October, 19 2011, 02:34pm EDT
ACLU Says Prosecutorial Misconduct Led to Capital Conviction
AUSTIN, TX
The American Civil Liberties Union today argued before the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals that a man should be given a new trial because serious misconduct by a special prosecutor led to his capital conviction despite grave questions about his guilt.
Manuel Velez was sentenced to death in 2005 for the murder of a one-year-old boy based on the false testimony of his live-in girlfriend and mother of the child. The woman, Acela Moreno, failed to admit she had pleaded guilty to inflicting her son with head injuries the day he died. Medical experts made clear these injuries were consistent with those that led to the child's death. At Velez's trial, Moreno testified she pleaded guilty not to committing violence against the child but rather to having failed to alert authorities that Velez had allegedly been hurting the child.
The special prosecutor in the case negotiated the plea deal with Moreno and so knew she was covering up her own abuse of the child; indeed, he told the judge presiding at Moreno's plea that she had injured the child. But at Velez's trial, he did nothing to set the record straight. He then presented Moreno's false testimony as fact during closing arguments, repeating that she was guilty only of having failed to alert authorities.
"The Constitution requires that our judicial system be fundamentally fair, and this case was riddled with unfairness," said Brian Stull, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Capital Punishment Project, who presented arguments in the case. "We should never be comfortable with sending a man to his death when we know that the state has relied on falsehood to convict him. In cases where the irreversible sanction of the death penalty is involved, it is imperative that due process be fully upheld to ensure that innocent people aren't executed."
Velez has maintained his innocence, there are no eyewitnesses accusing him of the crime and no forensic evidence links him to the murder.
Last week, three of the nation's pre-eminent legal ethicists filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the ACLU's argument that Velez should be granted a new trial. The brief, filed on behalf of Robert P. Schuwerk, a professor at the University of Houston Law Center, Lillian B. Hardwick, a regular consultant and expert witness on legal and judicial ethics in Texas, and Monroe H. Freedman, a professor and former dean at Hofstra University law school who is known as a pioneer in the field of legal ethics, says the conviction of Velez is a miscarriage of justice.
"There is no sugar coating what occurred here," the brief reads. "Both the defendant's conviction and his sentence of death are derived from a pervasive course of misconduct on the part of the special prosecutor."
More information about Velez's case is available online at: www.aclu.org/capital-punishment/manuel-velez-v-state-texas
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666LATEST NEWS
'Omen of the Future': Off-The-Charts Hot Oceans Scare Scientists
After 2023 was the hottest year in human history, experts warn that 2024 "has strong potential to be another record-breaking year."
Feb 27, 2024
While global policymakers continue to drag their feet on phasing out planet-heating fossil fuels, scientists around the world "are freaking out" about high ocean temperatures, as they toldThe New York Times in reporting published Tuesday.
A "super El Niño" has expectedly heated up the Pacific, but Times reporter David Gelles spoke with ocean experts from Miami to Cambridge to Sydney about record heat in the North Atlantic as well as conditions around the poles.
"The sea ice around the Antarctic is just not growing," said Matthew England, a University of New South Wales professor who studies ocean currents. "The temperature's just going off the charts. It's like an omen of the future."
Rob Larter, a marine geophysicist with the British Antarctic Survey who watches polar ice levels, told the paper that "we're used to having a fairly good handle on things. But the impression at the moment is that things have gone further and faster than we expected. That's an uncomfortable place as a scientist to be."
\u2026for almost a year now,\u201d McNoldy said. \u201cIt\u2019s just astonishing. Like, it doesn\u2019t seem real.\u201d Across the unusually warm Atlantic, in Cambridge, England, @rdlarter , a marine scientist who tracks polar ice levels, is equally perplexed. \u201cIt\u2019s quite scary, partly because\u2026— (@)
Last week, Jeff Berardelli, WFLA's chief meteorologist and climate specialist, also highlighted the warm North Atlantic and that "all signs are pointing to a busy hurricane season" later this year.
Noting that in the middle of this month, sea surface temperatures in the North Atlantic were around 2°F higher than the 1990-2020 normal and nearly 3°F above the 1980s, Berardelli explained:
That may not sound like a lot, but consider this is averaged over the majority of the basin shown in the red outline in the image above. A deviation like that is unheard of... until now.
To put it into more relatable terms, considering what's been normal for the most recent 30 years, the statistical chance that any February day would be as warm as it is right now is 1-in-280,000. That's not a typo. This is according to University of Miami researcher Brian McNoldy...
And that 1-in-280,000 is compared against a recent climate, which had already been warmed substantially by climate change. If you tried to compare it against a climate considered normal around the year 1900, the math would become nonsensical. Meaning an occurrence like this simply would not be possible.
McNoldy also stressed the shocking nature of current conditions to the Times, telling Gelles that "the North Atlantic has been record-breakingly warm for almost a year now... It's just astonishing. Like, it doesn't seem real."
The new comments from McNoldy and other scientists come on the heels of various institutions and experts worldwide recently confirming that 2023 was the hottest year in human history. Research also showed that it was the warmest year on record for the oceans, which capture about 91% of excess heat from greenhouse gases.
As Common Dreamsreported last month, Adam Scaife, a principal fellow at the United Kingdom's Met Office, said that "it is striking that the temperature record for 2023 has broken the previous record set in 2016 by so much because the main effect of the current El Niño will come in 2024."
That's the warm phase of the El Niño Southern Oscillation, a climate phenomenon that also has a cool phase called La Niña expected later this year. Still, Scaife warned that "the Met Office's 2024 temperature forecast shows this year has strong potential to be another record-breaking year."
Throughout the record-shattering 2023, experts also expressed alarm. After an April study showed that the ocean is heating up faster than previously thought, the BBCrevealed that some scientists declined to speak about it on the record, reporting that "one spoke of being 'extremely worried and completely stressed.'"
In July, when a buoy roughly 40 miles south of Miami recorded a sea surface temperature of 101.1°F just after a "100% coral mortality" event at a restoration site, Florida State University associate professor Mariana Fuentes toldNPR that "if you have several species that are being impacted at the same time by an increase in temperature, there's going to be a general collapse of the whole ecosystem."
The following month, the European Union's Copernicus Climate Change Service announced that the average daily global ocean surface temperature hit 69.7°F, and deputy director Samantha Burgess said, "The fact that we've seen the record now makes me nervous about how much warmer the ocean may get between now and next March."
"The more we burn fossil fuels, the more excess heat will be taken out by the oceans, which means the longer it will take to stabilize them and get them back to where they were," Burgess emphasized at the time.
Last year ended with a United Nations climate summit that scientists called "a tragedy for the planet," because the final deal out of the conference—led by an Emirati oil CEO—did not demand a global phaseout of fossil fuels.
Azerbaijan, which is set to host this year's U.N. conference in November, has similarly selected a former fossil fuel executive to lead the event. The country also plans to increase its gas production by a third during the next decade.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'A Massive Step': Starbucks Agrees to New Contract Talks With Union Workers
One labor expert and professor said it is "hard to overstate how big a deal this is."
Feb 27, 2024
U.S. labor advocates on Tuesday hailed an agreement between the Starbucks Workers United union and coffee giant to restart talks aimed at reaching a collective bargaining agreement after a two-and-a-half year impasse
"Starbucks and Workers United have a shared commitment to establishing a positive relationship in the interests of Starbucks partners," the company and union said in a joint statement. "During mediation discussions last week for the ongoing brand and [intellectual property] litigation, it became clear that there was a constructive path forward on the broader issue of the future of organizing and collective bargaining at Starbucks."
The statement added that the two parties "have agreed to begin discussions on a foundational framework designed to achieve both collective bargaining agreements for represented stores and partners, and the resolution of litigation between the union and the company. This includes resolving litigation related to both the partner benefits announced in May 2022 and the use of the Starbucks brand."
Reacting to the news, More Perfect Unionsaid on social media: "Starbucks has been refusing to bargain with over 300 unionized stores. Now they seem to finally be conceding to the union. This is a massive step forward."
Eric Blanc, a labor expert and professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey, said it is "hard to overstate how big a deal this is."
"Relentless organizing by Starbucks Workers United has forced Starbucks to stop illegally denying benefits to union members and to start (it appears) bargaining a first contract in good faith," he added.
In what Starbucks called a "sign of good faith," the company agreed to offer approximately 10,000 employees in unionized stores higher wages and benefits it extended to nonunionized workers nearly two years ago, including the ability for customers to add tips to credit card payments.
Starbucks executive vice president and chief partner officer Sara Kelly said: "We have reached an important milestone. We have agreed with Workers United that we will begin discussions on a foundational framework designed to achieve collective bargaining agreements, including a fair process for organizing, and the resolution of some outstanding litigation."
"There is a lot of work ahead, but this is an important, positive step," Kelly added. "It is a clear demonstration of our intent to build a constructive relationship with Workers United in the interests of our partners. I want to acknowledge and appreciate the union's willingness to do the same."
While workers at nearly 400 Starbucks stores have voted to unionize, none have worked out contracts with the company.
Last week, baristas at 21 Starbucks stores in 14 states launched the largest single-day unionization drive in company history.
Keep ReadingShow Less
$400,000 Per Missile? Sanders Rips War Profiteers 'Fleecing' US Taxpayers
"Congress must put an end to this form of corporate welfare," the senator said, arguing that one new way to do that involves reviving an old policy.
Feb 27, 2024
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders has a novel way to stop military-industrial complex profiteers from "bilking the American people"—and it's actually over 80 years old.
In an article published Tuesday in The Atlantic, Sanders (I-Vt.) called for a revived Truman Committee—a World War II-era bipartisan congressional panel "designed to rein in defense contractors, closely oversee military contracts, and take back excessive payments."
"America's national priorities are badly misplaced," the senator asserted. "Our country spends, with almost no debate, nearly $1 trillion a year on the military while at the same time ignoring massive problems at home. We apparently have unlimited amounts of money for nuclear weapons, fighter planes, bombs, and tanks. But somehow we can't summon the resources to provide healthcare for all, childcare, affordable housing, and other basic needs."
"The United States remains the world's dominant military power," the senator continued. "Alone, we account for roughly 40% of global military spending; the U.S. spends more on its military than the next 10 countries combined, most of whom are allies. Last year, we spent more than three times what China spent on its military."
Sanders noted that nearly half of the approximately $900 billion the U.S. will allocate for military spending this year "will go to a handful of huge defense contractors enjoying immense profits," with many weapons companies profiting handsomely off sales to Ukraine, which is struggling to repel a two-year Russian invasion.
In what Sanders called a "particularly egregious example" of war profiteering, RTX Corporation—formerly Raytheon—has increased the price of its Stinger shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles by 600% to $400,000 since the early 1990s.
The senator continued:
It's not just RTX. The stocks of American arms manufacturers have surged: Northrop Grumman's share price increased 40% by the end of 2022, and Lockheed Martin's by 37%. In 2022, the federal government awarded Lockheed Martin more than $45 billion in unclassified contracts. The company returned about one-quarter of that amount to shareholders through dividends and stock buybacks, and paid its CEO $25 million.
"There's a name for all this: war profiteering. There's a solution too," Sanders stressed. "Congress should resurrect the Truman Committee."
"These companies' greed is not just fleecing the American taxpayer; it's killing Ukrainians," he contended. "A contractor padding its profit margins means that fewer weapons reach Ukrainians on the frontlines. Corporate greed is helping [Russian President] Vladimir Putin."
Sanders highlighted the U.S. Department of Defense's six consecutive failed audits, including the most recent one last December, in which the Pentagon was unable to fully account for nearly two-thirds of its $3.8 trillion in assets.
"It should therefore come as no surprise that defense contractors routinely overcharge the Pentagon—and the American taxpayer—by nearly 40-50%," he wrote. "One company, TransDigm, overcharged by 4,451%."
"But despite billions in fines for fraud or misconduct, the contracts never seem to dry up," Sanders said. "That may be down to America's system of legalized bribery: A share of the profits from these lucrative contracts will flow back to politicians who gladly accept millions in campaign contributions to make sure the defense budget is always flush."
"According to the watchdog group OpenSecrets, defense contractors spent nearly $140 million lobbying the federal government last year," he noted. "Millions of dollars more go directly to members of Congress in campaign contributions from companies, individuals, and political action committees linked to the defense industry."
"Congress must put an end to this form of corporate welfare," Sanders argued. "The best way to do that is to reinstate the Truman Committee on war profiteering so that we can end corporate greed in the defense industry. A windfall profits tax could help achieve this end as well."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular