PDA

View Full Version : How One Person Managed To Thwart And Delay The Death Penalty For Years Thru Her Lies



Jolie Rouge
08-23-2007, 09:15 PM
Private eye gets five years for fake documents in death row cases
By DON THOMPSON Associated Press Writer
08/16/2007 06:41:59 PM PDT

SACRAMENTO—Death penalty investigator Kathleen Culhane said she recognized from the start that she was breaking the law when she systematically faked more than two dozen documents in an attempt to derail fast-approaching executions.

Her goal was to buy the condemned inmates more time. And in that she succeeded, prosecutors said, forcing attorneys to retrace her steps to make sure she didn't do more to undermine the state's legal system.

Culhane, 40, smiled slightly Thursday as she was led away in handcuffs to begin serving a five-year prison term for two counts of forgery and single counts of perjury and filing false documents. Her attorney said she is likely to actually serve about two years and eight months.

Under a plea agreement, the former San Francisco-based investigator avoided a possible 19 years in prison on 45 counts. She originally was charged with filing false documents under the names of 11 jurors, two witnesses, two court interpreters and one police officer. "I definitely knew the seriousness of what I was doing and what was at stake," Culhane told the Associated Press.

"For many years I worked legally and really strived to uphold truth in our justice system. But I think part of the truth of this is we have a very dysfunctional defense system in terms of the death penalty," Culhane said in a courthouse interview moments before she was sentenced.

She said she grew frustrated that most death penalty appeals ultimately were rejected and the inmates executed. "I think it got to the point where although I knew these acts were wrong, I believed they were necessary in order to try to prevent, or delay, executions," she said.

A defiant Culhane used her sentencing hearing in Sacramento County Superior Court to criticize at length a justice system she was sworn to serve.

Though trained as a lawyer, Culhane worked as a private investigator for Habeas Corpus Resource Center in San Francisco and for private attorneys defending condemned inmates in the final stages of their court appeals and in last-ditch clemency appeals to California governors.

She said she started making up statements from real witnesses and jurors and forging their signatures on documents favorable to condemned murderers out of her belief that the death penalty is often disproportionately applied to racial minorities and the poor.

She got away with it for years.

Investigators eventually found that Culhane filed at least 23 fraudulent documents to help four death row inmates between November 2002 and February 2006. They say she faked documents for a fifth inmate as well, but those allegations were dropped as part of her plea agreement.

Though Culhane said she was careful in forging the documents, prosecutors said she misspelled one juror's name and used another's old address.

She was discovered after Michael Morales petitioned Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger for clemency as he was about to be executed last year for the 1981 rape and murder of a Central Valley teenager.

San Joaquin County prosecutors challenged six documents provided by Culhane. They found jurors who swore they had never spoken with Culhane and said they supported Morales' death sentence.

San Joaquin Deputy District Attorney Robert Himelblau, who attended Thursday's sentencing, said it is ironic that Morales' execution has since been stayed because of concerns about the state's lethal injection method—an issue that was not related to Culhane. Morales is on death row for the rape and murder of 17-year-old Terri Winchell.

Senior Assistant Attorney General Michael Farrell told Judge Gary Ransom that California voters have consistently supported the death penalty, despite Culhane's concerns. He said Culhane's actions could undermine crime victims and the public's confidence in the judicial system.

"There's a real danger that people may inflict street justice. There's a real danger that suspects can get killed. That's the real irony here," Farrell said.

Culhane's attorney, Stuart Hanlon, told Ransom that his client engaged in acts of "civil disobedience."

Not so, said Himelblau.

"Civil disobedience involves breaking the law in an open and a notorious fashion, like sitting in the front of the bus or marching or protesting," Himelblau said after the hearing.

In addition to Morales, the other three death-row inmates named in Culhane's charges are: Jose Guerra, convicted by a Los Angeles County jury for the 1990 rape and murder of Kathleen Powell; Vicente Figueroa Benavides, convicted by a Kern County jury for the 1991 murder and rape of a 21-month-old child; and Christian Monterroso, convicted by an Orange County jury for the 1991 murders of Tarsem Singh and Ashokkumar Patel and the attempted murder of Allen Canellas.

Each remains on death row with pending appeals.

Under Culhane's plea agreement, prosecutors dropped forgery charges related to the case of a fifth condemned inmate, Richard Clark. He was convicted of murdering Rosie Grover, 15, who was walking home from a bus stop in Ukiah when Clark abducted, raped and fatally stabbed her in 1985.

Morales' attorneys had hired Culhane, but in the other three cases she was working as a staff investigator for the Habeas Corpus Resource Center in San Francisco. The center has withdrawn all the declarations she submitted and cooperated fully, Farrell said.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_6643404?nclick_check=1


It is a telling but unsurprising comment on the anti-death penalty industry that it has to rely on fraud to gum up the works yet one more time. The "accountability" issue here is that decades after their crimes and sentences, these murderers have not fulfilled their sentences. Shame on Culhane. Shame on the anti-DP movement.



Michael Morales petitioned Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger for clemency as he was about to be executed last year for the 1981 rape and murder of a Central Valley teenager.

Caught faking documents to defend the guy that raped and beat to death, with a hammer, a 17 year old girl.

Kathleen Culhane also lied to protect Vincente Benavides, who raped and sodomized 21-month-old Consuelo Verdugo so brutally that several of her internal organs were “cracked in half.” Consuelo lingered for 8 days and, undoubtedly, suffered a horrible death.

PrincessArky
08-24-2007, 04:17 AM
would like to see someone just as nice as those she helped run into her on a dark side street one night and then see how she feels about that

LuvBigRip
08-24-2007, 08:25 AM
Charming. Love that there are people out there who love the criminal more than the victim. With liberal judges sitting on the bench, idiots who sit on juries and toidis like this, it will only get worse.

Everyone sing kumbaya, hug the poor little criminal and it will all be better.

ilovecats
08-24-2007, 06:13 PM
Kathleen Culhane also lied to protect Vincente Benavides, who raped and sodomized 21-month-old Consuelo Verdugo so brutally that several of her internal organs were “cracked in half.” Consuelo lingered for 8 days and, undoubtedly, suffered a horrible death.


How could anyone live with themselves after this?That is disgusting.

PrincessArky
08-25-2007, 05:41 AM
Kathleen Culhane also lied to protect Vincente Benavides, who raped and sodomized 21-month-old Consuelo Verdugo so brutally that several of her internal organs were “cracked in half.” Consuelo lingered for 8 days and, undoubtedly, suffered a horrible death.


How could anyone live with themselves after this?That is disgusting.

well I couldnt but then again I have morals sounds like this one doesnt

Jolie Rouge
01-07-2008, 11:46 AM
Court divided over lethal injection case
By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 9 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Supreme Court justices indicated Monday they are deeply divided over a challenge to the way most states execute prisoners by lethal injection, which critics say creates an avoidable risk of excruciating pain.

With executions in the United States halted since late September, the court heard arguments in a case from Kentucky that calls into question the mix of three drugs used in most executions.

Justice Antonin Scalia was among several conservatives on the court who suggested he would uphold Kentucky's method of execution and allow capital punishment to resume.

States have been careful to adopt procedures that do not seek to inflict pain and should not be barred from carrying out executions even if prison officials sometimes make mistakes in administering drugs, Scalia said. "There is no painless requirement" in the Constitution, Scalia said.

But other justices said they are troubled by the procedure in which three drugs are administered in succession to knock out, paralyze and kill prisoners. The argument against the three-drug protocol is that if the initial anesthetic does not take hold, a third drug that stops the heart can cause excruciating pain. The second drug, meanwhile, paralyzes the prisoner, rendering him unable to express his discomfort.

"I'm terribly troubled by the fact that the second drug seems to cause all risk of excruciating pain," Justice John Paul Stevens said.

Both sides in the case said they are bothered by the seemingly endless series of death penalty cases that come to the court.

Justice David Souter urged his colleagues to take the time necessary to issue a definitive decision about the three-drug method in this case, even if it means sending the case back to Kentucky for more study by courts there.

Scalia, however, said such a move would mean "a national cessation of executions. We're looking at years. We wouldn't want that to happen."

Kentucky, backed by the Bush administration, says it works hard to execute inmates humanely, countering claims that its procedure violates the 8th Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

But Donald Verrilli, a Washington lawyer who is a veteran of capital cases, told the justices that problems with executions in California, North Carolina and other states show that the three-drug procedure should be scrapped or thoroughly revamped.

"The risk here is real. That is why it is unlawful to euthanize animals the way Kentucky executes inmates," Verrilli said. Kentucky bars the use of the paralytic on animals. An overdose of barbiturates is commonly used on animals.

Verrilli suggested a similar method be adopted in Kentucky.

But Roy Englert, arguing for the state, said a single drug has never been used in executions.

By contrast, he said, Kentucky regularly trains its execution team and employs an experienced worker to insert the intravenous lines through which the drugs are administered.

Recent executions in Florida and Ohio took much longer than usual, with strong indications that the prisoners suffered severe pain in the process. Workers had trouble inserting the IV lines that are used to deliver the drugs.

Lined up in front of the court waiting to attend the arguments, college students Jeremy Sperling and Gira Joshi said they oppose the death penalty, but regard making executions less painful and more humane as a worthy goal.

"You have the right to die with dignity," said Joshi, a political science and religion major at New Jersey's Rutgers University. Sperling, a psychology and religion major at New York University, said serving a life prison term is the appropriate alternative to the death penalty.

The case is Baze v. Rees, 07-5439.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080107/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_lethal_injection;_ylt=AozTY6sUeexvChZHT.6Tq zKs0NUE
See also http://docket.medill.northwestern.edu/archives/004624.php



"You have the right to die with dignity," said Joshi, a political science and religion major at New Jersey's Rutgers University.

Too bad they do not seem to have the same compassion for the victims of these crimes.

It is interesting that I can find all types of documentaion on the court case ( Baze v. Rees )before the Supreme Court but can find almost nothing on the crimes committed by Ralph Baze and Thomas C. Bowling ...

PrincessArky
01-07-2008, 11:55 AM
Too bad they do not seem to have the same compassion for the victims of these crimes.

Exactly

Jolie Rouge
01-07-2008, 11:57 AM
It is interesting that I can find all types of documentation on the court case ( Baze v. Rees )before the Supreme Court but can find almost nothing on the crimes committed by Ralph Baze and Thomas C. Bowling ...
In the Supreme Court’s modern death penalty jurisprudence, it has seldom shown any interest in reviewing the constitutionality of specific methods of execution. And, in fact, it had repeatedly passed up chances to rule on the legality of the lethal injection method itself. In two decisions – Nelson v. Campbell in 2004 and Hill v. McDonough in 2006 – the Supreme Court ruled that death row inmates facing execution by lethal injection could bring constitutional challenges to that procedure. As a result, perhaps half of the inmates facing death by that method brought challenges in state or federal court – often, raising the issue on the very eve of execution.

The Kentucky case is different: there is no execution date set for either of the two inmates. It is important to stress, though, that they are not challenging their convictions, their death sentences, or the general proposition that lethal injection is a constitutionally valid method of execution. Their focus is on the specific chemical protocol used in Kentucky and 35 other states.

The appeal was filed by two Kentuckians who received death sentences for double murders. Ralph Baze was convicted of the shooting murders of a sheriff and a deputy sheriff in Powell County, Ky., in 1992, when they were trying to serve felony warrants on him from Ohio. They were killed execution-style.

Thomas C. Bowling was convicted of the shooting murders of a couple, and wounding their two-year-old son, as the victims sat inside their car in a business parking lot in Lexington, Ky., in 1990. Bowling had run into their car with his vehicle, got out and shot the three, and then fled the scene.

They filed challenges to the three-drug protocol in Kentucky state court in 2004, leading ultimately to a ruling rejecting their challenge, by the Kentucky Supreme Court on April 19, 2007.

http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=Baze_v._Rees

renaissanceman
01-07-2008, 03:15 PM
In many states the families of victims arent even allowed to be heard at parole hearings and death penalty appeals etc.

Our system in many cases actually protects the criminals MORE than the honest citizens and families left behind.

We need a massive overhaul of the judicial system, and a way to expedite death penalty cases.

Why on earth should a convicted murderer be able to stymie the rulings of a court for in some cases over 20 years!!???

freeby4me
01-07-2008, 03:20 PM
In many states the families of victims arent even allowed to be heard at parole hearings and death penalty appeals etc.

Our system in many cases actually protects the criminals MORE than the honest citizens and families left behind.

We need a massive overhaul of the judicial system, and a way to expedite death penalty cases.

Why on earth should a convicted murderer be able to stymie the rulings of a court for in some cases over 20 years!!???

:clapping :clapping ITA Ten Thousand percent!!! :clapping :clapping

gmyers
01-07-2008, 03:40 PM
It seems simple to me. Why don't the supreme court members sit in on a lethal injection and see for themselves if it looks like the prisoner is in evtreme pain. If it doesn't look like it then problem solved. If it does then adjust the medicine where it doesn't cause pain but don't stop the executions.