Two Executions

Johnny Johnson is scheduled to receive a lethal injection Tuesday at the state prison in Bonne Terre [Missouri] for killing 6-year-old Casey Williamson after trying to sexually assault her in 2002.

A sound constitutional rule would not allow the state to execute someone after over twenty years (see Justice Breyer's dissent in Glossip, who by the way has yet to be executed).  

There was the added concern that he had schizophrenia which made him constitutionally illegible.  The lower courts split, including the original 2-1 court of appeals ruling with judges nominated by Republican and Democratic presidents (FWIW) in the original majority.  The dispute was both on the merits and the process warranted to make his claim

In a "brief order" (aka "no" without any explanation), the Supreme Court let the most recent lower court ruling allow the execution to stand.  He was executed.  Justice Sotomayor with the two other liberals provided a written dissent.  The conservatives should have at least explained why they were wrong.  I will continue to ride that horse.

===

A Death Row inmate convicted of raping and murdering a woman in 1988 in Brevard County [Florida] will not try to halt his scheduled Aug. 3 execution.

James Barnes was convicted of capital murder after he already was in prison for life for the murder of his wife.  He actually confessed to the long unsolved murder, after he had converted to Islam.  He reportedly is not challenging the death sentence:

At the hearing on June 27, 2023, the defendant was adamant that he did not want any postconviction proceedings to occur, that he wanted to accept responsibility for his actions and proceed to execution (his death) without any delay,” the judge wrote. “The defendant specifically told the court that he ‘did not want to delay justice’ and he wanted to ‘see justice to be served in this case.

Once someone is already in prison for life, it is understandable (even if he is the one who confessed and enabled it in the first place) that a death sentence is applied.  It might be possible that he in some fashion was still eligible for parole or something else could have been done to punish him.  

Regardless, this is not one of those patently unjust cases from what immediately comes up when I read about it. There is a more basic problem.  If you allow the death penalty in these cases, a seriously flawed process continues and opens up problems in more troublesome cases.  

There is also a reasonable argument that the death penalty is not warranted.  The guy only was sentenced since he personally confessed while in prison for life.  For crimes he committed in the past.  Maybe, execution would discourage this.  Also, it seems it is possible he has some sort of rehabilitation in prison, especially if you take seriously his religious conversion.  What is the value in executing the guy after over two decades?  It comes off as a sort of state-supported euthanasia.  

What is "justice" in this case?  The state decided it was executing him. I'm far from sure, all things considered, that was the case. And, this is one of those times when the crime itself as well as the process overall (lawyers, competency, due process) appears to be generally acceptable.  There tends to be some wrinkle, however, for as long I have done these round-ups.

==

For now, the next execution is scheduled late next month.  

==

On August 1, 2023, death-qualified federal jurors unanimously recommended a sentence of death for Robert Bowers, who they had earlier convicted of killing 11 Jewish worshippers at a Pittsburgh synagogue in October 2018. 

This is the first successful attempt by the Biden Administration (to be more specific, the Garland Justice Department, which President Biden has specifically given independence of action, including when prosecuting his own son) to do so. An attempt was made regarding someone who murdered eight bikers in New York City, but that failed.  

As noted in the discussion, the jury is death qualified, which means those against the death penalty are removed.  This provides some degree of bias.  Robert Bowers offered to plead guilty to obtain an LWOP sentence, but it was rejected.  This to me seems gratuitous.  And, there is clearly a split among Jews about if the death penalty is appropriate. 

I saw one or more advocates argue that this means Biden's claim to be against the death penalty is empty rhetoric.   

The choice of the Justice Department to offer a jury a chance to execute a mass murderer is problematic if your goal is a total ending of the death penalty.  It shows an official policy that you support it at least in narrow cases.  But, there is a moratorium put in place.  This is not a meaningless gesture.  The lack of absolutism is noted.  For now, it is not clear what it will mean.  

For now, there will be appeals, and the final judgment in this case -- including President Biden needing to determine if it is appropriate to commute it to LWOP (which admittedly he can do now) -- will not be here for quite some time.