DOCSLIB.ORG

The Transition of Execution Methods in North Carolina

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Transition of Execution Methods in North Carolina The Transition of Methods of Execution in North Carolina: A Descriptive Social History of Two Time Periods, 1935 & 1983 Katrina Nannette Seitz Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology Dr. Clifton Bryant, Chair Dr. Peggy de Wolf, Co-Chair Dr. Donald Shoemaker Dr. Kathleen Jones Dr. Danny Axsom April 18, 2001 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: Deviance, Executions, Capital Punishment, North Carolina Copyright 2001, Katrina N. Seitz The Transition of Methods of Execution in North Carolina: A Descriptive Social History of Two Time Periods, 1935 and 1983 Katrina N. Seitz (ABSTRACT) The death penalty has been an area of focus in several academic disciplines, yet modest literature has been generated which examines the sanction from a sociological perspective. Most of the sociological interest in capital punishment is directed at examining and explaining racial disparities in sentencing, its effectiveness as a deterrent to violent crime, or its use as a mode of formal social control. Although execution methods have changed frequently over time in the United States, there is a paucity of research examining this phenomenon through a sociological lens. The extant literature identifies changing societal ideologies regarding the use of institutionalized violence as the impeti for legislative shifts in methods of execution. While these studies are useful in partially explaining method changes through time, there is a dearth of work which specifically addresses the dialectical process by which meanings attached to methods of punishment are socially constructed and negotiated, what social agents are engaged, and how this process occurs with respect to historical context. This dissertation examines the legislative changes in execution methods at two points in time in North Carolina’s history, 1935 and 1983. Grounded in a hybrid theoretical foundation of functionalist and interactionist perspectives, this study is a qualitative analysis of historical primary and secondary data. One goal of this project is to identify how social context informed ideologies of state-sanctioned death. Furthermore, this study attempts to reveal some of the various social agents who engaged in the process of negotiating meaning, how this process manifested itself, and how historical context may have influenced differences in legislative motive during the two transition years. A comparative analysis of the data reveals that deference to the institutions of science, technology, and medicine was vital to the process of socially reconstructing and redefining methods of execution at both points in time. However, findings also indicate that public exposure to an existing method of execution as well as historically relative ideologies concerning state- sanctioned death greatly affect how the negotiation of meaning transpires. DEDICATION I would like to dedicate the successful completion of this life-changing endeavor to the following individuals: To my committee members, Dr. Clifton Bryant, Dr. Peggy de Wolf, Dr. Don Shoemaker, Dr Kathleen Jones, and Dr. Danny Axsom: Your time in challenging me to see the world in fresh, alternative ways has undoubtedly made me a better scholar, a more critical and creative writer, and a more complete person. Thank you immensely for allowing me the privilege to learn and grow under your supervision. I would also like to thank Dr. Carol Bailey, who has supported and mentored me from the beginning. To the office staff of the Department of Sociology: Your time and efforts in helping me to achieve this goal will never be forgotten. Thank you for making my last few weeks a little less chaotic. To Jane: You have been the epitome of a colleague, mentor, and friend. Thank you for your patience, words of wisdom, and occasional lessons in the fine art of winning an argument. To my closest friends, Jeanne & Ricky, Robin, Melanie, Robbi, Angela, Andrea, Edye, and Dr. Martha McCaughey: Thank you for supporting me, caring about me, and listening to me as I progressed through my academic career. I appreciate everything you’ve done, and I will never forget you. To L: You have forever changed my life, and I will always hold a special place in my heart for you. Thank you for supporting me, having faith in me, and loving me. Finally, to my wonderful Mom and Grandmother: Your unselfish sacrifice over the years has helped me achieve my goals, dreams, and ambitions. I couldn’t ask for more loving, special people to call my family, and I will always be indebted to you. I love you both. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank the following organizations and individuals who contributed their time, information, and efforts in assisting with this project: Organizations and Agencies The North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, Division of Archives and History The North Carolina Department of Correction, Raleigh, North Carolina The Center for Death Penalty Litigation, Inc., Durham, North Carolina The North Carolina Medical Society, Raleigh, North Carolina The North Carolina Museum of History The North Carolina Supreme Court Library Eaton Metal Products, Denver, Colorado The North Carolina State Construction Office The Death Penalty Information Center, Washington, D.C. Greensville Correctional Center, Jarrat, Virginia Individuals Jane Garvey: North Carolina Department of Correction Tracy Little: North Carolina Department of Correction Bill Brown, Ron Vestal, Earl James, Steve Case, and Sam Shine: North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, Division of Archives and History, Raleigh, North Carolina Leslie Kesler: The North Carolina Museum of History, Raleigh, North Carolina Dennis Mullins: Eaton Metal Products, Denver, Colorado Clyde Alderman and Staff: Greensville Correctional Center, Jarrat, Virginia Kim Porcaro: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Dr. Deborah Denno: Fordham University iv Imaginary time is indistinguishable from directions in space. If one can go north, one can turn around and head south; equally, if one can go forward in imaginary time, one ought to be able to turn around and go backward. This means that there can be no important difference between the forward and backward directions of imaginary time. On the other hand, when one looks at “real” time, there’s a very big difference between the forward and backward directions, as we all know. Where does this difference between the past and the future come from? Why do we remember the past but not the future? Stephen W. Hawking, A Brief History of Time The sociologist may be interested in many other things. But his consuming interest remains in the world of men, their institutions, their history, their passions…He will naturally be interested in the events that engage men’s ultimate beliefs, their moments of tragedy and grandeur and ecstasy. But he will also be fascinated by the commonplace, the everyday. He will know reverence, but this reverence will not prevent him from wanting see and to under- stand. He may sometimes feel revulsion or contempt. But this also will not deter him from wanting to have his questions answered. The sociologist, in his quest for understanding, moves through the world of men without respect for the usual lines of demarcation. Nobility and degradation, power and obscurity, intelligence and folly – these are equally interesting to him, however unequal they may be in his personal values or tastes. Thus his questions may lead him to all possible levels of society, the best and the least known places, the most respected and the most despised. And, if he is a good sociologist, he will find himself in all these places because his own questions have so taken possession of him that he has little choice but to seek for answers. Peter L. Berger, Invitation to Sociology v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT................................................................................................................. ii DEDICATION ............................................................................................................iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................ iv HAWKING AND BERGER........................................................................................ v CHAPTER I – INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 1 1.1 Statement of the Problem ....................................................................................... 2 CHAPTER II – PARADIGM AND THEORETICAL FOUNDATION ..................... 4 2.1 Epistemology and Ontology of the Study .............................................................. 4 2.2 Social Conflict and the Death Penalty.................................................................... 5 2.3 A Functionalist Approach to State-Sanctioned Death............................................ 7 2.4 Social Construction of Deviant Institutionalized Violence and Labeling............................................................................................................... 12 2.4.1 The Normative Definition of Deviance............................................................. 14 2.4.2 Strategies in Legitimizing Deviant Institutionalized Violence ......................... 19 2.4.3 Dramaturgics and Privatization......................................................................... 20 2.4.4 Dramatugics and the Reduction of Risk...........................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • LETHAL INJECTION: the Medical Technology of Execution
    LETHAL INJECTION: The medical technology of execution Introduction From hanging to electric chair to lethal injection: how much prettier can you make it? Yet the prettier it becomes, the uglier it is.1 In 1997, China became the first country outside the USA to carry out a judicial execution by lethal injection. Three other countriesGuatemala, Philippines and Taiwancurrently provide for execution by lethal injection but have not yet executed anyone by that method2. The introduction of lethal injection in the USA in 1977 provoked a debate in the medical profession and strong opposition to a medical role in such executions. To 30 September 1997, 268 individuals have been executed by lethal injection in the USA since the first such execution in December 1982 (see appendix 2). Reports of lethal injection executions in China, where the method was introduced in 1997, are sketchy but early indications are that there is a potential for massive use of this form of execution. In 1996, Amnesty International recorded more than 4,300 executions by shooting in China. At least 24 lethal injection executions were reported in the Chinese press in 1997 and this can be presumed to be a minimum (and growing) figure since executions are not automatically reported in the Chinese media. Lethal injection executions depend on medical drugs and procedures and the potential of this kind of execution to involve medical professionals in unethical behaviour, including direct involvement in killing, is clear. Because of this, there has been a long-standing campaign by some individual health professionals and some professional bodies to prohibit medical participation in lethal injection executions.
    [Show full text]
  • Administrative Segregation & Death Row Plan-1
    Texas Department of Criminal Justice ------------------- Brad Livingston Executive Director () ?1)13 August 14,2013 VIA REGULAR MAIL Todd Hettenbach I WilmerHale 1875 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20006 RE: Texas Civil Rights Project Dear Mr. Hettenback: In response to your open records request dated August 2, 2013 we have the "Death Row Plan (October 2004)" and "Administrative Segregation Plan (March 2012)", responsive to your request. If have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. rY· .. !f};;JJ= tattenburg, A ministrator · Plans and Operations Texas Department of Criminal Justice Con-ectional Institutions Division /klj P.O. Box99 Huntsville, Texas 77342-0099 www.tdcj.state.tx.us TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE Administrative Segregation Plan FOREWORD There are occasions within a conectional setting when it becomes necessary to administratively segregate offenders in order to preserve the safety and security of both offenders and staff. The Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) policy, Administrative Directive (AD)-03.50, "Administrative Segregation" directs the TDCJ to develop an Administrative Segregation Plan which establishes uniform mles and regulations to guide staff in both the conditions and procedures relating to offenders housed in administrative segregation. The TDCJ is fully committed to abide by and enforce the provisions outlined herein, and all employees are expected to comply with its requirements. ACA References: 4-4140,4-4235,4-4250,4-4251-1,4-4253,4-254,4-4257,4-4258,4-4260,4-4261,4- 4262, 4-4263, 4-4265, 4-4266, 4-4268, 4-4269, 4-4270, and 4-4273 Supersedes: Administrative Segregation Plan, August 2005 3-o6 ·!20/1.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Penalty Prison Cells
    Death Penalty Prison Cells Which Benton plagiarise so contrapuntally that Rodrique velarized her self-abandonment? Inflamed and razed finedHaven when heel brandersalmost unbrokenly, some sheets though very Gerritwilfully unbinding and motherly? his spoon incarnate. Is Aylmer always historical and The death row made for prison cells even understand that my mother Deposited by friendsfamily andor money earned by working until the prison. A superior Before Dying Solitary Confinement on these Row. Death row Definition of Death tax at Dictionarycom. Lifers would no longer sent a cell which take their space in and already crowded jail. Willie Francis Wikipedia. The strict penalty Emotion numbers and turnover law divide The. The Management of Death-Sentenced Inmates Missouri. Wyoming Frontier Prison Rawlins Picture include row a Check out Tripadvisor members' 113 candid photos and videos of Wyoming Frontier Prison. Walking death camp at San Quentin State Prison KALW. Death row prisoners live in the barren cells Open bars. Living conditions on death during World Coalition Against the. The 156 death row inmates in Pennsylvania state prisons go just sleep every bullet the same note they wake up in an by-12 local cell illuminated. The one woman under a death midwife is incarcerated at an Atlanta prison manual any loose-row cell i look through bars at any chain-link came about 12 feet. In GHANA prison Services officials reported that cold one coil in Ghana 104 death row prisoners were held provide a cell designed to defend only 24 prisoners9 2 Death. Be found few single cells at the Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore Escambia County.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Row U.S.A
    DEATH ROW U.S.A. Summer 2017 A quarterly report by the Criminal Justice Project of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Deborah Fins, Esq. Consultant to the Criminal Justice Project NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Death Row U.S.A. Summer 2017 (As of July 1, 2017) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 2,817 Race of Defendant: White 1,196 (42.46%) Black 1,168 (41.46%) Latino/Latina 373 (13.24%) Native American 26 (0.92%) Asian 53 (1.88%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.04%) Gender: Male 2,764 (98.12%) Female 53 (1.88%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CURRENT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 33 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming, U.S. Government, U.S. Military. JURISDICTIONS WITHOUT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 20 Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico [see note below], New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin. [NOTE: New Mexico repealed the death penalty prospectively. The men already sentenced remain under sentence of death.] Death Row U.S.A. Page 1 In the United States Supreme Court Update to Spring 2017 Issue of Significant Criminal, Habeas, & Other Pending Cases for Cases to Be Decided in October Term 2016 or 2017 1. CASES RAISING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS First Amendment Packingham v. North Carolina, No. 15-1194 (Use of websites by sex offender) (decision below 777 S.E.2d 738 (N.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Brigitte Bailer-Galanda “Revisionism”1 in Germany and Austria: the Evolution of a Doctrine
    www.doew.at Brigitte Bailer-Galanda “Revisionism”1 in Germany and Austria: The Evolution of a Doctrine Published in: Hermann Kurthen/Rainer Erb/Werner Bergmann (ed.), Anti-Sem- itism and Xenophobia in Germany after Unification, New York–Oxford 1997 Development of “revisionism” since 1945 Most people understand so called „revisionism“ as just another word for the movement of holocaust denial (Benz 1994; Lipstadt 1993; Shapiro 1990). Therefore it was suggested lately to use the word „negationism“ instead. How- ever in the author‘s point of view „revisionism“ covers some more topics than just the denying of the National Socialist mass murders. Especially in Germany and Austria there are some more points of National Socialist politics some people have tried to minimize or apologize since 1945, e. g. the responsibility for World War II, the attack on the Soviet Union in 1941 (quite a modern topic), (the discussion) about the number of the victims of the holocaust a. s. o.. In the seventies the late historian Martin Broszat already called that movement „run- ning amok against reality“ (Broszat 1976). These pseudo-historical writers, many of them just right wing extremist publishers or people who quite rapidly turned to right wing extremists, really try to prove that history has not taken place, just as if they were able to make events undone by denying them. A conception of “negationism” (Auerbach 1993a; Fromm and Kernbach 1994, p. 9; Landesamt für Verfassungsschutz 1994) or “holocaust denial” (Lipstadt 1993, p. 20) would neglect the additional components of “revision- ism”, which are logically connected with the denying of the holocaust, this being the extreme variant.
    [Show full text]
  • Das Internet Und Die Leugnung Des Holocaust
    Bei dieser Arbeit handelt es sich um eine Wissenschaftliche Hausarbeit, die an der Universität Kassel angefertigt wurde. Die hier veröffentlichte Version kann von der als Prüfungsleistung eingereichten Version geringfügig abweichen. Weitere Wissenschaftliche Hausarbeiten finden Sie hier: https://kobra.bibliothek.uni-kassel.de/handle/urn:nbn:de:hebis:34-2011040837235 Diese Arbeit wurde mit organisatorischer Unterstützung des Zentrums für Lehrerbildung der Universität Kassel veröffentlicht. Informationen zum ZLB finden Sie unter folgendem Link: www.uni-kassel.de/zlb Wissenschaftliche Hausarbeit im Rahmen der Ersten Staatsprüfung für das Lehramt an Gymnasien im Fach Geschichte Eingereicht dem Amt für Lehrerbildung Prüfungsstelle Kassel Thema: „Das Internet und die Leugnung des Holocaust. Neue Perspektiven in deutschsprachigen Veröffentlichungen“ Vorgelegt von: Dennis Beismann 2011 Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Friedhelm Boll Inhaltsverzeichnis 1 Einleitung............................................................................................................1 1.1 Stand der Forschung.....................................................................................3 1.1.1 Publikationen aus den Jahren 1970 bis 1993........................................3 1.1.2 Holocaustleugnende Publikationen im Internet....................................4 1.2 Anlage der Studie.........................................................................................7 1.2.1 Fragestellung.........................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Holocaust-Denial Literature: a Fourth Bibliography
    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works Publications and Research York College 2000 Holocaust-Denial Literature: A Fourth Bibliography John A. Drobnicki CUNY York College How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/yc_pubs/25 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] Holocaust-Denial Literature: A Fourth Bibliography John A. Drobnicki This bibliography is a supplement to three earlier ones published in the March 1994, Decem- ber 1996, and September 1998 issues of the Bulletin of Bibliography. During the intervening time. Holocaust revisionism has continued to be discussed both in the scholarly literature and in the mainstream press, especially owing to the libel lawsuit filed by David Irving against Deb- orah Lipstadt and Penguin Books. The Holocaust deniers, who prefer to call themselves “revi- sionists” in an attempt to gain scholarly legitimacy, have refused to go away and remain as vocal as ever— Bradley R. Smith has continued to send revisionist advertisements to college newspapers (including free issues of his new publication. The Revisionist), generating public- ity for his cause. Holocaust-denial, which will be used interchangeably with Holocaust revisionism in this bib- liography, is a body of literature that seeks to “prove” that the Jewish Holocaust did not hap- pen. Although individual revisionists may have different motives and beliefs, they all share at least one point: that there was no systematic attempt by Nazi Germany to exterminate Euro- pean Jewry.
    [Show full text]
  • Violent Offender Incarceration and Truth-In-Sentencing Incentive Formula Grant Program
    U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Assistance REPORT TO CONGRESS Violent Offender Incarceration and Truth-In-Sentencing Incentive Formula Grant Program February 2012 Submitted by: Table of Contents Introduction 1 Funding History 1 Eligibility Requirements 2 Appendixes A. Fiscal Years 1996–2001 VOI/TIS Funding 4 B. VOI/TIS Program Activities by State 6 Introduction Title II, Subtitle A of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (“Crime Act”) (Pub. L. 103-322), established the Violent Offender Incarceration and Truth-in-Sentencing (VOI/TIS) Incentive Grant Program. The program assisted states in their efforts to remove violent offenders from the community and encouraged states to implement TIS laws. Originally administered by the Office of Justice Programs’ (OJP) Corrections Program Office (CPO), the program was transferred to OJP’s Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) in November 2002 after an OJP-wide reorganization merged CPO with BJA. The VOI/TIS Program provided formula grants to states to build or expand correctional facilities and jails to increase secure confinement space for violent offenders. From fiscal years (FYs) 1996 to 2001, half of the funds were made available for VOI grants and half were available as incentive awards to states that implemented TIS laws. VOI/TIS grant funds allowed states to build or expand correctional facilities to increase bed capacity for the confinement of persons convicted of Part 1 violent crimes or adjudicated delinquents who had committed equivalent acts. Funds were also used to build or expand temporary or permanent correctional facilities, including facilities on military bases, prison barges, and boot camps; to confine convicted nonviolent offenders and criminal aliens; or to free suitable existing prison space for the confinement of persons convicted of Part 1 violent crimes.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Maryland's Capital Punishment Procedure Constitutes Cruel and Unusual Punishment Matthew E
    University of Baltimore Law Review Volume 37 Article 6 Issue 1 Fall 2007 2007 Comments: The rC ime, the Case, the Killer Cocktail: Why Maryland's Capital Punishment Procedure Constitutes Cruel and Unusual Punishment Matthew E. Feinberg University of Baltimore School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/ublr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Feinberg, Matthew E. (2007) "Comments: The rC ime, the Case, the Killer Cocktail: Why Maryland's Capital Punishment Procedure Constitutes Cruel and Unusual Punishment," University of Baltimore Law Review: Vol. 37: Iss. 1, Article 6. Available at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/ublr/vol37/iss1/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Baltimore Law Review by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE CRIME, THE CASE, THE KILLER COCKTAIL: WHY MARYLAND'S CAPITAL PUNISHMENT PROCEDURE CONSTITUTES CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT I. INTRODUCTION "[D]eath is different ...." I It is this principle that establishes the death penalty as one of the most controversial topics in legal history, even when implemented only for the most heinous criminal acts. 2 In fact, "[n]o aspect of modern penal law is subjected to more efforts to influence public attitudes or to more intense litigation than the death penalty.,,3 Over its long history, capital punishment has changed in many ways as a result of this litigation and continues to spark controversy at the very mention of its existence.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil Rights in the Execution Chamber: Why Death Row Inmates' Section 1983 Claims Demand Reassessment of Legitimate Penological Objectives
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by ValpoScholar Valparaiso University Law Review Volume 42 Number 3 Spring 2008 pp.955-1016 Spring 2008 Civil Rights in the Execution Chamber: Why Death Row Inmates' Section 1983 Claims Demand Reassessment of Legitimate Penological Objectives Daniel R. Oldenkamp Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Daniel R. Oldenkamp, Civil Rights in the Execution Chamber: Why Death Row Inmates' Section 1983 Claims Demand Reassessment of Legitimate Penological Objectives, 42 Val. U. L. Rev. 955 (2008). Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr/vol42/iss3/6 This Notes is brought to you for free and open access by the Valparaiso University Law School at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Valparaiso University Law Review by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. Oldenkamp: Civil Rights in the Execution Chamber: Why Death Row Inmates' Sec CIVIL RIGHTS IN THE EXECUTION CHAMBER: WHY DEATH ROW INMATES’ SECTION 1983 CLAIMS DEMAND REASSESSMENT OF LEGITIMATE PENOLOGICAL OBJECTIVES The worst sin towards our fellow creatures is not to hate them, but to be indifferent to them: that’s the essence of inhumanity.1 I. INTRODUCTION Lawful capital punishment must be neither reckless nor ignorant in its means or ends.2 Historically, excessiveness in capital killings was the norm.3 In modern times, by contrast, the death penalty (or aspects 1 George Bernard Shaw, THE DEVIL’S DISCIPLE, act 2 (1901), reprinted in THE OXFORD DICTIONARY OF QUOTATIONS, 706 (Elizabeth Knowles ed., 5th ed.
    [Show full text]
  • THE OVERVIEW; Divisive Case of a Killer of Two Ends As Texas
    EXECUTION IN TEXAS: THE OVERVIEW; Divisive Case of a Killer of Two Ends as... Page 1 of 5 EXECUTION IN TEXAS: THE OVERVIEW EXECUTION IN TEXAS: THE OVERVIEW;Divisive Case of a Killerof Two Ends as TexasExecutes Tucker By Sam Howe Verhovek Feb.4, 1998 See the article in its original context from February 4, 1998, Section A, Page 1 Buy Reprints VIEW ON TIMESMACHl�E TimesMachine is an exclusive benefit for home deliveryand digital subscribers. Saying "I love all of you very much" and smiling as lethal chemicals were pumped into her body, Karla Faye Tucker was executed tonight in Texas, becoming the first woman put to death by the state since the Civil War. The execution ended a case that attracted an extraordinary amount of attention around the world and led to fierce debate about redemption on death row. The prospect of executing a woman clearly exposed a societal raw nerve, but it also prompted many death-penalty supporters to insist that Ms. Tucker had gained undeserved sympathy because of her sex and her doe-eyed good looks. Ms. Tucker, 38, who murdered two people with a pickax in Houston 15 years ago, came to be known recently, through relentless media coverage of her death row interviews, as a soft-spoken, gentle-looking, born-again Christian pleading for mercy. But her final appeals to the Supreme Court and to Gov. George W. Bush for a reprieve were denied today. She became the second woman executed in the United States since the Supreme Court allowed the death penalty to resume, in 1976.
    [Show full text]
  • Petitioner, V
    No. 17-___ IN THE Supreme Court of the United States ———— WILLIAM HAROLD KELLEY, Petitioner, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. ———— On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Florida Supreme Court ———— PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI ———— LAURENCE H. TRIBE SYLVIA H. WALBOLT Of Counsel Counsel of Record CARL M. LOEB UNIVERSITY CHRIS S. COUTROULIS PROFESSOR AND PROFESSOR E. KELLY BITTICK, JR. OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW JOSEPH H. LANG, JR. HARVARD LAW SCHOOL* CARLTON FIELDS Hauser 420 JORDEN BURT, P.A. 1575 Massachusetts Avenue Corporate Center Three at Cambridge, MA 02138 International Plaza (617) 495-1767 4221 W. Boy Scout Blvd. Tampa, FL 33607 * University affiliation (813) 223-7000 noted for identification [email protected] purposes only Counsel for Petitioner May 25, 2018 WILSON-EPES PRINTING CO., INC. – (202) 789-0096 – WASHINGTON, D. C. 20002 CAPITAL CASE QUESTION PRESENTED In Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016) (“Hurst I”), this Court held that Florida’s capital sentencing scheme violated the Sixth Amendment because a jury did not make the findings necessary for a death sentence. In Hurst v. State, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016) (“Hurst II”), the Florida Supreme Court further held that under the Eighth Amendment the jury’s findings must be unanimous. Although the Florida Supreme Court held that the Hurst decisions applied retroactively, it created over sharp dissents a novel and unprecedented rule of partial retroactivity, limiting their application only to inmates whose death sentences became final after Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002). Ring, however, addressed Arizona’s capital sentencing scheme and was grounded solely on the Sixth Amendment, not the Eighth Amendment.
    [Show full text]