Today, the United States Supreme Court denied the application for stay of execution of death of Richard Glossip, 52, who was convicted twice of orchestrating the death of his boss, Richard Van Treese, and carried out by the informant, Justin Sneed, in a brutal bloodbath with a baseball bat. http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-84552123/http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/093015zr_886a.pdf
The juries in two trials were denied to consider in evidence the confessional videotape of the killer, Sneed, a motel handyman, after goading by the detective that Glossip paid him to kill his employer, Van Treese, who owned the Oklahoma City Best Budget Inn in 1997. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/09/28/oklahoma-court-denies-richard-glossips-request-for-a-stay-of-execution/
…show more content…
International attention and the moral condemnation of the Catholic Church has been given over an eighteen period of the State-funded execution of Richard Glossip who is set to die today. (http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/lethal-injection/will-richard-glossip-avoid-oklahoma-death-chamber-today-n436166) Sneed testified against Glossip, and he was sentenced to life in prison without parole while Glossip received a death sentence. Glossip, 52, was convicted of murder and sentenced to death two separate times. He was first sentenced in 1998, but that sentence was overturned due to what a state court deemed ineffective legal counsel, and he was sentenced again in 2004. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-upholds-lethal-injection-procedure/2015/06/29/2b5cee6e-1b3c-11e5-93b7-5eddc056ad8a_story.html Sneed, apparently acting alone, admitted batting Van Treese to death and had a hard time killing him when the victim left him with a black eye. The killer was given a deal to accept life without parole, while Glossip claims he was offered the same deal but refused because he was innocent. APPARENTLY? CAN'T SAY THAT, BUT THIS IS ALL ACCORDING TO THE NEW WITNESS __ NAME? (http://www.reddirtreport.com/red-dirt-news/glossip-case-confessed-killers-cellmate-claims-sneed-acted-alone-never-mentioned) The OCCA points to the cash in hand of Glossip at the time he was arrested and helping Sneed clean up the crime scene. In an odd state of sin, the corrupt forensic examiner, Joyce Gilchrist and the former Oklahoma County death penalty maven, Bob Macy, were strangely involved in this case. WHY STRANGELY? WASN'T SHE INVOLVED IN OKC FORENSICS (ALL) AT THE TIME. (http://newsok.com/article/5443656? The U.S. Supreme Court weighed on the zinging issue of the lethal drug issue involving three death drugs, including the sedative midazolam, and upheld lethal injection. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-upholds-lethal-injection-procedure/2015/06/29/2b5cee6e-1b3c-11e5-93b7-5eddc056ad8a_story.html In Scalia’s scathing language toward the dissenting opinion of Justice Steven Breyer, “By arrogating to himself the power to overturn that decision, Justice Breyer does not just reject the death penalty, he rejects the Enlightenment.” Although Scalia has vocally expressed that he “wouldn’t be surprised” that the the death penalty was ended. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-scalia-death-penalty-pope-francis-xi-jinpeng-trump-boehner-20150925-story.html (http://anewdomain.net/2015/09/29/time-runs-richard-glossip-big-questions-loom/ and http://anewdomain.net/2015/09/24/richard-glossip-gestapo-tactics-witness-tampering-legal-analysis/ The End of the Death Penalty “Petitioners contend that Oklahoma’s current protocol is a barbarous method of punishment — the chemical equivalent of being burned alive,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote, in her dissent, “But under the court’s new rule, it would not matter whether the state intended to use midazolam, or instead to have petitioners drawn and quartered, slowly tortured to death, or actually burned at the stake.” Far from the High Court and in the cell block, "It's like you're in a tomb," Richard Glossip reported about the losing-side of agony of H-block “so they can finish it off” to send him to the grave which recalls the state statute of the “Forgotten Man” in the majority opinion of Judge Gary Lumpkin of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals (“OCCA”).
http://kfor.com/2015/07/09/i-want-people-to-know-i-didnt-kill-this-man-death-row-inmate-still-claims-innocence/ Glossip maintains his innocence that “I want people to know I didn’t kill this man.”
The OCCA declined to address the U.S. Constitution and instead elaborated on the state statutes that doesn’t permit the lapse of an 18-year death row inmate or allow additional time for stay of execution to consider the facts of the case or procedural error. http://www.scribd.com/doc/283014508/Order-Denying-Richard-Glossip-s-Rescheduling-Of-Execution-Date-Sept-28-2015
The majority opinion addresses the timing of the execution pursuant to 22 O.S. 2011 Section 1001.1 (E), (F) will take happen thirty (30) days after the stay is entered. The OCCA states that no witnesses refuted the State’s case - although the snitch didn’t testify at the second trial, the forensic evidence was discredited in multiple murder cases, and the chief prosecutor was a
…show more content…
fraud. Strangely, the dissenting opinion refers to the “Forgotten Man” Act codified at 57 O.S.2013 332.7 as “set by operation of law” the execution of date.
One of the dissenting opinions refers suspiciously to the State prosecutor and medical expert which is important to this case.
"Death and Execution"
Joyce Gilchrist, whose “flawed casework analysis” and “laboratory mismanagement” in this case (http://newsok.com/article/5443656), served the State as a forensic chemist who worked thousands of cases for the Oklahoma City police department and falsified evidence which brought 23 defendants sentenced to death. Gilchrist was dismissed and claimed that she was discharged for reporting sexual misconduct. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joyce_Gilchrist) She died on June 14, 2015.
Macy and Gilchrist carried out the trials and appeals, including the Glossip case - grandstanding personal confidence in State’s witnesses, withholding evidence, subporning jury, and inflaming jury’s prejudices. Gilchrist was noted as the “Black Wizard” and Macy was repeatedly known for his prosecutorial misconduct. http://truthinjustice.org/gilchrist/macy-gilchrist.htm
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/death-and-justice-mark-fuhrman/1101229633 CAN YOU ANSWER THESE QUICKLY, JIM?
The details disclosed that the prosecution highlighted the names of the potential black judges and tinted every black potential juror’s name in a different color. There were four different duplicates of the record of all of the individuals summoned for the task in the case. Evert record had a key, which indicated that the highlighted names represented the blacks. Besides, there were no any blotches made for the white jurors on the lists. There were also many marks made on the black people’s names on the juror questionnaires, and there was no any other race that was
This is a good case to show how it isn’t always the poor, black, or Hispanic groups getting tried for something they haven’t done. It shows that a white doctor could get his life destroyed by an unfair Judge and prosecutors.
a. Victor Burnette lived in Richmond, Virginia in 1979. He cared for his blind and arthritic grandmother at night and was getting ready to get his career started. However this all change on the 5th of August that year, when a local woman identified him as the man who raped her. When DNA testing was done in 2009 it confirmed that he was not the attacker. It had taken 20 years for Burnette to clear his name. [Exoneration Case Detail. 2014]
Your honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, thank you for your attention today. [Slide #2] I would like to assert that separation is not the end of a relationship. Divorce is not the end of a relationship. Even an arrest is not the end of a relationship. Only death is the end of a relationship. In the case of defendant Donna Osborn, her insistence that ‘“one way or another I’ll be free,”’ as told in the testimony of her friend Jack Mathews and repeated in many others’, indicates that despite the lack of planning, the defendant had the full intent to kill her husband, Clinton Osborn.
2 (A). After spending three decades behind bars, DNA evidence proved Cornelius Dupree’s innocence. Dupree was arrested and eventually wrongfully convicted for the robbery of a woman and a man. He was indicted on both the robbery and rape of the woman, but since prosecuting him for the rape would not extend his 75 year sentenced handed down for the robbery, the rape charges were dismissed. DNA testing was not available at the time to exonerate him for the crimes. Even though he was not convicted for the rape, the evidence clearing him of rape, stood for the robbery too, as they were both connected.
...cision-making process, McCleskey has clearly been wrongfully punished for his crime. The death sentence imposed on him was decided in a racially bias manner that targeted him for his black background. The fact that his victim was White and not Black increased the likelihood of his receiving the death sentence. The prosecution itself, with no guidelines to follow during the sentencing procedure, unfairly inflicted the penalty upon McCleskey. By meeting all three prongs of this standard, he has proven that he was deprived of the equal protection of the laws as clearly stated in the 14th Amendment. For this reason, the decision in McCleskey v. Kemp should be overturned, and racial disparities should definitely be considered relevant when determining a fair and substantively just outcome for future cases.
...lice or lawyers used their integrity. The police skirted around the law and use evidence that the witnesses said was not correct. They had a description of the suspect that did not match Bloodsworth but, they went after him as well. They also used eyewitness testimony that could have been contaminated.
Clarence Earl Gideon was arrested in 1961 and charged with breaking and entering a pool hall with intent to commit theft, by taking money out of vending machines. What he did at the time was considered a felony. When it came time to have the trial he did not have enough money for a lawyer and asked that one be appointed to defend him. The judge denied the request saying that under Florida state law counsel can be appointed only in a capital offense. Since Gideon didn’t have a lawyer and was not educated to defend himself he lost easily to the prosecution.
The court system includes the judges, jury, prosecutors and defense attorneys. The Attorneys convince the suspects to take plea bargains, the judges are sometimes unfair in the decisions they make, and the prosecutors overlook exculpatory evidence. Picking cotton shows in detail some common errors of the court system. During Ronald Cotton 's first trial, His Attorney, Phil Moseley, tried to bring a memory expert to testify on the unreliability of memory but the judge denied his request. After Ronald 's case was overturned by the supreme court, he got a new trial in another court which had even more problems and bias. First, there was racial prejudice during the jury selection. “Four black people from the community got called in for jury duty. The judge himself dismissed one of them and then Mr turner made sure none of the rest sat on my jury” Ronald cotton stated. Because he was black, the four jurors were dismissed and he was left with an all white jury and two white Alternates. Second, the judge “Held something called a “voir dire” hearing, which Phil explained meant he would have to put up all the evidence about Poole in front of the Judge, but not the Jury”(129). Also, Ronald Cotton 's defense attorney explained to the judge the parallelism between Bobby Poole 's case and the rape Ronald Cotton was charged with. Despite the weak physical evidence against Ronald Cotton, the
Capital punishment and bias in sentencing is among many issue minorities faced for many years in the better part of the nineteen hundreds. Now it continues to spill into the twenty first century due to the erroneous issues our criminal justice system has caused many people to suffer. In the book Just Mercy authored by Bryan Stevenson, Stevenson explains many cases of injustice. Stevenson goes into details of numerous cases of wrongfully accused people, thirteen and fourteen year olds being sentenced to death and sentences of life without parole for children. These issues Stevenson raises bring to question whether the death penalty is as viable as it should be. It brings to light the many issues our criminal justice system has today. There
Defendant Freddie Lee Hall filed a motion to declare Florida Statute 921.137 (Florida Statute) as contrary to Atkins v. Virginia (2002) and, thus, unconstitutional. Hall, convicted in 1981 for the murder of Karol Hurst, was initially sentenced to death in September 1982. For three years, he fought his sentence, filing “a motion to vacate, a petition for writ of habeas corpus and an application for a stay of execution, all of which were denied” . In 1986, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals heard his appeal and reversed part of the lower court’s ruling, a decision granted when the court found Hall “entitled to a hearing on the issues of his absence from the courtroom and whether he deliberately bypassed his ineffective assistance of counsel claim” .
They had an alibi witness, a gas receipt, a ticket on the day of the murder. A police officer who would not come unless the judge subpoena him and the judge of course refused and would not pay the $650 to summon him. There were also two jailhouse snitches who lied about their testimony. The police misconduct was used in how they charged these individuals originally and how they have been accused initially with robbery, which later turned into murder. The police created the story and intimidated an eye witness who refused to testify and threatened to charge her with the murder if she refused. The attorneys told a moving tale and Ron Keine and company ended up being convicted. This case was before DNA testing but what exonerated these individuals was the actual murder confessing to the crimes. The entire case seemed like a fluke and malicious attack on these people. A guy in Carolina, confessed to all charges and had an epiphany and told the police where the weapon was located and how everything happened and how he dragged the body. He had to fight to get the police to accept his confession because the police were acting as if they already had their
It took 70 years after his execution to exonerate him”, Lindsey Bever, states, “He was questioned in a small room, alone – without his parents, without an attorney” (Bever). It happens to be that George fell under the category of a minor, therefore it was illegal and immoral for deputies to interrogate him without proper legal representation or a legal guardian. This indicated that his “confession” might have been coerced or intimidated out of him. According to Terrell Jermaine Starr, author of “Executed at 14: George Stinney’s Birthday Reminds Us That the Death Penalty Must End”, adds that, there was no record of George actually confessing to the crime, no physical evidence whatsoever even exists (Starr). Starr also confirms that the deputies reportedly offered young George ice cream in order to further manipulate him into confessing (Starr). Whether Stinney actually confessed or was forced to confess; the confession could not have been used in court due to the false pretenses it was obtained
Steve Harmon is guilty of felony murder because he participated and had knowledge about a crime that ended up in the death of an innocent citizen. The judge stated the if you believe that Steve harmon took part in the crime than you must return a verdict of guilty. I believe that Steve went into the drugstore on that day for the purpose of being a lookout. Some of Steve’s journal entry’s lead to him feeling guilty or like a “monster”.
During those years, the Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment violated the Eight Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, this ended in 1976, when the Supreme Court reversed the ruling. They stated that the punishment of sentencing one to death does not perpetually infringe the Constitution. Richard Nixon said, “Contrary to the views of some social theorists, I am convinced that the death penalty can be an effective deterrent against specific crimes. ”1 Whether the case be morally, monetarily, or just pure disagreement, citizens have argued the benefits of capital punishment.