Various thoughts on current events with an emphasis on politics, legal issues, books, movies and whatever is on my mind. Emails can be sent to almostsanejoe@aol.com; please put "blog comments" in the subject line.
He murdered his wife about twenty years ago and seriously hurt his mother-in-law.
The jury later decided it warranted a death sentence, 11-1. His lawyers tried to challenge the unanimous jury finding, but a court held that he waived the challenge.
It does sound like he had mental health issues:
In 1999, Silvia's mother was killed by a drunken driver, and two years later, his brother John died from a drug overdose. According to defense psychologist Deborah Day, Silvia has a history of mental illness in the family, with his sister suffering from bipolar disorder and having been committed multiple times. Silvia himself attended sessions with a psychiatrist during his first marriage and was put on medications for six months.
The final appeal flagged that Silvia, in the end, had to rely on a lawyer also defending another person recently executed. This allegedly resulted in inadequate representation.
The Supreme Court, as usual, rejected this final appeal (this morning) without comment. These last-minute appeals are often somewhat desperate. This one isn't much different.
I still would have liked at least some justice to discuss the matter since we are talking about a final appeal, the end result being the deprivation of life. Oh well.
This is another case where people won't cry much for the person executed. It also does not appear to be a "worst of the worst" case.
He viciously murdered his spouse. There is a lot of domestic violence, often by people with a lot of issues. This was murderous. Warrants a long prison sentence. Instead, he lost the execution lottery.
Florida has been the busiest again, executing 13 of the 23 people executed this year. Texas had four and still has multiple scheduled for later this year. Oklahoma had three. Three states had one each. This is partially a game of catch-up. But still.
The second (of three) scheduled Supreme Court summer order list was released today.
The usual housekeeping dominated the short list of orders. Alito didn't take part in one case. The usual "rehearings denied" (they are nearly never granted) were included.
The list started this way:
REHEARINGS DENIED
25-432 PUCKETT, CARL E., ET UX. V. AIN JEEM, INC., ET AL.
25-567 VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC. V. FCC, ET AL.
25-573 TRUMP, DONALD J. V. CARROLL, E. JEAN
As noted by my local paper:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday again rebuffed President Donald Trump’s push to throw out a jury’s $5 million finding that he sexually abused the writer E. Jean Carroll at a New York City department store in the mid-1990s and later defamed her.
Many people alleged* that Trump, in various respects, sexually assaulted women. Trump has been accused of trying to see teen beauty contestants in a state of undress. He bragged about being able to do these things with impunity.
The "grab the pussy" talk received some attention. We know how things have gone. See also, Thomas and Kavanaugh.
E.J. Carroll, taking advantage of a New York law that extended the window, was able to obtain a jury verdict that Trump sexually assaulted her.
He denied it. Toss in defamation. He kept it up after the civil judgment. Another jury found defamation again. This time with a much higher financial judgment. The appeal for that is still pending.
People, if they are halfway honest, don't have the vapors about either charge. Defamation?
To slightly paraphrase a Supreme Court opinion, "Lying was and still is his habit."
The denial of rehearing is not truly news. There was no real chance that it would be granted.
(Trump already gave her the money, but it was held in trust until the finalization of the appeal.)
What it does help remind us is the nature of the person in the Oval Office. The election of Trump will be a blot on our country for time immemorial.
Sexual wrongdoing has been a major concern in multiple political races this election cycle. The Democratic candidate for governor in California and for Senate in Maine are different than expected for that reason. OTOH, we have Max Miller.
Trump remains a symbol of what not to do.
===
* One woman, someone who would otherwise be a Trump supporter, particularly comes to mind.
She alleged wrongdoing. Trump defamed her. She sued. The litigation went on and on and on.
She finally gave up. It wasn't worth the hassle, including not being able to openly talk about it. The Trump side alleged total vindication.
Three executions in three states. None in Florida or Texas.
Anthony Darrell Dugard Hines (TN)
These lengthy delays create two special constitutional difficulties. First, a lengthy delay in and of itself is especially cruel because it “subjects death row inmates to decades of especially severe, dehumanizing conditions of confinement.” Second, a lengthy delay undermines the death penalty’s penological rationale.