FEATURED POST

Harrowing Realities Of Iran’s Torture Chambers

Image
Four decades of the clerical regime’s rule in Iran has left thousands of victims through widespread practice of torture and ill-treatment with impunity.
Torture has been institutionalized in the regime’s punishment laws and is sanctioned by the Judiciary as well as the regime officials.
Hadi Sadeghi, Deputy Chancellor of the Judiciary was quoted by the state-run ISNA news agency on May 30, 2018, as saying, “There is no precepts of imprisonment in Islam, so we need to seek alternative punishments. Physical punishment is much more effective than imprisonment, and the punishment of flogging is much more effective in Islam. But, the human rights agencies do not have a good idea on this matter.”
The state-run Fars news agency cited Judiciary spokesperson Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Eje’i, on January 17, 2018 as stressing on cross amputation for offenders where their opposite hand and foot are amputated.
“Other punishments we have in mind for those who create insecurity in the society include ex…

Who Is Intellectually Disabled? Supreme Court Orders Alabama To Reconsider Death-Row Case

A month after a ruling against Texas' standards for determining when someone is intellectually disabled — and, therefore, ineligible for the death penalty — justices sent a case back to Alabama courts for further review over similar questions.

A US Supreme Court decision from March over Texas' death penalty standards — specifically, how the state determines who is intellectually disabled — could have a ripple effect into another state with one of the country's largest death-row populations.

The Supreme Court on Monday ordered Alabama courts to reconsider whether the state's process for determining if a person is intellectually disabled, and thus ineligible for the death penalty, is constitutional in the wake of that March ruling.

Nearly 15 years ago, the Supreme Court held that it was unconstitutional for states or the federal government to execute intellectually disabled people. In that case — Atkins v. Virginia — and a follow-up case barring states from using a strict cut-off IQ measurement to determine intellectual disability, the court had left open questions about how a state could determine whether a person is intellectually disabled.

This past fall, however, the justices considered whether Texas used appropriate standards in making intellectual disability decisions in death penalty cases. The so-called Briseno factors used by Texas courts — a series of questions addressing adaptive skills — overemphasized a focus on adaptive strengths, the Supreme Court held in March, and were not appropriate.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the court's five-justice majority, wrote that the use of the factors "creat[ed] an unacceptable risk that persons with intellectual disability will be executed." Even Chief Justice John Roberts, who dissented from the court's ruling along with Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, wrote that he "agree[d] with the Court ... that those factors are an unacceptable method of enforcing the guarantee of Atkins."

The court sent Bobby James Moore's case back to the Texas courts to address his sentencing in light of the decision.

While Moore's case was pending before the justices, the lawyer for Taurus Carroll — on death row in Alabama — asked the justices to review Carroll's case on similar grounds. Carrol's lawyer, Benjamin Maxymuk, wrote that if the Supreme Court sided with Moore, Carroll "will be entitled to similar relief from his death sentence."

Alabama balked, writing one day before the decision in Moore's case was handed down that Carroll's case "is distinguishable from Moore because the Alabama courts do not require a consideration of the seven evidentiary factors developed by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals in Ex parte Briseno" — in other words, Alabama did not use the Texas standards.

The justices did not take Alabama's advice. The court granted Carroll's case on Monday, vacated the lower court's judgment, and remanded the case to Alabama's Court of Criminal Appeals "for further consideration in light of Moore v. Texas."

Such a move is not uncommon when the justices issue decisions that have a bearing on similar laws in other states or affect related cases.

➤ Click here to read the full article

Source: BuzzFeed News, Chris Geidner, May 3, 2017

⚑ | Report an error, an omission, a typo; suggest a story or a new angle to an existing story; submit a piece, a comment; recommend a resource; contact the webmaster, contact us: deathpenaltynews@gmail.com.


Opposed to Capital Punishment? Help us keep this blog up and running! DONATE!

Most Viewed (Last 7 Days)

Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles rejects clemency for Chris Young

20 Minutes to Death: Record of the Last Execution in France

Alabama: 8 death row inmates request execution by nitrogen gas

'Life in prison isn't a life,' says Nevada inmate as execution nears

Scott Dozier case: Hours before execution, judge in pharma company suit halts use of drug

Utah to seek death penalty for parents charged with killing daughter, covering her in makeup

Sale of guillotine divides France

Indonesia: Gay couple publicly whipped after vigilante mob drags them out of beauty salon

Chinese court sentences man to death over school stabbings

Thailand: Spanish national loses appeal against death sentence