Oldest deathrow in-mate dead at 94

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**sebster**

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8515573.stm

The oldest death row inmate in the US has died of natural causes aged 94.

The Arizona Department of Corrections said Viva Leroy Nash died late on Friday at the state prison in Florence.

Nash had a criminal record dating back to the 1930s, and was deaf, mostly blind, crippled, mentally ill and had dementia, his lawyer said.

He was sentenced to death in 1983, for shooting a salesman after escaping from jail. But he managed to stave off his execution with a series of appeals.

At the time of his death, state prosecutors were appealing to the Supreme Court against a federal appeals court ruling that Nash might not be mentally competent to assist in his defence.

Nash's lawyer, Thomas Phalen, told the Associated Press his client was born in 1915 and had grown up in southern Utah. He was first imprisoned for armed robbery at the age of 15 in Kansas, he said.

He spent 25 years in prison for shooting a Connecticut police officer in 1947.

Then in 1977, Nash was sentenced to two consecutive life sentences for robbery and murder in Salt Lake City, but escaped from a prison work crew in 1982.

That November, he went into a coin shop in Phoenix and shot an employee. He was arrested as he fled the scene, and was later sentenced to death for first-degree murder.

Dude bust out of a prison work gang at 67? Sounds like a mean son of a bitch but that's still impressive.

That said, what are you doing getting assigned to a work gang after you've killed a policemen, done 25 years then been convicted for murder again?

**unbeliever87**

It sounds like he became institutionalised, and forgot how to live a normal life outside of prison.

**Noble713**

Sentenced to death in 1983.....26 YEARS of appeals? Our justice system is ridiculous. Can any of our resident lawyers explain why it takes so long?

**jbunny**

Noble713 wrote:Sentenced to death in 1983.....26 YEARS of appeals? Our justice system is ridiculous. Can any of our resident lawyers explain why it takes so long?

While not a lawyer, I think some of the problems deal with the fact that you get one or two automatic appeals when the Death Sentence is delivered. These are automatic appeals nad then you get a few more appeals. Given the shear volume of cases, it can take years for the first appeal to make it to court, let alone the others that you get.

Personally I think it needs to be shortened as well.

**Kilkrazy**

One reason there are so many appeals is because of the strong amount of sentiment against the death sentence.

The number of appeals would more easily be reduced by not giving the death sentence, then there would usually only be one appeal against the conviction.

**jbunny**

Kilkrazy wrote:One reason there are so many appeals is because of the strong amount of sentiment against the death sentence.

The number of appeals would more easily be reduced by not giving the death sentence, then there would usually only be one appeal against the conviction.

Not completely true. there are so many appeals because peope for and against want to make sure the right person is being exacuted. All for the death penalty, but I don't have a problem with a few appeals. However 20+ years is just too much.

Let's say after 20 years the courts declare a new trial. there is a great chance old witnesses are dead or unable to testify. Or vitcims are too fearful to testify again, es if they were placed into protective custody.

**unbeliever87**

jbunny wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:One reason there are so many appeals is because of the strong amount of sentiment against the death sentence.

The number of appeals would more easily be reduced by not giving the death sentence, then there would usually only be one appeal against the conviction.

Not completely true. there are so many appeals because peope for and against want to make sure the right person is being exacuted. All for the death penalty, but I don't have a problem with a few appeals. However 20+ years is just too much.

Let's say after 20 years the courts declare a new trial. there is a great chance old witnesses are dead or unable to testify. Or vitcims are too fearful to testify again, es if they were placed into protective custody.

Not sure how it works in the US, but in Australia there are only a limited number of appeals available. Once you are convicted in, say the Supreme Court, you can only then appeal to the Court of Appeals, and if that fails, the High Court after that. There are no other appeal options after that.

How do appeals work in the US?

**garret**

i think you appeal until your out or dead.

**sebster**

unbeliever87 wrote:Not sure how it works in the US, but in Australia there are only a limited number of appeals available. Once you are convicted in, say the Supreme Court, you can only then appeal to the Court of Appeals, and if that fails, the High Court after that. There are no other appeal options after that.

How do appeals work in the US?

I think in the US you can keep returning to the Appeals court if you can provide reasonable grounds. But I'm not a lawyer so I'm not sure of the differences.

I would guess, by the way, that he was on death row for 26 years because the process was put on the backburner - would anyone have really been all that keen to execute an old man?

**Wrexasaur**

At any rate, the guy did sound like quite the badass.

It seems like quite a few mistakes were made over his prior convictions. Not sure why he wasn't on complete lock-down, before being put on complete lockdown.

**Gitkikka**

Well...he's dead NOW, isn't he?

**Kilkrazy**

jbunny wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:One reason there are so many appeals is because of the strong amount of sentiment against the death sentence.

The number of appeals would more easily be reduced by not giving the death sentence, then there would usually only be one appeal against the conviction.

Not completely true. there are so many appeals because peope for and against want to make sure the right person is being exacuted. All for the death penalty, but I don't have a problem with a few appeals. However 20+ years is just too much.

Let's say after 20 years the courts declare a new trial. there is a great chance old witnesses are dead or unable to testify. Or vitcims are too fearful to testify again, es if they were placed into protective custody.

When we look at the passage of time, it can work either way. I mean, either the prosecution or the defence case can be weakened or improved by new evidence or old witnesses dying.

There are even cases where the invention of new technology, such as DNA testing, makes it possible to re-examine evidence and find out new information. There was a case in Japan recently where a man was released from Death Row after 17 years because DNA testing showed it wasn't him who did the murder.

**jbunny**

That is very true, and does happen from time to time. But given our system of innocent until proven guilty, it is harder for prosecution to convict after years since the first conviction. Not saying it does not hurt the defense just that it hampers one side more than the others.

**Relapse**

Gitkikka wrote:Well...he's dead NOW, isn't he?

True, but someone else is dead, also, that didn't have to be if he'd been executed in the first place.

**Nurglitch**

If only undesirables like him could have their appeals concentrated, so he could be liquidated sooner. You know, to protect our great society.

**Frazzled**

I thought this was going to be a thread about Death Row records....

**Kilkrazy**

jbunny wrote:That is very true, and does happen from time to time. But given our system of innocent until proven guilty, it is harder for prosecution to convict after years since the first conviction. Not saying it does not hurt the defense just that it hampers one side more than the others.

Is that is actually true? After all the appeal occurs because the defendant has been found guilty and is no longer presumed innocent..

You should research murder trials and see if the rate at which appeals overturns guilty verdicts increases with the length of time since the original conviction.

**KingCracker**

Just keep um in there until they die and rot! Thats how our death sentences seem to work.

**jbunny**

Kilkrazy wrote:
jbunny wrote:That is very true, and does happen from time to time. But given our system of innocent until proven guilty, it is harder for prosecution to convict after years since the first conviction. Not saying it does not hurt the defense just that it hampers one side more than the others.

Is that is actually true? After all the appeal occurs because the defendant has been found guilty and is no longer presumed innocent..

You should research murder trials and see if the rate at which appeals overturns guilty verdicts increases with the length of time since the original conviction.

Well if the appeals court orders a new trail, then yes he is presumed innocent eventhough he wa already convicted. i am also only talking about cases where after 20+ years the court orders a new trail, and not about all appeals.

**Frazzled**

Kilkrazy wrote:
jbunny wrote:That is very true, and does happen from time to time. But given our system of innocent until proven guilty, it is harder for prosecution to convict after years since the first conviction. Not saying it does not hurt the defense just that it hampers one side more than the others.

Is that is actually true? After all the appeal occurs because the defendant has been found guilty and is no longer presumed innocent..

You should research murder trials and see if the rate at which appeals overturns guilty verdicts increases with the length of time since the original conviction.

At the US appellate level its different. You're looking to see if there were errors in law, or alternatively errors in fact so eggregious as to warrant a return to the lower courts. Burden of proof is not a point of issue. Basically its did the court follow the rules properly in administering the case. I don't know about the UK though.

**Kilkrazy**

In the UK appeals aren't necessarily upheld, and if they are it can result in the conviction being quashed, or a retrial, or just a change of the sentence (up or down.)