Day: May 4, 2012

Please take 5 min for read this juvenile case

I share with u a comment on my blog , maybe we can  help this mother and her son

blog link :

Congrats, My son is in a Texas Prison, He has been since 15 yrs old. Soon he will be 18. On September 09-2012, and scheduled to be transferred over to notorious adult unit-open bay- cell. My minor child has been Wrongfully Convicted of a murder that he is not guilty of and not culpable for. What is a mother to do? As you know many people out there proclaim to be there to help people like my child Bryce, yet they are the polar opposite

do you accept links where by the writing is in Spanish?

Thank you for your time.


Can we rationally debate death row ?

may 4, 2012, source

If anyone personifies evil, it is Anders Breivik. The 33-year-old Norwegian violently disrupted his country’s usual peace on July 22, 2011, by gunning down 69 mostly young people at a summer camp. A bomb he planted in Oslo killed eight others. He did it all to defend Norway against multiculturalism, he later raved.

Yet, on one point, Breivik is not talking crazy. At his trial, which began April 16, he pronounced a the maximum penalty for his actions — 21 years in prison, or longer if the government meets certain conditions — “pathetic.” He “would have respected” the death penalty, Breivik said. Of course, he won’t get it; Norway abolished capital punishment long ago.

Norway has suffered deeply because of Breivik, and I don’t mean to add insult to injury. But this situation illustrates what’s wrong with banning the death penalty in all cases. If executing an innocent man is the worst-case scenario for proponents of the death penalty, then threatening Breivik with prison is the reductio ad absurdum of death-penalty abolitionism

Anti-death-penalty sentiment is hardly limited to Europe. Last week Connecticut Gov. Dan Malloy signed a bill abolishing capital punishment, which means that no future Anders Breivik need fear execution in that state. Sixteen other states have no death penalty; California voters will get a chance to join them in a November referendum.

In the United States, abolitionist arguments are gaining traction, especially claims about the high cost of lengthy death-penalty litigation and the risk of executing people by mistake. Malloy also cited a “moral component” to his decision.

Such practical and moral concerns are at their most understandable in run-of-the-mill convenience-store murder cases, where the risk of error seems relatively high compared with the benefits of punishing murder with death.

But Breivik’s was no ordinary crime. It presents the special case of a cold-blooded massacre of children by a political terrorist whose guilt is unquestionable and who remains utterly unrepentant; indeed, he told the court that he would kill again if given the opportunity.

What is morally worse: putting the author of this bloodbath to death or letting him live, with the accompanying risk — however small — that he might broadcast his message to receptive audiences from jail, or escape, or one day litigate his way to freedom?

There is no scientific answer. To oppose the death penalty regardless of the crime or the consequences of letting the perpetrator live is a consistent and principled position. If Norwegians consider doing so a point of pride, that’s their choice.

In Connecticut, 62 percent of registered voters support the death penalty for murder, according to aQuinnipiac University poll published last month — so it took some political courage for the legislature and governor to do what they did.

But note that the Connecticut law is not retroactive: It does not apply to the 11 men already on death row, including two sentenced to death for a 2007 home invasion in which they raped and strangled a mother, murdered her two daughters and then set the bodies ablaze.

This tells me that the Connecticut politicians who voted to ban future capital punishment still find it hard to argue against the death penalty in every specific case, no matter how ghastly.

The stubborn fact is that death-penalty abolitionism runs counter to one of humanity’s oldest and most persistent moral intuitions: that there should be condign retribution for the most monstrous transgressions.

Even in Norway, Breivik’s rampage caused some second thoughts. Immediately after his crimes last summer, a man named Thomas Indrebo observed online that “the death penalty is the only just sentence in this case!!!!!! Indrebo was later assigned as a lay judge in Breivik’s trial and had to be dismissed because of his comment.

That was the right call, legally. But I wonder if the Breivik case will cause more people in Europe to ask whether there really is no place in civilization for capital punishment.

Both abroad and at home, we need less polarized debate, less moralizing — and more honest legislative efforts to reconcile valid concerns about the death penalty with the public’s clear and consistent belief that it should remain available for the “worst of the worst” offenders.

FLORIDA – Declared competent, convicted murderer receives new sentence

may 3 , 2012, source :

Carlos Bello was originally sentenced to death after being convicted of first-degree murder in the death of Detective Gerald Rauft in 1981. A change in his sentencing means he will spend life in prison.



The man convicted of killing a Tampa police detective more than 30 years ago will spend the rest of his life behind bars.

According to Bay News 9’s partner newspaper the Tampa Bay Times, Carlos Bello claimed for decades he was too mentally ill to understand his conviction.

Bello was sentenced to death after being convicted of first-degree murder in the death of Detective Gerald Rauft in 1981. That sentence was later thrown out. Since then, Bello’s attorney said his client was too incompetent to understand court proceedings or his sentencing. But, last February a Hillsborough Circuit Judge declared Bello competent.

Within the past month Bello has shown an understanding of life in prison over a death sentence.

In court Wednesday he said understood perfectly that the court was offering life behind bars instead of the death penalty.

DELAWARE : Jury recommends death penalty for Cooke

may 3,2012 source :

A New Castle County Superior Court jury recommended Thursday, in a vote of 11 – 1, that James Cooke receive a death sentence for the May 2005 rape and murder of University of Delaware student Lindsay Bonistall in her off-campus apartment in Newark.

Cooke’s first conviction and sentence, in 2007, were thrown out by the Delaware Supreme Court in 2009 because his public defenders argued that he was guilty but mentally ill, despite the fact that Cooke repeatedly claimed his innocence.

Newark’s fire chief discovered the lifeless body of Bonistall, a University of Delaware junior, in the bathtub of her Towne Court apartment on May 1, 2005 while responding to a report of possible arson. Graffiti written on the apartment’s walls included racially charged words like “KKK” and “White power.” An autopsy revealed that she had been strangled and raped.

Cooke, now 41, who lived about a block away from Bonistall’s apartment complex, was also tried and convicted of two nearby burglaries of two young women in the days leading up to Bonistall’s killing.

Judge Charles Toliver will make the final ruling on whether Cooke will receive life or death. No date has been set for that ruling. Delaware law requires judges to give “great weight” to the jury’s recommendation.

Lindsey Bonistall’s mom : ‘This the end of difficult time’ 

watch the video : click here