Dru trial

[HockeyMom]

I'm not sure how they isolate prisoners. But I can't imagine them keeping him safe 24/7 for life.

[redwing77]

Question I have is, if the jury decides to give him the death penalty, does he get sent to a federal pen that has a death row? Is he sent to a federal pen and then brought back to ND for the sentence carried out?

[Redneksioux]

It's not a question of what we want. It's what I understand is typically done with sex offenders in prisons.

Although this blog describes prison life in England from a convict's point of view, it shows that being treated as a "vulnerable prisoner" isn't exactly a bed of roses. I imagine that it's preferable to being beaten to death with a broom handle by another prisoner (i.e. Jeffrey Dahmer).

I hope they have broomsticks where Rodrigass is going. I understand Dahmer was more than just beaten with one...a broken one at that. Ouch!

[PCM]

I understand that "we" don't get a choice in the matter. Just stating the obvious (which my wife says I do far too often) that segregation is too good for him. I wish there a text style for sarcasm that I could use when I'm stating the obvious or some other sarcastic quip.

Sorry. I should have known.

Maybe you could give us a sign.

Or even more obvious...

[GeauxSioux]

Sorry. I should have known.

Maybe you could give us a sign.

Or even more obvious...

Thanks, I think I like the second one better. I think I may have found my answer, but I'll keep looking.

Sarcastic Font

[jloos]

If the jury finds for the death penalty there is only one place Rodriguez could go - Terre Haute Indiana, which has the only death row in the federal system.

Federal prisons have the reputation of being much more comfortable than state prisons. I have never seen a maximum security federal prison, but I imagine they are just as bad as state prisons. Most federal prisons are minimum security, as many federal inmates are white collar criminals. The "prison" in Duluth is more like summer camp, as is the one in Yankton.

[redwing77]

If the jury finds for the death penalty there is only one place Rodriguez could go - Terre Haute Indiana, which has the only death row in the federal system.

Federal prisons have the reputation of being much more comfortable than state prisons. I have never seen a maximum security federal prison, but I imagine they are just as bad as state prisons. Most federal prisons are minimum security, as many federal inmates are white collar criminals. The "prison" in Duluth is more like summer camp, as is the one in Yankton.

Thanks jloos.

WOuld he be put to death in Indiana or would he be brought back to ND for the deed?

[PCM]

When I lived in Bismarck 15 years ago, my landlady worked for the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Her job was to help keep tabs on the federal prisoners being held in the North Dakota State Penitentiary. At least back then, many federal prisoners were housed in state pens. Often times, it was to place them in locations where their identity (and deeds) wasn't known to other prisoners or to take make use of special facilities or services in a particular state. If this is still the case and Rodriguez isn't sentenced to death, I imagine it's possible that he could end up in a state pen far from North Dakota.

[PCM]

WOuld he be put to death in Indiana or would he be brought back to ND for the deed?

I assume that it would be up to the feds to execute him, not the state.

[jloos]

I assume that it would be up to the feds to execute him, not the state.

That is correct. ND does not have the death penalty (we don't even have a federal prison). Terre Haute is the only place in the country Rodriguez would go if convicted to death. He would be on death row, which I imagine is segregated from the rest of the prison.

If he is sentenced to life, he could be sent anywhere, including various state prisons. The feds do not have very many maximum security prisons, so they do often contract with state or private prisons for their violent convicts. Once sentenced it is the Federal Bureau of Prison's job to keep Rodriguez safe. If that means changing his identity, they will do that. From what I have seen of this case, it is more likely than not that Rodriguez will spend the rest of his days on death row in Terre Haute Indiana.

[Slap Shot]

I heard on the radio yesterday during the Barrister's brunch on KFAN that he could be executed somewhere out west (Colorado I believe). He could be wrong but I thought I'd pass that along.

I don't know if this has been said or not but the trial was just the first stage. The next is to determine whether or not his was a federal crime and therefore eligible for the DP. After that, there will be more deliberations as to whether or not he shoud be executed or given life in prison.

[Sioux-cia]

I don't know if this has been said or not but the trial was just the first stage. The next is to determine whether or not his was a federal crime and therefore eligible for the DP. After that, there will be more deliberations as to whether or not he shoud be executed or given life in prison.

Dam*, I thought that when they found him guilty it was of both the murder and kidnapping. And if he was found guilty of kidnapping then the jury believed Dru was alive when he took her into Minnesota which makes it a federal case. Dam*!!!

[mksioux]

I don't know if this has been said or not but the trial was just the first stage. The next is to determine whether or not his was a federal crime and therefore eligible for the DP. After that, there will be more deliberations as to whether or not he shoud be executed or given life in prison.

He's already been found guilty of a federal crime. The next stage is to determine whether he is eligible for the death penalty. The third phase is the actual sentencing.

[Slap Shot]

He's already been found guilty of a federal crime. The next stage is to determine whether he is eligible for the death penalty. The third phase is the actual sentencing.

Ok, thanks for the clarification. I knew there was still a stage that could determine he's not eligible for the DP but didn't describe it properly.

[redwing77]

Another dumb question:

Why have a seperate stage for this determination thing? If they determine that the death penalty is an option, then why can't they just deliberate it as such and, if they don't feel it is an option, give him life in prison?

[PCM]

Why have a seperate stage for this determination thing? If they determine that the death penalty is an option, then why can't they just deliberate it as such and, if they don't feel it is an option, give him life in prison?

As I understand the process, the jury must first determine whether the crime of which Rodriguez was found guilty qualifies for the death penalty, then determine whether he should get it. He wasn't convicted of murdering Dru Sjodin. He was convicted of a kidnapping resulting in her death.

The jury must first agree that the manner in which Sjodin was killed meets the definition of first degree murder. Mainly, they have to agree that it was a premeditated act. If the jury says it was, they then move on to determining whether Rodriguez gets the death penalty.

That's my understanding based on what I've read. If I'm wrong, I hope some the legal experts here correct me.

[Ruffian]

I believe that the fear of getting caught and the punishment for committing that crime- is the biggest deterent for others to commit said crime.

Fear of getting caught and punished works for normal people like me and you. For someone as sick as Rodriguez it's a compulsion. He's been in prison but he wasn't thinking about being caught and put back in prison when to kidnapped Dru. He had enough previous convictions that IMO he should never have been released to do to anyone else what he ended up doing to to her and what he had done to others previously.

If I was a juror this penalty phase would be the hardest part. Finding Rodriguez guilty of kidnapping and murdering Sjodin seemed pretty clearcut. I don't live in your area so I haven't had all the information you do so determing where she was killed would be a very serious consideration under the law. As Shep pointed out if she died before crossing the state line it's not a federal case and the death penalty no longer applies. The jurors are bound to follow the law, not their feelings that just because Rodriguez is guiilty of murder he should be put to death.

[Eskimos]

As Shep pointed out if she died before crossing the state line it's not a federal case and the death penalty no longer applies. The jurors are bound to follow the law, not their feelings that just because Rodriguez is guiilty of murder he should be put to death.

I don't think Shep is the only one to have pointed that out.

Of course the jurors are "bound to follow the law, not their feelings", I don't know if anyone would argue against that.

[jloos]

As I understand the process, the jury must first determine whether the crime of which Rodriguez was found guilty qualifies for the death penalty, then determine whether he should get it. He wasn't convicted of murdering Dru Sjodin. He was convicted of a kidnapping resulting in her death.

The jury must first agree that the manner in which Sjodin was killed meets the definition of first degree murder. Mainly, they have to agree that it was a premeditated act. If the jury says it was, they then move on to determining whether Rodriguez gets the death penalty.

That's my understanding based on what I've read. If I'm wrong, I hope some the legal experts here correct me.

They have to prove more than premeditation. They must also prove at least some aggravating factors - here is what the statute says (which is what the jury will base their decision on).

(A) intentionally killed the victim;

(B) intentionally inflicted serious bodily injury that resulted in the death of the victim;

© intentionally participated in an act, contemplating that the life of a person would be taken or intending that lethal force would be used in connection with a person, other than one of the participants in the offense, and the victim died as a direct result of the act; or

(D) intentionally and specifically engaged in an act of violence, knowing that the act created a grave risk of death to a person, other than one of the participants in the offense, such that participation in the act constituted a reckless disregard for human life and the victim died as a direct result of the act, shall be sentenced to death if, after consideration of the factors set forth in section 3592 in the course of a hearing held pursuant to section 3593, it is determined that imposition of a sentence of death is justified, except that no person may be sentenced to death who was less than 18 years of age at the time of the offense.

3592 sets forth the mitigating/aggravating factors. The media indicated this phase will be more difficult for the jurors. I would agree in that I image the prosecution will show much more graphic photos to prove the aggravating factors in 3592, which are:

© Aggravating Factors for Homicide. - In determining whether a sentence of death is justified for an offense described in section 3591(a)(2), the jury, or if there is no jury, the court, shall consider each of the following aggravating factors for which notice has been given and determine which, if any, exist:

(1) Death during commission of another crime. - The death, or injury resulting in death, occurred during the commission or attempted commission of, or during the immediate flight from the commission of, an offense under section 32 (destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities), section 33 (destruction of motor vehicles or motor vehicle facilities), section 36 (FOOTNOTE 1) (violence at international airports), section 351 (violence against Members of Congress, Cabinet officers, or Supreme Court Justices), an offense under section 751 (prisoners in custody of institution or officer), section 794 (gathering or delivering defense information to aid foreign government), section 844(d) (transportation of explosives in interstate commerce for certain purposes), section 844(f) (destruction of Government property by explosives), section 1118 (prisoners serving life term), section 1201 (kidnapping), section 844(i) (destruction of property affecting interstate commerce by explosives), section 1116 (killing or attempted killing of diplomats), section 1203 (hostage taking), section 1992 (wrecking trains), section 2280 (maritime violence), section 2281 (maritime platform violence), section 2332 (terrorist acts abroad against United States nationals), section 2332a (use of weapons of mass destruction), or section 2381 (treason) of this title, or section 46502 of title 49, United States Code (aircraft piracy).

(FOOTNOTE 1) So in original. Probably should be section ''37''.

(2) Previous conviction of violent felony involving firearm. - For any offense, other than an offense for which a sentence of death is sought on the basis of section 924©, the defendant has previously been convicted of a Federal or State offense punishable by a term of imprisonment of more than 1 year, involving the use or attempted or threatened use of a firearm (as defined in section 921) against another person.

(3) Previous conviction of offense for which a sentence of death or life imprisonment was authorized. - The defendant has previously been convicted of another Federal or State offense resulting in the death of a person, for which a sentence of life imprisonment or a sentence of death was authorized by statute.

(4) Previous conviction of other serious offenses. - The defendant has previously been convicted of 2 or more Federal or State offenses, punishable by a term of imprisonment of more than 1 year, committed on different occasions, involving the infliction of, or attempted infliction of, serious bodily injury or death upon another person.

(5) Grave risk of death to additional persons. - The defendant, in the commission of the offense, or in escaping apprehension for the violation of the offense, knowingly created a grave risk of death to 1 or more persons in addition to the victim of the offense.

(6) Heinous, cruel, or depraved manner of committing offense. - The defendant committed the offense in an especially heinous, cruel, or depraved manner in that it involved torture or serious physical abuse to the victim.

(7) Procurement of offense by payment. - The defendant procured the commission of the offense by payment, or promise of payment, of anything of pecuniary value.

(8) Pecuniary gain. - The defendant committed the offense as consideration for the receipt, or in the expectation of the receipt, of anything of pecuniary value.

(9) Substantial planning and premeditation. - The defendant committed the offense after substantial planning and premeditation to cause the death of a person or commit an act of terrorism.

(10) Conviction for two felony drug offenses. - The defendant has previously been convicted of 2 or more State or Federal offenses punishable by a term of imprisonment of more than one year, committed on different occasions, involving the distribution of a controlled substance.

(11) Vulnerability of victim. - The victim was particularly vulnerable due to old age, youth, or infirmity.

(12) Conviction for serious federal drug offenses. - The defendant had previously been convicted of violating title II or III of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 for which a sentence of 5 or more years may be imposed or had previously been convicted of engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise.

(13) Continuing criminal enterprise involving drug sales to minors. - The defendant committed the offense in the course of engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise in violation of section 408© of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 848©), and that violation involved the distribution of drugs to persons under the age of 21 in violation of section 418 of that Act (21 U.S.C. 859).

(14) High public officials. - The defendant committed the offense against -

(A) the President of the United States, the President-elect, the Vice President, the Vice President-elect, the Vice President-designate, or, if there is no Vice President, the officer next in order of succession to the office of the President of the United States, or any person who is acting as President under the Constitution and laws of the United States;

(B) a chief of state, head of government, or the political equivalent, of a foreign nation;

© a foreign official listed in section 1116(b)(3)(A), if the official is in the United States on official business; or

(D) a Federal public servant who is a judge, a law enforcement officer, or an employee of a United States penal or correctional institution -

(i) while he or she is engaged in the performance of his or her official duties;

(ii) because of the performance of his or her official duties; or

(iii) because of his or her status as a public servant. For purposes of this subparagraph, a ''law enforcement officer'' is a public servant authorized by law or by a Government agency or Congress to conduct or engage in the prevention, investigation, or prosecution or adjudication of an offense, and includes those engaged in corrections, parole, or probation functions.

(15) Prior conviction of sexual assault or child molestation. - In the case of an offense under chapter 109A (sexual abuse) or chapter 110 (sexual abuse of children), the defendant has previously been convicted of a crime of sexual assault or crime of child molestation.

(16) Multiple killings or attempted killings. - The defendant intentionally killed or attempted to kill more than one person in a single criminal episode. The jury, or if there is no jury, the court, may consider whether any other aggravating factor for which notice has been given exists.

The Defense will try and show mitigating factors, which are:

a) Mitigating Factors. - In determining whether a sentence of death is to be imposed on a defendant, the finder of fact shall consider any mitigating factor, including the following:

(1) Impaired capacity. - The defendant's capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of the defendant's conduct or to conform conduct to the requirements of law was significantly impaired, regardless of whether the capacity was so impaired as to constitute a defense to the charge.

(2) Duress. - The defendant was under unusual and substantial duress, regardless of whether the duress was of such a degree as to constitute a defense to the charge.

(3) Minor participation. - The defendant is punishable as a principal in the offense, which was committed by another, but the defendant's participation was relatively minor, regardless of whether the participation was so minor as to constitute a defense to the charge.

(4) Equally culpable defendants. - Another defendant or defendants, equally culpable in the crime, will not be punished by death.

(5) No prior criminal record. - The defendant did not have a significant prior history of other criminal conduct.

(6) Disturbance. - The defendant committed the offense under severe mental or emotional disturbance.

(7) Victim's consent. - The victim consented to the criminal conduct that resulted in the victim's death.

(8) Other factors. - Other factors in the defendant's background, record, or character or any other circumstance of the offense that mitigate against imposition of the death sentence.

[PCM]

They have to prove more than premeditation.

Great post, jloos. Thanks.

[redwing77]

Thanks again, jloos.

[Fetch]

Great Info - knowing what we know does it look like he will FRY or get injected

[HockeyMom]

The only question still for the jury to decide, Ney said, is whether Rodriguez dies "when God decides, or when man decides."

Ok, not to be a smartass, but my feelings are that everyone dies when their number is up......no matter how they die. So if Rodrig-ass is sentenced to death, and that death is carried out by man- isn't he still dying when his number is up?

[PCM]

Ok, not to be a smartass, but my feelings are that everyone dies when their number is up......no matter how they die. So if Rodrig-ass is sentenced to death, and that death is carried out by man- isn't he still dying when his number is up?

Rodriguez didn't have any problem deciding when Dru should die.

[Siouxmama]

Rodriguez didn't have any problem deciding when Dru should die.

Here's hoping the jury is problem-free deciding when Rodriguez' number is up.