NCADP   
1436 U Street,   
NW Suite 104   
Washington DC    
20009   

888-286-2237   
[email protected] 

  Antonio Richardson (MO) 

  (Received a Stay) 
 

  March 7, 2001…1:01am (EST) 
  Antonio (Tony) Richardson has been condemned to death for accessory 
  to murder of Julie Kerry in April of 1991.  What is sad about this 
  case is the fact that Richardson was only 16 years old at the time of 
  the murder. Richardson has a sub-par intelligence level ranking him in 
  the category of borderline mental retardation. 

  Richardson’s upbringing could be labeled as nothing but tragic. 
  First, Tony has never had the love of a father.  His natural father 
  had never accepted Tony as a son, and refused to be involved with any 
  part of his life.  Tony’s upbringing was marked by poverty.  He spent 
  much of his life living in a one-room apartment with his mother and 
  three other brothers.  Throughout his childhood Tony and his brothers 
  were subjected to their mother’s drug and alcohol abuse in which 
  their mother would often abandon them for weeks at a time while she 
  co-habited with various boyfriends. 

  Another issue raised by this case is the United States’ reluctance to 
  adhere to international norms concerning the execution of juveniles. 
  As of yet, the United States is the only country to have signed but 
  not ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which is an 
  international treaty concerning the prohibition of execution of 
  juvenile offenders.  Moreover, the United States claims to be the 
  leader of human rights reform, yet is one of only a few countries 
  that executes juveniles along with other countries such as Iran and 
  Iraq. 

  Richardson should have been sentenced to life in prison instead of 
  receiving the death penalty.  First, Richardson had a sub-par 
  intelligence level.  When tested by The St. Louis Special School 
  District, Richardson had an average IQ of seventy at the age of 13. 
  The cut-off point for mental retardation is 70.  Richardson’s brain 
  functions at the level of a third grader.  Mentally challenged 
  individuals often confess to crimes they did not commit and are also 
  known to have little will of their own.  As a result, they can easily 
  be misled by others.  This could explain why Richardson did not 
  object to any of the actions that were committed.  Intellectual and 
  neuropsychological testing revealed that Richardson did not know the 
  difference between a lake and an ocean.  He could not name the 
  country or even the state that he lived in Additional tests showed 
  that Richardson’s ability to cope with everyday life in the areas of 
  communication and social skills ranked equivalently with someone 
  seven years, nine months in age. 

  The jury in this case should have given a verdict of life in prison. 
  Putting a person to death could only have been brought by a unanimous 
  decision of guilt involving at least one of the aggravating 
  circumstances.  The jury, however, returned a verdict that stated 
  they could not agree on a punishment.  One of the jurors even stated 
  in an affidavit that she never agreed to any of the aggravating 
  circumstances.  Despite all this, Richardson was still sentenced to 
  death. 

  The Missouri Supreme Court failed to compare Richardson’s case with 
  similar cases, which is a mandate of Missouri law.  Of the cases that 
  were reviewed by the Missouri Supreme Court, none involve a 
  sixteen-year-old mentally retarded defendant who was convicted as an 
  accomplice to murder. 

  During the guilt phase of the trial, the defense failed to bring up 
  any evidence of retardation.  Prior to the trial, a clinical 
  neuropsychologist was brought in as an expert to testify about 
  Richardson’s retardation.  However, at the penalty phase of the 
  trial, this evidence was not brought to the court, nor was the expert 
  summoned to testify. 

  In the midst of all this, Antonio Richardson is still slated to die 
  on March 7th, 2001.  Please write Missouri Governor Bob Holden and 
  ask 
  him to grant clemency to Antonio Richardson. 

  (Received a Stay) 

  Ronald Spivey is scheduled to be executed in Georgia’s electric chair 
  on, or within seven days of 6 March 2001. Sentenced to death in 
  1977 for the murder of Billy Watson, he has been on death row for 
  over 23 years. 

  Billy Watson, an off-duty police officer, was shot during a robbery at a 
  bar in Columbus, Muscogee County, in 1976. Ronald Spivey was also 
  convicted in separate proceedings of killing another man in a bar in 
  Macon, Bibbs County, a few hours earlier. The Bibb County conviction 
  was later overturned by a federal court because it relied on evidence 
  acquired in violation of Ronald Spivey’s constitutional rights. 

  In 1982, a federal court granted Spivey a retrial for the Watson 
  murder, at which he was again sentenced to death. At the 1983  
  retrial, the Muscogee County prosecutor urged the jury to vote for a 
  death sentence. Referring to the Bibb County conviction, the 
  prosecutor argued that a ‘verdict of life imprisonment will not add one 
  day of punishment to this man. Bear that in mind. Bear that in mind. 
  And if that is not a slap on the wrist… then what is it? What is it? It is 
  literally two lives, two human lives for the price of one because a 
  person only has one life. If he is sentenced to life imprisonment on 
  the first murder and you give him life on the second, is that 
  appropriate punishment?… Why do we even go through the effort of 
  trying this case…?’ 

  When the federal US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit upheld 
  Ronald Spivey’s death sentence in 2000, one of the three judges 
  dissented, saying that he should receive a new sentencing: ‘Spivey 
  was prejudiced here because the prosecutor presented the jury with a 
  false choice between imposing death and imposing no punishment. 
  Not only did the jury consider a conviction that has since been 
  vacated, but the prosecutor presented the vacated life sentence not 
  simply as a factor to consider, but as the decisive factor in urging the 
  jury to recommend a death sentence.’ 

  Ronald Spivey suffered a childhood of emotional and physical abuse 
  and has a history of psychiatric problems. As a child, he was 
  allegedly abused by his father, who would beat him, lock him in 
  cupboards, and threaten to kill him. The boy fled home on numerous 
  occasions, only to be returned by the authorities. At school, it was 
  recognized that he had severe emotional problems, and he began 
  receiving mental health treatment at the age of 12. However, his 
  father frequently prevented him from receiving the psychiatric care he 
  needed, apparently believing that beating was a more appropriate 
  course of action. 

  Ronald Spivey has written: ‘America is killing the economically 
  deprived, those of the lower socioeconomic strata, killing the insane, 
  killing the retarded, killing illiterates, killing the emotionally crippled, 
  killing the socially disenfranchised and the politically powerless of our 
  society, killing those so criminally abused as children that they never 
  had a chance to develop normally to a well-balanced human being’. 

  BACKGROUND INFORMATION 

  The USA has executed 697 men and women since resuming judicial 
  killing in 1977, frequently violating international standards of justice 
  and decency in its pursuit of death sentences (see Amnesty 
  International News Release, USA: Flouting world trends, violating 
  international standards – 700th execution imminent, AMR 
  51/031/2001, 1 March 2001). 

  Georgia accounts for 22 of these executions, the most recent being in 
  June 1998. The method of execution is electrocution for those 
  sentenced to death for murders committed before 1 May 2000, and 
  lethal injection for those convicted of murders committed after that 
  date. The constitutionality of execution in Georgia’s electric chair 
  continues to be challenged in appeal cases, on the grounds that it 
  violates the constitutional prohibition on cruel or unusual 
   punishments. In Georgia, the power to grant clemency to inmates 
   facing execution rests solely with the state Board of Pardons and 
   Paroles. It has five members, appointed for renewable seven-year 
  terms by the Governor. 

  Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases. It is a 
  symptom of a culture of violence, not a solution to it. There is 
  unprecedented national concern about the reliability and fairness of 
  the capital justice system in the USA, particularly since the Governor 
  of Illinois suspended executions in his state last year because of its 
  record of wrongful convictions in capital cases. 

  RECOMMENDED ACTION: Please send faxes/express/airmail 
  letters, in your own words. 
  – expressing sympathy for the relatives and friends of Billy Watson, 
  explaining that you are not seeking to condone the manner of his 
  death; 
  – opposing the execution of Ronald Spivey, who has been on death 
  row for over two decades; 
  – noting that he suffered a childhood of physical and emotional abuse, 
  and that he has a history of psychiatric problems; 
  – expressing concern at the prosecutor’s arguments at the retrial; 
  – calling for the Board of Pardons and Paroles to take a stand for 
  justice and decency by commuting Ronald Spivey’s death sentence. 

  APPEALS TO: 

  The State Board of Pardons and Paroles 
  Floyd Veterans Memorial Building 
  Balcony Level, East Tower 
  2 Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive, S.E. 
  Atlanta, Georgia 30334 
  Fax:           1 404 651 8502 
  E-mail:   via the Board’s website: www.pap.state.ga.us 
  Salutation:    Dear Board Members 

  If possible, also send a copy of your appeal to: 
  Georgia Resource Center, 303 Elizabeth Street, Atlanta, Georgia 
  30307  Fax: 1 404 222 9202 

  You may also send brief letters of concern [not more than 250 words] 
  to: 
  Letters to the Editor, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, PO Box 4689, 
  Atlanta, GA 30302 
  Fax:       1 404 526 5611 
  E-mail: via website: www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/letters/ 

  PLEASE SEND APPEALS IMMEDIATELY. 
 
 

  Delaware 

 (Received a Stay) 

  David Dawson (DE) 
  March 9, 2001…12:01am (EST) 
  David Dawson has been sentenced to death by the state of Delaware for 
  the murder of Madeline Kisner.  Dawson is charged with her murder 
  following a prison break involving three other individuals. 

  What stands out in this case are a series of incidents that have been 
  overlooked by the court.  The first incident involves one witness the 
  prosecution brought to the stand.  Kathy Nave, sister of one of the 
  men who escaped with Dawson, originally claimed that she had provided 
  no assistance to the four escapees.  This information was recorded on 
  cassette tape, in which the witness swore on several occasions that 
  she was telling the truth. Prior to the trial, however, she recanted 
  her initial claim and instead claimed that she did give assistance to 
  the four in the form of transportation.  This should be considered 
  perjury and her testimony should have been withdrawn from the record. 
  Nave was instead granted a pardon, which Dawson claims should have 
  resulted in a mistrial. 

  The second piece of overlooked evidence were hairs found on the 
  victim that did not belong to Dawson.  Despite this mitigating 
  evidence, Dawson was still sentenced to death. 

  Today, Dawson still claims that he was not responsible for the 
  murder of Madeline Kisner and he believes that sufficient information 
  exists to back that claim. 

  (Executed)  

  Robert Massie (CA) 
  March 27, 2001…3:01am (EST) 
  Robert Massie has languished in California’s San Quentin Prison for 
  22 years for the 1979 murder of Boris Naumoff.  Massie pleaded guilty 
  to robbery and first-degree murder against the advice of his counsel. 

  The trial judge accepted Massie’s plea and sentenced him to death. 
  Both the conviction and sentence were automatically appealed to the 
  California Supreme Court.  Massie tried to waive this automatic 
  appeal that California files on behalf of its condemned prisoners. 
  The motion was denied.  While Massie’s state court appeal was 
  pending, he sought a writ of habeas corpus in federal district court.  The 
  writ 
  was denied.  Meanwhile, in 1985, the California Supreme Court 
  reversed Massie’s conviction, holding that as a matter of law the 
  trial court could not accept a guilty plea against the advice of 
  counsel in a capital case.  The State subsequently sought to 
  prosecute 
  Massie for the murder again. 

  Massie again sought a federal writ of habeas corpus.  He contended 
  that a new trial would violate due process under the double jeopardy 
  clause of the Fifth Amendment because the automatic appeal after his 
  guilty plea and sentencing was taken over his objection.  In other 
  words, because he objected to the mandatory appeal, he did not waive 
  the double jeopardy defense.  The Fifth Amendment, which protects 
  against a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal or 
  conviction, states, in part, that no person shall “be subject for the 
  same offense to be twice put in the jeopardy of life or limb.”  The 
  idea is that the State, with all its resources and power, should not 
  be permitted to make repeated attempts to convict an individual for 
  an offense, thereby subjecting him to embarrassment, expense, and 
  ordeal and compelling him to live in a continued state of anxiety and 
  insecurity.  The Court rejected Massie’s double jeopardy arguments 
  and in 1989 again sentenced him to death.  The execution will proceed 
  on March 27, 2001. 

  Although Massie is currently volunteering to be executed, he has 
  always maintained ardent objections to state-sponsored executions. 
  Massie argues that the State has no incentive to advocate for 
  prisoners because the institutional system benefits when people are 
  in prison and on death row.  Undoubtedly, there is truth to Massie’s 
  claims.  Fear of crime drives investment and crime control is a 
  source of profit, which is directly tied to the growing number of 
  inmates. 

  The current trend indicates that prison construction is increasingly 
  being subcontracted to private industry.  In fact, the rate of growth 
  of private correctional facilities is four times the rate of growth 
  of state facilities.  Clearly, a built-in incentive to imprison 
  people 
  exists.  Massie, who has been in prison since 1979, knows firsthand 
  the horrors of being in a system that benefits from his demise. 

  (Executed)  

  Willie Ervin Fischer (NC) 
  March 9, 2001…12:00am (EST) 
  Willie Ervin Fisher was sentenced to death for the murder of Angela 
  Johnson on April 2, 1992.  Fisher’s execution by lethal injection is 
  set for March 9, 2000, following the denial of his petition for writ 
  of certiorari by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth 
  Circuit.  Fisher’s defense rests upon a state of “voluntary 
  intoxication” by way of drug and alcohol consumption leading up to 
  and 
  during the murder. In this state, Fisher would be unable to commit 
  premeditated murder and thereby would not be eligible for 
  first-degree 
  murder in the state of North Carolina.  This claim was corroborated 
  by 
  the testimony of a clinical psychologist who testified that at the 
  time of the murder, Fisher was, in all likelihood, in an alcohol and 
  drug induced blackout state.  In this state, Fisher would be unable 
  to 
  form a plan for murder, let alone carry it out.  Furthermore, the 
  testimony of Cliff Foster, a friend of Fisher’s, confirmed Fisher’s 
  drug and alcohol use prior to the murder.The jury also heard a series 
  of mitigating circumstances presented by  clinical psychologist Dr. 
  Hoover.  He stated, “Fisher had a passive, dependent personality by 
  reason of an abusive father and an alcoholic mother” and “the capital 
  felony was committed while under the influence of mental or emotional 
  disturbance.” The jurors ultimately decided that the mitigating 
  circumstances were not satisfactory enough to outweigh the 
  aggravating circumstances and sentenced Fisher to death. 
 
  North Carolina 

 (Received a Stay) 
 
  Ernest Paul McCarver 
  March 2, 2001…12:00am (EST) 

  Ernest Paul McCarver has been sentenced to die on March 2, 2001 for 
  the murder of Woodrow F. Hartley on January 2, 1987.  This sentencing 
  came in a second trial after the North Carolina Superior Court 
  dismissed the first trial on basis of unrecorded bench conferences 
  between the trial court and jurors without McCarver or his counsel 
  present. 

  Regardless of the outcome of the first trial, there are important 
  mitigating circumstances that did not receive significant attention. 
  Expert testimony by a clinical forensic psychologist revealed that 
  McCarver has borderline intellectual functioning with an emotional 
  and intellectual capacity of a 10- to 12-year-old.  Second, McCarver 
  has a history of acute depression, in addition to an alcohol abuse 
  problem. 

  Furthermore, McCarver was diagnosed with personality disorder 
  resulting from childhood sexual abuse.  The court also heard that 
  McCarver suffered from mental and emotional disorder that affected 
  his conduct and his ability to understand the severity of his crimes. 

  In addition to the mitigating circumstances, McCarver contends that 
  the trial should be dismissed due to the number of mistakes by the 
  court.  McCarver claims that the court erred by allowing the defense 
  to make important tactical decisions without following his wishes. 
  There were also questions about whether or not the jury was required 
  to vote unanimously in deciding the death sentence.  The jury was 
  instructed that a unanimous vote was required to bring a death 
  sentence, but whether or not the jury came to a unanimous decision is 
  under question. This  raises the possibility that McCarver’s received 
  a death sentence as a result of erroneous information. 

  Robert Clayton (OK) 
  March 1, 2001…10:00pm (EST) 

 (Executed)  

  “If he had some kind of defense, he would not have been convicted,” 
  wrote one of the jurors to the judge after the trial. Robert Clayton 
  was convicted, partly due to ineffective assistance of counsel, for 
  the 1985 murder of Rhonda Timmons. 

  Clayton’s attorney, Ron Wallace, did not want the case and failed to 
  adequately prepare for it.  He never called a psychologist, nor did 
  he answer calls from his client. 

  Clayton grew up in a poor, alcoholic family.  He was one of 9 
  children and dropped out of school in eighth grade. 
  Clayton’s trial was fraught with error.  He should have never been 
  convicted because he was not capable of understanding the 
  proceedings. 

  Clayton is mentally retarded with an IQ of 68. A retrospective 
  competency hearing was held six years after the trial and he was then 
  found to be competent. 

  Important evidence including a bloody sock, which now could be tested 
  for DNA, has been lost. In addition, during the sentencing phase of 
  the trial, the prosecution was allowed to present a woman who said 
  that Clayton had raped her. The testimony was meant to support the 
  argument of future dangerousness. Clayton had never been charged or 
  convicted for the alleged rape. 

  Note: Robert Clayton’s family wants to bring his body home after the 
  execution but they do not have the money for the transportation and 
  funeral. 

  Send donations to: 
  Robert Clayton 
  013839123 Hankok Bank 
  Pascagoula, Mississippi 39567 

  Phillip Dewitt Smith (OK) 

  (Received a Stay) 

  March 8, 2001…10:00pm (EST) 
  Phillip Dewitt Smith is scheduled to be executed on March 8, 2001 in 
  Okalahoma for the November 4, 1983 murder of Matthew Taylor.  Myriad 
  injustices occurred during Smith’s trial.  First of all, Smith was 
  denied due process of law because the judge presiding over his 
  preliminary hearing was the brother of the district attorney 
  representing the State.  Smith’s attorney failed to contest this 
  obvious conflict of interest.  And, unfortunately, the conflict may 
  have contributed to prejudice against Smith – an employee of the 
  district attorney mistakenly dismissed several defense witnesses 
  before they were able to testify. 

  During the trial, the prosecution introduced particularly gruesome 
  photographs of the victim.  This was done ostensibly to show how the 
  crime was committed, but it primarily served to inflame the jury. 
  The photographs were completely irrelevant because the defense did 
  not 
  object to the prosecution’s contention that the victim was murdered 
  with something that resembled a hammer.  The medical examiner 
  adequately explained that the injuries were most likely caused by a 
  hammer without the assistance of the highly inflammatory photographs. 
   The photographs depicted the victim’s injuries during the autopsy. 
  Autopsy photographs do not show the crime scene as it existed prior 
  to the cutting and other medical procedures performed by the medical 
  examiner, but instead portray the handiwork of the medical examiner. 
  Therefore, in a sense, these photographs consist of evidence 
  manufactured by the State to be used against the accused. 
  How could these autopsy photographs, which showed the victim’s skull 
  after the overlying skin had been peeled back, do anything but incite 
  the jury and cause their emotions to cloud their judgment?  And what 
  purpose did such photographs serve, aside from amassing prejudice 
  against Smith?  These photographs should not have been introduced 
  because the requirement for admitting photographs was not met – 
  there was insufficient probative value to outweigh the danger of 
  unfair prejudice.  Even one of the judges, Judge Parks, who served on 
  the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals stated, “Whatever probative 
  value the photographs possessed was not related to any material issue 
  in this case…the probative value of the photos was substantially 
  outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.”  Judge Parks went on 
  to say, “In light of the purely circumstantial nature of this case, it 
  is apparent that the prosecutor strategically used the autopsy 
  photographs to inflame the jury so as to influence it to return a 
  verdict of guilty and a sentence of death.” 

  Smith suffered additional prejudice as a result of more prosecutorial 
  misconduct.  Even though the murder weapon was never recovered, the 
  prosecution introduced into evidence a claw hammer, which they 
  suspect is similar to the instrument used to commit the murder. 
  Admission of the hammer was inflammatory because it is connected to 
  the photograph showing a hole in the victim’s skull approximately the 
  size and shape of the hammer.  The jury did not need additional 
  mental 
  images to make them emotionally charged and biased against Smith. 

  Furthermore, the medical examiner removed loose strands of hair from 
  the victim’s hands.  For some unknown reason, the hairs did not reach 
  the office of the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation. 
  Consequently, a scientific hair comparison analysis was not made to 
  determine the origin of the hair.  Nevertheless, the medical 
  examiner, over an objection from the defense, was permitted to 
  testify 
  that because of the color and general appearance of the hairs, he 
  suspected that they belonged to the victim.  The medical examiner 
  should not have been allowed to offer this testimony since there is 
  no 
  evidence that he was qualified as an expert in hair comparison, and 
  further analysis could not be done once the hairs were lost. 
  Testimony from other prosecution witnesses is also dubious.  One 
  suspect, Michael Oakley, and his friend Jackie Johns had stolen a 
  television from Taylor’s apartment the evening prior to his homicide. 
   The trial court improperly forbade Smith’s attorney from asking 
  Oakley if Johns had told him, prior to the time he gave his statement 
  to the police, that he could be charged as an accessory to murder. 
  Smith’s attorney should have been able to show the circumstances 
  under which Oakley made his statements to the police.  The subject 
  was 
  not hearsay, as Oakley clearly had a powerful incentive to testify. 
  Later, the defense was permitted to ask Oakley if the police told him 
  that they wouldn’t charge him with a crime if he would cooperate with 
  them and tell them about the television.  Oakley admitted that this 
  was true.  Therefore, his testimony should not carry much weight.  If 
  the jurors had also heard that Johns warned Oakley, they may have 
  given even less consideration to Oakley’s testimony. 

  Another witness for the prosecution, Billy Joe Dickson, Smith’s 
  cellmate, gave improper testimony.  Not only did he say that Smith 
  confessed to committing the murder, but he also specifically 
  mentioned additional offenses that Smith allegedly confessed to 
  committing (other than the one for which he was on trial).  These 
  offenses were not relevant to the charge at hand and merely served to 
  again prejudice the jury.  For testifying against Smith, Dickson and 
  prosecution witness Darvin Brison were given more lenient treatment 
  on their own convictions.  The prosecutor misled the jury into 
  believing that Dickson was not testifying pursuant to a deal with the 
  State.  However, Dickson had been charged with burglary and faced a 
  possible 20 years in prison.  A few days after Smith’s trial in which 
  Dickson testified, the State dropped the felony portion of Dickson’s 
  burglary charge (he had a  prior felony conviction) and he was 
  released based on time already served.  At no point did the trial 
  court issue a cautionary instruction concerning the credibility of 
  these informants. 

  Unfortunately, Smith’s attorney neglected to object to the 
  instructions given.  Later, at the evidentiary hearing, Robert 
  Watkins, a cellmate of Dixon’s at the time of Smith’s trial, 
  testified that Dixon had confessed that he had lied on the witness 
  stand and that Smith did not say that he killed Taylor. 
  Additionally, Smith’s attorney did not provide effective counsel when 
  he failed to object to instructions given to the jury regarding what 
  charges they could consider.  The jurors were not told that they 
  could consider second-degree felony murder and first-degree 
  manslaughter; rather, the only choice they were given was 
  first-degree 
  malice aforethought murder.  But, by far, the worst thing that 
  Smith’s 
  trial attorney did was during his closing argument.  The attorney 
  conceded that this crime was “cruel” (thereby satisfying an 
  aggravating circumstance and indicating that the death penalty was 
  warranted).  He proceeded to tell the jurors not to “kid yourselves, 
  ladies and gentlemen.  If you find that [Smith]…brutally murdered 
  [Taylor]…, the penalty you’re going to impose is going to be the 
  very severe one.” 

  The attorney also suggested that the murderer was an “animal” and 
  emphasized the gruesomeness of the crime scene.  This merely served 
  to further sensationalize the trial.  This “death penalty inclined” 
  jury (two potential jurors who expressed doubts about the death 
  penalty had been excused with the prosecutor’s peremptory challenges) 
  returned a guilty verdict on the first-degree murder charge and 
  ultimately sentenced Smith to death. 

  Without a doubt, Smith’s attorney could have done more to ensure that 
  Smith’s life would be spared.  During the penalty phase, the defense 
  failed to present mitigating evidence.  Counsel neglected to request 
  the assistance of a mental health expert, despite the fact that the 
  State alleged that Smith would be dangerous in the future.  The jury 
  also never heard that Smith suffers from organic brain damage, which 
  impairs his judgment and causes him to act impulsively.  Furthermore, 
  affidavits and deposition testimony of a number of people indicated 
  that they would have testified on Smith’s behalf.  Those witnesses 
  include a number of family members, the mothers of Smith’s two 
  children, friends, his childhood pastor, a coach and a former boss. 
  None of these people were heard, even though they could have offered 
  testimony concerning Smith’s close family, the effect of his mother’s 
  death on him, his love and care for his children and family, his 
  reliability and good attitude at work, his easygoing, likeable 
  personality, his school and athletic activities, his church 
  attendance, his politeness and respect for others, and his history of 
  nonviolence. 

  It is an utter disgrace that the State of Oklahoma is proceeding with 
  this execution.  The entire case against Smith was based on 
  circumstantial evidence.  A preponderance of this so-called evidence 
  should not even be considered because it was provided by informants 
  who were given incentives to testify.  Even part of the medical 
  examiner’s testimony cannot be corroborated because physical evidence 
  was lost.  The prosecutors went out of their way to inflame the jury 
  in order to ensure that they would get their conviction.  And, Smith 
  did not stand a chance due to the ineffective counsel he received. 
  Please, do what you can to stop Oklahoma (a state that has already 
  killed 8 people in 2001 – as of February 9th) from carrying out 
  this immeasurably unfair execution. 

  Dennis Dowthitt (TX) 
  March 7, 2001…7:00pm (EST) 

  (Executed)  

  Dennis Dowthitt is scheduled to be executed in Texas on March 7, 2001 
  for the June 13, 1990 murder of Gracie Purnhagen, the girlfriend of 
  his son, Delton.  Meanwhile, Delton was charged with the murder of 
  Purnhagen’s sister, Tiffany.  Delton pled guilty to the charge and 
  entered into a plea agreement with the State – he was sentenced 
  to 45 years and testified against his father at trial.  In addition, 
  the second murder charge for Gracie’s death was dropped, even though 
  there is reason to believe that Delton murdered her.  According to a 
  signed declaration by Dowthitt’s nephew, Billy Sherman Dowthitt, 
  Delton confessed to killing his girlfriend.  James Dowthitt also 
  signed an affidavit confirming his son Billy’s statements. 

  Another witness may have come forward if he had not been intimidated. 
   David Tipps, Delton’s jailmate, would have testified that Delton 
  confessed to killing both girls; however, after a visit from two 
  State investigators, Tipps refused to testify.  Joseph Ward, Dowhitt’s 
  state habeas investigator, stated in an affidavit that Tipps would 
  not 
  sign an affidavit out of fear for his life.  Tipps never testified, 
  yet during the guilt/innocence phase of the trial, the jury was 
  allowed to hear testimony from Darla Dowthitt.  The State failed to 
  disclose that Darla was under felony indictment for indecency with a 
  child when she testified for the prosecution. 

  During the penalty phase of the trial, Dowthitt’s attorney failed to 
  introduce Dowthitt’s psychological disorders and mental deficiency as 
  mitigating factors.  In his petition for federal habeas relief, 
  Dowthitt revealed records not discovered by trial counsel, which 
  indicate that he suffers from mental illness.  A 1964 readmission 
  form from Austin State Hospital shows that a young Dowthitt was 
  diagnosed as having a “schizophrenic reaction” of a “chronic paranoid 
  type”.  He was temporarily committed.  The admission history also 
  states that when Dowthitt was hospitalized due to an automobile 
  accident in August of 1962, tests showed brain damage.  Statements 
  made by Sergeant Walter Blakeslee on July 14, 1964 corroborate 
  Dowthitt’s limited mental capacity.  Blakeslee recommended Dowthitt’s 
  discharge from the Air Force, stating “It was evident…that Airman 
  Dowthitt was suffering from some mental deficiency.” 

  Recent examinations of Dowthitt by mental health experts Dr. Paula 
  Lundberg-Love and Dr. Faye E. Sultan provide evidence of Dowthitt’s 
  chronic psychological problems.  According to Lundberg-Love, 
  Dowthitt’s “profile was consistent with paranoid and schizophrenic 
  features” and he suffers from depression.  Sultan stated in her 
  affidavit that Dowthitt has “severe mental problems” and that the 
  trial mental health expert’s “examination was cursory.”  She also 
  wrote that Dowthitt “functions quite peacefully and successfully 
  within the prison environment”, which contradicts the predictions 
  made at trial about his potential for future dangerousness. 
  Dowthitt’s petition on the grounds that information regarding his 
  mental state was not introduced was denied – despite the fact 
  that the 
  jurors knew nothing of Dowthitt’s history of mental illness and 
  deficiency.  They may have spared his life if they were aware of 
  these 
  mitigating factors.  The defense did not introduce any psychological 
  experts during the trial, yet the jury heard the State’s expert 
  witness, Dr. Walter Quijano.  Another capital case has recently been 
  reversed due to Dr. Quijano’s improper testimony. 

  Dowthitt’s attorney also failed to present mitigating evidence via 
  family members during the punishment phase of the trial.  The 
  affidavits of Darlene Glover, Dowthitt’s sister, Stacey Dowthitt, 
  Dowthitt’s step-son, and Danna Taft, Dowthitt’s wife demonstrate that 
  they would have testified to Dowthitt’s abusive upbringing, his 
  mental difficulties, and his close, loving relationship with some of 
  his children.  The jurors did not hear pivotal testimony at various 
  points in the trial.  They were not made aware of Delton’s confession 
  to several individuals, nor did they hear any of the mitigating 
  factors, which could have spared Dowthitt’s life. 
 
  Texas 

  (Received a Stay) 
 
  Deryl Madison (TX) 
  March 12, 2001…7:00pm (EST) 

  Deryl Madison is scheduled to be executed in Texas on March 12, 2001 
  for the April 4, 1988 murder of Beulah Jolivet.  The jury only 
  deliberated for seven minutes.  The quick conviction and death 
  sentence were most likely the result of intense media coverage of 
  recent murders of the elderly.  At the time, Jolivet was one of 13 
  elderly Houstonians slain during a period of six months.  Her death 
  was not considered related and Madison was in no way implicated in 
  the other killings.  However, the public was undoubtedly fearful. 
  This fear drove the jury to seek revenge.  It is apparent that the 
  jury merely wanted someone – anyone – to pay for the murders 
  of 
  the city’s elderly citizens.  Although Madison confessed to the 
  crime, 
  the jury did not take the time to consider the mitigating 
  circumstance 
  in this case.  It is clear that Madison served as a scapegoat – 
  he 
  paid for the crimes committed against all the elderly citizens, even 
  though he had nothing to do with any other murders. 

  Despite testimony from clinical psychologists, who stated that 
  Madison would not constitute a continuing threat to society, he was 
  still sentenced to death.  The jury also did not take into account 
  the 
  remorse that Madison showed when talking to police about Jolivet’s 
  death.  Madison was Jolivet’s neighbor and had done odd jobs and yard 
  work for her from time to time.  According to Homicide Sergeant 
  Ronnie Doyle, Madison “got somewhat emotional” while talking about 
  Jolivet’s death.  “I think it was concern over her,” more than for 
  himself, Doyle said. 
 

  Michael Moore (TX) 

  (Received a Stay) 

  March 28, 2001…7:00pm (EST) 

  Michael Moore is scheduled to be executed in Texas on March 28, 2001 
  for the murder of Christa Bentley, which was committed on February 
  26, 1994.  This murder occurred in Coryell County, a small county in 
  Texas. There was so much pretrial publicity about the case that it is 
  likely that many potential jurors were prejudiced against Moore 
  before even walking into the courtroom.   Considering the tremendous 
  amount of publicity, it would be difficult for Moore to have a fair 
  and impartial trial in Coryell County.  However, repeated requests 
  for 
  a change of venue were denied. 

  Moore subsequently requested a jury-selection expert in an attempt to 
  offset the effects of the tainted jury pool. The trial court used (or 
  rather, abused) its discretion and denied not only the motion to 
  change venue, but also the request for a jury-selection expert.  If 
  Moore had been able to afford a jury-selection expert, his case may 
  have been seen in a different light, and it is likely that his life 
  would have been spared.  Unfortunately, the Court has not held that a 
  State must purchase for the indigent defender all the assistance that 
  his wealthier counterpart may buy.  Rather, indigent defenders are 
  only guaranteed access to the “raw materials” integral to building an 
  adequate defense.  It is an outrage that if only Mr. Moore was 
  wealthy, he would not be on death-row. 

  During the penalty phase of his trial, Moore presented mitigating 
  evidence of his tumultuous, abusive childhood.  His father, Michael 
  Francis Moore, was an alcoholic. Moore’s mother, Gloria Steele, was 
  just 18 years old when she became pregnant with him.  Although she 
  was pregnant, Moore’s father continued his pattern of severe 
  beatings. 
  He was also verbally callous, telling his wife that that “he was 
  getting dressed . . . going out . . . and `maybe I will get 
  lucky.'” 
  To further add fuel to the fire, Mr. Moore took Ms. Steele far away 
  from her home in Copperas Cove, Texas to upstate New York. Being 
  uprooted like this fueled bitterness in Ms. Steele toward the unborn 
  child. 

  It was into this atmosphere that Michael Patrick Moore was born on 
  September 16, 1963. He suffered early childhood diseases that caused 
  him to cry “48 hours a day” and constantly vomit.  His mother was 
  left to tend to him alone because his father was out out drinking and 
  womanizing. The pressure of raising a sick child alone grew too 
  intense for Ms. Steele, and she began to act out violently toward the 
  baby.  The abuse culminated in an attempt to end Moore’s two-month 
  old life by placing a pillow over his head. After this attempt on his 
  life and as he grew older, Moore grew quiet.  During the trial, his 
  mother testified that “He would just sit and stare at the TV; he 
  didn’t run and play… He just sits there, he just sits there and 
  stares.” 

  Home life only deteriorated.  To evade the constant beatings, and to 
  escape her problems, Moore’s mother began to “sleep all the time.” 
  During this time, which accounted for most of the day, she padlocked 
  Moore in his room. Since no one ever checked on him, he would soil 
  himself, which resulted in more brutal beatings. Finally, Steele took 
  Moore to live with his maternal grandmother.  But, he continued to be 
  the child that no one cared for.  He was ultimately rejected by his 
  grandmother, as well as an aunt.  Consequently, he was placed in 
  Conner’s Children’s Home. He once walked twenty miles to see his 
  mother, passing an area infested with drug dealers and prostitutes. 
  Upon his arrival at home, Moore was not greeted by his family; 
  rather, his mother called the Children’s Home and told them to come 
  get him. 

  Finally, at the age of 13, following years of separation, Moore 
  arrived back with his mother because the Children’s Home discharged 
  him.  According to his mother, “We didn’t have a relationship as 
  mother and son. He came home, and I didn’t know what to do with him.” 
   Since she did not know how to properly care for her child, she 
  resorted to her old habits – slapping, hitting, and constantly 
  fighting with Moore. In school Moore was unable to form any 
  meaningful relationships and was routinely beaten. He quit school at 
  the age of 16. 

  Moore moved in with his uncle, but this arrangement also failed. He 
  returned to his mother’s house, where he was subjected to more verbal 
  abuse. His mother ripped away any shreds of remaining confidence by 
  telling him, “You screwed up again, you can’t do anything right. This 
  was the one chance you had to…get ahead…and you screwed it 
  up, as usual.” Shortly thereafter, Moore attempted suicide. After 
  hospitalization, he entered the Navy. He ultimately earned an 
  honorable discharge after nine years of service. 

  Meanwhile, Ms. Steele had remarried. Her new husband was in poor 
  health, which forced the couple to move back to Copperas Cove, Texas, 
  where Moore also settled after his discharge. During that time, his 
  life seemed to stabilize – he was able to secure employment, as 
  well as a fiancée.  Two weeks before he was to be married, 
  however, he 
  found that his fiancée was seeing another man.  Moore’s mother 
  summed up life when she testified: “I feel that Michael is sick. He 
  is 
  definitely sick. It is because what I have done to him, and I don’t 
  believe that we should kill sick people . . . I think that we should 
  put him somewhere where he will get some help, and I just don’t think 
  he should die for what I did. It’s not his fault.” 
  In addition to the testimony concerning his upbringing, Moore 
  presented a number of witnesses who testified he was not violent or 
  aggressive, including a Texas Department of Criminal Justice Employee 
  and Dr. Windel Dickerson, a licensed psychologist and social worker 
  at the Children’s Home. He testified that Moore did well in a 
  structured environment and would not be a threat in prison. According 
  to Dickerson, Moore was afraid of other children and was not an 
  aggressive child. Another psychologist also testified that Moore was 
  the type of person who would do well in a prison environment. He 
  stated that Moore would not be a predator while in prison; rather, he 
  was more likely to be a victim, as he had been throughout his life. 
  Despite the evidence of Moore’s horrific childhood and expert 
  testimony that he would not be a danger in prison, the jury concluded 
  there were not sufficient mitigating circumstances to warrant a life 
  sentence.  Moore’s agonizing life will end when the State of Texas 
  executes him on March 28, 2001. 

  Thomas Akers (VA) 

  (Executed)  
 

  March 1, 2001…9:00pm (EST) 

  Thomas Akers is scheduled to be executed on March 1, 2001 for the 
  murder of Wesley B. Smith. 

  Although Akers refused to have contact with his counsel, attorneys 
  were prepared to present some 2000 pages of mitigation detailing 
  Akers’ “chaotic, insecure childhood.”