[Guest post by DRJ]

Merril Leroy Jessop was found guilty of child sexual assault today by a San Angelo jury. The prosecution focused on the DNA testimony as proof Jessop fathered a child by a 15-year-old FLDS bride. The defense focused on the religious aspects:

“Lead defense attorney Dan Hurley began his closing arguments with a reference to the book “To Kill a Mockingbird,” specifically a time when the main character is told to “walk a mile in their shoes” before judging someone.

Hurley said all the sect members, not just women, were raised to believe that the FLDS prophet is “God’s mouthpiece on earth.”

Hurley noted that, according to documents with cover sheets saying they were “incomplete and unapproved,” Merril Leroy Jessop had been called to marry the alleged victim with half an hour of notice.

“Was he intentionally and knowingly violating the law, or was he following the directive of the prophet?” Hurley asked.”

The jury began deliberations at 11:30 AM and returned its verdict at 12:30 PM. The sentencing phase began this afternoon and will continue tomorrow. Jessop faces the possibility of life in prison.

– DRJ

[Guest post by DRJ]

The Bexar County (San Antonio) Jail has a new idea for jail food:

“To cultivate better inmate behavior, and make some money, San Antonio jail officials are allowing friends and loved ones to special order hot meals for delivery to prisoners.

In allowing food services contractor Aramark to initiate its “iCare” online ordering system, officials expect to bring in $15,000 yearly in new revenue for operations at the chronically overcrowded jail, the biggest expense in Bexar County Sheriff Amadeo Ortiz’s $100 million-plus budget.

The novel service offers a limited menu, but it’s gaining popularity “as word has spread among families,” said Darrell Wagner, who oversees the for-profit operation for the Bexar County sheriff’s office.

The county keeps 29 percent of every sale.”

The favorites are the “jumbo cheeseburger with fries, at $8.99, which is cooked on-site and delivered hot to the inmate,” and the $7.99 Italian meatball grinder. The beef and cheese nachos are a good fit in San Antonio, but there’s also a “pizza and wings party pack.” Invite your friends over!

– DRJ

[Guest post by DRJ]

A recent Austin American-Statesman report on the sentencing hearing of Milton Dwayne Gobert reminded me of Jack Dunphy’s recent post “A Question for Opponents of Capital Punishment.” As noted in this February post, Gobert was on trial for capital murder in an Austin, Texas, courtroom:

“Gobert is accused of stabbing his ex-girlfriend’s friend, 30-year-old Mel Cotton, to death while attempting to rob and kidnap her.

Cotton’s son, who was 5 years old at the time, witnessed his mother’s murder. He was also stabbed during the attack. The boy survived, and now at 11 years old, is expected to testify sometime later this week.”

During his trial, Gobert complained about uncomfortable leg restraints immediately after testimony about his victims’ horrific injuries — she was stabbed 107 times and her son was left for dead with a chest wound. The American-Statesman article suggests why Gobert was in restraints:

“[T]he victim’s sister took the witness stand and called Cotton, a Velocity Credit Union teller and single mother, “an angel.”

“That (expletive) wasn’t no angel, that was a (expletive),” Gobert, 37, screamed from the defense table, cutting off Ethel McPherson midsentence.

Gobert, who claimed that the killing was in self-defense, stood and turned to Cotton’s family, seated in the front row on the opposite side of the courtroom, and continued to scream profanities. He yelled again when state District Judge Bob Perkins told him to be quiet. Then on Perkins’ orders, sheriff’s deputies escorted Gobert from the courtroom while he yelled even more profanity.

The outburst was foreshadowed earlier in the day when Gobert — testifying against his lawyers’ advice — told jurors, “When I explode, I explode.” During his testimony, Gobert said his mother did not treat him well and that he did not love her.”

During the sentencing phase, the prosecution presented testimony that Gobert had an escape plan that included killing a corrections officer. He wanted to emulate Brian Nichols, a criminal defendant who stole an officer’s gun and killed several people in an Atlanta courthouse in 2005. Gobert also had a history of violent outbursts.

However, in an argument similar to views expressed by commenters in the discussion at Jack Dunphy’s post, Gobert and his attorney urged jurors not to limit Gobert’s chance for redemption by imposing a death sentence:

“Gobert also told jurors that if they sentenced him to life in prison instead of death, he would share his experiences with “youngsters coming through, kind of like giving back.”

“I have a redemptive will,” Gobert said. “I can be changed.”
***
During closing arguments, defense lawyer Kent Anschutz called Gobert “a prosecutor’s dream case” and said it would be “ridiculous to come in here and try to justify or defend the nature of Mel Cotton’s death.”

But Anschutz, like his co-counsel Martinez did later, urged the jury to decide that life in prison would be punishment enough.

“When it comes to a life being taken, let it be on God’s time,” Martinez said.”

The Austin jury sentenced Gobert to death, which means they decided Gobert posed a danger to others. In effect, the jury decided Gobert should be killed to protect others — a principle related to self-defense that allows deadly force to protect the lives of third parties.

Some people object to all state-sanctioned killing, including acts by the military, but I suspect most people object to the death penalty because they don’t view capital punishment as a reasonable or acceptable method to protect third parties. However, they might fully support the use of deadly force to protect a hostage threatened with imminent death.

I understand these views and I admire people who are willing to give others a second or third chance, but where do you draw the line? Does the threat to others have to be immediate, e.g., someone is holding a gun to a hostage’s head, or is it enough that there is evidence someone like Gobert would kill the moment he gets the chance? And if you find the last example persuasive, why wasn’t it equally persuasive regarding the Compton gang member who killed a fellow inmate in prison as set forth in Jack Dunphy’s post?

Finally, is there a limit to the time society must give an individual for redemption, or is that even society’s job?

– DRJ

[Guest post by DRJ]

A jury was seated this morning in the sexual assault trial of Merril Jessop in San Angelo, Texas. The San Angelo Standard Times summarized counsels’ opening statements, starting with the State:

“[Eric] Nichols, who spoke first, said the indictment provided a basic “road map” of what the state’s evidence would show in the case.

He also said substantial genetic evidence would prove the assault beyond a reasonable doubt.

“You will hear that she was not legally married to the defendant. You’re going to hear about what is described as a so-called ‘spiritual’ or ‘celestial’ marriage. You will hear evidence that not only was she placed in a spiritual or celestial marriage, but that she bore him a child,” Nichols said.

Nichols said the girl in question was 15 at the time of the alleged assault.”

The jury heard next from the defense:

“[Dan] Hurley, for his opening statement, at one point motioned to the wooden railing at the front of the jury box.

“This rail here separates you from the government,” Hurley said. “It’s a shield. The state cannot reach its burden of proof because they might be guilty, because they’re probably guilty — they must be guilty.”

Hurley said large amounts of evidence came from the raid on the YFZ Ranch outside of Eldorado when authorities carried out a search warrant to find a girl who reported having suffered abuse on the ranch, a call that law enforcement authorities now believe to have been a hoax.

Hurley said that despite the evidence, the quantity won’t be enough to convict his client.

“You will hear about seizures and boxes of evidence that took three trailers to fill up. The simple weight does not give it the quality it needs,” Hurley said.”

The jury also heard at least three State witnesses — a DPS agent who testified about evidence seized at the Yearning for Zion ranch and two University of North Texas DNA experts who testified there is a 99% chance Merril Jessop is the father of the alleged assault victim’s child.

– DRJ

[Guest post by DRJ]

Monica Conyers, a former Detroit councilmember and the wife of
Democratic Rep. John Conyers, has been sentenced to prison after pleading guilty to bribery:

“Former Detroit City Councilwoman Monica Conyers has been sentenced to 37 months in prison with two years supervised probation and no fine.

The 37 months is the top of the sentencing guidelines recommended by the probation department.”

Before sentencing, Conyers claimed innocence and tried to withdraw her guilty plea — arguing the plea resulted from “badgering” to which a doctor said she was susceptible — but the Judge found she entered the plea knowingly and voluntarily and proceeded with sentencing. Breitbart reports Conyers plans to appeal.

– DRJ

[Guest post by Jack Dunphy]

For those who believe life in prison is an adequate punishment for murder, regardless of the circumstances, how do you propose to punish a man who, while already serving a life sentence for murder, kills his cellmate? From the Los Angeles Times:

A Compton gang member already sentenced to life in prison for murder and awaiting trial in a second slaying is being investigated for allegedly strangling his Twin Towers jail cellmate.

Jamar Lavon Tucker, 28, was found Thursday morning inside a two-man cell next to the body of William Levell Hansbrough during a security check at the county jail in downtown Los Angeles, officials said.

Tucker allegedly told deputies that he had just killed his cellmate, said Steve Whitmore, a spokesman for the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department. A coroner’s autopsy determined Hansbrough’s death was homicide by strangulation . . .

Tucker was being held at the jail because he is slated to go on trial May 10 for the 2005 murder of Kevin Watts. Prosecutors are pursuing the death penalty against Tucker if he is convicted in that case, officials said.

Tucker was convicted two years ago of a murder and attempted murder along with three other men, court records show. During the trial for the April 2005 home invasion robbery and carjacking in Redlands, Tucker pleaded guilty to murder and attempted murder. Tucker received a life sentence.

When Redlands police arrested Tucker, they described him as a member of the L.A. gang the 107th Street Hoover Crips who goes by the name “Baby Hoover Ray.” Tucker, along with three other men, carjacked a car restoration expert and then forced him to drive them to his Redlands home.

Once there, the men fatally shot the carjacking victim’s 28-year-old cousin and wounded his 51-year-old mother. They then stole thousands of dollars in cash, according to police. As they drove back to L.A., Tucker shot the carjacking victim, according to authorities. The man faked he was dead and was dumped in Fullerton.

California still has the death penalty, at least in theory if not in actual practice, and if Tucker hasn’t demonstrated his worthiness for execution then surely no one has. If you oppose the death penalty, how would you propose he be punished for his second and third alleged murders, and how would you protect other prisoners and prison staff from a man for whom the law holds no punishment beyond that to which he has already been sentenced?

–Jack Dunphy