Send to death, but no crime committed!!

[Matteo Martini]

It seems that in Texas, you can get executed even if you did not commit any crime and even if the jury acknoledges that you did not commit any crime!!
This is the story of Kenneth Foster, an African-American, who, was standing 80 feet away from the place where the crime of Michael LaHood Jr. took place, without taking part in it.
Now, according to the Texas` " Law of Parties ", you can be sent to death, even if you did not kill a fly, if you can have " the intention " of taking part in a crime.

Foster was sentenced to death in May 1997 for driving a car from which Mauriceo Brown got out and shot Michael LaHood Jr. Brown got out of the car, allegedly attempted to commit a robbery, though he claimed that no robbery was intended, and said that he wanted to talk to a woman who was with LaHood. Complications arose and Brown shot LaHood while Foster and two others stayed in the car nearly 80 feet away with the windows up and the radio on. ( link: http://www.workers.org/2007/us/kenneth-foster-0621/ )

Under the law of parties, a person is criminally responsible as a party to an offense committed by the conduct of another if the person acts with an intent to promote or assist in the commission of the offense, and solicits, encourages, directs, aids, or attempts to aid another person to commit the offense. Tex.Pen.Code Ann. § 7.02(a)(2)(Vernon 2003) ( link: http://www.tjpc.state.tx.us/publications/reviews/98/98-1-12.htm )

This is the site of Kenneth Foster: http://www.freekenneth.com/

 

[gnome]

Hangon a sec... is he opposed to the law of parties (which to me is just a restatement of standard accessory laws)... or is he saying that his actions are not crimes under that law? He seems to be speaking against the law itself in the workers.org column.

 

[Matteo Martini]

If he is oppsed or not, to the " Law of Parties ", that is not the point, in my opinion.
The point is that he will be executed, for a crime he did not commit, as he was stainding in a car, with another person, with radio at high volume, 80 feet away from the place where the white guy got murdered.
That is the point.

 

[WildCat]

Not that I don't trust the communist newspaper to get all the facts correct, but is there a transcript of the trial available anywhere?

 

[Just thinking]

If he is oppsed or not, to the " Law of Parties ", that is not the point, in my opinion.
The point is that he will be executed, for a crime he did not commit, as he was stainding in a car, with another person, with radio at high volume, 80 feet away from the place where the white guy got murdered.
That is the point.

Sounds like the definition you supplied makes him part of a party in which one person committed murder. BTW ... are you serious in using the supplied link as an unbiased source?

 

[Just thinking]

Not that I don't trust the communist newspaper to get all the facts correct, but is there a transcript of the trial available anywhere?

That's what we really need here ... but, God -- how lengthy can that be?

From the article ...

I have dedicated my life for 10 years now. I will not walk head down. In my own right I have left a legacy—for my family, for my child, for fellow strugglers. ...

10 Years??? One might think that in all that time if there was a strong link to innocence in this case it would have netted something by now.

 

[Matteo Martini]

The case was reported exactly as in the link provided, by the Italian leading newspaper, " Il Corriere della Sera ", but the link is in Italian, alas.
The most authoritative article in the net, is maybe the one from Amnesty: http://blogs.amnestyusa.org/death-p...you-know-about-the-case-of-kenneth-foster.htm
The American newspapers give no attention to the case ( maybe, because it is no news, in Texas? ).

This is the link to the Texas state official site:
http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/statistics/deathrow/drowlist/fosterk.jpg

 

[Just thinking]

This is the link to the Texas state official site:
http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/statistics/deathrow/drowlist/fosterk.jpg

The police summary strongly conflicts with the article.

 

[Matteo Martini]

The police summary strongly conflicts with the article.

Nope.

They both say that:

1) he killed nobody;
2) he was driving the car, in what the police says it was an attempted armed robbery, while Foster denies that;
3) he was not even close to the murdered, when the murder happened;
4) in the site, we also read that the car had the stereo on, at high volume.

Even assuming that Foster knew it was an armed attempted robbery, do you get death penalty for being the driver in an armed attempted robbery, in Texas?

 

[WildCat]

The case was reported exactly as in the link provided, by the Italian leading newspaper, " Il Corriere della Sera ", but the link is in Italian, alas.
The most authoritative article in the net, is maybe the one from Amnesty: http://blogs.amnestyusa.org/death-p...you-know-about-the-case-of-kenneth-foster.htm
The American newspapers give no attention to the case ( maybe, because it is no news, in Texas? ).

You're quoting exclusively from anti-death penalty sources. There's that whole bias thing and all, which is why I'd like to see an actual trial transcript. Convicts always claim they didn't do nothin'. And if the facts show that he drove the shooter to the victim knowing that there will at least be a robbery attempt, he is indeed guilty as charged.

 

[WildCat]

Even assuming that Foster knew it was an armed attempted robbery, do you get death penalty for being the driver in an armed attempted robbery, in Texas?

Once a murder occurs, you are no longer an accomplice to robbery, but an accomplice to murder. This is true in every state as far as I know, and rightly so IMHO.

 

[Matteo Martini]

Your quoting exclusively from anti-death penalty sources. .

Nope.
I have included the police trnscript and official record, as well.

There's that whole bias thing and all, which is why I'd like to see an actual trial transcript. .

I have posted that

Convicts always claim they didn't do nothin'. And if the facts show that he drove the shooter to the victim knowing that there will at least be a robbery attempt, he is indeed guilty as charged.

He denies that.
But, even assuming that he drove the shooter, in a robbery attempt, do you get death penalty for that??

 

[Just thinking]

But, even assuming that he drove the shooter, in a robbery attempt, do you get death penalty for that??

ABSOLUTELY !!!

 

[Texas]

Nope.

They both say that:

1) he killed nobody;
2) he was driving the car, in what the police says it was an attempted armed robbery, while Foster denies that;
3) he was not even close to the murdered, when the murder happened;
4) in the site, we also read that the car had the stereo on, at high volume.

Even assuming that Foster knew it was an armed attempted robbery, do you get death penalty for being the driver in an armed attempted robbery, in Texas?

Yes. The death of any person resulting from committing another felony is capital murder. He was already involved in the felony of armed robbery and that sealed his fate regardless of the fact that he pulled the trigger.

 

[WildCat]

Nope.
I have included the police trnscript and official record, as well.

No, that was just a very short summary.

I have posted that

No, you haven't.

He denies that.

Of course he does. But the jury or judge that tried him didn't buy his story. A transcript would be helpful here.

 

[Matteo Martini]

Once a murder occurs, you are no longer an accomplice to robbery, but an accomplice to murder. This is true in every state as far as I know, and rightly so IMHO.

Well, that is questionable.
I think he can hardly be proven, that he knew, it was going to become a murder.
Also, the police stated that it was an attempted robbery, which turn out into a murder.
So, even if you agree with the police` s version, you can hardly deny, that he is got sentenced to death, for being the driver of an attempted robbery which turned out murder.

 

[WildCat]

Well, that is questionable.
I think he can hardly be proven, that he knew, it was going to become a murder.
Also, the police stated that it was an attempted robbery, which turn out into a murder.
So, even if you agree with the police` s version, you can hardly deny, that he is got sentenced to death, for being the driver of an attempted robbery which turned out murder.

He got sentenced to death for being an accomplice in a murder. It matters little whether or not he actually pulled the trigger.

 

[Just thinking]

Nope.

They both say that:

1) he killed nobody;

Strawman -- accomplices are just as guilty in many cases.

2) he was driving the car, in what the police says it was an attempted armed robbery, while Foster denies that;

Ahhh ... that qualifies as a conflict.

3) he was not even close to the murdered, when the murder happened;

Close ... please supply evidence for actual distances and definition of close

4) in the site, we also read that the car had the stereo on, at high volume.

No mention in the police report -- evidence to support this???

 

[Matteo Martini]

No, that was just a very short summary.

Well, I do not know where to find the complete transcript of the process.
I do not even know if it is posted on the web.
But the main points I have stressed, can be easily verified from the link to the State Police I gave you.

 

[Texas]

Well, that is questionable.
I think he can hardly be proven, that he knew, it was going to become a murder.
Also, the police stated that it was an attempted robbery, which turn out into a murder.
So, even if you agree with the police` s version, you can hardly deny, that he is got sentenced to death, for being the driver of an attempted robbery which turned out murder.

That makes absolutely no difference. Had he not been driving the get away car the shooter would not have been in place to shoot the other guy.