Jamesian Philosophy Refreshed

This year is destined to seem a remarkable one for yet unborn historians of the struggle over capital punishment in these United States, if only because this was the year that Richard Glossip escaped execution. It was a near-run thing, but it now seems that not only will Glossip get a new trial, but that death will be "off the table" in the context of this new trial.   On February 25 of this year, SCOTUS held, in an opinion by Justice Sotomayor, that Glossip must get a new trial on the precedent of the same court's ruling in 1959, NAPUE v. ILLINOIS. NAPUE established that prosecutors violate the constitution when they knowingly obtain a conviction using false evidence, either by soliciting false testimony or by allowing false testimony to stand without correction.  When that happens, Sotomayor wrote, the defendant is entitled to a new trial if there is a reasonable chance that the false testimony could have affected the first jury's decision.    In this case, mu...

Not only is Richard Glossip still alive, but he will receive a new trial, a new opportunity to establish the reasonableness of doubt about his guilt.  A really ugly injustice has been done here already, by virtue of the very fact that such celebration is necessary.  But it is an ugliness that may avoid a final consummation now.  Glossip is alive because the US Supreme Court, more than a year ago now, agreed to hear his case. You can enter his name in the search engine to this blog if you want to find a fuller explanation. Or, go to other sources of news if you believe that there are other sources.   https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/02/supreme-court-grants-richard-glossip-new-trial-in-capital-case/     In January 1997 (yes, more than 28 years ago, and days before the second inaugural of President Clinton) and man called Barry Van Treese beat Justin Sneed to death with a baseball bat. In order to avoid the death penalty, Sneed testified that Glossip ...

To pick up on the thought with which I ended yesterday's entry: as I write these words, Richard Glossip is still alive. And that has to be considered good.  Glossip is alive because the US Supreme Court, in January of this year, agreed to hear his case. I mentioned that fact in this blog in February, but I'll say a bit more now.  In January 1997 (yes, more than a quarter of a century ago, and days before the second inaugural of President Clinton) and man called Barry Van Treese beat Justin Sneed to death with a baseball bat. In order to avoid the death penalty, Sneed testified that Glossip instructed him to do this.  Van Treese's sayso is virtually the whole of the prosecution case. Just about everybody who has looked into the matter believes that Van Treed was lying. Sneed's family members, and the Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma, are among the many who have drawn that conclusion. So ... why is Glossip still on death row?  The short answer is bureaucratic ...

  Richard Glossip still alive?  I heard about his case months ago, and only now decided to check up on him. The Glossip case is the one that led a state rep in Oklahoma, Kevin McDugle, to promise to "fight to end the death penalty if Glossip dies." Given how hard it has proven to be to achieve any other result, shouldn't McDugle reach that conclusion for himself anyway?  Does he need the sacrifice? Hmmm. Anyway, after some web searching, I have to say that appears he is still alive.  Either that or he died of natural causes on death row and the fact has been underreported.  On Jan. 22, the Supreme Court granted cert on Glossip's claims to actual innocence and whether "due process of law requires reversal ... where a capital conviction is so infected with errors that the State no longer seeks to defend it."    In terms of timing, my guess is that the Court hears arguments early next term, so that a decision won't come down until early 2025.   Glos...