Roof

Feds Weigh Whether to Seek Death Penalty for Charleston Killer

The federal government’s decision about whether authorities should seek the death penalty against the man accused of killing 9 African-Americans in Charleston is still likely months away, South Carolina U.S. Attorney Bill Nettles said in a recent interview with Free Times.
The federal case against alleged Charleston shooter Dylann Storm Roof got off to a surprising start last month when Roof’s lawyer, David Bruck, indicated to a federal judge in Charleston that Roof wished to plead guilty to the 33 federal hate crime charges levied against him. Prosecutors allege that Roof outlined his hate-filled worldview in a racist online manifesto and that he told others he hoped to incite a “race war” with his actions.
However, Bruck told the judge that he couldn’t advise his client on whether to enter that plea until he knows whether Roof could face a death sentence. A temporary “not guilty” plea was entered on Roof’s behalf.
The 21-year-old also faces murder charges from state prosecutors. Ninth Circuit Solicitor Scarlett A. Wilson has not yet said whether her office plans to pursue the death penalty in the case.
Nettles says once his office decides on its recommendation, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch would weigh it before coming to a final decision. The South Carolina prosecutor, an Obama appointee who has held the post since 2010, called the process and decision “extraordinarily complex,” noting that generally “enormous deference is given to victims.”
In this case, many family members have garnered worldwide admiration for their forgiveness of Roof.
“I have never witnessed such a pronounced expression of hope or grace,” Nettles says. “A lot of the victims have already expressed forgiveness that is unfathomable.”
Along with interviews with family members of victims, Nettles, a former public defender who has worked on capital cases from the other side of the courtroom, says the federal government’s protocol puts in place “layers of review to balance competing interests.”
A Department of Justice spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. Bruck, Roof’s attorney, also could not be reached.
Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit that seeks to provide unbiased information and analysis of the death penalty, says federal prosecutors will weigh several factors in making a decision. (Bruck, Roof’s lawyer, is on the board of the center.)
The wishes of victims’ families, the cost of a capital trial and whether local prosecutors can seek the death penalty themselves are big factors, he says.
Roof’s potential capital charges differ from the ones against Boston terrorist Dzokhar Tsarnaev, Dunham says. State authorities in Massachusetts cannot pursue the death penalty because capital punishment has been ruled unconstitutional there.
Dunham also says that Roof’s indication that he would prefer to plead guilty would save both the federal government and the shooting victims’ families a prolonged trial and hefty costs.
“He’s expressed willingness to plead guilty, and if the death penalty were off the table that would give the family members of the homicide victims an opportunity to give their statements without cross-examination or interruption during sentencing proceeding,” Dunham says. “They could say what they had to say without being subjected to re-traumatization through a trial.”
The federal government also has tools the state does not – the ability to put a permanent muzzle on Roof. As they have done with Tsarnaev, “special administrative measures” could be imposed on Roof, meaning his contact with the outside world would be severely limited, Dunham says. In essence, Roof could be barred from publicly expressing racist views.
“The federal prosecution has the ability to essentially make Dylann Roof disappear from view,” Dunham says. “His ability to become a symbol for white supremacists disappears.”
A trial on Roof’s state murder charges has been set for July 2016. No further hearings have yet been scheduled by federal prosecutors in the case.
Source: free-times.com, August 27, 2015

 

Not guilty plea in federal court for church shooting suspect; he wants opposite, lawyer says

The white man accused of gunning down 9 parishioners at a black church in Charleston wants to plead guilty to 33 federal charges, but his lawyer said in court Friday that he couldn’t advise his client to do so until prosecutors say whether they’ll seek the death penalty.
During a brief arraignment in federal court, defense attorney David Bruck said that he couldn’t counsel his client, Dylann Roof, to enter a guilty plea without knowing the government’s intentions.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant then entered a not guilty plea for Roof, 21, who faces federal charges including hate crimes, weapons charges and obstructing the practice of religion. Appearing in court in a gray striped prison jumpsuit, his hands in shackles, Roof answered yes several times in response to the judge’s questions but otherwise didn’t speak.
“Mr. Roof has told us that he wishes to plead guilty,” Bruck said. “Until we know whether the government will be seeking the death penalty, we are not able to advise Mr. Roof.”
The federal prosecution, particularly on hate crimes, has been expected since the June 17 shootings at Emanuel African Methodist Church. Early on, officials with the U.S. Department of Justice said they felt the case met the qualifications for a hate crime, and Roof was indicted by a federal grand jury about a month after the killings.
Roof appeared in photos waving Confederate flags and burning and desecrating U.S. flags. Federal authorities have confirmed his use of a personal manuscript in which he decried integration and used racial slurs to refer to blacks.
Because South Carolina has no state hate-crimes law, federal charges were needed to adequately address a motive that prosecutors believe was unquestionably rooted in racial hate, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said during a news conference announcing Roof’s federal indictment.
18 of the 33 charges against Roof could potentially carry the death penalty, while conviction on each of the others could mean a life prison sentence. Each charge also carries the possibility of hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.
Also during Friday’s hearing, Marchant accepted Roof’s application as an indigent defendant – meaning the state will pay for his attorneys – and formalized the appointment of Bruck and another defense lawyer, Michael O’Connell. Marchant set Aug. 20 as a deadline for attorneys to file pre-trial motions. No future hearings are scheduled in Roof’s case.
Marchant also heard briefly from victims’ family members, who at Roof’s bond hearing in state court expressed statements of mercy and forgiveness despite his alleged crimes. On Friday, several relatives made similar comments in federal court.
“We don’t hold no ill will,” Leroy Singleton, brother of Myra Thompson, said tearfully. “We’re going to let the system work it out.”
Gracyn Doctor, daughter of another victim, DePayne Middleton Doctor, said she misses her mother greatly but wouldn’t let Roof get the better of her.
“Even though he has taken the most precious thing in my life, he will not take my joy,” Doctor told the judge.
An attorney for the church said that the AME community nationally and worldwide would be watching the case closely as it moves forward.
“The world is watching,” Eduardo Curry told reporters outside the courthouse after the hearing. “What we want justice to be is mighty and fair.”
Roof also faces numerous state charges, including nine counts of murder and another potential death penalty prosecution. The Justice Department has not said if its case will come first, and the state also has not announced its decision on the death penalty.
Source: Associated Press, August 1, 2015

Dylann Roof, Charleston Shooting Suspect, Is Indicted on Federal Hate Crime Charges

JULY 22, 2015

WASHINGTON — Dylann Roof, the man suspected of killing nine people at a historically black church in Charleston, S.C., last month was indicted on Wednesday on federal hate crime and other charges, including some that carry the federal death penalty, two law enforcement officials said on Wednesday.

Mr. Roof, 21, already faces nine counts of murder in state court and could face the death penalty there. But Justice Department and F.B.I. officialshave said the Charleston shooting was so horrific and racially motivated that the federal government must address it.

He was also charged with killing someone while obstructing religious freedom, which is eligible for the death penalty.

South Carolina does not have a hate crimes law, and federal officials have said they believe that a murder case alone would leave the racial component of the crime unaddressed.

A grand jury was expected to return a federal indictment on Wednesday afternoon. It was not immediately clear how that indictment would affect the state prosecution. The Justice Department has the option to delay its case and wait to see how the state case ends before deciding whether to proceed with a second trial. Under federal law, a hate crime does not, by itself, carry a possible death sentence.

Authorities have linked Mr. Roof to a racist Internet manifesto and said he was in contact with white supremacist groups before his attack on the Emanuel A.M.E. Church. He was photographed holding a Confederate flag and a handgun.

“I have no choice,” the manifesto reads. “I am not in the position to, alone, go into the ghetto and fight. I chose Charleston because it is most historic city in my state, and at one time had the highest ratio of blacks to Whites in the country. We have no skinheads, no real KKK, no one doing anything but talking on the Internet. Well someone has to have the bravery to take it to the real world, and I guess that has to be me.”

Survivors said that Mr. Roof arrived at the church as worshipers gathered for a Wednesday night Bible study group. “You are raping our women and taking over our country,” Mr. Roof said to the victims, all of them black, before killing them, witnesses told the police.

The shooting sparked fresh national debate over the symbolism of the Confederate flag. South Carolina lawmakers responded by removing the flag from the State House grounds.