Florida set to execute man for killing wife, 2 kids in new state death sentence record for 1 year
A death warrant signed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis directs that 60-year-old Edward Zakrzewski be executed by lethal injection at 6 p.m. Thursday at Florida State Prison near Starke. Zakrzewski's final appeal for a stay was rejected Wednesday by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The highest previous annual total of recent Florida executions is eight in 2014, since the death penalty was restored in 1976 by the U.S. Supreme Court. Florida has executed more people than any other state this year, while Texas and South Carolina are tied for second place with four each.
Zakrzewski, an Air Force veteran, was sentenced to die for the 1994 slayings of his 34-year-old wife, Sylvia, and their children Edward, 7, and 5-year-old Anna, at their home in Okaloosa County in the Panhandle. Trial testimony showed he committed the killings after his wife sought a divorce, and he had told others he would kill his family rather than allow that.
Sylvia was attacked first with a crowbar and strangled with a rope, testimony shows. Both children were killed with the machete, and Sylvia was also struck with the blade when Zakrzewski thought she had survived the previous assault.
Opponents of the execution point to Zakrzewski's military service and the fact that a jury voted 7-5 to recommend his execution, barely a majority of the panel. He could not be executed with such a split jury vote under current state law. The trial judge imposed three death sentences on Zakrzewski.
The Action Network, which organized an anti-execution petition, asked people to call DeSantis' office and read a prepared script urging a stay of execution for Zakrzewski.
'Florida does not need the death penalty to be safe. This execution will not make us safer, it will simply add another act of violence to an already tragic story. Justice does not require death,' the script reads in part.
Zakrzewski's lawyers have filed numerous appeals over the years, all of which have been rejected.
Twenty-six men have died by court-ordered execution so far this year in the U.S., and 11 other people are scheduled to be put to death in seven states during the remainder of 2025.
Florida was also the last state to execute someone, when Michael Bernard Bell died by lethal injection on July 15. DeSantis also signed a warrant for the 10th execution this year for Kayle Bates, who abducted a woman from an insurance office and killed her more than four decades ago.
Wednesday night, DeSantis issued a death warrant for Curtis Windom, 59, convicted of killing three people in the Orlando area in 1992. His execution is scheduled for Aug. 28.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
22 minutes ago
- Politico
Texas AG Paxton will try to expel Texas Democrats if they don't return by Friday
The legal process to remove the lawmakers will likely take time. First, Paxton must file a case against each individual absent Democrat in various district courts, a process that would surely lead to appeals and could drag out long beyond the end of the special session on Aug. 19. Even if Paxton succeeds in getting them removed, Gov. Greg Abbott would need to call for special elections to fill the seats, according to Texas law, which says that 'an unexpired term in office may be filled only by a special election.' Paxton issued a nonbinding legal opinion in 2021 during Democrats' last quorum break, which Republican Gov. Greg Abbott cited on Monday while also accusing the lawmakers 'absconded from their responsibility.' In that opinion, Paxton took no position on whether breaking quorum is constitutional. He also declined to say whether fleeing Democrats could or should be removed from office. Rather, he called it a 'fact question for a court' that he said was beyond the scope of his office to decide. He noted instead that he could file what are known as 'quo warranto actions' in court, asking a judge to determine whether the missing lawmakers had officially vacated their seats. When Abbott made the same argument on Monday, Democrats responded simply: 'Come and take it.' Democrats have fled Texas to blue strongholds like Illinois, New York and Massachusetts in order to prevent the legislature from voting on a recently-drawn congressional map — pushed by President Donald Trump — that would give the GOP five more friendly seats ahead of next year's midterms. 'Democrats are going to fight this tooth and nail and until the will of the voters is respected,' Democratic National Committee chair Ken Martin said during a press conference on Tuesday. 'This is not the Democratic Party of your grandfather, which would bring a pencil to the knife fight. This is a new Democratic Party. We're bringing a knife to a knife fight.' The Texas Constitution allows for quorum-breaking, and lawmakers and legal experts alike were quick to dismiss Paxton's claims that Democrats had abandoned their positions. Kyle Cheney and Shia Kapos contributed to this report.
The Hill
24 minutes ago
- The Hill
Crucial exemption allows majority of Canadian and Mexican goods to be shipped to US without tariffs
TORONTO (AP) — U.S. President Donald Trump raised the tariffs on Canadian goods to 35% last week, but a key exemption for Canada and Mexico shields the vast majority of goods from the punishing duties. Goods that comply with the 2020 United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement trade pact that Trump negotiated during his first term are excluded from the tariffs. Here's a look at Trump's tariffs on the two countries and their exemptions: Most Canadian exports reaching the U.S duty free Canada's central bank says 100% of energy exports and 95% of other exports are USMCA compliant. The Royal Bank estimated that almost 90% of Canadian exports appear to have accessed the U.S. market duty free in April. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said the commitment of the United States to the core of USMCA, reaffirmed again last week, means the U.S. average tariff rate on Canadian goods remains one of its lowest, and over 85% of Canada-U.S. trade continues to be tariff free. 'Canada is better off than any of the trading partners right now because the Americans appear to be relying as a default on USMCA,' said Flavio Volpe, president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association. 'That gives them the tough tariff headline but also allows them the access to the stuff they need from us. Because of that we're in a relative better position.' Canadian and Mexican companies can claim preferential treatment under the USMCA based on where the products are made. 'The headline news is 35% tariffs but it's somewhat targeted,' said John Manley, Canada's former industry minister, finance minister, foreign affairs minister and deputy prime minister. Manley said Canada is doing okay despite the economic uncertainty. 'There is a lot of resilience I'd say. The Canadian economy has done relatively well, better than most of us expected, and remember that there is no tariffs on any of our energy exports,' he said. 25% tariffs on Mexican goods target a small slice of trade Trump said last week he would enter into a 90-day negotiating period with Mexico, also one of America's largest trading partners. The current 25% tariff rates are staying in place, down from the 30% he had threatened earlier. But that 25% only applies to the fraction of Mexico's trade with the U.S. that isn't covered by the USMCA. Shortly after speaking with Trump on Thursday, President Claudia Sheinbaum said that within the 'new commercial world order,' Mexico was still the best positioned nation because of the free trade agreement. 'What's within (USMCA) has no tariff, with the exception of what we already know: autos, steel and aluminum; and what is outside the treaty has 25%,' Sheinbaum said. But Economy Secretary Marcelo Ebrard pointed out that under the USMCA no tariffs were paid on more than 84% of Mexico's trade with the United States. Most imports from Canada and Mexico are still protected by the USMCA, but the deal is up for review next year. U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said last month: 'I think the president is absolutely going to renegotiate USMCA.' Preserving the free trade pact will be critical for Canada and Mexico. 'It would be an incredible disruption to lose it especially if you lost it to the levels of tariffs Trump is imposing, 30%, 25% or even 20%. You can absorb a single digit tariff level across the board but you can't adjust that kind of increase,' Manley said. More than 75% of Canada's exports go to the U.S. while more than 80% of Mexico's exports go there. Manley said that depending on how the trade war plays out the risk to the USMCA is very high. 'Uncertainty in business is the enemy of decision making,' he said. Charging for access Carney said in a series of recent agreements with other countries that America is, in effect, charging for access to its economy. Manley said the investment thesis for Canada is pretty straightforward as Canada is rich in natural resources, has a skilled labor force, is open to immigration and has unfettered access to the U.S. market, the largest economy in the world. 'If that latter point is no longer the case, we've still got all the others, but we've got to really redevelop the investment thesis for attracting investment to Canada,' Manley said. Trump has some sector specific tariffs, known as 232 tariffs, that are having an impact. There is a 50% tariff on steel and aluminum imports and a 25% tariff on auto imports, though there is a carve-out for Canadian and Mexican made cars. 'Despite our advantages, certain major Canadian industries are being severely impacted by U.S. trade actions. These strategic sectors include autos, steel, aluminum, copper, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and of course, softwood lumber,' Carney said Tuesday. 'It is clear we cannot count or fully rely on what has been our most valued trading relationship for our prosperity.'
San Francisco Chronicle
24 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
What's known and not yet known about the Justice Department's scrutiny of Trump-Russia probe origins
WASHINGTON (AP) — News that Attorney General Pam Bondi is moving to criminally investigate the Obama-era origins of the Trump-Russia investigation means that one of the most studied, and politically polarizing, chapters of modern American history will be under the microscope yet again. A saga with a long backstory Perhaps no issue continues to aggravate President Donald Trump more than the assessment by intelligence officials that Russia interfered in the 2016 election on his behalf and the investigation by law enforcement into whether his campaign colluded with Moscow to tip the outcome of the contest. Robert Mueller, the former FBI director tapped as special counsel by Trump's first Justice Department to investigate, found that Russia had waged a multi-prong operation in Trump's favor and that the Republican president's campaign welcomed the aid. But Mueller did not find sufficient evidence of a criminal conspiracy between Russia and the Trump campaign. As president for a second time, Trump has made no secret of his desire to use the Justice Department as a weapon of retribution against perceived political adversaries he sees as having smeared him, including by calling for Obama-era officials to be jailed. And his administration, now more broadly and across multiple agencies, has been engaged in a effort to reopen the long-accepted conclusion — including among prominent Republicans — of Russian interference and to scrutinize the officials involved in reaching that assessment. A Bondi grand jury directive Bondi, a Trump loyalist, has directed Justice Department prosecutors to present evidence related to the Russia inquiry to a grand jury. Grand juries are tools used by prosecutors to issue subpoenas for records and prosecutors and to produce indictments based on the evidence they receive. The bar is low for an indictment given that the presentation of evidence by prosecutors is one-sided, though grand juries do have the option to decline to indict and have done so in the past. A person familiar with the matter confirmed Bondi's directive to The Associated Press but key questions remain. It was not disclosed, for instance, which prosecutors are pursuing the investigation, where the grand jury that might hear evidence is located and whether and when law enforcement officials might seek to bring criminal charges. The Justice Department, in an unusual statement last month, appeared to confirm the existence of an investigation into former FBI Director James Comey and former CIA Director James Brennan but provided no details or specifics. Potential targets of probe remain unclear It's not clear who might be targeted in the investigation, but the Trump administration has been aggressively challenging intelligence community conclusions about Russia's actions and intentions that had long ago seemed settled. It's been a welcome diversion for the administration as it confronts a wave of criticism from Trump's base and conservative influencers over the handling of records from the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking investigation. In the last month, Trump administration officials and allies have released a series of documents aimed at casting doubt on the extent of interference and at portraying the original Russia investigation as an Obama administration frame-job. The documents have been hailed as incontrovertible proof of a conspiracy, but a close inspection of the records shows they fall well short of that. Among the documents released by Tulsi Gabbard, the administration's director of national intelligence, are emails from 2016 showing that Obama administration officials recognized in 2016 that Russians had not hacked state election systems to manipulate votes in favor of Trump. But the absence of evidence that votes were switched — something the Obama administration never alleged — has no bearing on the ample evidence of other forms of Russia interference, including a hack-and-leak operation involving Democratic emails and a covert social media campaign aimed at sowing discord and spreading disinformation. Last week, Sen. Chuck Grassley, the Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, released a previously classified annex of a 2023 report by John Durham, the special counsel appointed by the first Trump administration to hunt for government misconduct in the Russia probe. The annex included a series of emails, including one from July 2016 that was purportedly sent by a senior staffer at a philanthropic organization founded by billionaire investor George Soros, that referred to a plan approved by then-Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to falsely link Trump to Russia. But Durham's own report took pain to note that investigators had not corroborated the communications as authentic and said the best assessment was that the message was 'a composites of several emails' the Russians had obtained from hacking — raising the likelihood that it was a product of Russian disinformation. Fresh scrutiny has also centered around the intelligence community assessment on Russian election interference, which was published in January 2017. An annex in a classified version of the assessment contained a summary of the so-called Steele dossier — a compilation of opposition research that included uncorroborated rumors and salacious gossip about Trump and Russia. The latest in a series of investigations Multiple government reports, including not only from Mueller but also a Republican-led Senate intelligence committee that included current Secretary of State Marco Rubio, have documented Russia's activities in sweeping details. To be sure, reports from the Justice Department inspector general and Durham also identified significant flaws in the FBI's Russia investigation, including errors and omissions in applications the Justice Department submitted to a secretive surveillance court to eavesdrop on a national security adviser to the 2016 Trump campaign. But Durham found no criminal wrongdoing among government officials, bringing three criminal cases — two against private citizens that resulted in acquittals at trial and a third against a little-known FBI lawyer who pleaded guilty to doctoring an email. It is unclear if there is any criminal wrongdoing that exists that Durham, who launched his investigation in 2019 and concluded it four years later, somehow missed during his sprawling inquiry.
