Roof found competent for sentencing, gets extra prep day

[DonViejo]

Source: Associated Press



By MEG KINNARD
Jan. 3, 2017 7:02 AM EST

CHARLESTON, S.C. (AP) — After a judge ruled Monday that Dylann Roof is competent to represent himself, the same jury that last month unanimously found him guilty in the slayings of nine black parishioners at a South Carolina church will return to court to begin contemplating his punishment.

With the 22-year-old representing himself, the process is sure to be unconventional. But even if Roof is sentenced to death, it's highly unlikely he'd be executed anytime soon.

While prosecutors plan to call up to 38 people related to the nine people killed and three who survived the June 2015 slaughter during Bible study at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, Roof said last week he plans on calling no witnesses and presenting no evidence.

Roof was found guilty last month on 33 federal charges, including hate crimes and obstruction of the practice of religion. A jury took less than three hours to return its verdict, and a judge dismissed the jury for a break over the holidays. That same jury returns to court Wednesday.

Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/115de865c56a46f8bf60ac30a3d6e518

[Jacob Boehme]

1. They Walk Among Us. n/t

[sarah FAILIN]

2. Thank God!

I was afraid they would find him incompetent and throw the trial out

[jmowreader]

9. If they would have found him incompetent, he simply would have been assigned lawyers

Right now, the only real question as to Mr. Roof's fate is, is he going to be executed in the Terre Haute Federal Pen or the South Carolina State Prison?

[sarah FAILIN]

11. I thought if he was incompetent for the sentencing..

An attorney would argue he was incompetent for the trial and get him off.

I'll take your word for it.

[jmowreader]

12. There are several levels of competency

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competency_evaluation_(law)

You're thinking of Competence to Proceed, aka Competence to Stand Trial. If you're found not competent to proceed, you'll be placed in treatment until you are competent to proceed. There's no "well, we know he killed nine people but he's crazier than a Trump voter, so we gotta let him walk scot-free. Please try not to do it again, okay?" If you're not competent, you get to go to a rubber room...and you get to stay there until you ARE competent. If that's the rest of your life, so be it.

They've also got Competence to Waive Assistance of Counsel (which is the question here), Competence to Plead Guilty (the same test as Competence to Stand Trial), and Competence to be Executed (you must understand why you are going to be executed and the effect it will have on you - yes, that means you have to understand you'll be dead at the end of the process)...all of which will come into play here.

It's very possible that a person can be both found Competent to Stand Trial and Incompetent to Waive Assistance of Counsel. The courts have the obligation to allow you to assist in your own defense. They do not have the obligation to let you talk yourself into a cell.

[Yo_Mama]

15. Not according to the SC in Godinez

Godinez v. Moran, 509 U.S. 389 (1993)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godinez_v._Moran

Although Godinez does mandate that the trial judge should ensure that the decision to waive counsel is "knowing and intelligent". Whatever the heck that does mean in such a context, it does not carry the implication that the judge must find the decision to waive to be wise.

It will be interesting to see the appeals; we might revisit Godinez.

[Yo_Mama]

13. No, if he had been found incompetent, it would almost certainly have led to a mistrial.

In any case, the trial could not have been completed at this time, and barring a very short period of competency, the trial could not have been lawfully completed. You can't hold a jury indefinitely waiting on a defendant's return to competency! I think the judge would have had to declare a mistrial.

However, if the judge had not granted the additional competency hearing, that would have formed grounds for an appeal.

The sentencing phase is as much a part of the trial as the guilt phase; both have to be completed. And the defendant's constitutional right to a fair trial is as much violated in the sentencing phase if incompetent as in the guilt phase.

In Dusky, the SC confirmed a right to a competency hearing before trial. In Ford V Wainwright, the SC established a right to a competency hearing before execution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dusky_v._United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_v._Wainwright

[sarah FAILIN]

14. Before the trial starts makes more sense

Waiting till the end seemed dangerous

[Yo_Mama]

16. There was one before the trial, and he was found competent.

But going back to Godinez v Moran, the judge also is obligated to ensure that the decision to waive counsel is "knowing and intelligent". So if the judge had refused counsel's request for a hearing about the decision to waive counsel in the sentencing phase, that would have formed grounds for an appeal.

[cyclonefence]

3. Does anyone have a clue

as to what the information is that this guy does not want revealed? He is apparently very concerned that certain specific information regarding his family will become public. I'm hoping that the secret is that he's African American or Jewish or both. I think the penalty, death or otherwise, should include this revelation, if we really want to punish him.

And I want to say that it's hard for me to imagine how cruel a person would have to be to kill people with whom he'd sat and ?prayed? discussed the scriptures? for some little time just before he gunned them down. I believe we are all capable of any horrible act, given the right circumstances, but this one has me stumped. I would think that even the most rabid racist would soften at least a little after having personal conversations/contact with the objects of his fear/hatred.

[forgotmylogin]

5. Is the sentencing closed to the public?

My hypotheses:

If Roof requested it, it's damage control to avoid people seeing the actual emotional testimony that would make them empathize with his victims. A white-supremacist wouldn't want people to empathize with minorities.

If someone else requested it, it could be to avoid broadcasting any "message to the world" comments he might make in his statements. I can't imagine he wouldn't realize he has a huge platform to say his piece about his ideology.

[cyclonefence]

7. This is from the 12/3/16 USA Today

Dylann Roof, representing himself against murder and hate crime charges, on Friday told a federal judge he does not want his former defense attorneys to present evidence they believe would be favorable to his case. The nature of the evidence that has caused a rift between Roof and the attorneys has not been publicly disclosed.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/12/02/alleged-charleston-shooter-has-secret-he-intends-keep/94859488/

It doesn't sound like keeping survivor statements out of the public eye. I suspect that even if the proceedings were closed to the public, survivors would happily tell the press what they said.

No, I think it's something weirder and/or darker.

ETA: I bet it's a school psychologist report or something that casts doubt on Roof's sanity.

[jmowreader]

10. Martyrdom?

Maybe he wants to Die For The Cause?

[cyclonefence]

17. But then

wouldn't he *want* to publicize it? And I'm sure he does see himself as a martyr. No, it's got to be something like a history of schizophrenia, maybe him, maybe a relative. He's so insistent that he is competent--plus it's the reason he dropped his lawyers; they apparently felt the secret information would be helpful to him, and god knows a history of crazy *might* keep him out of the chair.

[47of74]

4. I hope he gets a very long stay in prison

70 years in prison with no hope of getting out alive would be a bigger punishment than death for this guy.

[forgotmylogin]

6. 70 years is probably terminally optimisitic.

Isn't it possible to get 70 years per victim (or a life sentence for each victim) in open and shut cases like this?

[heaven05]

8. man if this had been

a black man having done this in a white church he would be dead under the prison/jail by now. What a fucking joke of a process. This bastard will live at least, if he gets the death penalty, which I truly doubt, 10-20 more years and be celebrated as a hero by steve bannons groups of white supremacists. Put him up against the wall put him out of my misery.