California’s application of the Death Penalty has been in the Hot Seat for a couple years now. (note the Death Penalty was added back into the Constitution by an amendment, similar to how Proposition 8 got added)
Michael Morales was convicted of Murder and sentenced to Death. Just before his execution date his applications for Clemency and relief were denied. His clemency application is of particular issue, because a fake impostor pretended to be a Private Investigator and submitted faked, forged Declarations for consideration. NO ethical Licensed Private Investigator would do such a thing and to jeopardize Mr. Morales’ chances at clemency. The issue here isn’t whether Michael Morales is guilty. The issue is whether he should be executed and whether the enhancements should have ever been on the table. The original sentencing judge acknowledges that the testimony of a jail house informant was riddled with lies and a complete fabrication that he has now gone on record saying he wouldn’t have allowed Mr. Morales to be on Death Row.
Federal litigation to postpone and/or stop the execution has been quasi-successful. Then when the State changed the protocol without the required input, another lawsuit (Morales v. CDCR, Marin County Case No. CV061436) was filed at the state level to invalidate the newly adopted administrative protocol. Superior Court Judge Lynn O’Malley Taylor ruled in favor of Morales and claimed the new protocol is in violation of the law. California determined to continue, appealed that decision and just recently the 1st District Court of Appeals for California affirmed O’Malley Taylor’s ruling.
Will California get on board with a “legal” ethical execution protocol or will they continue to waste more of our tax paying dollars with a budget we can’t balance? You can read more.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed! 
Leave a Reply