Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ashling

(25,771 posts)
Sun Feb 2, 2014, 09:07 PM Feb 2014

Missouri Executes Man While His Appeal Was Still Pending Before Supreme Court

Herbert Smulls was in the middle of a phone call discussing his attorneys’ final efforts to save his life when he was reportedly seized by prison guards, hauled into an execution chamber, and injected with a toxic cocktail of drugs. At the time of his death, an appeal was pending before the United States Supreme Court asking the justices to halt his execution. Andrew Cohen lays out the timeline:

At 10:11, the final lethal injection protocols were initiated. By this time, the 8th Circuit had rejected all of the claims before it—over another pointed dissent from Judge Bye—leaving only an active appeal before the Supreme Court. At 10:20 Smulls was pronounced dead. Ten minutes later, at 10:30, the Supreme Court notified the lawyers that Smulls’ final stay request had been denied at 10:24. This means that Missouri began to execute a man 13 minutes before it was entirely sure it could do so. Smulls was pronounced dead four minutes before the Supreme Court finally authorized Missouri to kill him.

As Cohen notes, “[j]ust imagine what we’d be talking about today if the justices had granted Smulls’ stay request four minutes after he was pronounced dead.” At the very least, Smulls’ appeal held enough merit that a United States Court of Appeals judge would have granted the stay.

And yet, thanks to a 1983 Supreme Court ruling, Missouri’s actions were probably legal. The state points to Barefoot v. Estelle, which explained that “[s]tays of execution are not automatic pending the filing and consideration of a petition for a writ of certiorari from this Court to the court of appeals that has denied a writ of habeas corpus,” to justify its actions in the Smulls case.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/02/02/3237571/missouri-executes-man-appeal-pending-supreme-court/
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Missouri Executes Man While His Appeal Was Still Pending Before Supreme Court (Original Post) ashling Feb 2014 OP
jeebus.... spanone Feb 2014 #1
I'd call that murder, or at least wrongful death. kestrel91316 Feb 2014 #2
not unusual FBaggins Feb 2014 #3
This is why I could never support the death penalty. F4lconF16 Feb 2014 #4
Is the last line of the second paragraph true or false? Donald Ian Rankin Feb 2014 #5
False of course FBaggins Feb 2014 #6
 

kestrel91316

(51,666 posts)
2. I'd call that murder, or at least wrongful death.
Sun Feb 2, 2014, 11:14 PM
Feb 2014

Somebody needs to spend the rest of their own life in jail for that.

FBaggins

(26,749 posts)
3. not unusual
Mon Feb 3, 2014, 12:35 AM
Feb 2014

If any of the justices thought there was any chance of the appeal succeeding... they would have granted a temporary stay off execution.

F4lconF16

(3,747 posts)
4. This is why I could never support the death penalty.
Mon Feb 3, 2014, 04:50 AM
Feb 2014

While I do think there are people who don't deserve life after what they've done, and as much as I sometimes wish I believed in a hell so we can send them to it, we just can't know. We never can. The number of improperly tried cases, the number of screwups, the number of falsely imprisoned people, all of that speaks to why the death penalty needs to be abolished. I for one am surprised it hasn't happened already (though I guess I probably shouldn't be).

Donald Ian Rankin

(13,598 posts)
5. Is the last line of the second paragraph true or false?
Mon Feb 3, 2014, 04:57 AM
Feb 2014

"Smulls was pronounced dead four minutes before the Supreme Court finally authorized Missouri to kill him."

From the rest of the article, it sounds to me as though this is probably false, and what actually happened was that Smulls was pronounced dead four minutes before the Supreme Court passed up on an opportunity to revoke the valid authorisation to kill him that Missouri had at the time it did so.

There are a number of good reasons to oppose the death penalty, and to be alarmed about states trying to preempt the results of appeals, but I'm slightly suspicious of presenting this as unauthorised.

FBaggins

(26,749 posts)
6. False of course
Mon Feb 3, 2014, 08:14 AM
Feb 2014

The USSC does not "authorize" death sentences (which implies that nobody can be executed until they say so).

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Missouri Executes Man Whi...