|
|
Post by Tony on Aug 7, 2003 17:53:10 GMT -6
Brownsville boy's slayer spared from execution
By Mariano Castillo
San Antonio Express-News
Web Posted : 08/07/2003 12:00 AM
The convicted killer of a 3-year-old Brownsville boy received a last-minute stay of execution late Wednesday.
About three hours after Jose Alfredo Rivera, 40, was scheduled to die, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans granted him a reprieve, said Larry Fitzgerald, spokesman for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.
"He was informed of the stay about 5 minutes till 9 p.m.," Fitzgerald said. "He said he was kind of expecting the stay ... he never lost faith."
Rivera's attorney and other groups had objected that Rivera was mentally unfit, and they pointed to letters written by a co-defendant proclaiming Rivera's innocence.
The reprieve was granted to give him time to prove his mental condition; his case was sent back to federal court in Brownsville.
Rivera was scheduled to die after 6 p.m., but he was never actually in the execution chamber.
By the time the stay was issued, the U.S. Supreme Court already had rejected two rounds of appeals earlier in the day, and Rivera had eaten what could have been his last meal. He had tamales, enchiladas, frijoles, jalapeños, tacos, chalupas, onions, chips and salsa, and pecan pie, washed down with Dr Pepper.
"When we went back to get his reaction, he was praying," Fitzgerald said. "He had a rosary."
The victim's family could not be reached for comment.
Rivera was convicted in 1994 of strangling Luis Daniel Blanco in a Brownsville park that since has been razed.
Veronica Zavala, 28, then a neighbor of the Blanco family, was also convicted of capital murder and is serving a life prison sentence for the killing on July 9, 1993.
"As a prosecutor, I'm disappointed," said Luis Saenz, the former Cameron County district attorney and prosecutor in Rivera's trial.
During her trial in 1994, Zavala testified that on that day she lured the boy to the park, where she and Rivera got high on cocaine, performed sex acts in front of the child, and sexually assaulted him before Rivera strangled him.
His body was found the next day in a park lake.
Prosecutors relied on a videotaped confession from Rivera, which he later said was beaten out of him by investigators. The district attorney has denied the charge.
As Rivera's execution date crept closer, Zavala increased a letter-writing campaign to exonerate him. She began the campaign in 1999, addressing judges, lawyers and anyone who would listen.
In a letter she wrote on the 10-year observance of the murder, she took sole responsibility for the slaying, recanting her court testimony.
Attorneys at Texas Defender Service, a nonprofit law agency that defends inmates facing the death penalty, joined Rivera's attorney, David Sergi, in arguing that Rivera's execution would be unconstitutional because he is mentally retarded.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2003 18:05:19 GMT -6
I personally wouldn't go so far as to say it is justice denied, yet. Under the current system he has the right to seek an appeal based upon his retardation. Now if it comes back that he has to be spared his life, and he is not in-fact retarded that would be truly justice denied. The Parry case is a perfect example of Justice being denied many times over by using the retardation excuse.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sharon on Aug 9, 2003 13:18:20 GMT -6
I live near Brownsville and remember this horrific crime very well. The citizens of this community thought justice was served when the death sentence was imposed. Now, ten years later, it's reported that this scum bum is retarded. His family even denies this! A local reporter who interviewed this child killer says that he is definitely NOT retarded.
And, of course, this blob of whale afterbirth, has found Jesus --- blah, blah, blah.
|
|
|
|
Post by felix on Aug 15, 2003 6:13:39 GMT -6
C'mon now Sharon, dont be so cynical!!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2003 6:52:58 GMT -6
Since the process of law is being followed, that of due process, I don't think it is justice being denied. It might be something else being denied, but I won't throw stones at such.
I do question, however, the note about the USSC being involved. Now maybe if it is a different appeal than what the USSC decided on, then the 5th circuit can act. But the USSC isn't even in session, so how could they have acted on 8/7/03?
Quite frankly, had his appeal not been heard because he was being executed that day, then that would have been a situation of justice being denied.
------------------------------------
("The best I can offer them is a fair trial, not an excuse for their crime.--Territory Judge, (wtte), "Hang Em High!")
|
|
