Kayle Barrington Bates [Maud Dib Al Sharif] Executed

He overpowered her and forcibly took her from the office building to the woods where he savagely beat, strangled and attempted to rape her, leaving approximately 30 contusions, abrasions and lacerations on various parts of her face and body. Bates was found at the scene of the crime and he had the victim's blood on his clothing. He had the victim's ring in his pocket.

This is another horrible crime that warranted a long prison sentence. In many countries, imprisoning someone for this crime for over forty years (as here) would be deemed cruel and unusual punishment. 

It is overall rather serious. Justice Breyer remains correct in arguing that there is a constitutional problem with executing someone after all this time. The state interest has significantly decreased. 

You are executing a different person. After they were in prison for decades. I think it is a form of euthanasia to end the life of a certain subset of senior citizens. 

There is also a claim that Florida has applied the death penalty in an illegitimate racial way. They have done so in the dark, so to speak, adding another layer of difficulty. The Supreme Court was not accepting of a comparable claim back when he was in prison for only a few years. They are not much more open to it. 

The claim was given somewhat more attention with two amicus briefs provided. I think that is worthy of a bit of discussion from some justice before the state executes the tenth person (a third of the national rate) this year. They have another one scheduled later this month. 

No comment. The usual no comment final orders. That is wrong. Wrong Sotomayor. Wrong Jackson. Wrong Kagan. Wrong all the rest.  

One new claim, rejected by the state as long past its sell date, is that he has "organic brain damage" that makes it unreasonable to execute him. Such claims are hard to prove. My stance is that when the death penalty is involved, a big thumb should be on the scales on the side of the challenger. 

He was first sentenced by an all white jury. He was resentenced in the 1990s by a 9-3 vote. Only Florida and Alabama allow non-unanimous juries to authorize the death penalty. The Supreme Court has determined that the original guilt phase must be unanimous.  

The Supreme Court has not directly addressed whether this is acceptable, but repeatedly (with Sotomayor flagging it) refused a request to do so. I find it dubious. An execution effectively involves a special crime, the worst of the worst, murder. 

(The Supreme Court, in dicta, allowed drug kingpin-type laws where murder is not directly involved. Also, treason and war crimes are treated differently. Military crimes, including rape, have also been left open.)  

I think it warrants a unanimous jury, at least, if that is the rule otherwise in place. If only two states, states where racism is still a concern, emphasizing the value of a unanimous jury, allow them, it makes it harder to justify. "Due process" is partially a matter of looking at normal procedures nationwide.  

Anyway, executing someone over forty years after they committed a horrible crime, whatever name he uses, is misguided at best. Even without there appearing to be some other red flags.