#Login Register

  • 1 Vote(s) - 3 Average

Arizona woman's murder conviction, death sentence overturned
03-15-2013, 05:16 AM #1
Posts:4,546 Threads:1,029 Joined:Jun 2012

(CNN) -- After 22 years on death row, Debra Milke is close to freedom.

A jury convicted the Arizona woman, now 49, of murder, conspiracy to commit murder, child abuse and kidnapping on October 12, 1990, less than a year after her 4-year-old son was found dead.

A judge sentenced her to death a few months later.

But those convictions and the related sentence were tossed out Thursday by a federal appeals court judge. In explaining his decision, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals chided the prosecution for remaining "unconstitutionally silent" on the "history of misconduct" of its key witness, a Phoenix police detective.

"The Constitution requires a fair trial," Kozinski wrote. "This never happened in Milke's case."

A day after seeing Santa Claus at a mall, young Christopher Milke asked his mother if he could go again.

That was the plan, she said, when the boy got into the car with Milke's roommate, James Styers.
Styers picked up a friend, "but instead of heading to the mall, the two men drove the boy out of town to a secluded ravine, where Styers shot Christoper three times in the head," according to Kozinski's summary of the case. Styers was convicted of first-degree murder in the boy's killing and sentenced to death.

The detective, Armando Saldate, said the friend told him that Debra Milke was involved in a plot to kill her son. But neither the friend nor Styers testified to that assertion in court.

In fact, "no other witnesses or direct evidence (linked) Milke to the crime" other than Saldate's testimony. After pleading not guilty, Milke stood trial and tried to convince a jury that her account -- and not the detective's -- was the true one.

more: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/14/justic...paign=cnni
03-15-2013, 05:17 AM #2
Posts:4,546 Threads:1,029 Joined:Jun 2012
and this is why we no longer need the death penalty because you can't overturn that once its done
03-15-2013, 06:38 AM #3
Ruby Wolf Member
Posts:10,142 Threads:719 Joined:Oct 2012
If this was a guy on death row,he would have already been executed by the state or killed by other prisoners years ago,but for some damn reason,again and again, female murderers are punished less harshly than male murderers,i suppose even judges and prosecuters like to get a little action on the side...

My uncles head was blown off by his girlfriend who killed him with a shot gun blast to the face at close range and she (the f#####g bitch) received only around five years in a nut house and now shes walking around innocent society living on free social security checks and government pushed psych meds,in the hopes she'll commit more extremely violent acts,because thats how the law makers create their own business,to ensure their police have work to do...

But if it was my uncle who blew off his girlfriends head,he would still be in prison and he would be made to stay there till he rotted away and died...
03-15-2013, 08:52 AM #4
オタマジャクシ Member
Posts:1,104 Threads:31 Joined:Nov 2012
This isn't a hard case. Did she take more than 6 hours to report him missing or not?

Well, no, the boyfriend called her and said the boy was missing.

And as the story continues:
The next day Phoenix police arrested Roger Scott, a long-time friend of Styers. After more than fourteen hours of interrogation, Scott admitted that he knew where Christopher was and that the boy was dead. He directed the police to a desert area north of Phoenix, where Christopher's body was discovered. Christopher had been shot three times in the head. Scott claimed that Styers had committed the murder and that Milke had "wanted it done."
"Styers agreed to provide Scott with $250 to file a social security claim. Styers believed he would receive some of Christopher's $5,000 life insurance policy. At the conclusion of the interview, Mr. Scott led police to the desert area where they found Christopher Milke's body."
Before Scott finally confessed, he and Styers stuck to an improbable story that they were babysitting Christopher on the afternoon in question and had stopped at Metrocenter in an impromptu outing to "see Santa Claus."
Scott later claimed that the young single Phoenix mom told him shortly before the murder that "she just had to get away from Chris, and she just wasn't cut out to be a mother, and that she wanted us [Styers and Scott] to take care of it."

By "take care of it," Scott said, Debbie Milke meant that she wanted her son dead.

Milke, he said, had been the mastermind of Christopher's murder, with her motive being that his constant presence was interfering with her work ambitions (she was in the insurance field) and social life (in particular with one boyfriend who supposedly didn't want to take on a stepfather's role).
Styers, who had helped in the initial search for Christopher, was arrested and interviewed by police after being implicated by Scott. Milke voluntarily went to the Pinal County sheriff's office, where she waited in a jail dispensary. Other Phoenix police detectives were told via radio not to speak to Debra. When the lead case detective, Armando Saldate, arrived with a helicopter, he sent her accompanying acquaintance out of the room, and started the interrogation behind the closed door. He had neither set up a tape recorder, nor was any other witness present.

To understand this case you need some history. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is as complete a set of godless communist liberal pinko lawyers as you can find in this country. They will stop at almost nothing to overturn a death penalty case. The Arizona courts are sane and reasonable people.

The successful miranda challenge in 2009 at the Ninth Circuit caused the case to be remanded back to Arizona to review the adequacy of the miranga warning. The Arizona courts affirmed the adequacy of the warning. The amazed Ninth circuit then searched for new grounds to overturn the conviction. They overturned the conviction on 5th amendment grounds.

Scott has one of those personalities that you can twist under cross examination. He was offered a plea agreement for his testimony at the time of the original trial but turned it down. However he has consistently maintained that Milke was involved. Most of the stories defending Milke say that Scott implicated Milke in exchange for a reduced sentence - THIS IS A LIE - HE WILL PROBABLY BE EXECUTED IN DECEMBER. Further the Debbie Milke defenders have the unmitigated gall to suggest that her boyfriend and Scott were paid by her ex-husband to kill her son.

The original article is dishonest. Milkes confession wasn't recorded but Scott's was.

From what I can tell so far I'd light her up like a Christmas tree.



DISCLAIMER / Terms of Service (TOS):
Kritterbox.com - Socialize anonymously, commentary, discussion, oddities, technology, music and more!  This website is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. kritterbox.com shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, those resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of this site or other documents which are referenced by or linked to this site.
This website exists solely for the purposes of exchange of information, communication and general entertainment. Opinions from posters are in no way endorsed by kritterbox.com. All posts on this website are the opinion of the authors and are not to be taken as statements of fact on behalf of kritterbox.com. This site may contain coarse language or other material that kritterbox.com is in no way responsible for. Material deemed to be offensive or pornographic at the discretion of kritterbox.com shall be removed. kritterbox.com reserves the right to modify, or remove posts and user accounts on this website at our discretion. kritterbox.com disclaims all liability for damages incurred directly or indirectly as a result of any material on this website. Fictitious posts and any similarity to any person living or dead is coincidental.
All users shall limit the insertion of any and all copyrighted material to portions of the article that are relevant to the point being made, with no more than 50%, and preferably less of the original source material. A link shall be visible in text format, embedded directly to the original source material without exception.
No third party links, i.e. blogs or forums will be accepted under any circumstances, and will be edited by staff in order to reflect the original source of copyrighted material, or be removed at the sole discretion of kritterbox.com.
Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Users may make such material available in an effort to advance awareness and understanding of issues relating to economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science, and technology. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for educational and/or research purposes.
This Disclaimer is subject to change at any time at our discretion.
Copyright © 2011 - 2017 kritterbox.com