On
Thursday August 24, 2017 the State of Florida executed Mark Asay - who
we all knew as "Catfish", even though there was absolutely no question
that he was illegally sentenced to death and in an unprecedented act,
only days before he was put to death the Florida Supreme Court
recognized that the factual basis for the theory upon which he was
prosecuted was wrong.
Specifically,
Asay was prosecuted on the theory that he had killed two blacks for no
other reason than that they were black. The media repeatedly
characterized him as a "white supremacist" and the state bragged to the
media that Asay would be the first white person ever executed in the
state of Florida for killing a black person. But the problem is, Asay
didn't kill any black person. As the Florida Supreme Court recognized
only days before Asay was executed, the one victim ( Robert McDowell) was not
black (contrary to what prosecutors told the jury!), but was white, or
maybe mixed white/Hispanic - but not black.
As
for the second victim, Asay has always said that he did not kill Robert
Booker - but nobody would listen. For 30 years the prosecutor never
disclosed evidence that indicated that, according to three witnesses, Roland Pough actually killed Booker. This undisclosed evidence also
revealed that shortly after these witnesses identified Roland Pough as
the person who actually killed Booker, the Jacksonville police shot and
killed Pough in what their own interdepartmental investigation showed
was an "unjustified" shooting - the cop claimed that his gun accidentally
misfired, killing Pough. That was awfully convenient - Asay's jury
never knew about that.
Last
year when I was on death watch counting down the days to my own
scheduled execution, Mark Asay was also down there with me. I've
personally known 'Catfish" for about 30 years and he's never once
wavered in admitting that he shot the transvestite prostitute McDowell
that night when he "spontaneously" stripped while drunk - but that he
did not kill Booker. And that while he was previously associated with a
"white supremacy" group in a Texas prison, he got away from that and
race had nothing to do with what happened that night - he was drunk.
One
consolation is that I also knew that "Catfish" found comfort in his own
strong religious beliefs as a "born again" Christian. As with so many
victims of injustice he had long ago abandoned any faith in the
politically corrupt "justice" system, and accepted that truth means
nothing to the courts when it comes to carrying out the death penalty -
and prosecutors will never admit they were wrong.
The
question now becomes who will be the next? To be honest, I expected
them to immediately reschedule my own execution the next day after they
killed Catfish and I am now the only other person (in Florida) under an
active death warrant and previously granted stay of execution lifted. In
the past Governor Scott has consistently signed a new death warrant (or
re-cheduled one previously signed) the morning after an execution was
carried out, and then scheduled each execution precisely 5 weeks apart.
This is why he has put more people to death than any other governor in
Florida history - and he still has over a year left in office.
For
that reason, the morning after they killed Catfish I was expecting them
to come get me and take me back down to death watch. But they didn't
come. And so I went through a long weekend of uncertainty, assuming
that they'd come early Monday morning instead. But again, they didn't
come. And nobody else was scheduled either. Governor Scott had broken
his pattern - but why? Could it be that now that Scott is running for a
seat on the United states senate (elections are in early November 2018)
he's starting to see the death penalty as a political liability?
The
reality of it is that public support for the death penalty has been
consistently dropping and is now at almost historic lows, barely over
fifty percent - and that support drops even lower if people are given a
choice of mandatory life sentences instead of death.
Equally
so, Governor Scott knows that while his won political base - rural deep
south Rabid Redneck Republicans - ("R.R.R.") fanatically support the
death penalty - but he cannot win that seat on the US Senate he wants
with only their support as he's running against a very popular
Democratic incumbent, Senator Bill Nelson. That means that Scott will
need support beyond his typical R.R.R. base.
That
also means that any controversy surrounding even one execution could
easily cost him any chance of winning next years Senate election and as
we all know only too well, when it comes down to it, the administration
of the death penalty is not about justice, but the politics of a
vengeance driven system.
It
was for that reason that up until recently Governor Scott was all but
pathologically methodical in selecting whose death warrants he would
sign - he deliberately focused on so called "serial killers" and the
child killers and those who killed law enforcement. each death warrant
he signed was a strategic play to win votes.
But
there were only so many of those high profile killers eligible for a
death warrant and it didn't take long before he ran out of those and
found himself in a real political dilemma - his support base wanted more
executions but there were not many left on Florida's death row legally
eligible to be executed as they still has appeals pending and had not
yet had their obligatory "clemency review", required before a death
warrant can be signed.
As
it stands at the time I am writing this (August 31) no new death
warrant has been signed. Governor Scott could sign a new warrant
tomorrow - it could be me, or someone else.
It
used to be that as long as you had legitimate appeals still pending they
would not sign a death warrant. But as evidenced by Mark Asay's case,
under Governor Scott the signing of death warrants are now being used to
stack the deck in favor of the state, as they know that by signing a
warrant the courts will be far less likely to grant relief.
I
currently have four (4) appeals pending in various courts, with two
petitions in front of the United States Supreme Court specifically
arguing my actual innocence and a new state appeal arguing that because
Florida law now mandates an unanimous jury vote to condemn anyone to
death, my non-unanimous jury vote renders my death sentence illegal.
In
the fourth and most recently filed Petition for Writ of Habeas corpus,
my lawyers lay out how the readily available evidence, including DNA
evidence, substantiates my consistently plead claim of innocence and that
I'm constitutionally entitled to a full review of this evidence before
the State of Florida puts me to death.
You
can read this "actual Innocence" appeal HERE, or go to the Florida
Supreme Court website and pull up Lambrix v Jones, case No SC17-5153.
But would innocence be enough to avoid execution?
No comments:
Post a Comment