![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I am working on a possible series of posts about capital punishment. While reviewing posts I had already made on the subject, I found this post on Bell v. Thompson. The decision came down when I was on vacation, and I missed it.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the state. Which means a man who was schizophrenic at the time he committed the first crime, who had incompetent counsel, who an appeals court said should have a new trial, will be executed because the Circuit Court's decision that he should be given a new trial came too late and was technically insufficient.
This is not justice. This is barbarism.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the state. Which means a man who was schizophrenic at the time he committed the first crime, who had incompetent counsel, who an appeals court said should have a new trial, will be executed because the Circuit Court's decision that he should be given a new trial came too late and was technically insufficient.
This is not justice. This is barbarism.
Tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
[*] Sorry, "rules-lawyer" isn't the best phrase in context, but it's the only expression I know for the concept. I learnt it while roleplaying.