Washington Post Article: “How is my brother the worst of the worst?”

421559_10151099708697317_228576518_n
Terri Been, left. Jeff Wood, middle.

Kristine Guerra of The Washington Post breaks her readers hearts with the lead into her story on Jeff Wood: “In Texas, a man who didn’t kill anybody is about to be executed for murder“.

Terri Been’s voice shook as she read a long text message from her niece.

“I had a nightmare about my dad last night,” Paige Rowan told her aunt in the text.

Rowan described a dream in which she watched helplessly as the execution needle pierced her father’s skin.

She woke up screaming, panicking and feeling hopeless, she told Been.

Then, she said, she dropped to her knees and prayed.

“Please don’t allow this to happen,” Rowan wrote. “Don’t take my father away.”

Been struggled to finish reading the text message, her voice breaking as she paused several times to regain her composure during an interview with The Washington Post.

The message was sent Sunday, Been said, less than three weeks ahead of the date her niece has come to dread: Aug. 24, when the Texas Department of Criminal Justice plans to inject Jeffrey Lee Wood with a lethal dose of pentobarbital to stop his heart.

Rowan’s nightmares have been happening more often as her father’s execution date looms closer.

It is so close now that she can feel it, Rowan told her aunt.

The scheduled execution is Wood’s punishment for the 1996 death of a man he did not kill — and, by some accounts, did not know was going to be killed.

Legal experts say his case is rare, even in Texas, the execution capital of America — and a state that allows capital punishment for people who did not kill anyone or did not intend to kill.

Read the rest of the article at The Washington Post.

 

Nearly 50 Evangelical Leaders Ask Governor Abbott and BPP to Spare Jeff Wood’s Life

Today, nearly 50 Evangelical leaders from Texas and across the country delivered a letter to Texas Governor Greg Abbott and the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles asking them to spare Mr. Wood’s life. Mr. Wood is scheduled for execution on August 24, 2016, even though he was not the triggerman, had no previous criminal history, and suffers from borderline intellectual functioning and mental illness. In their letter, the Evangelicals stated: “The death penalty, we are told, is reserved for the most egregious crimes. Wood’s actions — which did not include directly committing a murder or intending to — simply do not fall into this category.” The letter can be viewed at http://bit.ly/2aUlueb.

Mr. Wood’s application for clemency noted that, in recent years, the Board of Pardons and Paroles has recommended commutations for two people who, like Mr. Wood, did not take a life themselves. Mr. Wood’s emotional and intellectual impairments made him vulnerable to the manipulation and domination of the actual shooter, Daniel Reneau, who committed the crime while Mr. Wood was outside the building and who was executed in 2002. Mr. Wood’s clemency petition can be viewed at http://bit.ly/2aGNOOP.


August 8, 2016

 

Governor Greg Abbott

P.O. Box 12428

Austin, TX 78711

 

Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles

P.O. Box 13401

Austin, TX 78711-3401

 

Dear Governor Abbott and Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles,

We are evangelical leaders united in our call for a new sentencing hearing for Jeff Wood and for his scheduled execution to be stopped. Our faith compels us to speak out in this case, where a looming execution date threatens the life of an individual with significant mental impairments  who never should have been sentenced to death. Officials have a moral obligation to rectify this mistake and stop this execution while they still can.

On January 2, 1996, a senseless murder occurred during the course of a convenience store robbery in Kerrville, Texas. Daniel Reneau shot and killed Kriss Keeran, who was working as the store clerk. While this happened, Wood was in the car that he had come in with Reneau. Nothing suggests that Wood planned with Reneau to murder Keeran. In fact, witnesses attest that Wood told Reneau not to bring his gun before they left for the convenience store.

These details significantly lessen Wood’s culpability in the crime. As the getaway driver, Wood committed a crime, but not one deserving the death penalty. The death penalty, we are told, is reserved for the most egregious crimes. Wood’s actions—which did not include directly committing a murder or intending to—simply do not fall into this category.

Moreover, Wood had intellectual and emotional disabilities that were well documented before the murder. His impairments impacted his behavior at trial, as he irrationally instructed his attorneys not to present any evidence on his behalf. So the jury never heard any evidence of his background, including his mental impairments. Instead, Dr. James Grigson—a psychiatrist expelled from the American Psychiatric Association for ethical violations—testified to the jury that Wood represented a future danger, despite never evaluating him.

It deeply troubles us when the criminal justice system concludes that some of the most vulnerable in society can be executed and disposed of. All are made in God’s image, and as a society we especially must protect those with mental illness and disabilities. Public officials must not shirk this responsibility. We urge them to act now to spare Wood’s life.

In Christ,

 

Texas Pastors

Larry Baker, Director of Doctor of Ministry Program and Professor of Pastoral Ministry at Logsdon Seminary at Hardin-Simmons University, Abilene, TX

Paul Basden, Pastor of Preston Trail Community Church, Frisco, TX

Derek Dodson, Senior Lecturer of the Religion Department at Baylor University, Waco, TX

Wes Helm, Associate Pastor of Springcreek Church, Garland, TX

Robert Hunt, Director of Global Theological Education, Director of the Center for Evangelism and Missional Church Studies, Perkins School of Theology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX

William O’Brien, Executive Director of The Gaston Christian Center, Dallas, TX

Paul Randall, Associate Pastor of Ecclesia, Houston, TX

Scott Tjernagel, Lead Pastor of River City Vineyard Community Church, New Braunfels, TX

Donald Williford, Dean of Logsdon School of Theology, Abilene, TX

Ralph Wood, University Professor of Theology and Literature at Baylor University, Waco, TX

 

National Leaders

Bob Adams, Baptist Industrial Chaplain, Asheville, NC

Vincent Bacote, Director of the Center for Applied Christian Ethics at Wheaton College, Wheaton, IL

Cheryl Bridges Johns, Professor of Discipleship and Christian Formation at Pentecostal Theological Seminary, Cleveland, TN

LaMon Brown, Retired Missionary for the International Missions of American Baptist Churches, USA, Birmingham, AL

Valerie Burton, Minister for Christian Formation at Baptist Church of the Covenant, Birmingham, AL

Tony Campolo, Co-founder of Red Letter Christians, Wayne, PA

Shane Claiborne, Author, Activist, and Co-Founder of Red Letter Christians, Philadelphia, PA

Jim Clifford, Hospice Chaplain, Fairhope, AL

Carolyn Dipboye, Co-Pastor of Grace Covenant Church, Oak Ridge, TN

Larry Dipboye, Pastor of Grace Covenant Church, Oak Ridge, TN

Tom Duley, Minister of Missions and Pastoral Care at Bluff Park United Methodist Church, Hoover, AL

David Gushee, Director of the Center for Theology and Public Life and Distinguished University Professor of Christian Ethics, Mercer University, Atlanta, GA

Christopher Hamlin, Pastor of Tabernacle Baptist Church, Birmingham, AL

Lisa Sharon Harper, Senior Director of Mobilizing for Sojourners, Washington, D.C.

Antipas Harris, Associate Professor of Regent University School of Divinity and President of GIELD, Inc.

Ruford Hodges, Jr., Retired Baptist Minister, Birmingham, AL

Fisher Humphreys, Professor of Divinity, Emeritus, Samford University, Birmingham, AL

Joel Hunter, Senior Pastor of Northland – A Church Distributed

Lynne Hybels, Co-founder of Willow Creek Community Church, South Barrington, IL

Kate Kooyman, Project Developer for the Office of Social Justice, Christian Reformed Church in North America, Grand Rapids, MI

Bill Leonard, Professor of Baptist Studies and Church History at Wake Forest University, Winston Salem, NC

Jim Lyon, General Director of Church of God Ministries, Anderson, IN

Carlos Malavé, Executive Director of Christian Churches Together, Louisville, KY

Eric Mason, Chair of Biblical Studies at Judson University, Algonquin, IL

Brian McLaren, Christian author and theologian, Ocala, FL

Jonathan Merritt, Senior columnist for Religion News Service, Brooklyn, NY

Sam Mikolaski, Retired Southern Baptist Theological Professor and former President of the Atlantic Baptist  College, Oceanside, CA

Kelvin Moore, University Professor of Biblical Studies at Union University and Pastor of Idlewild Baptist Church, Bradford, TN

Morris Murray, Jr.,  Associate Pastor, New Life Baptist Church, Japser, AL

John Phelan, Former President and current Dean of North Park Theological Seminary, Chicago, IL

Paul Richardson, Former Treasurer and Board member of the Alliance of Baptists, Birmingham, AL

Samuel Rodriguez, President of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference/CONELA, Sacramento, CA

Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, Washington, D.C.

Walter Shurden, Minister at Large at Mercer University, Macon, GA

Tony Suarez, Executive Vice President of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference/CONEL, Virginia Beach, VA

Peter Vander Meulen, Coordinator of the Office of Social Justice for the Christian Reformed Church in North America, Grand Rapids, MI

Jim Wallis, Founder of Sojourners, Washington, DC

Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove, Associate Minister of St. Johns Missionary Baptist Church, Durham, NC

Angie Wright, Greater Birmingham Ministries, Birmingham, AL

 

Jordan Smith in The Intercept: “Jeff Wood Didn’t Kill Anyone, but Texas is About to Execute Him Anyway”

IMG_0061-crop-4-1024x512-2Jordan Smith of The Intercept explains the case of Jeff Wood and the law of parties in her August 2, 2016 article, “Jeff Wood Didn’t Kill Anyone, but Texas is About to Execute Him Anyway”.

Some excerpts:

The use of the law of parties in Texas death penalty cases has been controversial. It earned the state harsh criticism from around the world in the case of Kenneth Foster, who was tried for capital murder in connection with the 1996 killing of Michael LaHood Jr., the son of a prominent San Antonio lawyer. Foster drove a car that the triggerman was riding in but said he had no idea the man would shoot anyone. The state pointed out that in the hours before LaHood was killed, Foster and three others, including the triggerman, had committed two robberies at gunpoint while driving around the city, and that Foster, as a “reasonable person,” should have anticipated that a murder might occur.

Arguably, Foster’s culpability for the death of LaHood was greater than Wood’s in the murder of his friend Keeran. Yet in 2007, Gov. Rick Perry granted clemency to Foster, commuting his sentence to life in prison. During his tenure as governor, Perry presided over nearly 300 executions; Foster’s was the only case where he exercised his discretionary clemency power to spare a life. (Other inmates whose sentences were commuted by Perry were done so pursuant to court order.)

Though Perry’s stated reason for granting Foster’s commutation was that he was jointly tried with the triggerman (co-defendants in Texas have no right to individual trials), Foster’s attorney, Keith Hampton, believes it was concern about Foster’s culpability that convinced the state’s Board of Pardons and Paroles to recommend to Perry that Foster’s life be spared. (Texas law only allows the governor to grant discretionary clemency on a recommendation of the BPP.) Part of Hampton’s argument to the board was a religious and moral one: If the death penalty was intended as an eye-for-an-eye punishment, executing Foster would serve no moral purpose, because Mauriceo Brown, the triggerman, had already been executed. The same logic applies to Wood’s case, Hampton points out. Reneau was executed in 2002.
Excessive Punishment

More to the point, in Wood’s case the imposition of the death penalty seems almost certainly unconstitutional, given the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1982 decision in Enmund v. Florida. In that case, Earl Enmund was tried and sentenced to death for the murder of an elderly couple committed in the course of a robbery, even though he was not present during the robbery or the murders. Instead, he was sitting in the getaway car while the crime was committed. Florida’s highest court agreed that Enmund was a party to the robbery scheme and upheld the conviction and sentence, ruling that it was irrelevant whether he was present or whether he intended to kill anyone. The Supreme Court disagreed, noting that the death penalty was an excessive punishment for a robber. “Here, the focus must be on the petitioner’s culpability, not on those who committed the robbery and killings,” Justice Byron White wrote for the majority. “He did not kill or intend to kill, and thus his culpability is different from that of the robbers who killed, and it is impermissible for the State to treat them alike and attribute to petitioner the culpability of those who killed the victims.”

In 1987, the court issued a second opinion on the matter in a case known as Tison v. Arizona, carving out an exception to Enmund if the defendant was substantially involved in the crime at hand and “had the culpable mental state of reckless indifference to human life.”

In short, Hampton argues, it would appear that Wood’s execution, like Enmund’s, should be barred by the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

Yet, this argument has never been made in any of Wood’s appeals, and one of Wood’s current lawyers, Jared Tyler, who has worked on the case since 2008, said he believes strongly that a court should consider the issue before it’s too late. “It is correct that no court has determined whether Mr. Wood’s execution is barred by the Eighth Amendment because [the punishment] would be disproportionate to his culpability,” Tyler wrote in an email to The Intercept. “We believe a court should do so before he is executed.”

My Uncle Didn’t Kill Anyone

In the absence of a ruling on the fundamental question of whether Wood’s sentence is constitutional, Terri Been and her children have pressed to amend the Texas law of parties to bar its use in death penalty cases — and possibly to provide Wood some retroactive relief. During the 2009 session they came tantalizingly close when a bill that would have banned the practice made it out of the fractious and largely pro-death penalty House and sailed through a Senate committee only to languish without being called up for a vote on the chamber’s floor.

That was heartbreaking for Terri, who had quit her job in 2008 in anticipation of the start of the biennial session the following January. Throughout the first part of 2009, she and her kids, under the banner of Kids Against the Death Penalty, were at the Capitol nearly every day, organizing with other abolitionists, talking to legislative staff, and testifying at committee hearings. She found an ally in Rep. Harold Dutton, an attorney from Houston, who signed on to the legislation. By the end of May, she was optimistic about the chances of getting the bill passed. But then, in the waning hours of the session, while waiting for the bill to be called up for a vote, she got a call from the aide of another of the bill’s sponsors saying that Gov. Perry was threatening a veto unless the bill was rewritten.

In addition to barring death in law of parties cases, the measure also codified the right for co-defendants to have separate trials. Perry was fine with that portion of the bill — after all, that was the reason he gave for commuting Foster’s sentence — but he wanted the law of parties provision to be excised. The bill died. That night, Terri wrote in a recent email, on the hour-long drive home from Austin, “I had a hard time … because it was hard to see underneath all of my tears.”

Terri and her family made great material and emotional sacrifices — she lost her job, her house, and her cars — fighting for her brother’s life. Still, Terri and her kids, now young adults, with the help of Dutton, have continued to fight for the law to be changed — though they have never gotten as close as they did in 2009.

In front of the governor’s mansion late last month, Wood’s supporters and his family carried signs castigating Texas law — “The law of parties executes innocent people!” — and admonishing Gov. Abbott to do the right thing. One sign featured a quote from Abbott himself, written in black marker: “Human life is not a commodity or an inconvenience. It is our most basic right. Without it, we have no other rights.”

Nick Been concluded his emotional speech with a plea to spare his uncle’s life: “I’ve been visiting death row, literally, since I was born. … My cousin Paige had to grow up without a father because of somebody else’s actions. My mother has missed her brother; my grandparents, their son,” he said.

“The ripples of Daniel Reneau’s actions are immeasurable,” he continued. He said that he and the family were only asking for fairness: His uncle didn’t kill anyone; punish him for robbery and let him live. “Punish actions,” he said, “not affiliations.” He turned slightly toward the white mansion behind him and addressed Gov. Abbott directly: “We’re asking you to do the right thing: Save Jeff Wood.”

Attorneys for Jeff Wood filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus today with the 216th District Court requesting a new, fair sentencing hearing

 

New Filing: TX Man Facing Execution Based on Testimony of Discredited Psychiatrist Must Have New, Fair Sentencing Hearing

Jeff Wood Was Not the Triggerman and Had No Previous Criminal History; Suffers from Borderline Intellectual Functioning and Mental Illness 

Austin – Attorneys for Jeff Wood, who is scheduled for execution in Texas on August 24, 2016, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus today with the 216th District Court requesting a new, fair sentencing hearing because Mr. Wood’s original sentencing hearing was prejudiced by the false and misleading testimony of the discredited psychiatrist Dr. James Grigson. The petition can be accessed here: http://bit.ly/2agwOye

Mr. Wood was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death under Texas’s “law of parties” after another man, Daniel Reneau, killed a convenience store clerk in Kerrville in 1996 while attempting to rob it. Mr. Reneau, who was executed in 2002, committed the crime while Mr. Wood was outside the building, sitting in a truck. (p. 1) Mr. Wood had no criminal history until he fell under the influence of Mr. Reneau a few months before the crime for which he is scheduled to be executed. (pp. 7, 15)

“The man who actually committed this crime was executed in 2002. Jeff Wood, who was not even in the building at the time of the crime, was sentenced to death after false expert testimony about his future dangerousness was presented at his capital murder trial. Justice will be served if Mr. Wood is spared from execution and given a new sentencing hearing,” said Jared Tyler, a Houston-based attorney who represents Mr. Wood. “I believe that no person in the history of the modern death penalty has been executed with as little culpability and participation in the taking of a life as Mr. Wood. In that respect, his execution may mark a national first.”

Executions under the law of parties or similar laws in other states are rare. The Death Penalty Information Center has confirmed only 10 cases, five of which were in Texas (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/those-executed-who-did-not-directly-kill-victim).

In Mr. Wood’s trial, Dr. Grigson testified that Mr. Wood “certainly” would be criminally violent in the future based on a hypothetical given to him by the prosecution. (pp. 27-28) Dr. Grigson never personally evaluated Mr. Wood. (p. 68)

In 1995, three years before he testified in Mr. Wood’s trial, Dr. Grigson was expelled from the American Psychiatric Association and the Texas Society of Psychiatric Physicians for flagrant ethical violations involving this same conduct. (p. 26)

The organizations found these kinds of hypotheticals “grossly inadequate to elucidate a competent medical, psychiatric differential diagnostic understanding adequate for diagnosing a mental illness according to current standards.” (p. 25) Dr. Grigson was also faulted by the organizations for testifying that he could predict with certainty that a defendant would be criminally dangerous in the future. (p. 25)

In 2004, a federal judge found that Dr. Grigson had falsely testified in that case by “exaggerat[ing] the degree of his certainty that [the defendant] would be dangerous in the future.” (p. 50) The judge also found that Dr. Grison “inflat[ed] the number of defendants he determined would not likely be dangerous in the future” as “a conscious attempt to mislead the jury as to his objectivity.” (p. 50) A Texas judge has previously described Dr. Grigson’s testimony as “prejudicial beyond belief.” (p. 55) As a report analyzing the behavior of death-sentenced prisoners showed, Dr. Grigson has been proven wrong time and time again. (p. 22-24)

At Mr. Wood’s sentencing hearing, the jury also did not hear evidence that might have caused it to spare Mr. Wood’s life. Due to mental illness that should have rendered him incompetent to stand trial, Mr. Wood instructed his attorneys not to present any evidence on his behalf or cross-examine witnesses. (p. 40) The jury therefore never heard that Mr. Wood had borderline intellectual functioning and emotional and psychological impairments which rendered him vulnerable to Reneau. (pp. 2, 28) As a child, Mr. Wood suffered from several psychiatric disorders and was placed in special education. (pp. 3-5) A clinical neuropsychologist who tested Mr. Wood before trial found that he had significant cognitive impairments and had reading and spelling abilities ranging from the fourth to fifth grade levels. (pp. 30-31)

An earlier jury found Mr. Wood incompetent to stand trial based on clinical testimony about his delusional belief system. (p. 16) He was placed in the Vernon State Hospital, but was deemed competent 15 days later without having received any medication or treatment. (pp. 16-17)

###

Kenneth Foster Appeals to Save Jeff Wood and Reform Law of Parties

Picture20lg
Kenneth Foster with Laura Brady

When Death Comes Easy –

By Kenneth Foster, former Texas death row inmate

The battle against the Law of Parties in Texas continues. This archaic law plagues the criminal justice system with controversial capital murder convictions that result in death sentences for people who never killed anyone.

In summary, the law states that a person is criminally responsible as a party to an offense if he helped plan, knew of, or did not try to prevent the offense. Further, it states that even if a more egregious crime occurs in the carrying out of the original offense the non-principal (accomplice), who may never have even entered the crime scene area, is held criminally responsible for any and every offense committed by the principal offender.

This law has been under extreme scrutiny since my 2007 commutation. I was convicted as a getaway driver in 1997, yet I was over 70 ft. away from the crime in a car with the windows rolled up and the air conditioning on. A passenger in my car, Mauriceo Brown, stepped out of my vehicle and, according to prosecutors, attempted to rob a man, Michael La Hood, whom he wound up shooting and killing. Maurice jumped back in my car and I drove away.

Four people were in my car that night. Only Mauriceo and I were prosecuted and, against our objections, were forced to go to trial together. Brown testified that there was no plan to rob anyone — a statement not refuted by the state’s star witness, Julius Steen, who had been sitting in the front seat with me. But, the prosecutors convinced the jury it was a robbery anyway.

As an alleged accomplice, I was convicted alongside Mauriceo, and in May 2007, I received my execution date. Supporters worldwide rallied to my defense. The Board of Pardons and Parole voted 6-1 in favor of commutation. On August 30, 2016, Gov. Perry commuted my sentence. His stated his reason was that he was concerned about a Texas law that allows capital murder defendants to be tried simultaneously. He stopped short of acknowledging that there was no evidence that I agreed to commit even a robbery let alone a murder. If the jury had not convicted us of robbery at my trial, I would not be considered a party and therefore ineligible for the death penalty. I remain in prison, fighting my capital life sentence.

Many legislators are not aware of the Law of Parties works. But most who are familiar with it seem to be against any reform. In 2009, it appeared I might expect some legal relief when legislative Bill HB 2267, The Kenneth Foster Bill, was introduced. It prevented non-killers from execution and forbade joint trials in capital cases. Gov. Perry objected to omitting the death penalty for Law of Party defendants and promised to veto the bill if passed. Unfortunately, state representatives who sponsored the bill did not listen and the Lt. Governor, David Dewhurst, never called the bill, presumably at the request of Gov. Perry. It died in the Senate, thus ending the chance of passing a severance law which would have been beneficial to my case.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center, under the “Law of Parties,” there have been at least seven executions of “accomplices” (those who had little to no knowledge of the depth and breadth of a crime that was to be committed by the principal), since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. This, is exclusive of murder-for-hire cases. Though the “Law of Parties” is derived from English Common Law, England abolished it 51 years ago. 24 of the 36 American death penalty states implement it.

This brings me to the current outcry over the case of Jeff Wood. He is scheduled to be executed on August 24. His crime was being an accomplice to a robbery. In his case, while Jeff waited outside in the car, the principal conspirator took the plan into his own hands and shot and killed the store clerk. According to Texas Penal Code 7.02b: “If, in the attempt to carry out a conspiracy to commit a felony (robbery), another felony (murder) is committed by one of the conspirators, all conspirators are guilty of the felony actually committed though having no intent to commit it, if the offense was committed in the furtherance of unlawful purpose and was one that should have been anticipated as a result of the carrying out of the “conspiracy.” Therefore, by the Law of Parties, though Jeff Wood did not have the gun, nor any influence over the person pulling the trigger and committing the murder, he is treated as though he planned the murder and pulled the trigger himself. Even if the law provides he be tried for the crime as if he were the principal, how could it provide a punishment (the death penalty) for someone who had no influence in the murder and is to be used in the most extreme of cases?

The Law of Parties bill also states in 7.02 (a) that one may receive a death sentence if: “acting with intent to promote or assist the commission of the offense, he solicits, encourages, directs, aids or attempts to aid the other person to commit the offense.” How can there be a fair and constitutional judgment regarding a standard of guilt under a single statute, when it has different criteria that are antithetical?

It’s hard to understand the opposition to reforming the Law of Parties as it is currently written as it has some severe flaws that allow people to be put to death that neither committed murder nor intended that murder would ever be carried out. University of Texas professor Jordon Steiker says the law’s application “flies in the face of a broader effort to reserve the death penalty for extreme cases.” A fair and equitable law should include careful consideration as to the extent in which an accomplice in one crime is held accountable for the actions of the principal(s) who carry out further crimes.

Because lives are literally at stake, the law should be rewritten so that prosecutors must prove a party had the intention to murder before a death sentence is applied. The language “should have been anticipated” is so ambiguous it needs to be removed. Without reform, broad criteria such as this ensnares people like Jeff Wood who is now forced to face the Texas death machine even though he never killed.

You can show your support against the Law of Parties by speaking out for Jeff Wood. Here are four ways you can help:

• Sign his petition: https://www.change.org/p/governor-abbott-and-the-texas-boar…

• Write a clemency letter –
http://savejeffwood.com/how-to-help Mail to both the Governor of Texas and the Board of Pardons and Paroles. A sample clemency letter, with addresses for both, can be found here: *Please also send a copy of your letter to the Save Jeff Wood Campaign at 246 County Road 7611, Devine, Texas, 78016

• Donate to his campaignhttps://www.generosity.com/…/campaign-to-save-jeff-wood-fro…

• Write Your Legislators
Demand that the Law of Parties be reformed. 7.02 (b). Copy the Texas Board of Pardons and Parole and politicians: Senator-elect Borris Miles, State Rep. Harold Dutton and Senator Juan “Chuy” Hinojosa, who are supportive of the Law of Parties reform.