Religious leaders seek clemency for Missouri man set for execution Wednesday

[rug]

8 hours ago • The Associated Press

Several religious leaders from across Missouri are asking Gov. Jay Nixon to grant clemency for a man scheduled to be put to death this week.

Mark Christeson is scheduled to die by injection at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday for killing a south-central Missouri mother and her two children in February 1998. The bodies of 36-year-old Susan Brouk and her children, ages 12 and 9, were found in a pond near their home outside of Vichy.

A clemency letter signed by leaders of several denominations raises concerns about actions of prosecutors in the case and says Christeson's trial attorney was inadequate. The letter also raises concerns about Christeson's mental capacity and questions why his case has not received review in federal court.

Christeson was convicted of three counts of first-degree murder.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/religious-leaders-seek-clemency-for-missouri-man-set-for-execution/article_ebcbc6ba-4e71-5c8f-99d5-f5d673830768.html

[The Magistrate]

1. A Bit Of Background, Sir

http://murderpedia.org/male.C/c/christeson-mark.htm

Judging by the Appellate Court's opinion, there is no question regard guilt, and no reason whatever to consider the trial was unjust.

[rug]

3. Clemency is not about criminal procedure.

Not that murderpedia.org cares.

[The Magistrate]

5. I Know What Clemency Is, Sir

The people requesting clemency made several statements about the trial and conviction, which do not seem to be well founded. One may object to executing murderers as a matter of moral conviction or social policy, and that is certainly a reason to request clemency. But that should be the ground; it should not be pretended there was an injustice where there clearly was none. There is no question regarding guilt, and no grounds to suppose better counsel would have led to a different result at trial or sentencing.

The link simply recounts the findings of fact at trial, and provides the Court's opinion in ruling on the appeal.

[rug]

8. Then you should kow trial errors have nothing to do with it.

Those comments are directed at the penalty phase, not the guilt phase, issues well within the moral and social objection to capital punishment.

The link is simply a waystation for the morbidly curious.

[The Magistrate]

9. That Is Not Clear From The Account Of The Letter You Provided, Sir

It seems, at least, to reference issues at trial, which are referred to in the appeal. With the text of the letter available, I might think otherwise.

You may not like a link to what are, in fact, public records of a verdict and subsequent rulings, but these are things people are entitled to know in deciding how they feel about this. Certainly the jury which recommended sentence knew these facts. I can certainly see no ground for mercy, and there is no doubt of guilt. I agree with the court there was no reversible error.

There is something a bit unusual in the failure to appeal to Federal courts in a timely manner, but this happened long after trial and sentence, and would not have affected the outcome anyway. Federal courts would have upheld conviction and sentence.

[rug]

10. Nor is your inference.

I have yet to find the text but some of the organizations are questioning the morality of imposing death on a mentally ill person. Imagine that.

As a matter of fact, there are many sources I don't like. That's why I get my facts and information from the Guardian and the Washington Post, not the National Enquirer and True Crime. Sometimes, if I must, I'll use Lexis and Westlaw.

I do see reason foe clemency. The difference between our positions is that if I'm wrong and he lives, he'll be in prison. If you're wrong and he dies, he'll be dead. I have neither the stomach nor the need to justify capital punishment.

[okasha]

11. Things always get shaky when you get into the subjunctive.

I can testify, as rug can even more certainly, that the competence of the defence attorney can make the difference between life and death for the defendant.

I have seen a case argued so badly by a lawyer in the initial trial that the judge himself, after a verdict of guilty and a death sentence, called up a noted defence attorney and asked him to take the case pro bono on appeal. As a result, the death sentence was commuted and the defendant was paroled after serving twelve years.

Without getting into details, the case was an exceptionally nasty triple killing involving three perpetrators. The person who did the actual killing was charged as a juvenile and is now a professional gunman for the Zetas. He's also schizophrenic. The politician's son who helped plan the killing and drove the car was never arrested or charged. The 17-year old who got the death sentence was from the projects, participated only peripherally in the crime, and had absolutely nothing between him and the needle except his appeals attorney.

[The Magistrate]

12. That Has Nothing To Do With This Case, Sir

No doubt about guilt:

"A medical examiner's autopsy report showed that the cuts to Ms. Brouk's neck were not severe enough to cause her death immediately and that the actual cause of death was drowning. Autopsies also revealed that Ms. Brouk and Kyle had hemorrhaging or bleeding under the scalp, indicating a blunt impact injury or blow to the head, and that there were two superficial cuts across Kyle's neck, but that he, too, died from drowning. Adrian died from suffocation, but there also was a small, shallow puncture wound in Adrian's left arm that could have been caused by a pellet from a shotgun shell, although no pellet was present. DNA testing performed by the Missouri State Highway Patrol Crime Laboratory established that genetic material from semen recovered from Ms. Brouk's body and from Adrian's sheets matched Christeson's genetic profile. Firearms-identification testing established conclusively that the sixteen-gauge shotgun that Christeson pawned in Texas was the one that fired the shell found on the bank of the pond."

The court's opinion regarding sentence:

"Having thoroughly reviewed the record, this Court concludes that there is no evidence to suggest that the punishment imposed was a product of passion, prejudice, or any other arbitrary factor.

Furthermore, this Court holds that the evidence amply supports the jury's findings on the aggravating circumstances that each murder was committed during the course of two other murders and that each involved depravity of mind because the killings exhibited a callous disregard for the sanctity of all human life. As noted, the record shows that Christeson raped Ms. Brouk and then bound her hands. When Ms. Brouk's daughter Adrian recognized Christeson's accomplice, Christeson decided to kill Ms. Brouk and her children. He took their personal property and vehicle and drove them to a pond where he cut Ms. Brouk's throat and cut Kyle's throat. He suffocated Adrian and then threw Ms. Brouk, while she was still alive, onto the bodies of her two children where she drowned.

Finally, this Court concludes that the death sentences in this case are neither excessive nor disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering the crime, the strength of the evidence, and the defendant."

[okasha]

13. I'm not a "Sir."

While there may be no question about the forensic evidence in this case, there is a question of competency, which is crucial in a "depraved mind" finding.

[The Magistrate]

14. Given The Facts, Ma'am

That a depraved mind was at work is the natural conclusion, and it is hard to see any argument that could be raised against it with a straight face. This took a while. There were numerous opportunities to step back from what was contemplated and being done. The murder of three people, a family, a mother and her children killed before each other's faces, to cover over a robbery and an opportunistic rape, requires a depraved mind, is an incredibly depraved and cruel act.

I personally see nothing wrong with execution of murderers. I am very sensitive to questions about actual guilt, and reasonably sensitive to questions of competence of counsel at trial. I have some sympathy for damaged personality, but not a great deal. There is no question of guilt, counsel was not incompetent at trial, we are not dealing with someone whose up-bringing was so far below the average as to shock to conscience.

I understand people who oppose execution on principle would be opposed to this one as they would be to any. I understand that since execution is a lawful penalty, an appeal in court, or even for clemency, must be hung on some other peg than 'it is wrong to execute any murderer in my opinion'.

[Cartoonist]

2. Not a religious issue

I too am opposed to the death penalty. Might change my mind should Dick Cheney ever get convicted.

[rug]

4. Why do you think humanist and human rights organizations do not this as regularly?

[Cartoonist]

6. I don't know about this case

I tried some follow up, specifically looking for that letter. All I could find were references to it in other articles. Didn't try too hard. Didn't find any religious reasoning behind it, just a general opposition to the death penalty. All I could see was his name: Mark Christeson.

[rug]

7. At least the name isn't Manson.

I can imagine the death vigil for the Son of Man.

[AtheistCrusader]

15. I do not oppose the death penalty on a per-case basis with lies and insinuation.

I oppose it universally on principle. That's why. I have no need to smear the prosecutors/etc to render a rational opposition to the death penalty.

[rug]

16. So do I. Where we disagree is prosecutors deserve every smear they get.

On principle.