats, and asked for the drugs to be returned. Texas refused, and the state Legislature passed a law in 2015 to maintain the privacy of any person or business involved in an execution, from the person who inserts the needle to the company that sells the drug.

    Since then, Texas appears to have had a steady supply of pentobarbital in stock for scheduled executions, faring better than some other states. In 2016, Pfizer, the last-remaining open-market execution drug manufacturer, banned its products from being used in executions.

    Now, states that had regularly performed executions have halted the practice as they are unable to obtain any drugs. Others have rushed to schedule executions ahead of the expiration dates of their limited supply of drugs or switched to using a controversial sedative, midazolam, which was involved in botched executions in Oklahoma and Arizona.

    Even with its relative security, Texas is always looking for new supplies. In 2015, the state attempted to import from overseas a drug previously used by Texas in executions, sodium thiopental. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration seized the drugs and later ruled that they couldn’t be brought into the United States because they were unapproved and misbranded.

    https://apps.texastribune.org/execution-drugs/
    Last edited by Ryan; 04-30-2017 at 05:00 PM.

  6. #156
    Administrator Aaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    New Jersey, unfortunately
    Posts
    4,382
    Lethal Injection Drugs Delivered to Texas, Arizona Must Be Destroyed  or Exported: FDA 

    Execution drugs delivered to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and the Arizona Department of Corrections must be refused and either destroyed or exported within 90 days, according to court documents filed on Thursday.

    The FDA made “a final decision, refusing admission of the detained drugs into the United States,” said the agency in a document filed in federal court in Galveston, Texas.

    In July 2015, the FDA detained 1,000 vials of sodium thiopental meant for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Sodium thiopental, which also is referred to as ‘thiopental,’ is an anesthetic. Texas has used this drug as one part of a lethal three-drug cocktail which also included pancuronium bromide to induce paralysis, and potassium chloride to stop the heart when administered by injection. The state no longer relies on the three-drug combination for executions.

    In January 2017, Texas sued the FDA, requesting the agency release the drug from federal custody.

    “The FDA previously exercised enforcement discretion regarding the importation of sodium thiopental used for lethal injection,” said Lyndsay Meyer, a spokeswoman for the FDA. But in 2012, a US District Court permanently ordered the agency to prohibit entry of (or release shipments of) foreign manufactured thiopental that is misbranded or unapproved, explained Meyer.

    “The court order requires the FDA to refuse admission to the US any shipment of foreign manufactured sodium thiopental being offered for importation that appears to be an unapproved new drug or a misbranded drug,” said Meyer.

    In 1982, Texas became the first state to execute a criminal offender using lethal injection, in particular the three drug cocktail. Since then, the US has carried out 1,283 executions using lethal injection, including 542 by Texas, with an additional 171 executions relying on another method.

    In response to the FDA action, Texas Department of Criminal Justice spokesman Jason Clark said it “fully complied with the steps necessary to lawfully import the shipment” and it is “exploring all options to remedy the unjustified seizure.”

    “It has taken almost two years for the Food and Drug Administration to reach a decision which we believe is flawed,” said Clark.

    The drugs for lethal injection are in short supply, in part because European drug manufacturers began banning exports to the US in 2010. US-based pharmaceuticals also stopped making the drugs in response to pressure from anti-execution activists.

    Going forward, Clark said that the Texas Department of Criminal Justice “can currently carry out all scheduled executions. We use a single drug protocol — pentobarbital.” Pentobarbital is a barbiturate, frequently used by veterinarians to anesthetize animals.

    http://ktla.com/2017/04/21/lethal-in...ed-fda /
    Don't ask questions, just consume product and then get excited for next products.

    "They will hurt you. They will hurt your grandma, these people. The root cause of this is there's no discipline in the homes, they don't go to school, you know, they live off the government, no personal accountability, and they just beat people up for no reason, and it's disgusting." - Former Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters

  7. #157
    Administrator Aaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    New Jersey, unfortunately
    Posts
    4,382
    Appeals court: Names of Texas execution drug suppliers should have been public

    AUSTIN -- A Texas appeals court ruled Thursday against expanding government secrecy in a case involving the public's right to know who supplies the lethal drugs Texas uses to execute death row inmates.

    The decision in favor of openness by the state's 3rd Court of Appeals addressed the broader question about when potential safety concerns should trump the public's right to know how the state is spending taxpayer money.

    The ruling likely has a limited effect immediately, however, because the Texas Legislature passed a law requiring state prison officials to keep the identities of the drug makers secret.

    But the case has been watched by open-government advocates who said its outcome could be significant in other cases where the state has withheld information by claiming that doing so could could create "a substantial threat of physical harm" -- a litmus test put in place by the Texas Supreme Court in 2011 in a case involving gubernatorial security records.

    The appeal came after a state district judge in Austin ordered officials to make information about drug suppliers public under the state's open records act.

    The lawsuit and appeal were filed by attorneys representing two condemned convicts challenging their impending executions. Both convicts were executed while the case was pending.

    Lawyers for the Texas Department Criminal Justice argued that officials need to keep the names and details about the suppliers secret to prevent them from being threatened or harmed by death-penalty opponents.

    Attorneys representing the convicts argued that the threats were vague and should not preempt public disclosure.

    State officials could appeal the ruling to the Texas Supreme Court.

    Maurie Levin, an Austin attorney who was one of three parties who challenged the secrecy, said the ruling is significant because it overruled the state's assertion that the suppliers of lethal drugs were confidential under the Texas Public Information Act.

    And while the law has since been changed to allow state officials to keep the information secret, "it's a significant opinion because it affirms that the reasons (the state) used to withhold the information were not appropriate," she said.

    "Information may be withheld if disclosure would threat a substantial threat of physical harm," the opinion cites as the standard for releasing information. Levin said the appellate decision affirms that the state did not meet that standard.

    Representatives with the Texas Attorney General's Office and the state Department of Criminal Justice said they were reviewing the decision and had no immediate comment.

    http://m.chron.com/news/houston-texa...n-11173336.php
    Don't ask questions, just consume product and then get excited for next products.

    "They will hurt you. They will hurt your grandma, these people. The root cause of this is there's no discipline in the homes, they don't go to school, you know, they live off the government, no personal accountability, and they just beat people up for no reason, and it's disgusting." - Former Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters

  8. #158
    Administrator Aaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    New Jersey, unfortunately
    Posts
    4,382
    Yesterday, the Fifth Circuit rejected the challenge to Texas' execution method brought by Perry Williams and Thomas Whitaker, ruling that to reset the accrual date, a change to an execution protocol must be substantial, and any new accrual date is applicable only to the portion of the protocol that changed. The switch from manufactured to compounded pentobarbital was not a substantial change because the switch between two forms of the same drug does not significantly alter the method of execution. In this case, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of plaintiffs' complaint under 42 U.S.C. 1983, challenging their method of execution. The court held that the district court properly dismissed Counts One, Two, and part of Three as time-barred. Even if the claims were timely, plaintiffs failed to state a claim with regard to Count Three, which addresses the method-of-execution claims regarding the compounded pentobarbital; Counts One and Four, which deal with plaintiffs' alleged inability to access information about their method of execution; and Count Two, which alleges the right to counsel during the events leading up to and during the execution. The court also held that the district court did not apply a heightened pleading standard; the district court did not consider evidence outside the pleadings; and any discovery error was harmless because plaintiffs were not entitled to discovery without a properly pleaded complaint.

    http://cases.justia.com/federal/appe...?ts=1499470231
    Don't ask questions, just consume product and then get excited for next products.

    "They will hurt you. They will hurt your grandma, these people. The root cause of this is there's no discipline in the homes, they don't go to school, you know, they live off the government, no personal accountability, and they just beat people up for no reason, and it's disgusting." - Former Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters

  9. #159
    Administrator Aaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    New Jersey, unfortunately
    Posts
    4,382
    Execution drugs behind Texas lawsuit have expired, suit to continue

    The seized execution drugs that sparked a legal battle earlier this year have now expired — but Texas is still moving forward with a federal lawsuit to get them back and shore up future supplies.

    The dispute will not halt a scheduled July 27 execution of a Bexar County man, because the state still has enough drugs on hand to carry out the seven executions currently scheduled.

    The courtroom wrangling kicked off earlier this year when the Texas Department of Criminal Justice sued the U.S. Food and Drug Administration demanding the return of 1,000 vials of the lethal injection drug sodium thiopental confiscated two years ago at Houston Intercontinental Airport.

    Although state officials called it an "unjustified seizure," the FDA said the drugs were improperly labeled and not approved for injection in humans.

    "The detained drugs appear to be unapproved new drugs and misbranded drugs," the agency said in April. "As such, the shipments must be exported or destroyed."

    Texas upped the ante with new federal court filings in Galveston that month but the drugs expired the following month, officials say.

    "We do have documents that indicate that the drugs expired in May," TDCJ spokesman Jason Clark said Monday. "But the lawsuit is still moving ahead at this point."

    That's in part because the legal claim isn't just about one seized shipment— the amended federal court filings seek to lift the FDA's ban on importation of sodium thiopental, when it's for law enforcement use.

    Sodium thiopental has been used in more than 400 Texas executions, but it's fallen out of favor in recent years as manufacturers have become wary about their products being used in executions.

    The powerful drug was part of the execution process until 2011, when dwindling supplies forced the state to replace it with pentobarbital as part of a three-drug cocktail.

    The following year, the state switched from a three-drug mix to a single dose of the pentobarbital.

    But when pentobarbital suppliers started drying up, Texas started looking for other sources of lethal injection drugs.

    "The future supply of lethal injection drugs is unknown so we continue to explore all options," Clark said. "You just can't speculate on the future availability of lethal injection drugs."

    The state's effort to bolster its reserves led authorities to the India-based supplier Harris Pharma.

    At this point, taxpayers have already paid for the drugs, dishing out about $27,000 to the foreign company before the vials were shipped, according to state records.

    After the FDA issued its final refusal to let the vials in back in April, the agency gave TDCJ 90 days to export or destroy the drugs. Clark said Monday that the seized shipment is still in the FDA's hands, as far as the state is aware.

    Whether Texas wins its bid to import the pricey drug in the future, executions will continue.

    Among the seven executions on the calendar in the Lone Star State is recently added October date for Anthony Allen Shore, an admitted serial rapist and killer who terrorized Harris County in the 1980s and 1990s.

    But Clark said he was not immediately able to offer details on how much longer the current supplies would last.

    In the meantime, the state has not put in more orders with the overseas drug seller.

    "The agency has not purchased any further drugs from the supplier at this time," Clark said. "We will reevaluate the situation at the conclusion of the lawsuit."

    http://m.chron.com/houston/article/E...photo-13156405
    Don't ask questions, just consume product and then get excited for next products.

    "They will hurt you. They will hurt your grandma, these people. The root cause of this is there's no discipline in the homes, they don't go to school, you know, they live off the government, no personal accountability, and they just beat people up for no reason, and it's disgusting." - Former Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters

  10. #160
    Administrator Helen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    20,875
    Texas Cracks Down on the Market for Jailhouse Snitches

    By The Editorial Board
    New York Times

    Prosecutors love jail house informants who can provide damning testimony that a cell mate privately confessed to a crime. Jail house informants, in turn, love the perks they get in exchange for snitching, like shortened sentences, immunity from prosecution or a wad of cash.

    As you might imagine, though, in a market driven by such questionable motives, the testimony these informants provide is often unreliable.

    Even worse, it can be deadly. False testimony from jailhouse informants has been the single biggest reason for death-row exonerations in the modern death-penalty era, according to a 2005 survey by the Center on Wrongful Convictions. They accounted for 50 of the 111 exonerations to that point, and there have been 48 more exonerations since then.

    Last month, Texas, which has been a minefield of wrongful convictions — more than 300 in the last 30 years alone — passed the most comprehensive effort yet to rein in the dangers of transactional snitching.

    Texas has become a national leader in criminal-justice reforms, after having long accommodated some of the worst practices and abuses in the nation. The state, particularly in light of past abuses, deserves credit for seeking innovative solutions to problems that have long proved resistant to change.

    The new law requires prosecutors to keep thorough records of all jailhouse informants they use — the nature of their testimony, the benefits they received and their criminal history. This information must be disclosed to defense lawyers, who may use it in court to challenge the informant’s reliability or honesty, particularly if the informant has testified in other cases.

    The law was recommended by a state commission established in 2015 to examine exonerations and reduce the chances of wrongful convictions. The commission also persuaded lawmakers to require procedures to reduce the number of mistaken eyewitness identifications and to require that police interrogations be recorded — smart steps toward a fairer and more accurate justice system.

    But the new procedures on jail house informants shouldn't have been necessary in the first place. Under longstanding Supreme Court rulings, prosecutors are required to turn over any evidence that might call an informant’s credibility into question — such as conflicting stories or compensation they get in exchange for their testimony. Yet far too many fail to do so.

    A better solution would be to bar the use of compensated informants outright, or at least in cases involving capital crimes, as one Texas bill has proposed. Studies have shown that even when a defense lawyer is able to make the case that an informant has an incentive to lie, juries are just as likely to convict. And that’s assuming a defense lawyer uses such evidence — not always a safe assumption given the wide range of quality in the defense bar.

    Also, making evidence admissible at trial only goes so far. The vast majority of convictions are the result of guilty pleas, which means a defendant may not even find out that an informant was paid to incriminate him before having to decide whether to accept a plea offer.

    Some states have begun to require that judges hold hearings to test an informant’s reliability, much as they would test an expert witness’s knowledge — before the jury can hear from him.

    But the deeper fix that’s needed is a cultural one. Many prosecutors are far too willing to present testimony from people they would never trust under ordinary circumstances. Until prosecutors are more concerned with doing justice than with winning convictions, even the most well-intentioned laws will fall short.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/15/o...-snitches.html
    "I realize this may sound harsh, but as a father and former lawman, I really don't care if it's by lethal injection, by the electric chair, firing squad, hanging, the guillotine or being fed to the lions."
    - Oklahoma Rep. Mike Christian

    "There are some people who just do not deserve to live,"
    - Rev. Richard Hawke

    “There are lots of extremely smug and self-satisfied people in what would be deemed lower down in society, who also deserve to be pulled up. In a proper free society, you should be allowed to make jokes about absolutely anything.”
    - Rowan Atkinson

Page 16 of 33 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... 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
  •