Bloody Texas

While reviewing each of the 451 executions in Texas since 1976, I stumbled across some evidence I believe has substantial bearing on Hank Skinner’s case. It relates to the State’s position on the significance of a high blood alcohol level.

In the trial of Texas v. Granville Riddle, November 1989, the defense claimed self defense. Texas pointed out the victim had a blood alcohol level of 0.29 and was therefore incapable of mounting an attack. Granville Riddle was convicted and executed.

In the trial of Texas v. James Moreland, July 1983, the defense claimed self defense. Texas pointed out that one victim had a blood alcohol level of 0.24, the other had a blood alcohol level of 0.19, and that both must have been sleeping at the time they were killed. James Moreland was convicted and executed.

In the trial of Texas v. Hank Skinner, March 1995, the defense introduced evidence that Hank Skinner had a blood alcohol content of 0.24 plus a codeine level three times the normal medicinal value. They argued further that the alcohol and codeine were synergistic, their combined effect being worse than the sum of their individual effects. The defense then argued, just as Texas had three times earlier, that such a high blood alcohol content would render a person incapable of aggressive action.

Texas did not dispute the toxicology evidence. Instead they simply pooh-poohed it. Skinner was a heavy drinker they claimed (supposedly unlike the three people just mentioned with similar alcohol levels) and was therefore insensitive to alcohol. Hank Skinner was convicted and will soon be executed.

This seems to be just more evidence that Texas does not really care if Hank Skinner is factually innocent. They did a 180 on the significance of a 0.24 blood alcohol level, with nothing more than the flick of a wrist. Though they acknowledge that the hand print on the trash bag, the one holding the bloody knife and dish towel, was not left there by Skinner, they refuse to run that print through their fingerprint data base. It would take but a few minutes, but still they refuse.

They lied about and then ignored the post-conviction DNA test results they requested. They treat as insignificant the hair found clutched in Twila Busby’s dead hand, a hair they themselves claimed came from the killer, a hair now proven not to have come from Hank Skinner.

They hide the DNA results from the rape kit and broken fingernail clippings they sent out for testing.

They refuse to release the murder weapons for DNA testing, even though others have volunteered to cover the cost.

They refuse to release the foreign windbreaker for DNA testing, though it is a gold mine of hairs, blood, and sweat samples.

The State of Texas will probably execute Hank Skinner as scheduled, but Hank Skinner will not go away. He will join the growing list of people probably innocent but certainly executed by Texas. Texas and Governor Rick Perry will execute him despite the many cogent cautions they have been given. 

It will be a dark day indeed for Texas.

I do not think Hank Skinner's execution will prevent Rick Perry from being re-elected governor. I do predict, however, that it will thwart him during the next logical step of his political career.

In Search of the 54: Part II

It's been a few days since my claim that I was going to review all 450 Texas executions since 1976 in search of others who might have been factually innocent.  Plenty to report on that issue, and I'll do that before too long. Right now I would like to mention something I found in one particular case.

The case is Texas vs. Granville Riddle. Riddle was convicted of murdering Ronnie Bennett by bludgeoning him with a tire iron. During the trial, Riddle claimed that Bennett made homosexual advances towards him, so he hit Bennett in the knee with the tire iron to ward off the advances. Because Bennett persisted, Riddle hit him in the head with the tire iron, and thereby unintentionally killed him.

Because of details I haven't included here, I consider this case a slam dunk for Texas. On my 0  to 10 scale of being worthy for further review, I scored this one a zero. What I found worth mentioning here was the manner in which Texas refuted Riddle's claim that he acted in self-defense. The State of Texas pointed out that the victim had a blood alcohol level of 0.29, and argued that level would have rendered him unconscious.

Seems reasonable to me.

The Granville Riddle trial was in 1989. In 1995 the State of Texas argued that the 5'9" Hank Skinner was capable of killing Twila Busby and her two hulking sons despite having a blood alcohol level of 0.24. I realize that 0.24 is less than 0.29, but Hank's condition was further aggravated by a triple load of codeine. The state did not dispute the toxicology, they merely claimed that Hank was insensitive to alcohol.

Seems unreasonable.

If Ronnie Bennett had a blood alcohol level of 0.24 coupled with a triple codeine level, I have little doubt Texas would still have argued Bennett was unconscious and incapable of any aggressive action. And had Hank Skinner's blood alcohol level been 0.29 unaggravated by any codeine, I have little doubt they would still have argued he was unimpeded by alcohol as he killed the three people.

In Texas, the significance of any particular blood alcohol level is variable, depending on whether it helps or hinders obtaining a conviction in a capital murder case. 

ADDENDUM

I've run across a second case of interest: Texas v. James Moreland.  Moreland was convicted of stabbing two men to death, the first because of amorous advances which seemed to be leading homosexual rape, and the second  because the guy startled him. Texas rebutted Moreland's defense by pointing out that the first guy had a blood alcohol content of 0.19 and the second had a blood alcohol content of 0.24. The medical examiner testified that testing indicated both victims had stopped drinking and had probably fallen asleep from 1½ to 2½ hours before their deaths.

Now we have a case where we have one blood alcohol level equal to that of Hank Skinner, and a second less than that of Hank Skinner, and we have Texas arguing that this was sufficient to cause loss of consciousness.  Also, neither of these two men carried a triple load of codeine in their blood to boot.

Clearly if Hank Skinner had been murdered by (for example only) Robert Donnell, and Donnell had claimed self defense, Texas would have argued that Skinner could not possibly have attacked anyone, since his 0.24 blood alcohol level would have rendered him unconscious.

This is getting ridiculous. 

The series continues here.

In Search of the 54

I recently made the outrageous claim that Texas has executed 54 innocent people since 1976, give or take some statistical variation.  I calculated that number using ratios of people exonerated from death row to people executed. That ratio for Texas was a paltry 2.4% compared to 14.1% for the rest of the nation. Assuming Texas juries were no more wise or foolish than the rest of the county, that discrepancy suggests that Texas has executed 54 innocent people, give or take.

I've decided to find the 54.

That sentence was surprisingly easy to write. It's going to be hard as hell to accomplish. I start with an unfortunately large list of 450 people executed. If I were able to round up and evaluate the information on one person per day, it would take me a year and a half. But it will take many, many days per person.

I recognize also, that I will never be able to "prove" any of them to be innocent. I will have to establish some criteria by which I include or exclude people from the list. I will have to be satisfied to allow the list to grow slowly, since I begin with no time to spare for this massive effort. I'll probably have to recruit help. I'll have to be clever.

As I said, it won't be easy. Nonetheless, I've decided to find the 54. I'll keep you posted.

Part II is here.

Part III is here.

Former Texas DA Wants DNA Tested Before Execution

Sam Millsap once was the District Attorney for Bexar County, Texas. Bexar County, for reference, includes the city of San Antonio.  In the March 9, 2010 edition of the Houston Chronicle, Millsap makes his case that the DNA evidence in the Hank Skinner case should be tested prior to Skinner's execution.

We have been trying to make that case for quite a while now. Millsap's experience, however, gives him a unique perspective on the execution of persons possibly innocent. Consider this segment from the article.

Several years ago, this newspaper argued persuasively that Ruben Cantu, a defendant I prosecuted who was put to death in 1993, may well have been innocent. Twenty years after Cantu's trial, my star witness recanted his trial testimony. Many people consider his recantation credible because he had nothing to gain by reversing his position except a whole lot of trouble.

That case brought home to me, in a way that nothing else could have, that the system we trust to determine who may live and who must die simply doesn't work in all cases. Other investigative stories have revealed that Texans Carlos DeLuna, who was executed in 1989, and Cameron Todd Willingham, executed in 2004, were almost certainly innocent.

Now if we can get a few innocence projects to join the call, maybe many will follow. And maybe then Governor Perry will see the wisdom in testing the DNA before executing Hank Skinner.

Hank Skinner Will Be The 55th Innocent Person Executed by Texas

“They told me there would be no math.” -- Chevy Chase as President Gerald Ford on Saturday Night Live, 1975.

Texas is eager to execute, reluctant to exonerate. Since 1976, Texas has executed 450 people. That’s more than a third of all executions from all 50 states combined. On the other hand, Texas has exonerated only 11 people from death row. That means in 2 cases out of every 100, Texas spared a person rather than executing him, usually at the insistence of a state or federal court.

The other forty-nine states have been somewhat less eager to execute but substantially more willing to exonerate. Since 1976, the forty-nine other states have executed a total of 743 people while exonerating 122 from death row. That means in 14 cases out of every 100, the other forty-nine states have spared a person rather than executing him.

Before proceeding to the shocking implication of these numbers, I want to clarify what I mean by the term “exoneration.” Elsewhere, we at The Skeptical Juror Project declared Hank Skinner to be “factually exonerated.” We based our declaration in large measure on post-conviction DNA testing conducted by the State of Texas, and on the significance the State assigned to that testing prior to receiving the results. We used the term “factually exonerated” to indicate Hank Skinner was exonerated by probative facts, even though he has not been legally exonerated by the courts, even though Texas plans still to execute him.

For this analysis, on the other hand, I use the term “exoneration” without qualification. I use it instead as defined by The Death Penalty Information Center, from where I obtained the list of exonerees. To be included in their list, the defendant must have been convicted, sentenced to death and then subsequently acquitted at re-trial, or had all charges dropped, or had been granted an absolute pardon by the governor based on new evidence of innocence.

Hank Skinner would not be considered exonerated based on the definition used in this analysis. Also excluded by this definition would be any person who had his death sentence reduced to life in prison based on some failing of the State during the death penalty phase of the trial. One example from that category would be Cory Maye of Mississippi.

Put simply, the exonerees included in this analysis should never have been on death row in the first place, based on evidence learned only after the trial.

One final delay before the shocking implications. I want make clear two assumptions. First, I’m assuming the juries (in some cases the judges) in Texas are neither more foolish nor more wise than their counterparts in the other forty-nine states. This means I’m assuming the same percentage of factually innocent people have been sent to death row in Texas as in the other states.

My second assumption is that not every innocent person on death row is identified and exonerated. Some, pehaps many, are executed. If I’m correct in this assumption, the results which follow are less disturbing than they should be. If I'm wrong in this assumption, if every innocent person is identified and spared before execution, then that would be of great comfort. Unfortunately, as we shall see, I’m probably not wrong.

Okay. Everything is in place. Here we go.

If Texas juries are neither more wise nor more foolish than their counterparts in the other states, then Texas juries placed the same percentage of innocent people on death row as did the other states. We can estimate that number using the death row exonerations-to-executions ratio from the other forty-nine states. Recall that number was 14 exonerations for each 100 persons executed or exonerated.

Since Texas executed 450 people while freeing 11, we can calculate they should have exonerated 14% of the 461 individuals. That equals 65 and a fraction.

They should have exonerated 65 people, give or take some statistical variation. They exonerated 11.

The difference is 54 wrongfully executed people who should have been exonerated.

Hank Skinner will be 55.