Discussion

home | story | media | letter | links

 

The Story

On April 9, 1995 Betty Long was fatally shot during a robbery at the laundromat she operated in Birmingham, Alabama.

The jury found Carroll guilty of capital murder. Carroll contends that the gun discharged accidentally, and there is no direct evidence to show the contrary. A shell casing with was found, but there were no fingerprints on it, and no other physical evidence was found.

During the penalty phase of Carroll's trial the panel heard that Carroll's mother had kicked him out of the house at the insistence of her drug-abusing husband and that his grandmother raised him in one of Birmingham's worst slums.

Several members of Betty Long's family asked that Carroll's life be spared. The jury voted 10-2 for life, but Judge Alfred Bahakel ordered Carroll to the electric chair. Carroll was sent to Holman's death row where he awaited execution.

The co-accused in this case was sentenced to life without parole.

Police Misconduct

Without the presence of his parent or guardian, seventeen year old Taurus Carroll was questioned and later charged with murder and robbery.

Carroll was given a Miranda warning, but no juvenile Miranda. Carroll should never have been questioned without the presence of a parent or a guardian. Carroll contends that the statement he made at the time was involuntary and the result of coercion. Following the interview Carroll was charged with murder and robbery.

Judicial Override

On December 11, 1997 he was found guilty of capital murder in the circuit court of Jefferson County, Alabama. On December 12, 1997, the jury came back with a 10-2 recommendation of life without parole. On February 13, 1998 Judge Alfred Bahakel overrode jury recommendation for life imprisonment and sentenced Carroll to death.

The victims family asked the court for a life without parole sentence, but Judge Bahakel ignored their plea in his sentencing of Carroll to the electric chair.

Carroll, who was a juvenile at the time of the offense, was imprisoned at Holman to await his execution.

Insufficient Evidence

There was insufficient evidence to support Carroll's conviction of capital murder, the state failed to present evidence through testimony or evidence that Carroll caused the death of another person.

Alabama code S 13-A-6-2 (1) 1975 states "Therefore, a conviction based upon a record wholly devoid of any evidence of crucial element of the offense charged is constitutionally infirm."

A witness at the time testified that he did not see anything that he could identify as a gun. The victim's daughter stated that no demands were made by Carroll and she did not see a shot fired.

A shell casing was found and dusted for fingerprints but none were found. There were anumber of people at the crime scene when Police arrived, yet none could identify Carroll.

The evidence used to convict Carroll was largely circumstantial. States witness was daughter of the victim who stated that Carroll made no demands and that she did not see a shot fired. Therefore, the state failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Carroll committed the offense of capital murder.

Ineffective Counsel

Carroll's initial counsel were ineffective in that they were not adequately maintained by the state to provide sufficient resources in support of a capital murder case. This is a violation of both Federal and State Consistitutions.

In refusing to adequately compensate counsel appointed to represent indigent capital defendants. Alabama fails to meet its Consititutional obligation to provide capital defendants with counsel. Gibion v. Wainwright, 372, US. 335, 83 S.ct 792 L.Ed 2d 799 (1963).

Breaches of International Treaty

The death sentence imposed on Carroll is a clear contravention of International treaties and the American Convention on Human Rights, which states:

American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR): "Capital punishment shall not be imposed upon persons who, at the time the crime was committed, were under 18 years of age..." (Article 4(5))

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR): "Sentence of death shall not be imposed for crimes committed by persons below eighteen years of age ..." (Article 6(5))

Rights of the Child, (CRC) which states in part, "...neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offenses committed by persons below eighteen years of age..". (Article 37 (a))

Rights of the Child (CRC) further states:

1.
States Parties recognize the right of every child alleged as, accused of, or recognized as having infringed the penal law to be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion of the child's sense of dignity and worth, which reinforces the child's respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of others and which takes into account the child's age and the desirability of promoting the child's reintegration and the child's assuming a constructive role in society.

2.
To this end, and having regard to the relevant provisions of international instruments, States Parties shall, in particular, ensure that:

    (a)
    No child shall be alleged as, be accused of, or recognized as having infringed the penal law by reason of acts or omissions that were not prohibited by national or international law at the time they were committed;

    (b)
    Every child alleged as or accused of having infringed the penal law has at least the following guarantees:

      (i)
      To be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law;

      (ii)
      To be informed promptly and directly of the charges against him or her, and, if appropriate, through his or her parents or legal guardians, and to have legal or other appropriate assistance in the preparation and presentation of his or her defence;

      (iii)
      To have the matter determined without delay by a competent, independent and impartial authority or judicial body in a fair hearing according to law, in the presence of legal or other appropriate assistance and, unless it is considered not to be in the best interest of the child, in particular, taking into account his or her age or situation, his or her parents or legal guardians;

      (iv)
      Not to be compelled to give testimony or to confess guilt; to examine or have examined adverse witnesses and to obtain the participation and examination of witnesses on his or her behalf under conditions of equality;

      (v)
      If considered to have infringed the penal law, to have this decision and any measures imposed in consequence thereof reviewed by a higher competent, independent and impartial authority or judicial body according to law;..." - (Article 40 (1-2) (A-B)and 1-5).

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/k2crc.htm

home | story | media | letter | links