A study conducted by Stanford professor John Donohue finds no difference between inmates on death row, and other violent offenders who have been sentenced to life. Professor Donohue confirms what Los Angeles criminal defense lawyers have believed for long - that the death penalty, as administered in states like California, is arbitrary, and is not necessarily meant to punish the worst criminals.

The study was meant to explore the implementation of the death penalty in the state of Connecticut, and considered data between 1973 and 2007. During this time, there were 4,686 murders committed in the state of Connecticut. Out of these, 205 cases were eligible for the death penalty, and 138 of these were charged with capital felony. Out of these, 92 were convicted of a capital felony, and then proceeded to a death penalty sentencing hearing. Out of these, 9 received a sustained death sentence, and one prisoner was executed in 2005.

The study concludes that Connecticut’s record of handling cases that are eligible for the death penalty is representative of an unsound criminal justice policy that does not pose any deterrent. The death penalty is meant to deal with extremely violent criminals, and the death penalty as applied in several states across the country, including California, doesn't fulfill that objective at all. Professor Donohue concludes that the death penalty as applied in most cases, has nothing to do with the way that the case turns out, and is completely arbitrary.

The report also confirms that there's much discrimination in the death penalty process. For instance, the death penalty is much more likely to be meted out to blacks convicted of killing whites. There are harsh lessons in this report for California, which remains one of those states in the country that continue to impose the death penalty.

35-year old, Ian Rodriguez, has been accused of killing his son and torturing his wife and four of his other children.  Mr. Rodriguez appeared in San Bernadino Superior Court yesterday Morning to plead not guilty to all the charges.  Mr. Rodriguez is being held without bail for the serious and violent felony charges of torture, child abuse, attempted murder, and murder.

If the charges are found to be true, Mr. Rodriguez faces several consecutive life sentences in state prison.  He is alleged to have repeatedly assaulted his wife and children with a monkey wrench, threatened to light them on fire, and made them walk on broken glass during 11 hours of alleged torture.  Mr. Rodriguez’s eldest son eventually died from the severe beating he received.

As a criminal defense attorney who has practiced often in the San Bernadino County courts, and also has handled countless violent crimes cases, this story does appear gruesome in the alleged details.  However, if there is one thing I have learned over the years as a criminal defense lawyer is: there are two sides to every story.  This is not to say that even the smartest, most aggressive criminal defense attorney could find something legally or morally defensible in these alleged acts of torture, if these acts are proved true; however, there are certainly unknown factors at play: drug and/or alcohol addiction, mental illness on Mr. Rodriguez’s part.

If you, or someone you love, has been accused of a violent crime, then call and consult with an experienced and compassionate violent crimes attorney at The Law Offices of Karen L. Goldstein: (888) 445-6313.

Finally, some media attention on cops behaving badly, which by the way, they do all the time.  Now I know as a criminal defense attorney in Los Angeles, I have my biases.  Clearly, I deal with law enforcement on a regular basis and most of the time it is in an adversarial, confrontational manner.  However, no matter what one might day about my ideological slant and skepticism towards law enforcement, police officers and sheriffs and CHP are just like everyone else, they lie. 

Officer Jeffrey Stenroos falsely reported that a burglary suspect, armed with a gun, had attempted to shoot him in the chest while he was on patrol bear El Camino High School in the San Fernando Valley area.    In response to his false attempted murder and burglary report, over 350 police and deputies arrived on scene to assist in the manhunt for the suspect and nine different schools were placed on lock down while the manhunt occurred. After the alleged attempted murder incident, Officer Stenroos claims he was saved by his bullet-proof vest. Well, apparently he completely lied about the entire incident.  Sadly, this is just one egregious example of the type of officer misconduct that I have witnessed over the course of my criminal defense cases throughout the years in Los Angeles and the San Fernando Valley courts.  Specifically, when it comes to officer involved shootings, when the alleged shooting suspects are themselves seriously injured or die as a result, I always wonder what really happened here.  I can’t remember ever reading a news article about a Los Angeles police officer who fired his gun too quickly, killing a young minority from the inner city, and then admitted he did not have the right to use deadly force. It just doesn’t happen but at least media attention on Officer Stenroos will show the public that law enforcement isn’t even half as squeaky clean ethically as the public would like to think.

If you, or a loved one, has been involved with an attempted murder, assault with a deadly weapon case, or any other type of violent crime case, then call and speak with an experienced and aggressive criminal defense attorney at the Law Offices of Karen L. Goldstein: (888) 445-6313.

In California, a defendant accused of having killed a man who allegedly molested him when he was a minor, pleaded no contest to voluntary manslaughter—a lesser offense than the first degree murder with which he was originally charged.  The defendant claims that the person he attacked, and killed, had committed child molestation against him when he was a minor but had not been prosecuted for the sexual abuse.  The accused alleges that this man was a childhood neighbor of his who had begun to molest him when he was 11 years old.

Under the plea bargain terms, the defendant faces a sentence of anywhere from probation and no jail time to 10 years in state prison.

Both prosecution and defense will argue for what they believe to be an appropriate sentence for this violent crime.  Any and all mitigating and aggravating circumstances, including the details of the child molestation, will be considered by the Judge in determining a sentence.

If believed as true, defendant contends that he killed this man because he abused his position of trust as a boy scout leader to sexually abuse and to manipulate young boys.  He alleges that the sexual abuse occurred during camping trips where alcohol and drugs would be  provided before the molestation would begin.  The defendant also alleges that his abuser continued to contact him by calling and visiting as he became an adult which became a constant reminder of the sexual abuse.

In California, it is not permissible to “take the law into your own hands” to remedy a wrong you believe has been done to you.  However, that being said with sex offender law and child molestation being such “hot button” issues in California today, only time will tell if these examples of vigilante justice will be prosecuted as harshly as other types of violent crimes and sex crimes.