The Impending Execution of Shannon Johnson

Shannon Johnson sits on death row awaiting execution by the people of Delaware. His execution is scheduled for 20 April. Though Johnson wants the execution to proceed without delay, his sister is attempting to secure a stay. I suspect Johnson will not survive the day.

I offer a summary of the crime from the relatively recent sentencing decision in State v. Johnson (2008).

The Defendant Shannon Johnson was convicted by a jury of Murder in the First Degree for the killing of Cameron Hamlin, as well as of Possession of a Firearm During the Commission of a Felony (3 counts), Possession of a Deadly Weapon by a Person Prohibited (2 counts), Reckless Endangering in the First Degree, and Assault in the First Degree (both involving Lakeisha Truitt). ... 

The Defendant, Shannon Johnson, had a relationship with Lakeisha Truitt, from which was born a son. Ms. Truitt attempted to end the relationship on multiple occasions, because the Defendant was violent and unfaithful, and testified that she had not had a steady relationship with the Defendant for several years preceding the events that give rise to the charges in this matter. She did, however, continue to see the Defendant on some basis, including, but not limited to, effecting visitation with his son. 

From all appearances, Ms. Truitt had tried to move on with her life. She was a single mom, was employed, had purchased a home, and just prior to the initial incident in this case, began seeing another young man, Cameron Hamlin. By all accounts, Mr. Hamlin was a solid and sober individual, who had an interest in music, and was caring and thoughtful of his family. On September 24, 2006, Mr. Hamlin spent the night at Ms. Truitt's home, and in the morning, was in the process of taking Ms. Truitt to her grandmother's, where her son spent the night, and then was going to take his mother to church. The Defendant accosted the couple at a stop sign in his vehicle, and after some words were spoken, took out a gun and fired into Mr. Hamlin's vehicle, killing him. Ms. Truitt was not injured in this incident. She ran to her grandmother's, where she called the police, and reported the incident. Due to concern for her safety, she was advised not to go to her home until the Defendant was apprehended, but on November 10, 2006, she decided to go to her home and retrieve clothes for her son. On the way, she encountered one Rima Stewart, and had a brief conversation with her. As she was leaving her home, after having been there only a short time, the Defendant ran toward her car, brandishing a firearm, and fired several times, striking Ms. Truitt. To this day, a portion of one bullet remains lodged in her chest. The Defendant was later apprehended, and has been incarcerated since his arrest.

I object to any execution in which the person to be executed may be innocent. In other cases, I stand mute. Given that I find no one claiming Johnson is factually innocent of the crime for which he is scheduled to die, and given that Johnson has waived all further appeals, and given that Johnson wishes no further delay in his execution, I stand mute.

The Impending Execution of Daniel Greene

Daniel Greene sits on death row awaiting execution by the people of Georgia. The execution is scheduled for 19 April. I relate the facts of the case as presented in the adverse appellate decision Green v. State, 1996.

On the evening of September 27, 1991, Greene made a series of trips to the Suwanee Swifty, a convenience store and gasoline station in Reynolds, Taylor County, Georgia. During his final visit, Greene grabbed the store clerk, Virginia Wise, held a knife to her throat, and told her to give him the money from the cash register. After obtaining the money, $142.55, Greene continued to hold the knife to Wise's throat. He pulled her to the back room, then cut her across three fingers and stabbed her through the lung and liver. Upon hearing the automatic doorbell ring as Bernard Walker entered the store, Greene placed Wise against the bathroom wall, telling her that if she left the room he would have to kill her. Greene reentered the public area of the store and encountered Walker waiting at the counter to make a purchase. He stabbed Walker in the heart, threw down the knife, left the store and drove away. After attempting to get help, Walker fell dead in the parking lot. 

Later that evening, Greene went to the home of Willie and Donice Montgomery, an elderly couple in rural Macon County for whom Greene had worked as a farm laborer for about two months. Greene burst through the Montgomerys' kitchen door wielding a knife and asked for their car keys. Mr. Montgomery gave Greene the keys, and Greene proceeded to stab each victim multiple times in the head.

After leaving the Montgomerys' home, Greene drove their car to a convenience store in Warner Robins, Houston County, Georgia. Once there, he held a butcher knife to the cashier, Bonnie Roberts, and forced her to give him the money from the cash register. He then walked toward her and attempted to stab her in the chest. She bent down, and Greene drove the knife into the back of her shoulder. Greene then drove the Montgomerys' car to the home of an acquaintance in Warner Robins, where he was apprehended. 

Greene was tried separately and convicted of the Macon and Houston County crimes. The trial from which this appeal is taken concerned only Greene's indictment for the crimes committed in Taylor County. 

Before trial, Greene confessed to the crimes, explaining in a videotaped interview that he had committed them to obtain money for crack cocaine. At trial, Greene testified that he could not remember committing the crimes or confessing, and that he could only recall experiencing a severe headache inside the Suwanee Swifty after having smoked a cigarette given to him earlier by an acquaintance. He theorized that his criminal behavior might have been induced by the cigarette, which must have been laced with a powerful, mind-altering drug.

I oppose those executions in which the person to be executed may be factually innocent of the crime. In all other cases, I stand mute. In the case of Daniel Greene of Georgia, I stand mute.

The Case of Preston Hughes III: Lakeside

One of the spectacularly well orchestrated fictions in this case is that Shandra Charles, in a dying declaration, identified Preston Hughes as her attacker.

In this post, I will consider two possibilities: either Sgt. Hamilton fabricated Shandra's dying declaration out of whole cloth, or Sgt. Hamilton accurately reported what Shandra managed to tell him that night. In neither case did Shandra Charles identify Preston Hughes as her attacker.

Read on.

I will consider first the possibility that Sgt. Hamilton fabricated Shandra's dying declaration out of whole cloth. All quotes from police reports are from the compiled collection of reports, here.

There are numerous problems with Sgt. Hamilton's claim that Shandra spoke to him that night, the first of which is that the claim is completely uncorroborated. Sgt. Hamilton conveniently places himself alone with Shandra, though other officers (at least three) were on the scene. Officers Becker and Cook, the first two officers to arrive, found Shandra unconscious but alive. They found Marcell with neither breath nor pulse. They elected to tend to the seemingly dead Marcell rather than obviously alive Shandra. According to their report, they never did return to Shandra.

Their behavior seems odd if you accept the HPD story as told. On the other hand, their story is convenient, even necessary, if Sgt. Hamilton is going to claim he heard a dying declaration that never happened.

Sgt Hamilton confirms that Becker and Cook were standing away from Shandra, but he does not confirm they were applying CPR to Marcell. From his report:

Upon arriving on the scene Sgt Hamilton found the crime scene to be an open field. Sgt Hamilton noticed officer Becker and Cook standing near a B/M juvenile in the field. While approaching officer Cook, Sgt. Hamilton noticed a second compl [i.e. complainant, victim, Shandra Charles] a B/F, laying face down on the ground in a small pool of blood.

What were Becker and Cook doing just standing there? I guess they gave up on Marcell as hopeless, and didn't think even then of trying to save Shandra. I guess they just waited for Sgt. Hamilton to arrive so he could interview her in private.

We know also that Patrol Supervisor Sgt. J.H. Parham was on the scene at some point. We don't learn that from Sgt. Hamilton, since he describes himself as being alone with Shandra. Instead we hear of Sgt. Parham elsewhere in the police reports. We hear of him once, and only once, and that from lead investigator Sgt. Gafford:

When we arrived, there were several patrol supervisors, Sgts D. Hamilton and J.H. Parham, already on the scene.

Not only is Sgt. Hamilton mute with respect to Sgt. Parham, Sgt Parham is mute with respect to Sgt. Parham. In the collection of police reports, Sgt. Parham's report is missing. Perhaps Sgt. Parham's report would place him within earshot of anything Shandra might have said. Perhaps that would be inconvenient.

We have reason also to suspect that someone was standing nearby Sgt. Hamilton as he interviewed or sat by Shandra. Recall this photo from Shandra's Trail.

The upright drinking cup in the upper right corner of the image indicates someone was standing there refreshing himself. Perhaps it was the attacker or one of the victims or a witness, in which case the cup should have been secured as evidence. More likely an HPD police officer placed that cup there, right at the edge of the trampled area. Perhaps it was Sgt. Hamilton, who sipped a cool beverage as he walked towards the scene and who then placed the cup there before interviewing Shandra. Perhaps it was the mysterious Sgt. Parham, who failed to write a report of his time at the scene. Perhaps it was any one of "numerous officers" standing right there by Shandra. I obtain the description "numerous officers" from Officer Cook's report:

The boy did not respond to any resusitation [sic] attempts. Officer Becker continued to look in the immediate area for any susp(s) or evidence. Becker then went back to the Stop N Go and picked up Hartley from the store and brought him back to the scene. Cook stayed at the scene and observed numerous officers attending the black female. Paramedics from HFD Unit 69 arrived on the scene, assessed the situation, and pronounced the boy dead.

Numerous officers. Not "an officer" or "two officers" or "a couple" or "a few." Numerous officers, none of whom filed a report, none of whom had anything to say about Sgt. Hamilton's claim that Shandra spoke to him that evening.

Cook and Becker's report presents other mysteries. Didn't either of them brief Patrol Supervisor Sgt. D. Hamilton when he arrived on the scene? Who instructed Officer Becker to return to the Stop N Go to retrieve Drew Hartley? If both were on the scene and standing by Marcell when Sgt. Hamilton arrived, as per Sgt. Hamilton's report, wouldn't Becker have had to walk right past Shandra and Sgt. Hamilton as he returned to his patrol car in the Fuddrucker's parking lot? Did he not brief Sgt. Hamilton even then? Did he simply say "excuse me" as he stepped over Shandra or squeezed around Hamilton?

It's all very mysterious, as I suspect it is designed to be.

So the first problem with Sgt. Hamilton's claim of a dying declaration is that it is uncorroborated, though it seems as if there were others there who could have or should have corroborated such a critical claim. A much more serious problem is that Shandra Charles was almost certainly unconscious by the time Sgt. Hamilton arrived.

In my previous posts (Pools of Blood, Eleven Twenty Five, and Severed Carotid Arteries) I provided substantial evidence (via video, expert testimony, and even a graph!) that people cannot remain conscious for more than several minutes with a severed carotid in the absence of effective first aid. From the expert testimony in seven cases, I offer, in alphabetical order:

Commonwealth v. Lambert -- Dr. Larson also offered an opinion that the left carotid artery was severed. … He felt she would have had to lose consciousness within three minutes and suffer brain death within two minutes after that. 

Cooper v. Brown -- Jessica suffered a stab wound to her neck. The wound resulted in massive bleeding. Unconsciousness from the wound would have occurred in as little as thirty to sixty seconds, and would have been fatal in a couple of minutes. 

Jefferson v. State -- The victim died from an excessive loss of blood due to the fact that both of the jugular veins and the right carotid artery had been severed ... The extensive loss of blood caused the victim to loose consciousness after several minutes, and to die several minutes thereafter. 

People v. De Sarno -- Another bullet ... severed the left common carotid artery and the jugular vein ... According to these experts, an individual who sustained wounds similar to those caused by the bullet which penetrated Officer Sledge's face ... may be capable of performing voluntary acts for 30 to 60 seconds  ... before losing consciousness. 

State v. Bonds -- The neck wounds severed both the carotid artery and the jugular vein and punctured the victim's right lung. The victim bled to death, but could have remained conscious for a few minutes after she was stabbed. 

People v. Mayfield -- The cause of death was a single gunshot wound to the face, the bullet shattering the left side of the jaw at the angle and completely severing the external carotid artery, causing profuse bleeding, immediate loss of consciousness, and a rapid decline in blood pressure. 

State v. Henretta -- A wound immediately below the right ear, which Doctor Scruggs described as "particularly damaging," severed the carotid artery and the jugular vein ... Doctor Scruggs testified that this most severe wound ... would have rendered the victim unconscious within approximately 30 seconds. 

State v. Penley -- Dr. Harlan determined that the cause of death was "an incised wound, meaning a cut, to the neck transecting the right internal carotid artery." ... Dr. Harlan testified that once the artery was cut, "unconsciousness would have occurred . . . within just a matter of seconds."

Three minutes. Sixty seconds. Several minutes. Sixty seconds. A few minutes. Thirty seconds. A matter of seconds. Seven experts. All the expert testimony I could find about time of consciousness after suffering a severed carotid, and not one of the experts gives any time longer than 3 minutes, or several minutes if one wishes to grasp at straws.

There is no way Sgt. Hamilton was on the scene within three minutes of the attack. How could Shandra have been conscious when he arrived on the scene?

But you need not rely on my analysis. You may choose instead to take the HPD police reports at face value, though that causes an even bigger problem. In their report, Officers Cook and Becker confirm what should now be obvious to you: Shandra Charles was unconscious when they found her.

Officers walked east along the path that hunter eluded to and walked approx 30 yards when observing a black female laying face down in the path. She was positioned face west and feet east. There was blood along the neckline and she was breathing deep but was unconscious. Officers notified the west side dispatcher of the find.

In none of the seven cases I found did anyone happen to mention that a person with a severed carotid could or would recover consciousness after losing consciousness. There is no reason to believe that Shandra would regain consciousness after losing it, particularly since she received no medical attention, particularly since she simply continued to bleed out after Cook and Becker found her unconscious.

That blood you see soaked into the ground was supposed to supply her brain with oxygen. It did not.

Yet Sgt. Hamilton claims not only that she was conscious, but that she was lucid and calm, that she could speak in full sentences and enunciate clearly. I present to you Sgt. Hamilton's description of his interview with Shandra Charles, she of the severed carotid, severed jugular, and stab wound to the chest.

It appeared to Sgt Hamilton that the compl was having a difficult time trying to breathe. At this point, Sgt Hamilton asked the compl if she wanted to roll over on her back, the compl stated she did. Sgt. Hamilton rolled the compl over to her back ... Sgt Hamilton the asked the compl what had happened. The compl stated "He tried to rape me." Sgt Hamilton then asked the compl "Who tried to rape you?" The compl stated "Preston". Sgt Hamiltion again asked the compl to repeat the name of the person that had tried to rape her. Compl again stated "Preston". Sgt. Hamilton asked the compl if she knew Preston's full name, the compl replied something, Sgt Hamilton could not understand. Sgt Hamilton then asked the compl if she knew where Preston lived, the compl replied what sounded like Lakeside to Sgt. Hamilton. While waiting for the amb to arrive, Sgt continued to speak with the compl, during this time, the compl stated her name was Lashandra or Lasanda. It should be noted that at this point, the compl's speech began to become totally slurred and not understandable. Sgt then asked the compl if she was by herself. The compl then became upset and began stating where is (what sounded like Marshell or Marchell). Sgt asked the compl who was Marshell, the compl stated that he was her cousin. Sgt sat by the compl until amb arrived.

This report is nonsensical. Let me count the ways.

1. After initially responding with a complete sentence, Shandra could suddenly answer only with single words. She could say "He tried to rape me," but she could not give her attacker's first and last name in the same response. 

2. She said "Preston" clearly, unlike most of her other answers. Hamilton nonetheless asked her to repeat the word he heard clearly. 

3. She gave her attacker's last name, but it was inaudible. Hamilton did not ask her to repeat what he could not hear clearly. 

4. She said her attacker lived somewhere that "sounded like Lakeside." This is the first and only use of this qualifier. When Hamilton heard Shandra say "Preston", twice as it turns out, he did not say something that "sounded like Preston." 

5. She said her name was Lashandra or Lasanda. She could say Preston's first name clearly, but not his last name, and not her own name. 

6. Shandra did not become upset until Hamilton asked her if she was alone. 

7. She said her cousin's name was Marshell or Marchell. Once again, she could not clearly state Marcell's name, or her own name, or her attacker's last name, but she could clearly state Preston's name.

If we are to believe that his report constitutes a complete and accurate description of his interview with Shandra Charles, we must accept that Sgt. Hamilton has a quirky interview style: if the person being questioned answers clearly, the person is asked to repeat the answer; if the person answers in a fashion that cannot be understood, the person is not asked to repeat the answer.

Nonetheless, I stated at the beginning of this post, long ago, that it made no difference whether or not Sgt. Hamilton fabricated the dying declaration. I stated that even if we took his report at face value, Shandra Charles did not identify Preston Hughes as her attacker.

Read on, just a wee bit farther.

Shandra (allegedly, from here on out allegedly) gave a one-word description of where her attacker lived. She said Lakeside. Sgt. Gafford and company decided (for reasons to be discussed later) that she really meant the Lakehurst Apartment complex. Sgt. Gafford was wrong.

Sgt. Gafford could have just as easily decided that she really meant the Lakewood Village Apartments, but he still would have been wrong. It is nonetheless interesting that he searched the resident list only of the Lakehurst Apartments, and not the resident list of the Lakewood Village Apartments as well.

Sgt. Gafford should have instead searched the resident list of the Lakeside Green Condos, located just 0.3 miles north of Fuddrucker's, straight up South Kirkwood.

According to Google, it is but a 6 minute walk from Fuddrucker's to Lakeside.

So there you have it. It is exceptionally unlikely that Shandra Charles could have been conscious when Sgt. Hamilton arrived at the scene. If one nonetheless accepts his report at face value, then Shandra Charles did not identify Preston Hughes as her attacker. She identified someone who lived at Lakeside. That is Lakeside. Not Lakewood. Not Lakehurst. Lakeside, exactly as Sgt. Hamilton claims he heard.

Lakeside.

 <-- Previous                          Table of Contents                               Next --> 

The Impending Execution of Mark Wiles

Mark Wayne Wiles sits on death row awaiting execution by the people of Ohio. The execution is scheduled for 18 April. I present a summary of his case from the adverse appellate decision of Wiles v. Bagley, 2009.

Mark Wiles murdered a fifteen-year-old boy with a kitchen knife during a botched burglary in 1985. After he waived his right to a jury trial, a panel of three Ohio judges convicted him of aggravated murder and aggravated burglary, then sentenced him to death. … 

In 1982, Wiles went to work as a part-time laborer for Charles and Carol Klima on their horse farm, where they lived with their son Mark. One day in early 1983, the family learned that $200 in cash was missing. That same day, Wiles had reported for work, but he could not be found after the Klimas learned of the missing cash, and he did not return to collect his paycheck or for that matter return to work any longer on the farm. In the spring of that year, Wiles began serving a 4 - 25 year sentence in an Ohio prison for an unrelated burglary he had committed the previous year. 

On August 7, 1985, after serving eighteen months of this sentence, Wiles returned to the Klima farm, entered the unlocked house while the family was gone and began to search the house for valuables. While he was still in the house, Mark Klima returned and confronted him. Wiles stabbed the boy 24 times with a kitchen knife, stole approximately $260 and fled. Carol Klima returned home to find her unconscious son lying on the floor with a knife buried in his back. Later that day, Mark Klima died in a hospital emergency room. 

Wiles initially fled from the authorities. Five days after the murder, however, he turned himself in to the police in Savannah, Georgia, telling them that he was wanted for murder in Ohio. After being informed of his rights, he told the police what he had done and signed a confession admitting that he had killed Klima. 

A state grand jury indicted Wiles for aggravated murder and two counts of aggravated burglary -- one for the 1985 home invasion, one for the 1983 $200 theft. He waived his right to a jury, and a three-judge panel heard his case. After the guilt phase of the proceedings, the court determined that there was insufficient evidence that he had committed the 1983 burglary but convicted him on the aggravated-murder and the other aggravated-burglary count. After a mitigation hearing, the court determined that neither Wiles' youth (he was 22-years old at the time of the murder) nor his confession outweighed the aggravating circumstances of his crime. The court imposed a death sentence, and the Ohio Court of Appeals and the Ohio Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and sentence.

No one claims, not even Mark Wiles himself, that he is factually innocent of the crime for which he is scheduled to die. I offer this excerpt from Ohioans to Stop Executions.

Ohio is planning to execute Mark Wiles on April 18, 2012. Mr. Wiles was convited of murdering 15-year old Mark Klima in 1985 in Portage County. Mark Wiles accepts full responsibility for his actions and expresses sincere and profound remorse. He has been attempting to apologize to the Klima family since 2005.

I oppose any execution in which the person to be executed may be factually innocent of the crime for which he is to be executed. In all other cases, I stand mute.

In the case of Mark Wayne Wiles, I stand mute.

The Impending Execution of Carey Grayson

Carey Dale Grayson sits on death row awaiting execution by the people of Alabama. The execution is scheduled for 12 April. I offer a summary of his case from the adverse appellate decision Grayson v. State, 1999.

On the night of [February 21, 1994,] Vickie Deblieux, age 37, was dropped off by a friend on 1-59 near Chattanooga, Tennessee, to hitchhike to her mother's home in Louisiana. 

Four teenagers, the defendant, Kenny Loggins, Trace Duncan, and Louis Mangione, all who had been drinking alcohol and using drugs, saw her hitchhiking on 1-59 at the Trussville exit in Jefferson County, Alabama. They offered to take her to Louisiana; instead they took her to a wooded area, on the pretense of picking up another vehicle. 

After arriving in this area, they all got out of the vehicle, and began to drink. The defendant, along with the others threw bottles at Ms. Deblieux, who began to run from them. They tackled her to the ground and began to kick her repeatedly all over her body. When they noticed that she was still alive, one of them stood on her throat, supported by the Defendant, until she gurgled blood and said “Okay, I'll party,” then died. 

They then put her body in the back of a pickup truck and took her and her luggage to Bald Rock Mountain, after removing her clothing and a ring, and they played with her body and then threw her off a cliff. 

They then went to a car wash in Pell City to wash the blood out of the truck. After rummaging through her luggage, they hid the luggage in the woods. 

On their return to Birmingham, they took Mangione home and then returned to Bald Rock Mountain, where they began to mutilate the body by stabbing and cutting her 180 times, removing part of a lung, and removing her fingers and thumbs. 

The next morning defendant's girlfriend found the three of them in Birmingham asleep in the truck all covered in mud and blood. The defendant told her they got blood on them from a dog. 

On [February 26, 1994,] three rock climbers found Ms. Deblieux's body and called the police. Her body was taken to the medical examiner's office. 

The medical examiner found the following injuries; almost every bone in her skull was fractured, every bone in her face was fractured at least once, lacerations on the face over these fractures, a missing tooth, left eye was collapsed, right eye was hemorrhaged, tongue discolored, 180 stab wounds (postmortem), two large incisions in her chest, her left lung had been removed and all her fingers and both thumbs were cut off. 

The medical examiner opined that the cause of death was blunt force trauma to the head and that she was alive during the beating. 

All defendants were later arrested after Mangione began showing one of Ms. Deblieux's fingers to friends. 

Defendant's Case: 

Ralph Wiley, the defendant's uncle testified that he [Carey Grayson] was disabled because of a bipolar disorder, which is a prevalent disorder in the defendant's family. That Defendant's mother died when he was age three and his father has been married four or five times. He had not been around defendant in many years. 

Dora Roper, the defendant's second cousin testified that her mother had mental problems for which she had to be hospitalized. 

Jan Arnett, testified that she was defendant's junior high school teacher when he was ages 13-16. That he was hyperactive in class, not interested in school, and wouldn't do classwork or homework. ... She tried to get defendant's father to help the defendant. That defendant was not violent and knew right from wrong. ... 

Dr. Rebert, a forensic psychologist for the State of Alabama, Department of Mental Health, opined that the defendant at the time of the incident suffered from a mental disease or defect. She described this as a bipolar disorder and said he was in a manic state at the time of the incident; however, he did know the difference between right and wrong and was able to appreciate the nature and quality or wrongfulness of his acts. 

Dr. Goff, a private psychologist who opined that at the time of the incident the defendant suffered from a mental disease or defect, bipolar I disorder, which involves extreme mood swings. However, the defendant did know right from wrong but would not be able to respond to the rightness or wrongness of his acts. 

Jan Deblieux, the victim's mother testified that she was not involved in a lawsuit filed by her daughter's estranged husband. 

The record further indicates that, although the investigation originally involved suspects in Chattanooga because the victim was from that area, the investigation eventually led the police to the Jefferson County jail, where the appellant was incarcerated. He was interviewed by the police at the jail where he agreed to give a statement, indicating that "they were not hanging this case on him and [he wanted] to tell his side of the story." The appellant then gave the following statement which was admitted at trial:

"Kenny, T.R., Louis and myself were all drinking very heavily when T.R. and Louis suggested that we get into a fight. We left and went riding around and found a hitchhiker at 1-59 exit in Trussville, Alabama. We picked her up and took her to the pipeline. ... Medical Center East. We were all talking when she made a remark about killing us all when I threw a beer bottle at her, then Kenny hit her with his bottle, Louis hit her with his and T.R. with his. After that she began to run when Kenny got her in the back of the head with another bottle, causing her to fall. We all ran over and began to kick her and hit her. When she stopped moving, Kenny saw she was still alive and stood on her throat [until] she died. Then we took her to Pell City and left the body. We then went to the car wash and washed out the bed of Kenny's truck and we took Louis home. When we got back to my car, T.R. and Kenny asked me to show them the way to the body and I did. When we got there, T.R. and Kenny began to mutilate the body by cutting off the fingers and cutting open the stomach. T.R. had found a bottle and shoved it into the [vagina] while Kenny took out her eyes. After this we dumped the body and left for T.R.'s house. Kenny and I returned to my car and we went ... to Hardee's in Chalkville and all three of us fell asleep in the truck, where Kenny's girlfriend woke us up later that morning."

Upon further questioning, by the authorities, the appellant made other statements concerning the details of the offense. The appellant stated that while T.R. was standing on the victim's throat, he placed his hands on the appellant for balance. He further indicated that, when they dumped the victim's clothes over the cliff, T.R. took some of the clothing and Kenny took a ring from the victim. The appellant indicated that he took nothing from her. The appellant was then asked why he and his accomplices had killed the victim; the appellant responded that he did not know why they had killed her, "but it was not his problem." The officer who took the appellant's statement noted that he was very cooperative and that his attitude was "almost one of humor. He had a smile during the entire time we were speaking with him.

I find nobody, not even Carey Grayson, claiming he is factually guilty innocent of the crime. I oppose the execution of someone who might be factually innocent of the crime for which they are to die. With respect to all other executions, I stand mute.

With respect to the execution of Carey Grayson, I stand mute.