Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 26 of 26

Thread: Douglas Stewart Carter - Utah

  1. #21
    Senior Member CnCP Legend Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    4,795
    Death row inmate will get new hearing after evidence shows Provo police bribed witnesses

    By Ashley Stilson
    The Daily Herald

    After finding new and "damning revelations," the Utah Supreme Court is granting a new hearing to a man convicted of killing the aunt of a Provo police chief almost 34 years ago.

    In an opinion published Friday, justices determined that the Provo Police Department had threatened and bribed two witnesses who testified at the murder trial in 1985.

    "We hold that there exists a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the outcome of the trial would have been different but for the absence of the evidence," the opinion states.

    Douglas Stewart Carter has spent more than 33 years on death row after a jury convicted him of killing 57-year-old Eva Olesen.

    The woman was halfway through knitting a sweater inside her Provo home when Carter reportedly stabbed her eight times in the back and shot her in the head.

    The woman also had several of her clothes removed and her hands were tied behind her back. The gun used in the murder was never located, but the knife had come from the Olesen's kitchen, investigators reported.

    Carter was one of eight suspects being investigated for the murder. Although 19 fingerprints and a blonde hair were recovered at the scene, none of the physical evidence linked Carter to the crime.

    When Carter's wife spoke to police, she said Carter and two friends had decided to go to Olesen's house to steal her necklace. One of the friends reportedly had a grudge against the then current Provo Police Chief Swen Nielsen.

    Carter's wife said her husband waited in the car while the two friends entered the house and that he was unaware of what happened until the two men returned.

    A jury still convicted Carter based "no small measure on the testimony of Epifanio and Lucia Tovar," the opinion stated.

    The couple testified that Carter had visited them after the murder and he had "laughed and giggled" when he showed them how he had killed Olesen.

    "The Tovars’ testimony regarding Carter’s state of mind gave the State the evidence it needed to argue aggravating circumstances to the jury and push for the death penalty," the opinion states.

    Shortly after testifying, the couple disappeared. Prosecutors claimed they were unable to testify because the family had fled the country.

    When Carter appealed the death sentence, another jury convicted him again based on the Torvars' prior testimony, which had to be read to the jury.

    Carter continued to appeal and through a coincidence, his attorneys located the Torvars in 2011.

    The couple then told the counsel that Provo police officers had threatened them with deportation, prison and the removal of their son if they did not cooperate in the case.

    "Mr. Tovar declared that he felt pressured 'before, during and after' his interrogation and that he was told things 'would go badly' for him if he did not cooperate. He claims that he feared for the welfare and safety of his family due to police threats," the opinion states.

    Officers also reportedly "coached" the couple on their testimony, paid for their rent while waiting to testify at trial and ordered them to lie about the financial support.

    The couple were moved to new apartments before the trial and received gifts like food baskets or children toys. On Christmas Day, the police force came caroling to the apartment and delivered a Christmas tree.

    "Furthermore, both of the Tovars assert that the prosecutor spoke with them before trial and told them what he wanted them to say in their testimony, and the Tovars felt they had no choice but to comply in light of the threats of deportation and separation," the opinion states.

    A former officer also stated it was his responsibility to "keep the Torvars happy" and bought them groceries and Christmas gifts.

    When presented with this evidence, the district court dismissed the appeal again. The Utah Supreme Court reversed the decision and ordered another hearing.

    "It is clear then that the Tovars’ testimony was crucial at both the guilt and sentencing phases of Carter’s trial," the justices wrote. "Carter argues that the financial benefits provided to the Tovars demonstrate that the Tovars’ testimony was 'bought and paid for by police.'"

    The testimony provided by the couple was inconsistent and "tainted as a whole" during the trial, the justices determined.

    While Carter also admitted to the murder after interrogation by investigators, his attorneys claimed the testimony was coerced.

    The justices wrote that if the jury had heard about the threats, bribes, gifts and coaching, the outcome of the trial may have changed.

    "We may not be certain that disclosure of the evidence contained in the Tovars’ declarations would have resulted in a different sentence," the opinion stated.

    The case will be sent back to the district court for an evidentiary hearing. No court date has been set.

    https://www.heraldextra.com/news/loc...ce2e32caf.html

  2. #22
    Senior Member CnCP Addict maybeacomedian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    657

    Attorneys for Utah death row inmate Douglas Carter, seen in this 2022 photo, are pushing to have his death sentence overturned, alleging Provo police misconduct and false testimony at his trials. The motions in Carter's case come as Utah lawmakers are debating whether to do away with the state's death penalty. (Utah State Prison)


    Will 'damning revelations' overturn Utah death row inmate's sentence?

    By Pat Reavy
    KSL.com

    SALT LAKE CITY — Claiming that Utah death row inmate Douglas Stewart Carter's conviction and death sentence were secured "through the use of false testimony and egregious police misconduct," defense attorneys are seeking to have Carter's conviction thrown out, or at least have his death sentence overturned.

    The latest actions in Carter's case come as Utah lawmakers are debating whether to do away with the state's death penalty. The "damning revelations," as the Utah Supreme Court called them, are raising concerns about whether Utah got Carter's case wrong — and stirring debate about whether Utah's own justice system is insulated from capital punishment issues other states have grappled with, as some death penalty supporters have argued.

    Carter, 66, was convicted of aggravated murder, a capital offense, in 1985 for the killing of Eva Olesen, 57, who was stabbed multiple times and shot during a home invasion robbery on Feb. 27, 1985, at her Provo home.

    Much of Carter's conviction was based on the testimonies of his friends, Epifanio and Lucia Tovar, who said in court that Carter had bragged about the murder, as well as a written confession from Carter that he later claimed was coerced.

    He appealed his sentence in 1992, but another jury upheld the death penalty. By that time, however, the Tovars had disappeared and did not testify at Carter's resentencing.

    But in 2011, Carter's defense attorneys successfully tracked down the Tovars in Mexico. At that time, they claimed that they lied on the witness stand during the original trial and were pressured by police to testify against Carter. They claimed police paid for their rent and threatened to deport their son if they did not testify against him.

    In 2019, the Utah Supreme Court called the claims from the state's star witnesses "damning revelations" and ordered that Carter receive a new evidence hearing in 4th District Court.

    That hearing was held in November. On Jan. 31, Carter's defense team submitted their written post-hearing brief to the court asking for either a new trial or new sentencing hearing.

    In their 95-page court filing, Carter's attorneys again point to what they called "egregious" police misconduct that included "direct cash payments to, and repeated threats against the prosecution's principal witnesses ... Epifanio and Lucia Tovar. The Provo police employed a carrot and stick strategy: paying the Tovars' rent and other living expenses, which made them financially dependent on the police, while also regularly reminding the Tovars that police had the power to destroy their lives by arresting them, having them deported, or taking away their young child.

    "The Tovars — the main witnesses against (Carter) at the guilt phase who provided key facts supporting the death sentence — were paid thousands of dollars by the Provo Police Department prior to their testimony and testified falsely," the brief alleges.

    Former Provo officers who were assigned to the Carter case, however, denied during the November evidentiary hearing that they ever threatened the Tovars, according to the brief, although they did not deny giving the Tovars money. The state has argued in the past that the Tovars' inconsistent statements could stem from fear of retaliation from Carter, or that they now want to help Carter.

    Defense attorneys countered that argument by stating, "The state's allegation that the Tovars had or have an ulterior motive to help Carter is entirely unsupported by any evidence."

    The Utah Attorney General's Office has until mid-March to file a response to Carter's brief.

    According to declarations obtained from the Tovars, from April to December 1985, "Provo police officers gave them monthly cash infusions of roughly $400 for their rent, moved them into two new apartments, paid their utility bills, and delivered groceries, toys and a Christmas tree. Significantly, the Tovars' declarations are corroborated by new declarations from former members of the Provo Police Department who were involved in the Olesen case."

    A former Provo police officer testified at the evidentiary hearing in November that the entire department was "emotionally involved" with the murder case because then Chief Swen Nielsen was related to the victim, according to the defense brief. The former officer testified that he was to "make certain the Tovars were happy" so they would not flee Provo, according to court documents. That included payments to the Tovars for rent.

    "The lack of documentation for thousands of dollars of payments made to the Tovars indicates that there was a plot to conceal these payments from the beginning," defense attorneys wrote in their court filing.

    The filing also notes that the Tovars' testimony was essential to the case since "to this day, no direct physical evidence links Carter to the crime for which he was sentenced to death."

    The defense contends if they had known about the payments at trial, they "could have portrayed the Tovars' testimony as carefully sculpted by the police and prosecution over the course of months," the brief states. At the very least, the defense argues that if this evidence had been presented at the sentencing phase, they believe at least one juror would have voted against the death penalty. A jury must be unanimous when sentencing a person to death.

    "It is likely that this evidence would have turned the tides for the jury at sentencing, resulting in at least one juror voting for life," the brief states.

    Carter's defense team is also alleging Epifanio Tovar lied when he testified on the witness stand during the original trial that Carter told him his intent on the night of the murder was to "rape, break and drive." Furthermore, the trial prosecutor did not speak up and correct the testimony he knew was false, according to the defense. The brief states that after Tovar was located and deposed in 2011, he said at that time that he "felt compelled to lie to the jury about the 'rape, break and drive' comment because police told him they would arrest him and deport his wife and take his son away."

    Police claimed in court documents that they never threatened the Tovars. But Carter's defense team believes otherwise.

    Defense attorneys are also questioning Carter's confession, which was not recorded and was written by a Provo police officer who took dictation from Carter.

    "Unlike almost all of the other witnesses interviewed by Provo police, Carter's confession was not recorded via audiotape," the brief states. "Carter's counsel also pressed (the officer) about the fact that he had dictated Carter's written statement using (the officer's own) characterization of what he says Carter told him, rather than having Carter write out his own statement."

    Defense attorneys contend that Carter's confession was coerced because, at the time, he was being pressured by police in relation to the arrest of a friend.

    "Carter's confession was anything but a smoking gun for the prosecution. There was evidence Carter's signed statement was coerced, the interrogation was not audio recorded, the signed statement was dictated using (the officer's) and not Carter's words, the dictation tape was destroyed, and the signed statement did not contain key incriminating statements that (the officer) testified Carter made. As a result, Carter's confession could not stand on its own," the defense argues in its brief.

    The court filing concludes by stating: "When the state seeks the death penalty, its actions at trial and sentencing should be above board. The actions of the state, in this case, were most assuredly not. Carter respectfully requests this court vacate his conviction. In the alternative, Carter requests this court vacate his death sentence."

    https://www.ksl.com/article/50345030...mates-sentence
    https://archive.is/sGUt6

  3. #23
    Administrator Helen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    20,875
    Despite 'damning revelations,' death row inmate's confession holds up, state says

    Death row inmate Douglas Stewart Carter's conviction and death sentence should be upheld based on the strength of his own confession, which has been upheld in previous challenges, according to prosecutors for the state.

    Even if the jury had known about the Provo Police Department paying the rent of the state's 2 key witnesses at Carter's original trial, it would not discredit the strength of their testimonies, a new court filing from state prosecutors argues. In fact, the witnesses received help from police as part of the department's witness protection program because they were in fear of retaliation from Carter.

    Carter, 66, was convicted of aggravated murder, a capital offense, in 1985 for the killing of Eva Olesen, 57, who was stabbed multiple times and shot during a home invasion robbery on Feb. 27, 1985, at her Provo home.

    Much of Carter's conviction was based on the testimonies of his friends, Epifanio and Lucia Tovar, who testified that Carter had bragged to them about the murder right after it happened, as well as a written confession from Carter that he later claimed was coerced.

    He appealed his sentence in 1992, but another jury upheld the death penalty. By that time, however, the Tovars had disappeared and did not testify at Carter's resentencing.

    Then in 2011, Carter's defense attorneys successfully tracked down the Tovars in Mexico. At that time, they claimed that they lied on the witness stand during the original trial and were pressured by police to testify against Carter. They claimed police paid for their rent and threatened to deport their son if they did not testify against him.

    The Utah Supreme Court called such claims from the state's star witnesses "damning revelations" in 2019, and ordered that Carter receive a new evidence hearing in 4th District Court.

    That hearing was held in November. In January, Carter's defense team submitted a post-hearing brief to the court asking for either a new trial or new sentencing hearing. On Thursday, the Utah Attorney General's Office submitted a lengthy 212-page response to Carter's petition for a new trial.

    Carter's defense team claims the Tovars were paid thousands of dollars by Provo police for their testimony, including paying their rent and other living expenses. But the state argued that the payments were for witness protection, and that the Tovars truthfully told police about the crime before they received any compensation at all.

    "Although the core of Carter's current claims centers on alleged payments police gave to the Tovars, the Tovars gave these statements and details about the murder before they received any alleged assistance or witness protection," according to the response filed by the attorney general's office.

    The prosecutors noted that during the evidentiary hearing, a retired Provo police captain testified that in 1985, "it was common for the Provo Police Department to offer protection to witnesses or 'anybody who felt that they were in jeopardy.'" They said the Tovars were in fear of Carter, and even if the payments provided by police had been raised at trial, it would not have changed the outcome.

    "Had all of the facts been put before the jury, the jury would have had no reason at all to doubt Carter's guilt and death-worthiness given the totality of the evidence. Carter's unchallengeable confession and the Tovars' consistent and truthful corroboration of that confession — and their admissions that their testimony about Carter's confession and demonstration to them were true — entirely mitigate any unease a jury might have about the Tovars' testimony," the state's court filing states.

    The state contends that the Tovars were afraid of Carter, "so much so that the police were protecting them from him."

    "Indeed, evidence of financial assistance, if disclosed, would have backfired by illustrating that the Tovars needed police protection from Carter. And any taint to Epifanio's credibility, had the prosecutor corrected his allegedly false testimony, would have been vastly outweighed by the fact that Epifanio, Lucia, Perla (LaCayo, friend of Carter), and Carter himself all agreed on the same basic fact: that Carter murdered Eva. No reasonable juror, even doubting the Tovars' credibility, would have disregarded Carter's confession and acquitted him.

    "It is simply unquestionable now that Epifanio and Lucia both persistently and repeatedly expressed fear of Carter to anyone who would listen. ... And many of those expressions of fear predated any payments," according to the state prosecutors.

    Prosecutors also deny that police ever threatened the Tavors to coerce testimony from them.

    "What Epifanio and Lucia characterize as direct threats by police were likely their own natural fears — as they remember it over 30 years later," the state responded.

    The state also noted that during the evidentiary hearing, Wayne Watson, the prosecutor at Carter's original trial, stated that Carter's defense team did know about the payments.

    Carter's defense team is also alleging that Epifanio Tovar lied when he testified on the witness stand during the original trial that Carter told him his intent on the night of the murder was to "rape, break and drive."

    But even if that phrase wasn't actually used and had prosecutors corrected him on the stand, the state says it still wouldn't have been enough to change the jury's verdict.

    "He has never recanted his trial testimony about Carter's confession, even many decades after any state-sponsored incentive to lie has evaporated. That testimony tracks Epifanio's and Lucia's pre-payment statements, Carter's confession, and the crime scene," according to the state's response. "Given Carter's confession and the many aggravating factors other than the Tovars' testimony, there is no reasonable likelihood that any false testimony by Epifanio could have affected the jury's judgment at sentencing or that had any allegedly suppressed, favorable evidence been disclosed, Carter would not have been sentenced to death.

    "Carter's confession, which has been challenged unsuccessfully several times over the decades, is beyond review and insurmountable. It corroborated details that Epifanio and Lucia gave to police before they claim to have received any assistance, which they have never recanted," according to the state's brief.

    Given the length of the state's response, Carter's attorneys have requested that the court allow him until April 19 to file his reply.

    (source: KSL news)
    "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

  4. #24
    Senior Member CnCP Legend Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    4,795
    Judge overturns Utah death sentence case, citing misconduct by Provo police, prosecutors after 1985 killing

    The judge has stayed his ruling rejecting the convictions against Douglas Stewart Carter, awaiting a possible appeal by prosecutors.

    By Scott D. Pierce
    Salt Lake Tribune

    The conviction and death sentence of a man found guilty in a 1985 Provo killing has been overturned by a judge who ruled there was misconduct by Provo police and prosecutors.

    Douglas Stewart Carter’s convictions were vacated by 4th District Court Judge Derek P. Pullan on Wednesday.

    In 1985, Carter was convicted in the brutal killing of Eva Olesen, the aunt of the then-Provo police chief, and was sentenced to die. Epifanio and Lucia Tovar testified that Carter bragged about the killing, and demonstrated how he had stabbed Olesen.

    Carter appealed his death sentence, and in 1992 was again sentenced to die.

    However, after a series of appeals, the Utah Supreme Court found in 2019 that “damning revelations” about the conduct of police and prosecutors could have affected Carter’s conviction and sentencing. Justices sent the case back to 4th District Court, where a hearing took place in November 2021.

    Carter argued that his confession was coerced, and that the Tovars were threatened and paid to manufacture testimony against him. Prosecutors failed to disclose evidence that could have impeached the witnesses’ testimony — that police “threatened the Tovars with arrest, deportation and loss of their child” and paid them thousands of dollars before the 1985 trial.

    It was further alleged that police coached Epifanio Tovar to testify that Carter said he was going to “rape, break and drive” before the murder — a statement Carter never made.

    Epifanio Tovar testified that he lied on the stand when he originally testified he had received only $14 from police, while he actually received thousands of dollars for rent, utilities, food, Christmas presents for his children and more. Carter’s appeal alleged that prosecutor Wayne Watson knew this and did not correct the false testimony during the trial.

    Lucia Tovar told a police officer she feared deportation and said that a Provo police officer told her, “As long as you’re working with us, it’s not going to happen.”

    “I thought they would put me in jail and take my son away and deport my wife,” Epifanio Tovar said, adding “They had told me they would accuse … me of being an accomplice, and that they would put me in jail.”

    According to Epifanio Tovar, police also told him to lie on the stand. At Carter’s 1984 trial, he testified that Carter had said he was going to “rape, break, and drive” before the murder. What he actually said was that he “was going to break into a car and steal from the car.”

    When asked why he lied, Epifanio Tovar said he was “threatened” by police and lied “because that’s what they [police] wanted me to say.”

    Police testified that the money was paid for “witness protection,” but, the judge ruled, evidence of that is “paper thin.” He also wrote that evidence that “the payments made by police on behalf of the Tovars constituted evidence favorable to Carter.”

    The judge also ruled there was evidence that police “threatened the Tovars with arrest, deportation, and separation from each other and their son,” and that “police coached Epifanio to not disclose the financial benefits and to say that Carter said ‘rape, break, and drive.’

    “In directing a specific witness to withhold damaging evidence or give false testimony, the police interfered with the truth-seeking function of the criminal justice process,” Pullan ruled. “And the specific instances of coaching call into question the integrity of the police investigators and their investigation generally.”

    Pullan stayed his order for five days. If prosecutors do not respond, the stay on his ruling will be lifted; if prosecutors appeal his decision, the stay will remain in effect during that appeal.

    https://www.sltrib.com/news/2022/11/...ns-utah-death/
    "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

  5. #25
    Senior Member CnCP Legend Mastro Titta's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Prato, Italy
    Posts
    1,275
    The State of Utah has appealed Judge Pullan's order overturning Douglas Carter's death sentence.

    https://kslnewsradio.com/wp-content/...-to-appeal.pdf

  6. #26
    Moderator Bobsicles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    7,318
    Utah Supreme Court considers reinstating death row sentence

    By Ben Winslow
    fox13now.com

    SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah Supreme Court is considering whether to reinstate the murder and death sentence of Douglas Stewart Carter.

    On Friday, the state's top court heard arguments in the case. A lower court judge vacated Carter's conviction and sentence. The state is seeking to reverse that.

    "The district court used an incorrect standard to come to an incorrect conclusion. It's ruling and order vacating Carter’s murder conviction and sentence cannot stand," argued assistant Utah Attorney General Daniel Day.

    Carter was convicted and sentenced to death for the 1985 murder of Eva Olesen. Carter challenged his conviction, arguing that Provo police bribed witnesses and his own confession had been coerced. Police at that time claimed that any funds used for a pair of key witnesses were for their protection.

    In 2019, the Utah Supreme Court sent Carter's case to a lower court, finding problems with how police and prosecutors handled the case. In 2022, 4th District Court Judge Derek Pullan vacated the death sentence ruling that failures to disclose false testimony, financial benefits and other threats gave a "reasonable probability" there could be a different outcome and undermine confidence in the original jury verdict against Carter.

    The panel of judges hearing the case (three Utah Supreme Court justices recused themselves from hearing it) quizzed lawyers for both sides about case law governing fair trials and whether they can focus on what a jury in 1985 might have considered versus a jury in 2024. Day argued that Carter's confession should stand and witnesses still maintain their belief Carter killed Olesen.

    Carter's attorney, Eric Zuckerman, argued that the lower court's ruling ought to stand given the problems with the original case.

    "The entirety of police investigation is undermined in this case. That’s because the conduct was so egregious. That’s what the district court’s finding support. They did so much wrong in this case," he told the Court.

    The Utah Supreme Court took the case under advisement with no timeline for a ruling. Carter remains incarcerated because the case is under appeal.

    https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-...h-row-sentence
    Thank you for the adventure - Axol

    Tried so hard and got so far, but in the end it doesn’t even matter - Linkin Park

    Hear me, my chiefs! I am tired. My heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands, I will fight no more forever. - Hin-mah-too-yah-lat-kekt

    I’m going to the ghost McDonalds - Garcello

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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