Judge denies Ralph Menzies' request for another competency evaluation
A judge has denied a request from Utah death row inmate Ralph Menzies to undergo another evaluation to see if he's competent to be executed, clearing a major hurdle for the state to proceed with his firing squad execution.
Utah 3rd District Judge Matthew Bates denied the 67-year-old inmate's request on Thursday morning, writing that he is 'unpersuaded' by the claim that Menzies, who has dementia, is mentally unfit to be executed.
State and federal law prohibit executing inmates who don't have a 'rational understanding' of why they're being executed, which essentially means they can't grasp the government's reasoning behind pursuing the death penalty.
For much of the last year, attorneys have tried to argue that Menzies lacks that understanding. Menzies underwent a competency evaluation about a year ago, where doctors commissioned by the state, and his attorneys, reviewed the inmate's cognitive abilities. In June, Bates ruled that he does have dementia, but was not incompetent.
Menzies' attorneys say terminal illness and good behavior are reasons to spare him from firing squad
Menzies' attorneys then filed a petition for another review in July, arguing that Menzies' dementia has worsened — that's what Bates denied on Thursday.
Menzies, convicted of kidnapping and murdering Maurine Hunsaker in 1988, is scheduled to die on Sept. 5. His attorneys still have a pending appeal with the Utah Supreme Court, with arguments set for next week. The Utah Board of Pardons and Parole is also holding a commutation hearing, where board members could vote to impose a life sentence without the possibility of parole (although that has never happened in Utah).
But Bates' ruling on Thursday allows the Utah Department of Corrections to continue moving forward with their plans to execute Menzies. Had they ruled in his favor, it would have likely paused execution proceedings, giving doctors time to conduct their evaluation.
Both Menzies' attorney and Matt Hunsaker — Maruine's son — reacted to the news Thursday. Hunsaker said he was 'very pleased' with the ruling.
'I had no doubt that Judge Bates spent a lot of time and a lot of effort,' Hunsaker said. 'I'm happy that this step is over and that we can now focus on getting this commutation (hearing) over as well.'
Eric Zuckerman, Menzies' attorney, called the ruling disappointing, telling Utah News Dispatch that it 'may result in the execution of a man who does not understand why he is being executed.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
'Mr. Menzies has not been evaluated by an independent evaluator for over a year and to proceed with his execution without an assessment of his current cognitive functioning offends the Constitution and will not serve the ends of justice,' Zuckerman said.
Bates, in his ruling, cited phone calls from the prison that show Menzies is still able to hold conversations and understand the basics of his case. There is a change in his voice, Bates writes, which 'sounds weaker and more tired.'
'Even so, Menzies is able to speak with a normal speed. He is able to ask questions, track conversations, and laugh at appropriate times. He remembers names of family members, makes plans with family to visit, and even gives a brief update on his court case. Nothing in the current phone conversations demonstrate a substantial change in his cognitive functioning,' the ruling reads.
Bates also said there's a lack of evidence showing that he's disoriented, impaired or doesn't have a basic understanding of the concept of crime and punishment.
'He had a sense of time and place. He was not confused about who the examiners were, who he was, or where he was,' Bates wrote.
Instead, Bates found the reports and evidence submitted simply show that Menzies is physically struggling, with a memory that isn't as good as it used to be — not enough to be deemed incompetent.
'Forgetfulness, an inability to concentrate, and a paucity of language do not amount to a lack of an ability to reach a rational understanding of the link between crime and punishment. Menzies has not alleged sufficient facts or provided sufficient evidence that raises a significant question of whether Menzies is incapable of understanding that he is being executed because he killed Maureen Hunsaker,' Bates wrote.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Trump Administration Strips Security Clearance From 37 Officials
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump's administration has said it is revoking the security clearances from 37 current and former national security officials, citing the "politicization or weaponization of intelligence." Newsweek contacted the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for comment by email outside of regular working hours. Why It Matters The action forms part of a continuing effort by the White House to penalize officials it deems hostile to its aims, and it renews debate over the use of security clearances as a political instrument. In March, Trump revoked the security clearances from a number of his political opponents, including former President Joe Biden and his family, former Vice President Kamala Harris, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Representatives Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, and New York Attorney General Letitia James. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard speaking at the White House in Washington, D.C. in July. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard speaking at the White House in Washington, D.C. in July. Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP What To Know In a memo posted on X, formerly Twitter, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard accused the affected individuals of "manipulating intelligence, leaking classified intelligence without authorization, and/or committing intentional egregious violations of tradecraft standards." She added: "Being entrusted with a security clearance is a privilege, not a right. Those in the intelligence community who betray their oath to the Constitution and put their own interests ahead of the interests of the American people have broken the sacred trust they promised to uphold. In doing so, they undermine our national security, the safety and security of the American people and the foundational principles of our democratic republic." The memo did not offer any evidence to support the accusations. The memo said that the affected individuals had engaged in some or all of the following actions: "Politicization or weaponization of intelligence to advance personal, partisan, or non-objective agendas inconsistent with national security priorities; failure to safeguard classified information in accordance with applicable laws, regulations and agency policies; failure to adhere to professional analytic tradecraft standards; and other conduct detrimental to the trust and confidence required for continued access to national security information." The 37 people affected by the latest revocations include: Andrew Cedar, Andrew P. Miller, Benjamin A. Cooper, Beth E. Sanner, Brett M. Holmgren, Charles A. Kupchan, Christopher Center, Corinne A. Graff, Dilpreet K. Sidhu, Edward Gistaro, Emily J. Horne, Harry Hannah, Heather R. Gutierrez, Jamie S. Jowers, Jeffrey M. Prescott, Joel T. Meyer, Joel Willett, John W. Ficklin, Julia S. Gurganus, Julia Santucci, Loren DeJonge Schulman, Luke R. Hartig, Maher B. Bitar, Mark B Feierstein, Mary Beth Goodman, Megan F. Doherty, Michael P. Dempsey, Perry J. Blatstein, Richard H. Ledgett, Samantha E. Vinograd, Sarah S. Farnsworth, Shelby L. Pierson, Stephanie O'Sullivan, Thomas W. West, Vinh X. Nguyen, William J. Tuttle, Yael Eisenstate. The memo said these individuals would have their access to classified systems, facilities, materials and information cut off immediately, and that any contracts or employment would also be terminated. It also said that agencies are required to report to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence as soon as the revocations are completed. Many of the individuals left the government a number of years ago, according to The Associated Press. Some worked on issues that have long infuriated Trump, including the investigation into Russian interference into the 2016 presidential election. What People Are Saying Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard wrote on X on Tuesday: "Our intelligence community must be committed to upholding the values and principles enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and maintain a laserlike focus on our mission of ensuring the safety, security and freedom of the American people." The memo said: "Intelligence community professionals must remain nonpartisan, fact-driven, and committed to truth above all else. All personnel are reminded that holding a clearance is a privilege, not a right, and this privilege is contingent upon continued adherence to the principles and responsibilities of our profession. Any betrayal of these standards compromises not only our mission, but also the safety and security of the American people." Mark Zaid, a national security lawyer whose own clearance was revoked by Trump, told The Associated Press: "These are unlawful and unconstitutional decisions that deviate from well-settled, decades-old laws and policies that sought to protect against just this type of action."


New York Post
3 hours ago
- New York Post
Pirro to ease prosecutions for carrying registered rifles, shotguns — calls DC law ‘violation of the Supreme Court's holdings'
Registered rifle and shotgun owners may no longer face felony charges for carrying their weapons in Washington, DC due to concerns the district's restrictive gun laws run afoul of Supreme Court rulings, US Attorney Jeanine Pirro explained Tuesday. The policy shift, first reported by the Washington Post, comes after Pirro said she received guidance from the Justice Department and solicitor general determining that DC's prohibitions on registered, but non-permitted, rifle and shotgun owners violate the Second Amendment. The DC law 'is clearly a violation of the Supreme Court's holdings,' Pirro told the Washington Post, confirming the Trump administration's memo. Advertisement 3 US Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro speaks during a press conference in Washington, DC, on Aug. 12, 2025. REUTERS The Supreme Court struck down DC's ban on handgun ownership in the home for self-defense in the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller case. The high court further expanded gun rights in the 2022 NY State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen case, where a majority of justices determined that the Constitution protects the rights of gun owners to carry firearms in public for self-defense. In the Bruen case, the Supreme Court also found that gun laws must be 'consistent with the Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation.' Advertisement Pirro, a notoriously tough-on-crime former judge, was adamant that the new guidance would not impact her ability to prosecute gun crimes, and get illegal firearms off the streets of the nation's capital. 'Nothing in this memo from the Department of Justice and the Office of Solicitor General precludes the United States Attorney's Office from charging a felon with the possession of a firearm, which includes a rifle, shotgun, and attendant large capacity magazine pursuant to DC Code 22-4503,' she told the outlet. 'What it does preclude is a separate charge of possession of a registered rifle or shotgun,' she added. DC's stringent gun laws prohibit open carry and, in general, require individuals to obtain a concealed-carry permit – which are not issued for shotguns or rifles – in order to leave home with a firearm. Advertisement 3 A person carries a rifle in public during a Second Amendment protest in Albuquerque, New Mexico, on Sept. 12, 2023. AP 3 Pirro, a notoriously tough-on-crime former judge, was adamant that the new guidance would not impact her ability to prosecute gun crimes, and get illegal firearms off the streets of the nation's capital. AP Unlawfully carrying a registered long gun in DC can result in a fine and imprisonment for up to five years. Advertisement In response to a request for comment from The Post, Pirro said: 'Criminal culpability is not determined by the instruments people employ but by the intent and conduct of the actor.' 'Crimes are intentional acts and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent by my office regardless of what instruments of criminality are used,' her statement continued. 'My job is to keep this city, its citizens, its businesses, and its visitors safe from harm and I will do that to the fullest extent of the law.'


UPI
9 hours ago
- UPI
Tulsi Gabbard revokes security clearance for 37 intelligence officials
Aug. 19 (UPI) -- National Security Director Tulsi Gabbard has revoked the security clearances for 37 current and former intelligence officials, as directed by President Donald Trump. Gabbard acknowledged that the president directed her to revoke the security clearances in a social media post that she made on Tuesday afternoon. "Being entrusted with a security clearance is a privilege, not a right," Gabbard said. "Those in the intelligence community who betray their oath to the Constitution and put their own interests ahead of the interests of the American people have broken the sacred trust they promised to uphold," she added. Gabbard's post includes a copy of the department memorandum that was circulated on Monday and lists the 37 officials whose security clearances are revoked. Among those whose security clearances are revoked is Maher Bitar, who worked for Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., when he was the House Intelligence Committee chairman during the first impeachment effort against President Donald Trump in 2019, The Hill reported. The Biden administration's National Security Council spokeswoman Emily Horne and Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research Brett Holmgren also are among those who lost their security clearances. Others with revoked clearances include officials who held senior positions within the State Department, the CIA, the National Security Agency, the Defense Department and the National Security Council, according to Politico. Several formerly advised Biden when he was the vice president under former President Barack Obama, and some also were involved in the investigation into claims that Trump colluded with Russia ahead of the 2016 election. The revocations are effective immediately, and those whose security clearances are revoked also have any related contracts or employment terminated and must surrender their credentials to security officers, Fox News reported. The revocations prompted criticism alleging that the Trump administration did so for political purposes. "Further proof of weaponization and politicization," Mark Zaid, a national security attorney, said in a post on X. He said most of those who lost their security clearances "are dedicated public servants who have worked across multiple presidential administrations." The Trump administration also revoked Zaid's prior security clearance. Many who lost their clearance also had spoken to media regarding decisions made by the Trump administration, according to The Hill.