The Case

John has been accused of the fatal shooting of his wife Wendy; a crime in which the judge refused to allow the defence theory of why Wendy was killed, to be heard by the jury. I would like to take the opportunity to tell you a little about the history of this crime to show you why the judge's ruling was wholly biased and unfair. The death penalty is not given fairly and arbitrarily since juries can have different interpretations of mitigating circumstances and so the same crime can be committed by two different defendants, and one will get the death sentence when the other will get a life sentence. Sadly, but realistically, this is usually due to the amount of money that they have to spend on their defence. John's case is not the kind of case that ordinarily warrants the death penalty, and his lawyer has never heard of any other men on death row for shooting their wife in the heat of passion.

John and Wendy had two sons together, Robert and Eric. (He had already had two other children, Sabrina and John Jr with another woman). They had a turbulent and unhealthy relationship filled with many infidelities - Wendy had been unfaithful to John with his brother, cousin, best friend, neighbour to name only a few. She once hit him so hard that he was knocked unconscious. He was desperately in love with her, but sadly both were alcoholics and both were violent towards each other, but John maintains he wanted to stop all the infidelities on both sides and raise their children together in a safe and loving environment.

They constantly separated and reunited, but on one occasion when they were apart, he drove to where Wendy was staying, so that he could spend some time with his children. She was living with a local drug dealer, and although he can't remember most of that day due to extreme intoxication, he does remember going to visit his children. John didn't want them in that kind of environment, so he and Wendy began arguing. He asked Wendy if she had been unfaithful again, and tragically the gun was in his possession at the same time of the chilling details of Wendy's latest liaisons were revealed. He called a priest the next day to act as an intermediary between him and the police when he handed himself in.

The next day, the police surrounded him, and as was about to kill himself one of his friends walked past, and said that he must think of his children - so he couldn't do it. In the trial that followed Sabrina, John Jr and Robert helped to defend their father. All his children have always said he was a good father to them, and never hurt them. They have already been the victims of crime, and for the state to do this to them again with their father is intolerable. The racism and ineffective assistance of counsel in John's case was appalling, but sadly a court appointed lawyer does not have to be properly trained and there are no minimum standards of competency for court-appointed defence attorneys, even in capital cases.

John was immediately at a disadvantage in the courtroom because the victim, the judge, the attorneys and all the jurors were white. The race of the victim is the most important factor in determining whether someone should be tried for Capital murder (where the maximum sentence is the death penalty), rather than non-Capital. The racism in John's case was outrageous. The prosecutor started from the beginning of trial, that is, from the time of picking the jury to make race an issue. He made sure that the jury knew that John was Hispanic and that Wendy was white, and he made fun of Hispanics and tried to load the jury with self-admitted racist jurors. He continued in the same vein until the end of trial, where in the punishment phase and closing arguments he argued that John's race should be used against him, in deciding punishment. John was originally convicted on the basis of future dangerousness to society, which was decided in part, because he was Hispanic.

During the 14 years on death row, he has never harmed another officer or inmate, and has always been courteous and kind to everyone he meets. On August 28th 2000 John was given a partial reversal on his case by the federal courts after 8 and a half years of battle, they sent his case back to the state trial court for a re-sentencing trial. John and his family did not have the time or the means to raise enough money to hire a competent lawyer, and as with at least 95% of men on death row, they are very poor and cannot afford competent attorneys. The re-sentencing hearing has shown overwhelming racial disparities of those given death sentences. This combined with the overt racism in John’s original trial offers a compelling indication of extreme racial prejudice.

Therefore members of the John Alba Campaign have opened an account in the UK to help raise the funds necessary to help fight the injustices and barbarity of the death penalty. This is John and his family's only hope to avoid getting the death penalty being carried out. Please find it in your hearts to do all you can to help. Please feel free to ask any questions if you require any further information: