Letters From Hell----Robert Comer wrote to New Times from prison for
years, predicting recently that his soul would be in the real hell "soon
enough"

Robert "Gypsy" Comer, whose path to death by lethal injection was paved
with bad intentions, sent a series of letters to New Times before his
execution on the morning of Tuesday, May 22.

Robert "Gypsy" Comer was executed on Tuesday, May 22, for a 1987 murder,
rape, and kidnapping."I'm ready, and I've been ready," he wrote from his
cell in Florence on April 29, "though I know there are some people out
there who are going to fight me until they put the needle in my arm."

Comer was the 1st person executed in Arizona since November 2000.

Comer's missives remained consistent with what he had been telling
attorneys, judges, confidants and New Times for years that he wanted to
waive any remaining appeals and be put to death as soon as possible.

Becoming a death penalty "volunteer" was far more of a legal ordeal than
the 50-year-old killer originally envisioned. Along the way, Comer's
toughest fight was against his court-appointed habeas lawyers, whose job
it was to find legally compelling flaws in their client's trial and
sentencing.

Those attorneys tried desperately to convince various state and federal
courts ("Arizona's Worst Criminal," May 2, 2002) that Comer had been
rendered mentally incompetent to make decisions about his life by his long
incarceration at the Arizona Department of Corrections' SMU II unit, a
super-maximum-security facility, where isolation from other inmates and
other mind-twisting punishments are the norm.

But Comer had presented a credible case for his execution during a
memorable March 2002 federal hearing in downtown Phoenix, telling U.S.
District Court Judge Roslyn Silver that "[this] has to do with me paying
my debt to society. I ended a whole bunch of innocent people's lives, and
changed their lives forever. I was sentenced to death. That's the legal
sentence."

Silver concluded that Comer was competent, a key finding that moved the
long-standing case ahead.

After years of other legal twists and turns, the infamous inmate finally
landed on a gurney and poison coursed fatally through his veins, courtesy
of the state of Arizona.

It is unlikely that those who weren't in Arizona back in early February
1987 can grasp the level of antipathy and horror that Comer's name
conjured. It was then that the California native went on a reign of terror
near remote Apache Lake, about 65 miles north of downtown Phoenix.

Then 30, a methamphetamine-fueled Comer shot a disabled camper in the head
at close range, then cut his throat, and stole his possessions. He also
killed the man's beagle. Later that night, Comer and a female companion
(who would serve about six years in prison) came upon a young Chicago
couple who were camping.

Comer raped the young woman after binding her boyfriend to the fender of
his pickup truck. He left the boyfriend tied to the truck in the desert.
He then kidnapped the woman in her vehicle (taking along his companion and
her 2 young children). He continued to sexually assault the Chicago woman
over the next several hours.

That vehicle ran out of gas north of Roosevelt Lake, and the young woman
miraculously escaped into Tonto National Forest, practically naked. Bloody
and bruised, she sought refuge for almost 24 hours, until passers-by found
her along Arizona 188 near the little town of Punkin Center, about 40
miles north of Phoenix.

The next day, Maricopa County Sheriff's deputies, aided by tracking dogs,
arrested Comer and his companion at a campground in Gila County.

Television cameras recorded the end of the highly publicized manhunt, and
the heavily tattooed, feral-looking career criminal reminded many of the
infamous Charlie Manson, except that this guy did his own killing instead
of leaving it to others.

During his trial, which Comer chose not to attend, the prosecutor called
him the "reincarnation of the devil." An appellate court later
characterized the statement as excessive but not necessarily inaccurate.

Jail officials rousted Comer from his cell before his sentencing with
water from a pressurized fire hose (after he had tried to stick one of his
captors with a shank), shackled him, covered with only a blanket and his
underpants, to a wheelchair, and took him into court, where he told county
Judge Ron Reinstein, "Let's get it on."

The crimes for which Comer went to death row in April 1988 included
murder, kidnapping and rape.

Though long known to prison authorities as one of their most troublesome
and dangerous inmates (Comer's weapon-making abilities are the stuff of
legend among correctional officers), records show that his last infraction
came August 30, 2001.

In his letters to New Times, Comer attributed his marked positive change
in attitude to courteous corrections officers who treated him with respect
and to attorneys Holly Gieszl and Mike Kimerer, who worked on his behalf
to expedite the execution.

But he added a cautionary note in a 2002 letter, writing: "I am not
Hannibal Lecter, but I'm not that far away from being him, either, under
the right circumstances."

Comer adopted a more pensive tone in recent weeks, as the likelihood of
his execution became apparent.

"Executions are creepy," he wrote. "Imposed death violent or at the hands
of the state is wrong. Murder is murder, no matter the name you give it .
. . I don't believe in Jesus, have no urge to tell anyone to go to Hell
(I'll be there soon enough), and telling the families I've destroyed that
I'm sorry on my deathbed, no matter how sincere I am, would just be
written off as a load of crap.

"So, they will either forgive me of their own accord, or hate me.
Hopefully, if they hate me, they will channel that to helping other
victims cope. Wish I could help stop the violence. In the end, it's all so
very stupid."

In this final letter to New Times, received last week, Comer wrote a
postscript to his terrible life.

"Just between you and me, I'm tortured in my mind, in my heart for all the
wrong I've done," he wrote. "No matter what was done to me, I had no right
to destroy anyone's peace, anyone's life. How could I hurt, destroy like
that?"

(source: Phoenix New Times)

top

Murderer maintains defiant smile to end----Comer finally gets last wish in
execution by lethal injection

Robert Comer died with a steady gaze and a defiant smile on his face, the
1st person to be executed in Arizona since November 2000.

He was strapped to a gurney and covered up to his neck with a sheet.

There was no sight of the catheter into his groin that made the lethal
injection possible, no sight of the executioners on the other side of a
wall.

But Comer was smiling; he had petitioned the federal courts to stop his
appeals and hasten his own execution. He was in control of his destiny.

Comer brought a picture of his daughter with him to the death chamber and
used his last words to say, "Go, Raiders."

Then, the chemicals coursed through his veins - 1st Sodium Pentathol to
render him unconscious, then pancuronium bromide to stop his breathing and
paralyze him, then potassium chloride to stop his heart - and he held that
smile until he slipped away.

Arizona is gearing up to resume executions after a nearly seven-year
hiatus. Another Arizona death-row inmate recently lost his last appeal. A
third may be extradited from West Virginia.

But as Arizona lapsed in executions, lethal injection, its preferred
method, has come under scrutiny as possibly cruel and inhumane.

In fact, a last-minute motion for reprieve filed on Comer's behalf by a
Tucson capital-punishment watchdog group raised the risk of extreme
suffering as grounds for a stay of execution.

The Arizona Supreme Court refused to consider the motion.

Of the 37 states that use lethal injection as a means of execution, more
than a dozen have either granted stays or have completely halted
executions because of legal or ethical challenges.

The Arizona Department of Corrections does not reveal the exact
prescriptions and protocols of its lethal-injection procedures.

"Because of the lack of standards provided for in the statute, the
lethal-injection process subjects condemned prisoners to significant and
utterly unnecessary risks that they will be tortured to death," said
public defender Victoria Washington, who, to no avail, has filed motions
about the potential cruelty of lethal injection.

Comer, who was sentenced to death for fatally shooting a man in 1987,
appeared to die peacefully.

State moratoriums

But anti-lethal-injection lobbyists say the paralyzing drug may prevent
the condemned person from showing pain or discomfort. That drug and the
fatal drug that stops the heart are said to be extremely painful when
administered without adequate sedation.

"You don't know what he's feeling when pancuronium bromide is involved,"
said Lisa McCalmont, a former assistant federal public defender in
Oklahoma. McCalmont is considered an expert on lethal injection.

"It masks the viewer's ability to see what pain Mr. Comer is
experiencing," she said. "An execution can look peaceful and not be
peaceful for him."

Though it may be another strategy to stop the death penalty, disputes over
lethal injection have spread.

Last year, New Jersey became the first jurisdiction to enact a moratorium
on executions through legislation and appointed a study commission to
review its capital-punishment system.

In June, the District Court for the Western District of Missouri ordered
that all executions be put on hold until the Department of Corrections
adjusts the execution procedures.

Not enough doctors

Meanwhile in California, the state could not find enough doctors willing
to perform executions. Doctors there said executing inmates would violate
the Hippocratic oath.

The state has proposed a lethal-injection protocol that would involve
using the same three drugs but would not require the use of doctors in
carrying out executions.

The new protocol would increase training to prevent erroneously mixing the
drug cocktail. The state has also altered the dosage of the drugs.

A federal judge in California ruled in December that the state's current
method of lethal injection was at risk of violating the constitutional ban
on cruel and unusual punishment. The judge said California's
"implementation of lethal injection is broken, but it can be fixed."

The state is in the process of updating its lethal-injection protocol.

Florida Gov. Jeb Bush declared a moratorium in December after the botched
execution of an inmate. The drugs had to be administered a second time,
and it took the inmate 34 minutes to die.

Dale Baich, a federal public defender in Phoenix, said, "We have reviewed
the state's 2004 execution manual (the last one available) and requested
the updates. After further consultation with our experts, we will soon
decide whether to challenge the Arizona lethal-injection protocol."

Comer's execution lasted nine minutes from start to finish.

Arguing the sides

As he was dying, 17 protesters gathered about two miles from the Florence
prison to object to Comer's execution. The protest was kept on prison land
and could not be seen by passers-by.

"Taking a person's life does not bring a person back," protester Dan
Wolford said.

"His taking a life doesn't justify taking his. He doesn't forfeit his
right to live because he took someone else's life."

Regardless of the outcome of the debate about whether lethal injection is
cruel and unusual punishment, Wolford said, he is vehemently against the
death penalty and believes there are other alternatives to protect
society.

"If you take an eye for an eye, it just makes both people blind," Wolford
said.

About a mile down the road, George Williams of Mesa was the sole supporter
of the death penalty. Williams held a sign bearing the names of Comer's
victims.

Williams said execution is the only way to guarantee that a killer won't
escape.

"This man can never do it again," he said. "He can never kill again."

(source: Arizona Republic)

Top

Reporter details killer's execution

Executions are public rituals.

You, the public witness, empty your pockets and get patted down and driven
through a locked-down prison complex. There are armed uniformed guards
behind roadblocks on the side streets. The van passes through a sally port
in gray walls to a building euphemistically called Housing Unit 9.

It also is known as the Death House; a darkened room with a set of three
risers small enough to be crowded by only 20 people. At the back of the
room, hidden behind venetian blinds, is the gas chamber, which hasn't been
used since 1992. But you're looking straight ahead at the thick, blue
theater curtain. A Department of Corrections sergeant slowly pulls it
open.

It's 10 a.m. Beyond a glass window, in a bright tiled room, lies Robert
Comer, kidnapper and rapist, murderer of 2 men, 1 in Arizona and the other
in California. That accounts for 2 of the 5 tear drops tattooed on his
cheek beneath his left eye. What the others signify is anyone's guess.

He is flat on a table, covered up to his neck in a white sheet. One
shoulder of his orange prison uniform peeks out from under.

But his head is turned as far as the restraints allow, and his dark eyes
search the faces in the room. He nods at you, then nods again so that you
acknowledge his greeting and nod back. Then he smiles. Slowly.
Unexplainably. He holds your gaze, and, then again, maybe he's not even
looking at you, but still, your knees tremble, and you look away.

The warden reads the charge for which he was sentenced to death, the
murder of Larry Pritchard in 1987 at an Arizona campground, and he asks if
Comer has any last words.

"Yes," he says, eagerly. "Go, Raiders."

Still, he smiles, perhaps at the control he has over the room. Who is the
captive here? His lips move quickly, silently mouthing words that only he
can hear.

"Phase 1 has begun," a voice says to announce that the 1st of 3 drugs is
being injected into Comer's body through a catheter in his groin. Comer
holds the smile for a minute, maybe 2, then gives in slowly, his head
easing back down to the table, his eyes closing so that only a sliver of
light still shines through.

"Phase 2." A 2nd chemical intended to stop his breathing and paralyze his
body courses through his veins. But there's no shudder, no gasp, no
perceptible movement. His eyes are still cracked open, his mouth, too, but
the grin is drooping away.

"Phase 3," a chemical to stop his heart, we are to believe. But again,
there's no movement. His face takes on an ashen color, and the smile fades
completely away.

A last announcement: "Death has occurred, and this concludes the execution
of Robert Comer."

It's 10:09 a.m.

The sergeant pulls the curtain shut.

(source: Arizona Republic)

top

Killer gets death wish

Robert Comer never flinched Tuesday morning as he was injected with a
lethal cocktail of drugs that put him to death.

Comer took a picture of his daughter into the death chamber with him and
seemed defiant as he smiled and maintained eye contact with his witnesses
as drugs coursed through his body.

His last words were "Go Raiders!" and with that, his smile slowly faded
until he passed out. His chest stopped moving after the 3rd drug was given
to him.

By 10:08 a.m. he was dead.

Just hours before his execution, Comer told prison workers "I am ready."

Comer's execution was not without controversy. Protesters moved on to
prison grounds earlier in the morning to voice their objections over the
planned execution. However, the Arizona Department of Corrections
officials made sure they could not be seen from the main road.

A group of 17 people from Pax Christi USA drove from Phoenix, formed a
circle and prayed the Hail Mary.

"You don't teach not killing by killing," Ruth Zemek said.

Wearing a hat that said "let us not become the evil we despise, abolish
the death penalty," Margaret Snider said: "I don't think it accomplishes
anything. The crime has been committed. It doesn't make anything well."

However, at least one man from East Valley drove to Florence to support
Comer's execution.

"This man can never do it again after 10. He can never kill again. They
will be safe from this man," said George Williams, the lone pro-death
penalty protester. He held a sign saying "Coomer will never murder or kill
again"

Williams said he supports the execution because "prisoners escape,
murderers get released, people kill prison guards. But not this one."

Gabrielle Smith, manager of a drug store on Main Street, said she was
opening the store at 10 a.m., the same time the execution was to start.

"You get used to it," the lifelong Florence resident said. "Prisoners
escape. Schools get locked down. It's just part of Florence."

Death penalty opponents exhausted their efforts to halt Comer's death,
with the U.S. Supreme Court refusing to order a stay of execution.

Comer was the 1st inmate to be put to death in Arizona since 2000.

Nearly 20 years ago Comer was sentenced to death for the brutal killing of
a Florida man at a campsite at Apache Lake. He is also serving 339 years
for rape and kidnapping.

His execution came after he waived his rights to further appeal.

"This is his day. This is what he's been waiting for since 2000," said
Arizona Department of Corrections spokesman Bill Lamoreaux.

Comer was given his last meal atht dinner hour Monday evening.

About 20 people witnessed Comer's execution. Among the witnesses, Arizona
Attorney General Terry Goddard, State Sen. Ron Gould, R-Havasu City, and
officials from Phoenix police, Maricopa County Sheriff's and Pinal County
Sheriff's departments.

Comer was given the opportunity to invite witnesses to watch his death.
Those witnesses include his attorneys, Michael Kimerer, Holly Gieszl and
Amy Byrd, a pen pal he met in prison.

'I made the decision'

This day is a welcome one for Comer, who has fought to be executed since
2000. Comer spent much of that time just proving he is competent to make
that decision, saying he owes it to his victims, society and himself.

Comer was convicted in a 1987 crime spree in which he killed a fellow
camper at Apache Lake east of Phoenix. He also was convicted of repeatedly
raping a female camper the same night, once in front of her boyfriend.

"This is my life. I made the decision to pull my appeals," Comer said,
according to transcripts from a 2002 competency hearing. "Remember I stuck
a gun in the guy's ear and pulled the trigger, scrambled his brains,
right? You sentenced me to die. You have that right in this state. I don't
see where the big problem is."

It's hard to believe that the Comer requesting to be put to death is the
same man who had to be subdued with a hose, beaten and dragged to his
sentencing in 1988.

When he was brought into the courtroom strapped to a wheelchair, he was
bloodied, barely conscious and naked except for a towel on his lap. His
extensive tattoos, including a swastika, were exposed and his shaggy hair
and beard were wild. Comer looked every bit the "monster" and
"reincarnation of the devil" the prosecutor said he was.

After being sentenced to death, Comer spent the next 13 years making
knives and shanks, fighting with prisoners and guards and setting fires in
his own cell. He was cited 43 times between 1988 and 2001 for such
infractions.

But since 2001, he hasn't been disciplined once. Guards, psychologists,
lawyers and Comer himself say he has matured, mellowed and become more
thoughtful during his prison time, particularly after his best friend in
prison, Robert Vickers, was executed in 1999.

Comer's lawyer, Kimerer, described Comer as extremely insightful and wise
about life. Kimerer said he and Comer have become close over the years and
that he will be "extremely sad" to see him go.

K.C. Scull, who prosecuted Comer nearly 20 years ago, said it doesn't
matter if Comer has changed.

"He's very cunning, he's very intelligent," Scull said. "I also know he
was a very nasty guy, but that doesn't change anything ... Rehabilitation
was never a factor in this case. You do things that are so bad, we don't
care of you're rehabilitated."

Scull said Comer's case has haunted him, police officers and the surviving
victims in the case.

"Everybody's entitled to closure here," especially the woman Comer raped
repeatedly back in 1987, Scull said.

"She has to get up every day and think, That S.O.B. is still breathing
somewhere and I wonder if he'd come and kill me if he had the chance,' "
Scull said.

Comer was the first inmate to be put to death in the state since Donald
Miller was executed on Nov. 8, 2000, for helping murder an 18-year-old
woman.

On the Net: Arizona Department of Corrections:
http://www.azcorrections.gov/

Comer becomes the 1st condemned inmate to be put to death this year in
Arizona and the 23rd overall since the state resumed capital punishment in
1992.

Comer becomes the 20th condemned inmate to be put to death this year in
the USA and the 1077th overall since the nation resumed executions on
January 17, 1977.

(source: Arizona Republic)

Top

Killer to be executed this morning

After 7 years of fighting to die, death row inmate Robert Charles Comer is
about to get his wish this morning.

Comer is scheduled to be executed at 10 a.m. in Florence, becoming the
first inmate to be put to death in Arizona since 2000 and the 15th to die
by injection. This day is a welcome one for Comer, who has fought to be
executed since 2000. Comer spent much of that time just proving he is
competent to make that decision, saying he owes it to his victims, society
and himself.

Comer was convicted in a 1987 crime spree in which he killed a fellow
camper at Apache Lake east of Phoenix. He also was convicted of repeatedly
raping a female camper the same night, once in front of her boyfriend.

"This is my life. I made the decision to pull my appeals," Comer said,
according to transcripts from a 2002 competency hearing. "Remember I stuck
a gun in the guy's ear and pulled the trigger, scrambled his brains,
right? You sentenced me to die. You have that right in this state. I don't
see where the big problem is."

It's hard to believe that the Comer requesting to be put to death is the
same man who had to be subdued with a hose, beaten and dragged to his
sentencing in 1988.

When he was brought into the courtroom strapped to a wheelchair, he was
bloodied, barely conscious and naked except for a towel on his lap. His
extensive tattoos, including a swastika, were exposed and his shaggy hair
and beard were wild. Comer looked every bit the "monster" and
"reincarnation of the devil" the prosecutor said he was.

After being sentenced to death, Comer spent the next 13 years making
knives and shanks, fighting with prisoners and guards and setting fires in
his own cell. He was cited 43 times between 1988 and 2001 for such
infractions.

But since 2001, he hasn't been disciplined once. Guards, psychologists,
lawyers and Comer himself say he has matured, mellowed and become more
thoughtful during his prison time, particularly after his best friend in
prison, Robert Vickers, was executed in 1999.

Comer's lawyer, Michael Kimerer, described Comer as extremely insightful
and wise about life. Kimerer said he and Comer have become close over the
years and that he will be "extremely sad" to see him go.

K.C. Scull, who prosecuted Comer nearly 20 years ago, said it doesn't
matter if Comer has changed.

"He's very cunning, he's very intelligent," Scull said. "I also know he
was a very nasty guy, but that doesn't change anything ... Rehabilitation
was never a factor in this case. You do things that are so bad, we don't
care of you're rehabilitated."

Scull said Comer's case has haunted him, police officers and the surviving
victims in the case.

"Everybody's entitled to closure here," especially the woman Comer raped
repeatedly back in 1987, Scull said.

"She has to get up every day and think, That S.O.B. is still breathing
somewhere and I wonder if he'd come and kill me if he had the chance,' "
Scull said.

Comer will be the first inmate to be put to death in the state since
Donald Miller was executed on Nov. 8, 2000, for helping murder an
18-year-old woman.

Arizona Department of Corrections officials said Comer's last meal request
is one of the most bizarre they've ever seen.

Arizona history

Arizona judges and juries have never been shy about imposing the death
sentence.

There are 112 men and women on Arizona's death row, some of whom have
lingered there for more than 20 years as their cases struggle through
state and federal courts.

Although Arizona was among one of the most active states to carry out
executions in the late 1990s, no one has been put to death here since
November 2000.

When Comer is laid on a gurney today, he will be the 1st person executed
in nearly seven years - and only because he went to court to earn the
right to die.

Why have there been so few executions this decade and what takes so long?

A pair of U.S. Supreme Court cases shut down executions in Arizona for at
least 4 years. And backlogs in the state and federal courts have slowed
case movement to a trickle.

Comer, 50, has waited nearly 20 years to die. In 1987, he killed a man at
a campground near Apache Lake, then raped a woman in front of her
boyfriend. He was sentenced to death in 1988. When he petitioned the
courts to let him waive his appeals in 2000, it set off hearings to
determine whether he was sane.

"It's human nature to want to live," said Robert Storrs, veteran capital
defense lawyer. "People can make a rational choice to die. But anytime
someone does, you have to make sure it's not because of mental illness."

In the late 1990s, Arizona was in the forefront of states that executed
murderers. 4 prisoners were put to death in 1998, 7 in 1999 and 3 in 2000.

But during that time, the U.S. Supreme Court was reinventing the way that
sentences were imposed with a pair of rulings saying that juries and not
judges should determine if a defendant deserved a harsher, or
"aggravated," sentence. Prosecutors and defense attorneys across the
country waited for the right case to test how that theory would be applied
to capital cases.

It came from Arizona.

In January 2002, the high court agreed to hear the case of Timothy Ring,
who had been sentenced to death for killing an armored-car driver in
Phoenix in 1994. That June, the justices issued their ruling in the case,
which said that juries, not judges, should decide whether there were
aggravating factors to warrant the death penalty.

Arizona went one step further in rewriting its death penalty statute so
that juries not only determined aggravating factors but also the sentence.

The Ring decision affected 5 states that did not have jury determination
in death penalty trials: Arizona, Nebraska, Colorado, Montana and Idaho.

Those states, unlike Arizona, have very few people on their death rows.
But executions did not start up immediately, because no one knew whether
the ruling was retroactive. Then, in 2004, the Supreme Court ruled in
another Arizona case that courts only needed to re-examine those cases
that had not yet gone through the first stage of appeals.

In Arizona, that meant 30 convicted killers were removed from death row as
their cases were reviewed by the state Supreme Court. Most cases were
returned to the lower courts to have juries decide on the death penalty.
Many, including Ring's case, are still awaiting new trials.

Lengthy delays

Many Arizona defendants have been on death row for more than 20 years.

One cause of the logjam is there are not enough qualified attorneys to
take cases to the 2nd stage of appeal. Nine Arizona cases are on hold at
that stage as they await attorneys.

"We just could not find enough attorneys to take these cases in a timely
fashion," said Arizona Supreme Court Justice Michael Ryan, who heads a
state task force on the death penalty.

"There really isn't a good explanation, in my opinion, for a lengthy delay
for a case just to be considered on appeal," said Kent Cattani, who heads
the capital litigation section of the Arizona Attorney General's Office
and who has lobbied the federal courts to speed up.

Ryan points to the heavy caseload of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
and to the efficiency of the local federal Public Defender's Office
representing the cases in federal court: 54 in the district court and 21
in the 9th Circuit.

Dale Baich, who heads the staff in that office, said, "The cases are
moving. Most of those cases have been sent back either for an evidentiary
hearing or a new sentencing."

But there are other factors that affect cases. Since the Ring decision,
for example, there have been U.S. Supreme Court decisions stopping
executions of juveniles and the mentally retarded. Such rulings open new
doors to appeal old cases.

"At some point, a balance between defendants' rights and public safety and
justice has to come back to a more reasonable level. And right now the
death penalty is effectively being nullified through trial delays and
endless appeals," said Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas.

Scrutiny necessary

Some say that time is a necessary price to pay for justice. The ultimate
penalty demands that the ultimate scrutiny be paid. Since 1989, 200 men
nationwide, including two in Arizona, have been exonerated based on DNA
evidence, a development that spurred reform efforts as officials began to
realize that there could be other frailties in the criminal justice
system. Of those men, 14 had served time on death row.

Eleanor Eisenberg, president of the Death Penalty Forum, an anti-death
penalty lobby, recalled the case of Ray Krone, who spent 10 years in
prison and nearly three years on Arizona's death row before DNA evidence
proved that he didn't commit the murder for which he was accused.

"We don't think we should ever get to execution," Eisenberg said "But if
we are going to continue to execute people in this country, then we have
to make absolutely sure not that the person is guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt as proved at trial, but that it is truly the correct person who
committed the crime."

(source: Arizona Republic)

Top

Execution 1st in Ariz. in years-----112 inmates linger on state's death
row as cases wade through court system

Arizona judges and juries have never been shy about imposing the death
sentence.

There are 112 men and women on Arizona's death row, some of whom have
lingered there for more than 20 years as their cases struggle through
state and federal courts.

Although Arizona was among one of the most active states to carry out
executions in the late 1990s, no one has been put to death here since
November 2000.

When Robert Comer is laid on a gurney in Florence today, he will be the
1st person executed in nearly 7 years - and only because he went to court
to earn the right to die.

Why have there been so few executions this decade and what takes so long?

A pair of U.S. Supreme Court cases shut down executions in Arizona for at
least 4 years. And backlogs in the state and federal courts have slowed
case movement to a trickle.

Comer, 50, has waited nearly 20 years to die. In 1987, he killed a man at
a campground near Apache Lake, then raped a woman in front of her
boyfriend. He was sentenced to death in 1988. When he petitioned the
courts to let him waive his appeals in 2000, it set off hearings to
determine whether he was sane.

"It's human nature to want to live," said Robert Storrs, veteran capital
defense lawyer. "People can make a rational choice to die. But anytime
someone does, you have to make sure it's not because of mental illness."

In the late 1990s, Arizona was in the forefront of states that executed
murderers. 4 prisoners were put to death in 1998, 7 in 1999 and 3 in 2000.

But during that time, the U.S. Supreme Court was reinventing the way that
sentences were imposed with a pair of rulings saying that juries and not
judges should determine if a defendant deserved a harsher, or
"aggravated," sentence. Prosecutors and defense attorneys across the
country waited for the right case to test how that theory would be applied
to capital cases.

It came from Arizona.

In January 2002, the high court agreed to hear the case of Timothy Ring,
who had been sentenced to death for killing an armored-car driver in
Phoenix in 1994. That June, the justices issued their ruling in the case,
which said that juries, not judges, should decide whether there were
aggravating factors to warrant the death penalty.

Arizona went one step further in rewriting its death penalty statute so
that juries not only determined aggravating factors but also the sentence.

The Ring decision affected 5 states that did not have jury determination
in death penalty trials: Arizona, Nebraska, Colorado, Montana and Idaho.

Those states, unlike Arizona, have very few people on their death rows.
But executions did not start up immediately, because no one knew whether
the ruling was retroactive. Then, in 2004, the Supreme Court ruled in
another Arizona case that courts only needed to re-examine those cases
that had not yet gone through the 1st stage of appeals.

In Arizona, that meant 30 convicted killers were removed from death row as
their cases were reviewed by the state Supreme Court. Most cases were
returned to the lower courts to have juries decide on the death penalty.
Many, including Ring's case, are still awaiting new trials.

Lengthy delays

Many Arizona defendants have been on death row for more than 20 years.

One cause of the logjam is there are not enough qualified attorneys to
take cases to the 2nd stage of appeal. Nine Arizona cases are on hold at
that stage as they await attorneys.

"We just could not find enough attorneys to take these cases in a timely
fashion," said Arizona Supreme Court Justice Michael Ryan, who heads a
state task force on the death penalty.

"There really isn't a good explanation, in my opinion, for a lengthy delay
for a case just to be considered on appeal," said Kent Cattani, who heads
the capital litigation section of the Arizona Attorney General's Office
and who has lobbied the federal courts to speed up.

Ryan points to the heavy caseload of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
and to the efficiency of the local federal Public Defender's Office
representing the cases in federal court: 54 in the district court and 21
in the 9th Circuit.

Dale Baich, who heads the staff in that office, said, "The cases are
moving. Most of those cases have been sent back either for an evidentiary
hearing or a new sentencing."

But there are other factors that affect cases. Since the Ring decision,
for example, there have been U.S. Supreme Court decisions stopping
executions of juveniles and the mentally retarded. Such rulings open new
doors to appeal old cases.

"At some point, a balance between defendants' rights and public safety and
justice has to come back to a more reasonable level. And right now the
death penalty is effectively being nullified through trial delays and
endless appeals," said Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas.

Scrutiny necessary

Some say that time is a necessary price to pay for justice. The ultimate
penalty demands that the ultimate scrutiny be paid. Since 1989, 200 men
nationwide, including two in Arizona, have been exonerated based on DNA
evidence, a development that spurred reform efforts as officials began to
realize that there could be other frailties in the criminal justice
system. Of those men, 14 had served time on death row.

Eleanor Eisenberg, president of the Death Penalty Forum, an anti-death
penalty lobby, recalled the case of Ray Krone, who spent 10 years in
prison and nearly 3 years on Arizona's death row before DNA evidence
proved that he didn't commit the murder for which he was accused.

"We don't think we should ever get to execution," Eisenberg said "But if
we are going to continue to execute people in this country, then we have
to make absolutely sure not that the person is guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt as proved at trial, but that it is truly the correct person who
committed the crime."

(source: Arizona Republic)

top

Remembering victims key to death penalty; Executing justice: Arizona's moral dilemma

Opponents of the death penalty rarely want to talk about the crimes of those sentenced to death. One commentator has observed that this is "a bit like playing Hamlet without the ghost, reviewing the merits of capital punishment without revealing just what a capital crime is really like and how the victims have been brutalized."

In the week ahead, the public will be riveted with news of Robert Comer: his life, his struggles and his legal battles borne by others to the very end. But what of his victims?

Let us hope, in the end, the law will speak for them. And let us hope that those who excuse or minimize his crimes will listen, if only for even a brief moment or so, to what Judge Alex Kozinsky has rightly called "the tortured voices of the victims crying out for justice." It is in those voices that we understand the morality of the death penalty, even when they are raised in opposition, as they sometimes, albeit rarely, are.

There are 112 murderers on Arizona's death row. Robert Comer is one of them, having been sentenced to death almost 20 years ago, April 11, 1988.

The Department of Corrections reports, "(O)n Feb. 23, 1987, Comer and his girlfriend . . . were at a campground near Apache Lake. They invited Larry Pritchard, who was at the campsite next to theirs, to have dinner and drinks with them. Around 9 p.m., Comer shot Pritchard in the head, killing him. He . . . then stole Pritchard's belongings. Around 11 p.m., Comer and (Juneva) Willis went to a campsite occupied by Richard Brough and Tracy Andrews. Comer stole their property, hogtied Brough to a car fender and then raped Andrews in front of Brough. Comer and Willis then left the area, taking Andrews with them but leaving Brough behind. Andrews escaped the next morning and ran for 23 hours before finding help."

Donald Beaty is another.

"On the evening of May 9, 1984, Christy Ann Fornoff, a 13-year-old news carrier, was collecting from her customers at the Rockpoint Apartments in Tempe. Beaty, who was the apartment custodian, abducted Christy and sexually assaulted and suffocated her in his apartment. Beaty kept the body in his apartment until the morning of May 11, 1984, when he placed it behind the apartment complex's trash dumpster."

Richard Bible is another.

"On June 6, 1988, around 10:30 a.m., 9-year-old Jennifer Wilson was riding her bike on a Forest Service road in Flagstaff. Bible drove by in a truck, forced her off her bike and abducted her. He took Jennifer to a hill near his home where he sexually assaulted her. He then killed her hitting her in the face and head with a blunt instrument. Bible concealed the body and left the area. He was arrested later that day. Jennifer's body was not found until June 25, 1988."

Shawn Grell is yet another.

"On Dec. 2, 1999, Grell took his 2-year-old daughter, Kristen, to a remote area in Apache Junction, doused her with gasoline and set her on fire. After Kristen was engulfed in flames, she managed to walk around and stomp her feet for up to 60 seconds before collapsing in the dirt. Kristen (died suffering) third- and fourth-degree burns over 98 percent of her body."

And there are so many more. Repeating them is hard. Thinking about the victims and their loved ones, left to grieve, is heartbreaking. But think about them we must if we are to truly understand the context of the death penalty debate.

Those who agitate to abolish the death penalty for these killers say the killers don't deserve to die because no crime justifies death.

These arguments continue to find disfavor with large portions of the public. Gallup consistently reports support for the death penalty by wide margins (67 percent in favor, 28 percent opposed: 2006) when the question is asked in a straightforward manner. When the question is asked whether death or life imprisonment is the "better" penalty, 48 percent choose life and 47 percent death. Yet, when the facts of a case are cited, support for the death penalty grows dramatically. Even among those who said they opposed the death penalty, more than half of those supported the execution of Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh.

Another issue the abolitionists like to avoid is deterrence, which is of two kinds, specific and general. Specific deterrence is the measure of the penalty's effectiveness in deterring the sentenced murderer from ever killing again.

General deterrence is the effect of the penalty on deterring others from committing murder. Most recently, Professor Paul Rubin of Emory University and his colleagues have reported the results of the most extensive econometric study of death penalty deterrence and concluded that every execution saves on average 18 lives because of the murders that are deterred. Rubin's results have been replicated by others.

This is such an "inconvenient truth" for the abolitionists that they prefer to ignore it. Professing to revere life so dearly as to oppose even the taking of depraved life, they nonetheless seem to care little that their advocacy would result, if successful, in the slaughter of more innocents.

This week, when the news is filled with Robert Comer, let us pause to remember Larry Pritchard, Richard Brough and Tracy Andrews. And let us remember also Christy Anne Fornoff, Jennifer Wilson and, dear God, let us remember little Kristen Grell and all the other victims.

In those memories, let us offer prayers for their families and a steady, steel-eyed resolve that we will value their innocent lives so dearly that we are willing to exact the ultimate punishment for their murders, in order that we might preserve justice and protect others from becoming victims. In the wake of these decades-long delays to justice, let us finally resolve to demand of our courts that they become more respectful of the victims' constitutional rights to a "prompt and final conclusion of the case."

Steve Twist, former chief assistant attorney general for Arizona, is founder of Arizona Voice for Crime Victims. He is a Phoenix lawyer.

top

High court denies stay of execution for convicted murderer

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay the execution for
convicted murderer Robert Charles Comer, who is scheduled to die by
injection on Tuesday.

Comer was convicted in a 1987 crime spree in which he killed a fellow
camper at Apache Lake east of Phoenix. He was also convicted of repeatedly
raping a female camper the same night, once in front of her boyfriend.

Attorney Denise Young filed a petition last week to the Supreme Court to
stay Comer's execution.

Kent Cattani, chief counsel in the capital litigation section of the
Attorney General's Office, filed a response to the high court on Friday,
arguing that Young did not have the standing to ask for a stay of
execution.

"Comer has been found competent and has voluntarily waived all further
legal proceedings," he wrote to the court.

Cattani also pointed out that Comer's current attorney, Michael Kimerer,
is his counsel of record, not Young.

Young represented Comer when he was still fighting his death sentence.
Kimerer has been helping Comer in his more recent fight to be executed.

In 2000, Comer began requesting to be put to death, saying he owes it to
his victims, himself and society. Much of his fight was spent just proving
he was competent to make that decision.

"An eye for an eye," Comer once said in court. "I mean, I ended a whole
bunch of innocent people's lives and changed their lives forever. Even
though they're still alive, their lives are destroyed. I owe that to them.
I owe it to myself, man. I was totally wrong."

Nothing else was pending in court Monday afternoon that could delay
Comer's execution.

If Comer's execution is carried out Tuesday, he will be the 1st inmate to
be put to death in the state since Donald Miller was executed on Nov. 8,
2000, for helping murder an 18-year-old woman.

On the Net: U.S. Supreme Court: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/

Arizona Department of Corrections: http://www.azcorrections.gov/

(source: Associated Press)

top

Executions are immoral, no deterrent----Executing justice: Arizona's moral
dilemma

More than 1,000 people have been executed in the United States since 1976
when the death penalty was reinstated as a constitutionally sound
punishment. Since 1973, 123 death row inmates in 25 states have been
exonerated.

Reasons to support the death penalty have eroded while grave concerns
regarding inequity and injustice in its application have arisen. It is
time for Arizonans to take stock of the actions undertaken in our name.

For many years, the death penalty was viewed as a deterrent to murder.
That justification no longer carries any credibility, as most police
chiefs and expert criminologists do not believe the death penalty reduces
the number of homicides. In fact, studies reveal lower murder rates in
states without the death penalty. For instance, New York, where the death
penalty has been unconstitutional since 2004, the murder rate is 4.5 per
100,000 as opposed to Arizona's 7.5.

For every 8 people executed, the death conviction of one person is
overturned. Ray Krone was released from death row in Arizona after serving
almost 20 years. He was the 100th person to be exonerated in the United
States. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, Krone is one of
6 innocents to be set free from Arizona's death row. Krone's exoneration
resulted from DNA evidence, yet DNA evidence is available in only about 10
percent of all capital cases. We cannot be sure that other innocents are
so lucky.

The question of killing innocents has led some states to eliminate the
death penalty. But here in Arizona, with counties such as Pima County,
where 70 % of local death sentences have been overturned due to error, we
somehow remain indifferent.

Making things even worse, arbitrariness, racism, mental illness and
poverty are factors in who is charged and convicted of capital crimes and
sentenced to death. In the United States, though only half of murder
victims are White, 80 % of capital cases involve White victims. In
Arizona, a minority defendant is nine times as likely to receive the death
penalty if the victim is White. This extreme bias (mirrored nationally)
has led state governments to call for moratoriums on executions.

Arizona, however, continues to increase the number of homicides it
classifies as death penalty eligible. We now hold the dubious title of
"death penalty capital," overtaking Harris County, Texas, thanks to
Maricopa County Andrew Thomas, whose heavy hand has overwhelmed the courts
and has exposed the absence of qualified death penalty defense attorneys.

Popular opinion in Arizona does not support the death penalty. A recent
poll conducted for the Arizona Death Penalty Forum indicated that only a
narrow majority supports capital punishment, and even this support slips
to a minority when the option for life without possibility of parole is
presented.

Arizona kills by use of lethal injection. A recent medical review of
dozens of executions concluded that execution drugs sometimes do not work
as planned, that deaths can be slow, painful or involve suffocation while
awake, and that the method probably violates bans on cruel and unusual
punishment. Although 37 states in the United States have adopted lethal
injection, 11 have suspended its use on evidence of such problems.

As Teresa Zimmers, a biologist who led the study, said, "You wouldn't be
able to use this protocol to kill a pig at the University of Miami without
more proof that it worked as intended."

In a failure of leadership, though medical ethics embodied in the
Hippocratic oath clearly prohibit doctors and other health professionals
from taking part in executions, the Arizona chapter of the American
Medical Association has taken the morally dubious and professionally
questionable position of permitting doctors to decide independently on
participating in executions.

In 2 days, Arizona plans to kill Robert Comer. He is a "volunteer" for his
own death. Comer didn't attend his own trial. He was forcibly brought to
his sentencing slumped over in a wheelchair, nude except for a towel
around his waist. The judge asked whether he was conscious and then
sentenced him to death. One must wonder whether he has made an informed
decision, making the state complicit in his own suicide - an act Arizona
legally prohibits.

It is time to halt executions permanently. A majority of Arizonans now do
not support capital punishment if the option of life without parole is
given. There is no credible argument that the death penalty is a
deterrent, and while many Americans share a false conception that victims'
desire for revenge is natural and inevitable, many victims openly claim an
execution not only fails to bring "closure," it traumatizes them again.

The death penalty perpetuates and sanctifies a culture of violence. In a
nation ongoingly wounded by violence of all types, it is time we stop
celebrating violence by ceasing state-sanctioned murder. The death penalty
is not only morally wrong, it is applied in a racist fashion; it is more
expensive than life in prison and it is too often mistakenly applied - a
mistake that is impossible to correct.

(source: Michael J. Coyle, Ph.D., teaches on crime and justice in the
School of Justice and Social Inquiry at Arizona State
University-----Eleanor Eisenberg is president of the Arizona Death Penalty
Forum and former executive director of the ACLU of Arizona-----Viewpoints,
The Arizona Republic)

Top

Comer execution set for 10 a.m.

Arizona's 1st execution in 7 years is scheduled to take place Tuesday at
10 a.m. ---- Robert Charles Comer

Comer shot Larry Pritchard to death at a campground near Apache Lake on
Feb. 23, 1987. He and his girlfriend then went to another campsite, where
Comer tied up a woman and raped her before abducting a male camper, who
later escaped.

Comer has been seeking to end the appeals process since 2000, according to
the Department of Corrections. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
granted his request to withdraw his federal appeals early this year.

He chose to be executed by lethal injection.

There are 112 inmates on death row in the Arizona State Prison
Complex-Florence.

(source: Associated Press)

Top

Robert Comer Execution is State-Sanctioned Suicide, Says Amnesty
International

(New York) -- Larry Cox, executive director of Amnesty International USA,
released the following statement today regarding the scheduled execution
of Robert Comer in Arizona on Tuesday, May 22:

"Robert Comer has given up his appeals and has 'volunteered' to be
executed by the state. But a decision by someone under an imminent threat
of death can never be truly 'voluntary' -- and this execution date should
never have been set. No matter which way the state would like to spin it,
there is no disguising the fact that this is state-sanctioned suicide."

"It has been well documented that Comer has suffered from a major
depressive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder and SHU (Segregated
Housing Unit) syndrome. It is unconscionable that an individual suffering
from such severe mental illness is deemed 'competent' to give up his
appeals. It's ironic that a state does all it can to prevent inmates from
committing suicide while simultaneously carrying out an execution of a
'volunteer' -- in essence, aiding and abetting an inmate's death wish.

"Arizona's move to execute Robert Comer stands against the national trend
of questioning the death penalty and moving away from it. This execution
is a macabre act that takes Arizona a step backwards."

# # #

For more information on Amnesty International's work against the death
penalty, please visit: www.amnestyusa.org/abolish

(source: Amnesty International)

Top

Convicted murderer who fought to die now set for execution

Death row inmate Robert Charles Comer has been fighting to die for 7
years. Now, more than 2 decades after committing the crimes for which he
was condemned, Comer is about to finish his struggle. On Tuesday, he is
scheduled to become the 1st person executed in Arizona since November
2000.

"An eye for an eye," Comer once said in court. "I mean, I ended a whole
bunch of innocent people's lives and changed their lives forever. Even
though they're still alive, their lives are destroyed. I owe that to them.
I owe it to myself, man. I was totally wrong."

The 50-year-old was sent to death row for a 1987 crime spree at a
campground at Apache Lake east of Phoenix.

Comer and then-girlfriend Juneva Willis invited a fellow camper, Larry
Pritchard, to their campsite for dinner. After they ate, Comer shot
Pritchard in the head with a .38-caliber revolver.

Comer forced Willis to look at Pritchard, telling her, "See what I've
done. I'm a cold and callous killer." At another campsite, Comer later
used wire and duct tape to bind a Chicago couple he had met earlier in the
day. He raped the woman repeatedly, once in front of her boyfriend. Comer
and Willis were arrested the next day.

"It was an especially cruel and depraved crime," said Kent Cattani, chief
counsel in the capital litigation section of the Attorney General's
Office.

Comer described his crimes as revenge for how he said guards at Folsom
State Prison in California treated him while he served time in the 1980s
for rape and assault with a deadly weapon.

Comer said he and other inmates were beaten, and that guards tortured him
with a cattle prod. After his release, he said he began using
methamphetamine and knew he was bound to end up in prison again.

"My hate, my hate just started building and building and building," he
said, according to transcripts from a 2002 competency hearing. "Instead of
dropping that and go seeing a shrink, I just let it keep building. Got my
own justice."

Comer declined interview requests from The Associated Press. The surviving
victims and Pritchard's relatives also declined to comment.

Comer's lawyer, Michael Kimerer, said Comer has been somber as his
execution approaches, but that he is just hoping all goes as planned.

"He is glad that it is proceeding on schedule and really just wants to
basically have these last few days he has to be with himself and talk to
his family members and not really be involved in the legal process,"
Kimerer said.

Since Comer has been in prison, his daughter has grown up and had two
children of her own, his mother and 1 of 3 brothers died, and his father
remarried. His best friend in prison was executed in 1999.

Psychiatrists, lawyers and Comer himself say he has been transformed from
once being known to Arizona prison guards as the most dangerous inmate in
the state to a more mellow, mature and thoughtful man.

"I see a whole lot of things different these last few years than I used to
as a kid," Comer said at the 2002 hearing. "A couple of years ago, I'd
have chopped your head off just for, I don't know, looking crosswords at
me. Now I look back on it, it's, well, who the hell am I fighting?"

If Comer's execution by injection is carried out Tuesday, he will be the
1st inmate to be put to death in the state since Donald Miller was
executed on Nov. 8, 2000, for helping murder an 18-year-old woman.

Comer has said in recent years that he just wants to die for his crimes
and has fought in court to have the sentence carried out.

Comer spent much of his lengthy court battle just proving he was competent
to choose execution. That's because he made the choice to die in 2000,
shortly after he appealed his death sentence to the 9th Circuit Court of
Appeals in San Francisco.

The contradiction confused the court, which refused to allow the execution
to proceed without a competency hearing. Comer was found to be competent,
and the court agreed in March to allow his execution to proceed.

Another reason for the delay in Comer's execution was a 2002 Supreme Court
decision that said juries rather than judges should decide death penalty
cases, forcing Arizona to change its law. It took another two years for
the court to say the ruling did not apply retroactively, clearing the way
for dozens of death-penalty cases in the state.

Arizona has executed 86 people, 22 of them since resuming the death
penalty in 1992 after a 29-year hiatus.

(source: Associated Press)

Top

In 5-year turnaround, Pima no longer a death-penalty leader

In 5 years, Pima County has gone from having one of the highest rates of
death-penalty cases in the nation to among the lowest.

Although Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall is known statewide for her
tough stance on plea deals, when it comes to seeking the death penalty,
her approach to murder defendant Christopher Payne is rare.

Of the 65 1st-degree homicide suspects charged in Pima County last year,
just one faces execution. That's a big turnaround from six years ago, when
Columbia University Law School found Pima County had the highest rate of
death sentences in the nation, and was among the leaders in seeking the
death penalty.

This month the County Attorney's Office elected to seek the death penalty
for Payne, who is accused in the deaths of his children, Ariana, 4, and
Tyler, 5.

He is the 3rd person awaiting trial on capital murder charges here,
joining Jesus Rafael Muro-Monge, accused in the 2004 slaying of Patricia
Marie Rubalcaba, 27; and Marco Antonio Chavez, charged in the 2006
shooting of retired University of Arizona professor Mac Hadley, 76.

By contrast, Maricopa County seeks the death penalty in nearly half its
similar cases. And Tuesday, the state is set to execute a killer out of
Maricopa County, Robert Comer.

"We don't go in on every case and ask for the maximum," said Pima County's
chief trial counsel, Rick Unklesbay. "It's not just a knee-jerk reaction."

When Pima County does seek the death penalty, though, it is usually
successful. Of the last 8 such cases, jurors voted death 5 times.

(source: Arizona DailyStar)

Top

For Pima County attorneys, panel, death penalty never a 'slam dunk'

For 6 weeks over the summer of 2005, Dominique Martinez and his family
lived in mortal fear after a panel of 7 strangers decided he should face
the death penalty for killing someone during a kidnapping for ransom.

Today Martinez is facing life in prison, but not death. The panel reversed
itself after obtaining evidence he participated in the murder, but was not
the trigger man.

He was lucky. Since Pima County started using the panel 5 years ago it has
gone from having one of the highest rates of death-penalty cases in the
nation to among the lowest.

Just 1 of 65 accused killers charged in Pima County last year now faces
the death penalty, compared to 44 of the 89 1st-degree murder defendants
charged in Maricopa County.

For Christopher Payne, the facts went the other way, as prosecutors will
seek to have him put to death for the heinous way in which he is accused
of killing his children, Ariana, 4, and Tyler, 5. While the age of the
victim is a consideration in death-penalty cases, the decision isn't
automatic, even for child killers.

3 weeks after Payne was arrested in the deaths of his children, another
Tucson parent Diane Marsh was accused of killing her 5-year-old son with
an overdose of cold medications. The County Attorney's Office still hasn't
decided whether to present the case to the capital murder panel of senior
prosecutors, despite indications the boy was abused.

"Anytime someone harms a child it's cruel, heinous and depraved, but that
doesn't mean it always meets the legal definition of an aggravating factor
for the death penalty," County Attorney Barbara LaWall said.

There is no such thing as a "slam dunk," LaWall said. No matter how
violent, senseless or sickening a crime may appear on its surface, a
death-penalty decision must be based on legal issues, LaWall said.

With Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas seeking the death penalty at a
far more frequently than LaWall, the debate over when the death penalty is
sought, and by whom, is heating up in Arizona.

Both LaWall and Thomas leave the life-or-death decision to a panel of
senior prosecutors, although both retain final veto power. Until five
years ago, the decision in Pima County was made by 2 seasoned prosecutors
within LaWall's office.

In Arizona, prosecutors must be able to prove at least 1 of 14 different
"aggravating factors" before a defendant can become eligible for the death
penalty.

In the case of Payne, they found the fact that more than 1 death took
place, the age of the victims, and that the deaths were "especially
heinous, cruel or depraved" warranted the ultimate penalty. Chief trial
counsel Rick Unklesbay said words such as "cruel" and "depraved" take on
special legal meaning when considered as factors in a death-penalty
decision. To be "cruel," the state needs to show the victim was conscious
and aware of impending death, while "depraved," indicates the suspect
relished the act, he said.

Other factors include such things as whether the crime was committed for
financial gain, the suspect's criminal history, whether the suspect was on
probation for another felony, and whether the victim was a police officer.

The panel is given the facts of the case, information about the defendant,
victim and witnesses, photos, and the autopsy report, and sometimes
arguments against the death penalty from defense attorneys.

"We all bring something different to the table," said Unklesbay. "Barbara
looks at them differently than I do. I think she and David (Berkman, chief
criminal deputy county attorney) are more clinical than I am."

Berkman and LaWall tend to focus on what the statutes require and how
prosecutors can meet their burden in front of a jury.

Unklesbay, a 26-year veteran who visits almost every murder scene,
approaches it from a different angle.

"I go through the murders I've seen and I try to see how it fits in. All
murders are bad, but I try to decide just how bad was this murder and just
how bad is this defendant."

Proportionality also is considered by the entire panel.

"One of the ways we seek justice is when similar individuals commit
similar offenses, we attempt to treat them similarly." The problem is that
no two cases are exactly the same, LaWall said.

A lot of subjective issues related to whether a conviction is realistic
come up, like witnesses who aren't credible. Gang members with bad
attitudes who can barely speak intelligently don't make good witnesses,
Unklesbay said.

Sometimes victims aren't sympathetic characters or, conversely, the
defendant is, which can influence a case.

In 1999, the County Attorney's Office chose not to seek the death penalty
against Daniel Ray Averett for splashing acid in the eyes of Wal-Mart
executive Kurt Imel, stabbing him with a kitchen knife, and bashing in his
head. Averett was brain-damaged and had been convinced by Imel's wife and
daughter that Imel was an abusive father who deserved to die.

Also, jurors aren't likely to sentence one drug dealer to death for
killing another drug dealer, although they may be more inclined to do so
if the victim was burned alive or died while begging for his life, LaWall
said.

"Nobody deserves to be murdered, but as human beings, people do take those
things into consideration," LaWall said.

Pima County Public Defender Bob Hooker and defense attorneys Rick Lougee
and Joe St. Louis much prefer the way LaWall's office handles
death-penalty cases now.

Before the panel was implemented, the death penalty was sought on the
"subjective wishes" of one or two people, Lougee said.

Lougee speculates the number of death cases also has diminished because of
questions about DNA evidence.

"There's greater uncertainty right now over the reliability of the
verdicts; people just aren't sure about the science anymore," Lougee said.
"That affects jurors' willingness to impose the death penalty."

There were times in the past when he was alarmed by the decisions being
made in Pima County, St. Louis said. "I saw cases where they should not
have sought it and I wasn't convinced proportionality was being taken into
consideration." The County Attorney's Office is being much choosier now,
he said.

Last summer, a panel of the American Bar Association released a report on
the death penalty in Arizona that included a recommendation the attorney
general or some other outside entity, rather than individual elected
county attorneys, decide who should be eligible for the death penalty.

The study showed that how murder defendants were treated depended upon
where the crimes were committed, said panel member Larry Hammond, a
Phoenix lawyer.

The differences in the number of death-penalty cases in Maricopa County
and Pima County "can't be justified in any demographic way," Hammond said.

A system such as the federal government uses, with both prosecutors and
defense attorneys allowed to make their case to a central power, ensures
that every defendant is treated the same, Hammond said.

LaWall called the panel's recommendation "the worst idea I've ever heard
of."

"I'm an independent elected official who is responsible to my
constituency. One of the things I absolutely have to be able to do is
consider who the people are who elected me," LaWall said. "If they don't
like the decisions I make, they can choose to have another county
attorney."

Every community has different mores, and that fact is evident with what is
happening in Maricopa County right now, LaWall said.

Even with all the extra steps and safeguards, Art Martinez, whose nephew
Dominique currently is on trial for murder, said the panel still can make
mistakes, as shown by the decision to withdraw the death penalty in his
case.

The family went through hell during those six weeks they thought Dominique
could be convicted and executed, Art Martinez said. "Why did they put the
family through this?"

No one, whether it's a single person or a group of people, should have the
power to decide death sentences, he said. "Who are we in this world to
take somebody's life?"

Kathy Weir, whose brother was one of three people killed during an
attempted robbery at a Pizza Hut restaurant in January 1999, wants the
death penalty abolished too, but for an entirely different reason.

The killers, Christopher "Bo" Huerstel and Kajornsak "Tom" Prasertphong,
were tried a combined 5 times because of death-sentence issues.

"We went through 6 additional years of hell because of the death penalty.
If they'd been sentenced to life we would've been done with them," Weir
said.

Ultimately, the death penalty caused too much heartache, she said.

(Source: Arizona Daily Star)

top

OPINION: Arizona must stop its execution policy

Robert Comer, found guilty of murder in 1988, has asked the court to stop
all appeals and has volunteered to be put to death Tuesday by the people
of Arizona.

This would be our state's first act of legal homicide in nearly 7 years.

Years ago, our thirst for revenge made us a collective killer. But as we
have become more aware, our primary reason for executing prisoners is our
fear that a killer will be released to kill again.

When advised that the alternative is life in prison without possibility of
parole, only 41 % of us continue to support execution, according to the
Behavior Research Center.

We are growing up fast, and it's time for the majority of the people to
insist the death penalty be abolished.

We need laws appropriate for our stage of development.

Killing because we are opposed to killing is like stealing because we are
opposed to theft.

We cannot teach killers that killing is wrong by killing them. We cannot
teach our children that killing is wrong by being killers ourselves.
Executing a prisoner is simply an act of revenge and a display of our
failure as good guys.

Revenge feels wonderful. It's a high. And when we knew a lot about the
crime, and little or nothing about the suspect, we have been moved to
condemn the mentally ill, the retarded, even the innocent, in our lynch
mob eagerness to find somebody to blame and punish.

After what we considered a "fair trial," an execution has felt like
justice ("closure" is the modern term) because we didn't know the person
we killed. We were never given the information that might lead us to hate
the crime and have mercy for the criminal.

We still usually get a lopsided "two sides of the story" from the media as
emotionally charged as a simplistic good-guy/bad-guy drama.

Especially in matters of life and death, we need everyday media that write
and speak to the responsible adults we are becoming.

Members of the 41 percent who directly or tacitly support taking the lives
of fellow human beings have the duty as citizens of a democracy to study
those lives in depth.

Have their brains been infused prenatally with alcohol or other drugs?
What blows have they received from the world that helped to form them? If
the state did not hire a "hit man" to kill them, would you kill them by
your own hand?

I plan to stand with others who oppose the execution before, during and,
if the people of Arizona go through with it, after the event. Comer wants
to die, but I don't want to kill him. Not in my name.

(source: Tucson Citi