The case against Richard Glossip fell apart. Even the state’s Republican attorney general says he should not be executed. The Supreme Court may not care.

The Supreme Court announced on Monday that it will hear Glossip v. Oklahoma, a long-simmering death penalty case where the state’s Republican attorney general is urging the justices not to make his state kill a man after the prosecution’s case completely fell apart.

Last May, the Court temporarily blocked Richard Glossip’s execution, after Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond informed the Court that “the State of Oklahoma recently made the difficult decision to confess error and support vacating the conviction of Richard Glossip.”

Among other things, a committee of state lawmakers commissioned a law firm to investigate whether Glossip, who was convicted for allegedly hiring a coworker to kill his boss in 1997, received a fair trial. The firm released a 343-page report laying out many errors in the process that ended in Glossip being sentenced to die:

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Among other things, a committee of state lawmakers commissioned a law firm to investigate whether Glossip, who was convicted for allegedly hiring a coworker to kill his boss in 1997, received a fair trial.

    Instead, Glossip’s case primarily turns on a recently discovered piece of evidence which reveals that Sneed was treated for a serious mental illness that may have undermined his credibility as a witness.

    As Drummond recently told the Supreme Court, Sneed’s “serious psychiatric condition that combined with his known methamphetamine use would have had an impact on his credibility and memory recall in addition to causing him to become potentially violent or suffer from paranoia.”

    Given the comprehensive failures laid out in the two state-commissioned investigations into Glossip’s conviction, it’s a bit odd that the Supreme Court’s hearing is likely to focus on a single statement where Sneed briefly revealed that he’d been treated by a doctor whose name he didn’t even get right.

    Prosecutors in Jones’s case claimed that he fatally beat his girlfriend’s daughter, inflicting injuries that supposedly killed her 12 hours later.

    But medical examiners determined that the girl died from injuries that would have killed her much more slowly, and that they “could not possibly have been inflicted on the day prior to her death.”


    The original article contains 1,538 words, the summary contains 212 words. Saved 86%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!