Welcome to the new version of European Tribune. It's just a new layout, so everything should work as before - please report bugs here.

Exhibit 1

by Cat Tue Aug 22nd, 2017 at 11:28:10 PM EST

I did write

In the USA,the convicted person doesn't "appeal" the sentence. The convict's complaint addresses the injury (certain death) resulting from defective "due process" at trial e.g. errors in findings of fact (evidence) or findings of law (procedure) that preclude an exculpatory verdict. The remedy sought is a new trial.

Following is an example of those principles invoked by the petition, MARCELLUS WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. STEVE LARKIN, Superintendent, Potosi Correctional Center, Respondent (pdf), reported today

Whether the governor of Missouri is or is not a lawyer is irrelevant. The same, Mr Eric Grietens, confidently stated the certainty of harm to Mr Williams commanded by sentencing. "A sentence of death is the ultimate, permanent punishment. To carry out the death penalty, the people of Missouri must have confidence in the judgment of guilt. In light of new information, I am appointing a Board of Inquiry in this case." That is to investigate findings of fact.


According to Courthouse News, Grietens exercised the limit of his authorities, conferred by the Constitution of Missouri, to stay William's execution and convene a Board of Inquiry "whose duty it shall be to gather information, whether of not admissible in a court of law, bearing on whether or not a person condemned to death should be executed or ... whether the person's sentence should be commuted."

Concurrently, defendant's counsel has petitioned the US Supreme Court, given that the Supreme Court of Missouri dismissed a petition for writ of habeas corpus one week earlier. Defendant has exhausted any recourse to relief from the state, as is required, in order to petition the US Supreme Court to review alleged errors in findings of law.

On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The Supreme Court Of Missouri

Based upon the uncontradicted opinions of two DNA experts that petitioner could be excluded as the source of the m ale DNA detected on the knife, petitioner filed an original petition for a writ of habeas corpus before the Missouri Supreme Court on August 14, 2017 that  raised a freestanding claim of  innocence based on these new DNA test results and other existing evidence that had previously emerged during prior post-conviction proceedings that undermined the credibility of the prosecution's case. In the petition, petitioner also requested an evidentiary hearing before a special master, as  authorized by Missouri law, so that a trier of fact could hear and weigh all of the evidence that establishes his innocence of the murder for which he was condemned to die. The following  day the Missouri Supreme Court summarily denied the habeas petition, without granting a hearing, in a one page order.  

In light of the foregoing facts, this petition presents the following questions:

  1. Whether a freestanding claim of actual innocence presents a cognizable constitutional claim under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.

  2. Whether the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit an execution from being carried out where new DNA evidence and  other reliable evidence establishes that the condemned man is probably innocent.

  3. Whether the Missouri Supreme Court violated petitioner's Fourteenth Amendment rights in failing to grant him an evidentiary hearing on his claim of innocence and in failing to  reexamine the proportionality of his death sentence based up on this newly discovered evidence as required by state law.

"Nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"

Defendant's "reasons", or arguments, to compel an opinion on violations of 8th and 14th from the SCOTUS are presented in the table of contents of the brief.
 

Display:
Of constitutional models, 'personal' and 'public' law litigation, equity and "English law" efficacy

Supreme Court bars Triple Talaq for six months. Here's a 11-point primer is a fascinating example in retrospection.

The opinion of the court to which the article links is 395pp. It's actually, literally a compendium of related law, quoted at length, to demonstrate the tribunal's reasoning and it's purpose, which is to conform socially acceptable rules of conduct from diverse "custom and usage".

I'm at p298. Thank you, Prof. Lal.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Wed Aug 23rd, 2017 at 01:45:42 PM EST
This paragraph exemplifies the "plain language" exposition and citations in the court's reasoning. It features issues in dispute and juridical classifications (indicated above).


180. Muslims are followers of Islam. Muslims consider the Quran their holy book. For their personal relations, they follow the Muslim `personal law' - `Shariat'. The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, as already  noticed  above provided, "the rule of decision" in matters pertaining, inter alia, to marriage, dissolution of mar riage including talaq, ila, zihar, lian, khula and mubaraat would be the Mus lim `personal law' - `Shariat', and not, any custom or usage to the contrary. It is therefore, that by a statutory  intervention, customs and usages in conflict with Muslim `personal law', were  done away with, in connection with  `personal  law' matters, in relation to Muslims. The Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 provided, grounds for dissolution of marriage to Muslim women, under Section 2 of the above enactment. Details with reference to 1937 and 1939  legislations, have already been narrated, in Part IV  -  Legislation in India, in the field of Muslim `personal law'. Refe rence may, therefore, be made to Part IV above.

p249

Think about this marvel of "transparency", when next you gird your intellect to translate another Anglo-merican "position paper" (opinion) ...

aaaand that may be as early as this evening or tomorrow after the UK gov't releases version No. 3 of UK outlines plans to break free of European Court jurisdiction after Brexit

by accepting third-country status on "the withdrawal date", 29 March 2019. Thereafter, the EU has asserted, ECJ enforcement will apply only to disputes entered in and contracts concluded by EU28 "persons," when the UK enjoyed membership in the EU.

< wipes tears >

After 29 March 2017, UK and EU may negotiate a NEW! governing treaty.

::
EU Position Papers

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Wed Aug 23rd, 2017 at 04:41:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Categorized "Future partnership papers" at UK.gov | Article 50 and negotiations with the EU

Enforcement and dispute resolution (pdf)

so TTIP arbitration by any other name ... wait for it...

In leaving the European Union, we will bring about an end to the direct [!] jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).
[...]
There  are a number of existing precedents where the  EU has reached agreements with third countries which provide for a close cooperative relationship without the CJEU having direct jurisdiction over those countries.
[...]
The UK views enforcement and dispute resolution as two  distinct issues, and it is not  necessary, or indeed common, for one body to carry out both functions in this way.
[...]
For example, many  EU free trade agreements with  third countries include provisions on resolving disputes through a binding arbitration model in addition to mechanisms for political agreement.

NAFTA? SRSLY??

For example, the EEA Agreement provides for the creation of the EFTA Surveillance Authority. The Surveillance Authority is responsible for ensuring fulfillment of obligations under the EEA agreement by the EFTA States.

Say wut?
The ability of the European Commission and the CJEU within the EU legal system to impose sanctions, such as fines for non-compliance with EU rules, is exceptional.
[...]
There is no precedent [!], and indeed no imperative driven by EU, UK or international law, which demands that enforcement or dispute resolution of future UK-EU agreements falls under the direct jurisdiction of the CJEU.

< wipes tears >

o, I do believe, US District Courts beg to differ along with the Republic of Argentina and a host of USAID beneficiaries: indirect jurisdiction works!

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Wed Aug 23rd, 2017 at 05:35:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Part-6 - Judicial pronouncements, on the subject of `ta laq-e-biddat'). These judgments, however, attempted the  interpretative course, as  against an invasive one. The  details  depicted  above  relate  to  mar riage  between Christians, Parsis, inter-faith  marriages, Muslims and  Hindus, including Buddhists, Sikhs and Jains. The unbroken  practice during the pre- independence period, and the post  independence period - under the Constitution, demonstrates a clear and unambiguous course, namely, reform in the matter of  marriage and divorce (which are integral components of  `personal law') was only introduced through legislation. Therefore in continuation of the conclusion already recorded, namely, that it is the constitutional duty of all courts to preserve and protect `personal law' as a fundamental right, any change thereof, has to be only by legislation under Articles  25(2) and 44, read with entry 5  of the Concurrent List contained in the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. [p253]
 
There follows the court's scrupulous regard, "IX. Impact of international conventions and declarations on 'talaq-e-biddat'", relating articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Constitution of India each prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex, the European Convention on Human Rights affirming the presumption of innocence, and the Indigenous and Tribal Populations Convention (1957) "right of ownership ... over the land" leading to that intermediate judgement.
(8) Reforms to 'personal law' in India, with reference to socially unacceptable practices in different religions, have come about only by way of legislative intervention.
 

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 04:47:29 AM EST
ROPER, SUPERINTENDENT, POTOSI CORRECTIONAL CENTER v. SIMMONS 543 U.S. 551 (2005)
(c) The overwhelming weight of international opinion against the juvenile death penalty is not controlling here, but provides respected and significant confirmation for the Court's determination that the penalty is disproportionate punishment for offenders under 18. See, e. g., Thompson, supra, at 830-831, and n. 31. The United States is the only country in the world that continues to give official sanction to the juvenile penalty. It does not lessen fidelity to the Constitution or pride in its origins to acknowledge that the express affirmation of certain fundamental rights by other nations and peoples underscores the centrality of those same rights within our own heritage of freedom. Pp. 575-578. 112 S. W. 3d 397, affirmed. Kennedy, J., delivered  the  opinion of the Court.

Now here is the bouncing plea OTTE v. THE STATE OF OHIO from the US Supreme Court back to the tribal and indigenous lands of Cuyahoga County. Otte's post-conviction "appeal" to unconstitutionality of the penalty seeks a remedy which cannot be found without review of finding of facts, exculputory evidence, that exonerate him.

(ii) that the applicant was convicted under a statute that is in violation of the Constitution of the United States or the constitution of the state in which judgment was rendered, or that the conduct for which the applicant was prosecuted is constitutionally protected;

Otte maintains in principle that he would have been a protected class of convict, if at that time (1992) Roper had proscribed capital punishment for persons age 18 and younger in Ohio and scientific research subsequently admitted as in the decision Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Bredhold (1 Aug 2017) had been available in his own defense.

Dr. Benedict found that Mr. Bredhold was about four years behind his peer group in multiple capacities.

Otte appeals to "a national consensus against executing offenders under the age of twenty-one" to make clear objective indicia (notwithstanding custom and usage in Texas) that the death penalty is disproportionate punishment for offenders younger than 21 years old. That it is socially unacceptable. He is after all represented by federal public defenders.

Finally, Otte's prayer for relief depends on reversing time. After Chapman v. California, US standards for retroactive application of changes in constitutional law are narrowest when defendants convicted or sentenced have already exhausted a habeas proceeding, and it can "be said with relative assurance that [errors] had no effect on the ultimate verdict." For Otte was also convicted of additional substantive crimes, evoking instructions in McNeill v. United States which may well presume he alone is irredeemable.

He is scheduled to die 13 Sept 2017.


Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 05:01:13 AM EST
Duly noted sequel to Bredhold: Ohio Man Charged With Murder In Fatal Car Attack On Anti-White Nationalist March
"James Alex Fields Jr., 20, sped his silver Dodge Challenger into a crowd of people" killing  Heather Heyer. He had recently moved to Ohio from Kentucky.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 10:36:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
From a European (and non-legal specialist) point of view, this diary lacks context: Who is being executed for what, and why is this case unusual?  Are there any precedents and, if so, why might the outcome be different this time?  How might this case influence the ongoing development of US law? Of particular interest to us, are there any International or European human rights implications of what is going on that we need to consider (besides our principled objections to capital punishment).

Index of Frank's Diaries
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 10:26:20 AM EST
The answers to your questions are in the news articles and court documents linked to each exhibit. These are written in English. I had supposed readers interested in issues of law and its applications to socially acceptable and socially unacceptable behavior, especially punishment, would read this material.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 01:19:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
People usually have to recognize the relevance of something to an subject in which they are interested before devoting the effort necessary to pour thought technical or legal writing. Had some version of your answer above been in the body of the post that might have happened. As Missouri is next door, as I have long been following the standing outrage of wrongful convictions and death sentences for people of color and as the event described is topical I read the body anyway but wondered about the subsequent comments, which I mostly skimmed. It all made much more sense after your answer to Frank's question.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 01:54:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
m'k. India is not next door to either Missouri or Arkansas. Is this example of jurisprudence and the attempts of < reckless eyeballin'> those people to perfect a code of socially acceptable and socially unacceptable behavior irrelevant to those other people's um principles of justice?

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 04:16:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 04:35:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]
First comment in this thread, Frank, subject "Exhibit 2" linking to the news file and the opinion of the Supreme Court of India.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 05:37:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
So now your saying I have to read your diary, all linked documents, all comments, and their linked documents before I can make sense of a comment?  There is no reference to India in the comment itself - only if you open the link. I'm sorry, life is too short. If you have something to say, something on which your argument relies, saying it directly in your text. Links are for supporting evidence and should be optional from a reader's point of view. Otherwise, I'm outta here! :-)

Index of Frank's Diaries
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 05:49:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Certainly not. And I see your reasoning behind it - now.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Fri Aug 25th, 2017 at 02:06:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
We all have different approaches to blogging and YMMV, but my approach is to make an argument which I hope is of directly relevance to ET readers and support it with links which might be of further interest to a few ET readers with a specialist interest in a particular topic. However I try to ensure a post stands on its own merits for readers with just a few minutes to devote to a particular topic. So I often summarize a plethora of articles on a particular topic or make an argument based on them which I have not seen elsewhere in the MSM.

My editorial difficulty with your post is that it assumes a great deal of background knowledge to the particular case you are highlighting and assumes people will read a great deal of linked material in order to get a sense of what you are going on about. Although you state "It was my intention to illustrate briefly a "principle" or axiom of human activity, issues of law and its applications to socially acceptable and socially unacceptable behavior" I'm not sure the average reader will be much the wiser as to what argument you are trying to make.

It is an issue of connecting with your readership - such as it is - and providing a narrative that will entice a time poor reader to follow you down a certain track. I found myself struggling to make sense of what you are trying to say and wondering why I am even reading it given that I am not a lawyer with a specific interest in the development of US criminal law. Given time constraints, we all have to be extremely selective in what we read. Why is it that ET readers need to know what is going on in this particular case? It doesn't jump out at me. Perhaps an opening paragraph setting out what is at stake for all of us would set things to right...

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 03:25:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
My speech, generally, is aporetic. My opinions about certain, specific current events are not, because they are mine until I care to share them.

it assumes a great deal of background knowledge to the particular case you are highlighting and assumes people will read a great deal of linked material
I don't assume. To the contrary, after twenty-five years navigating the innerboobs, I have seen things, as Roy says, that defy all claims to the universal, the singularity, the "hive" mind of humanity and the One Economy. I ought not expect readers to read the links; I ought expect readers to criticize and excerpt, because its the wrong excerpt, no telling why, except it's TOO LONG.

Yet that doesn't stop me trying to pull the jailhouse lawyers together. For real.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 04:09:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
None of us have any entitlement to be read, much less promoted, recommended, commented or acted upon. But for me communication, learning and collaboration is what it's all about. Spouting opinions for it's own sake is little more than a venting of ego. As an editor, I see myself as haveing a responsibility to try and make this blog more accessible, enjoyable, educative, and widely read.  As you can see, I am doing a terrible job. It doesn't stop me from trying...

Index of Frank's Diaries
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 04:33:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]
< wipes tears >

Now there's an interesting idea in search of a public forum against censorship perhaps.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 05:41:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
being utterly bored with the constant misdirection of conversation is not the same thing as censoring it. Ciao

Index of Frank's Diaries
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 06:37:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Gov. Greitens: Pull Down Missouri's Racist Death Penalty Statutes!


Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Fri Aug 25th, 2017 at 02:46:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It was my intention to illustrate briefly a "principle" or axiom of human activity, issues of law and its applications to socially acceptable and socially unacceptable behavior may not isolated by geography, or nationality.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Thu Aug 24th, 2017 at 01:34:47 PM EST
Two recent stories about restorative justice pilot projects in the USA.

Restorative Justice Community Court arrives in North Lawndale
Cook County circuit court and UCAN "peace circles" received a $200,000 grant from the DoJ Bureau of Justice Assistance.

Innocent But Pleading Guilty
Relating convictions and exoneration. LISTEN. WYPR "On the Record" host talks with reporter Megan Rose and Maryland Restorative Justice Initiative exec director Walter Lomax.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Sat Sep 16th, 2017 at 12:55:03 AM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

Top Diaries

Smudges

by Oui - Sep 23
9 comments

2034

by Frank Schnittger - Sep 10
5 comments

Faux Accompli

by Cat - Sep 14
19 comments

Civic Self Defense Resources

by gmoke - Sep 19
1 comment

Recent Diaries

Smudges

by Oui - Sep 23
9 comments

Civic Self Defense Resources

by gmoke - Sep 19
1 comment

Faux Accompli

by Cat - Sep 14
19 comments

2034

by Frank Schnittger - Sep 10
5 comments

The Focus Group

by THE Twank - Aug 31
10 comments

Labour grows up?

by Frank Schnittger - Aug 27
57 comments

Exhibit 1

by Cat - Aug 22
22 comments

EU Position Papers

by Cat - Aug 22
25 comments

PACER

by Cat - Aug 18
5 comments

More Diaries...