Thursday, April 03, 2014

How grotesque can an anti death penalty person be?

How grotesque can an anti death penalty person be?
Dudley Sharp

Defense attorney Thomas Ullmann defended Steven Hayes in the capital murder trial of the three rape/torture/murders of Jennifer Hawke-Petit, who was raped and strangled to death, along with her two daughters, 17-year-old Haley and 11-year-old Michaela. Michaela was sexually assaulted. 

Both girls were burned alive and died of smoke inhalation. 

Dr. Bill Petit was beaten with a baseball bat, suffers permanent injuries, but survived. He is the sole survivor from his immediate family.

When the day came for sentencing Hayes to death, what did Ullman say?

"Today when the court sentences Steven Hayes to death everyone becomes a killer. We all become Steven Hayes." (1)

Ullman said that with Bill Petit and the extended Hawke/Petit family, loved ones and friends in the courtroom. Ullman called all of them Steven Hayes, a multiple rapist/torturer/murderer.

The moral decay of Ullman's statement is hard to fathom, as is the profound cruelty of when and where he voiced it.

Even Steven Hayes voiced knowing the moral differences between guilty murderer and innocent victims, the punishment of the guilty and the violation of the innocent.


A Statement by William A. Petit, Jr.:  

"Justice is the first virtue of social institutions," according to philosopher John Rawls. It transcends national borders, races and cultures. The death penalty is the appropriate societal response to the brutal and willful act of capital felony murder. Every murder destroys a portion of society. Those murdered can never grow and contribute to humankind; the realization of their potential will never be achieved. I support the death penalty not as a deterrent or for revenge or closure, but because it is just and because it prevents murderers from ever harming again. By intentionally, unlawfully taking the life of another, a murderer breaks a sacrosanct law of society and forfeits his own right to live.  (In a home invasion, Dr. Petit was, severely injured, his wife  Jennifer and their 11 year old daughter Michaela were raped and murdered. Both daughters, Michaela and Hayley were burned, alive.)


(1) "Connecticut man gets the death penalty for home invasion killings",,0,6596268.story

Saturday, March 08, 2014

CNN "Death Row Stories": How Bad Can A Network Be?

CNN "Death Row Stories": How Bad Can A Network Be?
Dudley Sharp

CNN is presenting a series of death row stories, beginning March 9th.

Based upon a review of CNN's work, introducing the series, as well as some previous death penalty articles, there are four questions for CNN.

Did CNN decide not to fact check? If so, why?

If CNN did fact check, why didn't you catch all your errors?

Will the series continue with those same standards?

All of this has been sent to  many (16 at this time) CNN producers and reporters and, also, to Redford/Sundance & Jigsaw Productions, the two production companies for "Death Row Stories".

1) The intro video for the series tells us how bad the series could be (1): 

A dream team of anti death penalty folks who can't seem to get anything right.

Kirk Bloodsworth, released from prison, not death row, by DNA exclusion, brings up the 143 "exonerated" from death row. He well knows that there are no 143 exonerated (2), as does Richard Dieter, who created this fraud. I presume that Jeffrey Toobin has fact checked and knows it's a fraud. But he doesn't speak up.

Ms. Banfied, the CNN anchor,  chimes in with a  -  isn't the number 130?

My guess is that the 143 "exonerated" fraud (2) will be repeated again and again, as it has been throughout CNN's intros.

Mr. Toobin states that Mr. Bloodsworth's story,  almost, singlehandedly got rid of the death penalty in Maryland. Nonsense.

Mr. Bloodsworth was on death row for two years and was never at risk of execution. The facts are that after 20 years on death row, no Maryland murderers are at any risk of facing the sanction given. Mr. Bloodsworth's sentence was commuted to life, whereby nearly 7 years later he was excluded by DNA and released.

What has gotten rid of the death penalty in the 5 state legislatures that have, recently, so voted, are that they had a Democratic Governor, with a Democratic majority legislature, in each case, voting against the will of the people, a majority of whom supported the death penalty. Illinois and New Jersey voted repeal during lame duck sessions.  New York's death penalty law  was voided by a state court.

There are, currently, three states with an execution moratorium, established by one person in each of those states - the Democratic Governor.

Mr. Toobin, as CNN, are aware of all of those facts. Aren't they? Did you miss the pattern?

Mr. Toobin seems to think that this exoneration fraud has so infested the media that some jurors can't help but be affected by it and that such has contributed to the reduction in death sentences. 

There is little doubt that reinforced frauds can have an influence, but there is no evidence that the exoneration fraud has so affected jurors.

The facts are that there is a 99.6% accuracy rate in actuallyguilty findings in death penalty cases, with the 0.4% actually innocent going free (2). It may be the most accurate sanction in the US, with, no surprise, the greatest of due process protections (3). 

Wouldn't that give jurors more confidence in considering a death sentence?

Or is Mr. Toobin confident that this exoneration fraud will get more acceptance, as opposed to it being exposed and corrected? Mr. Toobin?

The lack of fact checking and balance by CNN is astounding.  Will it continue?

The fraud of these "exonerations" has been well known for over a decade, indicating that CNN may have willfully and blindly accepted story lines with an anti death penalty bias, a presumption supported by other statements in the intros and other reports, by CNN.  

2)  CNN:  Another Horrendous Intro (4) for "Death Row Stories".

Maybe CNN should fact check?  We have this jewel:

"Upwards of 10% of all death row prisoners are later exonerated for the crimes," writes author and historian Thomas Cahill (4).

That would be "upwards" of 840 "exonerated" inmates, since 1976.

The real number is somewhere between 24-44, or 0.4% (2)

Even the horrendous Death Penalty Information Center puts it at "just" 143, or 1.7% (2)

3) CNN states (5):

A) At sidebar

35 -- Percent of executed defendants who were white
56 -- Percent of executed defendants who were black
138 -- Death row exonerations since 1973

They reversed it. Terrible.

Reality. 35% of those executed were black, 56% white (6). Today, it's 34% black, 56% white.

CNN, most likely, doesn't know that white murders are twice as likely to be executed as are black murderers (6).

The 138 (now 143)  "exoneration" is a blatant fraud, well known for over a decade, if CNN cared to fact check. They didn't, we can hope.

The real number is somewhere between 24-44 (2).

B) In the body of the article (5), we have this:

"There's no denying most Americans are pro-death penalty. " " . . . according to Gallup, . . . Support reached as high as 80% in 1994 and declined to 61% in a poll this month -- the lowest since 1972."

CNN missed better polls that showed 80% & 83% support (6), in the same year as the 61% poll. Support went to 86% in 2013 (7).

C) CNN writes:

"When asked to choose between the death penalty and life in prison, 50% of respondents in a recent CNN/ORC International Poll said they favored a life sentence, compared to 48% who preferred the death penalty."

What CNN doesn't comprehend is that this is a preference poll, not an exclusion poll. Neither death penalty nor life without parole support, all of a sudden, went down to such low levels, or at all. The individual support remains the same (6), likely 80% or so for the death penalty and greater than 90% for a life sentence, or does CNN wish to argue that support for life sentences, suddenly dropped to 50%?

D) From the same article. This is priceless:

"Thousands of people -- including entertainers, dignitaries, Amnesty International and the pope -- denounced the execution of Troy Davis. Some said they believed Davis was innocent in the slaying of a Georgia police officer. Others said there was too much doubt to execute him. (The officer's family, like the relatives of many victims, had no qualms about seeing the person convicted of their loved one's murder put to death.)"

"Entertainers"! "Dignitaries"! "Amnesty Intl"!  I think CNN is star struck.

Notice that CNN failed to say what the courts thought?  That is because the facts were that Davis was undeniably guilty (8). CNN, interesting exclusion.

E) The rest of this article is classic anti death penalty material, easily rebutted (8). You would have thought the article was written by Sister Helen Prejean (10).

4) Ohio's agonizing execution of Dennis McGuire (11). Really?

Well, as CNN reports:

"Ohio inmate Dennis McGuire appeared to gasp and convulse for roughly 10 minutes before he died Thursday by lethal injection using a new combination of drugs, reporters who witnessed it said"

"McGuire's "children and daughter-in-law were crying and visibly upset,"

"Watch this video  Witness: Inmate gasped during execution"

"He gasped deeply. It was kind of a rattling, guttural sound. There was kind of a snorting through his nose. A couple of times, he definitely appeared to be choking,"

". . . it is entirely premature to consider this execution protocol to be anything other than a failed, agonizing experiment,"

"CNN's Sonny Hostin said that McGuire's execution will likely spark debate over whether how inmates react to the use of the drugs constitutes cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the U.S. Constitution." 

And we could debate reporting.

How bad is CNN?  What some other reporters revealed (12): 

"State prison records released Monday say McGuire told guards that (McGuire's counsel, Robert) Lowe counseled him to make a show of his death that would, perhaps, lead to abolition of the death penalty. But three accounts from prison officials indicate McGuire refused to put on a display."

"Amy Borror, a spokeswoman for the public defender's office, said all accounts from execution eyewitnesses - which did not include Lowe - indicate McGuire was unconscious at the time he struggled to breathe."

"Medical experts would not comment on Mr. McGuire’s execution or speculate about what he experienced. They agreed that used for surgery, the two drugs would not cause pain."

“By virtue of what they do, they cause unconsciousness, and they inhibit pain,” said Dr. Howard Nearman, professor of anesthesiology at Case Western Reserve University."

As there was no surgery, both drugs were given at overdose levels and both drugs would enhance the effects of the other, of course there was no pain.

Do folks wheeze, snore, move or cough etc. while sleeping? Do those with opiate overdoses wheeze, snore, move, cough, have spasms, etc.? Of course, which is all that happened with McGuire, as some predicted.

The Associate Press witness:

"McGuire was still for almost five minutes, then emitted a loud snort, as if snoring, and continued to make that sound over the next several minutes. He also soundlessly opened and shut his mouth several times as his stomach rose and fell." "A coughing sound was Dennis McGuire’s last apparent movement, at 10:43 a.m. He was pronounced dead 10 minutes later."

No evidence of consciousness or pain.

And the series hasn't even started, yet. 

We can hope that there may be some good news with the fact that "Death Row Stories" is not produced by CNN.

Stay tuned.



1) CNN's "Death Row Stories" Promo, Added on February 11, 2014,

2) Sections 3 & 4 (read the rest, later)
The Innocent Frauds: Standard Anti Death Penalty Strategy 

3) One example

Texas Death Penalty Procedures

4) Talk with us: America's death penalty under scrutiny
 Join the conversation, iReport CNN, By Thom Patterson, CNN, March 4, 2014

5) "Death Rows Unlikely Opponents", CNN, 2011 


7) US Death Penalty Support at 80%: World Support Remains High
95% of Murder Victim's Family Members Support Death Penalty 

8)  Section 10) "Troy Davis & The Innocent Frauds of the anti death penalty lobby", Footnote 2, above

9)  New Testament Death Penalty Support Overwhelming 

10) Sister Helen Prejean: A Critical Review 

11) "Controversial execution in Ohio uses new drug combination", By Dana Ford and Ashley Fantz, CNN, Fri January 17, 2014

12) "The (imagined) Horror of Dennis McGuire's Execution"

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

The play "The Exonerated" - are any actually innocent?

"The Exonerated" -  anti truth, anti victim: Are any actually innocent?
Dudley Sharp


This play is presented as a true story of six innocents sent to death row because of corruption within the system.

The Exonerated is a true story just as CATS and The Lion King are.

The "error rate" for anti death penalty folks, in their nationwide claims of  "exonerated or "innocent" is 70-83%, depending upon review (1).

They have redefined "innocence" and "exonerated" as if they had redefined lie as truth.

Reviews of each "The Exonerated" cases, with links and contacts for your own review.

1) Robert Earl Hayes  Nothing about Hayes’ retrial changes the appeals court’s original observation that evidence existed to establish Hayes’ guilt.  Hayes has now been convicted of a nearly identical murder in New York, which was committed prior to the murder in Florida.    

Go to
2) Sunny Jacobs -- After the shooting, still at the scene of the murders, a trooper asked Jacobs: "Do you like shooting troopers?" Jacobs response:  "We had to."

The best review of the blatant dishonesty of this "Exonerated" case is "The Myth of Innocence", Josh Marquis, The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, v 95, No 2, Winter, 2005, Northwestern University School of Law.

Mr. Marquis can be reached at, or  503-791-0012.

There is no evidence to support a claim of innocence for Jacobs in the murder of two police officers in Florida. She eventually pled guilty to two counts of second degree murder and was released for time served, after 16 years. Hardly a finding of innocence.   

go to pages 40-46 at 

3) David Keaton --  Keaton's defense attorney stated that even without Keaton's numerous confessions, that the eyewitness testimony was likely sufficient to convict Keaton for the capital murder.

Through the testimony of numerous eyewitnesses, Keaton's numerous confessions, as well as those of co-defendants, Keaton was sentenced to death. There is no credible claim for innocence in this case of robbery/murder. The case was overturned on appeal. The prosecution chose not to re prosecute for a number of good reasons  --  1. he was no longer subject to the death penalty, because of changes in the law 2. Keaton was sentenced to 20 years in prison for a robbery that he committed ten days prior to the robbery/murder for which he was sentenced to death and 3. illness of witnesses.

Keaton was sentenced to death in 1971, under the old death penalty law. He was on death row for 13 months when the US Supreme Court overturned all death penalty cases in Furman v Georgia.

4) Delbert Tibbs -- The Florida Supreme Court candidly conceded that it should not have reversed Tibbs' conviction since the evidence was legally sufficient.

The state prosecutor who chose not to retry Tibbs  recently explained to the Florida Commission on Capital Crimes that Tibbs “was never an innocent man wrongfully accused. 

He was a lucky human being. He was guilty, he was lucky and now he is free." 

See no.10 at
and pages 134-138 at

5) Kerry Max Cook -- The judge, in accepting Cook's no contest plea, said that Cook was guilty of the crime and that the state was capable of proving its case.

This is not a DNA exoneration case.

Mr. Cook was convicted of the murder of Linda Jo Edwards, who was found in her apartment on June 10, 1977, beaten on the head with a plaster statue, stabbed in the throat, chest and back and sexually mutilated. Mr. Cook was arrested 2 months later where he worked as a bartender in Port Arthur. Officers said they found Mr. Cook's fingerprint on Ms. Edwards' apartment door. At first he denied knowing Ms. Edwards. Cook lied. He later said they met at the apartment complex's swimming pool and he went to her apartment. His original conviction resulting in a death sentence was overturned because of prosecutorial misconduct. 

A 1992 retrial ended in a hung jury. He was again convicted and sentenced to death in 1994. 

That verdict was overturned in 1996. Before a 4th trial, Mr. Cook pleaded no contest to a reduced charge of murder. He was sentenced to 20 years time served. Mr. Cook took the deal so he could avoid a possible return to death row. By taking the plea, both Cook and his attorneys conceded that this is hardly a case where there is no evidence for guilt and certainly not a case with confirmable actual innocence.

for more on this case, contact David Dobbs at

6) Gary Gauger -- Gauger confessed to the murder of his parents. That confession was thrown out based upon the lack of probable cause to arrest him. Gauger's ex-wife and children filed a wrongful death suit against Gauger in the murder of his parents. Gary's brother remains so convinced of Gary's guilt in the murders of their parents, that he has prepared a review of the case which claims to support Gary's guilt, even though there are now two other people jailed for the murders.

Furthermore, the trial court erroneously imposed a death sentence. The court granted a motion for reconsideration and vacated the sentence less than ten months later in September 1994. The trial court found that it had not considered all the mitigating evidence and concluded that Gauger should not be sentenced to death. People v. Bull, 705 N.E.2d 824, 843 (Ill. 1999); Chicago Tribune (9/23/94). Gauger served a brief time on death row. He was not properly sentenced to death by the trial court. He should never have been sent to death row because the trial court did not finally sentence him to be executed. Gauger’s case is an example of how consideration of mitigating evidence under current law results in a sentence less than death.

see no. 69 at 

Some additional articles:

"Cross-Examination for a Drama That Puts the Death Penalty on Trial",  Adam Liptak,  New York Times, January 27, 2005

"Prosecutors take exception to Court TV film", Richard Willing, USA TODAY, 1/24/05\

"The Myth of Innocence don’t believe everything you see on CourtTV",  Joshua Marquis, National Review, 1/27/05 

Are audiences being duped to further a political/social agenda? Of course. 

And theater critics?  They simply don't bother to fact check and blindly accept and repeat whatever the producers tell them.

Only one theater critic, Tom Sime of the Dallas Morning News, bothered to see if the claims were true. His brief review resulted in this published comment: 

 "Maybe three are actually innocent and three actually aren't.  In any case, blind faith - in the criminal justice process or in the truth of crusading art- is best left at home."

"The Exonerated" is strictly a bit of anti-death penalty deception, which is not at all surprising.  It appears that the Soros Foundation, through their Open Society Institute (OSI) is the primary benefactor of  "The Exonerated" . The Soros Foundation finances anti death penalty efforts, worldwide.

1)   The Innocent Frauds: Standard Anti Death Penalty Strategy

Monday, February 24, 2014

Gandhi "eye for an eye leaves everybody blind"

"An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind":
Zero evidence that Gandhi said it
Dudley Sharp

The quote should be attributed to Graham (below), with a correction against Gandhi's use

Fischer (below) suggested it as a philosophical principle of Gandhi, with zero attribution to Gandhi, which is where, I believe, this error started.

In the movie Gandhi, Briley, a screenwriter, put those words in Gandhi's mouth, for the fictional history.

Gandhi wouldn't have said it, because he wouldn't so pervert Christian text and its meaning. 

With zero evidence provided, Gandhi's family says (2006) that he did use it, confirming their belief that Gandhi misunderstood Christian scripture, something I think, highly, unlikely.

The actual meaning of the biblical text is that sanctions for crimes/sins shall be just and proportional to the wrongful act, as opposed to the wildly disproportionate and harsh sanctions of the past.

It was a call for more merciful and proportional sanctions.

There seems no chance that Gandhi would so misinterpret or pervert Christian scripture. 

It's a unfortunate reflection on Gandhi that many believe that he could make such an error and that, even worse, they do so with no evidence that Gandhi said it and, furthermore, to take it from the rightful author, George Graham, a politician, much more likely to make that error.

This, below, giving a timeline and attribution. from Wikileaks, all of which I have confirmed.

1914: "If…we were to go back to…'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,' there would be very few [Honourable] Gentlemen in this House who would not…be blind and toothless." — George Perry Graham, during a debate on capital punishment before the Canadian House of Commons. Official Report of the Debates of the House of Commons of the Dominion of Canada, Third Session-Twelfth Parliament, Vol CXIII, p. 496, February 5, 1914.

1950: "An-eye-for-an-eye-for-an-eye-for-an-eye ... ends in making everybody blind" in The Life of Mahatma Gandhi by Louis Fischer (1950), though Fischer did not attribute it to Gandhi and seemed to be giving his own description of Gandhi's philosophy.

Sharp note: I think this is were the error started.

1958: "The old law of an eye for an eye leaves everybody blind" in Stride Toward Freedom: The Montgomery Story by Martin Luther King, Jr., 1958.

1982: "An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind" in the 1982 film, Gandhi. In a 1993 biographical article about screenwriter John Briley, Jon Krampner wrote, "…Gandhi never said it. Michigan graduate John Briley put those pithy words in his mouth." From "John Briley '51 - Epic Screenwriter", Michigan Today, March 1993, p. 12.

Sharp note: And that is where the error became more well distributed.

2006: There is a quaternary source in Yale Book of Quotations (2006), in which editor Fred R. Shapiro states that the Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence stated that Gandhi's family believes it authentic, but did not provide any further reference and provided no year, place or body of work.

2006: Discussed in The Quote Verifier: Who Said What, Where, and When, by Ralph Keyes (2006), 1st ed., p. 74.

2010: Research detailed by Garson O'Toole in "An Eye for an Eye Will Make the Whole World Blind" in Quote Investigator.

Judaism & the Death Penalty

Judaism & the Death Penalty
Dudley Sharp

Another, of so many examples, whereby anti death penalty folks are wrong, on everything.


Another view of the death penalty, by Dudley Sharp
Jerusalem Post, published 03/19/2009

Innocents are better protected with capital punishment (1).

There are some clear problems with "Fabulously Observant: Jews and the death penalty," by David Benkof (JP, March 12, 2009). 

Rabbi Avi Shafran gave a common answer as to why a great many Jewish faith groups oppose the death penalty: 

"Jews have all too often found themselves on the wrong side of the administration of capital punishment - often for the sole 'crime' of being Jewish."  

Sadly, true. 

However, the fact that Jews have been wrongly executed doesn't mean that Jews cannot morally and rightly execute wrongdoers. An obvious example: Jews have been wrongly incarcerated, in just the same shameful manner, yet, Jews are not opposed to justly incarcerating those who violate the law.

Jewish talk show host Dennis Prager is correct, "capital punishment for murder is the only law that exists in all five books of the Torah." 

In other words, to God, implementing the death penalty for murder is a very big deal. If that is the case, why do so many Jewish faith groups oppose it? 

Rabbi Shafran ended, "That many a convicted criminal in the United States has later been exonerated by evidence or testimony only adds to the reluctance."


In the US, of those sentenced to death since 1973 or later, possibly 25 actual innocents have been identified and released from death row.  (2) That is 0.3 percent of those so sentenced. There is no proof of an innocent executed in the US, at least since 1900. Of all the government programs in the world that put innocents at risk, is there one with a safer record and with greater protections than the US death penalty? Unlikely.

In fact, innocents are better protected with the death penalty (1).

BENKOF ADDS, "... two individuals had to witness the capital crime (3), and there had to be a 'kosher' warning before the act took place."(3).

That was only for Jews, For all others, one witness would suffice and no warning was necessary (3).

Benkof continues, "The Talmud says that any court that imposed death on a convict once in seven years - or even once in 70 - was considered a 'bloody' court."

This is a common and unfortunate recitation since it excludes the response of a later Talmudic sage, Rabbi Simon ben Gamliel: "Such an attitude (allowing murderers to live) would increase bloodshed in Israel."(1)

In other words, by letting murderers live, you only embolden more murderers - an important omission by Benkof.

Benkof continues: "Finally, there is the issue of the humaneness of the death penalty. Under Jewish law, capital convicts would be given alcohol until they were intoxicated, so they would suffer less."

Suffer less? There were four methods of execution. If Jewish law were concerned with less suffering, why not pick only the least painful method? Why four, when three will always be worse than the fourth?

In fact, all four were horrendous. (added, later. stoning, burning, slaying (by sword), and strangling)

Benkof continues: "In the American system, convicts are first given a paralytic, so if they do suffer under the consequent two lethal drugs, they cannot express their pain. And there is significant evidence that they do suffer."

Benkof is factually in error. The paralytic is given second. The first drug given is a massive dose of barbiturate or other anesthesia, leaving the inmate in a coma state. Almost exclusively, the "evidence" of suffering with lethal injection is of the "maybe," "might," "could be" variety (4).

Benkof concludes: "But ultimately, it seems to me that life in prison without parole is a better option than the death penalty - in Israel, North America and throughout the world."

It would be helpful if (Benkof) would give a good reason why. 

End of article. 

Footnotes, added later

1) The Death Penalty: Do Innocents Matter?: A Review of All Innocence Issues

2) The Innocent Frauds: Standard Anti Death Penalty Strategy

3)  Is There a Biblical Requirement for Two Eyewitnesses for Criminal Prosecution?

4) a) Lethal Injection: Controversies Resolved

More here:


"Only especially vile murderers - such as false witness whose lies are discovered after the person who was framed has been executed, or a man who sacrifices both his son and his daughter to the pagan god Molokh - are denied execution because they are regarded as beyond redemption through capital punishment."

"Again, execution preserves human dignity, it does not defile it."

"...[T]he preservation of human dignity requires capital punishment of convicted murderers. The position of Judaism is opposite of the position espoused by liberals."

"It is precisely because of man's creation in God's image that capital punishment is declared justified and necessary. Human dignity requires execution of murderers, not compassion for their souls."

"Judaism's Pro-Death Penalty Tradition", Steven Plaut, PhD, Haifa University, Apr. 23, 2004 article for 


" . . . murder is a grievous offense, both against God and against society. And when you punish a murderer through the death penalty, you are not only affording that person penance for his or her crime, in all of the contexts of death penalty transgressions or other penalties that are imposed upon criminals in traditional Jewish law, the punishment is viewed as a component of the transgressor's penance. (my emphaisis). But in the context of murder, because it's also a crime against society, it's critical for the welfare of society. This is a traditional Jewish understanding of why it is imposed...".

"We're not about to take the position of abolition [of the death penalty], because the teaching that, again, the need for implementing justice, particularly with regard to crimes of murder, for society, is a critical component of Jewish teaching as well."

"Murder, is actually singled out in rabbinic teaching from all those other scores of transgressions and sins where the death penalty is proscribed...". 

"Religious Reflections on the Death Penalty", Nathan Diament, JD, Director of the Institute for Public Affairs of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, June 5, 2001 appearance at the Pew Forum's event 


Rabbi Azriel Rosenfeld at

68. Murderer and Protection of Life - Rotze'ach u-Shemiras Nefesh

It is forbidden to murder, as it says "You shall not murder".1

A murderer must be put to death, as it says "He shall be avenged"2;

it is forbidden to accept compensation from him instead, as it says "You shall not take redemption for the life of a murderer...; and there shall be no atonement for the blood that was spilled... except the blood of him that spilled it".3

It is forbidden to execute a murderer before he has stood trial, as it says "And the murderer shall not die until he stands before the congregation for judgment".4

However, we are commanded to prevent an attempted murder by killing the would-be murderer if necessary, and it is forbidden to refrain from doing so, as it says "And you shall cut off her hand; you shall not be merciful"5;  (my emphasis)

and similarly for attempted fornication, as it says "[If the man seizes her and lies with her...] just as a man rises up against his friend and murders him, so is this thing."6

It is forbidden to refrain from saving life when it is in one's power to do so, as it says "You shall not stand on your friend's blood."7, a

1. Ex. 20:13; Deut. 5:17
2. Ex. 21:20; see Lev. 24:17,21
3. Num. 35:31,33
4. Num. 35:12 d.
5. Deut. 25:12
6. Deut. 22:26
7. Lev. 19:16 a. 1:1,4-11,14

From Halacha Overview,

Wednesday, February 05, 2014


Dudley Sharp

This is one of those very common guilty murderer cases, whereby a bunch of anti death penalty folks and their patsies in the media, join the worldwide drumbeat chorus: 

"Texas is going to murder another innocent person".

Of course, these frauds have become so common that they seem an everyday occurrence (1).

Now, with the 2012 DNA results, the long known truth is not revealed, just re-asserted - Skinner is an always confirmed triple murderer.

13 years or so, ago, when Skinner first proclaimed "Test the additional DNA, it will prove my innocence", any thinking person knew he was guilty.

My 2011 op/ed, with the 2012 DNA results inserted:

Skinner previously rejected DNA testing
Dudley Sharp, Special Contributor
Austin American Statesman, published Nov. 3, 2011

Make no mistake: It was Hank Skinner's decision not to test additional DNA, pre-trial.

Had Skinner known that additional pre-trial DNA testing would have cleared him, he would have ordered it.

Look at what the cabal of "test the DNAers" want us to believe:

That Skinner refused additional pre-trial DNA testing, thereby taking the risk of receiving the death penalty, intentionally, and making that choice over taking the risk that he would be freed, instead.

Does anyone believe that nonsense?

The allegation that Skinner bowed to his original defense counsel's demands not to test additional DNA, pre-trial, holds no water.

There is the minor problem of Skinner responding to his counsel, "OK, good call, I'll risk death over freedom."

Absurd, of course.

All Skinner had to do was:

Order his attorneys to test the additional DNA, which they would have to do; or go to the judge and say, "My idiot attorney will not allow additional DNA testing that will clear me." At which point the court would insist on defense counsel following their clients' orders; or appoint new counsel who would.

That is precisely what would have happened if Skinner had known additional DNA testing would have helped him.

As Skinner knew the opposite was the case, he declined additional testing. It is the only possible reason Skinner denied additional pre-trial DNA testing.

Now comes Skinner, et al, meaning defense counsel, a bunch of "well meaning" anti-death penalty folks, and a smattering of the blindly ignorant crying, "Test the DNA. What have you got to lose, except revealing you are about to execute another innocent?"

Enter reality.

We already have DNA that implicates Skinner, as well as much additional evidence that sent Skinner to death row for the murder of Twila Busby, his live-in girlfriend, and her two mentally impaired sons.

Skinner's "own" experts said the DNA evidence against him was solid and that the blood splatter evidence contradicted Skinner's description of events.

First and foremost, Skinner wishes to live longer, just as Busby and her two sons did. That is the main reason for the appeals. What Texas is attempting to prevent now in testing the DNA that Skinner refused to test pre-trial is a very bad precedent, to wit:

In a successful effort to delay his execution, Skinner files motions to test the DNA material he had previously rejected pre-trial testing.

If Skinner succeeds, future defendants will be able to demand do-overs because their trial strategy failed. It is a horrible precedent, which the state must fight, and for which all criminals and defense counsel are drooling over, both for very good and obvious reasons.

(NOTE  2/3/14  this is the reason the state agreed to the DNA testing instead of having a court order it)

Some in the media, inexcusably, are not presenting those facts to their readers.

It is the important and only reason the state is fighting this fight: to stop criminals, their attorneys and their supporters from gaming the system even more.

The state will prevail, as it should.  And a triple murderer's life will be justly taken.


Added  2/4/14

 "  'Forensic tests on the knife blade proved the presence of blood on the weapon, and the material found on the knife contained DNA traces from Skinner, Caler and Busby.'  "

“  'We do not say it was that person’s DNA,” Hester said of how DPS interprets DNA results recovered from a crime scene. “They are not consistent solely with him, but they are consistent with him being a possible contributor.'  ”

"Hester also testified that some DNA recovered from the crime scene was contaminated with (Skinner's)  DNA . . . The longtime forensic scientist also testified that some genetic material recovered from a carpet stain, door handles in the home and a door frame could be tied to Skinner." ("Testimony ends in Hank Skinner's DNA hearing",  Jim McBride, Amarillo Globe-News, February 4, 2014 - 3:05pm)

This is ending, exactly, as Skinner knew it would. A guilty triple murderer executed.


Sharp, a Houston resident, is an author who has written extensively about the death penalty

1) The Innocent Frauds: Standard Anti Death Penalty Strategy

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

The (imagined) Horror of Dennis McGuire's Execution

The (imagined) Horror of Dennis McGuire's Execution
Dudley Sharp

Ohio justly executed rapist/torturer/murderer Dennis McGuire.

Unconscious, McGuire snored and the media went apoplectic.

The Horror is that anti death penalty folks and their allies in the media will have 10,000 more articles about the imagined suffering of this executed rapist/torturer/murderer than they did about the real suffering of his victims, Joy Stewart, her husband Kenny, unborn child Carl and their families and friends.

There is no indication that McGuire was in pain, at any time, or that he was conscious after the first 1-3 minutes of the 25 minute execution process, as pharmacological realities would dictate (see below).

There is every indication that Joy Stewart was conscious throughout the eternal horror of her savage rape and murder. McGuire forced Joy from her car, choked her, attempted to rape her vaginally, raped her anally, slashed her throat so deeply it severed both her carotid artery and jugular vein, all the while Joy realizing the horror of her own death, as well as that of her unborn child.

The baby’s name would have been Carl, his mother’s grave marker shows.

Joy's husband, Kenny, committed suicide within a year after their murders.

McGuire had more time on death row than Joy had in life.

"State prison records released Monday say McGuire told guards that (McGuire's counsel, Robert) Lowe counseled him to make a show of his death that would, perhaps, lead to abolition of the death penalty. But three accounts from prison officials indicate McGuire refused to put on a display." (1)

"Amy Borror, a spokeswoman for the public defender's office, said all accounts from execution eyewitnesses - which did not include Lowe - indicate McGuire was unconscious at the time he struggled to breathe." (1)

"Medical experts would not comment on Mr. McGuire’s execution or speculate about what he experienced. They agreed that used for surgery, the two drugs would not cause pain. (2).

“By virtue of what they do, they cause unconsciousness, and they inhibit pain,” said Dr. Howard Nearman, professor of anesthesiology at Case Western Reserve University (2).

As there was no surgery, both drugs were given at overdose levels and both drugs would enhance the effects of the other, of course there was no pain.

Do folks wheeze, snore, move or cough etc. while sleeping? Do those with opiate overdoses wheeze, snore, move, cough, have spasms, etc.? Of course, which is all that happened with McGuire, as some predicted.

The Associate Press witness:

"McGuire was still for almost five minutes, then emitted a loud snort, as if snoring, and continued to make that sound over the next several minutes. He also soundlessly opened and shut his mouth several times as his stomach rose and fell." "A coughing sound was Dennis McGuire’s last apparent movement, at 10:43 a.m. He was pronounced dead 10 minutes later." (3)

No evidence of consciousness or pain.

Sadly, we have ignorant, anti death penalty folks, who just can't wait to get their word out, such as McGuire's spiritual advisor, Father Lawrence Hummer, stating, "There is no question in my mind that Dennis McGuire suffered greatly over many minutes. . . . this experimental two-drug concoction had taken 26 minutes. I consider that inhumane." (4)

McGuire's children have threatened to sue the state over their father's just execution.  So foul. They have learned so very little.

Their only comments should have been:

"We are truly sorry for the horror and suffering that our father has caused to Joy, her husband, Kenny, their unborn son, Carl and to their family and friends.  Our thoughts and prayers will be with them, always."

Maybe Father Hummer's only words should been along those lines, as well.

Possibly, someone in the media, and others, will look up the overdose properties of the drugs involved (below) and tell us how McGuire could, possibly, have been conscious. He couldn't have been.

The properties of the drugs and their overdosing effects are very well known - by no means an experiment  . . and they don't just, suddenly, disappear, for no reason.

From Current Preble County Prosecutor Martin Votle (5) :

“The focus needs to stay where it belongs and that’s on Joy." " . . .  if there has been any injustice done it’s in a delay of 20 years between the imposition of that sentence . . . and the execution . . ".

"(McGuire) was vicious and dangerous. He had raped and murdered Joy Morningstar, gotten away with it and then 10 months later decided he liked abducting and assaulting women at knife point so much he did it again." " . . . “he abducted that 15-year-old at knife point . . . " "The girl struggled with him and he beat her and they made so much noise that her family and friends ran out the front door of the house and interceded and saved her life. . . "

“(McGuire) was a predator and had he not been caught, there is no doubt in my mind he would have continued that behavior until he was caught.”

“It occurred to me that Feb. 11 (2014), we’re talking three weeks now, will be the 25th anniversary of the murder. That (unborn son, Carl)  very likely would be looking forward to his 25th birthday coming up here. That’s pretty heartbreaking.” "(Carl) would have died from suffocation."


2) Family Sues in Protracted Ohio Execution, ASSOCIATED PRESS, New York Times, JAN. 25, 2014

3)  OHIO KILLER EXECUTED WITH NEW LETHAL DRUG COMBO, ANDREW WELSH-HUGGINS AP Legal Affairs Writer, The Daily Record, January 16, 2014 2:57PM

4)  "I witnessed Ohio's execution of Dennis McGuire. What I saw was inhumane", Lawrence Hummer, The Guardian,, 22 January 2014 13.51 EST

5) Home Votel: Victims need to be remembered, The Register Herald, January, 2014,
By Eddie Mowen Jr

FACT CHECKING: Midazolam, a sedative,  & Hydromorphone, an opiate/painkiller

The Ohio lethal injection protocol is 10mg of midazolam & 40mg of hydromorphone, mixed together then injected.

The injection took 20 seconds.

The toxicity of benzodiazepines (including midazolam) overdose and risk of death is increased when combined with opiates and when used intravenously, with symptoms including respiratory distress, coma and death.

"More than 80 deaths have occurred after the use of midazolam  . . . 78% of the deaths associated with midazolam were respiratory in nature." (MIDAZOLAM HYDROCHLORIDE: Human Health Effects,

"The initial intravenous dose for sedation in adult patients may be as little as 1 mg, but should not exceed 2.5 mg in a normal healthy adult.", Midazolam Injection,

4 times that initial maximum dose was given to McGuire.

However, " . . . total dose >5 mg (of midazolam) "usually" (my emphasis) not necessary to reach desired sedation . . .", Medscape, midazolam (Rx) - Versed, IV,

"IV initial dose: 0.2 to 1 mg every 2 to 3 hours (given slowly over at least 2 to 3 minutes)",  Hydromorphone Dosage,

40-200 times those dosages were given to McGuire.