Beazley execution: Assembly President calls for clemency

In Strasbourg, France,  Lord Russell-Johnston, President of the Parliamentary Assembly
of the 43-nation Council of Europe, made the following statement today:

"The execution of Napoleon Beazley is set for 15 August. Bar a last
minute reprieve by the United States Supreme Court, he will be the
19th teenage criminal to be put to death in America since 1976. Over
80 others, who were aged only 16 or 17 at the time of their crime,
are on death row. This is unjustifiable, inexcusable and barbaric. A
country which is practising capital punishment with such frequency and
fervor, which is killing people - including juveniles and mentally
retarded persons - in trials marred by clear evidence of social and
racial prejudice, cannot claim world leadership in justice and human
rights. The United States' moral influence in international affairs is
being eroded by the maintenance of a criminal justice system which is
seen to be arbitrary and based on retribution.

In June, the Parliamentary Assembly asked the United States and Japan,
the only 2 observer states to the Council of Europe which continue to
practice capital punishment, to change their attitude by 1 January 2003,
or face the threat of losing their status with the organization.
Napoleon Beazley cannot wait that long. I therefore wish to appeal for
his life to be spared. He was 17 when he committed his crime! The people
of Texas, and all of the United States, should not want to have the name
of another child added to the list - already far too long - of those
whose lives have been taken in the name of 'justice'."

Napoleon Beazley, a black man, has been on death row since 1995. He was
condemned to death for a murder committed during an armed robbery on 19
April 1994, when he was 17.

The Council of Europe has been a de facto "death-penalty-free zone"
since 1997. The United States has held observer status with the Council
since 1996.

Napoleon Beazley was just 17 when he fatally shot a stranger while
stealing the man's Mercedes sedan from his driveway in 1994.

As Beazley, now 25, seeks to avoid being executed Wednesday in Texas, his
youth at the time of the crime might be the best thing he has going for him.

Beazley's case is the focus of the latest assault on the death penalty,
this one aimed at the 23 states that permit the execution of murderers
who killed before they reached age 18. Beazley's lawyers are awaiting
word from the U.S. Supreme Court and the Texas pardons board, which have
been asked to set aside the death sentence because Beazley was a minor
when he committed his crime.

Adding an extra element: Beazley's victim, John Luttig of Tyler, Texas,
was the father of U.S. appeals court Judge J. Michael Luttig, a
conservative who is widely considered to be on President Bush's short
list of potential Supreme Court nominees.

Opponents say juveniles such as Beazley who kill are too young to fully
understand what they are doing, and often are good candidates for
rehabilitation. They say banning the death penalty for juvenile crimes
would eliminate only a few executions, noting that just 17 of the 726
people executed in the USA since 1973 committed their crimes before they
reached 18.

They also cite increasing pressure to end the practice from various
fronts: from death penalty opponents, such as Amnesty International and
Pope John Paul II; and from death penalty critics, including some who
favor the death penalty for crimes committed by those over 18.

"There's a shame factor here, when even other death penalty countries
like China and Iran are saying, 'We won't execute kids,'" says Walter
Long, an Austin, Texas, lawyer who has appealed Beazley's death sentence
to the U.S. Supreme Court. "We think this is an idea whose time has come,
and we think this is the case to demonstrate it."

For some death penalty supporters, the debate has a familiar ring.

"This is just more anti-death penalty spin under a different name," says
Dianne Clements, president of Justice for All, a crime victims' advocacy
group in Houston. Foes of executions in crimes committed by juveniles
"are just ... hitting the death penalty at what they think is its
weakest spot."

The arguments against executing inmates for juvenile crimes have been
raised before, but there are several reasons that they might carry more
weight this time.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote the 1989 opinion
that found executions for juvenile crimes to be constitutional, will not
take part in any high court decision in Beazley's case. Lawyers assume
that Scalia's friendship with J. Michael Luttig, his former law clerk,
led Scalia to recuse himself from the case.

For death penalty foes, Beazley's case might be a tough sell. Beazley and
2 friends, both over 18, were cruising in a Ford Probe when they followed
John Luttig home to steal his Mercedes. Beazley shot the 63-year-old man
in the head as he stepped out of his car. Luttig's wife, Bonnie, also
was shot and feigned death. Beazley and his friends drove over her as
they pulled away.

The friends testified against Beazley and each received sentences of more
than 40 years. Asked by an interviewer recently whether he is innocent,
Beazley said, "No." Before Beazley's accomplices were sentenced, J.
Michael Luttig told the court of the "horror, the agony, the emptiness,
the despair" that results when "your father is stripped from your life."

Beazley's appeal is based on 2 arguments. In 1992, the U.S. Senate
ratified the United Nations' children's rights treaty, but inserted
language exempting U.S. states from the section that bans executions for
juvenile crimes. Long argues that the exemption is invalid. He also is
seeking a reversal of Scalia's 1989 opinion, arguing that such executions
are "cruel and unusual punishment," and so are unconstitutional.

(source:  USA Today)

On April 19, 1994, a teenager named Napoleon Beazley and 2 friends
ambushed Mr. Luttig's father on his driveway in this East Texas city,
and Mr. Beazley shot him twice in the head. It was supposed to be a
carjacking, and whether Mr. Beazley fired out of rage or in a fit of
panic, John Luttig was killed as his terrified wife crawled under the
car to survive.

With Mr. Beazley now scheduled to be executed on Aug. 15, his case is
attracting international pleas for clemency because he was only 17 at the
time of the slaying and because his co-defendants have since recanted
parts of their testimony. His supporters also question whether
prosecutors sought the death penalty simply to placate Judge Luttig, who
moved his office to Tyler for the trial and apparently consulted with
prosecutors on jury selection.

The district attorney in Mr. Beazley's home county has taken the unusual
step of asking the state to spare him, arguing that death is too severe
considering his background and the fact that he had no prior record.

"The question is the appropriateness of the death penalty in this case,"
said Walter Long, the lawyer handling Mr. Beazley's death row appeal.

Here in conservative East Texas, the brutal killing is regarded as
senseless waste of not just 1 life but 2, involving 2 families that
are widely respected in their communities. Mr. Luttig lived here in
Tyler, where he was a civic leader and an elder in his church.

Mr. Beazley lived in Grapeland, a tiny town about 60 miles away, where
his father, Ireland, was the 1st black city council member and where he
himself was president of his senior class.

"I'm sure he was portrayed to be the master killer, but that is not the
Napoleon I knew," said Casey Vickers, who grew up with Mr. Beazley and
considered him his best friend, a uncommon relationship in a small Texas
town, given that Mr. Vickers is white and Mr. Beazley is black. "There is
not a day that goes by that I don't think about that. Why did it have to
go down like that?"

>From death row, where he has lived for the past 6 years, Mr. Beazley, now
25, still struggles with the same question. He does not say he is
innocent, but he will not explain exactly what happened that night. He
admits that no one, himself included, ever expected his life to turn out
this way. He was runner-up as Grapeland High School's most popular
student and a star football player.

"I can give you a list of reasons why I was easily influenced, peer
pressure," he said in a recent interview. "But other kids go through that
same stuff, and they don't commit capital murder. It would come off as
justification, and there is no justification for what happened."

The image of Mr. Beazley presented by Smith County prosecutors at his
1995 murder trial was of a ruthless killer and crack cocaine dealer, a
portrayal that stunned many people in Grapeland who knew him as a
friendly kid and physical fitness nut. From prison, Mr. Beazley
acknowledged that he sold small amounts of crack but said he never used
it.

And he said he owned a gun. He said that as a light-skinned black
teenager with lots of white friends he felt that stepping into the drug
world helped him fit in with some black teenagers in town.

"When I started selling crack, it was like, `I'm cool, I can fit in,'" he
said "I didn't want to be shunned by the black community, I guess you
could say. That's a sad thing to say."

His co-defendants were Cedrick and Donald Coleman, 2 brothers from
Grapeland, and Mr. Beazley said the idea of finding a car to "jack"
originated with a dare from Cedrick. They drove to Tyler, spent a few
hours searching for a car, then followed Mr. Luttig and his wife as they
returned home in their Mercedes-Benz from a divinity class.

The physical evidence at the trial, including a footprint found in a pool
of Mr. Luttig's blood, pointed to Mr. Beazley as the gunman. But in order
to win a death sentence, prosecutors needed to prove his "future
dangerousness," a difficult task considering his age and his lack of a
record, but one helped greatly by testimony from the Coleman brothers.
Donald Coleman testified that before the killing Mr. Beazley had talked
about "wanting to hurt someone" and that he also said he wanted "to see
what if feels like to see somebody die."

In recent affidavits, both brothers said they lied about Mr. Beazley's
comments as part of a deal with prosecutors to avoid the death penalty,
but prosecutors deny that. Mr. Long, the appellate lawyer, said the
recanted testimony was critical because it was used during the sentencing
phase of the trial by prosecution psychiatric experts as proof that Mr.
Beazley was dangerous.

Throughout the trial, the victim's son, a man who legal analysts say is
one of President Bush's top candidates for the Supreme Court, was a
regular presence.

He relocated his office, including 2 clerks, from Virginia to Tyler for
the proceedings. Prosecutors consulted with Judge Luttig regularly and
once sought a recess so that they could discuss jury selection with him,
according to court records. He also testified during the sentencing phase
about how the loss of his father had devastated his family.

In Tyler, John Luttig had been in the oil business, though associates say
he hardly fit the free-wheeling stereotype of a Texas wildcatter. He was
conservative, dependable and practical, associates say. "One of his great
pieces of advice that he gave to everyone was that the only thing you
have is your integrity, so don't jeopardize it," said John Hills, a
petroleum engineer who worked for Mr. Luttig for 8 years.

He also was deeply proud of his son, who was a deputy attorney general
under President George Bush and helped shepherd Clarence Thomas through
his Supreme Court confirmation hearings in 1991. That same year Judge
Luttig was appointed to the Fourth Circuit.

For Judge Luttig, the feeling was mutual. "I loved him more than life,"
he said of his father in an interview last October with The New York
Times Magazine. "Everything he said and did, I respected. He is the
single most important influence in my life. He is my hero."

Judge Luttig, who declined to comment for this article, has faced
questions about whether his father's death has affected his ability to be
impartial in dealth penalty cases. Some defense lawyers appearing before
the Fourth Circuit in Virginia have sought to disqualify him from death
penalty appeals, but all have been rejected. Legal experts say Judge
Luttig is undeniably conservative on criminal justice issues; he has
never voted to overturn a death penalty conviction, before or after his
father's death.

But he has denied all challenges to disqualify him and in one opinion he
wrote that judges should not be removed from cases just because they had
"experienced the fullness of life - good and bad." Former Chief Justice
Earl Warren, whose father was murdered by a burglar, also heard death
penalty cases as a justice.

Mr. Beazley's appeals lawyers tried and failed to have his conviction
overturned by arguing that prosecutors and the trial judge made
accommodations to Judge Luttig. The motion failed, and Smith County
District Attorney Jack Skeen said that Judge Luttig did not influence how
they handled the case. He also belittled the recantations by the Coleman
brothers and said the brutality of the killing was enough to prove future
dangerousness. "It was premeditated, pre-planned," he said.

One person who disagrees is District Attorney Cindy Marie Garner of
Houston County, whose jurisdiction includes Grapeland. Like many people
there, she says she believes that one reason prosecutors pushed for death
was because of the prominence of the Luttig family. She wrote a letter to
the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, asking that Mr. Beazley be
spared. Gerald Garrett, the paroles board chairman, said he could not
recall a Texas district attorney ever asking for mercy for a death row
inmate.

Ms. Garner, a death penalty supporter, says she believes the punishment
is too great, considering Mr. Beazley's age and background.

"He just comes from a really good family," said Ms. Garner, who is white
and recalled how Mr. Beazley's grandfather, also named Napoleon, was the
1st black man in the county to send his children to white schools after
integration. "I know who this kid is. I don't see how they could prove he
is a threat to society."

The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles will vote on Mr. Beazley's
clemency petition, possibly a day or two before the scheduled execution.
Many groups, led by Amnesty International, are urging mercy, particularly
since international treaties prohibit the execution of inmates who commit
crimes before the age of 18.

One person calling for mercy is Mr. Beazley's mother, Rena. "In this
situation, I think Napoleon was trying to prove himself to his friends
and the situation got out of hand," she said, sobbing quietly. "One
mistake at that age doesn't mean that somebody is a bad person. To
sentence somebody at the age of 17 to death, that is a stiff punishment."

"You know, people change."

(source: New York Times)

With a horrified world watching, Texas plans to execute Napoleon Beazley
next week. If Beazley is killed, it will be to the detriment of justice.

Gov. Rick Perry, his Board of Pardons and Paroles and the courts should
block this execution and seek a lesser penalty for several reasons. One
is that Beazley was a minor when the murder for which he was sentenced
was committed. Another is evidence suggesting that racial prejudice,
procedural unfairness and inaccurate testimony about the youth's danger
to society led to the death sentence.

If executed, Beazley would not be the 1st juvenile offender to die in the
notoriously busy Texas death chamber. Of the 249 people the state has
executed since it resumed capital punishment in 1982, 9 were sentenced
for crimes committed when they were 17 years old. (Execution No. 250 is
scheduled for today.) Among the 455 people on the state's death row, 31
were 17 the time of their crime.

But revulsion is mounting against execution of juvenile offenders and
offenders with mental retardation. Texas is out of step on both points.

Most nations and many death-penalty states prohibit execution of juvenile
offenders and of mentally retarded inmates. Perry's decision to override
the Legislature and veto a prohibition on execution of retarded killers
recently called attention to the state's harsh execution ethos.

Public dismay over executing juveniles rose up recently during the debate
over appropriate punishment of a Florida boy who, at age 13, murdered one
of his teachers. The boy was sentenced to 28 years behind bars.

In the Beazley case, the fatal shooting of John Luttig, 63, in Tyler was
considered aggravated because it involved car theft. Beazley got death,
while 2 older accomplices received life sentences.

"Death is inevitable," Beazley told long-time death row reporter Michael
Graczyk of the Associated Press. "It's not like it's my adversary."
Beazley, a former small-town honor student with no prior criminal
history, turned 25 on Sunday.

Others are less resigned. New York Times columnist Bob Herbert recently
described with quiet outrage how an all-white jury was picked to try
Beazley, who is black.

Protests of the sentence have been lodged by Norway, the Council of
Europe, Amnesty International and the American Bar Association. They say
death is an inappropriate punishment for a juvenile. And they are right.

The Southwest Key Program Inc., an Austin-based children's advocacy
organization, is working in various arenas to gain clemency for Beazley.

The group's general counsel, Cathy Kyle, cites a parallel case to show
how sentences vary. In a murder case in Tyler about a year after the
Luttig death, 3 young white men shot down a 63-year-old African American
man. "The trigger man was sentenced to 45 years and will be eligible for
parole in half that time," Kyle said. "His cohorts received even shorter
sentences."

Kyle also noted that in the Beazley case the victim was the father of a
federal appeals court judge from another state who was "intimately
involved in the prosecution of the case." She contends that several
jurors were biased against African Americans.

She said Beazley's advocates received a respectful and attentive hearing
from members of the governor's staff Tuesday.

The state has nothing to gain by killing Napoleon Beazley. And it has
more to lose than he does. His sentence should be commuted.

(source: Editorial, Austin-American Statesman)

                    HUNTSVILLE, Texas (Reuters) - The Texas
                    Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday
                    issued an emergency stay for a man who
                    committed murder when he was 17, in a case
                    that has renewed international condemnation
                    of capital punishment in the United States and
                    Texas in particular.

                    Napoleon Beazley, now 25, had been
                    scheduled to die by lethal injection shortly
                    after 6 p.m. CDT (7 p.m. EDT) at the state
                    prison in Huntsville, 75 miles north of
                    Houston.

                    The Texas court, which rarely grants stays,
                    decided to consider his lawyers' arguments
                    against the legality of executing someone who
                    committed a crime when he was a minor.

                    Critics ranging from Amnesty International to
                    the European Union (news - web sites) have
                    asked Texas not to kill Beazley. In a recent
                    report, Amnesty International called the
 United States a ``rogue state'' with regard to capital punishment and
 said Texas, which leads the nation in executions, was the worst of all.

 BEAZLEY CONVICTED IN OILMAN'S MURDER

 Beazley was condemned for shooting oilman John Luttig, 63, to death
 while stealing his Mercedes Benz in the east Texas town of Tyler on
 April 19, 1994.

 Luttig was the father of a well-connected federal judge in Virginia, J.
 Michael Luttig, which has brought charges that prosecutors sought the
 death penalty only because of the judge's prominence. They have
 denied the accusation.

 The crime shocked Beazley's family and friends because he was a
 popular athlete and president of his high school class and had no
 criminal record. But he admitted he had been a small-time crack
 cocaine dealer.

 The lawyer who lodged Beazley's initial appeal in 1996 said in an
 affidavit filed with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Tuesday
 that he handled it badly because he did not raise the age issue or
 interview two accomplices in the Luttig murder who have since
 recanted some of the testimony that helped send Beazley to death row.

 The lawyer, Robin Norris, admitted he had never filed a death penalty
 appeal before Beazley's and at that time had taken on too many such
 cases -- five -- to do them properly, the Houston Chronicle reported.

 Beazley's current attorney, Walter Long, is also arguing that the jury
 that condemned the young black man was all-white and included at
 least one member thought to be a racist.

 The case caused an unusual split in the U.S. Supreme Court (news -
 web sites) on Monday when it refused to stay the execution in a 3-3 tie
 vote. Three of the justices recused themselves because of links to the
 younger Luttig.

 TEXAS HAS EXECUTED 250

 Texas has executed 250 death-row inmates since resuming capital
 punishment in 1982 after the U.S. Supreme Court lifted a four-year
 ban on the death penalty.

 Many of them, including a number of the 151 performed while
 President Bush (news - web sites) was governor of Texas, have drawn
 widespread condemnation because of questions about the quality of the
 justice in the state.

 Bush, a death penalty supporter, has said many times he believed the
 people put to death under his administration got ''full and fair access to
 the courts'' and were guilty as charged.

 Death penalty opponents have often criticized the state for providing
 poor legal counsel for impoverished defendants.

Appeals court judge a rising star among conservatives
Despite father's death, Luttig says he is objective about death penalty

Former Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger was 1 of the giants of
the American judiciary in the 20th century. When he died in 1995, the top
echelons of the American judicial system convened at his funeral. He was
eulogized by 2 sitting justices of the high court -- Chief Justice
William Rehnquist and Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Burger also was remembered by a third, lesser-known judge, who delivered
a moving eulogy: J. Michael Luttig was a friend and former law clerk of
Burger's, and someone who many believe could one day be a Supreme Court
justice himself.

In recent weeks, Luttig has emerged on the national scene, but not
because of a case he has presided over as a judge on the 4th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals. Rather, it is because of a case in which he has a more
personal role: He is the son of John Luttig, the Texas man who was shot
to death by Napoleon Beazley during a carjacking in 1994. When the case
reached the Supreme Court, Luttig's ties to the nation's highest bench
caused 3 of the sitting justices to recuse themselves.

Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and David Souter recused
themselves from a petition to review Beazley's case because of their ties
to Luttig. That led to an unusual 3-3 Supreme Court tie, which was not
enough to stay his execution.

The high court still must decide whether to take action on the merits of
the petition -- whether or not Beazley should be spared because he was 17
at the time of the crime. The execution, however, was later put on hold
by a Texas appeals court.

Luttig 'not tortured by doubt'

Although Luttig's has not been a common household name in the United
States, he has long been a prominent player in national legal circles and
a rising star among conservatives during his decade-long tenure on the
appeals court.

Luttig also is considered by many legal experts as someone likely to be
on President George W. Bush's list of potential Supreme Court nominees.
Over the years, he has earned a reputation as a smart and bold
conservative, a strong advocate of federalism, and a jurist assured of
his convictions.

"He is a man who is not tortured by doubt over the correctness of his
judicial philosophy," said Bruce Fein, a lawyer and constitutional
scholar who was a deputy attorney general in the Reagan administration.

Luttig, 47, was born in Tyler, Texas. He earned a law degree from the
University of Virginia and lives in Northern Virginia, just outside of
Washington, D.C.

Former President George H.W. Bush nominated Luttig for the appeals court
judgeship in 1991. Luttig had clerked for Burger in the mid-1980s, and
before that, worked as a law clerk to Scalia when Scalia was an appeals
judge in the District of Columbia.

Luttig then went on to work for the Justice Department during the 1st
Bush administration, where he provided counsel during the Supreme Court
nomination process for both Thomas and Souter.

"His reputation is one of an extremely smart, hard-line conservative,"
said Heather Gerken, an assistant professor at Harvard Law School, who
also was a Supreme Court clerk for Souter. "Even those on the left, who
disagree with his politics, really agree that he is very, very smart."

Gerken said Luttig is recognized as one of the nation's most prominent
"feeder" judges, whose clerks go on to be law clerks at the Supreme
Court. She noted that they are reputed to be among the most conservative
clerks in the high court.

Longtime supporter of capital punishment

It has been during his time on the 4th Circuit bench that Luttig has
developed his reputation, staking out some of the most controversial
opinions from that bench in recent years.

2 years ago, he wrote an opinion striking down the Violence Against Women
Act on the grounds that Congress had overstepped its authority in
establishing the legislation. In 1998, he reversed a lower court ruling
and upheld a Virginia ban on partial birth abortion. A year earlier he
issued a ruling allowing the state to require parental notification
before a teen-ager could obtain an abortion.

Luttig was a supporter of capital punishment long before Beazley and 2
accomplices in the carjacking -- brothers Donald and Cedric Coleman --
killed his father and wounded his mother in the driveway of their home in
Texas.

In recent years, defense attorneys have at times asked him to recuse
himself from capital cases because of the personal tragedy he suffered.
But Luttig has said he can separate his personal emotions from his
judicial responsibilities.

The judge declined a request for an interview for this story, saying he
would not comment while Beazley's case is pending.

But he has made his feelings known in the past. He testified at Beazley's
trial, where he described his family's horror and anguish in the
aftermath of the murder, and of his love and admiration for his slain
father. "My dad was my hero. He still is my hero," he said. "I worshiped
the ground he walked on. I still do."

More recently, Luttig gave an interview to his hometown newspaper, The
Tyler, Texas, Morning Telegraph, in which he said he and his family did
not push for the death penalty in the case. His father's death was so
devastating, he said, that he had no room left to feel anger toward
Beazley.

"Things being as they are, I believe Beazley received the fairest trial
possible, in part because I was there," he said.

(source: CNN)

The case of Beazley, who committed murder at the age of 17, had reignited international
criticism of capital punishment in the United States.

His execution by lethal injection had been scheduled for 1800 (2300 GMT) on Wednesday at the state prison in Huntsville.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals decided to consider his lawyers' arguments against the legality of executing someone who committed murder as a minor.

Beazley, now 25, admitted shooting dead a businessman at point-blank range to steal his car, but asked for "a second chance" in view of his age at the time of the murder.

The US Supreme Court has already refused once to block the execution.

                                              Allegations of bias

Critics say the judicial system is unfairly biased against Beazley.

His execution would make him the latest in a line of teenage killers to die under US laws.

Beazley shot 63-year-old John Luttig in 1994.

As well as pointing to the killer's age, critics of the death sentence argue that Beazley could
not get a fair trial as Mr Luttig's son now sits as an appeals court judge in Richmond, Virginia.

Three of the nine US Supreme Court justices excused themselves from the appeal because
of their ties to Mr Luttig, whose son had either worked for them or advised them.

There have also been allegations that Beazley's trial was prejudiced because he is black.

But Jack Skeen, the district attorney who prosecuted the case, argues that the callousness of the murder dictates the death penalty.

Two of Beazley's accomplices received life sentences.

Beazley shot Mr Luttig in the head after pulling him from his car at his home, then stood in a
pool of blood while going through the dead man's pockets, searching for the car keys.

"If you look at the facts of this case, the premeditation, and the absolutely random
predatory nature of the crime... the death penalty is certainly appropriate," said Mr Skeen.

                                                  Death in Texas

The case has wider implications, being just the latest in the state of Texas, which carried out
a record number of executions - 40 - last year.

Since the US Supreme Court allowed states to reinstate the death penalty in 1976, 18 people who committed murder under the age of 18 have been executed across the United States.

Amnesty International argues that Texas does not recognise 17-year-olds as mature
when they try to buy alcohol, but treats them as adults when it comes to murder.

Beazley is one of 31 prisoners waiting on death row in Texas who killed at the age of 17.

The Supreme Court has ruled that it is constitutional to execute criminals who were as young as 16 at the time of their crime.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted an emergency stay of
execution in the case of Napoleon Beazley, just hours before he was
scheduled to die by lethal injection, a spokeswoman for the
court told CNN.

The court was considering a last-minute appeal filed Tuesday by Walter
Long, Beazley's lawyer. Long alleges that Beazley did not receive
competent representation from his lawyers after he was found guilty
and the death penalty was imposed.

On Monday the Supreme Court denied a stay request for Beazley in an
unusual 3-3 tie.  Three justices -- Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and
David Souter -- recused themselves from this case because of personal
relationships with J. Michael Luttig, son of the victim and a federal
appeals court judge.

Pending before the Supreme Court is a previous application by Beazley's
lawyer for a broader review of the case and whether those under 18
convicted of murder should be executed. The high court, though, does
not have to act on that appeal request before the execution.

It is possible the Supreme Court won't even rule on the petition for an
appeal.  4 justices would have to approve the request.

Supreme Court denies stay

On Monday the U.S. Supreme Court denied a stay of execution for Napoleon
Beazley. Where the justices stand on the Beazley case:

The victim
John Luttig was a prominent businessman in Tyler, Texas.

Luttig and his wife were returning home to Tyler when the slaying
occurred in front of their house. He was shot and killed in his driveway
in 1994 during a botched carjacking. He was 63 at the time of the shooting.

Luttig's son, J. Michael Luttig, later went on to become a federal judge
on the 4th U.S. Court of Appeals.

Earlier this week in Austin, the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles voted
13-3 against recommending a reprieve for Beazley and 10-6 against
commuting his sentence. The board takes up all death penalty cases in the
state.

'Death is inevitable'
Beazley spent much of the day Tuesday visiting family and friends. He was
seated in the small steel and glass cage at the Polunsky Unit of the
Texas Department of Criminal Justice near Livingston, according to The
Associated Press. Family members spoke with him, two at a time on
telephones, huddled on chairs in front of the window.

"I don't want it to happen by any means, but it's not something I spend a
lot of time dwelling on," Beazley said in a recent interview about his
impending execution, the AP reported. "Death is inevitable. It's not like
it's my adversary. People do it every day."

Beazley was convicted of the 1994 murder of a prominent Tyler, Texas,
businessman, John Luttig, as part of a carjacking.

Beazley was sentenced to death after the 1995 trial in which it was
alleged that Beazley and two friends were searching for a carjacking
victim and followed Luttig and his wife back to their house. It was not
until later that his son became a federal judge.

Testimony at Beazley's trial showed he stood in a pool of blood while
going through Luttig's pockets, searching for the car keys. He abandoned
the car a short distance away after hitting a wall, damaging the vehicle.
Beazley also fired at the victim's wife. He missed, but she played dead
while her husband lay beside her.

2 other men sentenced to life in prison later recanted their testimony
that Beazley had boasted of wanting to kill somebody.

Criticism at home and abroad
Death penalty opponents from around the world have sent letters and cards
protesting the execution. The European Union, through the Belgian Embassy
in Washington, urged Gov. Rick Perry to stop the execution, according to
The Associated Press.

Amnesty International, using the Beazley case as a springboard, issued a
report critical of the United States and Texas, in particular, for
allowing executions in such cases, the AP reported.

Beazley does not deny his role in the murder but has sought a review of
his case, including the question of whether the U.S. Constitution bars
executing people who were under age 18 when they committed their crimes.
In Texas, a capital murder committed at age 17 makes an offender eligible
for the death penalty.

Cindy Garner, district attorney in Houston County, which includes
Beazley's hometown, had written letters to the governor and pardons
officials asking that his sentence be commuted. She also testified in
Beazley's behalf in the punishment phase of his trial.

"I'm devastated. There's a good possibility this is going to proceed,"
she said Monday. "His family will be devastated. His mother really
thought he would get at least 30 more days for some consideration."

15 states that carry out capital punishment prohibit executions of
anyone under age 18.

(source:  CNN)

Former Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger was 1 of the giants of
the American judiciary in the 20th century. When he died in 1995, the top
echelons of the American judicial system convened at his funeral. He was
eulogized by 2 sitting justices of the high court -- Chief Justice
William Rehnquist and Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Burger also was remembered by a third, lesser-known judge, who delivered
a moving eulogy: J. Michael Luttig was a friend and former law clerk of
Burger's, and someone who many believe could one day be a Supreme Court
justice himself.

In recent weeks, Luttig has emerged on the national scene, but not
because of a case he has presided over as a judge on the 4th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals. Rather, it is because of a case in which he has a more
personal role: He is the son of John Luttig, the Texas man who was shot
to death by Napoleon Beazley during a carjacking in 1994. When the case
reached the Supreme Court, Luttig's ties to the nation's highest bench
caused 3 of the sitting justices to recuse themselves.

Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and David Souter recused
themselves from a petition to review Beazley's case because of their ties
to Luttig. That led to an unusual 3-3 Supreme Court tie, which was not
enough to stay his execution.

The high court still must decide whether to take action on the merits of
the petition -- whether or not Beazley should be spared because he was 17
at the time of the crime. The execution, however, was later put on hold
by a Texas appeals court.

Luttig 'not tortured by doubt'

Although Luttig's has not been a common household name in the United
States, he has long been a prominent player in national legal circles and
a rising star among conservatives during his decade-long tenure on the
appeals court.

Luttig also is considered by many legal experts as someone likely to be
on President George W. Bush's list of potential Supreme Court nominees.
Over the years, he has earned a reputation as a smart and bold
conservative, a strong advocate of federalism, and a jurist assured of
his convictions.

"He is a man who is not tortured by doubt over the correctness of his
judicial philosophy," said Bruce Fein, a lawyer and constitutional
scholar who was a deputy attorney general in the Reagan administration.

Luttig, 47, was born in Tyler, Texas. He earned a law degree from the
University of Virginia and lives in Northern Virginia, just outside of
Washington, D.C.

Former President George H.W. Bush nominated Luttig for the appeals court
judgeship in 1991. Luttig had clerked for Burger in the mid-1980s, and
before that, worked as a law clerk to Scalia when Scalia was an appeals
judge in the District of Columbia.

Luttig then went on to work for the Justice Department during the 1st
Bush administration, where he provided counsel during the Supreme Court
nomination process for both Thomas and Souter.

"His reputation is one of an extremely smart, hard-line conservative,"
said Heather Gerken, an assistant professor at Harvard Law School, who
also was a Supreme Court clerk for Souter. "Even those on the left, who
disagree with his politics, really agree that he is very, very smart."

Gerken said Luttig is recognized as one of the nation's most prominent
"feeder" judges, whose clerks go on to be law clerks at the Supreme
Court. She noted that they are reputed to be among the most conservative
clerks in the high court.

Longtime supporter of capital punishment

It has been during his time on the 4th Circuit bench that Luttig has
developed his reputation, staking out some of the most controversial
opinions from that bench in recent years.

2 years ago, he wrote an opinion striking down the Violence Against Women
Act on the grounds that Congress had overstepped its authority in
establishing the legislation. In 1998, he reversed a lower court ruling
and upheld a Virginia ban on partial birth abortion. A year earlier he
issued a ruling allowing the state to require parental notification
before a teen-ager could obtain an abortion.

Luttig was a supporter of capital punishment long before Beazley and 2
accomplices in the carjacking -- brothers Donald and Cedric Coleman --
killed his father and wounded his mother in the driveway of their home in
Texas.

In recent years, defense attorneys have at times asked him to recuse
himself from capital cases because of the personal tragedy he suffered.
But Luttig has said he can separate his personal emotions from his
judicial responsibilities.

The judge declined a request for an interview for this story, saying he
would not comment while Beazley's case is pending.

But he has made his feelings known in the past. He testified at Beazley's
trial, where he described his family's horror and anguish in the
aftermath of the murder, and of his love and admiration for his slain
father. "My dad was my hero. He still is my hero," he said. "I worshiped
the ground he walked on. I still do."

More recently, Luttig gave an interview to his hometown newspaper, The
Tyler, Texas, Morning Telegraph, in which he said he and his family did
not push for the death penalty in the case. His father's death was so
devastating, he said, that he had no room left to feel anger toward
Beazley.

"Things being as they are, I believe Beazley received the fairest trial
possible, in part because I was there," he said.

(source: CNN) 

Council of Europe Appeals for Inmate

Europe's leading human rights organization urged the governor of Texas to
spare Napoleon Beazley from being executed Wednesday for a crime he
committed as a teen-ager.

The 43-nation Council of Europe reaffirmed its unequivocal opposition to
the death penalty as an inhuman punishment which has no place in a
democratic country.

Council President Lord Russell-Johnston and Secretary-general Walter
Schwimmer said execution of Beazley would run counter to international
legal standards and the norms of civilized society.

"We call on you to show restraint in the case of Napoleon Beazley whose
life now depends entirely on your decision," they said in the statement
late Tuesday to Texas Gov. Rick Perry. "It is a matter of human decency
to right the wrong before it is too late."

Beazley, now 25, is to be executed in Texas later Wednesday, becoming the
19th criminal in the United States to be sentenced to death since 1976
for a crime committed as a teen-ager.

His case has drawn international attention because of his age at the time
of the slaying, but also because the victim's son is a judge on the 4th
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The case has also fractured the U.S.
Supreme Court, drawn a crowd of death penalty opponents and led to
renewed criticism about Texas' criminal justice system.

The Council of Europe is the guardian of the 1952 European Convention on
Human Rights. In June, it threatened the United States and Japan with the
loss of their observer status unless they stopped practicing capital
punishment by 2003.

(source: Associated Press)

The United States shares with Iran and the Democratic Republic of Congo an
unpleasant distinction. They are the only countries whose governments have
executed juvenile offenders in the past four years.

The Congo has killed one and Iran has killed three.

The US has killed eight and another 79 sit on death rows across the country.

The issue of juveniles facing the death penalty has become the latest point
of contention in the American justice system, following the granting of a
last-minute reprieve this week to a juvenile in President George Bush's home
State of Texas.

Napoleon Beazley was 17 when he shot dead the father of a federal court
judge during a car-jacking in 1994. The fairness of Beazley's death sentence
has been questioned on the basis of his age, that he is a black man who was
convicted by an all-white jury and because his victim's son, Judge Michael
Luttig, was an adviser to the prosecution.

Three of the nine members of the Supreme Court excused themselves from
considering Beazley's application for an appeal hearing this week because of
their relationships with Judge Luttig. The remaining court members divided
3-3, meaning the appeal, which required majority support, was rejected.

Beazley had said goodbye to his family and was ready to die on Wednesday
night when the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted an emergency stay
to consider 10 points of contention relating to his sentencing, including
the issues of his age, race and suggestions of Judge Luttig's influence.
Napoleon Beazley is no saint. He killed 63-year-old John Luttig in cold
blood and shot at the man's wife. Mrs Luttig was not hit.

However, Beazley's case has raised a broader political and philosophical
question for American legislators. They are asking how truly civilised their
society can be if it applies the death sentence to teenagers.

Opponents of the death penalty have launched two partly successful
Supreme Court challenges to the death penalty for teenagers.

Most States do not impose the death penalty on anyone younger than 18,
and the rest have introduced minimum ages of either 16 or 17 as a result of
the Supreme Court challenges.

A study by Professor Victor Strieb, of Ohio Northern University, found some
firm patterns in the profiles of the teenagers sent to death row.

All the offenders were male and all were convicted of murder. Two-thirds
were black or Latino and two-thirds of their murder victims had been white.
Half the victims were women and more than a third of the murders involved
rape.

The research highlighted the racial and cultural problems that lie beneath
the country's crisis in violent teenage crime. But Professor Strieb's work
has been used more often to amplify America'sincreasing international
isolation on the death penalty.

"The United States is the only Western democracy that executes its
children," he wrote.

"Even China, a nation hardly known for its enlightened human rights
practices, forbids death sentences for those under 18."

While the debate continues, two more juvenile offenders are preparing to
face the death penalty in US courts next week. Marcus Moore was found
guilty of a murder in Georgia this week and Antwoun Sims was convicted of
murder in North Carolina. Both are 17 and both are black.

The conundrum facing the US was put most succinctly in the case of another
teen murderer, 17-year-old cop killer Michael Lopez, when he was sentenced
to death in Texas two years ago.

Responding to public outrage over the decision to send yet another teenager
to death row, prosecutor Kelly Siegler lamented: "People cry and cry for
justice, until they get it. Then, they beg for mercy."

                WASHINGTON -- Just three of the nine Supreme Court justices voted to go
                forward with the execution of Napoleon Beazley. But in a case that lifted the
                veil from votes normally hidden, that will probably be enough to seal the Texan's
                fate.

                The unusual case underscores continuing conflicts among the justices over their
                role as judges of last resort for some 70 or 80 condemned people a year.

                Beazley's case fractured the court 3-3-3 - three votes for a reprieve, three to go
                forward with the execution and three abstentions by justices with connections to
                the victim's family. Under Supreme Court rules, a tie vote means the request for
                a reprieve is denied.

                Beazley is to die Wednesday evening for shooting a man to death during a
                botched carjacking in 1994. Beazley also fired at the victim's wife, who played
                dead while her husband lay beside her on their driveway.

                Unless the Texas governor steps in - or the Supreme Court does, on broader
                grounds than its Monday rejection - the execution will proceed in the case,
                which has drawn international attention because Beazley was just 17 when the
                shooting occurred.

                Beazley, now 25, spent Tuesday talking with his parents and friends by
                telephone from inside a cage in the visiting area of Texas' death row. His would
                be the 19th U.S. execution since 1976 for a murder committed by a killer
                younger than 18 - the 10th in Texas.

                The Supreme Court's three-paragraph order on Monday showed how each
                justice voted. Emergency requests for reprieves are typically denied in brief
                orders that do not reveal the votes. When all justices are voting, it takes five to
                grant a reprieve, four to agree to hear a case.

                Justices John Paul Stevens, the most vocal dissenter in past death penalty cases,
                and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer went on record
                supporting the stay.

                In a sharply worded speech earlier this year, Ginsburg criticized the quality of
                legal help offered to those facing the death penalty. Breyer has told French radio
                the use of DNA evidence to overturn some death sentences may eventually
                change American minds on whether the punishment is appropriate.

                By process of subtraction, eliminating the justices who recused themselves,
                Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and fellow death penalty supporters Anthony
                M. Kennedy and Sandra Day O'Connor must have voted to let the execution go
                ahead.

                O'Connor raised eyebrows last month when she said she has reservations about
                the way the death penalty is applied in the United States, but she did not say she
                would vote any differently on upcoming cases.

                The court has accepted two death row appeals for the coming term, although
                one may be dropped.

                On Monday, the court acted on Beazley's request for a stay of his execution. In
                a somewhat unusual move, the court did not simultaneously announce its
                decision on whether to hear Beazley's wider appeal.

                It is still possible for the court to accept the case, although lawyers said that was
                unlikely. The court is not obliged to act before the scheduled execution.

                Also unusual in this case was the personal connection to court members.

                Beazley's victim was the father of a prominent federal judge who once served
                as a law clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia and helped prepare Justices David H.
                Souter and Clarence Thomas for their Senate confirmation hearings.
                Presumably because of those connections, Scalia, Souter and Thomas recused
                themselves from the case.

                Lawyers who follow death penalty cases said they could not recall an instance
                where an execution went ahead on the strength of so few votes, although there
                has been at least one other case where the vote was 4-4.

                "There are so many problems with this case that I was hopeful that the Supreme
                Court would have taken the time, more time, to weigh the evidence a little bit,"
                said Anne James, an American University professor and death penalty opponent
                who worked on the Beazley case.

                Ronald Tabak, a New York lawyer who worked on the case for the American
                Bar Association, said, "I would think that if we're going to have the death
                penalty, a good case could be made that where there's this much confusion and
                division ... that even people who favor the death penalty should have real serious
                questions about carrying it forward."

                The ABA has asked for clemency for Beazley because he was 17 when he
                committed the crime. The ABA has no position on the death penalty in general
                but opposes it for anyone under 18 and for the mentally retarded.

                Texas allows the death penalty for killings committed at 17, and some states
                allow the punishment for killers who were 16. The United States is nearly alone
                in the world in that regard. More than 15 international organizations have
                protested Beazley's scheduled lethal injection.

                Beazley does not deny his role in the murder but has sought a review of his
                case, including the question of whether the Constitution bars executing people
                who were under age 18 when they committed their crimes.

LAW OFFICIALS LOBBY PERRY FOR DEATH SENTENCE
LETTERS RESPOND TO JUDGE'S APPEAL TO SPARE MAN WHO KILLED AT 17

Smith County's top three top law enforcement officials sent strongly
worded letters to Gov. Rick Perry on Friday asking that he not commute
Texas death row inmate Napoleon Beazley's sentence.

The letters were in reaction to a letter sent to the governor this week
by State District Judge Cynthia Stevens Kent, who presided over Mr.
Beazley's 1995 trial, asking that his sentence be commuted to life
imprisonment.

Mr. Beazley was convicted in 1995 for killing John Luttig, 63, of Tyler,
during a botched car-jacking. Because of his age at the time he
committed the crime (17), his case has attracted international attention
from human rights groups, and even foreign governments, that oppose the
execution of juvenile offenders.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals this week stayed Mr. Beazley's
execution just hours before he was scheduled to die.  The stay was in
response to a petition filed by Mr. Beazley's lawyers, and not to Judge
Kent's letter.

His attorneys had asked Judge Kent to intervene on their client's
behalf.    She faxed a letter to Mr. Perry on Wednesday, saying that
while she believed that Mr. Beazley was judged and sentenced "in
accordance with the facts and law in the State of Texas," his death
sentence should be commuted due to his age at the time of the offense.

Smith County District Attorney Jack Skeen, Tyler Police Chief Gary
Swindle and Smith County Sheriff J.B. Smith sent letters to the governor
on Friday opposing her request.

Mr. Skeen urged the governor "in the strongest terms possible to DENY
the request of Judge Cynthia Kent to commute Napoleon Beazley's sentence
to life."

Mr. Skeen argued that "the Texas Legislature decided long ago that an
individual who is seventeen years of age at the time he or she commits a
crime is an adult under the law."  The jurors were aware of Mr.
Beazley's age, he noted, as well as all the other evidence when they
rendered their decision.

Chief Swindle wrote: "It is obvious that Napoleon Beazley is a threat to
society.  There is no way he deserves anything less than the death
penalty."

Sheriff Smith described Mr. Beazley as a "cold-blooded killer."

Edward Marty, a Smith County prosecutor who is fighting Mr. Beazley's
appeals, said Friday that because of Judge Kent's letter, he believes it
would be inappropriate for her to be involved in the case in the future.
 

If Mr. Beazley's appeals are unsuccessful, the case could return to
Judge Kent's court, and it might become her responsibility to set a new
execution date.

Judge Kent has declined to comment on the case.

Legal experts say that the state appeals court probably issued a stay
based on allegations that Mr. Beazley had inadequate counsel at one
stage in the appeals process, one of several claims included in the
petition submitted by his current attorneys.

An appeal on his behalf also is before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Because of the action taken by the appeals court, Mr. Perry did not have
to make a decision on whether to issue a 30-day execution delay.   On
the recommendation of the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, he also
can commute a death sentence.

A number of good reasons support a stay of execution for Napoleon Beazley
in Texas this week, but his age at the time of the crime should be
sufficient.

In 1994, Beazley and 2 friends carjacked a prominent Tyler, Texas,
businessman and civic leader, John Luttig. According to testimony, it was
Beazley who shot the man twice in the head.

The young man, the son of Grapeland, Texas', 1st black council member,
also dealt crack cocaine. Yet, he had no criminal record at the time of
his arrest. He was president of his senior class and a star football
player. He was also just 17 years old.

Beazley obviously had little judgment at that age. But neither did his
initial appellate lawyer, who failed to raise the issue of Beazley's age
at the time of the 1st appeal. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals this
time around apparently thought enough of that argument to stay the
execution for further review. The court will also consider competency of
counsel, an increasingly pertinent issue in the growing number of capital
cases in the nation. The delay will halt further action in other courts.

The U.S. Supreme Court refused a stay, sparking a bizarre vote earlier in
the week. Three of the justices had to recuse themselves because of
connections to Luttig's son, J. Michael Luttig, now a federal judge. The
remaining justices split 3-3, virtually unheard of in a 9-member court.
In 1989, the court narrowly upheld the death penalty for actions