Mangino joins Chris Stewart on Law and Crime's 'On the Case'

To watch the interview CLICK HERE

Another proud moment for the USA, "War" Secretary Hegseth wants to bring back public executions

The last public execution in the U.S. was a hanging in Owensboro, KY in 1936.  20,000 people showed up. The U.S. was ridiculed internationally—and public executions stopped for 90 years.  I wrote in my book The Executioner's Toll, about the execution of Rainey Bethea, a black man, who was hanged for the rape of a white woman. Now the U.S. military wants to bring public executions back.

The New York Times reported that the Army officer convicted in the 2009 Fort Hood shooting would be executed in public, a practice that ended in the United States nearly a century ago and is most commonly carried out in a handful of countries, including Iran, North Korea and Afghanistan.

The Pentagon said in a statement that the military execution, scheduled for Dec. 3, would also be broadcast via livestream. Such a broadcast has little precedent, and releasing video of executions is most often associated with extremist militant groups like the Islamic State.

The announcement adds to the growing spectacle around the planned execution of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who killed 13 people and wounded 32 others when he brought a personal handgun onto the grounds of Fort Hood, Texas. The rampage was the deadliest shooting at an American military base and sent shock waves through the U.S. military.

There are few countries that hold public executions. The human rights group Amnesty International has highlighted some cases in which public executions in Iran and Saudi Arabia have been filmed by bystanders.

To read more CLICK HERE

Texas executed man for 2000 murder caught on surveillance video

The 30th Execution of 2026

A Texas man who fatally shot a convenience store clerk was put to death October 7, 2026, becoming the 30th person executed in the U.S. this year and the first since Tennessee’s failed attempt to administer a lethal injection to Christa Pike a week ago, reported The Associated Press.

Jamaal Howard, 46, was pronounced dead at 8:03 p.m. after receiving a fatal dose of pentobarbital at the state prison in Huntsville. He was convicted of killing Vickie Swartout, 42, in a 2000 store robbery caught on surveillance video.

Asked by the warden if he had a final statement, Howard apologized profusely to some members of his victim’s family, who watched through a window just feet from the death chamber.

“I wish that you accept my apology and I wish for your forgiveness,” he said, shortly before the injection got underway. “I’m sorry for what happened. I wish you can learn to forgive me one of these days.”

He also thanked his friends and family and said he loved them, adding he was “in a good state of mind to find peace and the Lord, so I thank y’all.” He concluded with: “Hey, enjoy life, and peace to y’all.”

Man took a few breaths and gasped as the drugs began flowing

As the pentobarbital began taking effect, Howard took a couple of breaths and gasped. He then began making snoring sounds, coughed and resumed the snoring sounds, each time the sound becoming quieter. Within about 30 seconds, all movement stopped.

He was pronounced dead 19 minutes later.

His sister was among witnesses watching through a window from an adjacent room and became distraught, exclaiming several times: “Get me out of here.” She was assisted by corrections officers in exiting the witness room.

Texas has executed seven people so far in 2026, including Howard, and plans two more executions later this year.

Howard’s attorneys unsuccessfully sought to block the execution by arguing that he was intellectually disabled and that he faced risks similar to those in Pike’s case because both states use pentobarbital for lethal injections.

Pike’s lawyers continue to seek more information about what went wrong after the 50-year-old woman survived two doses of pentobarbital on Sept. 30. Her lawyers said she was unconscious at a hospital after the attempt but was awake and speaking by Tuesday.

Store clerk’s killing was caught on surveillance video

Howard was convicted of capital murder in the killing of Swartout, who was shot once in the chest during the robbery. Evidence presented at trial included surveillance video showing Howard shooting Swartout.

Howard, who was 20 at the time, took $114 and a carton of cigarettes from the store in Silsbee, a small, rural town about 100 miles (160 kilometers) northeast of Houston, according to court records.

A flurry of late appeals failed to stop the execution

In bidding to halt Howard’s execution, his attorneys had filed a motion hours earlier before the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals raising concerns about the quality of Texas’ execution drugs. The court denied that request and a second filing involving the drugs without comment.

His attorneys also argued unsuccessfully to the U.S. Supreme Court that Howard’s execution should be halted because he was intellectually disabled. The Supreme Court in 2002 had barred the execution of intellectually disabled people, though it gave states some discretion in determining such disabilities.

The state told the court that Howard’s lawyers did not present evidence that would show he meets the requirements for a claim of intellectual disability.

The high court late Wednesday declined to intervene, without comment, clearing the way for the execution.

Florida leads the nation in executions this year

Florida has carried out 16 executions so far this year, the most of any state. Most states that allow executions use lethal injection as their primary method.

To read more CLICK HERE

U.S. Military schedules December execution for Fort Hood massacre

 Nidal Malik Hasan, a former Army officer and psychiatrist who killed 13 people and injured 32 others during a mass shooting at Fort Hood, Texas, in 2009, will be executed by a U.S. Army firing squad, the Pentagon announced, reported Military Times.

“Secretary of War (Defense) Pete Hegseth has recommended — and President Donald J. Trump has approved — death by U.S. Army firing squad for convicted terrorist Nidal Malik Hasan, the jihadist who opened fire on unarmed American soldiers at Fort Hood in 2009,” Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell announced. “He killed 13 people and wounded 32 others while shouting ‘Allahu Akbar’ during the attack.

“The Secretary of the Army will set the time and place of the execution,” he continued. “Judgement day for Hasan has finally come.”

If Hasan’s execution is indeed carried out by a firing squad, it would mark the first such case for the service since Jan. 31, 1945, when Pvt. Eddie D. Slovik was executed by a U.S. Army firing squad in France for desertion during World War II.

The last death sentence carried out by the U.S. military was in 1961, when Army Pvt. John Bennett was executed by hanging at the gallows in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, after he was convicted of raping and attempting to kill a young girl.

Hasan, who was born in northern Virginia, walked into a Fort Hood readiness processing center on Nov. 5, 2009, and opened fire using a semi-automatic handgun.

Thirteen people were killed, including a pregnant soldier.

Former Army Staff Sgt. Patrick Zeigler, a two-time combat veteran, was shot four times in the attack and spent nearly a year recovering in various hospitals.

“He looked me straight in the eyes as he pointed the gun at me, and a split second later, I’m on the floor with a hole in my head,” he told the Killeen Daily Herald in 2023.

At his court-martial, Hasan, now 56, admitted to the shooting, and in 2013 said he carried out the attack in support of the Taliban.

At the time, Hasan requested a delay in court proceedings so he could ready a new legal strategy that would show he acted “in defense of others.”

Asked by presiding Judge Col. Tara Osborn who he was defending, Hasan replied, “The leadership of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, the Taliban.”

Hasan was convicted by a military jury in August 2013, which recommended he be sentenced to death.

He was subsequently transferred to Fort Leavenworth, where he has been incarcerated on death row.

To read more CLICK HERE

Hudson: 'An effective public defense system strengthens public safety'

 Keisha Hudson of the Defenders Association of Philadelphia writes in the Pennsylvania Capital-Star:

The constitutional right to counsel is one of the cornerstones of American democracy. But a constitutional right without adequate funding is merely a promise on paper. 

After years of chronic underfunding, the Defender Association of Philadelphia has been forced to make painful staffing reductions and reduce services that thousands of Pennsylvanians rely upon every year. 

The recent service reductions in Philadelphia should serve as a warning to the commonwealth: if the largest public defender office in Pennsylvania is reducing staffing to critical court programs — despite years of operational improvements, grant funding, and careful financial stewardship — the problem is structural underinvestment. 

These cuts are the predictable consequence of a system that has failed to invest in one of its most basic constitutional obligations. 

This is not simply Philadelphia’s problem.

It is Pennsylvania’s.

While public attention mainly focuses on police, prosecutors, and prisons, public defenders are equally essential to a functioning justice system. An effective public defense system strengthens public safety. 

Defenders help identify people who need treatment rather than incarceration, reduce unnecessary pretrial detention, negotiate resolutions that hold people accountable while promoting rehabilitation, and ensure court proceedings move efficiently. 

Every part of the justice system functions better when public defenders have the resources to do their jobs well.

Pennsylvania remains an outlier nationally when it comes to funding public defense. For decades, it was one of the only states that did not provide recurring indigent defense funding, forcing counties to shoulder nearly the entire cost of this constitutional mandate. 

Although the commonwealth has finally begun investing in public defense, the current statewide appropriation of just $7.5 million is nowhere near enough to meet the need.

While local governments in New York and New Jersey still carry significant fiscal responsibilities for public defense, they still invest more than Pennsylvania. Neighboring states like  Delaware, Maryland and Massachusetts assume primary responsibility for funding statewide public defense systems. 

These states invest tens or hundreds of millions of dollars annually to ensure constitutional representation, regardless of where someone lives. 

Pennsylvania’s fractional investment creates a patchwork system, where justice depends largely on local resources instead of constitutional guarantees. In our Commonwealth, the quality of representation — and ultimately, access to justice — can vary dramatically depending on zip code.

That is not what the Constitution promises.

Pennsylvania has already acknowledged that indigent defense is a statewide responsibility by appropriating state funds for the first time. 

Gov. Josh Shapiro and the General Assembly should move the state toward a funding model that reflects making an investment in public defense a priority. 

The commonwealth should move toward a funding model that reflects the true cost of providing effective representation in all 67 counties — not one that leaves local governments to shoulder nearly the entire burden.

Public defense is not a discretionary government program. It is a constitutional mandate. 

We would never expect police departments, prosecutors’ offices, or the courts to fulfill their responsibilities without adequate funding. We should not expect public defenders to do so either.

The Defender Association of Philadelphia’s decision to reduce some services is more than a local budget story. It is a warning that Pennsylvania’s constitutional promise is becoming increasingly difficult to keep. 

The question is not whether we can afford to invest in public defense. The question is whether we can afford not to.

A justice system is measured not only by how it prosecutes crime, but by how faithfully it protects the rights guaranteed to every person. 

Pennsylvania has an opportunity to demonstrate that those rights are more than words on paper.

 To read more CLICK HERE

Federal Judge: Flock Cameras 'a type of indiscriminate mass surveillance'

 

A federal judge in Oklahoma ruled Thursday that a police officer violated the Fourth Amendment rights of a woman accused of meth trafficking when he searched her license plate in Flock’s automated license plate reader system simply because her license plate was from California, then used her travel history as part of the reason to search her car. The judge’s opinion is one of the first times a federal judge has decided Flock searches can be unconstitutional, and suggested that Flock’s network is “a type of indiscriminate mass surveillance,” reported 404 Media.

The officer’s “use of the ALPR Systems was an Unconstitutional Warrantless Search,” and “was not supported by probable cause, and it was done without a warrant in violation of [the defendant’s] Fourth Amendment rights,” the judge, Sara Hill, wrote, implying that the law enforcement officer should have obtained a warrant before searching for the vehicle in Flock’s system. There are currently more than a hundred thousand warrantless searches of the Flock system every month, according to audit logs viewed by 404 Media. Hill's decision will not set a binding precedent and there are several other cases throughout the nation considering the legality of warrantless ALPR searches.

Hill argued that previous judge opinions saying Flock searches were not a Fourth Amendment violation because they track cars in public do not consider the context that Flock’s nationwide network is quickly “approaching dragnet-type law enforcement practice,” and that courts should update their understanding of the technology moving forward. 

The circumstances of the court case are really interesting and highlight how commonplace Flock searches have become for police, and the depth of the information they can reveal. In May, a Tulsa County Deputy Sheriff named Freddie Alaniz was parked along the side of the highway in Oklahoma when he saw a Mazda SUV driven by a woman named Melisa Kyle with a California license plate pass by. “Alaniz then pulled his vehicle on the highway to follow the Mazda for no apparent reason other than the fact that it had a California license plate. Alaniz also ran a query on the Flock system for the California license plate number on the Mazda SUV,” Hill wrote. Alaniz then ostensibly pulled Kyle over for changing lanes without a turn signal.

To read more CLICK HERE

University punishment meted out to the Cornell 7

The lightest punishment called for writing a paper and completing training. The most severe was expulsion from the school for the Cornell 7, reported The New York Times.

After a woman attending Cornell University accused seven fraternity members of sexually assaulting her in 2024, the university convened a closed proceeding to determine what had occurred and whether those men should face discipline.

Since then, the sanctions imposed on each of the men, and the reasoning behind those decisions, have remained secret. The school has said little.

But detailed summaries of the punishments obtained by The New York Times provide the first look at how Cornell administrators apportioned blame for the alcohol and drug-fueled gathering that the woman has said left her shattered and degraded.

Two of the fraternity members were expelled. Another, who had already graduated, was barred from campus. Two more were suspended. The remaining men were handed lighter punishments, the summaries show.

All of them have denied any wrongdoing, and the Tompkins County district attorney declined to prosecute in 2024. None of the men have been charged with a crime. Their fraternity, Chi Phi, has been banned from campus.

Still, since allegations from the woman who has become known as Jane Doe surfaced in a lawsuit on Sept. 16, they have touched off intense anger over sexual abuse on campus and why more is not done to punish those responsible. Others have criticized what they see as a rush to judge the seven men involved.

In her lawsuit, Jane Doe claimed that, from the start of her encounter involving the seven fraternity members, she was incapable of consent because she was severely intoxicated. The lawsuit inflamed particular ire by stating that the defendants were all “afforded the opportunity to mitigate their conduct by submitting essays to Cornell,” an assertion Cornell has said did not accurately reflect what occurred.

Combined with more than 1,000 pages of interview transcripts, police reports and other records gathered by Cornell investigators and previously obtained by The Times, the discipline summaries show that the university based its decisions on a broad and complicated body of evidence.

In the end, the punishments handed out by the three-member panel, which met on Zoom over 12 days in May 2025, varied widely. The panel, which enforces federal civil rights at the university under Title IX provisions, did not conclude that Jane Doe was sexually assaulted by all the men she had accused, according to the discipline summaries.

The university investigative files outline in excruciating detail what the fraternity members were accused of doing on the night of Oct. 19, 2024.

It was Matthew Ingalls whom Jane Doe originally went to visit at the Chi Phi fraternity house at about 11 p.m. She walked there alone from a bar to see him, with her intoxication level from drinking through the evening at about a 5 out of 10, she told investigators.

After she arrived, Mr. Ingalls asked her if she wanted to have a threesome with Jonathan Newell, Jane Doe said. During that encounter, she said, the men gave her ketamine and alcohol. Eventually, other men engaged in sex acts with her without her consent and while she was incapacitated, she said.

To read more CLICK HERE