Showing posts with label John Jeffrey Eley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Jeffrey Eley. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

A Step Closer To Killing Billy Slagle

Damned if I know.

Just over a year ago, on July 10, 2012, Governor Kasich ignored the Parole Board's recommendation that Jeff Eley should be murdered (the Board's vote in favor of killing was 5-3) and commuted his sentence to life in prison.

That was so last year.

Today, the same governor obeyed the Parole Board's recommendation (by a 6-4 vote) that Billy Slagle should be executed.  Kill him, he said.  And for explanation?  The Parole Board said to do it.


Yes, I can explain how it is that Jeff Eley's case is different from Billy Slagle's.  I can write about how Jeff wasn't fully responsible for his crime because of his mental illness but how Billy's youth didn't reduce his responsibility but just made him a budding serial killer.  And I can discuss in detail how it's different that the prosecutor who actually worked on Jeff's case favored commuting his sentence while it's the chief prosecutor who thinks Billy should get relief.  Or I could talk about --

Hell, you get the idea.

The thing is,
it's all bullshit.
Last year Kasich voted for life when the Parole Board said to kill.  This year he didn't.  And while the cases are different, they're not really all that different.  

Here's one of the things we know about the death penalty.  For all its layers of review and all the Supreme Court decisions and all the Parole Board hearings and all the doctors and lawyers and indian chiefs who weigh in on it.  For all the need for counsel to be specially trained and certified.  For all the commissions and task forces and ABA Guidlines.  For all the studies and law review articles and special training sessions and continuing legal education and special capital defense units in public defender offices and all the pro bono work from big law firms.   For all the vigils and the petitions and phone banks and prayer services.  For all of that,
We don't know what the fuck we're doing.
Because it's all random.  It's all arbitrary.  Exactly what SCOTUS said it cannot be and, since they did, after all, say that the death penalty is basically constitutional, that must mean that it's not random or arbitrary.  Except that it is.

And by random chance, and because the Parole Board (or 60 percent of them) said to kill (though that didn't matter for Jeff Eley) the Board said to kill, so he will.

Billy Slagle is to be killed on August 7.  

Governor Kasich is fine with that.  Damned if I know just why.

Tuesday, July 10, 2012

This Time Without Caveat

Clemency for Jeff Eley.  From murder in prison to death in prison. Death penalty to LWOP. 
John Kasich did the right thing.
He didn't have to.
Insofar as it has any political consequence, it won't help him with his base and won't ultimately win him the support of those who think he's generally a troglodyte.
Yet he did.
He did it sooner than he had to, leapfrogging over the possibility that some court would step in and take away any need for him to act.
He was open about it.  He issued a simple but clear press release explaining why. No hedging, no obfuscation.  Here are the facts that led me to do it, he said.
So good for him.  No qualification and no waffling on my part.
Yes, LWOP is a terrible sentence. Death in prison.  Hopelessness.  It kills the soul - or at least it can.  It denies humanity, denies possibility.
So be it.  It's not homicide.
John Kasich prevented a murder.
The Parole Board told him not to do that.  They said to kill.
He said, "No."
He didn't have to.  It's hard to see any political upside for him.
But it was the right thing.
Thank you, Governor.

Monday, July 9, 2012

If Only He'd Thought So 25 Years Ago

The lead detective on the case thinks he shouldn't be executed.  The prosecutor who tried the case thinks he shouldn't be executed. At least one member of the three-judge panel that tried him and sentenced him to death thinks he shouldn't be executed.
That's not the kind of think I get to write every day.  It's a man-bites-dog story, a set of facts unusual enough that it deserves special mention and ought to carry special weight.  As it happens, I wrote that paragraph a couple of weeks ago, on the day the Ohio Parole Board issued it's recommendation to Governor Kasich in the case of John Jeffrey Eley. By a vote of 5-3, they said Eley should be killed.
But Kasich hasn't yet decided, and Gary L. van Brocklin, the prosecutor who put Eley on the row, hasn't given up. 
From his letter to the editor in Saturday's Columbus Dispatch.
The prosecutor, Gary L. van Brocklin, 
This case has haunted me for more than 24 years. Eley does not deserve to die for what I believe was Green’s crime. But not for Green, Ishan Aydah would be alive today.
. . .
I fully support clemency for Eley because, for me, it is the right thing to do. When I wrote to the Ohio Parole Board expressing my views on clemency, it was extremely difficult to do. The easier thing for me would be to say nothing at all. However, sitting on the sidelines watching this man be executed is not something I am prepared to do.
Powerful stuff.
I hope the Governor listens.
And of course he's right.  It's hard for a prosecutor to concede that he was wrong.  It's hard for him admit that he tried to arrange the murder of a man who didn't deserve to be killed.
I hope the Governor understands how hard.
I'm pleased that van Brocklin has come to see his mistake.  I'm filled with praise for his coming forward.
I hope the Governor acts.
And yet.
As the elected prosecuting attorney for Mahoning County, I prosecuted John Jeffrey Eley in 1987 for the aggravated murder of Ishan Aydah. At that time, I felt the death penalty was the appropriate response, given the facts and circumstances of the murder.
Need I mention that those "facts and circumstances" haven't changed?
Need I mention that van Brocklin thought Green the more culpable one back then?
Need I mention that van Brocklin was prepared back then to take death off the table for Eley if he'd just testify against Green?
I don't want to talk about blood on his hands.  I don't want to condemn van Brocklin.  The man has done, is doing an uncommonly (and truly difficult) decent thing.  He really does deserve praise and credit.  
And yet.
Because really, nothing has changed. Except that John Jeffrey Eley has spent the past 25 years on death row.  And if something doesn't happen, he'll be strapped down to a table and shot full of pentobarbital with the intent and effect of killing him in 17 days.
It didn't have to dome to this.
And despite the praise and credit van Brocklin deserves (and he does) and that I'm honestly giving him (and I am), despite that, he bears a fair share of responsibility - not all of it, but a fair share - for where it is.
He's not alone of course.
The cops bear some responsibility - including the lead detective who now thinks Eley should live.
The three-judge panel bears more than a bit of responsibility - including Judge Economus who now thinks Eley should live.
Green bears plenty of responsibility.
So, of course, does Jeff Eley.  Had he not killed Ishan Aydah . . . . Well, there's no getting past that one.
But van Brocklin made a knowing, conscious decision.
At that time, I felt the death penalty was the appropriate response, given the facts and circumstances of the murder.
He can't escape that.
I hope the Governor acts.
Gary L. van Brocklin hopes so, too.  Good for him for doing the right thing.
Now. 
When it may be too late, though I sure hope the Governor will do the right thing, too.
And yet, you know, it didn't have to come to this.


Wednesday, June 20, 2012

What's a Parole Board To Do?

It was early afternoon, a Tuesday, August 26, 1986, a cloudy day in Youngstown, the temperature in the low 80s, thunderstorms to come that evening.*
Melvin Green and Jeff Eley were hanging out when Green said they should go to the Sinjil Market, a place they called the "Arab store."  On the way, Green gave Eley a gun and told him to stick up the store.  He added that the Ihsan Aydah, whose store it was, kept a gun behind the counter.
You pretty much know what happened next, even if you didn't know.  Eley entered the store, pulled the gun, and told Aydah to put up his hands.  Green entered the store, Aydah went for his gun, and Eley shot him.  Green grabbed Aydah's wallet and some cash from the till.  Aydah died the next day..
Eley confessed.  They charged him with death specs figuring they'd trade them away in exchange for Eley rolling on Green.  He refused, which kind of forced their hands.
364 days after shooting Aydah, John Jeffrey Eley arrived on death row.
The plan is to murder Eley on July 26 of this year.  25 years and eleven months to the day since he shot Ihsan Aydah.
Eley was 37 when he killed Aydah.  He's 63 now.
He may or may not have mental retardation.  He may or may not be seriously mentally ill.  It's beyond serious dispute that he's what they used to call "slow" and that he's not altogether on top of what's going on.
He told the Parole Board he wants a full pardon.  He said he was framed.  He said he is wholly innocent.  His confession was faked, his signature on it must have been forged.  Nobody believes him.  Maybe he's delusional.  Maybe he's fantasizing.  Maybe he's just lying.**
The lead detective on the case thinks he shouldn't be executed.  The prosecutor who tried the case thinks he shouldn't be executed. At least one member of the three-judge panel that tried him and sentenced him to death thinks he shouldn't be executed.
Would that they'd thought so 25 years ago.
Today, the Parole Board issued it's decision.  By a vote of 5-3 they said he should die.
Oh, sure, all those folks who saw to it that he was sentenced to die think it was a mistake.  But, gee, he killed the man.  The dead body outweighs everything else.  And really, he hasn't proved he's retarded or insane.  And anyhow, the courts haven't found any of this sort of thing enough to undo his death sentence.
Wait, what's that last one?
The factors of Eley's head injuries, the possibility of residual doubt, an unpunished co-defendant and prosecutorial misconduct that Eley has provided to demonstrate that there was mitigation evidence that was not presented to the three-judge panel are not consistent with the trial transcripts or the state and federal court decisions. The merits of this argument were denied by several courts and a retroactive analysis conducted by the various courts found that this information would not be sufficient to outweigh the aggravating circumstances in this case.
That's the sort of bullshit the Board typically spouts.  But give it a moment's thought.  If the courts, if any court, had found those things compelling, Eley's sentence would have been vacated and he would be off death row.  Which means that the Parole Board wouldn't be considering his case.  Which means, when you get right down to it, that five members of the Parole Board think that one reason, maybe the most important reason, that Jeff Eley shouldn't have his sentence commuted to life in prison is that they have to decide whether they think his sentence should be commuted to life in prison. He should, that is, be denied relief because he's in a position to ask for it.
They could have written it this way.
When we need to decide whether to recommend commuting a death sentence, an important consideration, maybe the most important consideration, is whether there is a death sentence.  If there is, it shouldn't be commuted. 
There were three dissents, which is a lot.  They talked about the officials who now say he shouldn't be killed.  They talked about mental retardation and mental health.  They talked about Melvin Green.  But mostly what they said is that his is the wrong case.
The theory is that the death penalty is supposed to be for the worst of the worst.  The worst people who did the worst things.  If you buy into our version of the death penalty, that's what you're buying into.  Here's what the three dissenters said.
• Not the Worst of the Worst
o There are many prisoners on death row for Aggravated Murder during the course of a store robbery. Many of those have seriousness factors that are not present in this case (such as execution style or multiple slayings) that aggravate them. This case does not have circumstances to make it the worst of the worst.
o The only evidence as to whether Eley truly intended to kill the victim when he walked into the store is what he said during his police interview. He said " ... the Arab took his hands down and went under the counter. (Melvin) had told me he had a gun under the counter. I shot at him, trying to hit his shoulder." Later, after describing how Green took the victim's money and wallet, Eley said "I was in shock and just stood in front of the counter." This is hardly the reaction of someone who entered the store intending to kill the victim.
o Judge Peter Economus points out that "Mr. Eley's trial attorneys did not present any substantive mitigating evidence for us to consider when weighing the aggravating and mitigating circumstances." A strong mitigation case would have been difficult, given the client's uncooperativeness, but had there been more substantive mitigation and the availability of a sentence of Life without Parole, there is a good chance that the death sentence would not have been imposed.
o In order to convict co-defendant Melvin Green, the prosecution was willing to accept a punishment of less than death. The retributive needs of the state to condemn this very serious crime can be met with a punishment of life imprisonment without parole.
I don't know what happened that day at the Sinjil Market.  I don't know what was in Jeff Eley's mind.  I don't know how Melvin Green did or did not really orchestrate the whole thing. Neither do any members of the Parole Board.
Here's what I know.  
John Jeffrey Eley was 37 when he killed Ihsan Aydah.  He's 63 now.  He's been in prison for those 26 years, on death row for 25 of them. The folks who arranged for him to be sentenced to die think they shouldn't have done it.  A bare majority of the Parole Board thinks he should die, at least in part because his death sentence wasn't vacated before they got to decide.
The ball, as they say, is in Governor Kasich's court.


---------------------
*If this sort of thing sounds vaguely familiar, it might be because you once read Raymond Chandler's The Big Sleep (or one of the hundreds of books that tried to copy Chandler's style). Here's the first sentence of The Big Sleep.
It was about eleven o'clock in the morning, mid October, with the sun not shining and a look of hard wet rain in the clearness of the foothills.
**Or maybe, despite overwhelming evidence of his guilt and nothing to support his innocence, he's telling the truth.  It's remarkably unlikely, but I suppose it's possible.  He wouldn't be the first guy.