DOCSLIB.ORG

Missouri's Death Penalty in 2017: the Year in Review

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Missouri's Death Penalty in 2017: the Year in Review Missourians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty 6320 Brookside Plaza, Suite 185; Kansas City, MO 64113 816-931-4177 www.madpmo.org Missouri’s Death Penalty in 2017: The Year in Review A year-end compilation of death penalty data for the state of Missouri. Table of Contents I. Executive Summary 2 II. Missouri Death Sentences in 2017 3 New Death Sentences 3 Unconstitutionality of Judicial Override 3 Non-Death Outcomes: Jury Rejections 4 Non-Death Outcomes: Pleas for Life Without Parole 5 III. Missouri Executions 7 Executions in Missouri and Nationally 7 Missouri’s Executed in 2017 - Mark Christeson 8 Missouri Executions by County - a Death Belt 9 Regional Similarity of Executions and Past Lynching Behaviors 10 Stays of Execution and Dates Withdrawn 12 IV. Current Death Row 13 Current Death Row by County and Demographics 13 On Death Row But Unfit for Execution 15 Granted Stay of Execution 15 Removed from Death Row - Not By Execution 16 V. Missouri’s Death Penalty in 2018 17 Pending Missouri Executions and Malpractice Concerns 17 Recent Botched Executions in Other States 17 Pending Capital Cases 18 VI. Table 1 - Missouri’s Current Death Row, 2017 19 VII. Table 2 - Missouri’s Executed 21 VIII. MADP Representatives 25 1 I. Executive Summary Missourians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (MADP) - a statewide organization based in Kansas City, Missouri - publishes this annual report to inform fellow citizens and elected officials about developments and related issues associated with the state’s death penalty in 2017 and recent years. This report includes information about the following death penalty developments in the state of Missouri: ● Nationally, executions and death sentences remained near historically low levels in 2017, the second fewest since 1991. In 2017, Missouri had one execution and one new death sentence. ● The only new death sentence in 2017 was for Marvin Rice this October. It was the first new death sentence in Missouri in four years and was imposed by a judge, contradicting 11 of the 12 jurors in the case who wanted life for Rice. Rice’s case highlights how Missouri judges can undermine the role of a jury in the state’s death sentencing statute. ● Missouri executed one person in 2017: Mark Christeson. Christeson still had outstanding federal appeals, and he died without ever having his case reviewed in a federal court. ● Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens stayed the scheduled execution of Marcellus Williams, set for August 22, to convene a Board of Inquiry. ● Missouri has scheduled one execution for 2018: Russell Bucklew on March 18. Bucklew suffers from a rare medical condition that could make his execution prolonged and painful, and the U. S. Supreme Court previously issued a stay for Bucklew in 2014. ● Regional patterns of executions in Missouri show similarity to historic patterns of lynching. These form a “death belt” across the state in which executions and lynchings occur in concentrations in clusters of counties. 2 II. Missouri Death Sentences in 2017 New Death Sentences There was one new death sentence in the state of Missouri in 2017. This was the first new death sentence in Missouri since 2013.1 On October 6, St. Charles County Judge Kelly Wayne Parker imposed a death sentence on Marvin Rice despite the fact that the jury deadlocked, with 11 out of 12 jurors voting for life without the possibility of parole. Rice is a former Dent County deputy sheriff and state correctional officer. The case involved the shooting murder of his ex-girlfriend, Annette Durham, during a custody dispute over her son. Before the sentencing hearing, Rice’s lawyers argued that giving Rice the death penalty was unconstitutional. Prosecutors said jurors had found one aggravating factor in favor of the death penalty but had not unanimously decided mitigating evidence outweighed the aggravating circumstance. Mitigating evidence had included the issue of Rice’s mental health. Rice had a pituitary tumor in his brain at the time of the murder and was taking 17 medications that affected his impulse control and made him paranoid. Unconstitutionality of Judicial Override Judge Parker’s sentence of Rice to death was the first new death sentence in Missouri in four years and undermined the role of the 11 out of 12 jurors who wanted life for Rice and the role of the citizens who serve on juries in capital cases. No jury in Missouri has sentenced a defendant to death since 2013. Parker’s sentencing Rice to death has raised questions about judicial override in Missouri and its constitutionality under the Sixth Amendment. The relevant Missouri sentencing statute currently states that if a jury is unable to decide unanimously upon a punishment, the judge will assess the mitigating and aggravating evidence and then choose between life without parole or death.2 Most states with the death penalty follow the federal procedure of an automatic sentence of life without parole if a jury cannot reach a unanimous decision on appropriate punishment. The Missouri Supreme Court has previously rejected judicially imposed death sentences, which erode the role of the jury in imposing the ultimate punishment. In a similar case in 1994, a jury found Joseph Whitfield guilty of first-degree murder but could not settle on a punishment, with 11 out of 12 voting for life imprisonment.3 A judge sentenced Whitfield to death according to the four-step process of the Missouri statute at the time. In 2003, the Missouri Supreme Court rejected Whitfield’s death sentence unconstitutional, finding that “[t]his process clearly violated the requirement of Ring that the jury rather ​ ​ than the judge determine the facts on which the death penalty is based.” 1 R. Patrick, "Judge in St. Charles County sentences former Dent County deputy to death for murder," St. Louis Post-Dispatch, October 6, 2017 ​ ​ ​ 2 MO Rev Stat § 565.030 (2013) https://law.justia.com/codes/missouri/2013/title-xxxviii/chapter-565/section-565.030 ​ 3 State v. Whitfield, 107 S.W.3d 253 (Mo. 2003). 3 Missouri and Indiana are the only two states in which a judge can give a death sentence if a jury deadlocks. No state currently allows a judge to override a jury’s decision of a life sentence. Three states - Alabama, Delaware, and Florida - that once permitted the practice ended it in the past two years.4 Alabama repealed the judicial override portion of its death penalty statue in April 2017. Research found Alabama’s judicial override was employed to impose death sentences when a jury recommended life, rather than as a safeguard against unjust jury votes for death.5 The Delaware Supreme Court invalidated its death penalty statute and its relevant judicial override provisions in 2016. In January 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court found in Hurst v. Florida that Florida’s sentencing statute was ​ ​ unconstitutional, ruling that “[t]he Sixth Amendment requires a jury, not a judge, to find each fact necessary to impose a sentence of death.”6 Florida’s sentencing procedure, which required only an “advisory sentence” from a jury, had called for the sentencing judge to give “great weight” to the jury’s recommendation but only the judge provided reasons for the case’s eligibility of a death sentence. In a 1988 dissent in Johnson v. Alabama, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall highlighted the ​ ​ dangers associated with judicial override: “It approaches the most literal sense of the word ‘arbitrary’ to put one to death in the face of a contrary jury determination where it is accepted that the jury had indeed responsibly carried out its task.” Non-Death Outcomes: Jury Rejections Since 2013, juries in Missouri have rejected the death penalty each time they have considered it. In 2017 alone, death-qualified juries in this state rejected death in four cases. ● In May this year, a death-qualified jury from Boone County recommended life without parole in the re-trial of Mark Gill7. Gill and his co-defendant Justin Brown were convicted for the abduction and first-degree murder of Ralph Lape, Jr., in Cape Girardeau County. Then-Cape Girardeau County prosecuting attorney Morley Swingle had sought the death penalty against both men. A New Madrid County jury convicted and sentenced Gill to death in 2004. Brown was convicted and sentenced to life without parole by a Waynesville jury in 2006. Gill’s post-conviction motion alleged ineffective counsel in his first trial, and the Missouri Supreme Court upheld his conviction but reversed his sentence in 2010. Prosecutor Swingle sought the death penalty again when the case was moved to Boone County, and Chris Limbaugh continued to seek death when he took Swingle’s place. ● In October, a death-qualified jury from Springfield in the federal death penalty case of Ulysses S. Jones split.8 In federal court, a death sentence must be reached unanimously by a jury. 4 “Missouri Judge Sentences Defendant to Death After 11 Jurors Had Voted for Life Sentence.” Death Penalty Information Center, October ​ 201​ 7. 5 “The Death Penalty in Alabama: Judge Override.” Equal Justice Initiative, July 2011. ​ ​ 6 Hurst v. Florida. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/14-7505_5ie6.pdf ​ ​ 7 M Bliss. “Convicted murderer Mark Gill receives life sentence in retrial of penalty phase.” Southeast Missourian, May 23, 2017. ​ ​ 8 H. Keegan. “Springfield jury splits, allowing prisoner to avoid death in 4th murder conviction.” Springfield News-Leader, October 17, 2017. ​ ​ ​ 4 61-year-old Jones was found guilty by the same jury for the 2006 stabbing of fellow inmate Timothy Baker at the U.S. Medical Center for Federal Prisoners in Springfield. Jones had end-stage renal disease. He was already serving life in prison for three murders, one of which also occurred in prison.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Death Row U.S.A
    DEATH ROW U.S.A. Summer 2017 A quarterly report by the Criminal Justice Project of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Deborah Fins, Esq. Consultant to the Criminal Justice Project NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Death Row U.S.A. Summer 2017 (As of July 1, 2017) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 2,817 Race of Defendant: White 1,196 (42.46%) Black 1,168 (41.46%) Latino/Latina 373 (13.24%) Native American 26 (0.92%) Asian 53 (1.88%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.04%) Gender: Male 2,764 (98.12%) Female 53 (1.88%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CURRENT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 33 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming, U.S. Government, U.S. Military. JURISDICTIONS WITHOUT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 20 Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico [see note below], New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin. [NOTE: New Mexico repealed the death penalty prospectively. The men already sentenced remain under sentence of death.] Death Row U.S.A. Page 1 In the United States Supreme Court Update to Spring 2017 Issue of Significant Criminal, Habeas, & Other Pending Cases for Cases to Be Decided in October Term 2016 or 2017 1. CASES RAISING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS First Amendment Packingham v. North Carolina, No. 15-1194 (Use of websites by sex offender) (decision below 777 S.E.2d 738 (N.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Alumni to Be Recognized at 134Th Founders Day Banquet Washington University Will Honor Six John E
    Washington University School of Medicine Digital Commons@Becker Washington University Record Washington University Publications 11-5-1987 Washington University Record, November 5, 1987 Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wustl.edu/record Recommended Citation "Washington University Record, November 5, 1987" (1987). Washington University Record. Book 426. http://digitalcommons.wustl.edu/record/426 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington University Publications at Digital Commons@Becker. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Record by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Becker. For more information, please contact [email protected]. f\ ^/,5/^/vc/av LJ ^ IvaO'Ty Medical Library nuv Tn^eya/T ARCHIVES gWashir^ton WASHINGTON • UNIVERSITY- IN ■ ST-LOUIS Vol. 12 No. 11/Nov. 5, 1987 Alumni to be recognized at 134th Founders Day banquet Washington University will honor six John E. Gilster graduated from members of its alumni at its 134th the School of Dental Medicine in anniversary Founders Day Banquet 1944. In 1950 he joined the faculty Saturday, Nov. 14, at the Adam's of Washington University and rose to Mark Hotel. the rank of professor and chairman Ted Koppel, ABC News anchor- of the Department of Pedodontics. man, will be principal speaker. Four He is now a professor emeritus and members of the University's faculty is one of the school's most active also will be honored that night for alumni. He is a past member of the excellence in teaching. Stanley L. Alumni Board of Governors, and Lopata, an alumnus and emeritus served as its vice-chairman in 1973.
    [Show full text]
  • Petitioner, V
    No. 17-___ IN THE Supreme Court of the United States ———— WILLIAM HAROLD KELLEY, Petitioner, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. ———— On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Florida Supreme Court ———— PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI ———— LAURENCE H. TRIBE SYLVIA H. WALBOLT Of Counsel Counsel of Record CARL M. LOEB UNIVERSITY CHRIS S. COUTROULIS PROFESSOR AND PROFESSOR E. KELLY BITTICK, JR. OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW JOSEPH H. LANG, JR. HARVARD LAW SCHOOL* CARLTON FIELDS Hauser 420 JORDEN BURT, P.A. 1575 Massachusetts Avenue Corporate Center Three at Cambridge, MA 02138 International Plaza (617) 495-1767 4221 W. Boy Scout Blvd. Tampa, FL 33607 * University affiliation (813) 223-7000 noted for identification [email protected] purposes only Counsel for Petitioner May 25, 2018 WILSON-EPES PRINTING CO., INC. – (202) 789-0096 – WASHINGTON, D. C. 20002 CAPITAL CASE QUESTION PRESENTED In Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016) (“Hurst I”), this Court held that Florida’s capital sentencing scheme violated the Sixth Amendment because a jury did not make the findings necessary for a death sentence. In Hurst v. State, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016) (“Hurst II”), the Florida Supreme Court further held that under the Eighth Amendment the jury’s findings must be unanimous. Although the Florida Supreme Court held that the Hurst decisions applied retroactively, it created over sharp dissents a novel and unprecedented rule of partial retroactivity, limiting their application only to inmates whose death sentences became final after Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002). Ring, however, addressed Arizona’s capital sentencing scheme and was grounded solely on the Sixth Amendment, not the Eighth Amendment.
    [Show full text]
  • TOT AL NUMBER of DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN to LDF: White
    TOT AL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 3,565 Race of Defendant: 1 White 1,657 ( 46.48%) Black 1.5 16 ( 42.53 %) Latino/Latina 299 ( 8.39%) Native American 48 ( 1.35%) Asian 28 ( .79%) Un.known at this issue 17 ( .48%) Gender: Male 3,515 (98.60%) Female 50,,-( 1.40%) Juveniles: i\lale 65 ( 1.82%) 0JSPOSITIONS SJNCE JA:'\l'ARY 1. I 973: [:-;ecutions: 530 . uicides : 5-1 Commu tations: 80 11m:ludmi,:t /w,,: h~ ths· <.io, cmor of Texas rcsuhing from fa, orablc coun decision s) Died of natural causes or killed while under death sentence: 131 Con, ictions 1 entences re,·ersed 16-12 .Jl'RISDICTJO N WITH CA PITAL Pl'~ISHMENT STATUTES : 40 IL ndcrlincd jurisdictions ha, c 1nt111c, hut no sentences imposed) t\labama. Arizona. Arkansas. Calitorn1::i. Colorado. Connecticut. Delaware. Florida. Georgia. Idaho. lllinoi~. Indiana. Kansa~. Kcmucl-.:,.Louisiana. Maryland. Mississippi. Missouri. Montana. ~chra~l-.a.~e\'ada. 'e" Hamp,h1n.:. :-Sc,, Jcr c>. ·ev. Mexico. e\,\ York. North Carolina. Ohio, 01-.lnhoma. Oregon. Penn : I, an1;i. ~outh l arolinn. South Dakota. Tennessee , Texas. Utah. \ "1rg1111a. Washington. Wyoming. L S Gm ernment. U.S. Military . ,Jl'RISDI CT IOl\S \\ 'ITHOl" T CAPITAL P ISHM E 'T STATUTES : 13 :\la ~l-.a. District of Columbia. Ha,,ai i. lo,,a . Maine. Massachusetts, Michigan. Minnesota, \' onh Dal-.ota. Rhode b land. \ 'crmont. West Virginia. Wisconsin . Dca1hRo,1 U.S.A. Page I In the United States Supreme Court October Tenn -- 1998 Pending Capital, Habeas & Race Cases Strickler v.
    [Show full text]
  • Execution Ritual : Media Representations of Execution and the Social Construction of Public Opinion Regarding the Death Penalty
    University of Louisville ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository Electronic Theses and Dissertations 5-2011 Execution ritual : media representations of execution and the social construction of public opinion regarding the death penalty. Emilie Dyer 1987- University of Louisville Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.library.louisville.edu/etd Recommended Citation Dyer, Emilie 1987-, "Execution ritual : media representations of execution and the social construction of public opinion regarding the death penalty." (2011). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 388. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/388 This Master's Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. This title appears here courtesy of the author, who has retained all other copyrights. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EXECUTION RITUAL: MEDIA REPRESENTATIONS OF EXECUTION AND THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC OPINION REGARDING THE DEATH PENALTY By Emilie Dyer B.A., University of Louisville, 2009 A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of the University of Louisville in Partial Fullfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Department of Sociology University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky May, 2011 -------------------------------------------------------------- EXECUTION RITUAL : MEDIA REPRESENTATIONS OF EXECUTION AND THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC OPINION REGARDING THE DEATH PENALTY By Emilie Brook Dyer B.A., University of Louisville, 2009 A Thesis Approved on April 11, 2011 by the following Thesis Committee: Thesis Director (Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • CITY COUNCIL ~Gfnda
    CITY OF VENTURA CITY COUNCIL ~GfNDA Supplemental Information Packet Agenda Item - Father Serra Statue Posted July 7, 2020 {Input received July 7, 2020 noon to 3 p.m.) Special Meeting of July 7, 2020 Supplemental Information: Any agenda related public documents received and distributed to a majority of the City Council after the Agenda Packet is printed are included in Supplemental Packets. Supplemental Packets are produced as needed. The Supplemental Packet is available in the City Clerk's Office, 501 Poli Street, Room 204, Ventura, during normal business hours as well as on the City's Website - www.cityofventura.ca.gov https:/ /www.cityofventu ra .ca .gov/1236/City-Counci I-Pu bl ic-Hea ring-NoticesSu ppl Ventura City Council Agenda www.cityofventura.ca.gov CITY OFVENTURA CITY +\TTORNfY Date: July 7, 2020 To: Hon. Mayor & Members of the City Council From: Gregory G. Diaz, City Attorney Subject: Serra Statue, Alternate Basis for Removing and Storage; Safety of the Statue Itself The City has received a letter from an attorney indicating he represents an unincorporated association of residents who do not support the retmoval of the Serra statue. The letter has many inaccuracies and does not understand the process the City used, i.e., the emergency ordinance adopted by the City Council, however, it does threaten legal action against the City if you vote to remove and store the statue. Without commenting publicly on the merit or lack of merit of these claims, I want to suggest that there is a separate and independent basis for its removal and storage at this time-security and safety of the statue itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Penalty in 1977
    Missouri Catholic Conference The Messenger The Bishops of Missouri, speaking together on matters of public policy, form the Missouri Catholic Conference. February 2014 A Time for Reflection: 25 Years of State Executions By: Rita Linhardt On January 6th, 1989, the state of Missouri resumed capital pun- church teachings and urged Catholics to work to end the death pen- ishment when it executed George Mercer. This was the first execu- alty. tion in Missouri after it re-instated the death penalty in 1977. Twen- Twenty-five years of executions have resulted in a body of evi- ty-five years later Missouri has executed 70 individuals, ranking the dence showing that the death penalty is a systemically flawed sys- state the 5th highest in the nation in carrying out capital punishment. tem. Research shows the death penalty is arbitrary, racially biased, On this somber anniversary it is appropriate to reflect on our death and prone to mistakes. The toll of executions have been clearly felt penalty journey. Missouri quickly embraced capital punish- by corrections workers, legal pro- ment after 1989. By the mid-90s it seemed nothing fessionals, and even murder victim could stop the machinery of death, with an family members—many of whom execution taking place about every have joined their voices in oppo- two months in Missouri. In 1999, sition. Pope John Paul II ignited world- In many ways this anniversary wide attention on Missouri when finds a nation turning away he called for an end to the death from the death penalty. Last penalty in a St. Louis visit and year Maryland became the successfully pleaded to Gov- sixth state to end capital ernor Carnahan to commute punishment in the last the death sentence of a con- six years.
    [Show full text]
  • Habeas Corpus Committee
    5~-~ ~ • +v ~~~~I- MEMORANDUM TO: Justice Powell May 3, 1990 FROM: Hew RE: House Habeas Hearing ( ~d---c,, 2- 4 ) Virginia Sloan of Kastenmeier's staff called ~M,g&AIJ8a;, ~ to confirm that the hearing will take place on May 24, 1990. You should note that this is not a hearing of the ~ House Judiciary Committee. It is a hearing of Rep. Kasten- meier's Courts, Intellectual Property, and Administration of Justice Subcommittee. The hearing will begin at 9:30 a.m . Unlike the Senate hearing, where you spoke first as a single witness, the House subcommittee wants you to appear as one • member of a panel, including Judge Roney and perhaps another member of the Ad Hoc Committee. R.H.P . • MAJOIUTY MIMIW -WfY Mt t,111111 ) JA(l IAOOlt, TtV.I, CIWkMAN HAMILTON PIIH. JII.. "tw YOM FIRST CONGRESS CAlll.01 J. MOO~HIAD, c;A~IJOjUolA IIOIUT W. kAtTENMIEllll. WlfCOHtlN ONI ~UNDREO IIINIIY J. N'IDl, 11.LINOII DON lDWAIIOI, CAl,lfQ_. P. JAMIi HNllM.IIINNll. .Ill. WIICONI IN JOHN CON'l'llll, JII., MICM!OAN l1U lotcCOLlUM. fLOIUOA IIOMANO ~ M.UIOl.l UNfUCltY IIO!ICH \IW . OIIIAI, ,aNNl'tl.VA>IIA Ml.LIAW J. IIUG/4H. NtW JIW'I' MICWL D1W1Nt, ~10 MIKI l'l'NM OICI.AIIOMA ~onBrt.ss of tht tinittd £,tatts WIUIAM I. DANNIMIEYII\ CAulOIUIIA PATIIICIA ICHIIOIDIII. COlOMOO MOWl\1111 COIi.i, NORTM CAIIOI.INA !MN GLICKMAN. UIII.AI D. ,MNCM 11.AuGNlll. .ia.. WIOl!j lJ. IAIICl'I' f!W<II. ~IAC..UIITTI ttout or Rq,rumtati\lu 1.AMJ.111. IMITII.
    [Show full text]
  • DOCUMENT RESUME Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of The
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 401 563 CS 215 571 TITLE Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (79th, Anaheim, CA, August 10-13, 1996). International Communications Division. INSTITUTION Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication. PUB DATE Aug 96 NOTE 441p.; For other sections of these proceedings, see CS 215 568-580. PUB TYPE Collected Works Conference Proceedings (021) EDRS PRICE MFO1 /PC18 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Advertising; Agenda Setting; Anti Semitism; Case Studies; Content Analysis; *Development Communication; *Foreign Countries; Global Approach; Ideology; Journalism Research; Models; Newspapers; *Privatization; Publishing Industry; Telecommunications; World Wide Web IDENTIFIERS *Media Coverage; New York Times; Washington Post ABSTRACT The international communications section of the Proceedings contains the following 14 papers: "Spinning Stories: Latin America and the World Wide Web" (Eliza Tanner); "Private-Enterprise Broadcasting and Accelerating Dependency: Case Studies from Nigeria and Uganda" (Folu Folarin Ogundimu); "The Transitional Media System of Post-Communist Bulgaria" (Ekaterina Ognianova); "Comparing Canadian and U.S. Press Coverage of the Gulf Crisis: The Effects of Ideology in an International Context" (James E. Mollenkopf and Nancy Brendlinger); "Privatization in Indian Telecommunications: A Pragmatic Solution to Socialist Inertia" (Divya C. McMillin); "'Caribscope' -A Forum for Development News?" (Lisa A. McClean); "Ideology and Market:
    [Show full text]
  • Envisioning the Lethal Chamber
    C H a pte r 1 e nvisiOninG The Le ThaL chamBe r The history of the gas chamber is a story of the twentieth century. But an earlier event that would subsequently figure into its evolu­ tion occurred one day in 1846, when a French physiologist, Claude Bernard, was in his laboratory studying the properties of carbon mon­ oxide (CO), a colorless, odorless, and tasteless gas that would even­ tually be recognized as the product of the incomplete combustion of carbon­containing compounds. By that time the substance was already suspected of somehow being responsible for many accidental deaths, but nothing was known about the mechanism of its poisoning. Bernard therefore set out to explore its mysterious lethality by means of scien­ tific experiment. Bernard forced a dog to breathe carbon monoxide until it was dead, and immediately afterward opened the creature’s body to examine the result. The Frenchman observed the blood of the lifeless canine spilling onto the table. As he examined the state of the organs and the fluids, what instantly attracted his attention was that all of the blood appeared crimson. Bernard later repeated this experiment on rabbits, birds, and frogs, always finding the same general crimson coloration of the blood. A decade later Bernard conducted additional experiments with the gas in his laboratory – turned – killing chamber, carefully recording each of his actions as he proceeded. In one instance he passed a stream of hydrogen through the crimson venous blood taken from an animal poisoned by carbon monoxide, but he could not displace the oxygen 2 3 UC-Christianson-CS4-ToPress.indd 23 3/18/2010 2:03:22 PM 2 4 / T h e r i s e O f T h e L e T h a L c h a m B e r in the dead creature’s venous blood.
    [Show full text]
  • Gas Chambers and Animals
    Gas Chambers and Animals By Claudine Wilkins and Jessica Rock, Founders of Animal Law Source™ Approximately three to four million cats and dogs are euthanized at animal shelters throughout the U.S. every year.1 In five counties in Georgia in 2010, (Clayton, Cobb, DeKalb, Fulton and Gwinnet), almost 30,000 animals were killed. Gwinnet led the way by killing over 7,800 cats and dogs. Various methods were used to kill these animals, but the most prevalent methods were lethal injections or use of carbon dioxide gas chambers.2 Gas chambers can be extremely cruel and inhumane. Some animals do not die right away and suffer a horrific death trying to breathe for up to twenty or thirty minutes. The animals that live are usually gassed again until they are dead. The reason most shelters give for killing animals is that the animal was either (1) sick or old, (2) no one would adopt them, or (3) they had no more room in the shelter.3 Limiting Gas Chambers in Georgia In 1990, Chesley Morton, a member of the Georgia House of Representatives sponsored and passed the Georgia Humane Euthanasia Act, which was an attempt to limit the use of gas chambers at animal shelters in Georgia.4 The statute mandated the use of sodium pentobarbital rather than using gas to kill shelter animals. (O.C.G.A. § 4-11-5.1). However, there were several exceptions or loopholes in the law that if read broadly, would allow gas chambers to be used in the state: (1) Should a shelter have used commercially bottled carbon monoxide gas before July 1, 1990, and have properly notified the Commissioner of Agriculture in writing that they use gas, they will be allowed to continue to use gas (O.C.G.A § 4-11-5.1(b)(1)); (2) Rural counties with less than 25,000 people (O.C.G.A.
    [Show full text]
  • The Gas Chamber of Sherlock Holmes
    The Gas Chamber of Sherlock Holmes An Attempt at a Literary Analysis of the Holocaust Gassing Claim by Samuel Crowell 1999 CODOH PDF by AAARGH Editions on Internet 2005 Samuel CROWELL : The Gas Chambers of Sherlock Holmes "In Memoriam!" Dec 22, 1997: Revised Jan 10, 1999 Analytical Table of Contents Introduction The First Reports German Disinfection Procedures The First Reports from Auschwitz and Majdanek The Eastern Camps, Polevoi's Report, and the Gerstein Statement The Canonical Holocaust The Nuremberg Trials The Confessions of Rudolf Höß Interpreting Documents and the Postwar Literature Retrofitting the Euthanasia Campaign The Fear of Cremation and Poison Gas German Civil Defense Civil Defense in the Concentration Camps Pressac's "Criminal Traces" The Gas Chamber of Sherlock Holmes Conclusions NOTES — 2 — Samuel CROWELL : The Gas Chambers of Sherlock Holmes 1. Introduction A COMMON BELIEF is that in World War Two the National Socialist government of Germany carried out a secret policy of mass exterminations, chiefly using extermination gas chambers. The policy is said to have been ordered by Adolf Hitler, and involved the gassing of millions of human beings, who subsequently were burned either in crematoria or in huge pits so that scarcely a trace of their bodies remained. The claim of mass gas extermination has been questioned ever since the late 1940's, but only by a few people, and very much on the fringe of public discourse.2 In the early 1970's several new critics of the gas extermination claim emerged, and over the past two decades they have been joined by many others, so that now there are at least several dozen who have written on the subject.3 These researchers consider themselves heir to the tradition of those historians who sought in the 1920's to revise, and de-politicize, our understanding of the First World War, and so consider themselves historical revisionists.
    [Show full text]