South Carolina Executes Richard Moore

We earlier discussed how the South Carolina Supreme Court upheld its death penalty. 

Two justices argued the firing squad violated the state constitution and one justice added that so did the electric chair, which is the default if someone does not pick. The state then executed Freddie Owens.

Richard Moore was sentenced to death for the murder of a store clerk during a robbery.* His lawyers have alleged racial bias in the selection of the all-white jury who convicted him in 2001. 

The Supreme Court rejected a final appeal arising from these allegations without comment. This is typical. And, as usual, I think the end of a person's life warrants a brief statement. Well, at least, they got it out of the way the day before. 

Chris Geidner discussed the request, in part noting:

In Moore’s request, his lawyers noted that he is the only person remaining on the state’s death row sentenced to death by an all-white jury.

A delay of over twenty years also raises problems discussed by Justice Breyer in his dissent in Glossip v. Gross. COVID and lack of execution drugs helped to delay executions in South Carolina.  

A state judge rejected an attempt to have consideration of commutation done by someone other than the governor because of concerns of bias. Some states, including Texas, puts the responsibility in the hands of others. The president makes the decision themself.

Moore had a history of robbery but did not bring a gun to the store. He obtained it from the clerk. This is one of those cases where it is quite debatable if the person (assuming the penalty is just) is a member of the "worst of the worst" who deserves to be executed. 

Toss in due process concerns, this is an unjust execution, which is also likely unconstitutional.  

==

Alabama executed two people using nitrogen gas. 

There was clear evidence the first time was problematic. The second might have been relatively speaking a better attempt. Still was iffy.  

==

* This article provides some details of the crime including the absurd fact that the clerk had three guns. The defendant stole over $1400, which seems like a lot of money. It suggests premeditation though he was not armed when he went in. 

The article also notes -- this is common -- multiple jurors who sentenced him to death are now opposed to the execution. Jurors decide things based on the evidence available and for a limited purpose. They are not there to judge if now -- twenty years later -- things have changed and a commutation is warranted. 

Many probably figure their decision is not final. This has been flagged by some defense attorneys as worrisome since it provides jurors more incentive to sentence people to death. 

Juror statements might be helpful to determine if new information would have changed their mind. For instance, if new evidence is found that arguably should have been available and might have changed the final result.

OTOH, many people second-guess their decisions.