Today, the United States Supreme Court denied the application for stay of execution of death of Richard Glossip, 52, who was convicted twice of orchestrating the death of his boss, Richard Van Treese, and carried out by the informant, Justin Sneed, in a brutal bloodbath with a baseball bat. http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-84552123/http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/093015zr_886a.pdf
The juries in two trials were denied to consider in evidence the confessional videotape of the killer, Sneed, a motel handyman, after goading by the detective that Glossip paid him to kill his employer, Van Treese, who owned the Oklahoma City Best Budget Inn in 1997. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/09/28/oklahoma-court-denies-richard-glossips-request-for-a-stay-of-execution/
…show more content…
http://kfor.com/2015/07/09/i-want-people-to-know-i-didnt-kill-this-man-death-row-inmate-still-claims-innocence/ Glossip maintains his innocence that “I want people to know I didn’t kill this man.” The OCCA declined to address the U.S. Constitution and instead elaborated on the state statutes that doesn’t permit the lapse of an 18-year death row inmate or allow additional time for stay of execution to consider the facts of the case or procedural error. http://www.scribd.com/doc/283014508/Order-Denying-Richard-Glossip-s-Rescheduling-Of-Execution-Date-Sept-28-2015 The majority opinion addresses the timing of the execution pursuant to 22 O.S. 2011 Section 1001.1 (E), (F) will take happen thirty (30) days after the stay is entered. The OCCA states that no witnesses refuted the State’s case - although the snitch didn’t testify at the second trial, the forensic evidence was discredited in multiple murder cases, and the chief prosecutor was a …show more content…
One of the dissenting opinions refers suspiciously to the State prosecutor and medical expert which is important to this case. "Death and Execution" Joyce Gilchrist, whose “flawed casework analysis” and “laboratory mismanagement” in this case (http://newsok.com/article/5443656), served the State as a forensic chemist who worked thousands of cases for the Oklahoma City police department and falsified evidence which brought 23 defendants sentenced to death. Gilchrist was dismissed and claimed that she was discharged for reporting sexual misconduct. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joyce_Gilchrist) She died on June 14, 2015. Macy and Gilchrist carried out the trials and appeals, including the Glossip case - grandstanding personal confidence in State’s witnesses, withholding evidence, subporning jury, and inflaming jury’s prejudices. Gilchrist was noted as the “Black Wizard” and Macy was repeatedly known for his prosecutorial misconduct. http://truthinjustice.org/gilchrist/macy-gilchrist.htm
The details disclosed that the prosecution highlighted the names of the potential black judges and tinted every black potential juror’s name in a different color. There were four different duplicates of the record of all of the individuals summoned for the task in the case. Evert record had a key, which indicated that the highlighted names represented the blacks. Besides, there were no any blotches made for the white jurors on the lists. There were also many marks made on the black people’s names on the juror questionnaires, and there was no any other race that was
a. Victor Burnette lived in Richmond, Virginia in 1979. He cared for his blind and arthritic grandmother at night and was getting ready to get his career started. However this all change on the 5th of August that year, when a local woman identified him as the man who raped her. When DNA testing was done in 2009 it confirmed that he was not the attacker. It had taken 20 years for Burnette to clear his name. [Exoneration Case Detail. 2014]
Your honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, thank you for your attention today. [Slide #2] I would like to assert that separation is not the end of a relationship. Divorce is not the end of a relationship. Even an arrest is not the end of a relationship. Only death is the end of a relationship. In the case of defendant Donna Osborn, her insistence that ‘“one way or another I’ll be free,”’ as told in the testimony of her friend Jack Mathews and repeated in many others’, indicates that despite the lack of planning, the defendant had the full intent to kill her husband, Clinton Osborn.
2 (A). After spending three decades behind bars, DNA evidence proved Cornelius Dupree’s innocence. Dupree was arrested and eventually wrongfully convicted for the robbery of a woman and a man. He was indicted on both the robbery and rape of the woman, but since prosecuting him for the rape would not extend his 75 year sentenced handed down for the robbery, the rape charges were dismissed. DNA testing was not available at the time to exonerate him for the crimes. Even though he was not convicted for the rape, the evidence clearing him of rape, stood for the robbery too, as they were both connected.
The 14th Amendment of the Constitution states that the State shall not deprive any person equal protection of the laws. When equal protection is guaranteed, the outcome must be fair; in other words, substantive justice must be present. Based on this interpretation, McCleskey v. Kemp should be overturned because McCleskey’s death was a racially biased and unfair outcome that was not constitutionally protected by the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Justice Blackmun wrote in his dissenting opinion that in order for McCleskey to prove his innocence and the presence of a racially discriminatory criminal sentencing procedure, he had to meet a three-factor standard. First, he had to prove he was a member of a group that has historically suffered differential treatment. Second, McCleskey had to establish the extent of this treatment. Last, he had to prove that the process by which the death penalty was chosen was open to racial bias. McCleskey met all three prongs of this standard, and even though the Court’s decision denied his claim that he was not guaranteed equal protection, there is enough evidence to prove the selection process was not racially neutral and that a violation of the 14th Amendment was present. Furthermore, Justice Kennedy’s idea of “evolving standards of decency” in Roper v. Simmons (2005) demonstrates that the growing national consensus is against the death penalty and therefore in favor of equal protection for all persons.
Clarence Earl Gideon was arrested in 1961 and charged with breaking and entering a pool hall with intent to commit theft, by taking money out of vending machines. What he did at the time was considered a felony. When it came time to have the trial he did not have enough money for a lawyer and asked that one be appointed to defend him. The judge denied the request saying that under Florida state law counsel can be appointed only in a capital offense. Since Gideon didn’t have a lawyer and was not educated to defend himself he lost easily to the prosecution.
Capital punishment and bias in sentencing is among many issue minorities faced for many years in the better part of the nineteen hundreds. Now it continues to spill into the twenty first century due to the erroneous issues our criminal justice system has caused many people to suffer. In the book Just Mercy authored by Bryan Stevenson, Stevenson explains many cases of injustice. Stevenson goes into details of numerous cases of wrongfully accused people, thirteen and fourteen year olds being sentenced to death and sentences of life without parole for children. These issues Stevenson raises bring to question whether the death penalty is as viable as it should be. It brings to light the many issues our criminal justice system has today. There
Defendant Freddie Lee Hall filed a motion to declare Florida Statute 921.137 (Florida Statute) as contrary to Atkins v. Virginia (2002) and, thus, unconstitutional. Hall, convicted in 1981 for the murder of Karol Hurst, was initially sentenced to death in September 1982. For three years, he fought his sentence, filing “a motion to vacate, a petition for writ of habeas corpus and an application for a stay of execution, all of which were denied” . In 1986, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals heard his appeal and reversed part of the lower court’s ruling, a decision granted when the court found Hall “entitled to a hearing on the issues of his absence from the courtroom and whether he deliberately bypassed his ineffective assistance of counsel claim” .
They had an alibi witness, a gas receipt, a ticket on the day of the murder. A police officer who would not come unless the judge subpoena him and the judge of course refused and would not pay the $650 to summon him. There were also two jailhouse snitches who lied about their testimony. The police misconduct was used in how they charged these individuals originally and how they have been accused initially with robbery, which later turned into murder. The police created the story and intimidated an eye witness who refused to testify and threatened to charge her with the murder if she refused. The attorneys told a moving tale and Ron Keine and company ended up being convicted. This case was before DNA testing but what exonerated these individuals was the actual murder confessing to the crimes. The entire case seemed like a fluke and malicious attack on these people. A guy in Carolina, confessed to all charges and had an epiphany and told the police where the weapon was located and how everything happened and how he dragged the body. He had to fight to get the police to accept his confession because the police were acting as if they already had their
Steve Harmon is guilty of felony murder because he participated and had knowledge about a crime that ended up in the death of an innocent citizen. The judge stated the if you believe that Steve harmon took part in the crime than you must return a verdict of guilty. I believe that Steve went into the drugstore on that day for the purpose of being a lookout. Some of Steve’s journal entry’s lead to him feeling guilty or like a “monster”.
On a fall night in 1906 Kansas Governor Edward Hotch sent a letter to Governor Fletcher D. Procter of Vermont in order to show his opposition for capital punishment. In the letter the governor says that the state allows for the death penalty, but leaves the final decision up to the governor if the inmate has been incarcerated for at least one year. The following is a quote from the Governor’s letter: “I can understand how those who believe that death ends all can take a life by legal process, but ho...
Jennifer Thompson-Cannino was raped at knife point in her apartment. She was able to escape and identify Ronald Cotton as her attacker. The detective conducting the lineup told Jennifer that she had done great, confirming to her that she had chosen the right suspect. Eleven years later, DNA evidence proved that the man Jennifer Identified, Ronald Cotton was innocent and wrongfully convicted. Instead, Bobby Poole was the real perpetrator. Sadly, there are many other cases of erroneous convictions. Picking cotton is a must read for anybody because it educates readers about shortcomings of eyewitness identification, the police investigative process and the court system.
It took 70 years after his execution to exonerate him”, Lindsey Bever, states, “He was questioned in a small room, alone – without his parents, without an attorney” (Bever). It happens to be that George fell under the category of a minor, therefore it was illegal and immoral for deputies to interrogate him without proper legal representation or a legal guardian. This indicated that his “confession” might have been coerced or intimidated out of him. According to Terrell Jermaine Starr, author of “Executed at 14: George Stinney’s Birthday Reminds Us That the Death Penalty Must End”, adds that, there was no record of George actually confessing to the crime, no physical evidence whatsoever even exists (Starr). Starr also confirms that the deputies reportedly offered young George ice cream in order to further manipulate him into confessing (Starr). Whether Stinney actually confessed or was forced to confess; the confession could not have been used in court due to the false pretenses it was obtained
...lice or lawyers used their integrity. The police skirted around the law and use evidence that the witnesses said was not correct. They had a description of the suspect that did not match Bloodsworth but, they went after him as well. They also used eyewitness testimony that could have been contaminated.
During those years, the Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment violated the Eight Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, this ended in 1976, when the Supreme Court reversed the ruling. They stated that the punishment of sentencing one to death does not perpetually infringe the Constitution. Richard Nixon said, “Contrary to the views of some social theorists, I am convinced that the death penalty can be an effective deterrent against specific crimes. ”1 Whether the case be morally, monetarily, or just pure disagreement, citizens have argued the benefits of capital punishment.