One More Execution

The twenty-fourth execution in 2023 was Phillip Dean Hancock. For now, he is the final person executed this year. Texas had eight, Florida had six, Missouri and Oklahoma had four, and Alabama had two. Many more murderers out there.

Hancock's execution is not a travesty. It is still a dubious use of governmental power. The Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board voted 3-2 to make the recommendation for life without parole. He claimed self-defense. The jury didn't believe him. Why the board voted the way they did was not clarified. The facts appear to warrant the decision.

Phillip Dean Hancock was sentenced to be executed by lethal injection for the fatal shooting of two men in Oklahoma City in 2001. Hancock had been involved in a fatal shooting before, in 1982. He claimed self-defense at a murder trial and was convicted of first-degree manslaughter.

A clinical psychologist who evaluated Hancock testified that he reacted as he did in 2001 because he was beaten as a boy, sexually assaulted at age 14, and gang raped in prison at age 19. His lawyers also argued evidence that could have helped to provide his defense was not provided. 

The prosecution grants he was threatened in some fashion. Nonetheless, they argue the danger was at best fleeting. There does seem to be some doubt on that question. As a CNN article reports:

Hancock’s attorneys and his advocates – including two GOP state legislators – have argued he killed Robert Jett and James Lynch in a clear-cut case of self-defense, alleging the two victims were known outlaws who attacked an unarmed Hancock and tried to force him into a cage at Jett’s home in Oklahoma City. In a physical altercation, Hancock managed to get control of Jett’s gun and then fatally shot the two men, according to Hancock’s clemency petition.

We are talking about someone who was convicted of killing three people. The general facts suggest a dangerous person who should be in prison. Nonetheless, this is not someone who murdered two simple innocents. This fact, along with his background (the usual horror show of people on death row) very well might have led to the 3-2 vote. The board is not known to be lenient. 

Around twenty years ago, he was prosecuted and put in prison. The jury found that was warranted. Okay. Twenty years in prison is a long time. If you want him to be in there longer (until he's 65?), that might be warranted. An execution is gratuitous. It is another arbitrary execution.  

He did not have any last-minute appeals to SCOTUS though I found one from years back. Earlier in the week, they rejected without comment a request involving a voting rights case. There are more arguments scheduled for next week.