Two More Executions

Alabama is set to execute Geoffrey West, 50, by the relatively new method of nitrogen gas. He was convicted of the 1997 murder of Margaret Parrish Berry, a mother of two, during the robbery of the gas station where she worked.

The victim's son, a child when the crime took place almost 30 years ago, opposes the execution. Justice Breyer, again, was correct to point out the time lag as a constitutional problem. He was joined by Ginsburg and earlier Stevens. 

"That won’t bring my mother back," [now adult son of victim] wrote. 

"I believe that in seeking to execute Mr. West, the state of Alabama is playing God. I don’t want anyone to exact revenge in my name, nor in my mother’s."

A family member of the victim, who often disagrees with other family members, doesn't decide. 

It's a public offense. The governor's letter to him is correct on that point, even if I don't support the argument of its value. Preventing him from meeting with the killer to talk is more dubious.  

Still, it's notable given the "what about the victims" cries from certain supporters of the death penalty. His girlfriend pleaded guilty and received a thirty-five-year sentence. Less than he served. The jury voted 10-2 for the death penalty.  

West chose to be executed by nitrogen gas, which has mixed reports so far. I checked a few articles, and they didn't flag other special circumstances. 

At about the same time, Texas is set to execute Blaine Milam, 35, by lethal injection for the 2008 death of his girlfriend's 13-month-old baby in what Milam and her mother described as an "exorcism." 

This execution (factoring in COVID time lags) had less delay, though over fifteen years is still significant. There are also some limited arguments made that those under 21 should not be executed. 

The article linked at the top provides additional graphic details. I'm not going to handwave the horrible nature of many of these crimes. Okay.

The mother (Milam is not the biological father) was convicted of murder and sentenced to LWOP. Milam claims innocence. Both eventually (after saying they left the child alone) gave the exorcism rationale.

Two teenagers were involved in a horrible crime that, from the summary, appears to be perhaps influenced by twisted religious beliefs. The mother's sentence is more justified. Executing him is arbitrary. 

(I understand the LWOP approach, but it's an unjust penalty. There should be the possibility of parole at some point. That doesn't mean -- see Charlie Manson -- actual parole. OTOH, keeping people in prison into their 80s usually is dubious.)

SCOTUS, without comment (as usual), disposed of a final appeal today (sometimes they get it over the day before these days). The final claims involved an innocence claim and a dispute over the value of certain evidence. He's likely guilty. The question here is "guilty enough for an execution?" I think not. 

Again, even if these last minute claims don't have merit (and they sometimes do), someone should provide at least a brief comment. The government is taking someone's life. In the shadows.

===

A murder in the course of a robbery warrants the long prison sentence he received. The second murder is horrible, but it is the sort of tragic domestic crime that is not suitable for an execution. As the government realized, for one of the two people involved.  

Charlie Kirk's wife says she forgives his killer. Again, that is of small relevance when applying the death penalty, except when people yell at opponents that they are not respecting the feelings of the victims. 

(A vehement supporter of the death penalty once told me that it matters less if we ignore their wishes. 

For reasons. Plus, he just couldn't understand their mentality. It's apparently easier to see being "Christian" as not using vaccines or hating on gays.)  

The death penalty continues not to benefit the public welfare overall. If someone murders a person in prison, providing evidence that they cannot be safely detained, you might have a case. 

Somehow, all those places without capital punishment manage such special occasions. Which is a good thing, since even in those cases, something bad is likely going to happen when the state executes the person. 

ETA: Via Chris Geidner on Bluesky, summarizing an order by Thomas on Friday.

Justice Thomas issues an administrative stay, blocking a July order from the 11th Circuit from going into effect on Tuesday, while SCOTUS considers Alabama's request for a stay pending appeal of the ruling, which would vacate a death sentence b/c of discrimination in jury selection.