The execution of Marcellus Williams was a tragedy – hopefully the last of its kind

On Tuesday evening, the state of Missouri executed Marcellus Williams. This was legally sanctioned murder.

As the Washington Post puts it, he was “convicted of a 1998 murder he said he didn’t commit.” The evidence suggests that Williams should not have died this way. Even the St. Louis County District Attorney’s Office, which originally obtained the death sentence, did not want the sentence carried out.

Williams’ fate was embroiled in a jumble of errors and legalisms that obscured what should have been obvious. He died because the people who could and should have prevented his death, each for their own reasons, chose to look the other way.

That Williams was executed is an American tragedy, but he is not the only one. The American death penalty system has been found to be riddled with errors. Miscarriages of justice like those in the Williams case are legion, even if their precise number is not known.

Indeed, we do not know exactly how many innocent people have been convicted of capital crimes. Law professor Samuel Gross and his colleagues note that “there is no systematic method for determining the accuracy of a criminal conviction; if there were, these errors wouldn’t occur in the first place.

However, we do know that “since 1973, at least 200 people who were wrongly convicted and sentenced to death in the United States have been exonerated.” This means that for every eight executions carried out over the past 50 years, one person has been released from death row.

Beyond that, a 2014 National Academy of Sciences report estimates that “at least 4.1 percent of defendants on death row in the United States are innocent…and that the number of innocent people is probably more than that number.” double the number of people actually exonerated and released.” death row. »

Those who are exempt are the lucky ones. Others, like Williams, weren’t so lucky.

The Death Penalty Information Center lists 20 cases in which a person was put to death despite “strong evidence of innocence.” Additionally, the center notes that there are many cases in which an executed person was later found innocent and sometimes even granted a posthumous pardon.

For example, “in Maryland, in 2001, Governor Paris Glendening pardoned John Snowden, a black man hanged in 1919 for the rape and murder of the wife of a prominent white businessman. Two key witnesses in the trial had recanted their testimony and before the hanging, eleven of the twelve jurors had asked for mercy.

Or in 2009, when “South Carolina pardoned two African-American men, Thomas and Meeks Griffin, who were electrocuted in 1915 for the murder of a white Confederate War veteran.”

One wonders how soon Williams will join this shocking list of people whose executions we now recognize as shameful mistakes. And we should be troubled by the bloodthirsty nature of Missouri’s insistence on carrying out an execution so bloodied by legal errors.

Although there is no constitutional impediment to the execution of innocent people, this country would be better served if it adopted a policy that executions would not take place if there was even the slightest doubt about the guilt of the person. person sentenced to death. But we are far from it.

In the meantime, let’s look at who turned their back on Williams in his final days and who failed to live up to that standard.

Let’s start with the United States Supreme Court. On Tuesday, the court refused to halt his execution. Given the pro-death penalty record of the Court’s current majority, this was not a surprise. But the majority didn’t even give Williams the courtesy of an explanation for his decision.

They allowed Missouri to commit this appalling act despite the fact that, as a Scotusblog article states, “Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson indicated they would have stayed his execution” and the fact that the family of the victim did not want Williams to be executed.

Additionally, Missouri Governor Mike Parson (R) refused to stop the execution. However, unlike the U.S. Supreme Court, Parson seemed eager to explain why he agreed to let the case proceed. “Capital cases are some of the most difficult issues we deal with in the governor’s office,” Parson said in refusing clemency. Considering what Williams was up against, this statement seems a bit self-serving. After all, his hardships were nothing compared to the suffering Williams endured as he contemplated being put to death for a crime he always claimed he did not commit.

Parson went on to say, using a cliché all too familiar among those who want to deny responsibility when they allow someone to be put to death: “I respect the law and I have confidence in the integrity of our justice system. The governor then offered a recitation of the “facts” of the Williams case that ignored both the mistakes made in that case and the fact that the DA’s office now acknowledged those mistakes.

“Mr. Williams,” the governor said, “has exhausted all legal processes and avenues of justice, including more than 15 hearings in an attempt to plead his innocence and overturn his conviction. No jury or court, including at the trial, appeal and Supreme Court levels, never found merit to Mr. Williams’ claims of innocence.

Then, following the model popularized nationally by former President Trump and his MAGA supporters — with whom Parson often found common cause — the governor attacked the media. “I also want to add how deeply disturbed we have been by the manner in which this matter has been covered…I simply implore the media to do their due diligence and not rely solely on the claims of individuals who have a personal or financial interest in this matter. this matter. »

Finally, the Missouri Supreme Court bears its share of responsibility for not having corrected the judicial error committed in the Williams case. By refusing to halt his execution, the court downplayed the importance of the prosecutor’s admissions of error in the case.

Although prosecutorial failures have led to numerous convictions of innocent people in capital cases, prosecutors rarely, if ever, admit their mistakes. This is due, as a 2002 CNN report suggested, “to how politics affects the death penalty.” Regardless, until now, overturning a death sentence has been akin to political suicide for an elected district attorney or state attorney general, or for any state official with the ambition to be re-elected or to hold a higher office.”

Ultimately, the Missouri Supreme Court seemed more interested in reminding Wesley Bell, St. Louis County’s district attorney since 2019, that she — not he — had the final say on the legality of what was about to happen in Williams. The court wrote that it “is not bound by (the state’s) confession of error” and that Bell “cannot admit to constitutional error.”

What happened to Williams fits a sad pattern of the use of capital punishment in this country. But Americans are increasingly attentive to the plight of people like Williams and are turning away from the death penalty because of the injustice and unfairness associated with it. One day, hopefully, we will be able to look back on the tragedy of the Williams case and conclude that his death helped abolish the death penalty in this country.

Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College. Its views do not necessarily reflect those of Amherst College.

For the latest news, weather, sports and streaming videos, visit The Hill.