It's important to note that not everyone is as talented of a prosecutor as Mr. Felcman. He was my First Assistant for 14 years, and my trial partner for 4 of those years.

I've only seen one person better at cross examination than Fred, and I've known and watched some of the greats on both sides of the bar try cases. I've tried cases against several defense atttorneys that are known as excellent cross examiners. Fred is one of the ultimate murder prosecutors in the State.

[This message was edited by GG on 11-25-09 at .]

Convicted of cap murder (via law of parties) for his role in the ambush killings of three Atascosa area law enforcement officers. The CCA overturned the conviction, and he plead to murder before his second trial. The actual shooter killed himself during a stand-off.

This may be the worst editorial ever written: click here.

Not because it is yet another anti-death penalty whine.

Because it is grossly misleading, legally inaccurate and just flat wrong about pretty much everything factual.

How many mistakes can you find in it?

I'm sure that there are many factual errors in this editorial.

I have previously pointed out one major error concerning the legal requirements to impose a death sentence; namely, the deliberate blindness to the fact that a death sentence cannot be imposed based merely upon a conviction under either Penal Code Sec. 7.02 (a)(1) or 7.02 (b), and instead requires the jury to consider the defendant's individual role in answering the anti-parties special issue found in Code of Criminal Procedure Article 37.071, Sec. 2 (b).

The other glaring error I see is a recurring mis-interpretation of Texas law dealing with criminal responsiblity for the acts of another.
In particular, the author constantly describes the concept of liabbility for an offense which is an anticipated result of a conspiracy to commit another offense under Penal Code Sec. 7.02 (b) as "the law of parties". In actuality, that term is actually a shorthand description of the far more commonly applicable concept of responsiblity for soliciting, encouraging, directing, aiding, or attempting to aid another under Penal Code Sec. 7.02 (a)(2).

I am also amazed by the fact that the editorial calls the statute "flawed" when prosective jurors indicate that they understand and agree with these concepts when they are explained to them. I also find it ironic that the author also says that this statute is "often misinterpreted, when he or she is the one who is misterpreting it, probably because of the blinders over their eyes caused by their personal views.

Incidently, to give an overview to the subject, my wife is a government instructor at the lcoal community college. Some time ago, I helped her develop an outline of the many tumblers that have to fall in space in just a certain way in order for a death sentence to be imposed, upheld, and ultimately carried out. Because of the common constant misstatements about the subject, her students are surprised to learn of the many safeguards built into the system used in Texas.