The Mighty Pen vs the Death Penalty

For twenty-five years ZOLO AGONA AZANIA has been fighting the death penalty. The State of Indiana refuses to remove Azania from death row during several appeals that has proven that the procedure in imposing the death penalty was tainted.

Azania's sentenced should be life in prison for his crime..but Indiana wants to lynch Azania because he has proven that the Indiana courts do not follow the letter of the law. However, the court suggests that this is all Azania fault to escape blame:


Delays-Azania fault because he exercised his right to appeal- so the pen writes:

During much of the period of time in question, Azania and not the State had the responsi-bility of going forward. That is, it was Azania’s responsibility (1) to prosecute the appeal fol-lowing the completion of the original trial and imposition of the death sentence; (2) to prosecute his request for collateral review following the conviction and death sentence being affirmed on direct appeal; and (3) to prosecute his subsequent request for collateral review following the re-imposition of the death sentence.
11

Azania was using a defense strategy.

Delay is not an uncommon defense tactic. As the time between the com-mission of the crime and trial lengthens, witnesses may become unavailable or their memories may fade. If the witnesses support the prosecution, its case will be weakened, sometimes seriously so. And it is the prosecution which carries the burden of proof. Thus, unlike the right to counsel or the right to be free from compelled self-incrimination, deprivation of the right to speedy trial does not per se prejudice the accused’s ability to defend himself.

Forget the the court manipulated the jury pool. It's called a computer glitch.

The third time segment runs from the date of re-imposition of the death sentence in 1996 to 2002, when we again set aside the death sentence because Azania demonstrated to our satisfaction that the computer program used to select the jury pool inadvertently operated to deny him his right to be tried before a fairly constituted jury. Azania’s position is that this period of “delay” is not attributable to him because “he had nothing to do with the system of picking jurors which led to the unrepresentative jury.” (Br. of Appellee at 25.)

What was the computer glitch? Every African-Americans that was eligible for jury duty was excluded in the City of Fort Wayne. How can a computer pick out African-Americans by name is still a puzzle to me. Only in Fort Wayne, IN.


But what about full disclosure?

The penalty phase retrial record indicates that, more than one year and four months before the penalty phase retrial actually occurred, the State filed a “Motion for Hearing Regarding Conflict of Interest” disclosing that Azania’s lead defense counsel, Donald Swanson, was then a member of the Sheriff’s Merit Board; that defense investigator Jerry Ratajczak was then a Deputy Allen County Sheriff; and that defense forensic pathologist, Scott Wagner was then employed by the Allen County Coroner. In seeking the motion, the State represented that it sought to disclose potential conflict of interest information to the defendant and “to obtain a waiver of the defendant, upon the advice of independent counsel.”

A hearing on the motion was conducted and the defense waived the conflict. Swan-son withdrew fifteen days later. After Azania’s penalty phase retrial and sentenc-ing proceedings, Azania, acting pro se, filed a “Motion For Contempt of Court Proceedings Against Sheriff Joseph M. Squadrito” to which was attached a copy
13 of a newspaper article reporting Azania’s claims that Allen County officials pre-vented investigator Ratajczak and Dr. Wagner from joining his defense team, and that Swanson withdrew from the case “after his proposed defense team fell apart.”

But the Delay is still Azania Fault, because it was not unconstitutional. One of the Supreme Court Judges disagrees:

The net result of this exercise is that Azania has spent at least fifteen years on death row due to flaws in the criminal justice system for which he bears no responsibility.

Another Indiana Supreme Court states:

I agree with the trial court that given the circumstances caused by the long delay in this case, Azania’s constitutional rights to a speedy trial and due process would be violated if the State continues to seek a death sentence. A part of the due process violation includes Azania’s Eighth Amendment right to present meaningful evidence in mitigation.

Azania exposed the corrupt system in the City of Fort Wayne, and his punishment is the death penalty. Read the case and you will understand why they call Indiana Klu Klux Klan territory.

h/t to Indiana Law blog