There were three executions scheduled this week:
May 20 AZ Leroy McGill
May 21 TN Tony Carruthers
May 21 FL Richard Knight
Tony Carruthers is most troubling.
But in the decade that followed the trial, as post-conviction litigation played out in the courts, testimony from other forensic experts cast serious doubt on those supposed facts. Now, with the state set to execute Carruthers on May 21, his attorneys are arguing not only that forensic testing might prove his innocence, but that his death sentence was based on an inflammatory falsehood.
Other than the three-decade wait, which yet again is a problem, this execution has a bunch of issues. We had a serious innocence claim, mental health issues, self-representation, and more.
He was released in late 2015. Before his release, however, in 2010 and 2011, he met with members of a federal defense team and affirmed what Mr. Carruthers had long maintained: Mr. Carruthers was not involved in the crime. Instead, he pointed to an alternate suspect who was killed in 2002 but whose fingerprints and DNA sample are on file with the medical examiner’s office.
I understand that liberals feel they should pick their spots. But this is a case that deserved at least a statement. Instead, we had multiple "no comment" orders rejected various claims.
It also deserved a commutation. The co-defendant is out of prison. Instead ... he wasn't executed.
Why? They botched it. See you in 2027?
==
McGill flagged procedural problems and didn't have a final appeal. Horrible crime, which happened about twenty-five years ago. Again, that's too long ago. (Breyer, dissenting.)
Florida has executed some long-in-tooth cases. This one was "only" about twenty years ago. Domestic crime where the person also murdered a child.
The challenges repeated stuff that was rejected before. Understandably, no justice commented.
Both were executed.
==
The first case is particularly arbitrary.
The other two are more standard "death penalty as a whole is a bad policy" cases.
PUNT
The Supreme Court handed down three opinions today. Jackson wrote a quickie on ERISA, Kagan had a solo dissent in a second, and they punted.
(More next Thursday.)
Hamm v. Smith involved the rules in determining when someone is intellectually disabled enough to avoid execution. Some worried that it would result in a significant shift rightward, perhaps on much more than the specific subject matter.
The justices decided to "DIG" it as improvidently granted. You can hear Alito grumbling.
Kagan, Barrett, and Kavanaugh didn't provide any thoughts. Sotomayor (with Jackson) explained why they thought it a bad vehicle and responded to Alito's dissent (with Thomas joined in full, Roberts and Gorsuch mostly). A lot of writing for a DIG.
Thomas, on his own, also strongly dissented, wanting to toss Atkins v. Virginia (intellectually disabled cannot be executed) entirely.
Net result: The Supreme Court, on a 5-4 vote, lets stand lower court decisions tossing out Joseph Clifton Smith's death sentence in Alabama because the court found he is intellectually disabled.

No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your .02!